[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 116 (Thursday, July 23, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5530-S5533]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. MERKLEY (for himself, Ms. Baldwin, Mr. Booker, Mr. Bennet, 
        Mr. Blumenthal, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Brown, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. 
        Cardin, Mr. Carper, Mr. Coons, Mr. Durbin, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. 
        Franken, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. Heinrich, Ms. Hirono, Mr. Kaine, 
        Mr. King, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Markey, Mrs. McCaskill, 
        Mr. Menendez, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Murphy, Mrs. Murray, Mr. 
        Peters, Mr. Reed, Mr. Reid, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Schatz, Mr. 
        Schumer, Mrs. Shaheen, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Udall, Mr. Warner, Ms. 
        Warren, Mr. Whitehouse, and Mr. Wyden):
  S. 1858. A bill to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, 
gender identity, and sexual orientation, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Equality 
Act of 2015--comprehensive civil rights legislation for our LGBT 
community.
  There are few concepts as fundamentally American as equality. We were 
founded on this principle with these simple words:

       We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are 
     created equal, they are endowed by their Creator with 
     unalienable Rights, that among these are life, liberty, and 
     the pursuit of happiness.

  For more than two centuries, we have been working to fulfill that 
vision of equality. We have taken direct action as a nation so that our 
laws align more closely with these founding ideals. We have challenged 
unjust rules and destructive prejudices and chosen to advance basic 
civil rights.
  Martin Luther King put forth the vision that the arc of the moral 
universe is long but it bends towards justice. He knew that in the 
1950s and 1960s Americans were hard at work making that moral arc of 
the universe bend towards justice. That is the work we continue here in 
the Senate, here on Capitol Hill, here in the House of Representatives 
just 100 yards away.
  Step by step, stride by stride, the barriers that once prevented 
people from enjoying the full measure of liberty, the full measure of 
opportunity, the full measure of equality have broken down.

[[Page S5531]]

  At the same time, we recognize there is much more to be done to 
secure that reality for each and every American. In cities and towns 
across our Nation, many of our citizens do not receive equal treatment, 
not because of anything they have done but because of who they are--
lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, whom they love, and who they are.
  Yes, we have made progress in advancing rights for the LGBT 
community. We passed the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act 
after I came to the Senate in 2009. We repealed don't ask, don't tell, 
which prevented all Americans from serving openly in the U.S. military. 
We reauthorized the Violence Against Women Act, or VAWA, with 
protections for services for the LGBT community. We passed the 
Affordable Care Act so that no one could be denied health care because 
of their sexual orientation or gender identity. And we have seen 
landmark victories in the Supreme Court, first in the Edith Windsor 
case when the Court ruled it was unconstitutional for the Federal 
Government to discriminate and just last month when the Court 
reaffirmed that ``love is love'' and ensured that marriage equality 
would come to all 50 States.
  That is a significant number of steps, a significant number of 
strides on the path toward full equality, and it happened in a 
relatively short period of time. But we are far from where we need to 
be--full equality for every American. As long as people are afraid to 
put their spouse's photo on their desk at work, as long as they are 
worried about being evicted from their apartment if they do not pretend 
to be just roommates, we have a lot of work to do.
  The harsh reality remains that in far too many States there are still 
no laws specifically prohibiting discrimination against LGBT Americans. 
Nearly two-thirds of the LGBT community reports they have faced 
discrimination in their lives. In Pennsylvania, a transgender woman can 
be denied service and kicked out of a restaurant just for being who she 
is and it would be perfectly legal. In Michigan, a newly married couple 
can be denied the chance to buy their first house just because they are 
both women and that would be perfectly legal. In North Carolina, a gay 
man can be fired from his job today just for being gay and that would 
be perfectly legal.
  Only 22 States and the District of Columbia have passed legislation 
that prevents workers from being fired because they are gay. Only 19 of 
those States and the District of Columbia include language protecting 
against gender identity bias.
  The time has come to right this wrong. The time has come for us as a 
nation to be bolder and better at ensuring full rights and full 
equality for the LGBT community. Not only is it within our power, it is 
something America must work to lead. And the most powerful form of 
leadership is the example we set.
  In 1962, Bobby Kennedy said:

       Nations around the world look to us for leadership not 
     merely by strength of arms, but by the strength of our 
     convictions. We not only want, but we need, the free exercise 
     of rights by every American.

