The hearing continues

Listening to the testimony before Congress is an amazing experience. It is heartbreaking to hear the stories of jobs and families lost and the pain that transgender people have been through. At the same time, however, it is incredibly liberating to see trans people taking such a powerful stand for our community, speaking directly to members of Congress about the need for employment protections.

On the eve of the anniversary of the Stonewall Riots, we can reflect on how we've come from the days when people of diverse gender expressions fought discrimination with fists and beer bottles. Now we are advocating for ourselves in the halls of Congress. May the work we're doing now honor those who began the struggle because we need to be in the streets and on Capitol Hill.

Update on Congressional Hearing

What is happening: Representatives Tammy Baldwin and Barney Frank have both spoken before the House Committee on Education and Labor about the need to end workplace discrimination faced by transgender people, getting the hearing off to a strong start. One person at the hearing describes Rep. Frank as being "passionate" on the topic.

The committee is now in recess while members go to a vote on the floor of the House. The hearing will resume when they return.

The chair of the committee made a point shortly before the recess that his concern is not how many people are being discriminated against but the depth of the discrimination that they face.

Congressional Hearing Underway

You can view the proceedings of the Committee on Education and Labor, which is holding a hearing this morning on the discrimination transgender people face in the workplace. Go to http://edwork.edgeboss.net/wmedia-live/edwork/16137/300_edwork-2175stream_070124.asx to watch. The Committee's meetings have begun.

You can also read the testimony of some of the witnesses on our website at http://nctequality.org/hearing.html. These transgender people from around the country, from different walks of life and organizations, are talking directly to members of Congress this morning about our rights and the challenges we face in employment. They were called by the Committee to give their testimony.

LGBT Equality Caucus' First Briefing Addresses Foreign Policy

After attending the launch of the House of Representatives LGBT Equality Caucus two weeks ago, I was excited by the possibility of more transgender-related activity on the Hill this summer. I was not disappointed. Yesterday, the caucus held its first briefing, surveying an array of human rights issues related to the experiences of LGBT individuals abroad and how these are relevant to US foreign policy. In particular for me, it was great to see that issues of gender identity were included alongside sexuality in the briefing materials.

The presenters’ testimonies addressed a range of issues specific to various regions of the globe. These included criminalization of certain expressions of consensual sexuality, inequality in opportunities to participate in public and cultural life, and discrimination in public health services including HIV-AIDS assistance funded in part by the US and UN. The speakers particularly highlighted the increasingly high-profile Yogyakarta Principles, a set of suggested legal standards which calls for, among other things, the protection of free expression of each individual’s gender identity as a fundamental human right. Organizations represented included the Council for Global Equality, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission, all of which include transgender issues as part of their mission.

I felt really energized coming out of this first briefing. I think the very existence of this caucus sends a clear signal that our lives and experiences as LGBT people do matter to the policymakers on the Hill. I was also excited that the members have set down broad goals from its inception, focusing not just on domestic affairs but foreign policy.

Although there were no transgender individuals represented on the five-person panel, I thought it was encouraging that inclusive language and content was emphasized. I am eager to see what the caucus might do in the future to address transgender issues.

Congressional Hearing 101

Next Thursday, June 26^th the first-ever Congressional hearing on transgender issues will be held by the Health Education, Labor and Pensions subcommittee of the Education and Labor Committee. NCTE has received a lot of questions about this historic hearing, so we thought some of our members might appreciate some basic information about what a hearing is and how it works.

What is a Congressional Hearing?

Congressional hearings are simply one of the ways members of Congress gather the information they need to act knowledgeably as they do their work. Hearings are used as a way for members of Congress to learn more about particular areas of interest and whether Congressional action is needed. This hearing will be a fact finding hearing meant to educate Congress not to advocate for a particular piece of legislation, although it will certainly be helpful in the long run at advancing the passage of a Employment Non-Discrimination Act that we can all support.

At a hearing, selected people usually read pre-written testimony and then respond to questions from members of the committee. In addition to the oral testimony of witnesses, NCTE and other interested parties will also usually provide written testimony for the written committee record. Written testimony is due to the committee within 7-14 days at the discretion of the chairperson.

Sometimes hearings are held to discuss particular pieces of legislation, while other times, as in this case, hearings are held on subject areas and not tied to particular legislation.

Why is the Hearing on June 26^th so Historic?

Until now, no committee in either the United States Senate or House of Representatives has ever held hearings specifically on transgender people. Until recently, transgender issues just haven’t been on the agenda in Congress. Collectively the work of NCTE and other transgender and allied advocates has put job protections for transgender people on the federal agenda. The hearings represent a significant step forward.

