[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 155 (Monday, November 4, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7785-S7790]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              HEALTH CARE

  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I just returned from spending a weekend 
in my home State of Wyoming, traveling around the State and visiting 
with people in Natrona County and Casper as well as in Rock Springs, 
WY. I attended a marvelous event held every year in Sweetwater County 
called Cowboys Against Cancer. There were 700 people there to celebrate 
successes and remember those whom we have lost in these battles. I was 
there along with Senator Enzi as well as our Governor and others 
talking about an issue facing the Nation--an issue, of course, that is 
on everyone's mind--the health care law. This has been a very rough 5 
weeks for hard-working Americans who are concerned about their health, 
and this obviously came up for significant discussion at the Cowboys 
Against Cancer event Saturday night in Wyoming.
  Many people were hoping the Democrats' health care law would actually 
help decrease costs; that it would actually help increase access to 
quality health care. But all America knows that hasn't happened. On 
October 1, the Obama administration launched its health care exchange. 
This was to be the biggest moment of the President's signature 
achievement in office. It was one where people were looking forward to 
the opening of the exchanges, and it flopped. It completely flopped. 
The Web site crashed and fell right on the heads of the people who were 
already anxious about their health care. People all across the country 
saw this collapse, and even the late-night comedians have made a lot of 
jokes about the incompetence and the mismanagement of the Obama 
administration.
  But I have to say the failure of the exchange is no laughing matter, 
because this is much more than a failed Web site. Real people are 
facing real health care problems and are being hurt because of this 
administration's failed health care law. Because of this law, millions 
of people are getting letters saying their insurance has been canceled. 
I talked to some of them this past weekend in Wyoming. There are at 
least 3\1/2\ million people impacted by this across the country, and 
the number continues to climb every day. The Obama administration says 
that is no big deal. They say only 3\1/2\ million people are losing the 
insurance plans they have now. But this administration's goal--their 
goal--was just 7 million people covered in the exchanges. So why does 
the White House think 3\1/2\ million Americans losing their coverage is 
no big deal when their goal this year was to cover 7 million Americans?
  President Obama and Democrats in Congress promised over and over: If

[[Page S7786]]

you like your insurance, you can keep it. But that wasn't true. The 
Washington Post Fact Checker looked into the President's claim. These 
are the folks who decide if something is truthful or not truthful. They 
gave the President the full four Pinocchios for completely false 
claims.
  The Fact Checker wrote:

       The President's promise apparently came with a very large 
     caveat: ``If you like your health care plan, you'll be able 
     to keep your health care plan--if we deem it to be 
     adequate.''

  Well, the President never said that. If the White House had been 
honest about people losing their health insurance, this law would never 
have passed. But the law did pass and people across the country are 
learning how much it is going to actually hurt them personally.
  For millions of people who are losing the insurance they have, they 
are finding the options available under the Democrats' health care law 
much more limited and much more expensive. The rates are higher, the 
deductibles are higher, their copays are higher. It is not the kind of 
reform people wanted or needed, but that is what the Washington 
Democrats gave them.
  The cost increases and the canceled insurance policies are just the 
beginning. A lot of people are now starting to realize they are no 
longer going to have access to their family's doctor. It wasn't 
supposed to happen this way. President Obama said this in 2009:

       We will keep this promise: If you like your doctor, you 
     will be able to keep your doctor. Period.

  That is what President Obama said. If the White House had been honest 
about how many families were going to lose access to their doctors, 
this health care law would never have passed. But the White House did 
make that promise, Democrats did pass that law, and American families 
all across the country are suffering as a result.
  Coming back from Wyoming this morning I picked up USA Today. The 
editorial page of this newspaper supported the President's health care 
law, but their view today is:

       Coverage cancellations belie Obama's promise. Obamacare is 
     starting to resemble a patient bleeding from self-inflicted 
     wounds. A month after launch, the online health exchanges 
     where individuals are supposed to shop for insurance remain 
     slow or unusable, except in states that opted to run their 
     own marketplaces and did a more competent job than the 
     administration.

  States were more competent than the administration.
  Continuing to quote the article:

       As if that weren't trouble enough, critics are justifiably 
     mocking President Obama for his repeated, untrue promise that 
     if people liked their health plans, they could keep them.

