National
9 U.S. senators to Harkin: Time to move on ENDA
Bipartisan group calls for vote on non-discrimination bill
A bipartisan group of nine senators is backing the idea of having the Senate panel with jurisdiction over the Employment Non-Discrimination Act advance the legislation to the floor by a committee vote.
The group is asking for Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee, to hold a markup on ENDA in the wake of the panel’s hearing on the legislation last week and the senator’s remarks to the Washington Blade immediately afterward that he wanted “to poll the committee” about moving the bill forward.
Sen. Mark Kirk is among those calling for an ENDA markup (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)
In the week after the hearing, the Blade solicited statements from the offices of all 22 members of the Senate panel on whether they want to see the committee move the legislation to the Senate floor. Those who responded affirmatively were spokespersons for Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), ENDA’s lead sponsor, as well as Sens. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), the only Republican on the panel who responded to the Blade’s inquiry.
All 12 Democrats on the panel — as well as Kirk, an original co-sponsor of the bill — are among the 41 total co-sponsors of ENDA, so the bill should have no trouble moving out of committee. The legislation would bar employers in most situations in the public and private workforce from discriminating against workers because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
Sanders’ office accompanied his call for a committee vote on ENDA with a statement saying the time is now to pass ENDA to end workforce discrimination against LGBT people.
“As I’ve said many times before, discrimination of any kind is not what America is supposed to be about,” Sanders said. “Yet only 16 states, including my own state of Vermont, and D.C. currently prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. I will fully support Sen. Merkley and Chairman Harkin in their efforts to move the Employment Non-Discrimination Act out of committee, because no Americans should have to live with the fear of losing their jobs simply because of who they are.”
The support that Murray’s office conveyed to the Blade echoes the sentiment she expressed about moving the legislation forward during the committee hearing last week. Murray was explicit in calling for a markup, saying she wants to see ENDA pass out of committee “expeditiously.” In response, Harkin said, “I hope so.”
But speaking to the Washington Blade after the hearing, Harkin was non-committal about holding a markup, saying he wants to speak with panel members before moving forward.
Senate HELP Committee Chair Tom Harkin (Blade file photo by Michael Key)
“I’m going to poll my committee and see,” Harkin said. “Right now, I’m kind of up to here in getting [Food & Drug Administration] bill through, as you know. We got it through the Senate; we’ve got to work with the House on that trying to get that put to bed, and then I’m going to poll the committee and see what we want to do.”
The Senate HELP Committee didn’t respond to a request for comment on the possibility of holding a markup on ENDA. It’s unclear whether the seven senators who expressed support for a markup to the Blade’s solicitation is enough support for Harkin to schedule a markup.
Tico Almeida, president of Freedom to Work, said a markup would enable the committee to make technical changes to the bill before taking it to the Senate floor for final passage.
“Senate rules allow leader Reid to bring ENDA to the floor of the Senate without a committee vote, but a committee mark-up would present a good opportunity for Chairman Harkin to make technical improvements to ENDA, for example, by fixing the legal loophole created by a bad Supreme Court decision called Gross vs. FBL Financial,” Almeida said. “Mr. Harkin recently introduced legislation to fix the same loophole in the age discrimination statute, and ENDA needs the same fix to be incorporated into the bill.”
Ian Thompson, legislative representative for the American Civil Liberties Union, also backed the idea of a committee markup as a way to advance ENDA.
“The Senate HELP Committee should move forward with a markup of this critical and long overdue legislation that will allow American workers who stand side-by-side at the workplace and contribute with equal measure in their jobs to also stand on the same equal footing under the law,” Thompson said.
Thompson added the committee should make modifications to the bill when it comes up for consideration: (a) narrowing the legislation’s exemption so that it doesn’t provide religious organizations “with a blank check” to discriminate against LGBT people for any reason and not just religious teachings, and (b) removing a provision that expands the Defense of Marriage Act and allows employers in states where same-sex couples can legally marry to treat married gay employees as unmarried for the purposes of employee benefits.
Reporting the legislation to the floor would be similar to what Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) did for the Respect for Marriage Act, legislation that would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. In November, Leahy held a markup on the bill in the Senate Judiciary Committee, passing the bill via a party-line vote.
A committee markup may be the furthest extent to which ENDA can advance during the 112th Congress. The 41 co-sponsors of the legislation fall significantly short of the 60 votes needed to overcome a Senate filibuster. Additionally, it’s highly unlikely that the Republican-controlled House would consider ENDA as long as House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) is the presiding officer of that chamber.
