NOVEMBER 22, 2009
   Login or create a new account  ?
Join Washington Blade on FacebookJoin Washingtonblade on MyspaceJoin Washington Blade on Twitter!
The Latest:
Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) introduced the hate crimes bill earlier this month. (Photo by Lauren Victoria Burke/AP) 
House approves hate crimes bill
Heated debate includes Rep. Foxx calling Shepard’s murder a ‘hoax’

Following heated debate, the U.S. House approved legislation Wednesday that would enable the Justice Department to prosecute hate crimes committed against LGBT people.

The bill, passed 249-175, would allow the Justice Department to assist in the prosecution of hate crimes committed against LGBT people that result in death or serious injury. The federal government could lend its assistance to local authorities or take the lead if local officials are unwilling or unable to prosecute cases.

Should the measure pass the Senate and be signed into law by a supportive President Obama, it also would make grants available to state and local communities to train law enforcement officials, combat hate crimes committed by juveniles and investigate bias-motivated violence.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi praised her fellow House members Wednesday for approving the legislation and noted the bill backs up protections embodied in the U.S. Constitution.

"Today, with the passage of federal hate crimes legislation, we have affirmed these ideals and the inclusiveness that our nation stands for by extending the protection of its laws to all," she said.

House rules governing debate prevented any amendments from being offered on the floor. Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) made a motion to recommit the bill to the House Judiciary Committee, but it failed, 141-185.

During debate, proponents of the measure argued that its passage would help protect groups of people that historically have been the targets of violence because of their sexual orientation and gender identity.

Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.), the newest openly gay member of Congress, invoked on the House floor the memory of Angie Zapata, a Colorado transgender woman who was murdered last summer and whose killer was convicted last week of committing a hate crime against her.

"What makes this so odious is that they are not just crimes committed against an individual — they are committed against entire communities," he said.

Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.), the only out lesbian in Congress, said the legislation's passage would strengthen responses to the "domestic terrorism" that some groups have suffered.

"The House has an opportunity to reintroduce the principle of equal rights and equal protections in the Constitution," she said.

But opponents of the measure argued that the legislation unfairly creates special classes of people under the law and would enable U.S. officials to prosecute religious leaders if they preach against homosexuality.

Supporters of the measure countered that the bill explicitly contains language to ensure the bill doesn't infringe on any constitutional rights.

In her arguments against the measure, Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) dismissed the relevance of the death of the Matthew Shepard, a gay college student who was killed in 1998 near Laramie, Wyo., because of his sexual orientation.

"We know that that young man was killed in the commitment of a robbery," she said. "It wasn't because he was gay. This — the bill was named for him, hate crimes bill was named for him, but it's really a hoax that that continues to be used as an excuse for passing these bills."

Brad Luna, a Human Rights Campaign spokesperson, later condemned Foxx for the remark.

"Vile lies, like the one spread by Rep. Foxx today on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives about Matthew's brutal hate-fueled murder, continues to underscore how extreme anti-LGBT opponents have become," he said. "It is no longer acceptable in this day and age to just come right out and say you don't like gay people. Instead, extremist opponents of equality must resort to these types of malicious and twisted lies. Rep. Foxx should be ashamed of herself."

But opponents of the measure were unrelenting. Rep. Jason Chafferz (R-Utah) urged rejection of the bill because he said it's unconstitutional. He also railed against how the bill "gives special protections … to certain persons based on their lifestyle choices" and not members of the U.S. armed services.

"It is unbelievable to me that … those who have chosen different personal lifestyles deserve more protection than those who have chosen to serve their country," he said. Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) countered that the hate crimes bill was a "carefully crafted measure" and criticized arguments that gays choose their lifestyle and don't deserve protections under the law.

"Our gay and lesbian [friends] don't choose their lifestyle, they are who they are, and they should be protected like everyone else," he said.

In his arguments against the bill, Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) said the bill should be rejected because the federal government has no evidence that hate crimes are committed against people because of their gender identity. He noted that the Hate Crimes Statistics Act allows the Justice Department to collect data on hate crimes committed against people because of sexual orientation, but doesn't mention gender identity.

But U.S. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the longest-serving openly gay member of Congress, responded by saying Pence's comments smack of a line once given by comedian Chico Marx: "Who are you going to believe? Me or your own eyes?" The debate culminated with a late afternoon vote that won fast praise from many organizations, including the Democratic National Committee.

"I congratulate the House of Representatives," said DNC chair Tim Kaine, "and I urge the Senate to take swift action on this important civil rights issue so that the president may sign the bill into law."

Log Cabin Republicans also lauded the House bill's free speech protections.

