http://www.gaypeopleschronicle.com/stories08/may/0516084.htm

Equality bill is a civil rights and business issue, senators are told

by Eric Resnick

Columbus--"Basic protections should not depend on where you live or what company you work for," Equality Ohio director Lynne Bowman told an Ohio Senate panel Wednesday. "And make no mistake. A decision by this body to not pass this bill would be explicit permission to discriminate."

The bill she was discussing is the Equal Housing and Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would prohibit discrimination by sexual orientation and gender identity or expression in public and private employment, housing and public accommodations.

The May 13 hearing of the Senate Judiciary and Civil Justice Committee was the first time such testimony has been heard in the Statehouse on an LGBT equal rights bill. Similar bills were introduced in 2003 and 2005 but saw little action.

The measure, also known as EHEA, was introduced in March by Sen. Dale Miller of Cleveland, a Democrat who sponsored earlier versions as a member of the House.

The nine-member committee is chaired by Republican David Goodman of Columbus, who is also a co-sponsor.

Miller was pleased with Goodman's decision to hear proponents and opponents at the same time. This way, both sides will have been heard whether or not there are additional hearings, and the committee can act on the bill.

"It's farther along this way," said Miller. "I have been here long enough to have seen things pass [out of committee] this way."

Goodman said he may be able to schedule additional hearings when the Senate returns from its three-week recess.

He added that even though the majority of committee members support the bill, the majority of Republicans on the panel don't.

"That means you typically don't move a bill," said Goodman. "This is no different process-wise than any other bill."

One other Republican on the panel supports the measure, Steve Stivers of Columbus, who is running for Congress.

The rest of the committee Republicans, Kirk Schuring of Canton--also running for Congress--Steve Buehrer of Delta, Keith Faber of Celina and Bill Seitz of Cincinnati, are generally hostile to LGBT people and are not expected to support the bill.

Two of the committee's Democrats, Eric Kearney of Cincinnati and Teresa Fedor of Toledo, are also co-sponsors. The third, Lance Mason of Cleveland, is not a co-sponsor due to some questions, but supports the measure and says he would vote for it in committee and on the floor.

The companion bill in the House was introduced by Republican Jon Peterson of Delaware and Democrat Dan Stewart of Columbus. It has not moved.

All the committee members except Stivers were present for the May 13 hearing.

The proponents: Judge by character

"Not passing this bill is a statement that in Ohio, our lawmakers don't believe that everyone should be judged based on the strength of their character, the performance of their work or their contribution to their community," Bowman continued. "Rather, you would be saying that in Ohio, the thing that trumps everything, the thing that will legally allow you to lose your job, permit you to be kicked out of restaurants, or deny you a place to live, is the gender of the person you love."

Buehrer asked Bowman if the bill requires prospective employers to ask the sexual orientation of those they interview "so as to avoid any confusion."

"No," Bowman answered, the bill only requires that employers cannot discriminate.

"How far would you go in creating a protected class?" asked Buehrer.

"It's not my charge to decide what other classes should be added," replied Bowman, "only to see that there is no discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity."

Ohio anti-discrimination law presently includes race, color, religion, sex, familial status, ancestry, disability, and national origin.

Buehrer said when so many protected classes are created, employers are in "proverbial fear" of not having all the employees on the checklist.

"Where do you draw the line?" asked Buehrer.

"I don't know where the line is," said Bowman. "What I know is that employers should be able to choose employees based on qualifications, not discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Attracting the best and brightest

Jason Lansdale of Cleveland testified on behalf of the Cleveland Clinic.

Lansdale, who is gay, said the Clinic attracts, retains and promotes its best and brightest "in a variety of ways" including creating employee advisory groups and "publicly supporting legislation like [EHEA]."

"Is there any business reaction to support or opposition to this bill?" asked Fedor.

Lansdale responded that LGBT people tend to be brand-loyal and support businesses who see diversity as an imperative.

Goodman asked if the Cleveland Clinic, the second largest employer in the state, has had difficulty recruiting qualified LGBT people due to Ohio law.

"Yes," replied Lansdale. "There is a perception that Ohio does not protect LGBT people."

"Is this a civil rights issue?" asked Fedor.

"Yes, and also a business one," Lansdale said.

Barbara Richards of Dublin testified that her gay son was offered jobs in Ohio law firms, but chose one in Chicago instead.

"John's decision to take a job in Chicago instead of Columbus was in no small part influenced by the fact that as a gay man he was not afforded many of the basic rights that most of our children have as citizens of the state," said Richards.

