A gut-check for the NCAA and others.

I just read the new North Carolina “bathroom” bill, HB 142.  HB 142 purports to repeal the infamous HB 2.  The text is contained in this from CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/30/politics/north-carolina-hb2-agreement/

I was hoping that the statements by LGBT advocates were hyperbole, that maybe the repeal did advance the ball on LGBT rights, at least to some worthwhile degree.  But, sadly, the advocates are absolutely right. 

It is true that the original HB 2 not only barred localities from enacting protections for LGBT people, but also barred localities from setting a local minimum wage, regulating child labor, or making certain regulations for city workers.  And today’s repeal of HB2 does repeal those provisions.  But the only thing it does with respect to LGBT protections is to leave the status quo as it is – except that the prohibition on local ordinances protecting LGBT people is no longer permanent, but expires in December 2020, during which time the state legislature retains control of decisions as to restroom use. 

So the only difference between HB 2 and HB 142 is that under the HB 142, the bar on local ordinances expires in about three years.  For the next three years, the “lawful” discrimination against LGBT people continues, even if the local elected officials and populations do not want it to continue.  And, of course, the gerrymandered North Carolina state legislature could simply continue that state of affairs upon expiration of HB 142.  This change, then, is no change.  How is this progress, that would warrant the NCAA and the other organizations that have boycotted North Carolina because of the anti-LGBT impact of HB 2 to change course?  It is not progress, and the boycotts should continue. HB 142 is nothing more than a transparent fig leaf.  Or to put it more bluntly in the current colloquial language, to say it remedies the ills recognized by the NCAA, et al. would be “fake news.”

This is a gut-check for the NCAA and the other boycotting organizations.  Will they pretend that something has changed and go back to business as usual? Or will they continue to stand on principal.

Recap and Resources: Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Matters in the Montgomery County Public Schools

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Matters in the Montgomery County Public Schools

            Believe it or not, fifteen years ago MCPS pretended that everyone was straight. Teachers were forbidden from even mentioning sexual orientation or gender identity. But in 2002, that began to change, and, even though some forces tried to prevent progress, now MCPS enables full discussion of these matters in its secondary school health education classes.  See here and

here and here.

            Beginning in the 2014-15 school year, health education teachers develop their own curricula, based, in part, on guidance from the American Psychological Association.  See here and here.  Discrimination against LGBT students has been prohibited for many years, but that policy took on new strength in 2015, when MCPS specifically informed principals of new guidelines regarding gender identity matters.  These guidelines were strengthened and published in August 2016. See here [UPDATE:  The most recent iteration of the guidelines, updated and strenghthened in September 2019, may be found here.]

            In May 2016, the Obama Administration issued similar guidelines to public schools throughout the United States.   But in February 22, 2017, the Trump Administration withdrew the Obama Administration guidelines.  The very next day, MCPS issued a statement reaffirming its commitment to its existing non-discrimination policies.  And on March 2, 2017, MCPS filed an amicus curiae brief in the United States Supreme Court supporting Gavin Grimm, a transgender high school student in Virginia who had been denied the right to use the male restroom. 

            This history is important for families in Montgomery County, so that they know that, regardless of what may come from the current federal administration, the rights of LGBT students are respected in the Montgomery County Public Schools. 

Below, for reference, are pertinent blogs and MCPS and State of Maryland documents. 

Relevant recent blogs and documents

December 4, 2016

Life Goes On:  Advocacy for LGBTQ Youth

http://davidfishback.blogspot.com/2016/12/life-goes-on-advocacy-for-lgbtq-youth.html

January 12, 2017

“We are enraged, but engaged”

http://davidfishback.blogspot.com/2017/01/we-are-enraged-but-engaged-views-from.html

February 22, 2017

Transgender Students in Montgomery County: Your rights in MCPS have not changed.

http://davidfishback.blogspot.com/2017/02/transgender-students-in-montgomery.html

Feb. 23, 2017

MCPS Statement on Trump Administration's Decision to Rescind Federal Protections for Transgender Students

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/press/index.aspx?pagetype=showrelease&id=5026&type=&startYear=&pageNumber=&mode and

http://patch.com/maryland/northpotomac/s/g1jzq/transgender-bathroom-access-wont-change-in-montgomery-county-schools?utm_source=alert-breakingnews&utm_medium=email&utm_term=schools&utm_campaign=alert

March 2, 2017

MCPS amicus brief in the Gavin Grimm case: 
https://www.aclu.org/legal-document/gloucester-county-school-board-v-gg-montgomery-county-public-schools

MCPS POLICIES AND REGULATIONS

Guidelines Regarding Student Gender Identity Matters (originally issued July 2015, revised August 2016)

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/departments/studentservices/gender-identity-matters.pdf 
NOTE:  Guidelines as updated Sept. 2018
https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/departments/studentservices/mentalhealth/Guidelines%20for%20Students%20-%20Gender%20Identity%202018-2019.pdf 

Employee Code of Conduct, 2016-17

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/staff/Refresh_2013_Content_Pieces/0047_17_EmployeeCodeofConduct_BOOKLET_ENG_web.pdf  (see page 6)

A Student’s Guide to Rights and Responsibilities, 2016-17

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/students/rights/StudentRightsResponsibilities-English.pdf  (see third unnumbered page and page 9)

MCPS Regulation JFA-RA (Student Rights and Responsibilities) (last revised September 2016)

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/jfara.pdf (see pages 1 and 2)

MCPS Regulation RGT-RA (User Responsibilities for Computer Systems,

Electronic Information, and Network Security) (last revised July 2012)

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/igtra.pdf (see page 2)

