Skip to main content

U.S. Representative George Miller, Democrat of California's 7th Congressional District, is the Chair of the House Committee on Education and Labor, and a supporter of H.R. 3017, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. He will be presiding over the mark up of the ENDA bill this Wednesday at 10 am. You can view it as the Committee's website (see Live Webcast on the top right).

"Markup" is a meeting of the Committee to consider whether the bill should be reported back to the House floor for a vote of the full House. The markup will involve the full Committee, consisting of 47 voting members. Amendments are likely to be made at that hearing, some friendly, some not so much. There are 27 definite yes votes for ENDA on the Committee, which is a majority, so the bill expected to pass the Committee. You can see the positions of each of the Committee members here.

Once a bill is reported back to the House, it is given a number and will normally be considered when all the bills reported out before it have been considered. That could take a while. However, the House has a procedure to consider bills out of turn when it is important to the leadership. The Committee on Rules can issue a special resolution to permit this. The rules for getting the bill to the House floor for a vote via this mechanism are complex, but the bottom line is that the House could vote on the measure by Thanksgiving.

But ENDA could also be left until February, as recent comments by Congressman Frank suggest. I have also heard from someone in the know that the Senate may be in no rush to consider the bill, and might also be in slowdown mode, with markup in March and a vote in June.

That would put the ENDA Senate vote in the midst of midterm election campaigns, making support of the measure into a vulnerability for Senators up for re-election. The fragile coalition-building that has been going on in the Senate with the more conservative members of Congress is more likely to collapse in the heat of a likely-to-be very dirty, mudslinging election in which the Republicans struggle to gain a toehold in the most conservative parts of the country. That would increase the chances of ENDA dying in the Senate.

What will control the timing here, and how can we make it sooner, rather than later?

Is The Timing Really That Important?

I see urgency in getting an ENDA vote quickly, but some have counseled me not to worry about this, as ENDA is still on track and moving forward. "When" doesn't matter so much, they say. Support for ENDA, whether now or later, could be problematic for conservative Senators even though they and many of their constituents favor job equality. Someone can always raise the fact that they supported it, whether now or later. So it makes no difference whether ENDA comes to the Senate early in the New Year or late, see?

Wrong.

This questionable logic ignores the pressures of an election campaign. If a Senator supported a bill that passed months ago, and it is mentioned as one of a number of things in an election campaign, that is one thing. But if the bill is up for a vote during the election campaign, it is quite another, because opponents can ride the crest of the wave of media publicity that always surrounds an upcoming and recent vote. It magnifies the effect of the opposition tenfold and makes it tempting for the Senator not to raise his or her head over the other trees on that issue. It's the difference between a picture of a surfer far in the distance waiting for the wave, and the picture of the surfer triumphantly riding in on a huge wave. One is far more likely than the other to make it to the front page of Surfer Monthly.

Republicans will attempt to tar-and-feather Senators who support ENDA, as favoring the hiring of pedophiles as ministers and Boy Scout leaders. It doesn't matter that it's not true. What matters is that, during a violently-contested election season, Senators up for election will shy away from supporting this bill.

Who's Going For A Ride in the Re-Election Tilt-A-Whirl?

I think it significant that Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Senate majority leader, will be up for re-election in 2010. It has been said that Senator Reid is one of the most vulnerable Democratic incumbents in the 2010 Senate elections, though whether that is true I am hardly qualified to assess. But it does suggest that he will need to be especially careful with sensitive political issues. Now, Senator Reid is on record as saying that he is fully committed to passing ENDA out of the Senate. I believe him. But even though we have 56 likely yes votes now, getting those last 4 votes and keeping the other 56 in line is a labor worthy of Hercules. It's going to be nearly impossible to pull off in the throes of an election campaign.  

Here's some other Senators who will be up for election in 2010. How much are they going to want to be saddled with ENDA during an election campaign?

  • Blanche Lincoln, Democrat of Arkansas, who has already indicated non-support, though she has recently tentatively disavowed it in private

  • Evan Bayh, Democrat of Indiana, who has kept entirely mum on the subject, but who is expected to vote for the bill

  • Byron Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, who has also kept entirely mum on the subject, and who is considered a possible supporter.

  • Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, who has likewise not said anything about the bill, but who voted against the Republican filibuster of the hate crimes bill, and who is considered a possible supporter.

Think of these Senators cool and relaxed by a merry fire after New Year's, ready to come back to work with enthusiasm, presented with a nice dish of fresh steaming ENDA for dinner. Then think of them, hot and sweaty after a brusing Spring full of attack and counter-attack, presented with a large dish of over-ripe boiled ENDA to gulp down, along with a large side of wilted DADT. Which of these scenarios do you think is more likely to result in sending ENDA to President Obama's desk?

This is why Rep. Frank's surprise announcement that the House vote might be put off until February is somewhat problematic. Rep. Frank had previously said there would be House vote by December. Reps. Baldwin and Polis also thought it could pass the House and Senate by December. It also scares me that I've heard that the Senate might not mark up the bill until March, and put off a vote until June.

What Are Our Political Leaders Waiting For?