  Our commitment to the vision of equality and fairness is a 
significant part of America's soul. It makes us strong. It makes us who 
we are as a people. And we should settle for nothing less. These 
fundamental principles served as the guiding force behind the 
comprehensive legislation--the Equality Act of 2015--we are introducing 
today here in the Senate and the House of Representatives.
  I thank my lead cosponsors in the Senate, Cory Booker and Tammy 
Baldwin, who have done enormous good work in setting the stage for 
today's introduction.
  I thank four staff members who worked very hard on this on my team, 
including my chief of staff, Michael Zamore; my legislative director, 
Jeremiah Baumann; my legislative assistant, Adrian Snead; and my 
legislative correspondent, Elizabeth Eickelberg. There are many other 
members of the team who pitched in, but they have worked day and night 
to help make this moment arrive.
  We have had support, such critical support and involvement from 
numerous outside groups.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record 
a list of dozens of groups endorsing this legislation.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:


          National Organizations that endorse the legislation:

       9to5, National Association of Working Women, Advocates for 
     Youth, Aids United, American Civil Liberties Union, American 
     Federation of Teachers, American Federation of Teachers, 
     Anti-Defamation League, Athlete Ally, Bend the Arc Jewish 
     Action, CenterLink: The Community of LGBT Centers, Central 
     Conference of American Rabbis, Family Equality Council, 
     Family Equality Council, Freedom to Work, Generation 
     Progress, GLSEN, Hindu American Foundation, Human Rights 
     Campaign, Interfaith Alliance, JWI.
       Lambda Legal, NARAL Pro-Choice America, National Black 
     Justice Coalition, National Center for Lesbian Rights, 
     National Center for Transgender Equality, National Council of 
     La Raza (NCLR), National Education Association, National 
     Education Association, National Employment Law Project, 
     National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, National LGBTQ 
     Task Force Action Fund, National Organization for Women, 
     National Partnership for Women & Families, National Women's 
     Law Center, People For the American Way, PFLAG National, 
     PFLAG National, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, 
     Secular Coalition for America, Sexuality Information and 
     Education Council of the U.S. (SIECUS), The Trevor Project, 
     Union for Reform Judaism.


           State organizations that endorse the legislation:

       9to5 California, CA; 9to5 Colorado, CO; 9to5 Georgia, GA; 
     9to5 Wisconsin, WI; Equality Michigan, MI; Equality Michigan, 
     MI; Gender Justice, MN and Upper Midwest; Gender Rights 
     Maryland, MD; PROMO (Missouri), MO; Southwest Women's Law 
     Center, NM.

  Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, I particularly want to draw attention to 
several organizations that played a leading role, and I apologize to 
others that were also very involved. The Human Rights Campaign played a 
central role in organizing today's introduction. I also thank the 
American Civil Liberties Union, the National Council of La Raza, the 
National LGBTQ Task Force Action Fund, the National Women's Law Center, 
and so many others.
  The Equality Act will create uniform Federal standards to protect all 
LGBT Americans from discrimination in housing, in workplaces, in 
schools, in public accommodations, and in financial transactions. It is 
a vision of equality deeply rooted in the 1964 Civil Rights Act. It is 
setting the same foundation to end discrimination for the LGBT 
community that was set for ethnicity and set for gender and set for 
race. That is the foundation for the vision of eliminating 
discrimination in area after area, and it is time we place LGBT 
nondiscrimination on that same foundation. That is what we are doing 
today--comprehensively taking on discrimination.
  The bill also addresses gaps in legal protections against sex 
discrimination--ensuring women are treated equally in all aspects of 
their lives. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and a steadily 
increasing number of courts have recognized that sexual orientation and 
gender identity discrimination are properly understood as forms of sex 
discrimination in light of multiple controlling sex discrimination 
cases. The EEOC has done this through several decisions, most notably 
Macy v. Holder in 2012, which held that transgender discrimination is 
sex discrimination, and Baldwin v. Foxx very recently, which held that 
sexual orientation discrimination is sex discrimination.
  The bill we are introducing today, the Equality Act, codifies this 
understanding, making it clear that sexual orientation and gender 
identity are correctly understood as sex discrimination.
  In addition, the bill adds the terms ``sexual orientation'' and 
``gender identity'' to the list of protected characteristics throughout 
the code. This change should not be read to mean that sexual 
orientation and gender identity are not correctly understood as sex 
discrimination. These additions were made so covered entities as well 
as LGBT people can clearly see that these protections exist. Employers, 
businesses, and institutions are often not aware of the decisions by 
the EEOC and the courts holding that sexual orientation or gender 
identity are protected.
  This bill represents a paradigm shift in two ways. First, our civil 
rights community has worked incredibly hard

