Rebecca Juro

Some Quick Thoughts About The Congressional Hearing...

Filed By Rebecca Juro | June 26, 2008 3:30 PM | comments

Filed in: Politics, Politics, Transgender & Intersex
Tags: Barney Frank, gender, legbt, LGBT, politics, Rob Andrews, Tammy Baldwin, transgender, transsexual

It ended about ten minutes ago as I write this, and I have to say I was, for the most part, impressed. At some points, even proud.

Opening statements made by Tammy Baldwin and Barney Frank were both powerful and moving. Despite my many previous bashings of Frank in the past, I must say that for the most part he acquitted him admirably here.

While I probably wouldn't have made a point of mentioning how great it was that the subcomittee was even bothering to hold a hearing on transgender employment rights in the first place as Frank did, I also think he took exactly the right tack in making the point that transpeople should be entitled to the same rights as everyone else, that if those present could support someone like himself being treated as an equal then they should also be willing to do the same in the case of a transgender person.

This is exactly the argument I've been hoping to see Barney Frank make publicly for years now, the one that we all know he's much too smart not to know is not only compelling but has the additional advantage of being absolutely true; it's not about rights gays or rights for transgender people, it's about rights for all Americans.

Another surprise, to me at least, was Committee Chairman Rob Andrews. Like, Frank, Andrews voted for the non-inclusive version of ENDA when it passed in the House, but spoke eloquently during this hearing in favor of protecting transgender people from employment discrimination. Also, his questioning of Glen Lavy, Senior Council for the Alliance Defense Fund, a right wing anti-LGBT organization, was sharp, cutting to the bone of Lavy's protests to reveal the truth, that the argument Lavy was really offering is that businesses should be allowed the right to discriminate in hiring, ostensibly based on the business owner's religious beliefs.

It could be fairly argued that Andrews was the best speaker of the day with Barney a close second and Tammy a solid third. All three of these people voted for the non-inclusive bill, though Baldwin did so with publicly noted reservations. And now, here they are, leading the charge for fair and equal treatment of trangender persons.

What did we just see here? Did we just witness a single hearing that will now be quickly forgotten as the politicians move on to other business or the formal introduction of a sea change in the way this Congress is going to deal with LGBT civil rights issues in the future, a way more in keeping with the values of an anticipated upcoming Obama Administration? Or did we see the beginnings of something else entirely, something yet to be fully revealed? The honest answer is I don't know, but maybe, just maybe, there's reason to hope.


Recent Entries Filed under Politics:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.


What we may have seen here was the end of Raiders of the Lost Arc. Indy went through a lot of pain and energy to aquire the Arch for our country, only to see it packed in a crate and stored in a hugh warehouse, never to be seen again.

The hearing was a great event, but I fear it will be place in a file, never to be accessed again. This means we don't ever remain silent, or they will forget this day.

I want to see it again on YouTube.

I want to see it on YouTube too, Monica. I couldn't watch the 1st time!

There's no video up yet that I'm aware of, but you can download most of the audio here.

I hope you're wrong Monica, but I'm not at all convinced that you are.

9 out of 10 it's a ROTLA.

But even if so, it's a necessary step. The question though, is what will Frank and the HRC do now? 1 in 10, they'll help. 3 in 10, do nothing else. 6 in 10, now the sop has been thrown to Cerberus, use it as an excuse to continue their previous active non-cooperation.

I hope I'm wrong. I am going by the historical precedents, and who knows, pigs may be air-capable assets now.

Robert Ganshorn Robert Ganshorn | June 27, 2008 5:43 AM

Monica, I am surprised at you. It is usually I who make lame movie comparisons to real life situations. OK, but mine are mostly musicals! I think that it is great and ground breaking that it is being talked about at all and a reason to hang your hat on a more effective end to discrimination after the new year. Pop a cork!

Robert, I don't think I could have pulled a "Sound of Music" analogy out of this one, but maybe you can.

I was very much moved by the comments of Representatives Baldwin and Frank. It seems as though between last Autumn and the hearing yesterday that someone sat down with Mr. Frank and had a serious one-on-one conversation. He gets it!

The stories of the gender variant persons on the panel powerfully outweighed the attempts to justify discrimination.

Clearly, there is a porcine creature somewhere flapping its ears at the end of a runway. And, I think it's going to take off soon.

