Novotney: Who Wants to Tell the Senators They Voted Against White People?

The headline you haven’t read out of Charleston this week is: “Twenty-Five White Lawmakers Vote Against Caucasians in Wheeling”.

Wait? What?

That’s right. Before the seven members of Wheeling’s city council voted unanimously in December 2016 to adopt the municipality’s current non-discrimination ordinance, it was not spelled out that Caucasians in the Friendly City were officially protected from discrimination. Neither were American veterans. And, that’s right, neither were members of the city’s LGBTQ+ community.

So, thanks to the nine members of the city’s Human Rights Commission a decade ago, research on such an ordinance began in 2015 under former mayor Andy McKenzie and concluded under his successor, Glenn Elliott. The process included a Resolution sent by the Human Rights Commission to the Council recommending a new non-discrimination ordinance. Now, there’s nothing in there about restrooms or athletic competition, but it does protect people from discrimination with housing, at the workplace, and public accommodation based on race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status such as disability, age, marital and family status, sexual orientation and gender identity.

While reviewing the proposal, Ward 6 Councilor Dave Palmer recommended it be amended to include EVERYONE by creating protected classes for veterans, members of the LGBTQ+ community, and, yes, for Caucasians, too. 

A public hearing drew a large crowd at Wheeling Park’s White Palace, and a minuscule minority spoke out against the proposal, NOT because Caucasians and veterans were added as protected classes, but because it included sexual orientation and gender identity.

Granted, the state’s Human Rights Act and Fair Housing Act now prohibit discrimination based on race, color, religion, ancestry, sex, familial status, blindness, veteran status, handicap, or national origin, but there’s STILL no mention of sexual orientation and gender identity.

The vote in the W.Va. Senate was 25-8-1. Two senators from the Northern Panhandle region voted against the bill, including Sen. Ryan Weld (R-1) and Sen. Charles Clements (R-2). While Sen. Laura Wakim Chapman (R-1) was absent for the vote, Sen. Chris Rose (R-1) voted in favor of the legislation. 

“The purpose of Senate Bill 579 is to prohibit municipalities participating in the Home Rule program from establishing additional protected classes of persons beyond what is designated in state statute today,” said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Mike Stuart, R-Kanawha, in a widely circulated article by legislative reporter Steven Allen Adams.

But why? What happened to the spirit of Home Rule, an initiative created to permit recognized cities to craft and adopt ordinances that deviate from what’s allowed by state code because local control was believed to be the best approach? 

Adams also quoted Sen. Brian Helton, R-Fayette, the lead sponsor of SB 579, who said, “Uniformity of law is critical to ensure all West Virginians are equally protected. A patchwork of varying local ordinances creates uncertainty for individuals and businesses. Centralizing anti-discrimination laws in our state allows for a more efficient and consistent enforcement through dedicated agencies, like the Human Rights Commission of West Virginia. Limiting protected classes to those within the state Human Rights Act stops the expansion of classes. Where does it end? It ends in overreach.”

Overreach? Is that what we’re calling fairness now in West Virginia?

Folks, if the House of Delegates approves of Senate Bill 579 and it is signed by Gov. Patrick Morrissey, it ends with bigotry.