[[Page S5532]]

to defend the principles established in the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and 
today we are asking for their engagement to not simply defend this act 
but to expand this act. Second, we have worked very hard to take on 
pieces of discrimination, whether it be don't ask, don't tell, whether 
it be Federal benefits for same-sex partners. But today we are saying 
we need a vision of comprehensive nondiscrimination. That is the 
expression of full opportunity. You cannot access full opportunity if 
the door is closed in financial transactions or jury selection or 
public accommodations if you can still be turned away from a restaurant 
because of whom you love or whom you are. Every American deserves 
equality in every basic function of our society. Discrimination has no 
place in our Nation's laws.
  If it is wrong in marriage, as the Court has held, as numerous States 
have established, it is wrong also in employment. If it is wrong in 
employment, it is wrong in housing. If it is wrong in housing, it is 
wrong, too, in education.
  Overwhelmingly, Americans believe discrimination is wrong. 
Overwhelmingly, they believe it is already illegal, and they believe it 
has no place in our society and no place being condoned by our laws.
  Even though the Equality Act addresses multiple dimensions of 
discrimination, it is quite simple. It says that people deserve to live 
free from fear, free from violence, and free from discrimination, 
regardless of who they are or whom they love.
  Writing these protections into law will bring us another stride 
forward in our Nation's long march toward inclusion and equality. It 
will extend the full promise of America to every American. I will keep 
fighting until this bill is on the President's desk. I will not be 
satisfied until everyone in the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender 
community is guaranteed the dignity and the freedom they deserve, the 
whole sense of opportunity provided through participation in American 
society. A full measure of equality: equal citizen.
  I urge all of my colleagues to join me in this fight. I thank the 40 
Senators who stood up today to be original cosponsors of the Equality 
Act of 2015. Let's make our democracy more inclusive and our freedom 
more perfect by bringing our laws and our actions in line with the 
founding principle that all are created equal.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, last month, the Supreme Court took a 
significant step towards a more perfect union when it ruled that every 
American has the right to marry the person they love and have that 
lawful marriage recognized. It was a victory for love and justice over 
bigotry and intolerance. This historic milestone should be celebrated, 
but we must remember that the journey is not complete. The Fourteenth 
Amendment's principles of liberty and equality safeguard all couples' 
right to marry, and also serves as a bulwark against discriminatory 
treatment in the other aspects of everyday life, including where we 
live, where we work, and our interactions with the government.
  While LGBT Americans are now able to marry the person they love, they 
continue to experience discrimination in many other aspects of their 
lives. Achieving full equality means that LGBT individuals should be 
able to provide security for their families without fear that they will 
be fired from their jobs or denied housing. It means that a restaurant 
cannot refuse to serve an LGBT couple because the owner disapproves of 
that couple's relationship.
  These are not abstract concepts. In our country today, LGBT Americans 
continue to experience discrimination, and it must end. In a June 27 
article in the New York Times, entitled ``Next Fight for Gay Rights: 
Bias in Jobs and Housing,'' the author Erik Eckholm provides clear 
documentation of such discrimination. A landlord in East Nashville, TN, 
refused to rent his apartment to two women in a loving relationship 
after he learned of their partnership because it made him 
``uncomfortable.'' He refused their rental application even after they 
offered to raise the rent by $150. A transgender individual was fired 
from her job as an industrial electrician because, according to her 
boss, her identity was becoming ``too much of a distraction,'' in spite 
of the fact that she was doing ``great work.''
  If such discrimination were based on race, religion, sex, or national 
origin, these individuals would be protected under Federal law. But 
because Federal civil rights law, as well as many state and local laws, 
do not provide explicit protections based on sexual orientation and 
gender identity, these individuals continue to experience 
discrimination without any legal protection. Their stories show us that 
LGBT Americans continue to be treated as second class citizens in their 
daily lives.
  That is why I am an original cosponsor of the Equality Act. The bill 
would amend existing Federal law to provide explicit civil rights 
protections for LGBT individuals. This non-discrimination bill would 
ensure that sexual orientation and gender identity are protected under 
Federal law in the same way that race, sex, religion, national origin, 
and disability are also protected classes. The result would be to 
protect LGBT individuals against discrimination in public 
accommodations, federally-funded programs, employment, housing, 
education, credit, and other aspects of daily life. This is the kind of 
equality and security that all American families should enjoy.
  I am proud that Vermont was one of the first States to pass a 
comprehensive law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual 
orientation in 1992, and also passed a law explicitly prohibiting 
discrimination on the basis of gender identity in 2007. All Vermonters 
are protected from discrimination in employment, places of public 
accommodation, housing, credit, and other services. This is what we 
need on the Federal level as well.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the New York Times 
article referenced above be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                [From the New York Times, June 27, 2015]