  The editorial on the opinion page of today's USA Today says:

       Oops. Hundreds of thousands of people are getting 
     termination notices from plans that don't meet the strict new 
     requirements of the Affordable Care Act. Presumably, not all 
     those people disliked their plans.

  Referring to the President, they go on to say:

       Now he can't seem to admit he overpromised and 
     oversimplified. He and his aides compound their credibility 
     problem by suggesting that people whose plans are being 
     canceled ``just shop around in the new marketplace''--a 
     laughable impossibility while HealthCare.gov is plagued by 
     bugs.

  So that is what I read in this morning's USA Today as I was coming 
back from Wyoming. Then I picked up the Wall Street Journal and turned 
to another column, and this is a guest column: ``You Also Can't Keep 
Your Doctor.''
  You also can't keep your doctor. And there is a little subheadline 
that reads: ``I had great cancer doctors and health insurance. My plan 
was cancelled. Now I worry how long I'll live.''
  I am sorry the Senate Chamber isn't full of all those people who 
voted for this health care law as this woman worries how long she will 
live. The Wall Street Journal says it is an absolutely devastating 
piece by one woman who is suffering because of the health care law. Her 
name is Edie Littlefield Sundby. She wrote about her experience 
fighting stage 4 gallbladder cancer. She had a health care plan with 
affordable access to good doctors who she points out saved her life.
  As a doctor, I will tell you stage 4 gallbladder cancer has a very 
small chance of success and survival. She has beaten the odds because 
of those taking care of her. But now she has been told that the plan 
she has is being canceled because of the President's health care law. 
Here is what she wrote:

       What happened to the President's promise, you can keep your 
     health plan? Or the promise that, you can keep your doctor? 
     Thanks to the law, I have been forced to give up a world-
     class health plan. The exchange would force me to give up a 
     world-class physician.

  She has had some of the best physicians in the world--MD Anderson in 
Texas and California at Stanford, as well as in her home community of 
San Diego.
  Washington Democrats knew their law would harm people such as Edie 
Littlefield Sundby who writes today in the Wall Street Journal. They 
knew that people like her all across the country would lose their 
insurance and lose their doctors. They just didn't want the American 
people to know it.
  It was in the regulations that they wrote and they supported. The 
issue has to do with a section of the health care law that says that 
anyone who had an insurance policy on March 23, 2010, and continued to 
renew it, could keep it even after the ObamaCare exchange is launched. 
It is called a grandfather clause, and it is to protect people from the 
law's new rules and mandates--to let people, if they had something they 
liked, keep what they had.
  But less than 3 months after the President signed his health care 
law, the administration issued a regulation setting very specific 
criteria these health plans had to meet in order to be grandfathered. 
The regulation dismantled the section of the law by placing 
unreasonably tight restrictions on grandfathered policies. Now, any 
routine change made to a grandfathered insurance plan immediately 
breaks the Democrats' promise that Americans can keep their health 
insurance.
  A lot of consumers want the freedom and flexibility to increase their 
plan deductible, or copayments, rather than face a higher monthly 
premium. It is natural that people want to do it--with their health 
insurance, car insurance, or homeowners insurance. Looking and making 
decisions for you and your family is just part of being responsible. 
The Obama administration's regulations took away that choice.
  Republicans saw this train wreck coming, and we tried to stop it. My 
colleague Senator Enzi from Wyoming in 2010 brought S.J. Res. 39 to 
this floor. This was a Resolution of Disapproval, which would have 
immediately overturned the administration's burdensome grandfather 
regulations.
  What Senator Enzi brought to the floor for a vote of the entire body 
would have, if passed, allowed everyone to keep the insurance they had 
if they liked it--basically, to uphold the President's promise.
  Republicans supported this resolution. Senate Democrats voted against 
it in lockstep. Absolutely every one of them said no. They kept the 
regulation on the books and made sure people would not be able to keep 
the insurance policy they had if they liked it.
  Now Democrats don't want to hear about people like Edie with stage 4 
gallbladder cancer. Republicans do want to hear about people like her--
people who are losing their coverage because of this health care law. 
We want people to tell us their stories by tweeting with the hashtag 
``YourStory.'' We want to make sure that nobody in the Obama 
administration forgets that these are real people and they have been 
hurt by this health care law which the President has continued to, on 
party lines, force down the throats of the American people in its 
passage, and then continue to deliberately deceive the American people 
with his quotes, not very long ago, and repeated so many times: If you 
like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.
  Republicans support real health care reform. We support ideas such as 
allowing people to buy insurance across State lines. That would 
increase access to coverage and to care, not decrease it. That would 
increase competition and bring down prices--not raise them. But the 
Democrats' health care law is doing just that. That would be a reform 
that would help the American people. But the Obama health care law took 
the exact opposite approach.
  Here is how Edie Littlefield Sundby put it in her story. She wrote:

