Hall of Shame

There is a tendency in American politics for the people who feel most passionately about an issue, particularly ones that focus on a single issue, to be unrealistic in what a democratic political system can deliver... and that can be self-defeating.
It is "unrealistic," Mr. Frank suggests, to include transsexuals in a bill (that, by the way, he already knows will never pass). The fact that 280 gay rights groups sent him pleas to be inclusive is apparently irrelevant. I suppose it is also "unrealistic" to expect our representatives to actually listen to us, especially when we're "passionate." In fact, he belittled the efforts of the lesbian and gay community, suggesting that "responsible liberals" would not ask for more than their representatives are willing to give them. At what point, then, is our system no longer democratic?
----------------------------
http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3396

Representative Barney Frank: Blatantly Duplicitous
by: Autumn Sandeen
Tue Oct 23, 2007 at 21:34:08 PM EDT

"One thing [the transgender community around the late 80's] didn't
take into account was how deeply entrenched the anti-transgender
attitudes and doctrines were amongst gay and lesbian leaders. Barney
Frank (D-MA) is a prominent example of it. They still persisted in
holding the view that transgender people were 'crazy queens' who
would cost them their rights. Gay leaders were still trying to use
the 70's assimilationist strategy to counter the Religious Right
campaign against gay civil rights fueled by fear of the HIV/AIDS
pandemic."
- Monica Roberts, discussing attitudes and advocacy on the pre-2004
versions of ENDA in Why The Transgender Community Hates HRC

On October 19th, Representative Barney Frank publicly came out in
support of the Baldwin amendment. In his released statement, he said:

"The decision to offer such an amendment came out of a Caucus which
Chairman George Miller held of the Democratic Members of the
Education and Labor Committee. After some discussion, it became
clear that offering such an amendment would offer us the best chance
to achieve Speaker Pelosi's goal of adopting in the House the most
inclusive ENDA bill for which majority support existed."

"I argued in favor of transgender inclusion when I testified on the
original legislation on September 5, but many of us believed that
sending the full inclusive bill to the floor would open the door to
a series of demagogic procedural moves that would have endangered
our chances of a passing any bill at all. The discussion held by the
Democratic Members of the Education and Labor Committee,
Congresswoman Baldwin and myself resulted in this approach and I
believe it meets the goal of giving people the opportunity to
support a fully inclusive bill while avoiding the potential
parliamentary death traps that would otherwise have resulted. I will
on the floor of the House be repeating essentially the arguments in
favor of transgender inclusion which I made in the September 5
hearing, because we will now be able to do that in a procedural
setting that allows us to maximize support for an inclusive bill
without endangering our chances of getting any bill at all."

Privately, Representative Barney Frank's message to his
congressional peers has been much, much different.
Behind the public view, several congresspeople, congresspeople's
staffs, and other government sources have reported to ENDA activists
that Representative Frank is strongly advocating in private for
congresspeople to vote against the Baldwin Amendment because, in his
opinion, it would cause the bill itself to fail.

The debate over whether or not ENDA should or shouldn't be fully
inclusive shouldn't be about individuals or organizations, but on
the facts and merits of the issue. However, on the subject of how
inclusive ENDA should be, the blatant duplicity found between
Representative Frank's public and private statements is utterly
reprehensible...it's utterly unacceptable.

Representative Frank may be my ally on transgender inclusion in
years to come, but I will never again consider what he says publicly
to be even marginally truthful.

----------------------------------------------------
Links from Audio: