Connect with us

Tennessee Anti-Gay Law: Alcoa Only National Company To Say “No!”

Published

on

Alcoa can’t wait… to distance themselves from the part an Alcoa representative on the Tennessee Chamber of Commerce played in helping an awful anti-gay bill pass in that state.

In response to AmericaBlog initiated Netroots action, Alcoa has released a statement condemning the law and calling on Governor Bill Haslam of Tennessee to veto it.

“Alcoa provides equal employment opportunity without discrimination and supports state and local legislation protecting the rights of all community members. We do not agree with the chamber on this issue and would ask that the governor veto the bill.”

Alcoa responded 100% to the ask of the petition action, ask the Governor to veto it. The text of the petition:

We demand that you issue an immediate statement withdrawing your support for HB 600/SB 632, and that you tell Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam to veto this bill.

So we can be very grateful to Alcoa for this unequivocal show of support and penance. Alcoa is a publicly traded corporation with nearly 60,000 employees and reported over $21B in revenues in 2010. They produce aluminum. Other companies that control board seats include FedEx, AT&T, Comcast, DuPont, Pfizer, Blue Cross, Blue Shield, Caterpillar, KPMG,Whirlpool, Embraer and United HealthCare.Three others have responded to the petition action, although, less impressively.

The Netroots call to action has put corporate America swiftly on the run to distance their involvement in lobbying for Tennessee’s anti-gay bill, HB600/SB 632, which would strip away local LGBT non-discrimination protection, such as was recently enacted in Nashville, and prohibit it anywhere else in the state of Tennessee. Last week I wrote about the Equal Access to Intrastate Commerce Act. The state law purports to assert the State’s ultimate sovereignty to define anti-discrimination protection only at the state level and enforce uniformity. But, it is really a naked attempt to strip away local and city level ordinances that protect LGBT residents of Tennessee from discrimination. It has passed both houses and awaits the Governor’s signature.

The Tennessee Chamber of Commerce lobbied hard on behalf of the bill and as such, LGBT activists have called their board members and parent companies to do some explaining. Please tell us how stripping LGBT Americans from discrimination protection is good for business?

In just a few short days, this movement is already having a big impact. The petition has gained almost 10,000 signatures, it is here. It must be getting someone’s attention. No less than four of the 13 companies targeted have issued statements of response.

The other companies releasing statements are Nissan here, FedEx here and AT&T here. They are not nearly as forthright as Alcoa’s and contain a fair amount of spin.

The other statements seem more aimed at damage control than, you know, actually helping the LGBT citizens of Tennessee whose civil rights their companies representatives have thrown their weight behind stripping away.

None of the other three call on the Governor to Veto the bill.

FedEx’s statement says:

FedEx did not lobby for SB632/HB600 – it is our policy not to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. While FedEx is a member of the Tennessee Chamber of Commerce, we do not support every position proposed by the Chamber.

This is disingenuous, and bordering on a lie.In fact, FedEx is more than a member, they’re on the board of directors. Which would place them in the position to, ahem, direct the Chamber’s actions. As such they cannot so easily wash their hands of this and say, “We didn’t know what the Chamber was up to!”

Nissan’s statement says:

HB600/SB632 has become more closely associated with eroding civil liberties than fostering a strong business climate and this we do not support.

And AT&T says:

However, the bill has become implicated in efforts to erode the rights of the gay community, which we do not support.

Actually, that was the whole point of the bill, to erode a hard-fought victory in Nashville. And a little due diligence on the parts of these companies before endorsing would have made that quite clear to them.Nissan, AT&T and FedEx seem more concerned about the bill being “perceived” as an attack on gays than making any actual penance or reparations for their company’s role in helping it pass.

And it isn’t just a perception, this bill is very clearly an outright attack on LGBT Americans, designed specifically to strip them of protection from discrimination. It is a direct response to the LGBT community’s hard-fought victory in getting LGBT non-discrimination protection in Nashville, Tennessee. Stripping those discrimination protections away was the impetus and the purpose of the law. And a cursory research before these companies’ proxies endorsed and worked for it would made that very clear.

It was made quite clear by main bill backer Family Action Council’s support for the bill, from their web site:

How will new legislation in Nashville affect family values across Tennessee?