MCPS Regulation JHF-RA (Bullying, Harassment, or Intimidation) (last revised February 2017)

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/jhfra.pdf (see pages 1 and 2)

MCPS Form 230-35 (Bullying, Harassment, or Intimidation Reporting Form)

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/forms/pdf/230-35.pdf

(This form is also available in Spanish, French, Vietnamese, Korean, Chinese and Amharic: http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/forms/detail.aspx?formID=40&formNumber=230-35&catID=1&subCatId=44)

MARYLAND STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION GUIDELINES (October 2015)

PROVIDING SAFE SPACES FOR TRANSGENDER AND GENDER NON-CONFORMING YOUTH: GUIDELINES FOR GENDER IDENTITY NON-DISCRIMINATION: A guide to laws, regulations, and best practices for use in schools.

http://marylandpublicschools.org/about/Documents/DSFSS/SSSP/ProvidingSafeSpacesTransgendergenderNonConformingYouth012016.pdf

This Day in The Collaboration: The Defiling of the General Services Administration

This Day in The Collaboration

Yesterday, a contracting officer for the General Services Administration (GSA) sent a letter to Donald Trump, Jr., informing the Trump Organization that the lease for the Trump Hotel in the Old Post Office Building between the United States Government and the Trumps is still valid, notwithstanding the provision in the lease that unambiguously states that "no . . . elected official of the Government of the United States . . . shall be admitted to any share or part of this lease, or to any benefit that might arise therefrom."

Some  Background.

Shortly after the November 2016 election, procurement experts Daniel Gordon and Steven Schooner explained in The Washington Post  that Trump would have to give up the lease, because, as an elected official, he was barred from involvement or benefit in the arrangement. The lease provision was important, particularly if the “elected official” is President of the United States.  Any special interest seeking something from the Administration has every incentive to patronize the hotel. That is why the lease bars elected officials from having an interest in it.

Trump Response

The Trumps tried to find a way around the plain language of the lease.  But, as shown below, the arrangements they proposed were nothing more than deferred compensation for President Trump.  So every special interest seeking something from the Administration still has every incentive to patronize the hotel – and, indeed, many are doing so. Nevertheless, GSA Contracting Officer Kevin Terry has now accepted the arrangements.

So Many Outrages, So Little Front Page Space

The GSA letter was released the same week that President Trump's lies about President Barack Obama were definitively exposed, that the FBI revealed that President Trump's campaign is under investigation for collaborating with the Russian Government to undermine the candidacy of Trump's opponent in last year's general election, that Trump's nominee for the Supreme Court is very likely to undermine the rights of ordinary Americans, that Trump was trying to extort votes from the Dumb and Dumber/Mean and Meaner House Republican Caucus in order to deprive millions of people of health insurance and reward millionaires and billionaires with huge tax cuts.  So it is not really surprising that The Washington Post's report (U.S.: Trump hotel lease is compliant) on GSA's surrender to the Trumps is buried at page A14 of this morning's print edition.  (Perhaps the headline would have been more accurate if it had read, Hotel Lease: GSA is compliant.)  But this blizzard of outrages does not make the GSA surrender any the less significant.

National Public Radio, which is on the Trump Budget Chopping Block, bravely broadcast a useful report (GSA Says Trump D.C. Hotel Lease Is Valid, Despite Ban on Elected Officials), and the website post on the report includes the letter from Kevin Terry to Donald Trump, Jr.  Accurate reporting, going to the actual sources.

"Profile in No Courage"

This is the first “Profile in No Courage” from a federal civil servant in the Trump Era.  As Congressmen Cummings and DeFazio point out, this ruling from a government employee whose boss is President Trump is utterly absurd, rendering “meaningless” the vital lease provision, whose purpose is to stop corruption and back door – well, practically front door – bribery.   If you think Cummings and DeFazio are overstating the case, just read Mr. Terry's letter. At best, the arrangement amounts to deferred compensation to President Trump.  Money that otherwise would go directly to Donald Trump now will be plowed into the operation and maintenance of the hotel -- money which presumably is intended to increase the long term profitability of the hotel, inuring to Donald Trump's financial benefit once he leaves or is removed from office.

The terms of the lease are clear, and Trump is in clear violation of it. He plainly will be able to profit from moneys generated by the lease once he leaves office. If someone can get standing to sue and bring the matter to court, what would strict constructionist likely future Justice Gorsuch say? Bottom Line: Donald Trump is corrupt, and he is corrupting the Civil Service. As a retired career civil servant, I am embarrassed. May Mr. Terry and his supervisors be object lessons in how civil servants should not behave. The GSA will be tarnished for a long time.

Emoluments Clause

It is also noteworthy that Trump also asserts that any profits from business of the hotel with foreign governments will be turned over to the U.S. Treasury, thus presumably avoiding violation of the Constitution's Emoluments Clause. Two points here. First, if the rest of the arrangements save the lease – as Mr. Terry says they do -- then this step would be unnecessary.  Second, the bookkeeping arrangements on what would constitute profits and how compliance would be overseen are not disclosed; indeed, there may be no oversight at all, unless a Congressional committee chooses to engage in such oversight. Fat chance of that happening in the current Congress.  Yet another reason why the mid-term elections are so important.

Closing Thoughts

President Trump continues to thumb his nose at the American taxpayers and the United States Constitution.

As for Kevin Terry, whose absurd contortions probably insure protection of his job (and may be a basis for promotion) as long as Trump is president, he is a disgrace to the long line of dedicated civil servants who have declined to ignore the rule of law to satisfy their political bosses. The term "Good German" comes to mind. In the future, I suspect that ethics experts admonish their students to avoid pulling a "Kevin Terry."