Illinois is one of 13 states that include sexual orientation and gender identity in their anti-bias laws. Seven more have measures covering sexual orientation only.

Richards described her son as a summa cum laude graduate from Vanderbilt University and a cum laude graduate of the University of Pennsylvania Law School who has served internships with the Bush White House and the Ohio Attorney General and who did an externship for Legal Aid of Tennessee before clerking for U.S. District Court Judge Gregory Frost.

Goodman indicated that he knows Richards and her children.

Fedor, a former teacher, said that statistics show that one in nine students in any classroom "have a different sexual orientation."

"Are we raising our kids to discriminate?" asked Fedor.

"If they just look at the law, yes," answered Richards.

'It simply makes us equal under God'

"I am not here today to debate the biblical teachings regarding homosexuality, nor do I believe it necessary to engage in such a discussion when referring to this legislation," testified Rev. Stephen Moulton, a Presbyterian minister from Bowling Green.

"This measure does not ask anyone to condone or accept another person for being gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender any more than a prohibition against religious discrimination suggests that we somehow have to condone or accept the correctness of someone's faith decision."

"God calls me to honor and respect the rights of others to believe differently than I do," Moulton continued, "It does not make any of us necessarily right or wrong. It simply makes us equal under God."

"For those of us who believe in God, [passing this legislation] is not only the loving thing to do, but also the right and only thing to do."

Karen Days, president of the Columbus Coalition Against Family Violence and chair of the United Way's Diversity and Inclusion Committee testified that EHEA embodies her agency's commitment to inclusion, diversity and equal opportunity.

"The fact that this fundamental commitment to inclusion and human decency is not upheld by state policies that protect basic human rights is troubling and disheartening," Days said.

Days talked about the census the United Way conducted to learn about the central Ohio LGBT community.

"Almost two of every three participants who stated they experienced discrimination reported discriminatory practices at work," Days said.

Days said that finding complements similar findings by UCLA's Williams Institute last year that more than a quarter of LGBT people were denied a promotion or fired based on their sexual orientation, and 40 percent reported being verbally or physically abused or had their workplace vandalized.

The League of Women Voters of Ohio submitted written testimony calling EHEA an effort of government to be inclusive, fair and accountable in the fight to resist discrimination and inequity.

The ACLU also released a written statement supporting the bill.

The opponents: 'Fascism'

Carolyn Blow of Xenia called EHEA "fascism," and said it "forces people to be associated or yoked with people who are into homosexuality and or who cross dress, and or at the least, it forces people to promote a lifestyle that in many religions is antithetical to the doctrines of their faith."

"For the state to dictate what one's religion must involve or what one must accept against his conscience is tyranny."

"This bill forces Ohioans to accept and promote a deviant behavior," said Blow. "That characteristic is different from all the others against which discrimination is banned in current law."

"Regardless of how people who practice homosexuality think they are oriented, what they do is not normal," said Blow also claiming "much higher rates of antisocial behaviors, molestations and other criminal acts that [homosexuals] commit in comparison to others."

None of the senators questioned Blow.

Mission America president Linda Harvey agreed with Blow that EHEA is fascism, and continued that it "seeks to exalt homosexual behavior."

"If this law is passed, we can expect many more openly homosexual and cross dressing teachers in our public schools and day care centers," Harvey testified. "This will create a hostile environment for people who hold traditional values. We're likely to have many more school situations where homosexuality becomes noble and Christian values are discarded or mocked."

Harvey told the committee of afair housing ordinance passed by Wooster in 1990 that included sexual orientation which was repealed by voters the same year.

"That's the response you might expect if you pass this," Harvey testified.

Later, Harvey was asked about that.

"I'm not planning to lead the effort, but someone might," Harvey said.

Gays are doing well enough

Citizens for Community Values governmental affairs director Barry Sheets testified that EHEA isn't needed because Ohio's LGBT people are doing well enough without it.

"Under the legislation, a person's expression of their personal sexual behavior would be given the same force of law in determining unlawful discrimination as one's race, gender or national origin," Sheets said, "the latter all characteristics which are immutable in nature and have been recognized by the courts as having been stigmatized by economic disenfranchisement and powerlessness."

Sheets also pointed to the Williams Institute study as evidence that same-sex-attracted individuals are more likely to be employed than married ones.

He also said that same-sex couples have higher incomes and are more likely to hold professional or management level jobs.

Sheets also said that only ten states in the country have more companies scoring 100 percent on the Human Rights Campaign's Corporate Equality Index than Ohio.