The office of Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) reiterated the senator’s support for ENDA in response to the Blade inquiry without explicitly calling for a markup. Jude McCartin, a Bingaman spokesperson said, “Sen. Bingaman is a cosponsor of the bill and as such intends to vote for it.” McCartin didn’t respond to follow up inquiries to clarify whether this means Bingaman wants to see a markup.
But some of the committee members who responded affirmatively to the idea of a markup — Merkley, Murray, Casey and Kirk — went further and volunteered they also want to see a floor vote on the legislation despite the lack of assured passage of the legislation. Even a vote that failed would demonstrate where senators stand on the bill — and which lawmakers ENDA supporters should work to expel on Election Day.
Merkley expressed support for the idea of a markup and floor vote in response to a question from the Washington Blade during a conference call with reporters following the ENDA hearing last week.
“I support any effort that takes this issue forward whether it’s a markup in committee or it going straight to the floor,” Merkley said. “I’ll defer to the leadership of the committee on the most effective legislative strategy, but I think it is long past time for the Senate as a whole to debate and vote on this bill.”
In a statement to the Blade, Casey expressed support for a Senate vote on ENDA in a statement accompanying his backing a markup of the bill.
“I hope that the Senate moves quickly toward bipartisan passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act,” Casey said. “This common-sense legislation ensures that employees are judged on their skills and abilities in the workplace and not on their sexual orientation or gender identity and I am hopeful that it will see swift passage.”
Kirk’s support for both a markup and floor vote on ENDA puts him ahead of many Democrats on where he wants to take the legislation. Kate Dickens, a Kirk spokesperson, said, “Sen. Kirk is supportive of committee passage and floor consideration of ENDA.”
Christian Berle, deputy executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, said his organization supports Kirk’s call to advance the legislation as far as possible in the Senate.
“Jobs and the economy must be the first priority for Congress, and the freedom to work is fundamental to getting all Americans back to work,” Berle said. “Log Cabin Republicans support Sen. Mark Kirk’s effort to secure a markup both in committee and on the floor. Sen. Harry Reid remains the majority leader and could easily schedule a vote to maintain his commitment to equality and should not delay in doing so.”
Support for a floor vote on ENDA echoes a letter that Freedom to Work sent to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) calling for a floor vote this summer on the legislation. The letter notes that Reid said during a 2009 Human Rights Campaign dinner in Utah a floor vote on ENDA would take place “soon” — but has yet to happen — as well as the Blade’s questioning of then-White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs at the start of this Congress.
In response to a question on whether the administration sees values in passing ENDA in one chamber of Congress, Gibbs acknowledged, “there’s no doubt that whenever you get something done in one [chamber], you’re closer to certainly seeing it come to fruition.”
A number of LGBT groups — including the Human Rights Campaign and the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force — had previously called for a markup of ENDA as they sought a Senate hearing on the legislation. But the call for a full Senate vote on ENDA wasn’t as unified.
Fred Sainz, HRC’s vice president of communications, wasn’t explicit in calling for a floor vote when asked by the Blade if his organization wants to see the Senate take the legislation that far during this Congress.
“HRC supports advancing the bill in the smartest, most strategic fashion and at the most opportune time,” Sainz said. “We will continue to work with our ally organizations as well as fair-minded members of both houses of Congress to find that time.”
Stacey Long, the Task Force’s director of public policy and government affairs at the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, said her organization wants to see a Senate vote, but only after the committee has first marked up the bill.
“We want it to follow the procedure — first voted out of committee, then sent to the Senate floor, followed by a full Senate vote,” Long said.
But Almeida insisted that a Senate floor vote on ENDA is the best possible route for the bill in the immediate future regardless of what action the committee takes.
“The most opportune time for a Senate vote on ENDA is right away,” Almeida said. “We should not accept excuses for further delay on a Senate vote for legislation supported by super-majorities of the American people. … ENDA now has Republicans calling for a full Senate vote, and that is consistent with the White House’s position that right now the administration prefers a congressional vote on ENDA rather than an executive order that is waiting for the president’s signature.”
Almeida was referring to the proposed executive order barring federal contractors from discriminating against workers based on sexual orientation and gender identity. In April, the White House announced it wouldn’t issue such a directive at this time.
