Meet the 5 Indiana Republicans who voted against RFRA

Senate Bill 101 may have signaled "religious freedom" to the vast majority of his Republican peers, but to state Rep. Ed Clere, it said something else entirely.

"Do we want our sign to say 'Welcome?' " the New Albany Republican said Friday. "Or do we want our sign to say 'Closed for Business?' Or 'Certain people aren't welcome?' Or, as some have suggested, 'We don't accept fill-in-the-blank?' "

Clere is one of just five Republicans in the Indiana General Assembly who bucked their party line and voted "no" on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

Four of the five — all members of the Indiana House — spoke to The Star about their votes last week, as Indiana was thrust into a heated national discussion about whether the bill protects religious rights or promotes state-sanctioned intolerance.

Signed into law Thursday by Republican Gov. Mike Pence, RFRA sets up a new litmus test for Indiana courts, prohibiting state or local governments from "substantially burdening" a person's ability to exercise religion, unless the government can meet certain criteria.

Religious conservatives hailed the bill as providing a much-needed check against government forcing those who have strong faiths to violate their principles. Opponents fear it will be used as a license to discriminate, because it might encourage business owners to cite their religious beliefs if they wish to refuse service to someone.

Much of the focus of the debate has been the implications of whether the bill sent a discriminatory message to gays and lesbians and same-sex couples.

Clere said there's no doubt it did.

He said that while his fellow Republicans have tried to downplay that aspect, "it's impossible to separate it" so soon after a failed Republican-led push to amend the state's constitution to ban same-sex marriages.

"I know supporters of RFRA have said it's not about gay people or gay rights, but it's unavoidable," Clere said.

Clere said he also couldn't support the bill because no one really knows what it actually can or can't do.

"The only sure thing about this legislation from a legal standpoint is it leaves a lot of questions unanswered and will provide work for a lot of attorneys," he said.

Clere was by far the most outspoken of the four Republicans The Star interviewed, but all said they didn't think they would face repercussions for their vote in the next election.

And they might not, says Micah Clark, executive director of the American Family Association of Indiana, a conservative group that advocated for the bill.

He said there's so much "misinformation" being presented nationally about the supposed discriminatory aspects of the bill, that he doesn't know whether conservative voters in the five lawmakers' districts will take umbrage.

"I'm befuddled by this," Clark said. "If the perception of this is so wrong, how do you predict what's going to happen politically?"

While State Rep. Greg Beumer, R-Modoc, didn't return messages from The Star, here are the reasons the other Republicans lawmakers gave for why they said "no" to RFRA.

Cindy Kirchhofer

Kirchhofer said that she voted against the SB 101 because 75 percent of the calls, emails and letters she received from the constituents in her moderate Indianapolis district urged her cast a "no" vote.

The Beech Grove Republican says she personally could see "no clear, convincing evidence" the bill was needed. But she said that on social issues such as this, it's really her district's call.

"I don't vote my conscience," she said. "I vote the will of the district."

Sean Eberhart

Eberhart, who's from Shelbyville, said he also wasn't getting a big push from his constituents to vote for the bill.

"This wasn't something my district said was important," he said.

While he says he supports religious freedom, as a staunch small-government conservative, he said he could see no evidence the government needed to create a new law, one that he says doesn't seem to accomplish much of anything.

He said that since his vote, he's received far more messages in support than he has from those condemning his vote.

"I feel pretty good about it," he said.

Tom Saunders

The Lewisville Republican said that the response he's received from his constituents is much more mixed.

"I've had several nice emails thanking me for my vote," he said. "I've a had couple of people who have called in who are not happy. That's part of the job."

But having held his seat in the House for nearly 20 years, Saunders said he feels that his constituents have come to appreciate him not voting along the party line, which he says proudly is "kind of not unusual."

He said House Speaker Brian Bosma told the Republican caucus they were free to vote their conscience, so that's what he did.

"I just thought it sent an unwise message," he said. "It's kind of a divisive message."

Call Star reporter Ryan Sabalow at (317) 444-6179. Follow him on Twitter: @RyanSabalow.