Shakey,
Don't get your hopes up. He's a politician, and he seems to constantly display the sterotype for being a politican. You have to remember the saying that came out of the SALT II agreement, "Trust, but verify." But, in my opinion, Frank has a long way for me to even trust him again. His words have been proven to be hollow in the past. Let's see what the future brings this time.

Not sure Rebecca - if I had to pick the two most effective speakers at the hearing they would be Rep. Andrews (who was masterful & is clearly a rising star) and Col. Schroerer - I found her quite impressive. Not that Rep. Baldwin & Franks weren't impressive.

I particularly appreciated Col. Schroerer obeservation that the Library of Congress stated when they denied her employment that they felt she wouldn't be respected enough to testify before Congress given her transgender status - "but yet, here I am today".

Lavy had his ass handed to him by Rep. Andrews. Miller is the one to watch on the oppossing side - her suggestions on language need to be reviewed carefuly to determine the real world implications.

Not sure Rebecca - if I had to pick the two most effective speakers at the hearing they would be Rep. Andrews (who was masterful & is clearly a rising star) and Col. Schroerer - I found her quite impressive. Not that Rep. Baldwin & Franks weren't impressive.

I particularly appreciated Col. Schroerer obeservation that the Library of Congress stated when they denied her employment that they felt she wouldn't be respected enough to testify before Congress given her transgender status - "but yet, here I am today".

Lavy had his ass handed to him by Rep. Andrews. Miller is the one to watch on the oppossing side - her suggestions on language need to be reviewed carefuly to determine the real world implications.

that the hearing even occurred is ground breaking and historic. for that, let us be thankful.

that the opposition parties were exposed as bigots and exaggerated prophets of doom, let us be thankful.

as a hearing, the event was a complete success for the transgender community. the hard work of the Task Force and NCTE paid off. for that, let us be thankful.

unfortunately, the hearing is not a law. and even the law is not the reality that transgender individuals face when seeking and maintaining employment. the hearing was one small step in the right direction. one small step to gain basic human rights.

i really liked monica's movie analogy... comparing the hearing to the ark of the covenant was a bit dramatic, but hey, so are the concepts of equality and basic human dignity. the small steps we make cannot be wasted and allowed to be forgotten or hidden away. we have to make them count. taking the next step is up to all of us. we have to support the efforts of the orgs that work for our equality. we have to actively participate and become involved in the struggle in our own communities. we have to tell our stories and educate our elected officials. we know that we cannot depend on barney frank or HRC or anyone else to do it for us. and for that, we should also be thankful.


HRC did a great job putting this hearing together, along with help from NCTE, NCLR, and NLGTF. Jeri, you might want to go over to Donna Rose's blog and look at the entry from March 5th (I think). The key player in this hearing was HRC, not NGLTF.

I did think there were two flubs. Barney Frank's use of "people with transgender" and Sabrina trying to school a woman about discrimination. But other than those two things, it was fantastic.

Michael Crawford Michael Crawford | June 27, 2008 12:49 PM

It is fantastic to see the different organizations working together to make this hearing happen. It is going to take all of us working together to get an inclusive bill through Congress and signed into law.

But once again, no transpeopls of African descent were in that room.

Being a witness yesterday at the hearing spoke to me about my community - affirmed, powerful, heartening. Personally, I felt humbled. I have 3 things to say: 1) I needed EACH of the organizations that participated to do exactly what they for did for me. I needed HRC's influence and relationships to work with Congress to make it happen at all (Allison, David and the crew). I needed NCTE and NGLTF to help me (Mara and Lisa, respectively) to make me feel OK with being vulnerable at a mike in Congress and to help shape my testimony for impact and within the time limiit. I needed ACLU to do the moot session that gave witnesses practice and commentary by them and all of the others (HRC, NCTE, NGLTF, NCLR were all there, too). I needed NCLR to give us my brother Shannon Minter who I would die for. And I needed my sister Meghan Stabler, who helped me with my closing and built in some emphatic pauses that made my testimony better.
2) Congressman Frank is on our side and it's not new or news. He talked about civil rights for transgender people in the House on Oct. 9 last year, did the same earlier on Sep. 5 in that hearing I watched from my desk on C-SPAN and found powerful. Why do I know this? I know it because he's from MA, and so am I. I was honored to read his testimony supporting MA-HB1722 at our state hearing to include GI and E in our non-discrimination laws. And before someone writes a response that says, "He used to say people with transgender sometimes," I'll write that he DOES NOT since we asked him not to. He didn't yesterday. He didn't. He delivered an incredible set of persuasive remarks from his head, heart and he invested some of his capital in OUR lives and welfare. It's one more victory. We need more, but it's one.
3) I hope that we focus on what we ARE achieving, thank heaven that we have great organizations and people who are doing amazing things, and that our allies are invested in our lives. We need a law and he hearing was one more step closer. Diego