Who Testifies at a Hearing?

Who testifies at a hearing, as well as when and if a hearing happens, is pretty much up to the committee chairperson. The list of people invited to testify (witnesses) is set in advance of the hearing; individuals cannot just decide to testify. Generally the committee chairperson picks most of the people who will testify and the highest ranking member of the minority party selects the rest. Members of Congress who are not on the particular committee are usually permitted to testify if they want, so, for instance, in this case, Congressman Barney Frank and Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin are both planning to testify even though they are not on the Education and Labor Committee.

Organizations like NCTE often provide suggestions of people who would be appropriate witnesses and work with the committee staff to get best possible selection of witnesses. Rep. Frank in particular was also in bringing about this hearing and has no doubt advised Chairman Andrews about witnesses.

The list of witnesses is not yet publicly available, but you can expect that there will be transgender people who have been victims of job discrimination as well as policy experts and representatives from employers who have had good experiences with transgender employees. NCTE is already working with most of the invited witnesses to prepare their statements.

Can Anyone Attend a Congressional Hearing?

With only a very few exceptions, Congressional hearings by law must be open to the public and the media. This hearing on the 26^th will be open to both, although only a limited number of seats are available. If you are going to be in Washington, DC that day, feel free to attend.

In addition to significant work leading up to the hearing, NCTE staff will be in attendance at the hearing. We are working the Transgender American Veterans Association (TAVA)to bring Autumn Sandeen, an amazing transgender blogger from the Blog Pam’s House Blend to make sure Autumn can get to DC to blog the hearing, so that people can read all about it at pamshouseblend.com.

Where And When Is The Hearing?

The hearing will be held at 10:30AM (EST) until about Noon in Room 2175 of the Rayburn House office Building in Washington, DC. It is scheduled for approximately one and one half hours.

Will the Hearing be Broadcast on C-SPAN or elsewhere?

C-SPAN’s schedule for next week is not yet set. We have been in touch with them hoping to get the hearing covered. Once coverage is confirmed we will provide that information to you so folks who can’t be in Washington can be part of the historic event.

The Committee offers live webcasts of hearings. Click here during the hearing to view the webcast (this will take you to a new page and will open up a media player automatically).

Who is on This Subcommittee?

A detailed list of who is on the subcommittee can be found on their website.

First-Ever Congressional Hearing on Transgender Issue

Mara sent out this announcement yesterday via email, but we wanted post it here for those who are not on our mailing list:

The US House of Representatives announced America's first Congressional Hearing on transgender issues. The hearing, "An Examination of Discrimination Against Transgender Americans in the Workplace," is scheduled for Thursday, June 26, 2008 at 10:30 am in room 2175 of Rayburn House Office Building. Congressman Rob Andrews (D-NJ) called the hearing as Chairman of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) subcommittee of the Committee on Education and Labor.

This is not only an opportunity to be truly heard by our fellow Americans, it will help to build the foundation for significant changes in federal laws protecting transgender people from discrimination. Witness have not yet been announced.

The NCTE Team is extremely excited about this historic hearing, and we will be posting new updates here on our blog as more details emerge. Stay tuned!

Department of Homeland Security Blinks, Extensions Given

A REAL ID showdown has been averted for now and driver licenses from all 50 states will be accepted on May 11^th (the implementation date in the REAL ID Act). All four of the holdout States that refused to apply for an extension to REAL ID compliance were given extensions anyway. The Department of Homeland Security gave these extensions despite earlier declarations that only states that commit to implementing the REAL ID Act would get them. Anti-REAL ID advocates view this as further evidence that DHS is struggling to maintain support for REAL ID and that DHS has blinked.

The four states that got the unasked-for extensions are Maine, Montana, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. Each of the states had sent letters to DHS making explicit their refusal to comply with REAL ID. California, though it had applied for an extension, also sent a letter making clear that their extension request should not be viewed as a commitment to REAL ID.

Montana was given an unasked-for extension first, about two weeks before the March 31^st application deadline. Montana sent DHS a letter asking that Montana not be penalized, still not requesting an extension. DHS chose to interpret the letter as a request for an extension anyway. Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer said, "I sent them a horse and if they want to call it a zebra, that's up to them." He also said, "They can call it whatever they want, and it wasn't a love letter."

New Hampshire became the second state to get an unasked-for extension after sending a letter similar to Montana’s. An earlier letter from New Hampshire was rejected by DHS, but at that time DHS was still adhering to its tough stance demanding a commitment to compliance.