          Next Fight for Gay Rights: Bias in Jobs and Housing

                           (By Erik Eckholm)

       Exhilarated by the Supreme Court's endorsement of same-sex 
     marriage, gay rights leaders have turned their sights to what 
     they see as the next big battle: obtaining federal, state and 
     local legal protections in employment, housing, commerce and 
     other arenas, just like those barring discrimination based on 
     race, religion, sex and national origin.
       The proposals pit advocates against many of the same 
     religious conservatives who opposed legalizing same-sex 
     marriage, and who now see the protection of what they call 
     religious liberty as their most urgent task. These opponents 
     argue that antidiscrimination laws will inevitably be used to 
     force religious people and institutions to violate their 
     beliefs, whether by providing services for same-sex weddings 
     or by employing gay men and lesbians in church-related jobs.
       Nationally, antidiscrimination laws for gay people are a 
     patchwork with major geographic inequities, said Brad Sears, 
     executive director of the Williams Institute at the School of 
     Law of the University of California, Los Angeles. ``Those who 
     don't live on the two coasts or in the Northeast have been 
     left behind in terms of legal protection,'' he said.
       At least 22 states bar discrimination based on sexual 
     orientation, and most of them also offer protections to 
     transgender people.
       Tennessee is one of the majority of states that do not bar 
     such discrimination. There, in East Nashville, Tiffany Cannon 
     and Lauren Horbal thought they had found the perfect house to 
     share with a friend, and the landlord seemed ready to rent 
     when they applied in April.
       Then he called them to ask what their relationship with 
     each other was, Ms. Horbal, 26, recalled.
       She said that when the landlord learned that she and Ms. 
     Cannon, 25, were partners, he said, ``I'm not comfortable 
     with that.'' He refused to process their application, even 
     after they offered to raise their rent by $150, to $700 a 
     month, Ms. Horbal said.
       The women, both restaurant workers, are still looking for a 
     place to live.
       In many states, some local governments have 
     antidiscrimination laws, but they are often weak or poorly 
     enforced, said Ruth Colker, an expert on discrimination law 
     at Moritz College of Law at Ohio State University.
       ``Typically, the penalty for violating a city ordinance is 
     more akin to a traffic violation,'' she said. ``State-level 
     penalties can be much more significant.''
       As they push for more state and local safeguards, rights 
     advocates are also starting a long-term campaign for a broad 
     federal shield that would give sexual orientation and gender 
     identity protected status under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
       The goal is to achieve overlapping local, state and federal 
     laws, an approach that has proved effective in curbing other 
     kinds of discrimination, said Sarah Warbelow, legal

[[Page S5533]]

