Barney Frank | Discrimination | ENDA | News

BigGayDeal.com

Barney Frank Reintroduces Fully-Inclusive ENDA

Barney Frank today introduced a fully-inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). Pam Spaulding has posted a round-up of the reactions from LGBT groups.

Barney The Washington Blade reports: "According to his office, more than 100 members of Congress have signed on to co-sponsor the measure. Among the sponsors are gay House members Frank, Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) and Jared Polis (D-Colo.). The lead Republican sponsor is Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.). In a recent interview with the Blade, Frank said he believes prospects for passing a trans-inclusive ENDA have improved significantly since 2007, when he and other House Democratic leaders said the measure would be defeated if a gender identity clause were kept in the bill. Over the strong objections of transgender activists and many gay advocacy groups, House Democratic leaders dropped the transgender provision from the bill in September 2007. The House went on to pass it the following month, but the measure died when the Senate took no action on it."

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Thank god. The non-inclusive version should have never been introduced in the first place.

    Posted by: JeffRob | Jun 24, 2009 5:31:54 PM


  2. If it is not trans inclusive we should not want it. HRC should have know that the first time.

    Posted by: fred | Jun 24, 2009 5:42:14 PM


  3. This is the least Barney Frank can do after his fawning support of that awful DOMA brief submitted by the DOJ attorneys.

    Posted by: Yanz | Jun 24, 2009 5:45:21 PM


  4. It looks like only 10 people have signed on officially as cosponsors so far. Time to pressure your congressperson.

    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:HR02981:@@@P

    Posted by: Anonymous | Jun 24, 2009 6:08:42 PM


  5. The House can rush to pass it, then it can sit in the Senate with the Mathew Sheppard bill and gather dust.

    Two bills on gay rights? The plate is overflowing! Call the National Guard, only the straight ones though.

    Posted by: David | Jun 24, 2009 6:24:32 PM


  6. Unfortunately, David is correct.

    The House will pass it. And then it will go to the Senate, where it will die a slow death as that august body deliberates on more important matters. You know, important matters like where the most noble Arlen Specter's desk should go now that he has gone from RINO to DINO.

    (insert snicker here)

    Posted by: John | Jun 24, 2009 6:41:00 PM


  7. What should never have happened is that every gay activist shouldn't have thumbed their noses at an attempt to protect more of the glbt community when the opportunity was there. Can't be having any incremental positive change, the checks might not keep coming and we won't be able to make the payments on that huge building or get the special access our "leaders" so crave. The mainstream glbt organizations saw the last of my dollars after that fiasco (except Lambda Legal, who actually manages to accomplish something).

    Posted by: KJ | Jun 24, 2009 6:57:58 PM


  8. Yes, KJ.

    Those who want no bill at all if it doesn't cover the transgender community should follow their logic.

    If we don't cover lgbT, then let's repeal thw Aericans with Disabilities Act so those people don't get coverage that the entire LGBT community doesn't get. And you can work backwards from there. Are the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments in view?

    Posted by: BillyBoy | Jun 24, 2009 7:03:36 PM


  9. I just got a call from Barney. He said if ENDA passes you have to stop using his sex offender photo above.

    Posted by: David | Jun 24, 2009 8:31:46 PM


  10. I have a question...

    Is there a reason why Nancy Pelosi didn't/can't sign/support it? She may be Speaker, but she is also a Congresswoman and is suppose to represent her district. Her name was also missing from the "76 House Democrats Urge Obama to Halt Gay Military Discharges". Are their legalities as to her absence?

    Since I am from California, I love how Democrats like Pelosi and Boxer only speak out on gay rights when they are running for re-election (except of course Pelosi kept her mouth shut during Prop 8).

    Posted by: CB | Jun 24, 2009 10:12:31 PM


  11. CB,

    No legalities.

    But traditionally, the Speaker does not co-sponsor any "partisan" legislation. The office has become so partisan that it is an absurd anarchronism. However, this is Washington DC. And they'll go through the motions just for the sake of continuity.

    It is the same reason why the Sargeant-at-Arms carries the ceremonial mace into the chamber each morning. Pelosi obviously isn't going to actually hit anyone with it. Yet, technically, you can't call the House into session without it because it symbolizes the Speaker's authority and the indpendence of the chamber from the President and the Senate. So on and so forth.

    Americans tend to think that such silliness is only for monarchies. But we have plenty of ridiculously outdated rituals ourselves.

    Posted by: John | Jun 24, 2009 11:10:11 PM


  12. we in the glbt community allow them to forget about us and our pending legislation by not unifying nationwide. We just sit and take it. aren't we getting tired of this behavior?

    Posted by: steve | Jun 24, 2009 11:41:23 PM


  13. Thanks for the info John.

    Posted by: CB | Jun 25, 2009 5:03:08 AM


  14. Billyboy,

    the reason an inclusive ENDA is so important is because taking out gender expression in addition to leaving part of the community behind, leaves a giant loophole. You could still be fired for 'acting gay' and it would not be covered. Non conforming gender expression is what ultimately unites us as queers and straight folk don't care how straight acting you are, just liking other guys is enough to have a different gender expression and be fired, so it is in everyone's self interest to have an inclusive ENDA

    Posted by: alexmac | Jun 25, 2009 10:37:44 AM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Anti-Gay South Carolina GOP Governor Sanford Admits to Affair« «