Sex offenders’ retirement penalty fails

• By MARSHA SHULER
• Advocate Capitol News Bureau
• Published: May 7, 2008 - Page: 6A - UPDATED: 12:05 a.m.

• Print
• Email
• Save
• Twitter
• Social Media

• Del.icio.us
• Digg
• Facebook
• Reddit
• 

The House on Tuesday sidelined a proposed constitutional amendment that would strip retirement benefits from school employees convicted of felony sex crimes involving students.

The sponsor of the legislation, part of Gov. Bobby Jindal’s sex crimes package, voluntarily stopped debate on the measure after the House came one vote short of killing it.

Forty-eight representatives voted to table House Bill 783 while 49 representatives voted against the move.

A two-thirds vote, or 70 votes, is needed for passage of a proposed constitutional amendment in the House.

Jindal’s office blanketed the House floor with notes urging support of the proposition.

Earlier, his executive counsel, Jimmy Faircloth, testified for HB783 in a House committee alongside sponsor Rep. Pat Connick, R-Harvey.

Opponents said the proposal would create a new group of victims — the spouse and children of the convicted sex offender.

“That individual has a family it affects,” said Rep. Pat Smith, D-Baton Rouge. She suggested that the families of the offenders could become dependent on the state because they would not have the financial resources to live.

“You are willing to hurt the innocent family of the pedophile who committed the crime,” Rep. Jeff Arnold, D-New Orleans, told Connick.

He said a school employee could kill a child but could keep his retirement benefits under Connick’s measure.

Connick said lawmakers should consider the victim and his or her family as well.

“The whole family unit is destroyed because of one act by someone charged with taking care of our children,” Connick said.

Connick said the threat of losing state retirement benefits would act as a deterrent to a teacher, a school janitor or coach who may be thinking of committing a sex crime against a student.