       Before the Affordable Care Act, health-insurance policies 
     could not be sold across state lines; now policies sold on 
     the Affordable Care Act exchanges may not be offered across 
     county lines.


[[Page S7787]]


  That should change. President Obama and Washington Democrats wanted a 
political win. They were willing to do anything and say anything--to 
say whatever they needed--to get that win, whether it was true or not. 
If they had been honest with the American people, they would have never 
gotten this law passed. But the Democrats' health care law today in 
America is hurting people, hurting families, hurting Americans. This 
must end.
  The President should come to the table. He should work with 
Republicans to pass real reform, to help the American people who have 
been hurt and continue to be hurt by his health care law.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a 
quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the 
quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I come to the floor this afternoon to 
talk about a bipartisan effort to advance uniquely American values: 
freedom, fairness, and opportunity. The Employment Non-Discrimination 
Act, or ENDA, has at its foundation these core values. It is about 
freedom, the freedom to realize our founding belief that all Americans 
are created equal under the law. It is about fairness, about whether 
lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans deserve to be treated 
just as their family members, their friends, their neighbors, and 
fellow workers. It is about opportunity, about whether every American 
gets to dream the same dreams, chase the same ambitions, and have the 
same shot at success.
  One year ago this week the people of Wisconsin elected me to the 
Senate. The citizens of Wisconsin made history, electing our State's 
first woman to the U.S. Senate, and electing the first out gay or 
lesbian person to the U.S. Senate in the history of our great Nation. 
But I didn't run to make history, I ran to make a difference, a 
difference that would give everyone a fair shot at achieving their 
dreams.
  I couldn't be more proud of the bipartisan effort to make a 
difference with the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. I thank and 
recognize my colleagues Senators Mark Kirk, Jeff Merkley, Susan 
Collins, and Tom Harkin for their leadership working across party lines 
and moving this legislation forward. I take great pride at being a part 
of this effort. I think it shows great promise of what can be achieved 
if we work together in a bipartisan way to get work done for the 
American people.
  I also want to take the time to recognize the 55 cosponsors of this 
bill, both Democrats and Republicans, who made a commitment to ending 
discrimination against our fellow citizens simply because of who they 
are and who they love. I realize that for some this is not an easy 
vote. I understand for some they may believe it is not good politics. 
But I want to say that I have a deep respect for those who choose to 
stand on the side of progress for our country this week. For those who 
stand this week and answer the call for courage, I can say with 
confidence your courage will be respected and remembered when the 
history of this struggle is written.
  In June I had the opportunity to speak at the Department of Justice 
during its Pride Month observations. It was fitting that we gathered in 
a building that bears the name of Robert F. Kennedy. He became Attorney 
General at a time of rapid progress in the area of civil rights, 
progress that thrilled many Americans and frightened others. Kennedy 
knew, however, that America should be on the side of progress. He 
traveled to Georgia, at the time unfriendly territory for a civil 
rights reformer, to make his first formal speech at the University of 
Georgia law school. He did not shy away from the Kennedy 
administration's commitment to equal opportunity, ``For on this 
generation of Americans,'' he explained, ``falls the full burden of 
proving to the world that we really mean it when we say that all men 
are created free and equal before the law.''
  He backed his words with actions, not only by vigorously enforcing 
the laws and court orders that advanced the cause of civil rights but 
by holding the Kennedy administration itself accountable, demanding 
that the Justice Department and other government entities prioritize 
diversity in the workplace. Of course, as much progress as that 
generation made in fulfilling the promises America makes about fairness 
and equality, there was plenty to do for the generations that have 
followed.
  Today we continue that work, guided by the belief that everyone 
deserves a fair shot at the American dream and that our LGBT family 
members, friends, and neighbors deserve to be treated as everyone else 
in the United States. Every American deserves the freedom to work free 
of discrimination. Passing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act 
strengthens this freedom by recognizing the right to be judged based on 
your skills, talents, loyalty, character, integrity, and work ethic.
  My home State of Wisconsin was the first State in the Nation to add 
sexual orientation to its antidiscrimination laws. At the time, back in 
1982, only 41 municipalities and 8 counties in the United States 
offered limited protections against discrimination based on sexual 
orientation. Wisconsin's efforts to pass the Nation's first sexual 
orientation antidiscrimination statute were supported by a broad and 
bipartisan coalition, including members of the clergy, various 
religious denominations, medical and professional groups. The measure 
was signed into law by our Republican Governor, Lee Sherman Dreyfus, 
who based his decision to support the measure on the success of 
municipal ordinances providing similar protections against 
discrimination.
  Since Wisconsin passed its statute in 1982, 20 States and the 
District of Columbia, representing nearly 45 percent of our Nation's 
population, have passed similar antidiscrimination measures. Sixteen 
States and the District of Columbia also protect their citizens on the 
basis of gender identity. However, 76 million American workers have to 
contend with the ugly reality that in over two dozen States it is legal 
to discriminate against LGBT employees. That is simply wrong and this 
legislation seeks to right that wrong.
  The business community understands this. That is why a majority of 
Fortune 500 companies have sexual orientation and gender identity 
nondiscrimination policies in place, and more than 100 companies have 
endorsed this bill. It is time to level the playing field and extend 
these protections to all Americans. But we don't just want to live in a 
country where our rights are respected under the law; we want to live 
in a country where we are respected for who we are, where we enjoy 
freedom and opportunity because that is who we are as Americans.
  More than 5 years after he spoke at the University of Georgia law 
school, half a world away at Cape Town University, in South Africa, 
Robert F. Kennedy said, ``Few will have the greatness to bend history, 
but each of us can work to change a small portion of the events and 
then the total--all of these acts--will be written in the history of 
this generation.''
  The change we work for today can add up to incredible progress in our 
lifetime. This generation can be the one in which we fulfill the 
promises of freedom and equality for all, in which America finally 
becomes a place where everyone's rights are respected at work and every 
family's love and commitment can be recognized and respected and 
rewarded under the law.
  I am hopeful that we can now move this Employment Non-Discrimination 
Act forward, to build a tomorrow that is more equal, not less, for all 
Americans.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk the call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Hirono). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I am pleased to be a longtime supporter 
and original cosponsor of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, known 
more commonly as ENDA. This bill