Diego,
You did a great job and we are all proud of you. However, you are setting yourself up for a great disappointment when people you are putting blind faith into don't live up to your hero worship. It was what I warned Donna Rose soon after she got involved with HRC.

But, everyone seems to know better and have a tendency to ignore history, making them doomed to repeat it. You can't tell trans activists anything, because they each think they have all the answers. Just ask anyone and they will tell you the same thing about me.

If you want to work with people many of us can't trust as far as we can throw them, that's up to you. But, you need remember what I said in comment # 8, that this is like SALT II. "Trust, but verify." Your reputation could be on the line.

Hey Diego, want to come on my show next Thursday night and talk about this?

Diego,
Your long post still doesn't explain why African-American transpeople weren't represented, nuch less the organization that represents me, the National Black Justice Coalition, wasn't invited to participate in your hearing.

Marti, as far as HRC running the show...don't believe everything you read. The Task Force and NCTE were doing all the preparation with the witnesses, taking care of their accommodations, getting people in place, prepared, and on time. Monica H, none of those to whom I spoke were HRC friendly in the least. And I spoke to the majority.

Monica R, I was equally disappointed and troubled concerning the lack of representation from the African American community. It is my UNDERSTANDING (not absolute fact or knowledge) that the witnesses were chosen through members of the congressional committee. I do not know who actually was responsible for choosing those who would testify, or who supplied the committee with the pool of candidates from which to choose.

There were some transgender individuals from the African American community at the hearing. Some were staff that worked within the orgs to accommodate the hearing. I don't believe that they were local from DC or I would have probably known them. Fortunately, most of the local women are employed - and unfortunately could not get the day off to attend the hearing in person. The African American transgender community from the DC population was not proportionally represented at the hearing, but all were welcome to attend.

I don't believe that the Task Force or NCTE would have done anything but welcome any participation and assistance offered. I don't know that the NBJC was not invited, or if they ever expressed the desire to participate. I would expect their participation to be welcomed.

be well and stay true...

NCTE filed over seventy names with the Committee, and they chose the ones they chose. Just as the Democratic leadership decided how to move forward with ENDA, so did this subcommittee decide whom to call.

Diego is correct about Barney; it wasn't one conversation over the past nine months. It was multiple conversations, some just plain chit-chat, that many of us have had with him over the years. And with his staffers, too. I had more influence with Senator Kennedy once when I helped him walk his dog outside the Capitol one morning than I ever had in a conference room. As Woody Allen said, 95% of life is just showing up. And sometimes you get lucky.

My take on Barney, and I shared this with Deb Price at the hearing, was that Barney has always wanted to do the right thing, but could never quite internalize our experiences to find the words to help himself understand. He's old school, remember, and many of those guys grew up in a strictly assimilationist culture where trans women and all feminine gay men were anathema. I often find it harder to explain the concept of gender identity to gay men than straight persons, and remember the firestorm from some of them when Lambda had the temerity to suggest that gender expression in ENDA applied more to gay men and women than to trans persons. Some old habits and fears take a long time to die.

I believe that yesterday Barney finally was able to express the common humanity that binds us, and he did so eloquently and with great humor.

Also, for all the naysayers, and you know who you are, please note that Committee Chair George Miller attended a part of the hearing, and he was a critical part of leadership that stripped us out last time. He was impressed by Barney's comments, and that means something.

And those of us who are skeptical of HRC and Rep. Barney Frank have damned good reasons amd 10 years of history to be skeptical of the happy-happy joy-joy chatter coming from all you transpeeps once again falling for the HRC Okey-Doke.

I'll finally believe that HRC and Rep. Frank are on our side when I'm standing behind President Obama at a Rose Garden signing ceremony for a passed, inclusve ENDA bill that they fought like hell, twisted arms and browbeat people to get passed the same way they did the non-inclusive one last fall.

