Panel Kills Bill on Breast-Feeding : Assembly: Republicans block effort to grant women the explicit right to nurse in public.

Suzanne Macdonald didn’t think she was asking a lot of the California Legislature, just the explicit right to breast-feed her baby whenever--and wherever--he’s hungry.

On Wednesday, Macdonald and other nursing mothers came to the Capitol to fight for that right, but they went home without success. Despite a rally and a “nurse-in” by about 50 women, an Assembly committee killed a bill that would have expressly permitted mothers to breast-feed in any public place they are otherwise entitled to be.

Authored by Assemblyman Antonio Villaraigosa (D-Los Angeles), the legislation sought to protect women from harassment by those who find nursing offensive. Despite innumerable studies documenting the health benefits of breast-feeding, some mothers say they have been kicked out of restaurants and other businesses for nursing their child.

Kimber Holmes of Sacramento said she was asked to leave a Tower Records store after breast-feeding her daughter in the blank tape section.

“It happens all the time,” said Patricia DuBray of Elk Grove, whose 6-month-old daughter, Mackenzie, was one of the littlest lobbyists fighting for the bill Wednesday. “Breasts are seen as sex objects, so when we nurse, some people just can’t handle it.”

After gathering at midmorning on the Capitol steps, DuBray and other nursing mothers jammed the building’s corridors for a “nurse-in” outside the Assembly Judiciary Committee, drawing stares of surprise from pin-striped lobbyists passing by.

Later, the mothers fanned out and dropped in on individual committee members’ offices, lobbying for the bill with their babies in tow.

Despite the effort, the women could not overcome opposition from Republicans. Some foes portrayed the bill as simply unnecessary, while others predicted that it would trigger frivolous lawsuits.

Still others said a breast-feeding statute would lead to public nudity--suggesting that it might tempt mothers to become exhibitionists.

“I’m certainly not against motherhood and childbearing and healthy babies,” Assemblyman George House (R-Hughson) said at a recent hearing, but “there are other body functions that are natural but not necessarily . . . decent at a particular time.”

In the end, the Republicans were able to doom the bill. Seven members of the Assembly Judiciary Committee voted for the measure, but it needed eight votes to pass.

“I think it’s outrageous that the Republicans could be against this bill,” Villaraigosa said after the vote. “They portrayed it as something that would lead to public nudity--making it seem obscene. That’s absurd. . . . We’ll try again next session.”

As they nursed their infants beneath the Capitol dome Wednesday, mothers said Republican worries about nudity were nonsense: “Do you see any skin?” asked Fairfield resident Janet McLean, looking down at daughter Maggie, clasped to her breast. “Maybe one millimeter. You see a lot more at the beach.”

As for the charge that breast-feeding mothers might become exhibitionists, Sacramento lactation consultant Sian Nelson said the opposite is true: “New mothers feel self-conscious about their bodies. They’re trying to hide things, not show them off.”

The bill was quite straightforward. “No mother,” it read, “should be made to feel incriminated or socially ostracized for breast-feeding her child.” Six other states have adopted a similar breast-feeding rights law.

Nursing advocates say a fear of public embarrassment contributes to the low rate of breast-feeding in the U.S. About half of all American women breast-feed their babies immediately after birth, but only 20% are still nursing when their babies are six months old and only 5% nurse babies who are a year old. The rate is particularly low among poor women.

Villaraigosa said his goal was to ensure that if a mother chooses to breast-feed, “she can feel comfortable exercising this right anywhere.”

“Mothers all over the state are being told to stop or leave for breast-feeding their babies in a public place,” he said. “We need to tell them it’s OK and get rid of this old taboo.”

Republicans, meanwhile, said the bill would accomplish little and was merely an effort by Villaraigosa to win publicity and curry favor with the women’s movement. Howard Kaloogian (R-Carlsbad) called it “pure grandstanding” and suggested that a “Breast-feeding Awareness Week” would be a better way for Villaraigosa to achieve his goals.

“Breast-feeding in public is already legal,” said Kaloogian, a committee member who voted against the legislation. “This bill is just another example of government wasting its time meddling in people’s lives.”

Other critics on the committee said they would have supported the bill if Villaraigosa had amended it to include a requirement that women nurse in a “modest” or discreet fashion.

“I’m sympathetic to his cause, but one of the fears is that someone in this state of 32 million might feel empowered to get naked and breast-feed in the middle of a mall,” said Assemblyman Jim Battin (R-Palm Desert). “Is that an irrational concern? Maybe. But I think (the amendment) fixes the problem.”

In response to Republicans’ concerns, Villaraigosa made several changes to his bill. But he would not agree to the amendment requiring that nursing be done discreetly, saying it might give a business owner leverage to act against a breast-feeding mother.

“It would become a matter of interpretation,” he said. “Some store manager could say, hey, you’re not being discreet enough, and just throw a woman out.”

Moreover, he added, “women are discreet and modest about nursing now. I think these kinds of statements are offensive. We’re seeing some weird kind of Victorian moralism coming out here and it’s frankly kind of extreme.”