Thursday, September 13, 2007

David Scott won't cosponsor ENDA, but he will cosponsor this.

Selections from the bills that David Scott will cosponsor, to give an idea of what's more important to him than cosponsorship of ENDA and ending discrimination in employment on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. He cosponsors bills:

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a deduction for qualified timber gains.

To amend title 40, United States Code, to require restroom gender parity in Federal buildings.

To strengthen the national security through the expansion and improvement of foreign language study, and for other purposes.

To require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins in commemoration of veterans who became disabled for life while serving in the Armed Forces of the United States.

To redesignate the Department of the Navy as the Department of the Navy and Marine Corps.

To authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to provide financial assistance for the construction, improvement, and rehabilitation of farmers markets.

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide tax incentives for small businesses, and for other purposes.

Now, let me say, I don't fault him for cosponsoring any of these; for the most part, they seem fine, and if Congress were to pass any or all of them, I'd be fine with that. But the fact that David Scott is more willing to cosponsor bills that would "allow a deduction for qualified timber gains" and "require restroom gender parity in Federal buildings" than he is to cosponsor a bill that would finally put a well-deserved end to a pernicious form of legal discrimination - well, that's insulting.

But it's what one would expect from a Congressman who would be so petty as to vote to ban Washington, D. C. from using federal funds to implement a domestic partnership registry.