Tennessee
Tenn. lawmakers pass transgender “watch list” bill
State Senate to consider measure on Wednesday
The Tennessee House of Representatives passed a bill last week to create a transgender “watch list” that also pushes detransition medical treatment. The state Senate will consider it on Wednesday.
House Bill 754/State Bill 676 has been deemed “ugly” by LGBTQ advocates and criticized by healthcare information litigators as a major privacy concern.
The bill would require “gender clinics accepting funds from this state to perform gender transition procedures to also perform detransition procedures; requires insurance entities providing coverage of gender transition procedures to also cover detransition procedures; requires certain gender clinics and insurance entities to report information regarding detransition procedures to the department of health.”
It would require that any gender-affirming care-providing clinics share the date, age, and sex of patients; any drugs prescribed (dosage, frequency, duration, and method administered); the state and county; the name, contact information, and medical specialty of the healthcare professional who prescribed the treatment; and any past medical history related to “neurological, behavioral, or mental health conditions.” It would also mandate additional information if surgical intervention is prescribed, including details on which healthcare professional made a referral and when.
HB 0754 would also require the state to produce a “comprehensive annual statistical report,” with all collected data shared with the heads of the legislature and the legislative librarian, and eventually published online for public access.
The bill also reframes detransitioning as a major focus of gender-affirming healthcare — despite studies showing that the number of trans people who detransition is statistically quite low, around 13 percent, and is often the result of external pressures (such as discrimination or family) rather than an issue with their gender identity.
This legislation stands in sharp contrast to federal protections restricting what healthcare information can be shared. In 1996, Congress passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, requiring protections for all “individually identifiable health information,” including medical records, conversations, billing information, and other patient data.
Margaret Riley, professor of law, public health sciences, and public policy at the University of Virginia, has written about similar efforts at the federal level, noting the Trump-Vance administration’s push to subpoena multiple hospitals’ records of gender-affirming care for trans patients despite no claims — or proof — that a crime was committed.
It has “sown fear and concern, both among people whose information is sought and among the doctors and other providers who offer such care. Some health providers have reportedly decided to no longer provide gender-affirming care to minors as a result of the inquiries, even in states where that care is legal.” She wrote in an article on the Conversation, where she goes further, pointing out that the push, mostly from conservative members of the government, are pushing extracting this private information “while giving no inkling of any alleged crimes that may have been committed.”
State Rep. Jeremy Faison (R-Cosby), the bill’s sponsor, said in a press conference two weeks ago that he has met dozens of individuals who sought to transition genders and ultimately detransitioned. In committee, an individual testified in support of the bill, claiming that while insurance paid for gender-affirming care, detransition care was not covered.
“I believe that we as a society are going to look back on this time that really burst out in 2014 and think, ‘Dear God, What were we thinking? This was as dumb as frontal lobotomies,’” Faison said of gender-affirming care. “I think we’re going to look back on society one day and think that.”
Jennifer Levi, GLAD Law’s senior director of Transgender and Queer Rights, shared with PBS last year that legislation like this changes the entire concept of HIPAA rights for trans Americans in ways that are invasive and unnecessary.
“It turns doctor-patient confidentiality into government surveillance,” Levi said, later emphasizing this will cause fewer people to seek out the care that they need. “It’s chilling.”
The Washington Blade reached out to the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, which shared this statement from Executive Director Miriam Nemeth:
“HB 754/SB 676 continues the ugly legacy of Tennessee legislators’ attacks on the lives of transgender Tennesseans. Most Tennesseans, regardless of political views, oppose government databases tracking medical decisions made between patients and their doctors. The same should be true here. The state does not threaten to end the livelihood of doctors and fine them $150,000 for safeguarding the sensitive information of people with diabetes, depression, cancer, or other conditions. Trans people and intersex people deserve the same safety, privacy, and equal treatment under the law as everyone else.”
National
Glisten’s 30th annual Day of Silence to take place April 10
Campaign began as student-led protests against anti-LGBTQ bullying, discrimination
Glisten’s 30th annual Day of Silence will take place on April 10.
The annual Day of Silence began as a student-led protest in response to bullying and discrimination that LGBTQ students face. It is now a national campaign for the LGBTQ community and their allies to come together for LGBTQ youth.
It takes place annually and has multiple ways for supporters to get involved in the movement.
