There's an old saying that bosses pay employees just enough so they don't quit. The same is true about politics, in that parties give their coalition blocs just enough to keep them onboard. If you don't play hardball, you don't get much.
San Francisco's Bay Area Reporter relates that:
Congresswoman Jackie Speier put a damper on hopes for swift House passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act [stating] she doesn't see the LGBT workplace protections becoming law anytime soon. Addressing the crowd of gay and straight political and community leaders at Sunday's Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club Pride breakfast, Speier said, "Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi is doing all she can to ensure a majority for next year so we can pass ENDA."
Get that? Despite the big Democratic majorities in Congress that are certain to shrink after November, give us your votes and money and maybe next time round. Got to love the moxie, right?
Leaving aside the debate between gay progressives and libertarians/conservatives over whether ENDA is actually a good idea, the political reality is that its supporters can't sue through the courts to achieve protected-class status in the workplace. It's legislation or nothing. The same isn't true of overturning "don't ask, don't tell" and the Defense of Marriage Act, however. Which is why the White House and congressional Democrats can't simply announce that action will be delayed until after gays pony up their votes and dollars for the next election cycle. And the next. Or can they?
The L.A. Times reports:
Gay veterans organizations say the questionnaire sent to 400,000 military personnel will produce skewed results on the potential effect of repealing the ban on openly gay service members.
Most of the criticism focused on a handful of questions in the lengthy survey related to whether unit readiness would suffer and the extent of concerns among service members about sharing housing, bath facilities and attending social functions with gay and lesbian personnel.
Critics of the survey note it doesn't ask about the effect on unit morale or readiness due to the current policy of discharging troops found to be gay. The Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, which provides legal help to those discharged under the current law, recommends that troops not participate in the questionnaire.
Meanwhile, Politico reports:
Next week, a lawsuit brought by the Log Cabin Republicans is going to trial in California-and Obama's Justice Department is in the uncomfortable position of trying to prevent the "don't ask, don't tell" policy from being overturned as discharged veterans testify about its dramatic impact on their careers.
Some gay rights activists who were cheered by Obama's decision in May now say they're frustrated by what feels like a two steps forward, one step back approach to the issue-especially in light of Obama's delay in seeking to repeal of the policy in the first place.
Gay legal advocates "note that from time to time, [the Justice Dept.] has refused to stand behind laws under challenge as unconstitutional," but instead will fight in court to defend don't ask, don't tell. I'd add, just as they'll fight in court to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in the Massachusetts' case, discussed below.
More. Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight.com says that a key portion of the Department of Defense's troops survey "is fairly useless" in that it "measures the relationship between gossip and unit morale [more] than anything having to do with homosexuality per se" and "goes out of its way to avoid asking the troops about something which is arguably more relevant and which is certainly more measurable: their opinions about DADT."
The national Log Cabin Republicans, encourage servicemembers to complete the survey, arguing "Not doing the survey abdicates terrain to those who want to keep DADT in place."
6 Comments for “‘Wait Till Next Year’”
posted by Jorge on
The account I read was that the Servicemenbers Legal Defense Network was advising gays not to complete the survey because of concerns about confidentiality, and that they could be outed, which if true is madness. This rationale makes more sense but is still a case of “advocates” encouraging gays to shoot themselves in the foot.
It is also evidence that the “compromise” has weaknesses in it and does not guarentee the policy will be reversed in a matter of time. By the way, the Senate still hasn’t voted on the compromise bill. With each passing day, the ability to pass it grows weaker.
posted by Bobby on
The SLDN may be overcautious but remember, they’re trying to protect our gay military men, many of which are trying to have long term careers in the military.
posted by Mark on
I’m not a fan of ENDA, but considering that the GOP may actually win the House next year, how are its chances going to be better then? Also, isn’t the transsexual lobby demanding that they be included in ENDA, essentially dooming the bill anyway?
posted by Debrah on
Testing the Gaydar of the Troops? from Andy’s Dish.
This week the main bloggers subbing will be David Frum and David Weigel while Sullivan is on vacation.
Could he please stay on vacation?
posted by Debrah on
Bobby, this video is for you and Throbert……as well as anyone else on the dating scene.
People Are Like Wine posted at The Dish.
The guy is Dan Ariely, a behavorial economist.
He’s quite successful with his books, blog, and his career inside the academy.
When he was in high school participating in Israeli political demonstrations, there was a freak accident and he suffered burns on almost 70 percent of his body from an explosion.
posted by Bobby on
Thanks for the video, on the surface it makes sense, but I think both straight and gay men are more visually oriented than anyone else. That’s why pretty girls and pretty boys are always suspicious of anybody that wants them unless they also want them.
By the way, do you watch “True Beauty?” I love that show, it’s amazing what people do when they think nobody’s watching.