TG WORKS NEWS
If you have an item that might be of interest to the transgender community, don't hesitate to
send it along to us.
June 26, 2008
HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR AND PENSION SUBCOMMITTEE
HOLD HEARING ON TRANS ISSUES
Today's hearing, "An Examination of Discrimination Against Transgender Americans in the Workplace," provided some encouragement to transgender Americans facing employment challenges due to discrimination.
The hearing opened with an astounding flip-flop from Barney Frank (D, MA)in vociferous support of transgender inclusion in ENDA. It is our hope that Mr. Frank’s change of heart is in earnest. Tammy Baldwin (D, WI), the author of the trans inclusive amendment to the current version of ENDA, also presented a compelling opening statement. Witnesses testifying about their experiences, positive and negative in the area of employment included Col. Diane Schroer, ret., who was denied a position with the Library of Congress despite her years of service in the military and later, her work with the Department of Defense, Sabrina Marcus Taraboletti, former NASA engineer, fired upon transition in spite of her specialized skills and previous value to the space program, Diego Sanchez, Director of Public Relations and External Affairs for the AIDS Action Committee of Massachussets, and Bill Hendrix, Chair of Gays, Lesbians and Allies at Dow Chemical, both of whom testified to the positive aspects of transgender workplace inclusion, and the benefits to those businesses and organizations that have included gender identity among their non-discrimination policies.
Also testifying was JC Miller, a partner with the firm of Thompson Hine, who while not opposing this legislation, expressed concern about its specific language as it pertains to implementation by business owners, and asked that the language in the bill be written in a more specific manner, less open to interpretation. Of particular interest to Ms. Miller was the concept of "perceived" gender identity. She presented the view that this expression is vague and would be difficult and possibly costly for some business owners to intepret and implement.
Testifying in opposition was Glen Lavy, Senior Counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, who expressed opposition to the bill based upon moral and religious grounds, maintaining that to compel employers with “deeply held religious beliefs” to comply with such legislation would be unfair. When questioned further by Committee Chair Rob Andrews (D, NJ) and Minority Party Co-Chair John Kline (R, MN) as to the matter of choice as it pertains to religious beliefs and the lack thereof as it pertains to being transgender, and to specific hypothetical examples of religious exemption from discrimination legislation, not just with regard to gender identity, but race and religion, was unable to provide clear and compelling answers to support his view. Lavy's responses were evasive and non-specific, containing lots of stammering and hedging, refusal to address the specific questions and failure to present convincing arguments.
Overall, this was encouraging. We only hope that it’s not just some effort to mollify us and shut us up. It won’t shut me up until an inclusive version of ENDA is signed into law, I can tell you that. Mara Keisling of NCTE is to be commended for her efforts to make today’s hearing a reality, and for the conduct of this hearing with the conspicuous and refreshing absence of any representatives of HRC. Thank you, Mara, for making this hearing specific to our community’s needs independent of the GLB agenda.
It is our hope that this represents a positive step toward the establishment of an autonomous transgender political identity, and the securing of basic civil rights for transgender Americans.
June 19, 2008
CONGRESS TO HOLD NEW HEARINGS ON ENDA
Today 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.
Committee hearings are open to the public and you are welcome to attend in person if you are in the area, but space is limited. Some hearings are broadcast on CSPAN and streamed live through their website - we will keep you informed as we hear more details about the hearing.
June 17, 2008
AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION OFFICIALLY ADOPTS
PROGRESSIVE TRANSGENDER POLICY
While continuing to identify Gender Identity Dysphoria as a psychological disorder, the AMA did act to end discrimination in health insurance policy and possibly to remove some of the financial barriers to transgender medical treatment.
