|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
POST AND PARTICIPATE [how to post]
|
Any OMNIBUS BILL being drafted - should be issued for community comment BEFORE it is filed, not after.
We are definitely NOT organized as a community. We don't even have a national coalition!!
It's definitely NOT public. And EVERYONE SHOULD BE THERE.
Invite Gaga to the hearings. They'll make T.V.
Blah blah blah. We need to file a LAW SUIT against the movement leaders to figure out HOW these ridiculous strategies, founded mostly on excuses, are made, and who is in charge. This is like mystery soup. People are DYING.
Should we focus on removing Barney Frank from office in order to redistribute the power within the G&L Caucus?
The Gay & Lesbian Caucus - needs to have PUBLIC HEARINGS of its own - on our movement strategy, and it should consult through a PUBLIC PROCESS around the country. What's clear here is that an insiders group of elite (non-LGBT-elected) people are treating the suffering of 25 million people like a private game related to their own careers. The fact that they are not working in concert, in consultation openly with our community shows WHY we are where we are. If the process won't change, the results won't change.
Why is it so secret who is taking "leadership" in the House on crafting the Omnibus Bill????!!!???
We're also hearing lots of general history, but we're not hearing a PLAN. What is the PLAN?
Just as Rep. Baldwin said there was an accepted strategy in the 111th Congress in the order of bills introduction. It seems that their is an accepted strategy from those groups/individuals advising Rep. Baldwin NOT to introduce an Omnibus Bill. It would be great if she stepped away from the group-think and proposed a bolder Omnibus Bill to help with the education of Congress and the American Public.
The hearings in the Senate - MUST BE ON TELEVISION - and cover the full range of harms, and non-discrimination laws currently in place.
The state's rights argument cuts against the federal government intervening to end marriage discrimination at the state level. This is not a good argument when it comes to discrimination. States are NOT free to discriminate under the Federal Constitution.
We need an Omnibus Bill introduced. No questions about it. Worrying about the hurdle of multiple committees, and ownership of smaller piecemeal projects just dilutes our efforts as a community of LGBT advocates and allies. We are making the lift much harder, by spreading out our efforts!
Will Congress woman Baldwin FILE the omnibus bill?
Pet projects - and ownership of lame bills -- is NO EXCUSE for this piecemeal, failed strategy.
The question of seeking full federal equality - is NOT a question of committee processes. This is about a movement. The power of the collective will push this through.
ENDA is NOT enough, particularly an ENDA that does not put us directly in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Domestic Partner's Benefit Act is an exceptionally pathetic offering given the scope of discrimination we face. This proposed agenda doesn't reflect the discussion on "fundamental values of American equality," it reflects a victim's piecemeal, shameful concession to discrimination.
Will the version of ENDA that Sen Merkely will introduce be the same bill as last session or will it include banning discrimination in public accomodations and housing as well as jobs?
Can we get assurances that all pro-LGBT legislation introduced this Congress can count on the Equality Caucus to become immediate co-sponsors. Is that the case now with the current legislation? That wasn't the case in the 110th congress, as many didn't support the DOMA repeal, and many didn't sign-on as cosponsor with the bill introduced by Rep. Baldwin to address LGBT health disparities. We need the full support of the Equality Caucus this Congress, can we count on that?
There are thousands of LGBT organizations working for equality, but no PROCESS in place to consult with our community on our own strategy for liberation? How does this square with our democratic principles or with self-determination? Fundamentally, what gives gay and lesbian Congress people a mandate to represent the LGBT community interests, other than happening to be gay or lesbian? I don't see it.
Oh - just so you know - many of us don't care so much about DOMA as the first thing to take care of.
The priority should be people being able to get jobs and housing and public accomdations - a full nondiscim bill.
Me - I'm never going to get married. Still gotta work and put a roof over my head. Even if I got married and then divorced and then remarried - all that time I need to work & need to rent a place. Hell - without even public accom - I can't rent out a hall to get married in - or a bar for a party to celebrate my divorce.
With the House defending DOMA now and the DOJ NOT defending DOMA, might it make sense to file thousands of lawsuits in federal court against DOMA. I mean the House cannot possibly defend a thousand lawsuits, can they? If no one is there for the defense, the plaintiff wins, right? Your thoughts?
Why aren't some of the Tea Party people howling loudly about the House of Representatives spending money to defend DOMA in federal court when their whole raison d'etre is to have the government spend less money? Is there not a coalition of Tea Party people with this view and Democrats that could vote to keep Speaker Boehner from defending DOMA.....or at least give him a very very rough time (like you can't spend any money doing it)?
It is hard to care anymore about the federal level. You had both houses and the oval Office and you couldn't even bring a crippled civil rights bill up for a vote. One were the vote counters said we had the votes to prevail - even on a motion to recommit.
Why bother if all you're going to give us is another non vote on a bill that still leaves us with less protections than every other group included in civil rights legislation? Why spend another decade working on this, sending money to DC and working to elect Dems if you all can't stand up for us? Wouldn't my efforts & money be better put to use funding local civil rights, candidates and supporting our youth & elders pressing needs? An honest failure would have been preferable to not even being worth the effort.
I understand that you are filing a bill to repeal DOMA. Would you consider, as a compromise, passing a repeal of only part 3 of DOMA if you could get the votes for that and only that? Shouldn't some of the Tea Party representatives support something like that since it is basically "get the federal government out of the states' business and people's personal business" -- a libertararian view?
Most of Rep. Baldwin's bills on heath care tap into the "federal funding hook" under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Why would we carve out "health care" programs - from all the other federal programs. And that bill goes to MANY different committees. THIS IS NOT ABOUT LEGISLATORS HAVING PET PROJECTS. This is about you working as a GROUP. That answer is outrageous.
1. How is our federal legislative strategy for the movement decided and by whom, and by what process is the LGBT community consulted and given a voice? 2. Does Congress have the Constitutional power to pass a federal law to outlaw discrimination in marriage in the states?
What happened with the failure of the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act last session, and why shouldn't it pass this session -- particularly as amendment to other legislation if not a stand-alone bill?
Given the vast harm caused by discrimination based on SO+GI and the ignorance on this front, wouldn't it be helpful to have televised Senate hearings fully revealing the nature and extent of this harm, the specious nature of the opposition, the duty of the U.S. government under International and domestic law to protect against discrimination, and the role the Civil Rights Act, etc., already plays in this regard for every other type of discrimination? I.e., beyond passing legislation, shouldn't we also being using the process to start the conversation to cue up our equality as a major 2012 election cycle issue, or is this being intentionally avoided? FMI on the harm see: http://www.actonprinciples.org/2011/01/26/the-harm-caused-by-discrimination-against-lgbt-people-a-snap-shot/
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Last Modified 2012-09-18 |
|
||||||||||||||||||
