I checked to see if this LA Times article had already been posted and did not see it. My bad if a repeat.

LA TIMES OP/ED October 11, 2007

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-daniels10oct10,0,4380648.story?coll=la-opinion-center


Democrats tried to get away with a discrimination bill that left out transgender persons. Big mistake.

By Christine Daniels
October 10, 2007

The basketball expression for it is "low-bridge." It is the dirtiest foul in the sport, the act of suddenly taking out a player's legs as he or she leaps for a rebound, pass or jump shot. It's a cheap and devious move, in that it may look spontaneous but is almost always premeditated -- and almost always a prelude to a fight.

That's what happened to the transgender community on Sept. 26. We were low-bridged. By -- of all people -- Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

But, in a shocking upset, the transgender community picked itself up, rubbed its newly scraped elbows and fought back. Frank, Pelosi & Co. didn't know what hit them.

The impetus for this brawl was the struggle over the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, a bill that is the proud product of some hard battles won by a unified coalition of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender activists and advocates. ENDA seeks to protect civil rights so fundamental -- and so fundamentally American -- that it seems absurd we are still haggling over this in late 2007. ENDA would make it illegal to fire or refuse to hire or promote anyone based simply on the employee's sexual orientation or gender identity.

On paper, Frank, an openly gay Democrat, seemed the right person to lead this game plan. But as September rolled on, surveys of House members showed that ENDA did not have the votes to pass if it protected transgender people, but it did if it just covered gays and lesbians. So Frank huddled with Pelosi and other Democratic leaders and decided to play Solomon with ENDA -- only with half the wisdom. On Sept. 26, Frank announced his plan to split ENDA into two bills -- one bill protecting sexual orientation, which would get introduced immediately to Congress, and another bill protecting gender identity, which Congress would get to somewhere down the line. Maybe in a year or two. Or six or seven.

Ordinarily, self-interest dominates everything and everyone in Washington, and it often rolls right over decency and ethics. With ENDA, congressional thinking seemed to go: "This boat is listing. We better do something! But what? We really have no stomach for this sort of fight ... so let's throw the transfolk overboard! So what if they are the minority that needs ENDA's protection the most? Nobody knows a transgender person anyway; decades of intolerance and ignorance have kept them closeted. Who'll miss them in this bill?"

Big miscalculation. The strategy did not yield the usual we-got-ours run for safety. Lesbian, gay and bisexual activists stood alongside their trans sisters and brothers, and together we raised the roof. It was a beautiful noise, let me tell you.

It was so much noise -- about 140 gay and trans rights groups told Pelosi in no uncertain terms that protection for the transgendered needed to stay in the bill -- that she and Frank consented to delay a House vote until later this month. In these intervening weeks, Congress and America need to hear from the transgender people who live and walk and work among them -- you're reading one now -- and listen to what Barbara Sehr of the Ingersoll Gender Center told me last week.

"Until now, the problem has been that nobody has ever seen a trans person," Sehr said. "Before, the thinking was, 'Oh, they're just men in dresses and girls with beards. They're not worth the effort.' In their minds, this was not a civil rights issue. People saw it as a totally sexual thing, when nothing could be further from the truth. Sexual orientation has nothing to do with gender identity."

This generation, Sehr said, has more experience with the issue because more transgender people are being public about it.

"The same thing happened with the gay community. Twenty or 30 years ago, not that many gays were out, and people didn't realize they might be living next door to a gay person. Once people realized that the gay agenda included doing their laundry and driving their kids to school and getting their hair done, the thinking changed to, 'Hey, they're normal! They deserve civil rights.' "

You are reading this right now, in no small part, because in 2003 California passed a state version of ENDA, the Gender Non-Discrimination Act. In early March, I scheduled a meeting with a person in our human resources department to do some exploratory research about transitioning at The Times. I was told: "Well, The Times cannot discriminate against you because California has a law in place."

Well. That was worded somewhat more bluntly than I wanted to hear. But it also was comforting. I had protection. I could be myself, and I could continue to draw a paycheck. From those crude beginnings, I was able to work with HR and my editors on a transition strategy that enabled me to keep my job, change my byline and, as it turns out, boost my career to a new level of personal fulfillment. I now write three or four columns a week for The Times' Sports section along with two blogs, including Woman in Progress, about the experience of transitioning from male to female.

I realize I am lucky. California is one of nine states that currently bar discrimination against transgender employees. My friend Susan Stanton did not have that kind of protection in Florida. In February, she lost her job as city manager of Largo despite a long and outstanding record of public service.

So I have a personal and professional stake in what's happening to ENDA right now. So do you, if you care about the most basic rights being extended to a neighbor, a co-worker, a friend who might be transgender but afraid to tell anybody because a national ENDA is still but a concept being picked apart by some shortsighted political opportunists.

Christine Daniels is a Los Angeles Times sportswriter. [email protected]

And these A-Holes in Washington have the unmitigated nerve to claim they represent The People.

I don't want to politicize things but this is possibly the most important moment in trans legeslative history so far so I'm going to post this here since it's trans related.