By this time, only Sens. Goodman and Schuring remained.

CCV president for public policy David Miller continued Sheets' claim that LGBT people are better off economically than the rest of the population, making EHEA an unnecessary burden on businesses.

"By creating new civil rights protections based on someone's actual or perceived heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, asexuality, or transgenderism, we are actually inhibiting business, and we are running counter to more than a half-century of civil rights laws, thereby inflicting gross inequality upon traditionally protected classes," Miller testified.

Fired for expressing beliefs

"In an attempt to curtail discrimination based upon someone's sexual expression, religious discrimination often erupts within the workplace," Miller continued.

"Employees may be terminated for expressing their religious beliefs in the workplace and be subject to discrimination."

Miller laid out three criteria for creating protected classes, which he said are the ones recognized by courts: immutable characteristic, economic disenfranchisement, and political powerlessness.

Miller said homosexuality doesn't qualify as any of the three.

Goodman, who is Jewish, has talked extensively to reporters about his father's experience with religious discrimination when he graduated from law school. He says it is the main reason why he is co-sponsoring EHEA.

He seized on Miller's criteria.

"Would that have been the right argument to make to my father?"

Miller did not directly answer the question. Instead, he gave reasons why government might need to step in if there is economic disparity.

"Whether your father met all of these, I don't know the circumstance," Miller said.

Religion is not immutable

Later, Miller told a reporter that religion, though not an immutable characteristic, should be a protected class because "it's in the Constitution."

"Sexual orientation is not in the Constitution," Miller said.

Asked if there is discrimination based on sexual orientation, Miller said, "There very well may be. I have heard stories."

"But I will never agree that sexual orientation is immutable," Miller said.

Ohio Christian Alliance president Chris Long submitted written testimony in opposition to EHEA.

Goodman said he intends to treat EHEA like he treats all measures before his committee.

"I'm trying hard to treat it like any other bill that comes through," Goodman said. "I'm going to try to get it as much in front of the committee as I can."

"Some bills, especially Democrats' bills, get sponsor testimony, and that's all. This one merits hearings and potentially more," Goodman concluded.

Volume #77, Report #93, Article #04 --Tuesday, May 13, 2008

PARTISANS OFFER COMMITTEE CONFLICTING VIEWS OF BILL TO BAN DISCRIMINATION BASED ON SEXUAL ORIENTATION

Proponents of a bill to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation told a Senate panel Tuesday "it is the right thing to do for Ohio," while an opponent decried "the strong-arm, fascist nature of this legislation."

There appeared little if any room for compromise as partisans outlined their views on the measure (SB 305*) during testimony before the Senate Judiciary-Civil Justice Committee.

The legislation would add sexual orientation to a list of existing factors - race, color, religion, age, sex, familial status, marital status, national origin, ancestry, or disability - on the basis of which discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodation is prohibited.

Lynne Bowman, executive director of Equality Ohio, said Cardinal Health, the largest Fortune 500 company with headquarters in Ohio, supports enactment. She said 26 of Ohio's 28 companies in the Fortune 500 already have similar policies.

"In my experience businesses don't typically do something that is counter to their business interests. They know this is the right thing to do for their business, and it is the right thing to do for Ohio," Ms. Bowman said.

She said a decision of legislators to reject the bill would amount to explicit permission to discriminate.

"(You) would be saying that in Ohio, the thing that trumps everything, the thing that will legally allow you to lose your job, permit you to be kicked out of restaurants, or deny you a place to live, is the gender of the person you love," Ms. Bowman said. "I don't believe that is the message of Ohio we want to send."

Barry Sheets, governmental affairs director of Citizens for Community Values, said the proposal is the state version of legislation that has been introduced in Congress on numerous occasions but has not been enacted.

Mr. Sheets said the bill would create a number of difficulties for employers, religious organizations, and for government. He said it also would create unfunded mandates and unintended consequences for Ohio employers.

"The desire to accommodate what amounts to 2.9% of Ohio's population, and only 0.4% of all households in the state, with special protections of personal sexual expression by creating what would amount to affirmative action and quota programs for each of the enumerated classes in this bill is not well thought through," he said.

"We would sincerely hope that we will be able to report to our constituencies that you will heed the concerns of Ohioans who believe that Ohio should not extend special rights to individuals because of their personal private sexual expression," Mr. Sheets said.

Jason Lansdale voiced support for the bill as a representative of the Cleveland Clinic where he is a market development staff member. With 37,000 employees, the clinic is the state's second largest employer.

