"NO", REALLY, WE INSIST
On October 10th, the HRC launched a "10 in 10" Campaign, and subsequently published an open letter from 52 large businesses calling for Congress to move forward with inclusion. Informally, the HRC director estimated some 80,000 messages from peons to Congress Almighty. Even a few supporters of "the Congressman Frank strategy" found a silver lining in the sudden urgency that galvanized some to get involved in the political process, to stand up.
THE SHUTDOWN
Within two days, the House leadership, in a closed door session, moved to shut down debate and end the effort to swing votes. In spin worthy of Madison Avenue, they issued a declaratory that the non-inclusive bill would be "fast-tracked" (while simultaneously suggesting that action on other key 'workplace' discriminations, like the anachronistic don't-ask-don't-tell policy, would have to wait).
WAS THE HRC BLINDSIDED?
Why would the HRC launch a visible, public "10 in 10" Campaign, only to have it shut down within two days by the House leadership? The tea leaves suggest that, despite an overwhelming (some say fawning) willingness to be 'included in the legislative process', they were blindsided by the House leadership.
WHY ARE THEY DOING WHAT THEY ARE DOING?
Who knows? It just doesn't add up, though, to make a commitment to doing more, and simultaneously cut off the effort to do that...
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Putting the "N" in ENDA
