Questioning Slanted Equality

Courtney, Panel Discuss Incomplete Non-Discrimination Act

By: Heather Murdock

Posted: 12/3/07

A rainbow flag waved outside the Dodd Center on Saturday afternoon. A small amount of snow was still frozen on the ground, and six protesters in heavy coats handed out flyers that said, "HRC [Human Rights Campaign]: Your vision of equality only extends as far as your nose."

These protesters, however, did not stay out in the cold. When the UConn Town Hall Forum on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (EDNA) began, they came in to hear what the four member panel and Rep. Joseph Courtney (D-Conn.) had to say.

The forum, according to Matt Blinstrubas, who planned the event with Human Rights Campaign representative Brian Rice, was intended to be a constructive discussion about the ENDA controversy that has divided the gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender community across the country.

"It was the beginning of a conversation that needs to happen," said Blinstrubas, the executive chair of Queers United Against Discrimination (QUAD) and a 9th-semester English and social justice major. "It was the first of its kind in the country - where we all came to the table to talk. Before, it was a series of press release wars and protests. It can't end here."

"We wanted to get everybody in a room, from each perspective," said Rice, "and have an open dialogue about ENDA."

The controversy began in September when ENDA, a bill originally designed to protect Gay Lesbain Bisexual and Transgender (GLBT) workers from discrimination, was amended. The bill's sponsor, Sen. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) didn't believe that Congress would pass the bill if it included protection for discrimination based on, "gender identity." They amended the bill and Congress approved it by 235-184 votes on Nov. 7. The bill protects people from discrimination based exclusively on, "sexual orientation."

It is difficult to predict, according to Courtney, how the Senate will vote on the bill, but if it passes, most people expect it to be vetoed by President Bush. Passing the bill in the House, Courtney said, was an important step in the process of making it a future law, despite its prospects in the White House. Courtney added, civil rights legislation is, "done in chunks."

In response to the amendment, over 300 GLBT organizations banned together in opposition to the bill and formed a synthesis group called ENDA United. The HRC, the largest and most powerful GLBT activist organization in the country, initially remained neutral. On the day before the vote, however, the HRC joined a group of leading activist organizations to express its support for the bill, infuriating GLBT activists across the country.

All of the panel members and the congressman supported the original ENDA, and they all agreed that the old bill was better than the one Congress passed. Some of the speakers, and many members of the UConn community, however, said that the bill in its current form, which protects people based on sexual orientation only, should not have been put to a vote.

According to panelist Holly Ryan, the Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition co-chair, the change in the legislation was akin to offering the right to marry to lesbians, but not to gay men. She said that the transgender community faces discrimination more often than gays, lesbians or bisexuals, and it is the group most in need of protection.

Rachel Goldberg, the co-chair of the Board of Directors of the Gender Public Advocacy Coalition, said that when Congress changed the bill, which she had personally worked on, and then the HRC expressed its support for the amended bill, "the feeling of betrayal from the trans-community was complete."

Goldberg also said that ENDA United would need a public apology from HRC if the two organizations were to resume the productive relationship they had in the past. She challenged HRC Deputy Field Director Jeremy Pittman with the question, "If the bill protected gay people, and not lesbians, where would the HRC have been?"

"We can agree that the vast majority of the people in this room support a fully inclusive bill," said Pittman, "[but] the movement of ENDA to this point is a complex path. The question is: What is possible?" Pittman said that the HRC believes that passing an imperfect bill is preferable to passing no bill at all and, "a way to move forward for all of our community."

Pittman also said that the key to expanding protection was educating the public on transgender issues. Through education, he said, the HRC hopes to "move America on the issue, so Congress can move on the issue."

Thomas W. Ude Jr., a Lambda Legal senior staff attorney, agreed that the GLBT community should prioritize educating the public and government officials. He also said that from a legal standpoint, a non-inclusive bill, if it does become law, less likely to be constructive.

"The stronger the protections that are in the law to begin with, the better off our whole community is," Ude said.

Courtney represents Connecticut's 2nd District, which includes Storrs. He co-sponsored the original, all-inclusive bill and voted 'yes' on the amended bill. He agreed with Pittman, and explained his position at a reception in the Rainbow Center later that afternoon.

"Anyone who's been close to a legislative process knows," Courtney said, "that Rome isn't built in a day. If anyone looks at the history of civil rights legislation in this country- these are sometimes generations long struggles that take a lot of tenacity. For a bill to get passed- it's important. It educates the members too."

He said that he also wanted to pass an all-inclusive bill and added, "with all the frustration that people still have, I don't think they should minimize the fact that this never happened before."

Currently, there are no federal laws that protect Americans from discrimination based on sexual orientation, and none of the many bills that have been proposed over the years have survived a House vote. He also said that it is possible that the more conservative that Congressed passed will get more support from Republicans in the Senate than its predecessor.

Some UConn community members, however, remained unconvinced.

"For our community at UConn, it's very important for us to be inclusive of all people." said Dawn England, the financial chair of Queers United Against Discrimination and a 7th-semester animal science and human development and family studies major. "Without question," she said, "many of us took the position that an inclusive bill was necessary."

The forum also, "brought up an interesting point that the bill is not going to be passed anyway," England said, "yet we set a precedent that we were going to exclude members of our community."

Danielle Civitillo, a 7th-semester civil engineering major and the executive chair of Allies and Queers Undergraduate Association, agreed.

"They threw transgender people under the bus," she said, "I don't understand how that's fair."

Despite the fact that the Rainbow Center co-sponsored the forum with the HRC, the center's director, Fleurette King, did not support the HRC position either.

As a UConn official, she said, "we have to support an inclusive bill, because we do have transgender students here." If the Rainbow Center officially supported the current version of the bill, she said, some students might feel "isolated or not welcome on campus."

King's personal opinion echoed her professional opinion. "Why not put it through with full inclusion," she said, "and then get rejected on principle?"

The forum, however, was important, according to King. "There is great educational value in bringing in folks who have different opinions," she said. The panelists "were able to strongly express their thoughts and feelings, and that's what I love about what happened today- versus not having it because it might get heated. If there's heat, that's exactly why we should do a forum like that."

As the reception wound down, Blinstrubas, explained why he approached Rice and the HRC to put the meeting together. He said that he initially thought the HRC was wrong to support ENDA after it was amended. He said, "I knew that I needed to learn more."

Blinstrubas remains unconvinced of the HRC's or Courtney's position, but said the forum "shows that all perspectives are able to come together and listen to one another. I consider this to be contributing to the effort to move forward."

Contact Heather Murdock at

Heather.Murdock@UConn.edu.