Press Releases :: September 23, 2009

Testimony on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (H.R. 3017)

House Committee on Education & Labor Hearing
September 23, 2009

“Thank you Chairman Miller and Ranking Member Kline and members of the Committee for allowing me the opportunity to testify today.

I am a strong supporter of H.R. 3017, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2009.

As many of my colleagues know, twenty-five years ago, my own state of Wisconsin was the first state in the nation to add sexual orientation to its anti-discrimination statutes. At the time – and this was in 1982 – only 41 municipalities and 8 counties in the entire United States offered limited protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Wisconsin’s efforts to pass the nation’s first sexual orientation anti-discrimination statute were supported by a broad, bipartisan coalition, including members of the clergy, various religious denominations, medical, and professional groups. The measure was signed into law by a Republican Governor (Lee Sherman Dreyfus), who based his decision to support the measure on the success of municipal ordinances providing similar protections.

Since Wisconsin passed its statute in 1982, twenty additional states and the District of Columbia (roughly 44% of the population) have passed similar protective measures. Twelve states and Washington D.C. also prohibit discrimination based on gender identity. In addition to state and local measures, hundreds of American companies have enacted policies protecting their LGBT employees. Currently, 85% of the Fortune 500 companies extend protections based on sexual orientation and more than one-third do so on the basis of gender identity.

There is a clear record demonstrating the need for these protections: lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender employees are harassed, fired, not hired, and passed over for advancement without regard to their merit. Studies of LGBT employees reveal significant levels of discrimination or harassment occurring in workplaces across the country. For example, according to a 2007 report published by the ACLU, nearly 30% of LGBT workers reported that they have experienced discrimination or unfair treatment in the work place and one in four said they experience it on a weekly basis (Working in the Shadows: Ending Employment Discrimination for LGBT Americans). Without ENDA, these American do not have basic protections against workplace discrimination.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to share with you Sheri Swokowski’s story. Sheri is a retired Colonel, and former Director of Human Resources for the Wisconsin National Guard from DeForest, Wisconsin. In 2006, she traveled out to Fort Belvoir, Virginia to teach at the U.S. Army Force Management School – given her background and experience in the Army Guard, Sheri was a lead instructor. In August 2007, she began her transition from male to female and informed her human resources department (she was employed by a large government contractor, not the school itself) of her intent to teach the fall courses as a woman for the first time. Soon after this conversation, Sheri was told her teaching services were no longer needed and that her transition was “her problem.” To hear Sheri tell her story is heartbreaking. She knows she was qualified for the position, but she also recognizes that her former employer didn’t see her as Sheri – they only saw her gender identity. The sad reality is that Sheri’s life and her livelihood would be different today if ENDA were the law of the land.

We now have the chance to do so by passing H.R. 3017. As my colleagues know, the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, or ENDA, will provide basic protections against workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. ENDA does not create “special rights.” It simply affords to all Americans basic employment protection from discrimination based on irrational prejudice.

The importance of nondiscrimination laws cannot be overstated. Substantively, they provide real remedies and a chance to seek justice. Symbolically, they say to Americans, judge your fellow citizens by their integrity, character, and talents, not their sexual orientation, or gender identity, or their race or religion, for that matter. Symbolically, these laws also say that irrational hate or fear have no place in our work place.

Mr. Chairman, Americans are ready for ENDA. According to a 2008 Gallup Poll, 89% of the country believes that gay and lesbian Americans should have “equal rights in terms of job opportunities.” In another poll, 71% of Americans agree that performance should be the standard for judging an employee, not whether they are transgender. Americans rightly believe that their hard-working friends and neighbors should not be denied job opportunities, fired or otherwise be discriminated against just because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. Yet as the New York Times editorialized just two weeks ago, “Federal law has lagged behind the reality of American life.” (9/12/09)

Mr. Chairman, it is time to bring our laws in line with the reality of American life. Over the past two years, we have held constructive discussions on ENDA not only within the LGBT community, but here in Congress. Spurred by constituent meetings and conversations in their communities back home, my colleagues have deepened their understanding about why affording to all Americans basic employment protection from discrimination based on irrational prejudice is so meaningful. And here in Washington, we have discussed why transgender individuals – Americans who lead incredibly successful, stable lives, are dedicated parents, contribute immeasurably to their communities and their country – and why they, too, must be included in ENDA. Chairman Andrews, your hearing on Gender Identity last June was a testament to that effort.

I believe the conclusion of these discussions and debates is that Congress is ready to pass H.R. 3017. More than 40 years ago, we enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that banned employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. We knew then that irrational hate and fear have no place in our work place and now is the time to declare – as a nation – that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity is unlawful, as well. Through your work and your efforts in this Committee, I know we will help fulfill this promise.

Once again, I sincerely appreciate the opportunity to testify today and look forward to the discussion.

Thank you.”