Yes, “family values” because anything that is good for the LGBT is a threat to families. That’s always a given isn’t it? If a McDonald’s manager can’t fire the fry cook for being gay, you’re going to have to let Elton John babysit your son.The primary backer of the bill was the Family Action Council, a group with a very clear Christian right agenda:

Our Mission: To equip Tennesseans and their public officials to effectively promote and defend a culture that values the traditional family, for the sake of the common good.Our Goals: Engaged Citizens … Godly Officials … Strong Families

If Nissan and AT&T are now genuinely surprised this bill became “associated” or “implicated” to be anti-gay, they just weren’t paying attention. And just look at this TV advertisement Family Action Council produced in support of HB600/SB632. You’d have to be blind to miss the anti-gay animus and hateful demagoguery they were inciting to sell this bill to the public:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=7o2YGH8bacE%3Ffs%3D1%26hl%3Den_US

This is the most outrageously homophobic commercial I have ever had the misfortune of viewing. The message is simple: only passing HB600/SB632 can prevent your children from being molested in a public park by the gays. It’s also a tried and true tactic of these hate groups. The soundtrack of blood-curdling screams of the little ones was a particularly classy touch.One thing AT&T and Nissan might consider adding to their vetting process of deciding whether to endorse a piece of legislation, is seeing if it’s a pet project of known Hate Group, identified by The Southern Poverty Law Center. Among the groups sending out Action Alerts of support is The Family Research Council. Family Research Council has been named a Hate Group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, adding them to the ranks of the KKK and Neo-Nazis, and with good reason.

One quote that earned them that spot was in criticizing American Airlines for providing LGBT partner benefits a spokesman, “What are you going to develop next? A pedophilia market?” Equating homosexuality with pedophilia is a constant refrain for these groups, as we see by the advertisement above. There is no scientific basis to suggest gays and lesbians are more or less inclined to molest children than heterosexuals, but the keep banging that drum because it works.

In the future, any group considering endorsing legislation might do well to cross-reference if a Hate Group is also strongly endorsing it (like the Klan or neo-Nazis, who also make SPLC’s lists). If they are, the chances are pretty good it’s not going end up being a bill you’d want your name associated with. And you can save yourself the trouble of walking back your support by issuing statements like this one from Nissan:

However, HB600/SB632 has become more closely associated with eroding civil liberties than fostering a strong business climate and this we do not support.

Nissan, AT&T and FedEx still need to step it up and do as Alcoa has done: Call on the Governor to veto this bill. That is, if they are sincere in their support of LGBT Rights.

Right click to Enlarge.

Here is the original target list of companies, all are Board Members of the Chamber of Commerce, (not mere members as FedEx tried to say they were). Numbers are their Human Rights Campaign score on the Corporate Equality Index rating their gay-friendliness out of 100. Cross-outs indication companies that have tried to explain their company’s involvement thus far.

AT&T: 100
DuPont: 100
Pfizer: 100
KPMG: 100
Whirlpool: 100
Alcoa: 100
Comcast: 95
Blue Cross Blue Shield : 90
Caterpillar: 75
FedEx: 70
Nissan: 50

Interestingly, Pfizer’s Diversity and Inclusion page includes the following quote:

“Pfizer is committed to sustaining and expanding a culture of Diversity and Inclusion in everything we do.”

“Everything” Pfizer? Including having your representatives lobby for a bill that strips LGBTs in Tennessee of discrimination protection? How does that track?When we’re experiencing impact this substantial it means it’s time to double down. That a company the size of Alcoa, with major operations in the state of Tennessee, has called on the Governor to veto the bill is major news. I am optimistic we’ll be seeing this story get national media coverage in the coming days. That four targets have felt the need to respond will provide pressure for the others to explain their representative’s support for this awful and regressive piece of legislation, which the business community cannot have any reasonable explanation to have a stake in.

Please help us send a message to corporate America: “Keep your hands off of LGBT Americans’ Civil Rights.” Please sign the open letter calling on all of these companies to tell the governor to veto the bill. If you have already please, post it on on your Facebook wall, tweet it or email it to a few friends.

Lt Dan Choi helped out last week, tweeting the link and added a timely and humorous aside:

Photobucket

Yes, time is running out! The Governor may sign this bill this week. Thanks to everyone who signed yesterday. Keep up the pressure.

 

Scott Wooledge also writes at Daily Kos under the handle Clarknt67.
Read Scott’s previous post at The New Civil Rights Movement, “142 Gay Veterans Not Worth $2.1 Million To Obama Administration.”

.”

