Congressional
Republicans and Democrats will have to bridge a vast cultural divide over an
issue that has nothing to do with bullets and bombs to complete a must-pass
defense policy bill.
A key sticking point
in the negotiations during the upcoming lame-duck session is a House-passed
provision that Senate Democrats say would undercut
protections against
workplace discrimination based on sexual or gender orientation. They've called
the measure dangerous and are demanding it be removed from the $602 billion
measure.
Many House
Republicans, however, view the provision as a bulwark for religious liberty and
just as adamantly want it kept in the final package. Donald Trump's victory in
the presidential election has strengthened their hand should the contentious
debate begin anew next year.
"It's going to
be a tough one for them to figure out," said Justin Johnson, a senior
defense policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.
Drop the amendment and risk a backlash from rank-and-file Republicans, he said.
Keep it in and Democrats could mobilize to block the defense bill, which
authorizes spending for military programs that range from jet fighters to a pay
raise for the troops.
A filibuster carries
risks for Democrats. They could be hammered by the GOP for stymieing
legislation important to U.S. service members and their families. And even if
the provision is dropped to avoid a veto by President Barack Obama, Republicans
— who control both houses of Congress — could wait until Trump is in the White
House and attach the provision to a different bill.
"I think the
election gives congressional Republicans a lot more leverage on this
issue," Johnson said. "They don't have to be too worried about a veto
threat because the situation only improves next year."
Although much of
Trump's agenda on social issues remains opaque, he assured conservatives during
the campaign that he would place a high priority on religious liberty.
The tenure of
Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, the vice president-elect, was punctuated by his
steadfast support for conservative social issues that at times drew unwanted
attention to the state, most notably when a religious objections law he signed
provoked a national backlash from critics who said it could sanction
discrimination against gay people.
David Stacy,
government affairs director at the Human Rights Campaign, acknowledged that the
long-term prospects for barring the amendment from passing are challenging. But
he said he's bullish about the short term. Congress has little incentive to
drag out a lame-duck session and that means passing a defense bill unburdened
by a provision that has no bearing on the Pentagon's core missions, according
to Stacy.
"The blame
could fall either way," said Stacy, suggesting Republicans could be seen
as obstructionists for insisting the amendment be preserved at the expense of
speedy passage of the defense bill.
The provision is
brief and requires any U.S. government office to provide protections and
exemptions "to any religious corporation, religious association, religious
educational institution, or religious society that is a recipient of or
offeror" for a federal contract.
Forty Senate
Democrats plus two independents wrote in a letter last month that the provision
would amount to government-sponsored discrimination by permitting religiously
affiliated federal contractors to refuse to interview a job candidate whose
faith differs from theirs and to fire employees who marry their same-sex
partners or use birth control.
The provision would
"vastly expand religious exemptions" under the Civil Rights Act and
Americans with Disabilities Act to allow contractors "to harm hardworking
Americans who deserve to be protected from workplace discrimination based on
sexual orientation, gender identity, religious identity, or reproductive and
other health care decisions," they said in the letter.
Republicans argued
the measure merely builds on existing law by ensuring that faith-based organizations
that perform work for the U.S. government aren't forced to act against their
beliefs. The measure is known as the Russell amendment, named after its
sponsor, Rep. Steve Russell, R-Okla.
Paradoxically,
opponents of the Russell amendment may find support from Sen. John McCain of
Arizona, the Republican chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee who
plays a central role in determining the contents of the defense policy bill.
The Arizona
legislature passed a religious freedom bill in 2014 designed to give more legal
protections to people who might be accused of discrimination for actions they
took in accordance with religious beliefs. A frequently cited example is a
business that denies service to gay or lesbian customers.
With the state
facing a national backlash from business leaders, including the National
Football League, McCain urged then-Gov. Jan Brewer to veto the legislation. She
did.
"We're hoping
he sees this the same way," said Maggie Garrett, legislative director for
Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
NBCnews
Follow Solenzo Blog on




0 Comments