What the Hell is Wrong with Kasich?

Most of  you Cyrsti's Condo readers know I'm from Ohio but probably fewer of you know the Governor is Republican John Kasich. The good news is at the start of his term in 2010, Gov. John Kasich renewed an executive order to protect gay state workers.  The bad news was he removed language about gender identity.

For the life of me, I can't understand why emotionally.  Why would Kasich on purpose exclude the transgender population of Ohio? At that point, I started to try to redirect my thinking to what politics is really about- behind the scenes power.

It's no real secret in Ohio and probably elsewhere opposition to equal transgender rights in any form comes from the social right which includes a huge entrenched religious base. So I tried to connect the dots between them and Kasich's desire to deny us with basic rights every American should be entitled to.

I don't know of course which group Kasich was catering to on this move. Perhaps it was a last ditch "line in the sand"   deal with right wing social and religious groups-to be compared with someone who will tolerate a transgender person in public until the person wants to use the bathroom. Or maybe some in the statehouse felt an approval by Kasich would set the stage for Ohio employees to fight for more transgender coverage in their insurance plans?

Like I said- no one called me from Columbus. Perhaps another idea could be  Kasich's "responsibility" to other Republicans in the Ohio legislature. What pressure came to bear from them?

On the positive side, the wind of change seems to be blowing in Columbus.  I recently read an article in the Columbus Dispatch detailing some of the changes:


"The 2010 election brought a wave of fresh Republicans to Columbus. And at the start of his term, Gov. John Kasich renewed an executive order to protect gay state workers but removed language about gender identity. “Largely, I think there’s a younger generation of Republicans that may be more open to this,” said Sen. Frank LaRose, R-Copley, who was elected in 2010 and is co-sponsoring the Senate bill.

 There’s also been growing support on the national level, including from U.S. Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio, who made headlines in March when he announced his support for gay marriage. “I think more and more, it’s not a partisan issue,” said state Rep. Nickie Antonio, D-Lakewood, who is co-sponsoring the House bill with Rep. Ross McGregor, R-Springfield. “We have fair-minded people on both sides of the aisle — I know we do.” Eighty of the top 98 employers listed on the JobsOhio website include sexual orientation in their anti-discrimination policies."

So, here we go again:

"After years of trying to outlaw discrimination based on sexual orientation, a bipartisan group of state lawmakers is mustering another attempt. The package is nearly identical to previous efforts and would add a number of anti-discrimination protections, including housing, wages, certain government contracts and mental-health services. A set of bills — one in the House and one in the Senate — are sponsored by two Republicans and two Democrats."

My problem is I don't see "gender orientation" included here.  Plus this final excerpt may be the dot I was trying to connect- explaining in part why we were excluded:

"Small-business advocates are wary of possible side effects. Any time lawmakers expand the discrimination umbrella, owners are vulnerable to costly lawsuits and court cases, said Chris Ferruso, legislative director for National Federation of Independent Business/Ohio. “It creates a new avenue for employers to be sued,” Ferruso said. He said the federation has reviewed the bill but has not officially sided either way."

This business dynamic could be changing too though.  To attract new progressive business to the state requires equal protection under the law for all employees. Showing support from the state level would give Ohio a chance to take another step out of the dark ages- before everyone else does that we are competing with.

As I said, time will tell.  For more of the article in the Dispatch go here.

Home Sweet Home?

I'm from Ohio and I know it is not known as the most progressive state in the country but now we have a chance to join 21 other states and do the right thing.
From WSKU News:

Legislation introduced Friday in the Ohio Senate aims to expand Ohio’s workplace discrimination laws. The Equal Housing and Employment Act adds sexual orientation and gender identity to existing law, which prohibits discrimination based on age, race, religion and disability. The bill’s sponsors include State Sens. Frank LaRose of Akron, a Republican, and Democrat Michael Skindell of Lakewood. Republican Ross McGregor of Springfield and Democrat Nickie Antonio of Lakewood are sponsoring the companion bill in the Ohio House. To date, 21 states and the District of Columbia have enacted similar laws. The Ohio bill contains an exemption for religious organizations, and businesses with fewer than 15 employees. In a recent poll, 79 percent of Ohio voters supported equal rights regardless of sexual orientation.

You did notice the lack of "gender orientation" in that survey though!

Republican Politics

I really try to not be too political here in Cyrsti's Condo but every once in awhile a story comes along to reinforce my idea of why I'm not a Republican. Here's the latest.

Just when they think you aren't paying attention, House Republican leaders quietly unveiled their Violence Against Women Act reauthorization bill on Friday, a proposal that differs from what the Senate passed last week in a handful of ways, namely in its omission of LGBT protections and its modified language targeting Native American victims of domestic abuse. The GOP proposal was posted on the House Rules Committee website with little fanfare, along with an announcement that the committee will begin moving the bill forward in a Tuesday hearing. Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) will sponsor the bill and the House is expected to bring it to a full vote later next week, a House Republican leadership aide confirmed. Here is a link to their 288-page bill and a section-by-section analysis of what's in it. House Republicans are planning to take up the Senate bill, strip its contents and put their language into that bill. A cursory look at the bill reveals some notable changes from the bipartisan VAWA bill that cleared the Senate last week. The House GOP bill entirely leaves out provisions aimed at helping LGBT victims of domestic violence. Specifically, the bill removes "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" from the list of underserved populations who face barriers to accessing victim services, thereby disqualifying LGBT victims from a related grant program. The bill also eliminates a requirement in the Senate bill that programs that receive funding under VAWA provide services regardless of a person's sexual orientation or gender identity. Finally, the bill excludes the LGBT community from the STOP program, the largest VAWA grant program, which gives funds to care providers who work with law enforcement officials to address domestic violence.

 Read more here. Thanks Bobbie!

By The Numbers

From the LA Times:


A new study tracking the percentage of gay and lesbian adults in America has established a first-ever demographic atlas of the group, finding that state populations range from a low of 1.7% of in North Dakota to a high of 10% in the District of Columbia. The study, conducted by Gallup Poll Editor-in-Chief Frank Newport and UCLA scholar Gary J. Gates is the largest population-based survey to include a state-by-state measurement of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender identification. “This is simply new ground -- these are not just new statistics, they are the only estimates we have of these people at the state level,” Gates, a demographer at the Williams Institute at UCLA, which studies sexual orientation, told the Los Angeles Times. “There is no other data out there to verify these numbers, which constitute a significant advancement in our understanding of the LGBT population.” In all, more than 206,000 adult Americans were surveyed for the expansive study, with 41 of the 50 states including polling samples that exceeded 1,000, researchers said. Participants responded to the question, "Do you, personally, identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender?" in surveys conducted between June 1 and Dec. 30, 2012. Only eight states had less than 1,000 completed interviews, including the lowest sample size of 613 in Alaska. Analyzing the state-by-state breakdown, researchers found that while LGBT communities are clearly present nationwide, their visibility is generally higher in states with greater levels of social acceptance and supportive LGBT legal climates.


Of  course there is more and you can go here to read it.

Thanks Bobbie!