Glisten, originally GLSEN, champions LGBTQ issues in schools, grades K-12. Glisten’s mission is to create more inclusive and accepting environments for LGBTQ students through curriculum, supportive measures, education campaigns, and engagement, such as the Day of Silence.
There are three main ways for the community to get involved in the Day of Silence.
Glisten has a Day of Silence frame, a series of pictures used as profile photos across social media that feature individuals holding signs. The signs allow for personalization, by providing a space to put the individual’s name, followed by filling in the prompt “ … and I am ENDING the silence by…”
Participants are encouraged to post the photo on social media and use it as a profile picture. The templates can be found on Google Drive through this link.
Using #DayOfSilence and #NSCS, as well as tagging Glisten’s official Page @glistencommunity, is another way to participate in the Day of Silence.
Glisten also encourages participants to tag creators, friends, family and use a call to action in their caption, to call attention to the facts and stories behind the Day of Silence.
“Today’s administration in the U.S. wants us to stay silent, submit to their biased and hurtful conformity, and stop fighting for our right to be authentically ourselves,” said Glisten CEO Melanie Willingham-Jaggers. “We urge supporters to use their social platforms and check in with local chapters to be boots on the ground to help LGBTQ+ students feel seen, heard, supported, and less alone. By participating in the ‘Day of Silence,’ you are showing solidarity with young people as they navigate identity, safety, and belonging. Our voices matter.”
South Carolina
Man faces first S.C. ‘hate intimidation’ charge
Timothy Truett allegedly shot at gay club in Myrtle Beach on April 1
A South Carolina man remains in custody on a more than $300,000 bond after he allegedly opened fire at a Myrtle Beach nightclub on April 1, according to WMBF.
Reports say 37-year-old Timothy James Truett Jr., of Clover, S.C., was detained by the Myrtle Beach Police Department after the April 1 incident outside Pulse Ultra Club. He was later arrested and charged with possession of a weapon during a violent crime, discharging a firearm into a dwelling, discharging a firearm within city limits, malicious injury to real property valued over $5,000, and assault or intimidation due to political opinions or the exercise of civil rights.
At 10:57 a.m. on April 1, officers responded to a call about a possible shooting at Pulse Ultra Club, located in the 2700 block of South Kings Highway.
In an affidavit released later, the club’s owner, Ken Phillips, said he was doing paperwork that morning when he heard “five or six” gunshots. He went outside and found a window and the windshield of his SUV shattered by bullets. An SUV with blue plastic covering one window was left at the scene.
Police later reviewed footage that showed a silver vehicle stopping in the middle of the road. The video appeared to capture muzzle flashes coming from the passenger-side window.
According to the affidavit, an officer later pulled over a vehicle driven by Truett and found spent shell casings in the back seat, along with a gun.
Documents do not detail why Truett was ultimately charged under the state law covering assault or intimidation tied to political opinions or the exercise of civil rights.
As of April 1, records show Truett is being held in Horry County on a combined bond of more than $312,000.
WMBF spoke with Phillips after the incident and asked whether there was any prior conflict that might have led to the shooting.
“I don’t know if it’s personal, I don’t know if it’s related to being gay, I don’t know if it’s related to the bar issues,” Phillips told WMBF. “Anybody with a mindset of pulling out a weapon in broad daylight is not right.”
“My primary concern has and always will be the safety of my community and my customers,” he added. “It’s given me great concern … as to how far people will go.”
WMBF also spoke with Adam Hayes, vice chair of Myrtle Beach’s Human Rights Coalition, who was involved in pushing for the ordinance. He said that while the incident itself is troubling, it shows the policy is being put to use.
The ordinance is intended to deter “crimes that are motivated by bias or hate towards any person or persons, in whole or in part, because of the actual or perceived” identity, in the absence of a statewide hate crime law.
“It’s nice to see that something we put into policy is not just a piece of paper, that it’s actually being used,” said Hayes.
He said the shooting underscores the need for a statewide hate crime law in South Carolina and added that the incident has left the local LGBTQ community shaken.
South Carolina and Wyoming are the only two states in the U.S. without a comprehensive statewide hate crime law.
Truett remains in jail as of publication.
A Sondheim masterpiece ‘Merrily’ rolls onto Netflix
ROSENSTEIN: Vote McDuffie for mayor of D.C.
New book celebrates 1970s dance music icons
Report: Grenell wants Russian ambassadorship
