The Human Rights Campaign has found a new role for Associate Director of Diversity Allyson Robinson. They’re using her as an interviewer in an effort to provide a more in-depth explanation/justification of HRC’s fatally compromised Congressional Scorecard. I can think of a dozen tough questions that would have been far more informative (and fun) than the ones that were asked (read it here).
Here’s how the thing starts:
NOTE FROM CHRIS [JOHNSON]: Special thanks to Allyson Robinson, our associate director of diversity, for taking the lead on providing our readers with additional information on HRC’s latest congressional scorecard. She took time out from campaigning in Northern Virginia to catch up with Allison Herwitt, HRC’s legislative director, and ask her a few additional questions about the scorecard. Today she sent us the Q&A from the Allyson-Allison chat
As I said to Kathy, something tells me that whoever Allyson the Token was campaigning for should be pissed (or, perhaps, thankful; I haven’t figured out which.) Here’s how the ‘interview’ went:
Given last year’s wrangling over the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) bills, I knew many in our community would be interested to know how we scored Members around those crucial pieces of legislation. I recently sat down with HRC’s Legislative Director, Allison Herwitt, to ask her about that.
Allyson Robinson: How are we scoring members of Congress around the ENDA bills?
Allison Herwitt: For each two year session of Congress since 1989, the Human Rights Campaign has published a Congressional Scorecard. That scorecard includes key Congressional votes and co-sponsorship of pro-LGBT legislation. It is one of many educational tools to assist the LGBT community in assessing the relative support or non-support of Members of Congress. Included in the 110th Scorecard (2007-2008) are the House vote on HR 3685, the sexual orientation-only Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), the motion to recommit (a procedural motion to kill the bill), and cosponsorship of H.R. 2015, the fully-inclusive ENDA.
HRC routinely informs Members in advance of any votes or cosponsorships that may be included on the scorecard, and Members were notified in advance that H.R. 3685 and the motion to recommit would be a key votes, and that the cosponsorship of H.R. 2015 would also be scored. HRC’s scorecard reflects a combination of votes and cosponsorships on key legislation. Final passage votes and votes on amendments are given the most weight, with procedural votes and cosponsorships given less weight. Because of the unique circumstances surrounding the Employment Non Discrimination Act, cosponsorship of the transgender-inclusive bill was double weighted.
And that’s how it went – a bland, uninquisitive-in-reality question followed by more of the Scampaign’s spin. I won’t dignify any more of the spin, but here are the softer-than-softball questions:
A.R.: Why did we decide to do it this way?
A.R.: How do you think members feel about it?
A.R.: What do we hope the impact will be?
Gee…no ‘Why did HRC lie to trans people about being willing to go to the mat on a trans-inclusive ENDA?’? No ‘Why did HRC cook up a fraudulent survey to justify its lie?’?
A.R.: Thanks so much for your time, Allison.
Thanks for nothing, Allyson.
You had that little use for your soul?