eQualityGiving logo Equality Giving

Blueprint for LGBT Equality

in Federal law
days after
Inauguration

How it is computed

 

 

 

 

 

What does equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people look like? 

 

 

 

  MORE INFORMATION ON THE

BLUEPRINT FOR LGBT EQUALITY

> Download the Equality & Religious Freedom Act (Omnibus Equality Bill)

> Frequently Asked Questions on the Equality & Religious Freedom Act (Omnibus Equality Bill)

> Download the American Equality Bill

> Incremental LGBT legislation introduced at the federal level

> How we compute our Federal Legal Equality Index

> Speech President Obama could deliver for LGBT legal equality


 

 

 

   

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BASIS OF THE BLUEPRINT

In which areas of the law are LGBT people not treated the same as others?

The answer is:

  1. Employment in the private sector
  2. Employment in the federal government
  3. Housing
  4. Public accommodation
  5. Public facilities
  6. Credit
  7. Federally funded programs and activities
  8. Education
  9. Disability
  10. Civil marriage
  11. Hate crimes (Signed into law on October 28, 2009)
  12. Armed forces (the Don't Ask Don't Tell Repeal Act was signed into law on December 22, 2010)
  13. Immigration 

eQualityGiving has put forward since 2005 a set of goals needed to acheive legal LGBT equality. These are the Equality Goals, which explain what gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgenders are missing in current law in order to be treated like everybody else.

The Equality Goals are used to determine how eQualityGiving evaluates organizations. Which ones are significantly advancing one or more of the goals? The Equality Goals are also the basis for endorsing candidates. All our endorsed candidates support all the Equality Goals.  Read a one page summary of the Equality Goals.

 

 

EQUALITY & RELIGIOUS FREEDOM ACT (OMNIBUS EQUALITY BILL)

To reach legal equality, it is not enough to just determine the goals. We also need the most effective laws that will bring us to be treated like everybody else. This can be done incrementally or we can propose all the changes at once in a single Omnibus Bill. We can push for an Omnibus Equality Bill while still getting incremental legislation passed. At the request of eQualityGiving, Karen Doering, Esq. a stellar civil rights attorney prepared the Equality & Religious Freedom Act. Download the proposed Equality & Relibious Freedom Act (Omnibus Equality Bill) here.

After several months of preparation and discussions, eQualityGiving introduced this bill on March 18, 2009.

 

CONS OF AN OMNIBUS EQUALITY BILL

  • It is more difficult to navigate a bill that may affect many committees through Congress.
  • Convincing the public is more difficult since there multiple issues to educate the public on.
  • It is easier for our foes to find arguments against us in legislation that covers many fronts.
  • Historically, progress has been obtained incrementally. 

  

PROS OF AN OMNIBUS EQUALITY BILL 

  • The less we ask, the less we will certainly get.
  • It educates everyone that LGBT Americans do not have equality and that you can't be equal in some issues and not equal in others.
  • It allows an easy comparison of incremental legislation to the ideal in the Omnibus Bill.
  • It is in line with Presdient Obama leadership of change and doing things differently in Washington.

 

 

AMERICAN EQUALITY BILL

Some critics, have claimed that passing an Omnibus Bill is "too much" or "too difficult." While we believe that such a legislation is doable and a good goal, eQualityGiving asked Karen Doering, the author of the Omnibus Bill, to draft a bill that would concentrate on the civil rights components of the Omnibus Bill and put them together as an integrated modification of the Civil Rights Act in which the words "sexual orientation" and "gender identity/expression" are added in addition to race, religion, etc.  Download the proposed American Equality Bill here.

 

CONS OF AN AMERICAN EQUALITY BILL

  • Some people do not want to open the Civil Rights Act for discussion since they are concerned that unwanted changes may be added to the legislation. The reality is that the Civil Rights Act has been opened on several occasions to expand the groups of people covered by it.

 

PROS OF AN AMERICAN EQUALITY BILL 

  • Messaging is very simple: Include also LGBT Americans in the Civil Rights Act protections.
  • It is easier to navigate through Congress a bill that affects fewer committees.
  • It is a very focused expansion of the Civil Rights Act to a class of citizens that to not have those protections.
  • It educates everyone that LGBT Americans do not have equality by the fact that we are not included in the major civil rights protection legislation in our country.
  • It allows an easy comparison of incremental legislation to the ideal in the Omnibus Bill or the American Equality Bill.
  • It is in line with Presdient Obama leadership of change and doing things differently in Washington.