 

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘Hunting Grounds’: Trump Cancels Biden Ban on ICE Arrests at Schools, Churches, Hospitals

Published

12 hours ago

on

January 21, 2025

By

The Trump administration has canceled President Joe Biden’s ban on federal immigration agents arresting suspects inside schools, churches, houses of worship, hospitals, shelters, and at events such as weddings, funerals, and public demonstrations and protests.

“This action empowers the brave men and women in CBP and ICE to enforce our immigration laws and catch criminal aliens— including murders [sic] and rapists—who have illegally come into our country. Criminals will no longer be able to hide in America’s schools and churches to avoid arrest,” an unnamed DHS spokesperson said in a statement Tuesday, posted by CBS News’s Camilo Montoya-Galvez. “The Trump Administration will not tie the hands of our brave law enforcement, and instead trusts them to use common sense.”

“The Biden-Harris Administration abused the humanitarian parole program to indiscriminately allow 1.5 million migrants to enter our country. This was all stopped on day one of the Trump Administration,” the spokesperson alleged. “This action will return the humanitarian parole program to its original purpose of looking at migrants on a case-by-case basis.”

CBS’s Montoya-Galvez also reports that the “new DHS team has also instructed officials to begin the process of phasing out programs that allowed certain immigrants to stay in the U.S. under the immigration parole authority.”

“Pro-immigrant advocates had feared the rescission of the Biden-era rules, warning that it would allow the Trump administration to bring its mass deportations plans to churches and schools,” Montoya-Galvez wrote at CBS News.

READ MORE: Rubio Sidesteps J6 Pardons by Declaring ‘I Work for Donald J. Trump’

CNN calls the move “a departure from long-standing policy to avoid so-called sensitive areas.”

Attorney Krish O’Mara Vignarajah, formerly the Policy Director for First Lady Michelle Obama, responded to the news: “Churches, hospitals, and schools all appear to now be hunting grounds for ICE enforcement operations.”

Immigration law attorney Allen Orr Jr. remarked, “It’s never been about safety or national security. It’s about fear—weaponized to isolate and divide.”

In an interview with Fox Business (video below), Trump’s “border czar” Tom Homan was asked on Tuesday, “If and when ICE went into a school to arrest someone, that would be highly contentious, wouldn’t it?”

Homan quickly turned the hypothetical example from a “school,” which could be an elementary school, to a “college campus.”

“Absolutely. But then again, you know, what’s our national security worth?” he replied. “If we have a national security vulnerability that we know is a national security risk, and we have to walk on a college campus to get him, that’s something we have to do.”

Indeed, various Homeland Security officials prior to Trump’s administration have issued similar bans on arrests in sensitive areas. Among them, John Morton, the Assistant Secretary for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from 2009 to 2013, under President Barack Obama.

In 2021, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas issued a new memo, focused on how “we impact people’s lives and advance our country’s well-being.”

READ MORE: Trump Defends His TikTok Flip Flop: America Has ‘Bigger Problems’ Than Young Kids’ Privacy

Mayorkas wrote, “When we conduct an enforcement action – whether it is an arrest, search, service of a subpoena, or other action – we need to consider many factors, including the location in which we are conducting the action and its impact on other people and broader societal interests. For example, if we take an action at an emergency shelter, it is possible that noncitizens, including children, will be hesitant to visit the shelter and receive needed food and water, urgent medical attention, or other humanitarian care.”

“To the fullest extent possible, we should not take an enforcement action in or near a location that would restrain people’s access to essential services or engagement in essential activities. Such a location is referred to as a ‘protected area.’ This principle is fundamental. We can accomplish our enforcement mission without denying or limiting individuals’ access to needed medical care, children access to their schools, the displaced access to food and shelter, people of faith access to their places of worship, and more. Adherence to this principle is one bedrock of our stature as public servants.”

Mayorkas had expanded the list of “protected” or “sensitive” areas to include doctor’s offices, vaccination or testing sites, playgrounds, recreation centers, foster care facilities, and school bus stops, to name a few.

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: Cannon Blocks Classified Docs Report as Trump Targets Ex-Officials Over ‘Sensitive’ Info

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

Rubio Sidesteps J6 Pardons by Declaring ‘I Work for Donald J. Trump’

Published

15 hours ago

on

January 21, 2025

By

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio refused to comment on President Donald Trump’s pardons and commutations of more than 1500 people convicted of crimes surrounding the January 6 assault on the U.S. Capitol, including the insurrection — despite having denounced the attack in strong terms four years ago.