RESOLUTION 122
Subject: Removing Financial Barriers to Care for Transgender Patients
Whereas, Our American Medical Association opposes discrimination on
the basis of gender identity; and
Whereas, Gender Identity Disorder (GID) is a serious medical condition
recognized as such in both the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorders 4th Edition (DSM-IV) and the International
Classification of Diseases (10th Revision); and is characterized in
the DSM-IV as a persistent discomfort with one's assigned sex and with
one's primary and secondary sex characteristics, which causes intense
emotional pain and suffering; and
Whereas, GID, if left untreated, can result in clinically significant
psychological distress, dysfunction, debilitating depression and, for
some people without access to appropriate medical care and treatment,
suicidality and death; and
Whereas, The World Profession for Transgender Health, Inc. (WPATH) is
the leading international, interdisciplinary professional organization
devoted to the understanding and treatment of gender identity
disorders, and has established internationally accepted Standards of
Care for providing medical treatment of people with GID, including
mental health care, hormone therapy, and sex reassignment surgery,
which are designed to promote the health and welfare of persons with
GID and are recognized within the medical community to be the standard
of care for treating people with GID; and
Whereas, An established body of medical research demonstrates the
effectiveness and medical necessity of mental health care, hormone
therapy, and sex reassignment surgery as forms
of therapeutic treatment for many people diagnosed with GID; and
Whereas, Health experts in GID, including WPATH, have rejected the
myth that such treatments are "cosmetic" or "experimental" and have
recognized that these treatments can provide safe and effective
treatment for a serious health condition; and
Whereas, Physicians treating persons with GID must be able to provide
the correct treatment necessary for a patient in order to achieve
genuine and lasting comfort with his or her gender, based on the
person's individual needs and medical history; and
Whereas, Our AMA opposes limitations placed on patient care by third-
party payers when such care is based upon sound scientific evidence
and sound medical opinion; and
Whereas, Many health insurance plans categorically exclude coverage of
mental health, medical, and surgical treatments for GID, even though
many of these same treatments, such as psychotherapy, hormone therapy,
breast augmentation or removal, hysterectomy, oophorectomy,
orchiectomy, and salpingectomy, are often covered for other medical
conditions; and
Whereas, The denial of these otherwise covered benefits for patients
suffering from GID represents discrimination based solely on a
patient's gender identity; and
Whereas, Delaying treatment for GID can cause and/or aggravate
additional serious and expensive health problems, such as stress-
related physical illnesses, depression, and substance abuse problems,
which further endanger patients' health and strain the health care
system; therefore be it
RESOLVED, That our American Medical Association support public and
private health insurance coverage for treatment of gender identity
disorder as recommended by the patient¢s physician. (New HOD Policy).
September 26, 2007
OP ED:
BETRAYAL IN WASHINGTON, GIVE US BACK OUR T!
The rejection of the original draft of the Employment Non Discrimination Act in Congress this week, and the introduction of an alternative version of the bill excluding gender identity from discrimination criteria is a slap in the face to every transgender American by not only the members of Congress who, up until this past Wednesday made the pretense of supporting the bill, but by the LGB community, who once again have used the cause of trans Americans as a bargaining chip in their effort to gain political capital.
Those who would presume to speak for our community in Washington entered into a relationship with HRC and their ilk earnestly, no doubt, and with only the best intentions. They accepted the endorsement of HRC and, no doubt, some amount of financial support, in the hopes that by forming an alliance with the LGB cause, we might make some progress in the struggle for transgender equality, only to be sold down the river for 30 pieces of silver.
Time and again, legislators have sidled up to the gay cause sandwich bar to be offered the same bill of fare, an LGB sandwich, light on the mayo and hold the T. In Washington today, representatives of HRC are publicly lamenting the failure of ENDA in its original form, but you can bet that privately, they’re laughing all the way to the bank with the political capital they’ve gained at our expense.
Those trans advocates who bought into the HRC company line have served their purpose. Whatever has been gained from this relationship has now been paid for in full, and the time has come to end this relationship, go our separate ways and use the presence we have developed on Capitol Hill to establish an autonomous political identity independent of the LGB agenda.
Continuing this relationship would be counter productive to the cause of trans Americans, and would only serve to further perpetuate the popular perception of trans people as pathetic flamboyant circus clowns with a penchant for Judy Garland films, mincing about in a June Cleaver getup and lip syncing to Cher records. We need to break this pattern of exploitation by the gay community and make it clear that we are separate and distinct.
If you agree with this view, and you want to see us get what we deserve, the time is now to make your voice heard not in the hallowed halls of Congress, but to those who presume to advocate in our behalf. Take a minute to support United ENDA, an organization comprised of over 370 LGB advocacy and civil rights groups that recognize the importance of trans inclusion. Send a message to LGB leaders to GIVE US BACK OUR T!
July 3, 2007
COLORADO AND VERMONT ENACT TRANS DISCRIMINATION LEGISLATION
Two more states have enacted explicit nondiscrimination legislation since April 26, 2007, when the Iowa House of Representatives approved trans inclusive antidiscrimination legislation with a margin of 22 votes (59 – 37). The bill then moved on to receive the endorsement of the State Senate with a margin of 18 votes (34 – 16). The two additional states are Colorado, where Governor Bill Ritter signed trans inclusive nondiscrimination policy into law on May 25, and Vermont, where Governor Jim Douglas included gender identity as a protected category under that state’s antidiscrimination policies by signing the bill on May 22. The legislation in these states would make it illegal in Iowa to discriminate against a person in the areas of employment, public accommodation, credit, housing and education, based upon sexual orientation or gender identity. This brings the total number of states with such discrimination policy to 13, plus the District of Columbia. Including the numerous local and municipal jurisdictions (latest available number, 68) enacting trans inclusive antidiscrimination policies, nearly one third of transgender Americans are protected in some way against discrimination. Currently, those states that explicitly prohibit transgender discrimination include California, Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, New Mexico, Rhode Island and Vermont. Those states extending Court and Administrative Protections include Connecticut, The District of Columbia, Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York. Progress is slow at the state level, but as things look more encouraging for this kind of inclusive legislation at the federal level, transgender Americans may be a little closer to enjoying the civil rights to which they are entitled.
