Although House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., temporarily halted any action on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act ( ENDA ) following the massive response of national and local LGBT organizations, the controversy over a version of the bill that excludes protections for trans people continues.
Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., after introducing a fully-inclusive ENDA, introduced an orientation-only version in hopes of an easier passage. He also introduced a separate bill that would cover gender identity.
In a statement released Oct. 3, Frank responded to criticism he received from Lambda Legal, explaining that he was merely seeking widespread support. He provided his reasoning for introducing a new version, stating, '…the one change that is made substantively from the old bill to the new one that I reintroduced is to drop gender identity. No words have been added or subtracted that make it easier to fire a gay man because of some effort to transform homophobia into dislike of effeminacy and I believe the law continues to be a strong bulwark against that.'
Beyond that, in the cases of employee benefits and religious exemption, the efforts we made to try to increase our scope ran into insuperable opposition and the changes I made in the bill that was reintroduced simply reflect changes that would have been made in the original bill in the Committee markup. I should note that in both cases, all of those involved in the drafting of the bill were aware that we were going to have to make those changes and I am not aware of anyone who raised any objection because the case for doing so was so overwhelming. What we have now is exactly what we introduced in past years that had widespread support.'
Recently, House Majority Whip James Clyburn released a statement defending Frank's decision. 'Despite the Leadership's strong desire to pass an inclusive measure, the whip count made clear that we simply lack the necessary votes to pass a gender-identity-inclusive version of the bill at this time,' he said.
Yet others don't want to compromise. Pelosi, at Human Rights Campaign's ( HRC ) recent national dinner, stated, 'I strongly believe that transgender individuals deserve the same rights and the same protections as an other Americans and will work to see that ENDA also protects their rights.'
With action temporarily delayed by Pelosi, LGBT organizations continue to rally for a fully-inclusive bill, saying that massive lobbying efforts is the key. Many organizations and activists continue to also criticize HRC, the nation's largest LGBT organization, for what many have said is a weak stance, although the organization has since launched lobbying efforts of its own and a nationwide call to action at www.passendanow.org . On Oct. 4, a coalition of roughly 150 organizations announced United ENDA, a national campaign to win the passage of the original, fully-inclusive bill. HRC, as of press time, had not joined the United ENDA coalition, which now has about 255 signatories. The ENDA battle continued to make headlines on Oct. 3, when HRC's only openly transgender board member, Donna Rose, resigned because the national organization didn't voice opposition to the passage of a less-inclusive version of ENDA. In 2004, HRC's board voted to only accept a fully-inclusive ENDA. In a statement released by Rose, she said HRC's leader, Joe Solmonese, gave 'false promises.'
Rose felt the organization didn't play an active enough role. Over 90 other organizations immediately voiced opposition of the new measure and formed a national coalition while HRC stood silent.
'Organization after organization has seized the moral high ground knowing that this is a historic opportunity that cannot be squandered...,' Rose's statement read. 'There is a single significant organization glaringly missing from that list. The Human Rights Campaign has chosen not to be there.'
It wasn't until Oct. 5 that Solmonese, in a statement released to members, revealed the reasoning behind HRC's action.
'That final principle—staying in the game in order to influence the outcome—has thus far been almost unique to HRC,' the statement read. 'The actions we've taken based upon it have come under intense scrutiny by others. No matter now difficult it is to come under fire, however, we know that turning our backs on our relationships with Congress is not an acceptable strategy for HRC...
'…I won't leave anyone wondering about where HRC stands: we do not support the incomplete bill recently introduced in Congress and we only support a complete ENDA. Period.'
Despite concerns over HRC's strategy, multiple organizations have voiced their opinion that a fully-inclusive ENDA is possible, given enough support.
The legal community has also joined forces and lashed out against Frank's new bill, saying they won't back down, either. Transgender Law Center, along with the American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal, the National Center for Lesbian Rights and Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, released a statement criticizing the splitting of the bill.
Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights called the revised ENDA 'a major step backwards,' as well as a betrayal of the trans community. In a statement, she also pointed out that sex stereotyping is also at the root of much work discrimination of lesbians and gays, so the bill hurts the entire community.
