Norton to Manage Floor Debate, Releases Floor Remarks Opposing Resolution to Overturn D.C. Anti-Discrimination Law, Tonight at 9 P.M.

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The office of Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) announced that House floor debate on a resolution to overturn a District of Columbia anti-discrimination law, which Norton will manage for House Democrats, will begin tonight at approximately 9:00 p.m. Following debate, the House will vote on the resolution. The D.C. Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Act prohibits employers from discriminating against employees, their spouses or their dependents based on constitutionally protected reproductive health decisions.

Norton said that it is probably no coincidence the disapproval resolution is the last bill on the floor tonight, and that Republicans were so conflicted about this war-on-women resolution that overturns a local law, they decided only yesterday to bring it to the floor. Norton has received tremendous support from the Obama Administration, which issued a veto threat on the resolution, House Democratic leadership and the many Democrats who spoke earlier today on the rule for the resolution, including Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). Norton said she is also grateful to the coalition of 50 national and local organizations that has been alerting their members in the states about how Members of Congress stand on this unprecedented resolution, including NARAL Pro-Choice America and Planned Parenthood Federation of America, which have added the vote on the resolution to their annual scorecard on how Members voted on key bills, a rare move.

Norton's floor remarks, as prepared for delivery, follow:

Floor Statement of Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton

H.J.Res. 43, Disapproving the action of the District of Columbia Council in approving the Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act of 2014

April 30, 2015

Resentment does not begin to relate our response to this unprecedented disapproval resolution. Republicans have their usual war on women, but this time, they added men in the District of Columbia for good measure. This resolution is wildly undemocratic, is in violation of the nation's founding principle of local control of local affairs, and is profoundly offensive to D.C. residents. This resolution uniquely targets my district, but every Member will get to vote on it except for me, D.C.'s elected representative.

Notwithstanding its late-night consideration, Democrats will make sure Americans understand this inflammatory resolution. For the first time ever, the House is voting to license employers to discriminate against employees for their private, constitutionally protected reproductive health decisions. And for the first time in a quarter of a century, the House is voting to overturn the law of a local jurisdiction.

The D.C. bill stops employers from job discrimination based on the reproductive health decisions of employees, their spouses or their dependents. To name just some of the "horribles" permitted by this resolution, employers may fire a woman for having an abortion due to rape, fire a man for using condoms, reduce the salary of a parent for buying birth control for his or her child, and decline to hire a woman for using in vitro fertilization.

The D.C. bill is constitutional and legal. Under the U.S. Constitution, laws may limit religious exercise if they are neutral, generally applicable and rationally related to a legitimate governmental interest. The D.C. bill applies to all employers, does not target religion and promotes workplace equality. Under the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, laws may substantially burden religious exercise if they further a compelling governmental interest in the least restrictive means. D.C. has a compelling interest in eliminating discrimination, and the bill is the least restrictive means to do so.

The D.C. bill certainly protects religious liberty. The bill is subject to constitutional and statutory exceptions to discrimination laws. The narrow constitutional ministerial exception allows religious organizations to make employment decisions for ministers and ministerial employees for any reason whatsoever. The exception in Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which I enforced as chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, permits religious organizations to make employment decisions based on religion. D.C. law permits religious and political organizations to make employment decisions based on religion and political views. As such, employers in D.C. may continue to make employment decisions based on their religious and other beliefs, and employees must be willing to carry out employers' missions and directives.

The D.C. bill does not require employers to provide health insurance. Instead, it requires equal treatment of employees. Both the text and the legislative history of the D.C. bill make that clear. Nevertheless, Members of Congress expressed concerns, so the D.C. government, in order to eliminate any doubt, passed a new version of the bill that says, "This act shall not be construed to require an employer to provide insurance coverage related to a reproductive health decision." This provision is in effect now, but under the Home Rule Act, a D.C. bill is not final until the end of the congressional review period. How absurd is that?

The disapproval resolution is a deliberate abuse of congressional authority over the District. In 1973, Congress passed the Home Rule Act to give D.C. the authority to legislate on local matters, with a few enumerated exceptions, and to "relieve Congress of the burden of legislating upon essentially local District matters." D.C. employment and reproductive health laws are not among those exceptions. I ask my Republican colleagues to live up to their recently passed fiscal year 2016 budget, which calls for the federal government to let states and cities govern their own affairs: "America is a diverse nation. Our cities, states and local communities are best equipped and naturally inclined to develop solutions that will serve their populations. But far too often, local leaders are limited by numerous federal dictates." I ask the majority to live up to its professed principles of local control of local affairs, federalism and limited government.

I urge Members to vote no on the disapproval resolution to protect employees' reproductive health decisions, workplace equality and D.C.'s right to self-government. I ask unanimous consent to insert in the Record the President's veto threat on the resolution.