In three separate interviews on Tuesday — on ABC News, CBS News, and NBC News — when presented with his comments about the 2021 attack, Rubio declared that he would not discuss domestic issues because he is now Secretary of State.

CBS News’ Gayle King told Secretary Rubio, “in February 2021, even you issued a statement and you said the images of the attack stirred up anger in you, the nation was embarrassed in the eyes of the world by our own citizens.”

“How do you personally reconcile those feelings with the pardons that he did yesterday?” she asked. “I understand you have work to do in the job is hard for many things, but on this particular issue, I’m curious about what you’re thinking.”

“Yeah, well, what I’m thinking is that I used to be a United States senator until midnight last night, and now I’m going about to be sworn in as the Secretary of State of the United States,” Rubio curtly replied. “And that’s what I’m thinking is I work for Donald J. Trump, the new president of United States, the 47th president who has a clear mandate to reorient our foreign policy to one that once again puts America and our interests at the center. And that’s what I’m gonna focus on. A hundred percent.”

READ MORE: Trump Defends His TikTok Flip Flop: America Has ‘Bigger Problems’ Than Young Kids’ Privacy

In an interview with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos, Rubio would not budge, even when faced with more of his own comments from 2021.

“You called it a national embarrassment, saying we now have third world countries that are lecturing us and we have tinpot dictators that are mocking us,” Stephanopoulos told him. “Of course, you’re now America’s top diplomat. You’ll be speaking with your counterparts around the world. What message does that pardon send to them?”

“Well, I don’t anticipate a single one of our partners will ask about it, obviously, and you know this well, from your time in the [Clinton] administration and my job is to focus on the foreign policy of the United States,” Rubio continued. “I have a different job this morning and a different focus. And it’s one that demands 100% of our attention, and so that’s what I’ll be focused on and won’t be opining on domestic matters at this point, because, frankly, my focus needs to be 100% on how I interact with our, you know, counterparts, our adversaries, our potential enemies around the world to keep this country safe to make it prosperous.”

“That’s the clear mandate from the president,” he added. “It’s what he campaigned on.”

“But as a senator,” Stephanopoulos pressed, “you did say that it affected our standing in the world. Don’t believe that anymore?”

“Well,” Rubio, seemingly somewhat irritated, replied, “as a senator, I had an opinion all kinds of domestic matters, but now I’m focused singularly on foreign policy, on how I interact with our allies.”

President Trump’s pardons of the convicted January 6 attackers, including nearly 90 who committed acts of violence, even against law enforcement officers, were also the subject of Rubio’s interview with NBC News’ Craig Melvin on Tuesday.

According to Fox News, Melvin played video of Rubio saying in 2021, “Vladimir Putin loved everything that happened here today because what happened is better than anything he could have ever come up with to make us look like we’re falling apart.”

Melvin then “asked Rubio what message the pardons send to the rest of the world,” Fox reported.

But Rubio declared that he “would not ‘engage in domestic political debates’ with the media and could not in his role as the head of the State Department.”

READ MORE: Cannon Blocks Classified Docs Report as Trump Targets Ex-Officials Over ‘Sensitive’ Info

“I hope you guys all understand that my days – at least in the time at the Department of State – of engaging in domestic politics will be put aside as I focus on the affairs the United States has around the world and the engagements we have to have to make our country a safer, stronger, more prosperous place,” he said, after refusing to respond.

When pressed again, Rubio apparently expressed frustration.

“I think it’s unfortunate, you know, our first engagement as I agree to come on this morning with you. I’m going to be working on foreign policy issues, and you want to revisit these issues that are going on in domestic politics. I’m just – it’s not going to happen,” Rubio said. “If you have questions for me about foreign policy and engaging in the world, I’d be happy to talk to you about those.”

Watch the videos below or at this link.

READ MORE: Skipping Hand on Bible, Trump Declares ‘We Will Not Forget Our God’ at Inauguration

Image via Reuters

 

Continue Reading

News

Trump Defends His TikTok Flip Flop: America Has ‘Bigger Problems’ Than Young Kids’ Privacy

Published

17 hours ago

on

January 21, 2025

By

President Donald Trump has taken varied stances on TikTok, the wildly popular social media app that experts — including members of Congress and the FBI — warn poses risks to U.S. national security and raises significant privacy concerns for American users. Now, Trump is now disregarding those issues and leveraging his presidential authority to intervene in favor of the Chinese-owned platform, which, under federal law, was to be sold to a U.S. company or banned in the United States by January 19.