[[Page S7788]]

will affirm the principle that individuals in the workplace should be 
judged on their skills and abilities and not on extraneous criteria, 
such as sexual orientation.
  In 2002, more than 10 years ago, I was proud to join Senator Ted 
Kennedy, whom we all remember as a lifelong champion of civil rights, 
as the cosponsor of ENDA. I am pleased to support this important bill 
again today, but I am dismayed that so many years have gone by--more 
than a decade--and this bill still has not become law. It is time for 
us to enact this important legislation.
  I wish to recognize the efforts of the chief sponsors of this bill, 
Senators Merkley and Kirk, who took up this cause and moved this bill 
forward. I also acknowledge the work of chairman Tom Harkin in bringing 
this bill to the Senate floor. He, too, has been a champion of civil 
rights throughout his long career, and I hope that when he retires at 
the end of this Congress, this bill will be one more of his 
accomplishments.
  The time to pass it has come. All Americans deserve a fair 
opportunity to pursue the American dream. Over the years, we have 
rightly taken a stand against workplace discrimination based on race, 
sex, national origin, religion, age, and disability. It is past time 
that we ensure that all employees are judged solely based on their 
talents, abilities, hard work, and capabilities by closing an important 
gap in Federal employment law as it relates to sexual orientation. The 
right to work is fundamental. How can we in good conscience deny that 
right to any LGBT American who is qualified and willing to work? 
Especially in today's economy, job security has taken on an even 
greater importance to all Americans. How can we, in good conscience, 
tell one segment of Americans that they are not entitled to that 
security because of whom they love?

