News
2007-09-06
House panel
hears arguments for ENDA
ENDA
supporters plead their case
Dramatic
testimony from lawmakers, scholars, business leaders, and
Dramatic
testimony from lawmakers, scholars, business leaders, and
gay civilian employees marked Wednesday's hearings on
the federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2007.
Also known as
HR2015, ENDA, introduced in April, would make it illegal to
fire, refuse to hire, or refuse to promote an employee based
on sexual orientation or gender identity.
Only 20 states
and the District of Columbia now protect gay men and
lesbians in the workplace, and only 10 states protect
workers based on gender identity.
In her opening
statement to the Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions
subcommittee of the House Education and Labor Committee, the
bill's cosponsor, Rep. Tammy Baldwin, a Democrat from
Wisconsin, called ENDA an important step in extending
rights guaranteed by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
of 1964.
Just as Title VII
declared employer judgments based upon race, color,
religion, sex, or national origin to be unlawful, Baldwin
said, "today, we can point to a clear record
demonstrating further employment discrimination based
upon sexual orientation and gender identity, and it is
high time that we as a nation declare this sort of
discrimination unlawful as well."
Ninety-two
percent of Fortune 500 companies include sexual orientation
in their corporate nondiscrimination policies.
“Corporate
America is supportive of this bill," Human Rights Campaign
spokesman Brad Luna told Gay.com on Wednesday. The primary
opposition, Luna said, "is coming from the places
opposition always comes from—right-wing
religious organizations."
ENDA's current
iteration exempts religious organizations.
Kelly Baker, vice
president for diversity at General Mills, told the
House subcommittee that the legislation would help companies
attract and retain top talent; provide a safe,
comfortable, and productive work environment; and
"help create a culture that fosters creativity and
innovation that is vital to the success of all businesses."
Helen Norton, a
professor at the University of Colorado School of Law,
shared several cases of LGBT discrimination, including that
of Robert Higgins, a gay man who told the first
circuit court of appeals that coworkers targeted him
for both verbal and physical harassment because of his
orientation. The court told Higgins that he had no legal
standing in bringing a Title VII challenge to a
workplace environment, even after suffering such
egregious actions as having hot cement poured on him,
"because Title VII does not proscribe harassment simply
because of sexual orientation," Norton recalled.
Personal
testimony came from a gay police officer, Michael Carney,
who recalled his efforts to fight for his job.
"Had I not been
successful in fighting the bias that tried to prevent
me from working, all the good that I have done for some of
the most vulnerable people in my community would never
have happened," he told lawmakers.
Wednesday's
hearing consisted of two panels; the first, led by
cosponsors Representative Baldwin and Rep. Barney
Frank, a Democrat from Massachusetts, argued for ENDA,
while a smaller panel argued against the bill.
In his opposition
to ENDA, Mark Fahleson, an attorney in Lincoln, Neb.,
decried the "vague language" of the bill and insisted that
ENDA could lead to "meritless litigation" and a
significant new regulatory burden and cost for
employers.
“In far
too many instances the legislation adopts subjective or
fact-specific standards that are subject to multiple
interpretations," he told the subcommittee.
Congressional
Democrats first attempted to add federal protections for
gay men and lesbians in 1974, but were stymied by GOP
opposition for 20 years. With the 1994 GOP takeover of
Congress, gay rights legislation had no chance of
getting to a committee hearing at all.
That changed
after Democrats regained control of Congress in January.
ENDA, which has bipartisan support, is just one of several
LGBT rights bills Democrats are pushing forward.
Without significant opposition from the business
community, a version of ENDA has a good chance of passing,
Luna said.
"Today's hearing
was an historic advancement for ENDA," Luna said. "The
witnesses gave compelling testimony that starts out this
process on a high note."
Luna said he
expects the full House Education and Labor Committee to mark
up the legislation in the next couple of weeks and then move
for its first House floor vote this fall. (Larry
Buhl, Gay.com)
Click here to follow The Advocate on Twitter.
Page 1 of 1