The passage or failure of this bill will affect transgendered civil rights for the next 20 years.   This is THE defining moment in our history.

If we are not to be allowed equal rights to employement another generation of transwomen will be consigned to prostitution.  It will affect upcoming legislation for same sex marriage.

In all but 9 states we can be denied housing - even motel rooms. If this fails to pass we will probably not see equal civil rights for another 20 years.  We will have little to no chance of fair treament in jails - continuing to send transwomen to male jails to be raped and end up with an hiv death sentence for minor crimes.

Heck - in many states we can be legally kept from even going to the bathroom!

So please everyone take a moment and call your rep.

TODAY!

Hugs,
TS Jamie  


Why Gay People Oppose Ed. & Labor Consideration of H.R. 3685

301 Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender organizations have united to oppose H.R. 3685 in the House Education and Labor Committee.

On Friday evening, House leadership announced that despite enormous opposition from the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community, they would be moving forward with a version of ENDA that only includes employment protections based on sexual orientation.  The LGBT community resoundingly rejected this approach two weeks ago and rejects it still.

Why pass a civil rights bill no civil rights organization wants?

It would be unprecedented for Congress to pass a civil rights bill that is solidly opposed by the community it is meant to protect. Would Congress really move forward with a bill that not a single organization in the entire LGBT community has endorsed? Over three-hundred organizations, in a coalition called United ENDA, have joined to ACTIVELY OPPOSE H.R. 3685.

Most LGBT individuals are also opposed to H.R. 3685. A survey sponsored by the Human Rights Campaign showed that 70% of the gay, lesbian and bisexual public said gender identity protections were important to include in ENDA, even if it means taking longer to pass a bill.

Legal analysis by every LGBT legal service organization, as well as the ACLU, shows that even gay people are not sufficiently protected without gender identity protections.

The point of including both sexual orientation and gender identity in the bill is to be sure that the entire LGBT community is protected.  Carving out sexual orientation creates an artificial line that leaves out anyone—gay, transgender or even straight—who is not sufficiently masculine or feminine to match cultural stereotypes.

Why ask less-supportive Democrats from non-supportive districts to be out on a limb for a bill that LGBT people do not want and that cannot become law this year?

Forcing a vote on a bill that the LGBT community opposes will not be considered “a historic victory.”  LGBT-supportive members of Congress are being put in an untenable position of either voting against an LGBT civil rights bill or voting for it and alienating their LGBT supporters.  Some who oppose the law will have done so in support of the LGBT community; others will have done so in opposition. The resulting confusion from a vote is sure to be a lingering political blemish for Democrats.

The H.R. 3685 strategy is already hurting efforts to pass state and local laws.

Over the last five years, states all across the country have passed non-discrimination bills that provide protections on the basis of both sexual orientation and gender identity – and no state in that time has chosen to leave transgender people behind.  Just this year alone, states as diverse as Iowa, Colorado and Oregon have passed these protections. Unfortunately, in the last two weeks, the lead Republican sponsor in Florida has abandoned his plan to introduce a unified bill and has decided to move forward instead with two separate bills, citing the “Washington strategy.”  Clearly, this is a dangerous precedent that will hurt efforts to pass protections in very demonstrable ways.

Bottom Line

Our coalition of over 300 organizations, and the vast majority of LGBT people, support only pursuing H.R. 2015 (the original ENDA that includes transgender protections) because it is morally right and strategically smarter than pursuing a sexual orientation only bill.  We know that it is unlikely that any form of ENDA is likely to pass into law this congressional session.  We know our efforts now are about laying the necessary groundwork for consideration again in 2009.  Voting on a non-inclusive bill this Congress will make it more difficult to procure passage of a fully-inclusive bill later.

United ENDA’s 301 organizations urge the Education and Labor Committee to either take up H.R. 2015 or consider no bill for now, and set aside H.R. 3685 immediately.

For more information contact

Becky Dansky

bdansky@...

202-639-6315 office

202-288-5456 mobile

Democrats have held Congress long enough for me to tell they are not serious about our community. They've begun to treat us like they treat the African-American community. They come to out parties and make snide remarks about Republicans to make us think we're friends, but once they get our vote, you never hear from them again . . . untill they need your vote again.

but once they get our vote, you never hear from them . . . untill they need your vote again.....or want another date!
When was the last time these hypocrites who claim to be representatives of the communities in which we live ever asked a non financial campaign contributor an opinion about anything? I suspect if every member of the House or Congress who has spent time with a Transgendered person supported the bill, it would pass easily.
Jamie is correct, we all need to call or write, reminding them who they really represent and how you think they should vote.

Thus is the nature of the political beast, Melissa.  Such was likely in ancient Athens and ever will be.  A smile and lame joke.  Handshake and if blessed, a slap on the back.  "I can use your vote."  And see you at the next primary.  Alas, a better way has not been found.  Maybe a world run by transsexuals is the dream.

Below is a reprint from a TS rights forum that I thought would be of interest here.  

The ENDA bill goes to committee today (Thursday) and if passed goes to the floor for a vote next week - where they will re-introduce TS rights as an ammendment.

