The Alaska House of Representatives voted nearly unanimously on Wednesday to discipline Rep. David Eastman, R-Wasillafor speculating that the state would gain financially in the event that children suffer abuse and die due to their abuse.
Eastman’s comments in which he stated that they were meant to discredit some of the arguments that support abortion rights, were shared through social media platforms, contributing to a public outcry.
The House’s vote of 35-1 to denounce Eastman — where the sole vote in opposition came from Eastman himself the third time that the controversial Wasilla Republican was disciplined from the House. The House had previously sanctioned him in the year 2017. A year later after that, his House Ethics Committee found that he had violated the state’s ethics law.
A vote of censure as Wednesday’s is not a consequence beyond putting up a formal declaration of disapproval or reprimand onto the record.
“Censuring is not a way to discipline Eastman as well as any elected officials,” said former Rep. Colleen Sullivan-Leonard, R-Wasilla on Twitter, pointing out the fact that Republican Party resolutions censuring U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski and state Sen. Kelly Merrick had no impact.
However, some lawmakers in the present suggested that their vote must be considered an act, not just words.
“Actions are more powerful than words, and then look at the whiteboard. I’m not an elocutionist. I’m an actor,” stated Rep. Craig Johnson, from Anchorage, when asked why the vote in his favor was for censure.
Rep. David Eastman, from the state of Washington, is seated under an election board that shows the motion to suspend him on Wednesday, February. 22nd, 2023 within the Alaska House of Representatives. (Photo taken by James Brooks/Alaska Bear)
The action of Wednesday is as a response to remarks made during an hearing held on Monday by the House Judiciary Committee. Legislators were looking at the ways that adverse childhood experiences or ACEs like sexual and physical abuse can impact individuals throughout their life.
According to an presentation by Alaska Children’s Trust, that abuse results in millions of dollars in cost to society and individuals.
A child suffering from abuse actually be beneficial to society, Eastman asked hypothetically.
“It could be said time and time again that it’s actually a cost-saving since the child isn’t going to require all of the government services that they would otherwise have the right to receive or would need to receive based on growing in this kind of environment,” he said.
Afterward, Eastman said he didn’t intend to seriously argue for that argument. The goal was to draw attention to its absurdity and compare it to economic arguments for abortion.
For a portion of Monday’s talk The Children’s Trust discussed how conditions present in a family’s life before the birth of a child will determine the number of adverse childhood experiences the child will be exposed to.
Eastman claimed that he believed the group was providing an economic argument to support abortion.
“You are part of a group who’s been before the Legislature and claimed that it’s within the interest of the society, as well as the general public as well as the state to avoid unwanted pregnancy … Then they’re here on Monday and the same group is insisting that they’d like funding to prevent the exact kind of child abuse they are able to control and focus on to stop. If we’re to honour the request, why do they’re also asking the state to invest money in order to put an end to the lives of those children they want to defend?” Eastman said.
The Alaska Children’s Trust has taken no position on abortion and has no plans to take one according to Trevor Storrs, its director.
The discussion on Monday focused on how things like taking away asbestos and lead from the construction of homes and other things that are not related to children in any way, could help to reduce the damage.
“It did not have absolutely nothing to do with advocating for and claiming that abortion is a method to prevent ACEs and saving money or anything else of this nature. The idea of abortion was never even considered,” Storrs said.
In the hearing on Monday in the Monday’s hearing, neither Storrs or Eastman’s fellow legislators were able to comprehend his remarks since the topic of abortion did not come up; Eastman never made the analogy that he later said that he had in mind.
“He could have clarified his own explanation,” said Rep. Julie Coulombe, R-Anchorage.
She is the mother of an adopted son, and was furious over Eastman’s comments, however, she also said that she understands that at times, lawmakers make their own mistakes and is misunderstood.
In this instance it was unclear why at least not in the committee, as well as at the House floor on Wednesday at the time Rep. Andrew Gray, D-Anchorage , who is a member on the judiciary committee suggested a censuring Eastman to mark the anniversary on April 4, the day that Gray and his wife adopted their child in foster care.
“He has brought shame to this House. It’s the duty of every one of us to take action. We can’t allow such inhumane and indefensible language remain unreported,” Gray said.
Rep. Sarah Vance, Homer, a Republican and chair of the judiciary committee briefly opposed Gray’s motion for censure.
She described Eastman’s comments as “messy uninformed and offensive” however she said the matter should have been discussed in committee, and that lawmakers are entitled to freedom of speech.
Vance later retracted her objection and voted for the censure. In response to questions about why she changed her mind she replied, “They got what they wanted. I’m hoping they’re pleased.”
The actions of the floor speak about themselves, Speaker of the House Cathy Tilton, R-Wasilla spoke through an official spokesperson.
Gray declined to comment further after the vote, stating only that his next move will be to attend an upcoming meeting of the judiciary committee which he will attend alongside Eastman.