Despite my desire to move forward on ENDA, I must admit that our political leaders do need to be careful in the timing of the votes. Too early could cause a loss of momentum if the Senate won't be ready to vote on it soon.

The leaders of the House will look to the Senate to decide when to bring the bill to the floor of the House for a vote. If the Senate doesn't have enough votes, then rushing the bill to the House floor means the bill will have to languish for months in the Senate while support hopefully builds. But will support build in the Senate at the same time that health reform consumes that legislative body? Or will it diminish? Will there be any momentum left by June 2010? I do realize that support takes time to build, but we are 4 votes away in the Senate right now. Seems to me that a little pressure in the right places could get us there very soon. I'm not sure time is our friend on that one.

Another negative factor is the recent pressure being put on the leadership by the DNC boycott, that pressure may translate into delaying ENDA, and putting forward some other bill more likely to pass the Senate. The competition for ENDA is the Domestic Partner Benefits and Obligations bill (DPBO). It is less controversial than the comprehensive ENDA bill, as it affects only federal workers, and may be easier for conservative Senators to shrug off at home.

What would it take to get House leaders to schedule an ENDA vote?

The answer is quite simple: Enough visible support in the Senate.

Does ENDA have enough votes to pass the Senate? It's close. I calculate there are 56 likely yes votes, which is 4 short of the 60 needed to overcome the Republican filibuster. Can we get four Senators to indicate support in the next week, so the House leadership can have enough confidence to put ENDA to a vote?

Maybe.

If there were enough visible support in the Senate, that could get the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee to report the bill out to the Senate. That would encourage the House to move forward.

What could get the Senate HELP Committee to report the bill out to the Senate? The answer is simple.

Seeing 60 Senators visibly supporting ENDA.

We have 56. We need 4 more. Where can we get 4 more?

Click Here To Email 9 Unconfirmed Senators

Here is my list of the Senators that need some persuasion to step forward. I encourage you to call them, but I also think this is the time for progressive leaders to step forward to encourage them, publicly or privately, to come out in support of the bill. Sometimes Senators need encouragement from their leaders. This is such a time. President Obama, we've been calling these Senators for months. I think it might be time for you to make a few phone calls, too. Senator Reid, I think it might be time for you to get on the horn as well.  

Here's who you should be calling:

There are the Senators whom I believe to be possible supporters, but who are unconfirmed. These are Senators Murkowski, Pryor, Lincoln, Bill Nelson, Lugar, Hagan, Conrad, Voinovich and Byrd.  

Specific info on their positions can be found here.

Here are their email links and other contact information: http://bit.ly/...

Me? Why me?

The game is to get them to co-sponsor the bill, or at least to publicly state that they will support the bill. The players consist of you, reading public, whether you be Presidents, Majority Leaders of the Senate, or concerned citizens. The way to do this is to call them, write them, meet with them, send them flowers, whatever, until they speak up with their support. It's a numbers game.

Not only do you have to call, write and send flowers -- you have to get your social networks to do it too. Make your calls. Get the word out. Talk to your friends about calling these Senators. It doesn't take long.  Stand up for yourselves.

I'm not sure whether we have sufficient commitment as a community to ENDA to get that done in a timely fashion. Our attention is split by a dozen different issues, and not everyone feels the need for a non-discrimination bill, particularly gays and lesbians in more liberal parts of the country, where discrimination is not as much of an issue for them and their friends.

I'm working at full tilt to lobby Senators, as are others, but there are still too few, too few. We need more people talking about ENDA and getting their friends to lobby these Senators. Especially in their home states. But the problem is that those states -- among them Alaska, Arkansas, Indiana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, and West Virginia -- the statewide organizations are in disarray and have not been able to bring sufficient pressure to obtain commitments from their Senators. The nationwide organizations don't have sufficient contacts on the ground to make it happen.

I hope we do it, but only time will tell.

This was originally written by Dr. Jillian T. Weiss at Bilerico. It is reposted here with her permission.

Update [2009-11-16 19:47:35 by mcc111]: The markup wednesday has been abruptly "postponed", according to The Advocate until after Thanksgiving, apparently so that mysterious "technical amendments" can be made. Not much seems to be known about this yet.

Originally posted to mcc111 on Mon Nov 16, 2009 at 08:35 AM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  There isn't enough time, it has only (0+ / 0-)

      been (fill in blank) months.  What do you think you are about here?  Are you intentionally trying to destroy the strongest argument for inaction on things that the self-styled "moderates" have going for them.  Passage of ENDA would wreck their rhetorical game forever.

      "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

      by enhydra lutris on Mon Nov 16, 2009 at 09:18:34 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I think you'll get a couple of gopers on the bill (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Clarknt67, soms, KentuckyKat, mcc111

    Snowe, Collins and possibly Voinovich and Lugar.  That should supplant any dems we'll lose (Byrd, Lincoln).  

  •  Thank you. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    homogenius, jgilhousen, mcc111

    Action diary I can believe in.