  Equal rights in the workplace is neither a new nor a revolutionary 
concept. Much of corporate America has already embraced LGBT 
protections. Why? Because it allows them to attract the best and the 
brightest employees and to retain talented employees. Nearly 90 percent 
of Fortune 500 companies already have sexual orientation 
nondiscrimination policies in place, and many Maine businesses and 
businesses associated with the State of Maine have such policies. They 
include IDEXX Laboratories, L.L. Bean, Maine Medical Center, the Warren 
Center in Bangor, Hannaford Supermarkets, Bath Ironworks, and Unum, a 
large insurance company. There are many more. I ask unanimous consent 
that a list of leading Maine employers that support workplace fairness 
and the passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act be included in 
the record following my remarks.
  In addition, ENDA is very similar to current law in nearly two dozen 
States, including, I am proud to say, the great State of Maine.
  But in spite of how far we have advanced the cause of civil rights in 
this country, it still remains legal in 29 States to fire or to refuse 
to hire someone simply because he or she is lesbian, gay, or bisexual. 
Most businesses don't discriminate. They simply want to hire the best 
worker for the job, regardless of sexual orientation. But in others, 
high-performing LGBT employees can be and still are legally 
discriminated against.
  When I discuss this issue with many of my constituents, they are 
shocked to learn it is legal under Federal law--not Maine law but 
Federal law--for them to refuse to hire or to fire someone solely 
because of their sexual orientation. They find that shocking. They just 
assume our civil rights laws, which protect people from discrimination 
based on race, gender, religion, and age, also protect individuals 
based on sexual orientation. Of course, because they are operating in 
the State of Maine, they cannot legally discriminate against an 
individual based on sexual orientation. I am proud to say the vast 
majority of Maine's businesses would never think of discriminating 
based on sexual orientation. They simply want to hire and retain the 
best person for the job.
  Along with former Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, I worked hard 
to repeal the military's discriminatory policy of ``Don't Ask, Don't 
Tell.'' That policy prevented gay and lesbian servicemembers from being 
open about their sexual orientation. My view was that if they were 
willing to put on the uniform of our country, be deployed to distant 
lands, and risk their lives for our freedom, we should be thanking 
them, not trying to exclude them from serving in the military. Now that 
``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' has been repealed, I think it is significant 
that the implementation of repeal of ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' has gone 
so smoothly. It has gone very well, contrary to the dire predictions of 
some of the opponents. We hear some of the same kinds of predictions 
today as we debate this bill. I would say that, just as the repeal of 
``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' has been implemented quite smoothly, we will 
see ENDA implemented smoothly as well if we stand, do what is right, 
and pass this bill.
  The bill before the Senate deserves support as a matter of fairness 
and as a matter of civil rights. It is a commonsense solution 
consistent with existing Federal civil rights laws, and it will not 
place an undue burden on American employers. We would not see so many 
companies voluntarily adopting nondiscrimination policies if it were 
somehow burdensome to do so. They are doing so because it is in their 
own best interests, because they want the most qualified employees and 
to retain the most talented employees, regardless of their sexual 
orientation. That is not relevant to their ability to do the job.
  Finally, it is simply right to pass this bill. We cannot in this day 
and age countenance legal discrimination against qualified employees 
and applicants. It is time that we enact this bill.
  I urge my colleagues to support ENDA, and I am hopeful we will get 
more than the 60 votes needed this evening to proceed to this important 
bill.
  Thank you, Madam President. I yield the floor.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                     Human Rights Campaign--Maine-


  Headquartered Companies and Organizations with Gender Identity and 
             Sexual Orientation Non-Discrimination Policies

       Brewer Medical Center, Capehart Community Health Center, 
     Eastern Maine AIDS Network, Extended Care Services, Helen 
     Hunt Health Center, Hope House, IDEXX Laboratories Inc., L.L. 
     Bean Inc., Maine Medical Center, MaineGeneral Medical Center, 
     Penobscot Community Health Care, Summer Street Health Center, 
     Warren Center.