May 31, 2007
SUSAN STANTON REJECTED IN BID FOR SARASOTA JOB
Susan Stanton drew the media spotlight to the town of Largo, Florida, where as Steve Stanton, she worked as City Manager since September of 1993. Stanton was appointed to the position after acting as interim City Manager since February of that year, following the termination of former manager Steve Bonczek. Stanton was originally signed to an 18 month contract by City Commissioners, with numerous contract renewals and pay raises over the next 14 years, the most recent of which included an $11,000 raise in September of 2006.
Despite 14 years of positive performance evaluations and contract renewals, Largo City Commissioners voted to terminate Stanton’s contract after she revealed plans to undergo gender reassignment in February 2007. Interestingly enough, although the City Commissioners of Largo voted down a proposal to add sexual preference and gender identity to the city ordinance prohibiting discrimination in housing, public accommodations and employment in 2003, the city’s personnel policy is inclusive of these criteria. Despite this, the Commissioners voted to terminate Stanton’s contract. She remains on paid administrative leave while she appeals the decision.
On May 30, 2007, Stanton was considered for a similar position in the City of Sarasota, but was rejected in favor of one of four other candidates for the job. Though Sarasota City Commissioners narrowed the choice to Stanton and two other contenders, they chose another candidate for the position, citing the winning candidate’s “quiet leadership.”
Stanton commented “It’s just too soon. It’s too soon for a transgender city manager. I just don’t think the world is ready just yet.” This begs the question, since transgender candidates have experienced some success in public life in other areas, and since Stanton had successfully held just such a position for 14 years before revealing her transgender status, what, exactly, is the difference between Steve and Susan Stanton? Was Stanton somehow not transgender during her 14-year successful tenure as manager of the City of Largo? How would her performance differ now that her identity was revealed?
We will be watching this story closely. Stay tuned to this page for updates.
May 8, 2007
HOLD THE APPLAUSE …..
Rumors are circulating that the City of Berkeley, California has added gender reassignment surgery to the city’s employee health plan.
The conclusion of the City Council meeting on May 8 that started this rumor was not that city employees would be entitled to GRS under the plan, but that a committee would be formed to examine the issue.
Chances are that the motion will eventually pass, but it is not without some opposition from the citizenry of Berkeley. Lynn Riordan, 49, a post operative city employee, observed “Some people want to make transsexuality a political cause or a lifestyle change, but it’s not. It’s a medical issue. Do we need to spend $50,00 - $100,000 to change someone’s cosmetic appearance?”
Ms. Riordan, who paid for her surgery out of pocket, has led the effort to introduce this coverage to the health plan. The City of San Francisco offered this coverage to their employees in 2001. Some private employers are also covering this treatment to some degree through their health plans.
Change in this area is slow, but as more public and private employers are instituting trans inclusive diversity policies, eventually, the American insurance industry will need to amend their overall policy in this area to be consistent with that of the more enlightened of the socialized medical systems in the UK and the EU.
At least the City of Berkeley is examining the issue seriously. We hope they will conclude that what Ms. Riordan has proposed is not unreasonable.
May 3, 2007
CONGRESS PASSES HR 1592
The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crime Prevention Act has been kicked around Capitol Hill quite a bit since it was introduced in 2000 by a bipartisan committee of Senate and House representatives. The bill has passed in the Senate twice in the past, most recently in June of 2004, with a 32 vote margin (65 to 33). It has also passed in the House, in 2005, as an amendment to the Children’s Safety Act, with a 24 vote margin (223 to 199), but conservative House leadership during this period moved to block approval of the bill. Under the new House leadership, the legislation appears to be experiencing stronger support.
The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crime Prevention Act of 2007 contains language that would make it a federal crime to cause injury or to attempt to cause injury to another person on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability.
The bill has the support of 16 law enforcement organizations, including the International Brotherhood of Police, The International Association of Chiefs of Police and the National Sheriffs Association. NSA President Ted Sexton, Sheriff of Tuscaloosa, Alabama has commented “Unfortunately, there are situations where state and local authorities are unable to properly investigate these crimes. This legislation overcomes those situations.”
The recent House version of the bill (H 1592) was introduced by Representatives Conyers (D, Michigan) and Kirk (D, Illinois), and passed on May 3, with a 57 vote margin (237 to 180). A new Senate version of the bill (S 1105) is up for consideration. Though the bill has been successful in the Senate in the past, we still need to let our Senate representatives know how we feel about this legislation. Email your Senators here, and let them know your views on the Local law Enforcement Hate Crime Prevention Act, S 1105.
Home Job Seekers Employers Classifieds News Links Events Our Mission Statement Terms & Conditions TG Works Merchandise Contact Us© 2007 TG Works
Reproduction in whole or part without express written permission is prohibited.