CAN WE PASS EQUALITY LEGISLATION DURING THE CURRENT DIFFICULT TIMES?

Consider two quotes:

  • "A right delayed is a right denied."
    Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
     
  • "President Kennedy didn't have the luxury of choosing between civil rights and sending us to the moon."
    President Barack Obama, March 10, 2009 [More excerpts of this speech]

 

OUR POSITION

eQualityGiving, as the original sponsor of both proposed legislations, strongly supports the Omnibus Equality Bill and the American Equality Bill. We cannot remain silent about all the rights and protections that are available to others, but denied to the LGBT community.

We do not think this approach is incompatible with incremental legislation, but we need to ensure that each incremental legislation lives up to the standards of the Omnibus Equality Bill for that specific section and civil rights legislation is part of the Civil Rights Act.

Read the article in The Washington Blade describing the Omnibus Equality Bill.

Keep track of our progress towards LGBT legal equality in our special pages: Waiting for LGBT Equality



 
eQuality alerts

Keep up to date on how to reach legal equality faster by signing for our eQuality alerts (no spam!). Even better, register to have access to confidential information on this website (benefits of registration). Registration is free and your information is not given to anyone.

CLICK HERE TO REGISTER NOW AND BE PART OF THIS ONLINE COMMUNITY 

   

Home >>  Status of LGBT Equality Under the Law >>  Blueprint for LGBT Equality (top)

CLICK to email this page to your list

POST AND PARTICIPATE [how to post]

Click to Post
From J Todd - Nov. 23, 2011 11:20 AM

I think the reference to 29 U.S.C. sec. 705 (8)(F)(i) - should be to 705 (20) (F) (i).


From eQualityGiving - Mar. 21, 2009 3:51 PM

Thanks, Abigail, for your thorough review and excellent comments. When clicking on download the legislation a new version dated March 21 will download which corrects the typo in the reference and also indicates on Section J (page 11) that the definition of gender identity to be used in Hate Crimes is the same as the one that we use throughout.

This demonstrates the critical advantage of having prepared an Omnibus Equality Bill: it identifies weaknesses in incremental legislation presented.

 


From Abby - Mar. 19, 2009 10:57 AM

A few specific comments:

  • The reference to "29 U.S.C. §706(8)(F)(i)" in the amendments to the American with Disabilities Act (on p. 10) is incorrect.  The correct section is 29 U.S.C. §705(8)(F)(i).
  • The proposal uses the same definition of "gender identity," identical to the definition used in HR2015 (the inclusive version of ENDA from 2007), throughout except in the Hate Crimes Bill.  I recognize that the language in the Hate Crimes Bill was approved by both Houses of Congress in 2007.  However, having separate definitions of the same term in federal law invites unnecessary litigation over whether that term is intended to have a different meaning in the Hate Crimes Bill than everywhere else.  In addition, there is some concern that the definition in the Hate Crimes Bill is intentionally more narrow than the definition in HR2015 and that it excludes those who have physically transitioned to their affirmed gender.  In light of these concerns, the political advantages of using the definition approved in 2007 do not justify the use of different definitions.
  • I applaud the addition of gender identity to the provisions reversing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and the provision allowing those forced to leave the military under that policy to re-enter the service.  However, that provision omits those who have been removed from service because they are transgender with devastating consequences, since they often are discharged as "mentally unfit," a label that may haunt them for the rest of their lives.  Although DADT doesn't specifically apply to transgender service members, the harsh consequences of the military's past treatment of transgender military personnel should be corrected.  If the goal of this proposal is to be comprehensive in correcting the inequitable treatment of LGBT people under federal law, then this inequity should be corrected along with the rest.

Whether or not this bill is ever enacted, it serves a very useful purposes by highlighting in a single document all of the ways in which LGBT people are mistreated under federal law.

Abigail Jensen
Attorney at law
Prescott, AZ


Site

Search
Index

User

Login
Register

 
 

Last Modified 2012-09-03