ENDA | Harry Reid | News

BigGayDeal.com

Cloture Likely on ENDA Tonight, Setting Up Monday Vote

A cloture filing on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act is likely tonight, Buzzfeed reports:

ReidReid is likely to file a cloture petition on the bill this evening, a Democratic leadership aide told BuzzFeed Thursday, which would set a vote on the motion to proceed on debate of ENDA for Monday evening.

If the motion to proceed, which requires 60 votes, is agreed to, the Senate would debate and eventually vote on the bill. The vote would be the first Senate vote on the legislation since 1996 and the first vote ever on the legislation with both sexual orientation and gender identity protections.

Reid told Rachel Maddow in an interview last night he is confident that the measure has the votes to pass.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. and will most certainly die in the House.

    Posted by: MARCUS BACHMANN | Oct 31, 2013 2:44:23 PM


  2. That is, if it passes the Senate, which is still very unclear. Orrin Hatch isn't a sure yes vote and in fact said he needed to see changes made to the bill to vote yes on it. McCain is out, Flake is out and from what I read yesterday you can count Toomey out too. There are some others on the fence such as Heller, Ayotte, Burr and Graham.

    If ENDA passes the Senate, it may take further watering down of the bill.

    Posted by: Francis #1 | Oct 31, 2013 3:34:45 PM


  3. Care to post sources Francis?

    Posted by: Stefan | Oct 31, 2013 3:55:30 PM


  4. Who cares? The bill is unpassable as long as it has provisions relating to crossdressers and "gender expression." In 2009 and 2010, we had an excellent chance to protect all workers from discrimination based on sexual orientation but we lost it because of the ideology of "LGBT" which says that gays and lesbians are entitled to no civil rights unless they come packaged simultaneously with rights for heterosexual transvestites and transsexuals.

    Posted by: Matthew | Oct 31, 2013 4:15:35 PM


  5. I eat Trolls like Mathew for dinner; NOM NOM NOM.

    Aren't you so proud of your go-piggy self trying to create divisions amongst LGBTs?

    ...Just like NOM's leaked internal documents said they would pursue.

    Funny dat!

    Well, bless your heart... you pathetic hack!

    Posted by: Jenny 0 | Oct 31, 2013 6:07:29 PM


  6. So, "Matthew," without the T protections the bill would be passable in the Republican-controlled House? You must be delusional as well as transphobiic.

    Posted by: Ernie | Oct 31, 2013 6:26:57 PM


  7. @Jenny - Can't create divisions among LGBTs because there is no such thing as LGBTs. There is LGB and there is T. The division is definitional. Speaking of piggies, how's ur mom?

    @Ernie - It would have been passable in 2009 when the Dems controlled the House. If we had passed it then, we would be coming up on the 5th anniversary of a great victory which would have benefited all workers and the subsequent GOP takeover wouldn't undo that victory. Instead, because of people like you who disrespect gay civil rights and feel that gays can't exist on their own without straight transvestites tied to their hips, we have nothing.

    Posted by: Matthew | Oct 31, 2013 9:54:13 PM


  8. So convenient for "Matthew" to have erased gay transgender people in his privilege-fueled rant. Poor Matthew, always going to lash out at and be scared of what he doesn't understand. Stonewall was started by drag queens you fracking moon bat.

    Posted by: jdb | Oct 31, 2013 10:58:32 PM


  9. Mmm, yeah. "Drag queens" are not transfolk. That you don't even know what is included in the term transgender and what is not only demonstrates that gays and lesbians have no business being lumped in with transfolk.

    As for gay transfolk, they would have benefited from the passage of ENDA in 2009. They would be enjoying years of protection from sexual orientation discrimination today. But "LGBT" screwed them over, as it has everyone else.

    Posted by: Matthew | Nov 1, 2013 3:51:57 AM


  10. @Matthew, blame the Dem's for not passing a T-inclusive (or any) bill when they had the chance. And blame the Republican-controlled House for being as ignorant as you are. They wouldn't pass a T-less gay civil rights bill, either--they never have in all of history. Can't blame that on transgendered folks.

    Posted by: Ernie | Nov 1, 2013 4:37:11 AM


  11. Sorry Ernie, but it would have passed in 2009. And it would have been fully inclusive in that it would have protected everyone - gay, straight, trans or cis - from discrimination based on sexual orientation. It would have been a huge benefit to millions of people but it never happened because folks like you care more about crossdressing than about gay civil rights and you think that gay people have some special burden to sideline their civil rights in order to advance the rights of crossdressers and transsexuals.

    Posted by: Matthew | Nov 1, 2013 12:11:59 PM


  12. @Matthew, each time you comment and talk about cross dressers, as if discrimination on the basis of gender identity is really about a straight guy in a dress, you only further reveal your ignorance.

    That it didn't pass then and won't get through the homo and transphobic Republican House is only a testament to cowardly lawmakers. Can't blame it on me, bucko. (My state doesn't allow discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity--with enlightened lawmakers, it's not a problem.)

    Posted by: Ernie | Nov 1, 2013 2:12:35 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Filmmaker: Ugandan Pastors Tried to Pray My Gay Away — VIDEO« «