State House Hearing on Transgender Bill Stirs Controversy

Community members and legislators met at the State House Wednesday, June 8 to discuss a House bill deemed the "Transgender Rights Bill" or the "Bathroom Bill."

Introduced by State Rep. Carl Sciortino, D-Medford, the bill is about gender-based discrimination and hate crimes and was presented before the Joint Committee of the Judiciary.

More than nine hours of testimony from clergy, mothers, lawyers, public officials, public safety officers and other members of the Commonwealth took place. Attorney General Martha Coakley opened the hearing in support of the bill and questioned the constitutionality of opposing it.

Here is the text of House Bill 502. 

Gunner Scott, executive director of the Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition, and a resident of Jamaica Plain, spoke of the trials of transgendered people in day to day life. 

"If we need to fill out a CORI check for employment we have to disclose old names and that will give away our previous gender, and for some, if we have transitioned mid-career, past work references may not know us by the name we use now. A credit check for housing or a loan may turn up our old name or a request to see our school transcripts may also do the same." 

"Prior to my transition, I had civil rights," he added. "Now I don’t, and that just does not seem right.”

Longtime Parkway resident, and candidate for several political offices including last year's 10th Suffolk District State Representative race, Bob Joyce, testified at the hearing. Joyce spoke to Patch after the hearing and offered his feelings on the bill.

"My experience as a lawyer is that whenever there is an ambiguous statute, there will be litigation. I believe Massachusetts' businesses and families are fed up with ambiguity and litigation. I believe that our laws already protect those with gender identity concerns from harassment and criminal acts," said Joyce. "This bill would call upon citizens and business owners to make important, on the spot decisions based upon the vague definition put forth by the act. This act has an extraordinarily broad reach. It would effect all lawful sex-segregated facilities including bathrooms and health clubs, and would require proprietors to allow admission not based on what a patron's gender is, but rather upon what the person feels his gender to be."

State Rep. Shelia C. Harrington, R-Groton, focused her questions on the broad definition of gender identity and expression, and inquired over whether or not men can "just decide they identify as women" and walk into a women's bathroom, posing possible public safety concerns.

This point was made again by Roberto Miranda, pastor of the Lion of Judah Congregation in Roxbury, who said, "You are damned if you do, damned if you don't. If a young man is saying that this is how he expresses his gender identity, then our church could face a lawsuit." 

However, multiple testifiers sought to debunk this argument, particularly one by J.T. Scott, owner of the Crossfit Fenway gym. He said, "I have had no complaints about the transgendered members of my facilities. I am familiar with social anxieties, but they are no basis for the Legislature to stand for equality against all people." 

A major concern for the bill's opposition would be the cost induced by passing 502. Some argued that the law would be costly because of building changes, including changes to lock- and single-stall bathrooms. Other said that schools would have a difficult time dealing with parental complaints. 

Jennifer Levi, director of the Transgender Rights Project for Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders testified against a vague definition before the committee.

“Protections for a person’s gender-related expression – including appearance, behavior and mannerisms – need to be broad because our past experience has shown that sex discrimination and race discrimination protections have sometimes been interpreted narrowly by some courts, not recognizing the relationship between a person’s appearance, behavior, and mannerisms, and that person’s identity. For example, a recent federal appellate court ruled that an employer could fire a female employee for not wearing makeup even though wearing makeup for that person would be distressing and disruptive of that person’s ability to do her job." 

Scott noted that at least $3 million was lost annually to expenditures related to public health insurance programs, as well as other public services spent on transgender people who would not need these services if they could find employment.  

“This is a bill that won’t cost the state a dime, but has the potential to save us millions of dollars annually. The simple truth is that we can’t afford to not pass this bill,” Scott said.

South End resident and community activist Michael Falcone commented after watching the hearing, "This is important for public safety and for so many of my neighbors in the South End, and around the entire city, who are discriminated against every day because of their gender identity. I could not be more thrilled that both our State Rep. Aaron Michlewitz, and (state) Senator Sonia Chang-Diaz have been such strong supporters of the bill as well."

The legislation adds "gender identity or gender expression" to existing civil rights laws such as housing and employment non-disccrimination, as well as our state hate crimes laws. This language and its definition are consistent with the Boston City ordinance, rulings from the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination, and the other 15 states that have nearly identical language.

Gov. Deval Patrick is an outspoken supporter of legal protections of transgendered people and has said that he would sign the bill. It currently awaits the Judiciary Committees report in order for the House or Senate to begin voting procedures.