- Daily Photo: Obama Jokes Around at G-20
- Blackwater gets replaced in Iraq
- Daily Photo: U.S. Marines Look Out for Taliban in Afghanistan
- Hillary Clinton the Tomboy and Her "Ah-Ha" Moment
- Obama Administration Sudan Envoy Headed to Region
- Daily Photo: Potential Flashpoint in Iraq
- Clinton Says New Afghanistan-Pakistan Plan Depends on Diplomacy
- Exclusive: Three Israeli Airstrikes Against Sudan
- Additional 4,000 Troops to Be Ordered to Afghanistan
- Daily Photo: Navy Submarine Trains in the Arctic
- Alarm Over North Korea Missile Prep
- Anti-Terror Stimulus? US Offers Rewards for Top Terrorists
- Daily Photo: Pakistani Women in Refugee Camp
- Condoleezza Rice Appears on "The Tonight Show"
- Diplomat and Aid Group Sound the Alarm on Darfur Camp Situation
- auto industry rescue
- Ballotwatch
- Biden, Joe
- Bush, George W.
- Clinton, Bill
- Clinton, Hillary
- Dodd, Chris
- Edwards, John
- Giuliani, Rudy
- Gravel, Mike
- Huckabee, Mike
- Hunter, Duncan
- Inauguration
- Iraq
- Kucinich, Dennis
- McCain, John
- Obama, Barack
- Palin, Sarah
- Paul, Ron
- Romney, Mitt
- Tancredo, Tom
- Thompson, Fred
- Veepstakes
- Vote 2008: Democrats
- Vote 2008: Republicans
- Washington
- White House
« Previous | Main | Next »
Romney Draws Fire for Shift on Gay Rights
Email
ShareApril 23, 2007 6:29 PM
ABC News' Teddy Davis Reports: Mitt Romney's shifting stance on gay rights drew fire Monday from the president of the Log Cabin Republicans in advance of Tuesday's re-introduction of the Employee Non-Discrimination Act -- gay rights legislation whose main provisions Romney once supported but no longer does.
"Gov. Romney has some explaining to do about why he suddenly and dramatically changed his position on this issue," Patrick Sammon, the president of the Log Cabin Republicans, tells ABC News. "It really raises the question about whether you can trust Mitt Romney. Whether the issue is guns, gays, abortion, or other issues, his views seem to be constantly shifting and changing."
When he challenged Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., in 1994, Romney endorsed Rep. Barney Frank's, D-Mass., Employee Non-Discrimination Act which would have prohibited employers from making decisions about hiring, firing, promoting, or compensation based on sexual orientation.
In February, Romney explained his shifting stance on the Employee Non-Discrimination Act by telling National Journal's Marc Ambinder: "I do not support creating a special law or a special status. I've learned through my experience over the last decade that when you single out a particular population group for special status, it opens the door to a whole series of lawsuits, many of them frivolous and very burdensome to our employment community, and so I do not favor of specific law of that nature. What I do favor is people doing what I did, or what I tried to do, and not discriminate against people who are gay."
Sammon responded to Romney's comments to National Journal by asking: "If the Employee Non-Discrimination Act is such a bad idea, then why didn’t he introduce legislation to repeal the state' non-discrimination protection?"
"His rationale for explaining the flip-flop doesn't make any sense," Sammon said in his interview with ABC News.
A Romney campaign spokesperson did not have an immediate response to Sammon.
The new version of ENDA, which will be discussed at a Tuesday press conference by Frank along with Reps. Deborah Pryce, R-Ohio, Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., and Chris Shays, R-Conn., seeks to protect employees from discrimination not only on the basis of sexual orientation but also on the basis of "gender identity" (i.e., it extends legal protections to transgender people as well as gays and lesbians).
The version of ENDA being introduced this year provides that preferential treatment and quotas are strictly prohibited, and that lawsuits cannot be based on statistics about the sexual orientation or gender identity of employees, according to a supporter of the legislation. It also exempts members of the Armed Forces as well as veterans' and religious organizations. The proposed legislation does not require employers to provide benefits to domestic partners.
April 23, 2007 in Thompson, Fred | Permalink | User Comments (4)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
What's Romney going to change his position about next--that he is now a Christian and no longer a Mormon?
Posted by: Bill Smythe | Apr 23, 2007 10:12:08 PM
This article is completely slanted. It excuses its obvious anti-Romney intent with a brief explanation by Romney. However, this response is provided an immediate rebuttle and Romney is left without without another response, leaving him appearing like he has no good explanation: a cheap shot.
Posted by: Craig Estep | Apr 24, 2007 3:24:19 AM
Mr. Estep:
Just because you don't like the fact that Romney has opened himself up to valid criticism doesnt mean that the article is "slanted." When people flip-flop like Romney has on this issue in order to gain political points with their political party, they should be criticized. Romney has for years claimed to have deeply held beliefs that he now is abandoning in order to compete for a different office. If you don't want to see him criticized, I suggest you stick to FOX news.
Posted by: nelson boyle | Apr 24, 2007 9:44:52 AM
What an absurdly biased hit-piece. The gay groups want Rudy to win so are going after Romney for being pro-family and against gay marriage. Romney never voted for ENDA, he merely advocated tolerance in his 1994 run; ENDA is a bad idea, another 'welfare for lawyers' bill that is not needed at all. Romney has been consistent - against discrimination, but also against activist courts engaged in social engineering. ENDA would give them another tool to do that, so lets not go there.
As for:
"If the Employee Non-Discrimination Act is such a bad idea, then why didn’t he introduce legislation to repeal the state' non-discrimination protection?"
Mass. has an overwhelmingly liberal Democrat legislature, it wouldnt pass anyway.
Posted by: PJ | Nov 3, 2007 10:49:45 PM
Post a comment
