Civil Rights for GLBT Folks Passes Iowa House

On a bi-partisan 59-37 vote, the Iowa House expanded Iowa’s civil rights law to end discrimination in housing or the workplace based on sexual orientation.

“It is a historic vote,” said House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, a Des Moines Democrat. “I also think it was a mainstream vote. This was not some sort of liberal/social agenda. This is just saying that under housing and employment people should not be discriminated based upon their real or perceived sexual orientation.”

According to a House Democratic press release,”Discrimination in any form is simply wrong.  Whether in the workplace or housing, Iowans should not be discriminated against because of age, race, color, religion or sexual orientation,” said State Representative Beth Wessel-Kroeschell of Ames, who managed the bill. 

Senate File 427 updates Iowa’s Civil Rights Act to prohibit discrimination in employment, public accommodation, housing, education, or credit practices based on age, race, creed, color, sex, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability.

The discussion on various blogs throughout the state over the past few months has focused on what the Iowa Legislature has FAILED to accomplish – rather than the victories.  This bill is truly a victory for progressives and for everyone who would like to call Iowa home.  Leadership in both chambers made this bill a priority throughout the session – and now we can separate ourselves from the 33 other states where it’s OK to dismiss employees because of their real or perceived sexual orientation.

In particular, it was leadership from Democrats in cooperation with Iowa businesses and civil rights leaders who pushed this bill through to final passage.  Corporate America is rapidly realizing that creating a tolerant atmosphere for everyone to work is an important part of growing a business – and a state.  According to an article in Fortune Magazine:

So it’s clear where big business is going. What’s interesting is to watch it pull the rest of the country along. It turns out that the most important factor shaping people’s feelings about gay issues is not their age or even their religion – although those do matter – but whether they have relatives, friends or co-workers who are gay.

“The more out and open people are, the more changed the straight people are all around them,” says Joe Solmonese, the Human Rights Campaign president. HRC began organizing workplaces to secure benefits for gay employees. This has inadvertently become a shrewd political strategy as well. “To move the mindset of the American people, we need to find the places where they congregate,” Solmonese says. “Priority one is corporate America.”

About the Author(s)

Mark Langgin

  • Mark, would you please explain

    Does this bill goes straight to the governor, or does the Senate now need to pass the amended version that passed the House?

    The Register made it sound like it goes to Culver’s desk, but I don’t get how he can sign it if the House and Senate did not pass the same text. The Register reported:

    A compromise plan strikes “appearance, expression, or behavior” from protection related to gender identity. House Democratic leaders accepted the compromise and made the decision to bring up the bill Wednesday not knowing whether it would pass.

    • Getting Signed

      The Senate immediately took up the bill and sent it down to the Governor.  As for your front page post I think that you are mistaking the “frame” that is being engaged in Rep. McCarthy’s statement.

      He is saying a number of things in his comment:

      1.  Civil Rights legislation is mainstream
      2.  He’s making a statement against “wedge” politics
      3.  It’s a “historic vote”

      I don’t understand how you can paint these comments as being embarrased by being part of a “liberal social agenda”.  Yes, there is in fact a liberal social agenda – just as there is a conservative social agenda.  One of the major arguments in my post was that the fact that civil rights had escaped the “liberal” frame and transcended ideology.

      • yes, it is mainstream

        and he could have left it at that in his statement. He was not answering a direct question about whether the bill is part of the liberal agenda.

        I don’t see why he had to go out of his way to say that it is NOT part of a liberal social agenda. The way he said it makes it sound like, “hey, don’t worry, this isn’t one of those liberal things.”

Comments