   Other Companies and Organizations with Gender Identity and Sexual 
                Orientation Non-Discrimination Policies

       Adecco North America, LLC, American Eagle Outfitters, 
     American Institute of Architects, Bank of America Corp., Best 
     Buy, Charles Schwab & Co., Choice Hotels International, 
     Corning, CVS, Darden Restaurants, Dollar Tree, Gap, General 
     Dynamics (Bath Ironworks), General Electric, Hannaford 
     Supermarket, Home Depot, ING Financial, InterContinental 
     Hotels Group Americas, J C Penney, KeyCorp, Levi Strauss & 
     Co., Lowe's.
       Marriott, Marsh & McLennan Companies, McKesson 
     Technologies, Merck & Co., Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams, 
     Morgan Stanley, New Balance, Nike, Olive Garden, Pizza Hut, 
     RBC Wealth Management, Rite-Aid, Ryder Systems, Subway, 
     SUPERVALU, Target, TD Bank, Texas Instruments, Time Warner, 
     UnumProvident, UPS, Walmart.


 Colleges and Universities with Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation 
                      Non-Discrimination Policies

       Bangor Theological Seminary, Bates College Maine Media 
     College, Bowdoin College, Colby College, University of Maine 
     System (7 campuses).


State and Local Governments with Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation 
                      Non-Discrimination Policies

       State of Maine.
                                  ____


               Business Coalition for Workplace Fairness

       The majority of United States businesses have already 
     started addressing workplace fairness for lesbian, gay, 
     bisexual and transgender employees. But we need a federal 
     standard that treats all employees the same way.
       The Business Coalition for Workplace Fairness is a group of 
     leading U.S. employers that support the Employment Non-
     Discrimination Act, a federal bill that would provide the 
     same basic protections that are already afforded to workers 
     across the country.
       Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender employees are not 
     protected under federal law from being fired, refused work or 
     otherwise discriminated against. ENDA would do just that.


 Leading employers that support workplace fairness and the passage of 
             the federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act

       Accenture Ltd., New York, NY; Alcoa Inc., New York, NY; 
     American Eagle Outfitters

[[Page S7789]]