"This legislation specifically protects First Amendment rights and preserves and protects the rights of all Americans to express their own individual opinions, be it in the public square, in their private homes or their pulpits," said Charles Moran, a Log Cabin spokesperson. "This is not hate-speech legislation — it is hate-crime legislation."

In a related development, the Senate took the first step Tuesday toward passing hate crimes legislation when Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) introduced the Senate version of the bill.

Kennedy said in a statement the legislation was "long overdue" and "hate crimes are especially poisonous."

"They are acts of domestic terrorism that target whole communities, not just individuals," he said. "This bill will bring greater protection to our citizens and much-needed resources for state and local law enforcement to fight these vicious crimes."

Other sponsors of the Senate bill include Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Arlen Specter (D-Pa.). A Senate Judiciary Committee spokesperson said she didn't immediately know when the committee would take up the legislation.

Permalink


Spacer
email password
 
Please review and follow Washington Blade’s current Comment and Discussion Policy. Guidelines updated as of August 22nd, 2009. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

RCS
0
The Human Rights Campaign deserves a great deal of credit here.  It contacted its members, including me, to have them E-Mail their Senators and Representatives to urge them to support this bill.  Then, it contacted its members again to have them personally call their Representative to tell him to vote for this bill.  The HRC did a good job in rallying support for this legislation.  Now it's on to the Senate.

Posted 5/4/09 - 7:13 AM


RCS
0
The Human Rights Campaign deserves a great deal of credit here.  It contacted its members, including me, to have them E-Mail their Senators and Representatives to urge them to support this bill.  Then, it contacted its members again to have them personally call their Representative to tell him to vote for this bill.  The HRC did a good job in rallying support for this legislation.  Now it's on to the Senate.

Posted 5/4/09 - 7:12 AM


mushroomhead
0
QuoteSteve Charing:

Since when is enlisting in the military NOT a lifestyle choice?

How about obese people?  Is fatness a lifestyle choice?

How about short people, Steve??  Is being "under the norm" (Steve) and dwarfism a lifestyle choice? 

My point is, if you single out gay people for special protections, let's include the millions of other special groups in accordance with equal protection under the law. 

The whole argument is ludicrous.  Just enforce the laws on the books and abandon this nonsense of singling out "special" groups for "special" protections.

Posted 5/3/09 - 12:57 PM


Steve Charing
Clarksville, Md
0
Since when is enlisting in the military NOT a lifestyle choice?

Posted 5/3/09 - 12:46 PM


mushroomhead
0
Quotebigharold:

I resent member of the United States Congress saying that people like myself have chosen to live this life style. I have always had feelings toward member of the same sex since I was very young.

I did not choose to be gay but since Iam I have learned to accept who Iam.

I do not feel it is right to want to hurt or kill some one because they are gay.

Iam glad the house passed this bill and I hope the senate and the President make it a law.

 

bigharold, I agree with you.  But, how about those poor veterans who were ordered to war and now face repudiation from left loony wingnuts for their service?  trong>Equal protection under the law requires pan style="text-decoration: underline;">equal protection for ALL - not just gay people.  As a gay, why do I and all the other gay people warrant special treatment?  I'm offendended that members of Congress feel that I and other gays merit special treatment.  I simply don't understand the philosophy of those who support this unecessary and redundant legislation.

Posted 5/1/09 - 6:45 PM


mushroomhead
0
QuoteLeland Frances:

Despite his faxed, limp urging of Congress on this, Obama's WhiteHouse.gov LGBT agenda has been gutted. 10 paragraphs now 3 sentences. DOMA repeal gone. "Change" not repeal DADT, etc.

Ha Ha.  I'm laughing all the way to the fridge to get a cold one!!  The more I read about the Messiah, the more I like him!! 

Posted 5/1/09 - 6:40 PM


bigharold
Reseda, Ca
0
I resent member of the United States Congress saying that people like myself have chosen to live this life style. I have always had feelings toward member of the same sex since I was very young.

I did not choose to be gay but since Iam I have learned to accept who Iam.

I do not feel it is right to want to hurt or kill some one because they are gay.

Iam glad the house passed this bill and I hope the senate and the President make it a law.

 bigharold

Posted 5/1/09 - 4:26 PM


bigharold
Reseda, Ca
0
I resent member of the United States Congress saying that people like myself have chosen to live this life style. I have always had feelings toward member of the same sex since I was very young.

I did not choose to be gay but since Iam I have learned to accept who Iam.

I do not feel it is right to want to hurt or kill some one because they are gay.

Iam glad the house passed this bill and I hope the senate and the President make it a law.

 

Posted 5/1/09 - 4:25 PM


bigharold
Reseda, Ca
0
I resent member of the United States Congress saying that people like myself have chosen to live this life style. I have always had feelings toward member of the same sex since I was very young.