"Cleveland Clinic is one of the many companies and organizations across Ohio that already prohibits discrimination against individuals on the basis of their sexual orientation," Mr. Lansdale said.

"They do so because we believe it is the right thing to do as an employer, economic development catalyst, and a major health care provider," he said.

Barbara Richards of Dublin said the decision of her lawyer son, who is gay, to work in Chicago instead of Columbus was in no small part influenced by the lack of basic rights extended to him in Ohio.

"Being fired, not able to rent an apartment, or an equal shot at a job, are a few of the realities of life for a gay Ohioan," Ms. Richards said.

"This legislation is not about gay marriage. It simply states no one, that is no one, should be denied opportunity based on orientation," she said. "All of our children, gay or straight, should be valued, respected, and treated with the dignity afforded every citizen of this state."

David Miller, CCV vice president for public policy, said there is no demonstrated history of economic disenfranchisement among "homosexuals, bisexuals, asexuals, and gender-confused individuals." He cited an online source as saying the household income of such persons is significantly more than the national average.

"(No) one today would attempt to claim that those who identify themselves by their sexual expression have been shut out of the political conversation in this state or country," Mr. Miller said.

"Consider how many now serve in elected office, the amount of money in the multiple-millions of dollars that their political organizations raise each year to support their candidates, and what kind of support they enjoy from most every major news and media outlets," he said.

Linda Harvey, president of the Columbus-based Mission America, said she opposed "the strong-arm, fascist nature of this legislation," which she said, "seeks to force immorality" on Ohioans.

"If this law is passed, we can expect many more openly homosexual and cross-dressing teachers in our public schools and day care centers," Ms. Harvey said. "We're likely to have many more school situations where homosexuality becomes noble and Christian values are discarded or mocked."

Monday, May 12, 2008 - 2:00 PM EDT
Businesses support law to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation
Business Courier of Cincinnati - by Lucy May Senior Staff Reporter

Supporters of legislation to outlaw discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity on Monday released a list of businesses that have lined up to support the law's passage.

"Ohio's businesses -- big and small -- are lining up to support this legislation," said Lynne Bowman, executive director of Equality Ohio, in a news release. "They know that discrimination is not only wrong, it's also bad for business."

Business supporters include: Cardinal Health in Dublin; Certified Networker in Toledo; Cincinnati Precision Print; Cleveland Clinic; Cleveland MetroHealth; ComStar in Huntsville; LimitedBrands in Columbus; Nationwide Insurance in Columbus; and the University of Toledo, among others.

Equality Ohio spokeswoman Sandy Theis said proponents are awaiting endorsements from other major employers, too.

The organization also unveiled a new Web site designed to solicit examples of people who have been fired, denied housing or forced out of restaurants or other public places because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Anyone with knowledge of discrimination can visit the site at www.dowhatsrightohio.com and go to a link called "Tell Your Story."

Bills to outlaw such discrimination are pending in the Ohio Senate and Ohio House of Representatives. Hearings on Senate Bill 305 resume Tuesday.

Eleven of Ohio's 13, four-year public colleges and 16 Ohio cities and villages have ordinances that protect their gay and lesbian residents. The proposed legislation would create statewide standards for all Ohio residents.

Thomas Suddes: Anti-gay bias is holding back Ohio’s economy

Sunday, March 16, 2008

Thomas Suddes
Plain Dealer Columnist

Ohio taxpayers will spend $67 million to $100 million to make Omaha zillionaire Warren Buffet even richer and - we’re told - assure Ohio of jobs and progress. Ohio could accomplish the same thing - cost-free - through a statewide ban on discrimination against gay men and lesbians.

That’s basic fairness. But it’s also good business. Today, all the PR in the world can’t change one stark fact: Ohio, nationally, has a stodgy image. Some Americans blame Ohio for giving George W. Bush a second feckless term. Then there was Ohio’s humiliating “debate” over evolution vs. creation. Icing the poisoned cake was Ohio’s 2004 ballot initiative banning same-sex “marriage,” even though such “marriages” never had been, nor ever would be, legal in Ohio. Nevertheless, suburban Cincinnati needs something to hate, and on that issue the rest of Ohio and its legislators obliged.

To read the rest of Thomas’ column click here

Long past time for state to end legal bias

Monday, March 31, 2008 3:08 AM

By Ann Fisher

Some state lawmakers are quick to trash home rule when it comes to enacting gun laws and scrap-metal regulations. But they blithely ignore the patchwork quilt of statutes in Ohio that outlaw discrimination against a person because of sexual orientation or gender identity.