     Inc., Pittsburgh, PA; American Institute of Architects, 
     Washington, DC; Ameriprise Financial Inc., Minneapolis, MN; 
     Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA; AMR Corp. (American Airlines), 
     Fort Worth, TX; Bank of America Corp., Charlotte, NC; The 
     Bank of New York Mellon Corp. (BNY Mellon), New York, NY; 
     Barclays, New York, NY; BASF Corp., Florham Park, NJ; Bausch 
     & Lomb Inc., Rochester, NY; Best Buy Co. Inc., Richfield, MN; 
     Bingham McCutchen LLP, Boston, MA; Biogen Idec Inc., Weston, 
     MA; BMC Software Inc., Houston, TX; BNP Paribas, New York, 
     NY; Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals Inc., Ridgefield, 
     CT; BP America Inc., Warrenville, IL; Bristol-Myers Squibb 
     Co., New York, NY; Broadridge Financial Solutions Inc., Lake 
     Success, NY; CA Technologies Inc., Islandia, NY; Caesars 
     Entertainment Corp., Las Vegas, NV; Capital One Financial 
     Corp., McLean, VA; Cardinal Health Inc., Dublin, OH; 
     CareFusion Corp., San Diego, CA.
       CC Media Holdings Inc. (Clear Channel), San Antonio, TX; 
     Charles Schwab & Co., San Francisco, CA; Chevron Corp., San 
     Ramon, CA; Choice Hotels International Inc., Silver Spring, 
     MD; Chubb Corp., Warren, NJ; Cisco Systems Inc., San Jose, 
     CA; Citigroup, New York, NY; Clorox Co., Oakland, CA; The 
     Coca-Cola Co., Atlanta, GA; Corning Inc., Corning, NY; Darden 
     Restaurants Inc., Orlando, FL; Dell Inc., Round Rock, TX; 
     Deloitte LLP, New York, NY; The Depository Trust & Clearing 
     Corp., New York, NY; Deutsche Bank, New York, NY; Diageo 
     North America, Norwalk, CT; Dow Chemical Co., Midland, MI; 
     Eastman Kodak Co., Rochester, NY; Electronic Arts Inc., 
     Redwood City, CA; Eli Lilly & Co., Indianapolis, IN; EMC 
     Corp., Hopkinton, MA; Ernst & Young LLP, New York, NY; 
     Expedia Inc., Bellevue, WA; Gap Inc., San Francisco, CA; 
     General Electric Co., Fairfield, CT; General Mills Inc., 
     Minneapolis, MN; General Motors Corp., Detroit, MI; 
     GlaxoSmithKline, Philadelphia, PA; Goldman Sachs Group Inc., 
     New York, NY; Google Inc., Mountain View, CA.
       Groupon Inc., Chicago, IL; Hanover Direct Inc., Weehawken, 
     NJ; Herman Miller Inc., Zeeland, MI; Hewlett-Packard Co., 
     Palo Alto, CA; Hillshire Brands Co., Downers Grove, IL; 
     Hilton Worldwide, McLean, VA; Hospira Inc., Lake Forest, IL; 
     HSBC--North America, Prospect Heights, IL; Hyatt Hotels 
     Corp., Chicago, IL; Integrity Staffing Solutions Inc., 
     Wilmington, DE; InterContinental Hotels Group Americas, 
     Atlanta, GA; International Business Machines Corp., Armonk, 
     NY; Jenner & Block LLP, Chicago, IL; JPMorgan Chase & Co., 
     New York, NY; Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, CA; KeyCorp, 
     Cleveland, OH; Kimpton Hotel & Restaurant Group, San 
     Francisco, CA; KPMG LLP, New York, NY; Levi Strauss & Co., 
     San Francisco, CA; Marriott International Inc., Bethesda, MD; 
     Marsh & McLennan Companies Inc., New York, NY; Merck & Co. 
     Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ; Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA; 
     MillerCoors Brewing Co., Chicago, IL.
       Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams, Taylorsville, NC; Moody's 
     Corp., New York, NY; Morgan Stanley, New York, NY; Motorola 
     Inc., Schaumburg, IL; Nationwide, Columbus, OH; The Nielsen 
     Co., Schaumburg, IL; Nike Inc., Beaverton, OR; Oracle Corp., 
     Redwood City, CA; Orbitz Worldwide Inc., Chicago, IL; Pfizer 
     Inc., New York, NY; PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, New York, NY; 
     Procter & Gamble Co., Cincinnati, OH; QUALCOMM Inc., San 
     Diego, CA; RBC Wealth Management, Minneapolis, MN; 
     Replacements Ltd., McLeansville, NC; Robins, Kaplan, Miller & 
     Ciresi LLP, Minneapolis, MN; Self-Help Credit Union, Durham, 
     NC; SUPERVALU Inc., Eden Prairie, MN; Teachers Insurance and 
     Annuity Association--College Retirement Equities Fund, New 
     York, NY; Tech Data Corp., Clearwater, FL; Texas Instruments 
     Inc., Dallas, TX; Thomson Reuters, New York, NY; Time Warner 
     Inc., New York, NY; Travelers Companies Inc., New York, NY; 
     UBS AG, Stamford, CT; US Airways Group Inc., Tempe, AZ; 
     WellPoint Inc., Indianapolis, IN; Wells Fargo & Co., San 
     Francisco, CA; Whirlpool Corp., Benton Harbor, MI; Xerox 
     Corp., Stamford, CT; Yahoo! Inc., Sunnyvale, CA.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.
  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I thank my colleague from Maine for her 
statement. This is not a partisan issue. Senator Mark Kirk, my 
Republican colleague from Illinois, is a cosponsor of this issue as 
well.
  When it comes to discrimination, neither party has a monopoly on 
opposing discrimination. We should be working together. So I thank the 
Senator from Maine for speaking as she has so often for the kinds of 
liberties and values which we all should share in this country.
  If we ask most Americans this very basic question: Is it legal to 
discriminate against someone because they are gay--to say I won't hire 
you, I won't promote you, I won't give you a raise--80 percent of 
Americans say, of course not. That can't be legal in America. The 
reality is that in more than half of the States it is legal, and in 
more than two-thirds of the States it is legal to discriminate based on 
gender identity. That which we take for granted as part of the ordinary 
course of life and business in America turns out not to be true. This 
ENDA bill, which is going to be considered on a procedural vote in 
about an hour, is an effort to establish a national standard of 
tolerance, a national standard against discrimination.
  I come from a background--and I think most people do--that believes 
each person deserves a chance to prove themselves and that we shouldn't 
hold it against them if they happen to be a man or a woman, a person 
who is of one religious faith or another, or because of a person's 
national origin, race, or religion. We shouldn't discriminate against 
people based on that. It really strikes me as fundamental to what we 
are as Americans to say that everyone deserves a chance to be judged on 
the merits, on the basis of their performance. This Employment Non-
Discrimination Act, on which we will consider a procedural vote in 
about an hour, is an effort to enshrine that into law at the Federal 
level.
  Some of the critics say: Why are you doing this? The House of 
Representatives will never take this up; they will never consider it. 
Well, I think it is our responsibility to speak out in favor of doing 
the right thing. I am hoping that, as we saw with the statement from 
the Senator from Maine, Republicans will step up and realize that this 
shouldn't be a partisan issue, and that the Republican-controlled House 
of Representatives, where the Republicans have the majority, will 
actually stand and speak against this form of discrimination.
  As many as 48 percent of lesbian, gay, or bisexual Americans and 59 
percent of transgender Americans have no legal protection against 
discrimination in the workplace. In 29 States, lesbian, gay, and 
bisexual Americans have no legal protection. In three States, 
transgender Americans have no protection. Between 15 percent and 43 
percent of LGBT people have experienced discrimination or harassment in 
the workplace as a result of their sexual orientation. Twenty-six 
percent of transgender people report having been fired from a job 
because of gender identity, and 90 percent reported experiencing 
harassment, mistreatment, or discrimination.
  Those are terrible statistics, but there is a ray of hope. We found 
it on the issue of marriage equality, and we found it when it comes to 
discrimination based on sexual orientation, and here is what is most 
hopeful: Younger people don't feel this way. The newer generation 
across America looks at the older folks, scratches their heads, and 
says: What are you doing? Why would you possibly discriminate against 
someone because of their sexual orientation?
  There are some who will decry this as the deterioration of American 
values. Not me. I think it is an indication that each generation has an 
opportunity to expand opportunity, an opportunity to expand freedom, 
and to put to rest discrimination. How many times has it happened 
throughout our history? We waged a Civil War over the issue of race and 
slavery, and in our Constitution women were treated as second class 
citizens and not allowed to vote until the 20th century. We have seen 
similar discrimination against groups throughout our history. We know 
it happened in the early days when it came to discrimination against 
those who were disabled and faced other disabilities. All of that is 
changing for the better. We are moving toward a society that really 
judges people based on what they do with their lives, how they conduct 
themselves.
  When we extend Federal employment discrimination protections 
currently provided based on race, religion, sex, national origin, age, 
and disability to sexual orientation and gender identity, we will be 
moving forward on this Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which is 
known as ENDA. In this measure, we prohibit public and private 
employers with more than 15 employees, employment agencies, and labor 
unions from using an individual's sexual orientation or gender identity 
as the basis for employment discrimination such as hiring, firing, 
promotion or compensation. We apply to Congress and the Federal 
Government as well as employees of State and local governments the same 
basic protection.
  This bill reflects what the business community is largely already 
doing. A majority of Fortune 500 companies have sexual orientation and 
gender identity nondiscrimination policies in