“Every rich person has called me about TikTok,” Trump declared to reporters Monday evening, highlighting his newfound relationships with tech billionaires, some of whom were noticeably on stage near him during the inauguration.

About a dozen countries, including the U.S., have banned, fined, or restricted the use of TikTok in various ways, including by children or on government devices, according to a Washington Post report.

Calling it a “national emergency,” Trump in 2020, during his first term as president, signed an executive order aiming to ban TikTok, citing a wide range of issues, including “information and communications technology and services supply chain.”

READ MORE: Cannon Blocks Classified Docs Report as Trump Targets Ex-Officials Over ‘Sensitive’ Info

“Specifically, the spread in the United States of mobile applications developed and owned by companies in the People’s Republic of China (China) continues to threaten the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States. At this time, action must be taken to address the threat posed by one mobile application in particular, TikTok,” his executive order read.

“TikTok automatically captures vast swaths of information from its users, including Internet and other network activity information such as location data and browsing and search histories,” the order stated. “This data collection threatens to allow the Chinese Communist Party access to Americans’ personal and proprietary information — potentially allowing China to track the locations of Federal employees and contractors, build dossiers of personal information for blackmail, and conduct corporate espionage.”

Trump’s order also cited the risk of censorship by the Chinese Communist Party, and said the app “may also be used for disinformation campaigns that benefit the Chinese Communist Party, such as when TikTok videos spread debunked conspiracy theories about the origins of the 2019 Novel Coronavirus.”

Now, Trump is dismissing all those privacy and national security concerns, going so far as to apparently minimize concerns raised about how TikTok reportedly affects children.

In October, NPR reported that “internal TikTok communications have been made public that show a company unconcerned with the harms the app poses for American teenagers. This is despite its own research validating many child safety concerns.”

“As TikTok’s 170 million U.S. users can attest, the platform’s hyper-personalized algorithm can be so engaging it becomes difficult to close the app. TikTok determined the precise amount of viewing it takes for someone to form a habit: 260 videos. After that, according to state investigators, a user ‘is likely to become addicted to the platform.'”

According to NPR, 14 state attorneys general conducted an investigation into TikTok, spanning more than two years.

Investigators in Kentucky wrote that while 260 videos “may seem substantial, TikTok videos can be as short as 8 seconds and are played for viewers in rapid-fire succession, automatically.”

READ MORE: Skipping Hand on Bible, Trump Declares ‘We Will Not Forget Our God’ at Inauguration

“Thus, in under 35 minutes, an average user is likely to become addicted to the platform,” they alleged.

NPR also reported that “TikTok’s own research states that ‘compulsive usage correlates with a slew of negative mental health effects like loss of analytical skills, memory formation, contextual thinking, conversational depth, empathy, and increased anxiety,’ according to the suit.”

“In addition, the documents show that TikTok was aware that ‘compulsive usage also interferes with essential personal responsibilities like sufficient sleep, work/school responsibilities, and connecting with loved ones.'”

Those concerns did not appear to be on display Monday during Trump’s inauguration.

“TikTok’s CEO Shou Zi Chew was seated next to Tulsi Gabbard, President Trump’s nominee to be the director of national intelligence, at the Capitol as Trump was sworn-in,” The Wall Street Journal reported, noting that “the seating of Chew and Gabbard together comes as TikTok is under scrutiny for national security concerns.”

Later on Monday, reporters asked Trump why he flipped his position on TikTok and now supports it.

“Because I’ve got to use it. And remember, TikTok is largely about kids, young kids.”

“If China’s gonna get information about young kids, I don’t know,” he said appearing to shrug off the implications. “I think to be honest with you, I think we have bigger problems than that.”

“But, you know, when you take a look at telephones that are made in China and all the other things that are made in China, military equipment made in China. TikTok, I think TikTok is not their biggest problem.”

Trump went on to make the case for why he says the federal government should own half of TikTok.

“But there’s big value in TikTok if it gets approved. If it doesn’t get approved, there’s no value. So if we create that value, why aren’t we entitled to like half?”

The Washington Post’s Aaron Blake, responding to Trump’s remarks, noted, “Members of the House Energy and Commerce committee saw the intelligence on this and quickly voted 50-0 in favor of the ban.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: Trump Expected to Target Citizenship of Children With Undocumented Parents

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.