Anyone who has been conscious in our litigious society these past 25 years is aware of the argument that we don’t need another “protected class” of citizens in this country.

But who can point to any examples of cities, villages or states, colleges or universities swamped in lawsuits because their leaders had the courage and vision to extend inalienable rights to gays?

Any uptick in complaints, however minor, reflects not trial lawyers gone wild but injustice. That is, after all, why we need the protections.

To finish Ann’s column, click here

Lawmakers seek sexual orientation protections

By JULIE CARR SMYTH AP Statehouse Correspondent
Published on Tuesday Mar 11, 2008

After Jimmie Beall was fired from a teaching job she loved because she was a lesbian, she made a promise to her students that she’d fight to prevent the same thing from happening to others.

On Tuesday, Beall helped state lawmakers unveil a bill that would prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation in jobs, credit and housing. Backers say the political climate is prime to make Ohio the 22nd state to pass such a law.

Opponents of similar measures that have failed in the past suggest the potentially divisive proposal’s introduction may be politically loaded, coming just months before a critical presidential contest in the pivotal swing state.

Beall said she had just received a stellar review and great new work assignment days before her firing from the London City Schools in western Ohio. Then the principal discovered she was gay.

“Being fired left me stunned, absolutely devastated,” she said. “I don’t know how to express how it feels when you know that you have children and no income and no insurance now because of who you are.”

Democrats led this year by Rep. Dan Stewart of Columbus in the House and Sen. Dale Miller of Cleveland in the Senate have been behind similar measures in the past. More unique are the two Republicans who have signed onto the proposal this time: so far, Rep. Jon Peterson of Delaware and Sen. David Goodman of Bexley.

Peterson, who backed a bill in 2004 declaring gay marriage in conflict with state policy, said he has been soul-searching since then on the question of gay rights.

After conversations with his pastor, friends, and his 14-year-old daughter who is nonplussed at anyone’s interest in someone else’s sexual preferences he decided to advocate the anti-discrimination legislation.

“It’s a new day, it’s a new time,” he said. “And I am focussed on trying to open hearts, and open their eyes and their ears to compelling testimony like Jimmie’s this morning.”

Gov. Ted Strickland, a Democrat, said Tuesday that he would sign the bill if it made it to his desk.

Lynne Bowman, executive director of the gay rights group Equality Ohio, said 21 other states, 433 of the Fortune 500 companies, 11 of the state’s 13 four-year universities, and 16 Ohio cities and villages already have such protections in place.

“The public supports this, our top business leaders embrace this, fairness demands this,” Bowman said. “Why would the state tolerate any form of discrimination for any reason?”

Barry Sheets, a lobbyist for the conservative Christian group Citizens for Community Values, said similar bills have failed to win support in the past and that workplace equality seems to be improving for gays and lesbians just the same.

“I’m wondering if this isn’t a solution in search of a problem,” he said. “If I’m not mistaken, the Human Rights Campaign just came out with a workplace equality index and said there’s been quite a massive increase in the number of businesses that are GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender)-friendly.”

He wondered why a bill with few changes from its earlier incarnations took until 15 months into a 24-month session to be introduced.

“If this is really, truly a problem and I don’t see the data really showing that, even from homosexual advocacy groups, which are moving forward saying workplace equality is advancing by leaps and bounds why take 15 months to bring it up?” he said. “It makes me wonder whether maybe there’s something else going on here.”

Sheets’ organization backed a statewide gay marriage ban in 2004 attributed with mobilizing Christian conservatives who helped swing the state to President Bush in that year’s election.

The bill’s advocates say they have a growing body of evidence on discrimination’s economic effects such as Beall’s loss of her job and insurance to make their case this time around.

A 2002 study by the U.S. General Accounting Office found that such protections did not lead to a flood of lawsuits against government. In California, 596 of the 17,668 discrimination cases filed in 2001, for example, involved sexual orientation. In Connecticut, the number was 44 of 2,006. In the District of Columbia it was 19 in 210, and in Hawaii, 9 of 535, the study found.

And a recent survey by The United Way found that half of the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people who responded had been victims of some form of discrimination.

Beall said the superintendent in her former school district sent an e-mail to school board members urging them to fire her, just based on the suggestion that she might be gay. He later told the courts he didn’t know it was wrong to discriminate based on sexual orientation. The district has since passed an anti-discrimination policy.

Stewart said people across the country are aware you can be fired in Ohio for being gay, as Beall was, and are unlikely to take that risk and take a job in the state.