[[Page S7790]]

place. More than 100 companies have already endorsed this bill.
  Recent polling has shown the majority of small businesses have sexual 
orientation and gender identity nondiscrimination policies in place. 
One might say: If so many businesses are already moving in this 
direction, why do we need it? Well, the vast majority of American 
businesses didn't discriminate based on race, but to protect people 
looking for jobs, and others, we wanted to make sure everyone was 
protected in the Civil Rights Act.
  The business community from Wall Street to Main Street understands 
that hiring the best and brightest, without considering irrelevant 
characteristics such as sexual orientation and gender identity, is the 
best way to compete in our global economy.
  ENDA would extend the protections already offered by the majority of 
businesses to level the playing field and ensure that all Americans 
have equal protection against employment discrimination.
  We do not get many chances in this job to make a mark in history. 
This will be our chance in the Senate. In just an hour we will have 
this procedural vote. We need 60. We have 55 Democrats, but we need 5 
Republicans to step up and join us. I believe we will have them, and I 
hope many more.
  Let's make this a solid bipartisan effort, a solid stand against 
discrimination. That ought to be one issue that brings both parties 
together. With a solid vote coming out of the Senate, I hope our 
friends on the opposite side of the Rotunda will follow our lead and 
they will consider and pass this important and historic legislation.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________