As Rev. Robert Jones, pastor of Oak Park United Methodist Church in Sacramento appeared before a recent committee hearing, chaired by Sen. Wiggins, he was rudely interrupted by the senator who called his argument "bull----."

Rev. Jones was appearing before an informational hearing on the state's efforts to cut emissions.  It was his contention that when government imposes mandates and taxes, it hurts the poor and vulnerable.  Jones said, “We just simply invite the committee to have people from the community that can speak to those issues in a way that will certainly bring their voices to the table. I think we partner with you as representatives of the community and of the people in our commitment to better serve the people.” 

Sen. Wiggins interrupted with, “Excuse me, but I think your arguments are,  bull----.”  Regardless of how one comes down on the issue, I don’t think Sen. Wiggins’ behavior is taught in any Robert’s Rules of Order correspondence courses.

As of this writing, Sen. Wiggins has yet to issue a directly apology to Rev. Jones. Ironically, Wiggins' website states , "It is an honor to serve the residents of the 2nd Senate District, which includes portions or all of six counties: Humboldt, Lake, Mendocino, Napa, Solano & Sonoma.” 

Too bad that honor was not at he forefront of her thoughts when she decided to embarrass herself and her constituents. With one public expletive outburst, Wiggins also embarrassed the Legislature.

I invite anyone to go to Youtube and witness this encounter for themselves. How is this type of behavior from an elected official, whose job is to serve the interest of those in her district, acceptable? 

What’s wrong with “Rev. Jones, with all due respect I disagree with your position?” or “Rev. Jones, thank you for taking the time to meet with us today, but I have a different perspective.” Why was arguably the most debase and demeaning retort Sen. Wiggins’ first option?

Sen. Wiggins’ adjective of choice to describe Rev. Jones argument is exactly how I feel as Californians must endure 22 consecutive years of not having a state budget on time.  It also accurately characterizes the situation when many organizations may be forced this week to make the difficult decision of letting those on the margins go because the governor has cowardly used them as political pawns in the budget battle, but I was unaware it also pertained to committee hearings.

The arrogance displayed by Sen. Wiggins is emblematic of an elected official who believes he or she is impervious to defeat.

If Rev. Jones was one of her main campaign contributors she would most likely discovered the necessary restraint that was betrayed by her flippant remarks. The essential sensibilities  would have reminded her there were more constructive ways to make her point.

I have long been  under the impression that legislative committee hearings were to encourage citizen involvement and input and not subject individuals to verbal derision.

It is quite possible I do not share Rev. Jones opinion on the issue at hand, but that misses the point. Anyone watching the YouTube footage would be hard pressed to conclude that Wiggins’ behavior was necessary.

Rev. Jones was attacked for sharing his opinion. Doesn’t this public attack warrant a public apology? 

 Moreover, why has the senate leadership displayed unusual bipartisan silence?   The failure of the Sen. Wiggins’ legislative contemporaries to demand a public apology suggest by their omission they are complicit in her Neanderthal behavior.

If Sen. Wiggins does not publicly apologize to Rev. Jones and the constituents of her senate district, she should be censured by the senate. The failure of such actions would say more about the Democratic-led senate than Sen. Wiggins’ appalling behavior.