transgender sign.jpg

(File photo | The Republican)

BOSTON -- Drawing on a sense of history and civil rights, and on personal family experiences, the Massachusetts Senate on Thursday passed a bill providing anti-discrimination protections to transgender individuals in public places, such as stores and restaurants.

Senate President Stan Rosenberg, D-Amherst, who is openly gay, presided over the chamber during the vote. "It's just a really huge victory for civil rights in Massachusetts," Rosenberg said after the vote. "It's another chapter in the long story of fighting discrimination."

"As a member of the LGBTQ community, it was quite emotional, because it's just amazing listening to the stories and members talking from their hearts," Rosenberg said.

The vote on S.735 was 33 to 4. The four no votes were all from Republicans, including State Sen. Donald Humason, R-Westfield.

Humason said he worries that the bill will be difficult to enforce, since it defines who is transgender solely based on self-identification. A Republican-sponsored amendment to allow someone to use a change of birth certificate as proof of gender identity failed.

Humason said he heard from constituents worried about privacy. Republican-sponsored amendments exempting locker rooms and showers from the bill also failed.

"At the same time we're being asked to be tolerant of transgendered folks, we're sort of being intolerant to the concerns of people who just want privacy in the shower or privacy in the restrooms or privacy in the locker rooms," Humason said.

In 2011, the Legislature passed a bill adding non-discrimination protection for transgender people in employment, housing, credit, education and similar areas. But a mention of public accommodations got stripped out, after opponents dubbed the legislation "the bathroom bill," out of fear that it would require public places to allow a transgender woman, who is biologically male, to use a women's bathroom or locker room.

This year, the standalone bill extending the transgender anti-discrimination protection to places of public accommodation received an outpouring of support from members of Massachusetts' congressional delegation, Attorney General Maura Healey and a coalition of advocates calling themselves Freedom Massachusetts that includes businesses, unions, law enforcement, educational institutions and others.

Supporters say the bill is about ensuring transgender people are not discriminated against - for example, by being denied service in a restaurant because of their gender identify. Seventeen states have passed similar laws.

Opponents of the bill said it creates problems with privacy and safety.

During debate on the Senate floor, several lawmakers mentioned the history of civil rights in Massachusetts, drawing analogies with both racial desegregation and gay marriage.

"History is a harsh judge, but the history of civil rights in this state and frankly in this country is fairly clear - it is a slow and steady, sometimes faltering, sometimes hard struggle forward," said State Sen. Eric Lesser, D-Longmeadow.

State Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz, D-Boston, pointed to Massachusetts' decision in 1865 to become the first in the nation to enact a public accommodations law to prevent discrimination based on race. "We're civil rights pioneers by nature," Chang-Diaz said. "It's in our cultural DNA."

She said the anti-discrimination protection for transgender people is a continuation of the same fight. "No one deserves to be discriminated against for who they are, period," Chang-Diaz said.

State Sen. Ben Downing, D-Pittsfield, said, "Massachusetts has a history of being a welcoming community for absolutely everyone. We have a chance to once again clearly and loudly proclaim that everyone is welcome here in Massachusetts."

The only Republican to vote for the bill was State Sen. Richard Ross, R-Wrenthan. Ross said he came into state politics knowing little about gay marriage, but supported it in 2007 after speaking to constituents. His son and daughter later both came out to him as gay. He recalled a tearful conversation with his son, which ended with Ross telling his son how proud he was of him for being true to his identity.

Talking to parents of transgendered individuals, Ross said, "took me back to my struggle."

State Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr, R-Gloucester, stressed that Republicans do not condone discrimination. "There is no sentiment in this chamber that would harbor, condone or accept discrimination against any member of this commonwealth or of our society," Tarr said.

But Tarr said he wanted to amend the bill in ways that would "promote a sense of well-being and fairness" for everyone in Massachusetts. He introduced amendments to penalize anyone who asserts gender identity for an improper purpose, something Democrats said could be done under existing law. Tarr also tried unsuccessfully to delay the law's effective date.

The bill now goes to the House. House Speaker Robert DeLeo, D-Winthrop, said he personally supports the bill, but he is unsure whether he has the two-thirds support from members needed to override a gubernatorial veto.

The House and Senate are considering slightly different versions of the bill, with the House version postponing implementation of the new law until Jan. 1, 2017 and directing Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination and the Attorney General's Office to provide additional regulatory guidance to prevent someone from asserting their gender identity for an improper purpose.

Gov. Charlie Baker, a Republican, has not said whether he will sign or veto the bill if it reaches his desk. Baker said during his campaign that he would oppose an expansion of the anti-discrimination law, but he has since softened his tone, stressing that he opposes discrimination and believes everyone should use the restroom they feel comfortable with.