Here’s a round up of some notes related to the rewritten ENDA legislation (that has been, at least for now, temporarily shelved):

~~~~~

Lambda Legal has reviewed the stripped down ENDA bill. There was something in the original Washington Blade story on the dropping of transgender protections from ENDA was that the Democratic House Leadership that was apparently really significant.  The Congressional House Leadership ”met with the National Conference of Catholic Bishops to broaden the bill’s exemption for certain religious institutions that act as employers, and agreed to some changes to ENDA.” 

Some excerpts from the Lambda Legal media release — where we view see the legislative changes at least in part resulting from that meeting:

Lambda Legal’s preliminary assessment of the revised version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act shows the bill to be riddled with loopholes in addition to failing altogether to protect transgender people against discrimination.

…Preliminary Analysis Summary:

- As a point of clarity for the community: The recent version is not simply the old version with the transgender protections stripped out — but rather has modified the old version in several additional and troubling ways.

- In addition to the missing vital protections for transgender people on the job, this new bill also leaves out a key element to protect any employee, including lesbians and gay men who may not conform to their employer’s idea of how a man or woman should look and act. This is a huge loophole through which employers sued for sexual orientation discrimination can claim that their conduct was actually based on gender expression, a type of discrimination that the new bill does not prohibit.

- This version of ENDA states without qualification that refusal by employers to extend health insurance benefits to the domestic partners of their employees that are provided only to married couples cannot be considered sexual orientation discrimination. The old version at least provided that states and local governments could require that employees be provided domestic partner health insurance when such benefits are provided to spouses.

- In the previous version of ENDA the religious exemptions had some limitations. The new version has a blanket exemption under which, for example, hospitals or universities run by faith-based groups can fire or refuse to hire people they think might be gay or lesbian.

~~~~~

For those interested in the thoughts of a transgender HRC Board member, one should bookmark Donna Rose’s blog. Here’s some excerpts from her September 29th entry:

Wed Sept 26: As I drove from Rochester to Washington I got a calls alerting me that deals were being made regarding ENDA involving bill sponsor Barney Frank and HRC - that the provision protecting employees on the grounds of ‘gender identity’ in the bill was going to be removed. I immediately called to get a comment from HRC leadership. Joe called me about an hour later, and said that Democratic leadership had done a “whip count” to identify how many votes they had to pass the inclusive bill. The result was disappointing so Barney Frank would probably decide to remove the gender identity language to make it easier to pass. It was not a pleasant conversation.

I am angry at HRC leadership for what I can’t help but perceive as lying and deceiving, for betraying my trust, and for putting me in this position. Damage has been done and continues to be done that cannot be repaired. What happens next is, at best, too little too late. At a time when I should be celebrating the historic passage of Hate Crimes on Thursday, and the amazing work of the Out and Equal Workplace Summit, I’m consumed by feelings of betrayal and disappointment. The conspirist in me feels that I’ve been played, that this has been in the works for a long time, that people and organizations with a vested interest in passing ENDA at any cost believe that there will be some unhappiness but that it will be short-lived if and when ENDA passes (without trans inclusion). However, the idealist in me cares too much to give up. For now.

Although I don’t blame them for causing the current situation, I am tremendously disappointed in HRC for refusing to speak out loudly and publicly, along with the other coalition partners, in OPPOSING this wrong-minded strategy and these bills. The credibility and integrity of the organization is at stake, and I cannot and will not defend them on this in any way, shape, or form. I am disappointed in the lack of decisive direction being shown by the board leadership. I am disappointed by the delay by to board to meet to discuss this. And I am incredibly sad to see all the hard work of building bridges and repairing relationships with HRC become tatters and shreds. This isn’t just business - for me, it’s personal.

I am angry at HRC leadership for what I can’t help but perceive as lying and deceiving, for betraying my trust, and for putting me in this position. Damage has been done and continues to be done that cannot be repaired. What happens next is, at best, too little too late. At a time when I should be celebrating the historic passage of Hate Crimes on Thursday, and the amazing work of the Out and Equal Workplace Summit, I’m consumed by feelings of betrayal and disappointment. The conspirist in me feels that I’ve been played, that this has been in the works for a long time, that people and organizations with a vested interest in passing ENDA at any cost believe that there will be some unhappiness but that it will be short-lived if and when ENDA passes (without trans inclusion). However, the idealist in me cares too much to give up. For now.

The September 30th entry is pretty scathing too….

…Friendship or not, I have difficulty reconciling maintaining a relationship with an organization that I can’t trust. Depending on what happens in the next couple of days and my reaction to it, I may find myself with extra time on my hands in coming weeks.

I doubt that I’ll do it this week, though (if at all). We’ve got face-to-face board meetings in Washington DC next week. I want to see them. I want the people who are willing to give in to their own transphobia and to cut us out of ENDA to have to look me in the eye. It’s easy to do when it’s someone you don’t know, when it’s a vote over the phone, when you won’t have to face the people you’re discriminating against. I will not be chased away before having that opportunity. That’s just not my way.

~~~~~~

The San Francisco Chronicle has a new article up on ENDA that goes into some of the sorted mess:

Leading gay rights organizations, with the pointed exception of the Human Rights Campaign, withdrew their support Monday from a landmark gay civil rights bill after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco and Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., pulled transgender people from the legislation that would protect gays and lesbians from workplace discrimination.

The intense backlash by the gay community surprised House Democratic leaders, forcing them to postpone what had been intended as a big House vote this week to include gays and lesbians in the nation’s job discrimination laws for the first time in American history.

…Pelosi and Frank, however, fear the inclusion of gender identity will kill the overall bill - again denying gays and lesbians protection against job discrimination.

Pelosi, D-San Francisco, issued conflicting statements Monday in reaction to the turmoil. The first declared her personal support for including transgender people in the Employment Non-Discrimination Act but asserted she would stick by her decision to drop them from the bill to give it a greater chance of passage.

About three hours later, the speaker issued a new statement saying, “After discussions with congressional leaders and organizations supporting passage” of the bill, committee and floor votes on the bill had been postponed to “allow proponents of the legislation to continue their discussions with members in the interest of passing the broadest possible bill.”

Surprised house Democratic leaders? They checked with the HRC (per Donna Rose above), but apparently didn’t check with any of the ninety organizations that just rebelled against the Frank/Pelosi/Miller move to dump transgender folk.

It can’t just be me thinking this — this ENDA mess says something about the HRC being really, really, out of touch with the LGBT base. The LGBT world changed dramatically in the summer of 2004, and I don’t think congress or the HRC “got” that a real sea change occurred.

Realistically, I don’t think the HRC is going to be able to legitimately claim that they are the leading LGBT civil rights organization for very much longer. They just aren’t leading anyone any more– they seem to be just following pretty far behind the Task Force and its ally organizations.