My commentary from what I caught, also on another thread:

Watching the process on CSPAN, Pelosi is on now for 1 min. Rep Hoyer, D-Maryland, gave a great speech about why it is important to pass HR 1592. If anyone comes across it, please PM me with the location.




The Republicans went to the floor requesting that protections for senior citizens and military members be covered and then denied the inclusion. Instead they pushed a motion to recommit with instructions, which would have killed it. The Democrats countered that senior citizens and military members are already protected. Right now the vote is 227 to not recommit and 178 to re commit.  Out of the 188, 9 are democrats and out of the 227, 11 are republicans.




Recommit motion failed

Final vote on passage happening now

so far 130 for and 96 against


Right now it is 221 v 167, 23 repubs voting for and 11 democrats voting against

14 dems against, 224 v 173

25 repubs for, 233 v 180

Time is over, 237 v 180, Bill Is Passed!!

Please forgive my ignorance... but what is this exactly?

https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,12964.0.html

HR 1592

It's the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 allowing the Federal Government to give assistance (and grants of money) when requested by local law enforcement and adds sexual orientation, gender identity and disability to this list of hate crimes.

Beverly

I just checked and my congressman voted against the bill.  He has now lost my vote forever and I will actively work for his opponent next election.

Final vote count: 237 - 180

Cut another notch on the staff.  YAY!!!!!

It's a good day.  Life is good!

Cindi

Quote from: Cindi Jones on May 03, 2007, 01:37:59 PM
Cut another notch on the staff.  YAY!!!!!
It's a good day.  Life is good!

Except that Crawford, TX village idiot has already said he will veto it.

Beverly

Quote from: BeverlyAnn on May 03, 2007, 01:40:10 PM

Quote from: Cindi Jones on May 03, 2007, 01:37:59 PM
Cut another notch on the staff.  YAY!!!!!
It's a good day.  Life is good!

Except that Crawford, TX village idiot has already said he will veto it.

Beverly

More than 6 years and 2 vetoes so far.  The Republican party is crippled going into the next presidential election.  Even if Bush vetoes it, the next president won't.

I'm not so sure that the Democratic party is not crippled as well.  It's too bad we can't start over.

Cindi

I heard today the mainstream media say the bill will likely not pass because of the Bush veto.  The Bush Administration claims there are already enough hate crime laws in the books already and that they are not being enforced properly.  The religious right wing is afraid this bill will infringe on their religious freedoms such as protesting at gay rallys, etc.  If we can ban together and contact our Congressmen and Congresswomen, this bill may have a chance of passing if the Congress can get a two thirds vote to override Bush's veto.  I already contacted my congressman today and told him to vote for this bill.  All we can do is hope it will pass. 

Shannon   

You are welcome

That was a moving speech. I just can't understand why anyone would be against this bill.  I really can't.

Cindi

It doesn't make sense to me either. AmyT posted some interesting stats in the Activism forum:

"We are the largest victim of hate crimes in the country (1 out of 16 Transgender person will die as a result of a hate crime, more TS die and are victims of hate crimes compared to blacks, jewish people, gays, and all other minority groups COMBINED).  If we do not fall under the need for a protected class, I don't know who does.  We also face the largest rate of employment discrimination and medical discrimination against us is legal."

Outrageous in my opinion. On CNN, Jack Cafferty is asking for viewer commentary on Bush's threatened veto. I just sent mine in and I'm waiting to see what other comments are sent in. The misinformation about the bill being spread by people on the right is maddening.

Rhonda

Rhonda, do you have a URL?  I'd like to vote in on that one!

Thanks

Cindi
Never mind... I found it:

http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/situation.room/

At the risk of being hated for asking this... humour me here...

Why should killing a transsexual (or anyone protected under this bill) carry a harsher sentence than any other murder? I'm not sure I understand the intent behind this?

~Kate~

Quote from: Kate on May 04, 2007, 08:43:47 PM
At the risk of being hated for asking this... humour me here...

Why should killing a transsexual (or anyone protected under this bill) carry a harsher sentence than any other murder? I'm not sure I understand the intent behind this?

~Kate~

I think it is a fair question Kate. Let's not take an extreme case like murder. What happens if you were to be beat up and the local sheriff decides you were at fault, came on to the poor guy or some other pretense to blame the victim. Then you have no recourse. I think with a federal law in place, you could then complain to the FBI and get some unbiased(hopefully) investigation and prosecution.

Rhonda

Yes Rhonda, that's exactly what it is about. In many jurisdictions, the police or courts may not give any credence to our claims concerning a violent crime.  They may just think that we're queer and deserve anything dished out to us. Having this federal law would give us additional recourse.

Cindi

Quote from: rhondabythebay on May 04, 2007, 11:52:05 PM

Quote from: Kate on May 04, 2007, 08:43:47 PM
At the risk of being hated for asking this... humour me here...

Why should killing a transsexual (or anyone protected under this bill) carry a harsher sentence than any other murder? I'm not sure I understand the intent behind this?

~Kate~

I think it is a fair question Kate. Let's not take an extreme case like murder. What happens if you were to be beat up and the local sheriff decides you were at fault, came on to the poor guy or some other pretense to blame the victim. Then you have no recourse. I think with a federal law in place, you could then complain to the FBI and get some unbiased(hopefully) investigation and prosecution.

Rhonda

That is exactly what happened to Brandon Teena (Boys Don't Cry).  When his friends found out he was born natal female, he was assaulted and he reported it to the local sheriff who did nothing.  However Brandon did not have the resource of going to federal authorities and was later killed by his attackers.

Beverly

In a perfect world hate crime legislation would not be needed. I have a problem with the necessity of passing these types of laws but the fact is, that the laws are needed. This bill is wonderful in that it requires a violent act in order for it to be invoked. There is very little that someone can do to use this law other than for what it is intended to do, the ability to bring the feds into a case should the need to arise.

Another side effect is that violent crimes against us may be easier to track and will eventually give us a single source for the stats within the US. We have not had this yet as most of the time we are overlooked, either on accident or on purpose.

Quote from: Cindi Jones on May 03, 2007, 05:36:55 PM
I'm not so sure that the Democratic party is not crippled as well.  It's too bad we can't start over.

Cindi

hmmm...we could  ......ya wanna run with me as my Veep Cindi? 

Quote from: Shannon on May 04, 2007, 11:00:05 AM
The Bush Administration claims there are already enough hate crime laws in the books already    

Maybe the Bush administration shouldn't breed so much hate in the world then.....jus sayin' 

Quote from: Kate on May 04, 2007, 08:43:47 PM
At the risk of being hated for asking this... humour me here...

Why should killing a transsexual (or anyone protected under this bill) carry a harsher sentence than any other murder? I'm not sure I understand the intent behind this?

~Kate~

Kate I think the best analogy for this would be a beaten wife scenario...there was a time a wife could be at deaths door by her husbands hands and no one would do a damn thing about it. The woman could finally get the courage to leave and the husband would stalk her and often continue to beat if not kill her. With the spousal abuse laws and the newish antistalking laws an abused wife has much more power on her side to survie and even prosecute.

Laws that protect or at least pretend to are good things in the end because it gives us precedent and recourse.