Columnists :: Holding The Center
ENDA: a step forward by Richard J. Rosendall
contributing writerThursday Nov 15, 2007 Rep. Barney Frank’s voice cracked with rare emotion. He was the final speaker in the House floor debate on H.R. 3685, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2007. He was speaking against a Republican motion to recommit, which would have killed the bill.
"I used to be someone subject to [anti-gay] prejudice, and, through luck, circumstance, I got to be a big shot. ... But I feel an obligation to 15-year-olds dreading to go to school because of the torments, to people afraid that they will lose their job in a gas station if someone finds out who they love. I feel an obligation to use the status I have been lucky enough to get to help them. ... Yes, this is personal. There are people who are your fellow citizens being discriminated against. We have a simple bill that says you can go to work and be judged on how you work and not be penalized. Please don’t turn your back on them."
Thank God for C-SPAN, because it showed something that the Congressional Record does not: The cheers that erupted when Barney finished. This was not a rally on the steps of the Capitol. This was the United States in Congress Assembled, as the historical documents say. It showed that the American commitment to equality is gradually winning out over hate.
Earlier in the debate, Rep. John Lewis (D-Georgia), a civil-rights-era veteran of the Freedom Rides and Selma, put his personal authority behind the bill: "Madam Chairman, I for one fought too long and too hard to end discrimination based on race and color not to stand up against discrimination against our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters ... Today, we must take this important step after more than 30 long years and pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. It is the right thing to do. It is the moral thing to do."
Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) said, "I am proud to be an American today because when this ENDA bill passes, what we will be doing is affirming traditional values, traditional values like tolerance, traditional values like minding your own business, traditional values like allowing fellow Americans to rise to the full measure of their ability ..."
After the bill passed by a vote of 235 to 184, some people on "our side" inevitably rained on the parade. The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, a leading group in the United ENDA coalition, brazenly called H.R. 3685 "a bill not supported by most in the LGBT community," as if that community (which is a convenient fiction in the first place) consisted entirely of a few hundred executive directors.
The Human Rights Campaign, which had the sense not to ask representatives to vote against a gay rights bill, was slammed by the left for doing its best to navigate an impossible situation. HRC’s every tactical adjustment was treated as treachery by zealots who regard any change of mind as evidence of a lie.
The leftists’ repeated insistence that House passage is worthless because the bill has little chance of becoming law this term ignores the entire legislative process, as if all that mattered were the end result. But passage into law would never happen without arduous intermediate efforts. Refusing to take Congress’s yes for an answer because it is insufficiently comprehensive would do nothing but relegate LGBT advocates to the sidelines.
The ENDA that passed Nov. 7 is a good bill. I am sorry that we lacked the votes to make it better; but passage of this bill, even if only in the House, is a step forward that improves the chances for further victories including eventual transgender coverage. The all-or-nothing approach, by contrast, is as empowering as not feeding any hungry people because you cannot feed all hungry people.
Bismarck said, "Laws are like sausages; it is better not to see them being made." That is life in an imperfect world. Opposing gay protections until we can win transgender protections is not collaboration but hostage-taking. The more the radicals attack incrementalists, the more they undermine the very idea of an LGBT movement. Killing the bill would merely have highlighted the left’s proclivity for building losing coalitions. As it was, only seven House members voted against the bill for being insufficiently inclusive; all were from east coast states that already enjoy ENDA-type protections.
The endlessly repeated rhetoric about "throwing trannies under the bus" is not only unfair, it is particularly tasteless as we approach the Transgender Day of Remembrance commemorating victims of actual, savage, murderous attacks. To associate an honest disagreement over strategy with anti-trans violence is obscene.
Few of the self-righteous leftists will face up to the harm they are doing with their dogmatism; but the rest of us can limit the damage by refusing to pander to them. Working for the best bill we can achieve, while continuing to work toward a more comprehensive one, is not betrayal but the very definition of legislative effectiveness.
The House’s passage of H.R. 3685 is an historic victory, albeit not the final victory. Those who refuse to celebrate it were never tossed from any train, but deliberately left the train and tried to derail it. The fact that they failed shows the unpopularity of their approach even among liberals. The African American civil rights movement was also plagued by disunity, but persevered. As our predecessors did before us, we shall overcome.
Richard J. Rosendall is a writer and activist whose work has appeared on Salon.com and the Independent Gay Forum (www.indegayforum.com). He can be reached at rrosendall@starpower.net.
|
|
|
