By Gary Barlow

Staff writer

Members of the Human Rights Campaign’s Chicago steering committee faced an angry crowd upset with HRC’s endorsement of a non-gender-inclusive version of the proposed Employment Non-Discrimination Act at the monthly meeting of the Chicago Gender Society Nov. 13 on the Northwest Side.

“I’m disappointed HRC is in this room,” said Illinois Gender Advocates Chair Stevie Conlon. “I don’t think they should be allowed to represent the LGBT community. They betrayed us.”

Like others who packed the Stardust Banquet Hall for the meeting, Conlon cited pledges by HRC officials, including the group’s president, Joe Solmonese, that HRC would not support a version of ENDA that did not include gender identity. Conlon quoted a promise to that effect that Solmonese made at the Southern Comfort conference in September in Atlanta.

In the end, however, when ENDA’s Democratic sponsor in the U.S. House, Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), with the support of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), dropped gender identity protections from ENDA and brought the bill to a vote earlier this month, HRC reversed its position and urged members of Congress to vote for the non-inclusive version.

“HRC’s view of our community cannot be that all members of our community are equal, or they could not support this bill,” Conlon said.

Equality Illinois, which passed a statewide law in Illinois two years ago that not only outlawed employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, but also banned discrimination in housing, credit and public accommodations, joined the more the 300 groups that opposed the weakened version of ENDA. Equality Illinois board member Catherine Sikora, backed by other board members of the group, was one of those who spoke out against HRC at the CGS meeting last week.

“We’ve always supported the trans community and we’ve never had any doubts about whether the trans community should be part of equal rights or not,” Sikora said. “It’s not even a question and it never will be a question.”

The HRC steering committee members defended the organization but were hard-pressed to answer many of the attendees’ questions satisfactorily. Several said they personally disagreed with HRC’s position. Attendees asked repeatedly if HRC had consulted with local steering committee members around the country before reversing course, if the Chicago committee had considered or would consider protesting the decision by HRC officials in Washington and if local HRC members would demand Solmonese’ resignation. Many of the questions revolved around the amount of input local people had on HRC’s decisions in Washington.

At one point, HRC steering committee member John Barry conceded that he had left messages about ENDA at HRC headquarters in Washington but hadn’t had his calls returned.

“What we do locally is kind of organize the events here in Chicago,” Barry said. “National policy is made in D.C. for the entire organization.”

Barry did say that Solmonese and other HRC officials in Washington “could not have taken any of these positions without the (HRC) board’s approval.”

HRC was the only GLBT group in the country that supported the weakened ENDA, while more than 300 GLBT groups opposed it. The bill passed Nov. 7 but is thought unlikely to pass in the Senate. President Bush has promised to veto it if it does. It is not clear yet if ENDA’s chief Senate sponsor, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), plans to introduce the ENDA bill passed by the House or the original version, which included gender identity protections and exempted fewer employees. As passed by the House, ENDA exempts employers with 15 or fewer employees and employers with ties to religious organizations.

“I implore each one of you,” Julie Johnson told the HRC steering committee members, “to do everything in your power to make sure that your organization does everything in its power so that the next time there’s an ENDA that there will only be an inclusive ENDA.”