In meetings this week in San Diego the assumption is two things.  One, even if this prevails or even if we get gender identity included, Pres. Bush will veto it.  There is little chance of getting a rights bill through before 2009.

But we are now on the national stage - there is no congressman in the country who doesn't have trans-rights on his mind.  The push will be to get it passed with a democrate president and congress.

Now - let's have sex...

Giggle,
TS Jamie  

****************
United ENDA Supports Congresswoman Baldwin's newly announced efforts to restore gender identity protections to Employment Non-Discrimination Act

WASHINGTON, DC - Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) announced today that she has secured an agreement from the Democratic leadership to introduce an amendment to H.R. 3685 that would restore gender identity protections to the Employment Non- Discrimination Act (ENDA). The amendment would be considered on the House floor next week, after the bill moves through the House Education and Labor Committee this Thursday. After her announcement, the United ENDA coalition released the following statement:

Two weeks ago, our community was told that gender identity would not be included in any version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. Congressional Leadership expected our community to acquiesce. However, United ENDA effectively communicated the strong opposition of hundreds of organizations and millions of members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community to leadership's efforts to advance a stripped down version of the bill. It is because of our unprecedented efforts that new options, such as the proposed amendment by Congresswoman Baldwin, are able to come before Congress. Members of Congress responded to the successful strategy of our coalition and many expressed their strong desire to vote for an inclusive bill that protects all lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.

Clearly, our preferred strategy is to pass the original ENDA (H.R. 2015) out of committee. However, if we are faced with a non-inclusive bill following the committee vote, we will work with Congresswoman Baldwin to repair ENDA to include protections on the basis of gender identity. We appreciate that Congressional leaders like Congresswoman Baldwin continue to share our commitment to pass an inclusive bill, and we expect Speaker Pelosi and the House leadership will actively support the Baldwin amendment.

Ricci Levy
Executive Director
Woodhull Freedom Foundation

Congressman whats his name is making a big push to exclude Gender Identity in the bill with the thought that the bill will be easier to pass if Transgender is not on it. If we are excluded, it will never happen. I understand his idea to take babysteps and introduce Trannsgender later, but when did the "T" become optional in the acronym GLB"T"?

I dont understand how these congressmen can throw us under the bus, in order to protect a portion of this "so-called" community.

I also don't understand why as Transgender men and women, we do not organize a louder voice. We need to be heard...the voice of "T", represented by ourselves as well as the G, L and B

Thank you, thank you very much.  Jaz

I wrote my congressman, but it appears that the bill will come to the floor without transgender rifgts... that's pure and simple discrimination.... EVERY other sector in society is protected except for the transgendered...

Here's a link and text to an editorial I wrote for the San Diego GLT newspaper. For what it's worth.

Hugs,
TS Jamie

http://www.gaylesbiantimes.com/?id=10751

Dear Editor:
I am a transgendered woman. I was heartened by your editorial last week where your magazine took a stance in support of the transgendered segment of our community in supporting an all inclusive ENDA bill.

Then tonight I discovered from your “reader poll” that 66% of local gay and lesbian respondents support a NON-trans inclusive ENDA bill.
The fact that 66% of our brothers and sisters DO NOT support the idea of transgendered people enjoying the same protections and civil rights deemed so important to the GLB(T) movement is just sad.

As a transsexual in a same sex relationship with another transwoman I am doubly troubled. My partner and I identify as lesbians, call us gay if it pleases you. Are we not a part of the G&L community?

Then why are our brothers and sisters refusing to support us? There would be no GLBT civil rights if the TS/TV’s hadn’t gotten fed up with official abuse and rioted at Stonewall. After so many years, why would 66% of you be OK with letting our legislators sell us out at the last minute?

More than anyone, transgendered people need Federal job protections. Transgendered women are the mostly likely segment of our society to lose or be denied employment based on sexual or gender identity. Even more so than gay and lesbian youth, young trans people often end up losing family and community support and end up on the street.

The result is (depending upon which poll you use) between 30% and 50% of transgendered women work in the sex trade. Roughly 30% are HIV positive. There is a saying “30/50” - by age 30, 50% of young trans people will commit suicide or die of HIV or other causes.

ENDA is a step toward ending such horrific statistics – and I submit that it is the duty of the Gay and Lesbian community to become educated on the realities facing transsexuals, and that it is in the best interest of the GLB community to stand beside us in our mutual quest for full civil rights, some 230 years after we were all “created equal” by the Declaration of Independence.

Please my GLB brothers and sisters, don’t abandon us now.
Jamie S

-- Modified on 10/19/2007 11:53:18 AM

More comments re this important subject from LA Times writer Christine Daniels:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/womaninprogress/

BTW, Amazing the individual responses from our "representives" in Washington

"Rep insert name here thanks you for taking the time to write on this important issue and will take your opinion into consideration when he casts his vote"
Yeah....right

They must be sharing staff since I rec'd the same response back from 4 of my e-mails.
I am sure that these are programed responses, but really, maybe a bit of varity is in order.