Most lobbyists, paid to find consensus, probably subscribe to the idea that the perfect is the enemy of the good.
But as a grassroots push in preparation for a House floor vote this week illustrates, a central issue in any campaign is in deciding just when good is good enough.
The definition in this case relates to a bill that would extend employment protections to gays and lesbians.
The measure, H.R. 3685, already represents a big win for the gay community, according to Allison Herwitt, who is the legislative director to the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), a gay rights group that counts 700,000 members. For many gay and lesbian groups, however, the bill isn’t quite good enough.
HRC has lobbied since 1994 for a bill to prohibit employers from firing employees based on their sexual orientation. But with “anti-gay” congressional leaders in power, according to Herwitt, the group had little to show for its effort.
Tuesday’s scheduled vote on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, vigorously opposed by conservative groups like the Family Research Council, would be the first-ever vote in the House to extend employment protections to the gay community. A similar measure passed a Senate committee, but didn’t get any further.
“It’s historic that Congress is moving to consider employment protections,” Herwitt said of the bill, which has been championed by Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.).
All the same, gay and lesbian groups are pressing for improvements to the bill. HRC, for instance, is focusing its large grassroots network on expanding the bill’s employment protections to gender identity, which would include transsexuals and members of the transgender community.
Focusing mostly on 40 targeted congressional districts, the group estimates it has generated more than 80,000 e-mails, letters, phone calls and office visits for the gender ID inclusion. Two weeks ago, 100 HRC members visited 130 offices in support of an “inclusive” bill.
The group supports an amendment likely to be offered by Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) that would also prohibit employers from firing employees based on how they identify their own gender.
“We’ve always wanted an inclusive bill for our community,” Herwitt said. “That’s what we’ve been working so hard to get.”
Success, however, could come at a heavy price. Gender identity protections were originally in the bill but Frank split sexual orientation off in order to improve the chance that something would pass.
Herwitt wouldn’t say whether her group would pull support for the Frank bill if Baldwin’s amendment fails.
Conservative groups oppose either version. Tom McClusky, a vice president for the Family Research Council (FRC), said the group would score the vote on the Frank bill. In September, FRC sent Congress a letter describing the bill as a “threat to religious liberties of small businesses and religious organizations.”
For example, McClusky charges the bill could force a restaurant that serves a principally religious clientele — from a nearby church, for instance — to employ a gay or a transgendered person who could drive customers away.
But the group hasn’t had much luck getting businesses to launch a pro-business push against the bill.
“Business groups just don’t want to get involved,” McClusky said. FRC has since reached out to large chain restaurants like Cracker Barrel and Chick-fil-A but had not received a response as of Monday afternoon. Chick-fil-A closes on Sundays to allow employees to attend church and spend time with their families.
Meanwhile, in the Senate, liberal and conservative grassroots groups this week are battling again over judges, specifically President Bush’s nomination of Judge Leslie Southwick to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Curt Levey, executive director for the Committee for Justice, said his group, in conjunction with other conservative groups with broad memberships, is targeting six states in support of Southwick’s nomination: Louisiana, Virginia, Arkansas, Montana, South Dakota and Pennsylvania.
Levey noted Southwick’s “well qualified” rating from the American Bar Association and the fact that he had served in Iraq as part of a Mississippi National Guard unit as among the positive testaments to Southwick’s qualifications and character.
But liberal groups and civil rights organization have urged Democrats to oppose Southwick. Groups like People for the American Way have said Southwick’s judicial record demonstrates a lack of support for social justice programs.
“One of the reasons Democrats were elected was that America didn’t want to see judges like this placed on the federal judiciary,” said Judith Schaeffer, legal director for People for the American Way.
The vote could come as early as Wednesday, although Levey said there was a possibility that could slip.
“We need to have every Republican senator there, and that may not happen this week,” he said. |
