ENDA and the coming wave of lawsuits

posted at 11:31 am on June 15, 2013 by Jazz Shaw

Harry Reid has attached himself to yet another media friendly, demographic identity cause this month after signing on as a co-sponsor to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, or ENDA. The proposed legislation, which has been kicked around in Congress for years now, would ban at the Federal level any employment discrimination, “based on sexual orientation or gender identity.” It also gives Reid another super duper chance to hop behind the microphones.

“No one should face discrimination in their workplace based on sexual orientation,” Reid said in a statement to The Huffington Post. “It’s time to make fairness the law of the land. That is why I am co-sponsoring this legislation and I will do everything I can to ensure that it passes the Senate.”

Reid’s announcement makes him the 50th cosponsor of ENDA. He said earlier this week that he expects it to reach the Senate floor “soon.”

This particular bill, as I’m sure most of you could have predicted, has been a reliable lightning rod* and opportunity for the media to line up the bad guys. For the prime example, it’s serving as a convenient target to paste on Marco Rubio.

Rubio on ENDA (the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would protect LGBT people from being fired because of their sexual orientation or gender identity): “By and large I think all Americans should be protected but I’m not for any special protections based on orientation.”

Click through the link to get a taste of the howling protests coming over that assessment.

This legislation appears, at least on the surface, to be a textbook case of another bill which probably will accomplish a lot more in terms of fueling cable news wars than making any substantive change in society. The ostensible goal of the bill is one which, at the root of it, wouldn’t be opposed by very many people, including conservatives. In America, people should be able to compete for a job based on their own abilities and accomplishments and have the opportunity to excel and achieve. It’s the free market in action. Unfortunately, every time the federal government tries to get involved in the process they wind up trampling on the system they’re trying to fix, much like a bull being turned loose in a china shop.

Passing laws which seek to regulate how employers act in hiring and/or retaining employees has proven to be one area where government is least effective in “getting anything done” and most damaging when they invariably miss the target. Even assuming that you do have an employer or manager responsible for hiring and firing who is prejudiced against some particular group, these laws have almost no teeth. If “Sally” is the boss and she doesn’t like purple people, when a job opening comes up and some purple person applies for it, she need only find a reason why some other, non-purple applicant was a better fit for the job. And should a purple person turn up on the payroll, Sally would be foolish indeed to baldly announce that they were fired for their purpleness. She would instead wait a short period until there was some justification for a resource action and then eliminate them based on other stated criteria.

When Uncle Sam takes the next step, mandating that each employer must hire “x” percentage of purple persons to circumvent the preceding scenario, an entire new can of worms is opened. You now have a potentially huge pool of non-purple workers who may have been better qualified and more productive who are now passed over for employment. This results in the all too real, but despised and denied (in liberal circles) phenomenon of reverse discrimination.

But since the laws in question have massive political appeal, they are passed into law anyway and the real winners emerge: the lawyers. Because with the law in place, everyone who doesn’t get hired or is removed for cause of any sort finds themselves with the opportunity to sue the employer under the new rules. Dollars spent in such lawsuits and settlements are dollars not available to expand the payroll and get more workers off the unemployment lines.

No matter how well intended, ENDA has looked like yet another of these political fashion shows from the beginning, and apparently Reid has decided that the time has come to kick off the show. And from a political perspective, it’s pretty much a winner for liberals. Anyone who votes against it can immediately be branded a homophobe and tee up endless loops of commentary on the Sunday morning shows. Meanwhile, even if the bill stagnates, liberal voters supporting the proposal are left wondering… why didn’t Barack Obama do something about it by executive order when he clearly could have?

But that doesn’t make for a very good talk show segment, does it?

EDIT: (Jazz) A lightning rod would be far more suitable than a lightening rod. Though I might be able to use a lightening rod for this sunburn.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Napoleon an obscure Corsican from the working classes…was able to use his genius to rise in the military and eventually take over France and convince the French that they could be the super power Rome was.

Mussolini & Hitler followed Napoleon’s formula.

workingclass artist on June 15, 2013 at 10:04 PM

Before we had the popular name “fascism” to describe things, the charismatic despot leader phenomenon was called “Bonapartism”. In order to give a historical perspective on the fledgling fascism, Mussolini was called a “Bonapartist” and I believe that after his falling out, Trotsky accused Lenin and Stalin’s type of leadership as “Bonapartist” as well.

Axeman on June 17, 2013 at 9:59 AM

Ah, a little more humor. Drunken Scotsman receives a blue ribbon song:

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/06/15/enda-and-the-coming-wave-of-lawsuits/comment-page-3/#comments

SC.Charlie on June 17, 2013 at 10:04 AM

Oops, I goofed with the link…….

Ah, a little more humor. Drunken Scotsman receives a blue ribbon song:

http://www.allerdice.net/Downloads/Scotsman%20Song.mp3

SC.Charlie on June 17, 2013 at 10:06 AM

…99.9% of conversion therapy participants do not experience any change to their sexuality and apologized for the previous Exodus slogan “Change Is Possible”. – From Exodus International Wikipedia SC.Charlie on June 17, 2013 at 9:50 AM

Psychological therapy is a rather new thing. Its effectiveness or lack thereof has nothing to do with Christian morality. Nice try.

Akzed on June 17, 2013 at 10:08 AM

Before we had the popular name “fascism” to describe things, the charismatic despot leader phenomenon was called “Bonapartism”. In order to give a historical perspective on the fledgling fascism, Mussolini was called a “Bonapartist” and I believe that after his falling out, Trotsky accused Lenin and Stalin’s type of leadership as “Bonapartist” as well. – Axeman on June 17, 2013 at 9:59 AM

I have alway thought that if Napoleon had won and united Europe, it would have been a good thing. Instead Europe reverted to its old ways and WWI occurred ………….. then we had the rise of Hitler and World War II. There is nothing good to say about Hitler, absolutely nothing.

SC.Charlie on June 17, 2013 at 10:13 AM

Psychological therapy is a rather new thing. Its effectiveness or lack thereof has nothing to do with Christian morality. Nice try. – Akzed on June 17, 2013 at 10:08 AM

Wrong. It has been around as long, long time.

SC.Charlie on June 17, 2013 at 10:15 AM

Wrong. It has been around as long, long time. SC.Charlie on June 17, 2013 at 10:15 AM

Oh yeah, forgot about Phrenology.

Akzed on June 17, 2013 at 10:20 AM

Akzed, you claim to be hold a seminary degree. Do you have a congregation? And, if so how do you counsel members of your congregation who come to you that are distressed that they have same-sex attraction?

SC.Charlie on June 17, 2013 at 12:20 PM

Current law is sufficient. This is more fodder for grievance-mongers.

hillbillyjim on June 17, 2013 at 12:39 PM

“Current law is sufficient. This is more fodder for grievance-mongers.”

Yep, these types of laws are much more about generating fees for lawyers than about human rights.

tommyboy on June 17, 2013 at 2:04 PM

Akzed, you claim to be hold a seminary degree. Do you have a congregation? And, if so how do you counsel members of your congregation who come to you that are distressed that they have same-sex attraction?
SC.Charlie on June 17, 2013 at 12:20 PM

I do.

I’m retired.

Never had that particular issue to deal with since A.) it affects such a small percentage of the population, and B.) sexually confused folks tend not to be attracted to conservative churches.

If I had I would have advised repentance based on biblical injunctions to holiness, particularly in context of the prohibitions of that sin, just as for someone who was e.g. attracted to a married person, etc.

No matter what the sin however, “God made me this way” is no excuse.

Akzed on June 17, 2013 at 7:23 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4