The bill only needed to pass by a simple majority after it earlier obtained the necessary votes to break a Republican filibuster.
All Democrats (and Independents) present voted for the bill, along with 10 Republicans: Kirk, McCain, Flake, Toomey, Portman, Hatch, Ayotte, Murkowski, Heller and Collins.
The legislation now moves over to the House, where Republican Speaker John Boehner has promised to kill it.
Boehner claimed the other day that ENDA is unnecessary, as it duplicated existing protections under the law. That’s actually not true. First, here’s Boehner’s aide:
“We have always believed this is covered by existing law,” the aide said, adding that it is “not a new issue or a new position — it’s a longstanding position, and, frankly, not ‘news’ at all. This has been his position, on the record, for years, stated publicly many times.”It’s legal under federal law to fire (or not hire, or not promote) someone for being gay or trans. It also legal in 29 states to fire someone for being gay, and in 33 states to fire someone for being trans. Though, gays and trans people in those states would be protected if the city in which they live has outlawed such discrimination.
Another odd aspect of Boehner’s position: He claims that ENDA will lead to frivolous lawsuits and the loss of American jobs. But if gay job protections are already part of the law, and this legislation is duplicative, then we’re already have those frivolous lawsuits and lost jobs. So where are they?
As Democratic Senate Leader Harry Reid noted the other day, Boehner claims to be worried about frivolous lawsuits yet he spent $2 million of the taxpayers money on his own frivolous lawsuit against the Defense of Marriage Act, which was struck down (in part) by the Supreme Court earlier this year.
Because of Boehner’s opposition, the prospects for ENDA in the House aren’t terribly good. Which raises the question of how big a victory this really is.
I’m not a terribly big fan of passing legislation in one House that you know won’t pass in the other. It’s not always a good idea to make your team take hard votes when the vote won’t matter, because the legislation is going down. But in this case, things are more interesting as the “hard vote” has tended to be the vote against ENDA, not the vote for it.
As Senator Reid noted the other day, both GOP Senators Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, likely presidential contenders in 2016, chickened out when it came to speaking against ENDA on the Senate floor. Both men are known for being happy (and yappy) to go on the Senate floor and talk at length if it means a bit more media exposure. Yet on ENDA, they were silent (though they ended up voting against it). Arch-conservatives that they are, Rubio and Cruz fear that opposing gay rights might hurt their presidential aspirations, and Rubio is a religious right clone. That’s quite a tacit admission.
For that reason, the ENDA vote was likely a good idea, even if there is little chance of it passing the Republican House.
Clearly ENDA, and gay civil rights issues more generally, are making the Republicans squirm. What was once feared to be a third-rail for Democrats, has become a real third-rail for Republicans. And who doesn’t get a chuckle out of that.
Make the jump here to read the full article
No comments:
Post a Comment