Until then, if you honestly believe that 'HRC is our friends', I have some waterfront property in south Louisiana along I-10 between Breaux Bridge and Baton Rouge I'd like to sell you.

1. I didn't see the comment on African-Americans from Michael until just now, when I arrived from DC to Boston. It was a busy day for me with little internet access and that comment didn't appear for me when I read the thread. It was National HIV Testing Day, and I had DC and Boston work to do. Sorry for missing that. I am always distressed that I'm a rare or sole person of color in any setting. I wish we didn't even HAVE to have an CHC or CBC in Congress, but we do. I hope for a more balanced day in every setting. But it was a miss yesterday, to be sure. My initial draft of my testimony was ALL about race. But it's on the cutting room floor.
2. ALL of the organizations helped me personally, and to that, there's no question. I needed EACH, and they stood tall for me. Barney served us well. I am sorry if anyone can't see that as a result yesterday, regardless of yesteryear.
3. I have no heroes, sadly. Honestly, it goes back to the day that I realized that I, who was raised staunchly Roman Catholic, had to watch my parents no longer be welcome because they decided to divorce. Imagine seeing your parents extracted from being welcome just because they wanted to preserve sanity. I will never recover from that feeling. It taught me alot about what friendship, family and membership means, with the extra layer of faith. Y'all don't know me, but I'm nobody's fool for reasons that are more boring than bonding, so I'll keep them to myself.
4. I don't mistake trust for reliance. I spent my corporate life in Fortune 500 companies. If we think politics are political, just add stock option and bonus risks or rewards to the mix. I don't think that anything is done exclusively for altruism, and I wish I did because there are probably some things that are done for that. I'm just not be able to give them their due credit because of my jaded lens.
5. Sorry both posts are long. Yes, I'd love to be on your program, and let's talk offline. I'm going to bed. Tomorrow in Boston, we have a tremendous Trans Youth Leadership Conference that Gunner Scott assembled for MTPC. I'll only see the youth in the afternoon, but I'm meeting Gunner early. Best to all of you, and let's keep talking. I'm not overly invested in my thoughts, just our common outcomes. I have no children, so our next generation, those who follow us, are who give me the strength to do what I am humbly able to do with the help of my community family. Thanks so much. First, though, I have to go check out Pam's blog cuz I have had NO time to do what I want for a brief while. Diego

hey diego! you rule!

Marti, as far as HRC running the show...don't believe everything you read. The Task Force and NCTE were doing all the preparation with the witnesses, taking care of their accommodations, getting people in place, prepared, and on time. Monica H, none of those to whom I spoke were HRC friendly in the least. And I spoke to the majority.

Spoke with? Jeri, if you don't believe Joe Racalto or Donna Rose, then you might look down a few at Diego's comments. The fact that HRC was a "key player" in this hearing, is undeniable. I'm sure that the folks of United ENDA didn't like being saddled with HRC, but the fact of the matter is that they were. I'd disagree with Diego on Frank's use of people with transgender (you can listen to it here, and judge for yourself), but I think he is spot on about the roles of the organizations. BTW Jeri, can you please explain how you discount the words of Barney Frank's senior policy adviser? If anyone is in the know about these hearings, it would be Joe Racalto, Donna Rose and Diego Sanchez. Do you have some super secret inside source that goes beyond these folks?


as usual, marti, you are going to espouse whatever nonsense appeals to you and ignore every other fact. if you want really want to base your opinion on what you read, please review the blog on the National Center for Lesbian Rights at http://www.nclrights.org/site/PageServer?pagename=blog_katesBlog

or not.

i don't have any secret sources. i was there, i attended, i KNOW who was really doing the work. the difference between them and you is that they are willing to do whatever it takes - including swallowing some pride - if it furthers the goal of transgender equality - let's clarify that into plain old equality. maybe we should focus on attacking HRC and give up on the silly business of equal rights? the orgs involved continue to boycott HRC until they honor their commitment to support ONLY trans inclusive legislation. that does not mean they are unwilling to communicate or co-operate to further our common goals. enough already.

I dunno, Marti...

My own experience with Joe Racalto is that while he is a great guy and very committed to opening dialoge and helping the process along as much as he can, he also apparently can be much more optimistic and paint a much rosier picture than a situation actually calls for.