I did not choose to be gay but since Iam I have learned to accept who Iam.

I do not feel it is right to want to hurt or kill some one because they are gay.

Iam glad the house passed this bill and I hope the senate and the President make it a law.

 

Posted 5/1/09 - 4:25 PM


Leland Frances
0
Despite his faxed, limp urging of Congress on this, Obama's WhiteHouse.gov LGBT agenda has been gutted. 10 paragraphs now 3 sentences. DOMA repeal gone. "Change" not repeal DADT, etc.

Posted 5/1/09 - 11:11 AM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
QuoteDoug in Mount Vernon:

So, by that logic, the anti-terrorism laws that placed enhanced penalties on terrorists were unnecessary and duplicative of exsiting law too, right?

Face it.  These laws are there to make a statement about problems that society is not handling well, and it is meant to enable justice in crimes where there is not enough justice too many times.  These laws do NOTHING to harm anyone or to protect one class of people any more than another.  What they do is send a message that if you commit your crime out of an unjust and irrational hatred against an oft scapegoated group (undeniably GLBT people fit this bill) then you could face additional penalties....message to would be anti-GLBT terrorists--we will prosecute you.  These laws are hardly any more unconstitutional or wrong than any anti-terrorists enhanced penalty law.  So if you're going to argue against one, argue against both, please.

Great response, well reasoned and expressed.

Posted 4/30/09 - 3:32 PM


Doug in Mount Vernon
Alexandria, Va
0
Quotemushroomhead:

Bad judgment = bad legislation.  Hate crimes legislation is unnecessary/duplicative of existing law.  How could a murder/assault of a gay/Jew be more of a crime than a murder/assault of a str8 white presbyterian jock?  And, why only include gays/Jews in the legislation?  Shouldn't assault against obese people be covered?  How about veterans who return from Iraq and get eggs in the face from loony left liberals opposed to the war?  Why aren't they covered?

So, by that logic, the anti-terrorism laws that placed enhanced penalties on terrorists were unnecessary and duplicative of exsiting law too, right?

Face it.  These laws are there to make a statement about problems that society is not handling well, and it is meant to enable justice in crimes where there is not enough justice too many times.  These laws do NOTHING to harm anyone or to protect one class of people any more than another.  What they do is send a message that if you commit your crime out of an unjust and irrational hatred against an oft scapegoated group (undeniably GLBT people fit this bill) then you could face additional penalties....message to would be anti-GLBT terrorists--we will prosecute you.  These laws are hardly any more unconstitutional or wrong than any anti-terrorists enhanced penalty law.  So if you're going to argue against one, argue against both, please.

Posted 4/30/09 - 3:13 PM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
QuoteJim Stevens:

Virginia Foxx (R-NC), on 4/29/09, falsely claimed that murder victim Matthew Shepard was  killed while committing a robbery!

Her numbers:  DC: 1-202-225-2071, NC (Greensboro area): 1-336-778-0211, NC (Charlotte area): 1-828-265-0240, and TOLL FREE: 1-866-677-8968

Please spread the above.

pan style="font-family: Times;">

It's impossible to get through to her office in DC.  But, I was able to fax her (twice) at her office.  Her fax number is: 202-225-2995.  Imagine if she got a hundred faxes just today?

Posted 4/30/09 - 2:40 PM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
QuoteJim Stevens:

Video of the sickening Virgnia Foxx incident is here:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWm2zGTZBM0

I’m sure she’s getting quite a few calls today.  If PEOPLE REALLY WANT TO GET HER ATTENTION, I might suggest waiting one week or so (until it might seem the furor has died down), and then calling any or all of her offices.  Put it on your calendar.  Better yet, call every Tuesday (or whichever day of the week you choose) for the next three months!

Her DC number:  202-225-2071   PLEASE SPREAD THIS!

A good way around the phone is sending her a fax.  Her fax number in DC is: 202-225-2995pan style="color: #ffffff; font-family: Arial;">(202) 225-2995 

Posted 4/30/09 - 2:10 PM


Jim Stevens
0
Video of the sickening Virgnia Foxx incident is here:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWm2zGTZBM0

I’m sure she’s getting quite a few calls today.  If PEOPLE REALLY WANT TO GET HER ATTENTION, I might suggest waiting one week or so (until it might seem the furor has died down), and then calling any or all of her offices.  Put it on your calendar.  Better yet, call every Tuesday (or whichever day of the week you choose) for the next three months!

Her DC number:  202-225-2071   PLEASE SPREAD THIS!

Posted 4/30/09 - 2:02 PM


Jim Stevens
0
Virginia Foxx (R-NC), on 4/29/09, falsely claimed that murder victim Matthew Shepard was  killed while committing a robbery!

