The Legislature’s Efforts to Repeal HB 2 Have Turned Into a Big, Dumb Soap Opera | Triangulator | Indy Week
Pin It

The Legislature’s Efforts to Repeal HB 2 Have Turned Into a Big, Dumb Soap Opera 

Here is the one thing on which most people on Jones Street profess to agree: HB 2, the much-hated so-called bathroom law that has besmirched the state's reputation, cost it hundreds of millions of dollars of economic activity and numerous sports championships, lost its governor his reelection, and, oh yeah, enshrined anti-LGBTQ bigotry into state statute, has to go. Beyond that, agreement is hard to come by.

Most Democrats want a straight repeal, though they're willing to bend, as evidenced by Governor Cooper's proposed compromise, which would stiffen penalties for crimes committed in bathrooms—to offset conservative fears of men posing as women to gain access to women's facilities, which doesn't actually happen—and require municipalities to give a thirty-day notice before passing their own nondiscrimination ordinances, which in turn would give the legislature plenty of time to preempt them.

Many Republicans, meanwhile, want something that looks more like a repeal in name only—enough to get this monkey off their backs, but not enough to substantially improve protections for LGBTQ citizens, especially transgender citizens. This desire has most recently manifested in a "compromise" called HB 186, which is backed by some business groups and received tentative support from the ACC commissioner. It would repeal HB 2 but forbid cities from passing ordinances guaranteeing transgender individuals access to restrooms that conform with their gender identity. Also, while it would add veterans and pregnant women to the state's nondiscrimination law, it would leave it to local governments to enact protections for LGBTQ people—and even then, opponents, with just a few signatures, could put the LGBTQ community's civil rights up for a referendum.

Over the weekend, Cooper took to Medium to object to HB 186, which "subjects the rights of the minority to a vote of the majority. It would be like putting the Civil Rights Act to a popular vote in cities in the South during the 1960s." Instead, he suggested, it would be better to require city and town councils to pass these ordinances with a majority-plus-one vote. And, he argued, Republican leaders conned a handful of Democrats into getting on board—thus lending HB 186 the veneer of bipartisanship—by promising that the legislature would revisit the referendum provision, only to renege.

"This is not a Republican compromise with Democrats; it's a Republican compromise with Republicans," Cooper wrote.

On Monday, House Speaker Tim Moore clapped back in a statement: "Governor Cooper should stop playing political games, stop trying to please special interest groups, and stop attempting to sabotage legislative efforts to find consensus on both sides of the aisle and among the business community. This effort takes careful compromise, and House Bill 186 is a real solution that actually addresses conflicts with House Bill 2, finds common ground across stakeholder communities, and fully protects the privacy and safety of North Carolinians."

It's worth noting that, if they stuck together, Moore's Republicans could repeal HB 2 and replace it with whatever they wanted without a single Democratic vote. With their supermajorities, they could override Cooper's veto, too. But Moore doesn't have the votes, so he needs Democrats. And he can't get Democrats without doing something his base considers a bridge too far.

In fact, on Monday, state representative and HB 186 sponsor Chuck McGrady announced that he wouldn't move ahead without Cooper. "I don't have a path forward if I don't get the Democrats with me," he told reporters.

So, for now, the most likely scenario appears to be stalemate. And plenty of blame to go around.

  • Democrats want a clean repeal. Republicans want a repeal in name only. Stalemate!

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

INDY Week publishes all kinds of comments, but we don't publish everything.

  • Comments that are not contributing to the conversation will be removed.
  • Comments that include ad hominem attacks will also be removed.
  • Please do not copy and paste the full text of a press release.

Permitted HTML:
  • To create paragraphs in your comment, type <p> at the start of a paragraph and </p> at the end of each paragraph.
  • To create bold text, type <b>bolded text</b> (please note the closing tag, </b>).
  • To create italicized text, type <i>italicized text</i> (please note the closing tag, </i>).
  • Proper web addresses will automatically become links.

Latest in Triangulator



Twitter Activity

Comments

I would suggest that you change the headline to reflect the actual content of the story- e.g. "Wake County gives …

by John Trololo on Wake's Budget Gives School System Less Than Half of What It Asked For (Triangulator)

Jeff Bezos had to do it. He kept running out of kale for his salads.

by MichaelEdits on Amazon Bought Whole Foods. This Is Just the Beginning of the New World Order (Triangulator)

Most Recent Comments

I would suggest that you change the headline to reflect the actual content of the story- e.g. "Wake County gives …

by John Trololo on Wake's Budget Gives School System Less Than Half of What It Asked For (Triangulator)

Jeff Bezos had to do it. He kept running out of kale for his salads.

by MichaelEdits on Amazon Bought Whole Foods. This Is Just the Beginning of the New World Order (Triangulator)

David Cox represents District B, not C as you report here. And, what's the deal with giving Bonner an entire …

by FONCitizen on Raleigh’s City Council Ballot Begins Filling Out (Triangulator)

Edie Jeffreys is on the Planning Commission and I don't believe she plans to run in District E.

by Carole Meyre on Raleigh’s City Council Ballot Begins Filling Out (Triangulator)

Fabulous graphic!

by Cristel Gutschenritter Orrand on How to Win Friends and Gerrymander People: A Redistricting Timeline! (Triangulator)

© 2017 Indy Week • 320 E. Chapel Hill St., Suite 200, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation