June 26, 2008 7:22 PM BST
Well, today’s hearing opened with a shocking flip flop from Barney Frank in vociferous support of transgender inclusion in ENDA. It is my hope that Mr. Frank’s change of heart is in earnest. Tammy Baldwin, our hero in all this, also presented a compelling opening statement. Witnesses testifying about their experiences, positive and negative in the area of employment included Col. Diane Schroer, ret., who was denied a position with the Library of Congress despite her years of service to our country, Sabrina Marcus Taraboletti, former NASA engineer, fired upon transition in spite of her specialized skills and previous value to the space program, Diego Sanchez, Director of Public Relations and External Affairs for the AIDS Action Committee of Massachussets, and Bill Hendrix, Chair of Gays, Lesbians and Allies at Dow Chemical, both of whom testified to the positive aspects of transgender workplace inclusion, and the benefits to those businesses and organizations that have included gender identity among their non-discrimination policies.
Also testifying was JC Miller, partner at the firm of Thompson Hine, who while not opposing this legislation, expressed concern about its specific language as it pertains to implementation by business owners, and asked that the language in the bill be written in a more specific manner, less open to interpretation.
Testifying in opposition was Glen Lavy, Senior Counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, who expressed opposition to the bill based upon moral and religious grounds, maintaining that to compel employers with “deeply held religious beliefs” to comply with such legislation would be unconstitutional. When questioned further by Committee Chairs Rob Andrews (D, NJ) and John Kline (R, MN) as to the matter of choice as it pertains to religious beliefs and the lack thereof as it pertains to being transgender, and to specific hypothetical examples of religious exemption from discrimination legislation, not just with regard to gender identity, but race and religion, was unable to provide clear and compelling answers to support his view. His responses were evasive and non-specific, containing lots of stammering and hedging, refusing to address the specific questions and failing to present convincing arguments.
Overall, this was encouraging. I only hope that it’s not just some effort to mollify us and shut us up. It won’t shut me up until an inclusive version of ENDA is signed into law, I can tell you that. Mara Keisling of NCTE is to be commended for her efforts to make today’s hearing a reality, and for the conduct of this hearing with the conspicuous and refreshing absence of any representatives of HRC. Thank you, Mara, for making this hearing specific to our community’s needs independent of the GLB agenda.
One thing I would observe is how often the committee recessed. I realize that the committee members have lots of important stuff to do, and as a former union stagehand, I recognize the importance of regular breaks, but I wonder if it’s possible that Mr. Frank or some of these committee members need to seek some treatment for enlarged prostate to reduce the frequency of their need for the loo, or are the doughnuts in the break room really that good? No wonder it takes so long to get stuff done in our legislative bodies.
June 26, 2008 8:15 PM BST
Thanks Robyn for giving a great summary of what went on today. I was able to view both Baldwin's and Frank's statements earlier. It did sound encouraging.
Marsha
0 AM EST, and the hearing, titled "An Examination of Discrimination Against Transgender Americans In The Workplace" will begin any minute. Follow the link in the previous post to view this important hearing live. 