Her numbers:  DC: 1-202-225-2071, NC (Greensboro area): 1-336-778-0211, NC (Charlotte area): 1-828-265-0240, and TOLL FREE: 1-866-677-8968

Please spread the above.

Posted 4/30/09 - 1:59 PM


ReasonableDoubt
Washington, DC
0
How about veterans who return from Iraq and get eggs in the face from loony left liberals opposed to the war?  Why aren't they covered?

Yeah, that's the same as being tied to a fence and beaten to death, mushroomhead.  Exactly the same.

Has there been a rash of soldiers being attacked (by eggs, no less...eggs!  Why the horror...) as they step foot on US soil that has happened outside your deranged little fantasties?

Posted 4/30/09 - 11:17 AM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
QuoteTruth Monger:

We currently have laws that specifically provide protections to people against hate crimes because of race and relgion and these laws are not considered to be unnecessary or duplicative. If murder or assault against somone because of their religion or race is more of a crime than murder or assault against anyone else then there is no reason why the GLBT community cannot have similar laws to protect them as a specific class especially when FBI crime statistics backup the fact the gays are victims of such crimes along with race and religion. Historically gays have always been victims of violence and only a moron can deny reality and expect others to believe otherwise. You can find little if any parity between that violence and any that obese people and veterans may encounter.

pan style="font-family: Verdana;">How do you get so much space to write?  Most newspapers allow a LOT more space to write and respond in order to support conversation and community building.  Blade - why not consider providing more space for writers or allow writers to register for more space.

Posted 4/30/09 - 10:38 AM


blondee749
Philadelphia, PA
0
Specter's still a Republican...He's running for reelection as a Democrat.

Posted 4/30/09 - 10:29 AM


Truth Monger
1
Quotemushroomhead:

Bad judgment = bad legislation.  Hate crimes legislation is unnecessary/duplicative of existing law.  How could a murder/assault of a gay/Jew be more of a crime than a murder/assault of a str8 white presbyterian jock?  And, why only include gays/Jews in the legislation?  Shouldn't assault against obese people be covered?  How about veterans who return from Iraq and get eggs in the face from loony left liberals opposed to the war?  Why aren't they covered?

We currently have laws that specifically provide protections to people against hate crimes because of race and relgion and these laws are not considered to be unnecessary or duplicative. If murder or assault against somone because of their religion or race is more of a crime than murder or assault against anyone else then there is no reason why the GLBT community cannot have similar laws to protect them as a specific class especially when FBI crime statistics backup the fact the gays are victims of such crimes along with race and religion. Historically gays have always been victims of violence and only a moron can deny reality and expect others to believe otherwise. You can find little if any parity between that violence and any that obese people and veterans may encounter.

Posted 4/30/09 - 10:11 AM


stephenclark
Washington, DC
2
Equalnotspecial is correct, but there is no point in engaging mushroomhead. He thrives on making outrageous comments in order to get attention. It's best to pity and ignore him.

Posted 4/30/09 - 5:17 AM


Equalnotspecial
Sonoma, Ca
1
White people are covered under "race" and Presbyterians are covered under "religion" Straight people will be covered under "sexual orientation". The enhancement is justified because these crimes are directed at an entire group, rather than just one person, as Sentaor Kennedy pointed out.

Posted 4/29/09 - 9:46 PM


Leland Frances
0
If there were Stupidity Crime legislation, you'd get the chair, Fungushead.

Posted 4/29/09 - 9:24 PM


 mushroomhead voter suppressed comment (click to view) 
mushroomhead
-10
Bad judgment = bad legislation.  Hate crimes legislation is unnecessary/duplicative of existing law.  How could a murder/assault of a gay/Jew be more of a crime than a murder/assault of a str8 white presbyterian jock?  And, why only include gays/Jews in the legislation?  Shouldn't assault against obese people be covered?  How about veterans who return from Iraq and get eggs in the face from loony left liberals opposed to the war?  Why aren't they covered?

Posted 4/29/09 - 6:54 PM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
This is WONDERFUL -- and its fully inclusive.

Posted 4/29/09 - 5:38 PM




Email signup EMAIL SIGNUP Facebook FACEBOOK
RSS field RSS FEED Twitter TWITTER
Page by page PAGE BY PAGE Sign up SIGN UP
Find the Blade FIND THE BLADE Feedback FEEDBACK
Masthead MASTHEAD Advertise ADVERTISE
MySpace MYSPACE Privacy PRIVACY
Washington Blade Window Media CONTACT US: E-mail | Masthead | Location and Directions
© 2009 | A Window Media LLC Publication | Privacy Policy
Advertise with us!