When Joe was on my show, he seemed confident that Barney would have no problem appearing as a guest, but yet when I actually tried to get that interview scheduled I was treated little better than gutter trash by Frank's office. It was only after my second attempt to schedule the appearance that I got any reply at all, a curt two-sentence email telling me that Barney would not be appearing on my show. No explanation, no thanks but no thanks, no nothing except a definite "No.".

The fact that Joe Racalto's own opinion of Barney's willingness to appear on my show and the reality of the actual response to the idea from Frank's office when I attemted to actually make it happen are so diametrically opposed to each other lead me to believe that while Joe's heart is certainly in the right place, I'm not so sure his view of things isn't influenced by wishfully-thinking rose-colored glasses.

In my experience with the hearing, I benefitted from EACH of the participating organizations, and I needed EACH of them for different types of expertise. When I was 10, Grandma Sanchez taught me to make tortillas. The recipe calls for specific ingredients, mixed together in an order she told me and then handled with precise kneading before placing each tortilla on a comal to cook. THIS hearing for me, reminded me of that experience. Each ingredient needed to be there, for different reasons, and it was my job to knead to introduce my own oxygen, and then to shape and cook my part of the meal. The meal's next courses, future action following this hearing, will likely be richer and more diverse in all of the ways people are offering, and it will be a better meal for that. For me, all of this is about getting equalily in our lives and the lives of people who follow. Diego

Diego,
If you ever plan on visiting UGA again, let me know if you'll spend some time in the Atlanta area. You can make the tortillas and I'll make the spaghetti.

Go Daugs! (I was sad for the baseball team.)

And out of this transgender hearing stew, you left out the black pepper, so the meal gonna turn out a little bland.

I've refrained from comment, because I was neither able to attend or watch in realtime, but I've had the advantage of being able to watch and review the hearings, as posted on Youtube. Of course, I have a few comments to make, some of which have been overlooked thus far.

First of all, I don't purport to know who was responsible for what. This hearing was important and historic. It isn't an end, but it's a significant signpost. To those who had a hand in this, you know what you did or did not do, I'll say "good job on this." The entire panel did an especially good job, in my opinion, and never put a foot wrong. Yes, the panel should have been more diverse, but it is true that Congressional committees themselves normally choose the panel of witnesses.

Second, there were highlights we should all go back and take second looks at. Ms. Miller's testimony, in particular, tells us, along with the fights in Montgomery County and Colorado, how the "other side" is going to go to try to stop transgender rights efforts - we must pay special attention to that, strategically. I was glad to see Ms Miller lectured by Sabrina Marcus Tarabolletti - some decried that, but I think it injected a large measure of humanity and passion to the proceeding. I particularly enjoyed Rep. Donald Payne's extremely subtle method of questioning - the halting and disarming way he began his questioning, then bored in like a laser beam on his prey, leaving them without cogent answers. Of course, Rep. Andrews conducted the hearing with thorough professionalism.

Do not overlook the impact of past lobbying efforts on the actions of members of this subcommittee on this hearing. I know that many people have been working on members of this committee for some time. For instance, Monica Roberts, whose comments you read above, has made a point of keeping in contact with Rep. Payne's office since the late 1990s, as part of her continuing efforts to lobby the CBC. I know that Babs Casbar, Donna Cartwright, and others have built strong relationships with many of the New Jersey congressional offices. It should be obvious to all that past contacts with Congressmen have paid off. Dana Beyer made a comment about gaining the chance to speak to Sen. Kennedy while he was walking his dog; a number of us, in my area, have made a point of taking every opportunity to meet locally with our Congressman, and as a result he knows us by name, and knows our concerns, although the next time I run into him, he's going to have to explain to me why the heck he voted for the FISA bill.

To me, there are a number of lessons from these hearings, to use in moving forward. First and foremost, everyone who cares about transgender rights, absolutely and positively must develop a relationship with their Congressman and Senators, if possible - and work for their opponents and develop that relationship, if their Members are hostile. On the Hill, you will very likely be blocked by aides, but at home, you can often get to speak to Congressmen directly - and historically, aides have blocked our messages.
Have what I call a one-minute-message ready, make it quick, have bill numbers ready, and once you get their interest, they'll listen to the details.

Second, yes, Barney said the right things. Yes, HRC may have had a positive hand in this hearing. But they're not off the hook, and they're not yet forgiven, not by me, anyway. I've heard and seen Barney say the right things, but I never believe a word that comes out of that man's mouth, based on his track record.