     director at the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights advocacy 
     group. Visible laws can not only permit lawsuits, she said, 
     but also deter employers and others from biased behavior.
       Although a majority of states lack such protections, 
     federal orders and court decisions, especially in employment, 
     are gradually offering more safeguards.
       With executive orders last year, President Obama barred 
     discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender 
     identity by federal agencies and federal contractors, 
     including companies employing about one in five American 
     workers, Mr. Sears said.
       At the same time, the Equal Employment Opportunity 
     Commission, charged with enforcing federal law in the 
     workplace, has determined that discrimination against gay 
     men, lesbians and transgender people amounts to illegal sex 
     discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and 
     it is bringing or endorsing lawsuits under that provision.
       That application of existing law is still being tested in 
     court and is more established for transgender workers than 
     for gay and lesbian workers. In the past two years, the 
     agency has successfully pursued 223 cases involving gay or 
     transgender people who faced workplace harassment or other 
     discrimination, gaining settlements or court orders, said 
     Chai R. Feldblum, one of the agency's five commissioners.
       Patricia Dawson of Pangburn, Ark., 46, hopes to join that 
     list. Ms. Dawson, who grew up as Steven, had more than 15 
     years' experience as an industrial electrician and had been a 
     rising employee at H & H Electric, an industrial contractor, 
     for four years when she informed her boss in 2012 that she 
     was transitioning to female and had changed her name.
       The boss, she said in a Title VII-based lawsuit brought by 
     the American Civil Liberties Union, told her to keep her 
     plans secret and not to ``rock the boat'' with clients.
       When her identity became obvious and gossip raged at the 
     work site, she said, the boss said to her, ``I'm sorry, 
     Steve, you do great work, but you are too much of a 
     distraction, and I am going to have to let you go.''
       Ms. Dawson said she was devastated by her treatment. ``I 
     love what I do; I get the greatest joy out of fixing 
     things,'' she said in an interview. ``Treating us as second-
     class citizens, it's hurtful.''
       Civil rights groups worked for years for an employment 
     antidiscrimination act, an effort that was blocked by House 
     Republicans and collapsed this year over discord about 
     religious exemptions. Buoyed by the rapid advance of same-sex 
     marriage, these groups are now determined to seek a far wider 
     law.
       ``I think there's a very strong consensus now among 
     advocacy groups that we need a broader bill that puts 
     discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender 
     identity on the same footing as race, religion and gender,'' 
     said Shannon P. Minter, legal director at the National Center 
     for Lesbian Rights.
       ``No court decision could accomplish all of that,'' Mr. 
     Minter said.
       Senator Jeff Merkley, Democrat of Oregon, said he planned 
     to introduce a bill within the next few months to add 
     protections for gays and transgender people to the Civil 
     Rights Act.
       ``People are going to realize that you can get married in 
     the morning and be fired from your job or refused entry to a 
     restaurant in the afternoon,'' Mr. Merkley said. ``That is 
     unacceptable.''
       But the effort will take years, he said, because it appears 
     unlikely that Republican committee heads in Congress will 
     advance such a bill.
       In the emerging state-by-state battles for 
     antidiscrimination laws, the strongest opposition has come 
     from conservative religious groups that have been alarmed by 
     a few well-publicized cases, like that of a florist in 
     Washington State who was fined for refusing to provide 
     flowers for a same-sex wedding.
       ``We've got good reason to be concerned about these laws, 
     because they've been found to be coercive where they've been 
     enacted,'' said Greg Scott, vice president of communications 
     at Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal group.
       Russell Moore, president of the Ethics and Religious 
     Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, said 
     that it was wrong to equate religious objections to 
     homosexual behavior with racism, and that proposed 
     antidiscrimination laws could ``do more harm than good.''
       ``Some have suggested that we work out a compromise, 
     addressing housing and employment discrimination and 
     protecting religious freedom for those who dissent from the 
     ideas of the sexual revolution,'' he said. ``But I have yet 
     to see any proposal that would do both of those things 
     well.''
       There is some common ground. For example, under the Civil 
     Rights Act, religious organizations have the right to give 
     preference in hiring to those of their faith, Ms. Warbelow of 
     the Human Rights Campaign noted. In housing, federal rules 
     exempt owner-occupied rentals with four or fewer units from 
     discrimination provisions.
       ``We wouldn't expect these things to change,'' Ms. Warbelow 
     said. ``We really want L.G.B.T. people to be protected the 
     same as those in other protected categories.''
       But some disagreements, especially involving private 
     businesses, may be unbridgeable. The major gay and civil 
     rights groups are united in their opposition to ``religious 
     liberty'' bills, a priority of conservative Christian 
     advocates, which would allow religious vendors to refuse to 
     serve gay couples or wedding celebrations.
       ``Religious liberty does not authorize discrimination,'' 
     said James D. Esseks, the director of gay rights issues at 
     the American Civil Liberties Union.
       ``It's profoundly harmful to walk into a business open to 
     the public and be told, `No, we don't actually serve your 
     kind here,' '' he said. ``That's not how America works.''

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I am proud to join in sponsoring the 
Equality Act.
  Last month, the Supreme Court ruled on the right side of history by 
deciding that loving and committed same-sex couples have the right to 
be married. While same-sex couples now can be legally wed, Federal law 
still does not protect them from being fired or evicted from their 
homes on the basis of their sexual identity or gender identity. The 
Equality Act addresses this issue and represents a major step forward 
in protecting the civil rights of all Americans.
  At the same time we celebrate this historic bill, we must ensure that 
religious institutions have the right to their own views of marriage. 
As the Supreme Court noted in its decision, ``it must be emphasized 
that religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may 
continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine 
precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned.'' I look forward to 
working with colleagues to address these issues as the bill advances 
through the legislative process.
                                 ______