Civil rights protections for gays in Idaho rejected on party-line vote

BOISE – Idaho lawmakers have killed legislation to provide civil rights protections to gays on a straight party-line vote, with all 13 Republicans on the House State Affairs Committee voting against the bill, and just the panel’s four Democrats backing it. “We have come a long way,” said Rep. Ken Andrus, R-Lava Hot Springs, who made the motion to kill the bill, after three days of intense, emotional testimony. “I think this very hearing has brought us a long, long, way. I wish every employer, I wish every landlord could have heard your stories, and I think they will, through this hearing, I think they will hear your stories.” “Do not despair,” Andrus told backers of the bill who, for a fourth straight day, filled the Capitol’s largest hearing room, the Lincoln Auditorium. “I think we will have legislation. I think because of this hearing and because of things that have happened this week, we will have legislation. Do not despair. Your concerns are legitimate, very legitimate. And people in Idaho, in the Legislature, have heard you and are hearing you.” But he said he doesn’t feel that the bill, HB 2, adequately protects religious freedom. As the committee members cast their votes, one by one, sobs were audible in the audience. In three days with more than 22 hours of public testimony, 190 people testified on the bill, 134 of them in favor of it, 54 opposed, and two neutral. Many told wrenching personal stories of abuse and harassment for being gay or transgender, including stories of being physically attacked, taunted at school, fired from jobs and rejected for housing. Several of the stories shared involved Idahoans who took their own lives as a result.Four of the five North Idaho representatives on the committee voted against the bill; the sole exception was freshman Rep. Paulette Jordan, D-Plummer. She recalled her grandfather’s stories of returning from service in World War II to discrimination, including signs on stores saying “No and no Indians allowed.” Rep. Vito Barbieri, R-Dalton Gardens, said, “There’s no question but the testimony here is heartbreaking. I can’t deny the compassion that is stirred in me listening to these stories, and I certainly feel no animosity to anyone in the LGBT community. There’s no question in my mind that persecution, violence and abuse against the community, or any community, it needs to stop. Criminal behavior needs to stop.” But, he said, “Laws haven’t stopped that behavior. A change of the heart, of each heart, has to happen to stop criminal behavior, and to date throughout mankind that hasn’t happened.” Barbieri said it’s one thing to talk about transgendered Idahoans needing to use public restrooms that are for the gender with which they identify, rather than the one they were assigned at birth. That seems harmless, he said, “unless you’re a predator, and can use the loophole to continue your behavior.” Barbieri said, “You have to recognize that in crime there are predators, and those predators will use anything they can use.” There were grumbles from the audience at his comments. Rep. Kathy Sims, R-Coeur d’Alene, a former Idaho Human Rights commissioner, said, “This has been 21 hours of some very compassionate testimony and I’ve listened to it all. But you know, the time I spent on Idaho’s Human Rights Commission taught me that mediation and compassion can be effective for both sides. I’m sure that eventually the Idaho Human Rights Commission will be chosen to deal with this.” She said, “I know that we can’t ever legislate self-worth. That’s something you build on every day. So I’ll be voting to hold it in committee. But I’m sure that eventually we’ll continue to listen and we’ll continue to work and the Human Rights Commission will deal with this.” Rep. Melissa Wintrow, D-Boise, moved to pass the bill, but her motion failed. “We know that tolerance and inclusion is the way,” she said. “Let it get to the floor for everyone to weigh in. I think our state deserves that.” Rep. Brent Crane, R-Nampa, said, “There is a tension between someone’s rights based on their sexual orientation and gender identity, and another’s rights based on their sincerely held religious beliefs. I do not believe that HB 2 as it’s written will solve that tension.” A visibly moved Rep. Linden Bateman, R-Idaho Falls, said, “From this point on and forever, I will be kinder and I will be more compassionate to those who bear a heavy burden.” While not supporting the bill, he said, “I’d like to go on record that I will support a compromise.” After the meeting, Rep. John Rusche, D-Lewiston, the bill’s lead sponsor, said, “My question is: How do you compromise somebody’s rights?” He said, “If I learned anything from the last four days, it’s that there are incredible fears that are not based in fact, and I think there are some people that are advantaged by inflating the fears. Did we move the ball at all this week? I think so. But that was not the intent, the intent was to get the law passed.”