Third, I sense a possible bait-and-switch taking place, based on the selection of the witness panel, and based on the involvement of Barney and HRC, whose intentions I will likely never be able to trust, based on 15 years of history. Let's look at the witnesses for "our side", 2 worked for public advocacy organizations (Shannon Minter and Diego Sanchez), which is obvious - they are experienced witnesses, exactly who should be there advocating for our side. One was an HR professional for a F500 company - a good choice.
We then have 2 individuals with extraordinarily clear stories of prejudice that anyone should be able to understand - but stories of prejudice by Federal government agencies, or by contractors for Federal agencies. While a Federal ban on prejudice against T people covering Federal employees and contractors would be a positive step, it is not an acceptable sop to this community for exclusion from ENDA. I seriously hope that my sense that this might be coming is, indeed, alarmist - but HRC and Barney Frank are simply still not to be trusted, despite the roles they played in this hearing, positive though it is. It is also obvious that NCTE had to work with HRC to pull this off, and while this hearing was a good thing, I still have extreme suspicion and distrust for HRC and likely always will - again, 15 years of history and one very big lie last September. Please be careful that we do not count on or trust them. They cannot be trusted.

This was a huge step forward and all of the parties are to be thanked and congratulated for their parts in making it happen.

Many thanks to Representatives Frank and Baldwin for putting it out on the line, not only for our Trans brothers and sisters, but for gender non-conforming Lesbians and gay men as well. Gender Expression does not only apply to the trans community; one need only remeber the incident in the recent past of a Lesbian of colour harrassed in the woman's room by male security guards.

So this Lesbian is very pleased to see this hearing take place and looks forward to continuing moves forward.

This was a huge step forward and all of the parties are to be thanked and congratulated for their parts in making it happen.

Many thanks to Representatives Frank and Baldwin for putting it out on the line, not only for our Trans brothers and sisters, but for gender non-conforming Lesbians and gay men as well. Gender Expression does not only apply to the trans community; one need only remeber the incident in the recent past of a Lesbian of colour harrassed in the woman's room by male security guards.

So this Lesbian is very pleased to see this hearing take place and looks forward to continuing moves ahead.

In response to #25. You are seriously wrong, how you can pass comment about the work of organizations on putting this on, just because "I was there" Sheesh!. Were you involved? Did you work on this with others? Were you on the calls, talking to people, the Hill staff, the coalition? This was a coalition of organizations, equal credit to all, including HRC. HRC staffers from the top ranks down were instrumental and influential in getting this hearing. FYI I see that Diego is on HRC's Business Council and there was submitted testimony from Meghan who is also listed as being on their council.

Lets move forward and recognized that we should focus on getting an inclusive ENDA and stop this bickering between the organizations. The right will use it against us as way to show just how fractured we are. I am as frustrated as you are with HRC and what occured last year, but see their involvement in many trans issues as a good thing.

I've been around since 1996. HRC's done that for years, Sara - they'll screw the T community royally, then over the next year or two point to educational or small political efforts they've made on our behalf. Trust them if you want to, but the fact is their CEO flat-out lied to 1000 T people at SCC. I might - just might- trust what Solmonese has to say, if I see that he's hooked up to a polygraph machine, operated by a licensed examiner. Otherwise, I've been lied to by too many heads of HRC since 1996 to ever trust them myself.

There's no bickering. HRC lies. Period. No bickering needed. I don't do business with liars. Yes, this hearing was a good thing, but a number of groups set it up. I still wonder what Frank's and HRC's intentions were, what we're being set up for. Their history is to do something positive to set up thoroughly negative acts. They haven't earned my trust yet. My memory's too long for that.

sara,

i didn't say that HRC was not involved to any degree. behind the scenes, i am certain that they did support SOME aspect of this hearing. the work that was accomplished in preparation for and during the hearing was performed by orgs who participated in united ENDA - a group with a mission that HRC conspicuously did not subscribe to.

we are all aware that HRC was involved. the degree of their involvement in relation to the credit they receive - and their intentions - are what remain in question. or not. like polar, i don't forget things that quickly...HRC betrayed the community, and they have not yet instituted a policy that would warrant renewed trust. all of the united enda orgs are aware of that reality - the need to work with HRC is painful and cautious.

ps- i was involved, to a very very small degree - just like HRC. and HRC is the org that fractured our community - no one else.