DHS demonstrated further softening by giving a last-minute extension to South Carolina, even though the state sent a defiant letter rejecting REAL ID. Maine's extension came two days after the March 31^st application deadline, and after DHS issued an ultimatum and a rejection of Maine's first letter, also defiant. Maine's governor agreed to propose legislation requiring proof of citizenship for driver licenses in a second letter, which DHS found sufficient to grant the extension.

An article in yesterday’s Washington Post said that the Senate Judiciary Committee criticized DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff for “pressuring reluctant states to adopt new federally approved driver's licenses,” with Senator Leahy going so far as to describe it as "bullying."

Now that the May 11^th compliance deadline is a moot point (since all 50 states have been granted extensions), the next major deadline is December 31, 2009. By that date, states are supposed to have come into material compliance with REAL ID.

REAL ID Heating Up, Deadline Looming

A mini-showdown over REAL ID is looming on the horizon. States have until March 31^st to apply for an extension or else driver licenses and IDs from those states will not be accepted for air travel or entering federal facilities beginning May 11, 2008. Montana, New Hampshire, Maine, and South Carolina have said they will not apply for the extension, which is where the showdown comes into play.

With the deadline only five days away at this writing, we are starting to see some unusual twists and turns…

Montana has been leading the resistance by vocally proclaiming it will not apply for an extension, and urging other states to follow its actions. Yet, on Friday, March 21^st, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) gave Montana an extension, even though Montana had not applied for one and has insisted it will not follow the law. A few days before DHS gave Montana the non-requested extension, a bipartisan group of U.S. Senators had asked for a blanket exemption to the May 11^th deadline for all 50 states. DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff denied the request citing that he is legally bound to that deadline by the REAL ID law.

New Hampshire requested an exemption, but DHS regarded it as legally unacceptable. South Carolina is considering suing over REAL ID, and today it was reported that Maine’s governor has requested REAL ID leniency, similar to what Montana was given.

California had previously requested and been granted an extension, but is now backing off of its commitment to REAL ID and is considering legislation opposing REAL ID. Louisiana is one of several other states considering similar bills. A total of seventeen states have already passed legislation.

DHS has been adamant in earlier statements that the May 11^th deadline will be enforced. However, recent DHS actions have been characterized as “blinking” by both Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer and the American Civil Liberties Union.

The looming deadline may be the impetus for Senator Lamar Alexander’s (R. – Tenn.) decision to propose legislation next week that would stop REAL ID from going forward. Sen. Alexander could have the leverage necessary to push the legislation through where other anti-REAL ID bills have been stalled in committee.

Opponents to the REAL ID Act cite privacy, infringement of state rights, and enormous financial costs, with no discernable anti-terrorism benefit, as the basis for their rejection.

Understanding REAL ID

You’ve been hearing about REAL ID in the news and from us, at NCTE. But perhaps you are not quite clear what REAL ID is all about? In general, that is…not just the ways that transgender people are affected by REAL ID.

Fortunately, CNET News.com has published a four-part series of articles that provides background on the REAL ID Act and how the upcoming deadlines can impact people’s everyday lives.

CNET News.com does not cover the transgender angle of REAL ID, of course. However, the ways that all Americans will be affected certainly includes transgender people. I am sure that most transgender people will be able to imagine how these general difficulties would translate into even greater hardships for our particular community.

Four-part series: "REAL ID vs the states"

++++++++++++++

CNET News.com has also made available an easy-to-read version of the relevant section of the REAL ID Act. For those who want to read the entire text and history of the bill, click here.

national legislation to repeal REAL ID Act

We mentioned two pieces of legislation in our recent review and analysis of the Department of Homeland Security final rules for implementing the REAL ID Act. The following is a brief explanation of what those bills are:

The two bills, S. 717 and H.R. 1117 (U.S. Senate and U.S. House bills, respectively) are nearly identical. They both call for the repeal of Title II* of the REAL ID Act and to reinstitute section 7212 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, a much better law for making secure driver licenses and IDs, which includes privacy and civil liberty protections.

The Library of Congress Thomas website has the complete text of both bills, lists co-sponsors of the legislation, and provides the current status of the bills. Click on these links to go the appropriate sections of Thomas: S. 717 & H.R. 1117

If you would like to contact your Senators about S. 717, you can find their contact info here.

If you would like to contact your Representative about H.R. 1117, you can find their contact info here.


* Title II of the REAL ID Act is the section that pertains to driver licenses.