It was the best of times, and it was the worst of times. One week Gov. Rod Blagojevich and Senate leader Emil Jones stood united behind passing a state gay-rights bill. But last week, with not enough committed votes, Jones refused to allow a vote on SB 101, which would add GLBTs to protected groups in the state's Human Rights Act.
A community meeting will be held in December with some of the lead lobbyists for the bill, including Equality Illinois, the local National Organization for Women, the American Civil Liberties Union, and Sen. Carol Ronen, along with other elected officials. The focus will be discussion of the next steps in passing statewide GLBT protections. The original date of Dec. 2 has been postponed.
The earliest a bill can now move forward will be early next year.
Equality Illinois Political Director Rick Garcia held nothing back when speaking with the media about what happened in Springfield. He told Sun-Times columnist Mark Brown that 'The Democrats have always promised us this. ... At least the Republicans don't lie. The Republicans don't come into our community and pick our pockets and lie to us.'
While Garcia said he likes Emil Jones, he believes the Democratic leader is not standing up strongly enough to his Democratic leadership team, which includes several conservatives who oppose SB 101.
SB 101 had a chance to be reignited in this fall veto session, and the governor said it was part of his three-point plan for the fall. But many GLBT activists now question whether he ever wanted this bill to land on his desk—was the public statement a smokescreen? After all, the Democrats control the House, Senate and governor's mansion, and they have managed to get some bills through very quickly. Was a civil-rights bill simply not worth wasting political chips on?
'The Democratic leadership did not want this bill to come out,' Garcia told Windy City Times as he returned from Springfield last week. 'I am not talking about the good leadership—I am talking about the white ethnic [block]—Vince Demuzio, Louis Viverito ... . They don't want the party to be perceived as concerned only about 'Blacks, Mexicans, gays and the City of Chicago.' People have said these things—internally—in leadership meetings—that the party is perceived as too liberal.'
Garcia said he does believe there was a 'genuine push from the governor's office,' with staff working on the bill. 'The governor did what the governor could do—he does not have a good relationship with many members of the Senate. ... He could have played chips—[as could] Emil Jones ... . Both the governor and Emil could do much more. The governor, the president of the Senate and the speaker of the House all are on record as supporting this, some stronger than others. If those three can get the SBC bill passed, why can't they get a civil-rights bill passed? I don't think any of them were willing to cash in a chip for any of this.'
The fact that Jones did not allow an actual vote also means voters do not have a chance to know who is truly supportive of the bill, or those who are hedging their bets. 'I am very disappointed he would not let it up for a vote,' Garcia said.
When a new bill is introduced in January, Garcia said he believes it will be a stronger and clearer one, based more on the California model, still inclusive of transgendered individuals.
'We've had many of these conversations on Highway 55 as I drive back from Springfield,' Garcia said. 'After a holdup or defeat, many times I have been disheartened, sad, depressed. Right now I am just pissed off. I am especially pissed off because these are people who have told us, 'we are your people, get us in and it's going to happen.' I remember before last year's election ... at a small cocktail party, Emil Jones said 'one of the first things we are going to do when we get to Springfield is pass this bill.' It didn't have to be first, but it could have been 10th or 100th. Another reason I am not disheartened, is that we took off the gloves the other day in talking to Mark Brown [of the Sun-Times]. We made it very clear to [Jones] that we want this to come up and we've only just begun to show our displeasure and push for it.
'It encourages me, the number of calls and e-mails I have received because of the Brown article—from people in our community, saying it's about time, Rick, draw the line in the sand. This is from all over the state. 'Don't let them a lie to us, then roll over and play dead. And don't cover for them.' Viverito, Demuzio, [George] Shadid and other Dems, Edward Maloney and William Haine ... did not want this bill to come up. They didn't want to vote on it—and Emil caved into those anti-gay elements ... . That is very, very sad for a Democrat to do that—leadership means standing up for what is right. It is extremely painful to go after Emil, I adore him. But he let us down."
As lobbying was occurring in Springfield, Chicago activist George Cheslock planned a march in Andersonville. Just eight people showed up for the Nov. 19 protest, according to Cheslock.
"We held up our posters and candles in front of the windows of every gay or gay-friendly establishment," he said. "We were able to get some bystanders to take flyers, a couple came out to get a flyer, but only one person joined us."
----------------------------------------
----------------------------------------