    "Gives us a sense of momentum when the United States has accolades tossed its way rather than shoes."-09-Oct-09

    by soms on Mon Nov 16, 2009 at 08:59:27 AM PST

  •  Excellent explanation of process. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Clarknt67, soms, mcc111

    Too many discussions about LGBT bills fail to take into account the details of process in congress.

    I try to stay pragmatic about our chances with ENDA this congress--adding trans inclusion changes the landscape. I am committed to keeping the T in LGBT in all things, but it was a game changer on ENDA. We have a lot of education to do with voters and congresscritters to get over the "bathroom" ick factor. It gives them too big an excuse to get out of voting for justice and fairness.

    As important as ENDA is for many people in red areas of the country not covered by state or local laws, I'm actually less concerned about passing ENDA in this congress than I am about continuing to pass LGBT rights laws in general. We only just passed the first LGBT federal law in history, and now we have a shot at ENDA and repealing DADT.

    ENDA is, in many ways, the big one, and housing and public accomodation will likely follow. But we also need immigration reform, repeal of all or part of DOMA, and repeal of DADT. There are more things beyond that, but IMO those are the big ones.

    "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." --Mohandas Gandhi

    by homogenius on Mon Nov 16, 2009 at 10:05:35 AM PST

  •  There is a finite limit to the number of things (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    soms, mcc111

    GOPs can filibuster, because bills they want are stuck behind the read-the-phone-book-fest. We have a GOP filibuster for this and one for HCR and one for ...... Is there any way to schedule the consideration of these bills so that ENDA is before something the GOPs really want? Or don't want to be the ones charged for delaying? I keep thinking Agriculture and all those subsidies but there may be others. Anything that would close down something that hurts them if not dealt with promptly.

    There are times when I wonder if we should not simply take the filibusters on some of these, so we can say look what they are holding up that affects you, voters! And look how many times they have done it. Of course, with their poll results in the toilet, it may not affect them, but the promise of having to explain themselves in 2010 to all those swing voters might have some effect. And it takes away the constant filibuster threat if they have to keep doing it. Or, having threatened the filibuster so often, if they don't do it on ENDA to record the votes of Dems for the election, but do do it for something else, then go after them with the point that ENDA was not as important to them as ....you, value voters out there, listen up. I am unusually cynical today.

    •  I'm not sure about that (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Clarknt67

      I really don't think there is anything the GOPs "really want". Anything at all. What they want is to win elections, and until such time as America starts letting them win elections then America can go to hell as far as they're concerned. This really is not exaggeration-- look at how they've voted this year. The GOP really has become so radicalized that they could shut down the entire government through their obstruction and it wouldn't even be something like a tragic price to pay, it would be the goal. Even in the case of the one thing you'd think the Republicans would actually still want to support, military spending, obstructionism still takes precedence-- notice the mass votes in the House against the military funding authorization bill this year just because of (of all the minor things) IMF funding, or notice the 64-35 cloture vote in the Senate on the same bill caused by the inclusion at that point of the lgbt hate crimes amendment. If the Republicans were forced to shut down the Senate for months rather than let a bill move forward that the Democrats refuse to drop, it might make them look sort of bad, but it wouldn't hurt any of their priorities-- they don't have priorities, anymore-- and I don't think they'd really bat an eyelash before deciding to just let everything shut down if the Democrats gave them a chance. I mean, look at it this way-- they were nearly willing to obstruct funding the military over the Matthew Shepard act, that makes it seem unlikely they'll mind obstructing funding the military over ENDA or health care...

      I don't think ENDA is going to be one of those bills where it reaches the point of such drastic measures on either side, though. I don't think this is a bill either where the Republicans are so unified that they could shut things down just to keep it from passing, or where the Democrats consider it such a high priority (at a time when any number of other large Democratic agenda items, like cap and trade, are still pending, and even the lgbt grassroots seems to be more interested in the fate of DADT) that they'd be willing to risk a shutdown of everything. If cloture can't be reached on ENDA Reid is more likely to just move on to the next thing, or more likely Reid wouldn't allow a cloture vote that could possibly fail to even be held.

      There are times when I wonder if we should not simply take the filibusters on some of these, so we can say look what they are holding up that affects you, voters! And look how many times they have done it.

      I really agree that this would be nice! The "new normal" under Reid has been that Republicans get to "silently" filibuster everything that comes along without having to actually filibuster. I've seen people trying to explain that under the arcane Senate rules the filibuster is, as a procedure, actually more complicated than just "you read the phonebook until you give up and a vote happens", so I don't really know about that, but still it definitely seems like the Democrats could do more to make there be a cost or some sort of public blame for filibustering. It's starting to look like maybe the Dems are moving in that direction on health care at least? But I don't know.

  •  I've found two great resocurces (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LuvSet, soms, mcc111

    this is a listing of 37 unconfirmed Reprensatives, and all their pertinent contact info (email, phone, fax in-state & DC).

    This is a comprehensive spreadsheet of every Representative, where they stand, and indicators, based on previous statement and votes, where they stand.

    Start working those phones.

    "He's not your boyfriend." -- Bill Maher

    by Scott Wooledge on Mon Nov 16, 2009 at 10:45:27 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site