The bill was an attempt to provide safeguards for LGBT individuals in Indiana.
It would have prohibited discrimination with regard to real estate, housing, education, public accommodations, employment, extending credit and public contracts based on military active duty status or sexual orientation. However, organizations such as adoption services or crisis pregnancy services were exempted from these provisions.
By yesterday’s session, the bill was amended 27 times. One of which was the addition for gender identity, according to the Indiana General Assembly’s website.
However, the bill notably did not include protections for transgender people and limited states’ ability to create local ordinances to protect LGBT people.
While LGBT advocates agreed SB 344 had its issues, many were disappointed it failed.
The American Civil Liberties Union said the bill, “while fundamentally flawed, would have opened the door for updating Indiana’s civil rights law to protect Hoosiers based on sexual orientation and gender identity.”
Matt McTighe, executive director of Freedom for All Americans, a national bipartisan campaign to secure protections for LGBT people, also said in a press release that while aspects of the bill were problematic, it still should have been discussed and moved forward.
“The Indiana legislature’s failure to update existing civil rights laws and protect LGBT Hoosiers today is deeply disappointing,” McTighe said in the release. “Senate Bill 344 was far from perfect, but it deserved to be debated and amended to ensure all Hoosiers are protect from discrimination.”
Freedom Indiana, a state grassroots organization advocating for LGBT rights, said doing nothing was not an option and doing nothing was exactly what the lawmakers did yesterday, a statement on their website said.
The Freedom Indiana statement said the group would continue to press for sound LGBT legislation in the future.
“The legislative process is just that — a process,” the Freedom Indiana statement said. “The conversation should continue in the coming weeks and months, not be shut down without a vote on the Senate floor.”
In response to Senate Bill 344, the Indiana Urban Mayors Caucus also released a statement in support of retaining local civil rights ordinances that protect gay and transgender Hoosiers.
“We want to be part of that discussion at the Statehouse and offer our support to lawmakers in a way that helps them strike a balance between what many of us already have accomplished in our communities and a statewide solution,” the group said in a press release.
Senate Bill 344 would have undermined ordinances passed at the city level, like South Bend’s 2012 Human Right’s Ordinance, South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg said.
“The state appears to be considering a measure that would trample local control,” Buttigieg said. “So our question is, ‘why would you pass a bill that would undercut local government’s ability to address these issues?’”
Buttigieg said this is in part because legislators have “fallen out of touch” with the majority of Hoosiers.
The Indiana Urban Mayors Caucus, however, unanimously supported the retention of local civil rights, according to the press release.
The IUMC represents all Indiana cities with more than 30,000 residents.
The caucus includes Indianapolis Mayor Joe Hogsett and Carmel Mayor James Brainard, who “urged lawmakers to work together to find a statewide solution that does not strip local elected officials of their ability to protect local residents,” according to the group’s press release.
Support for civil rights, religious freedom and local control are not partisan issues, Buttigieg said.
Mayors from both sides called upon the statehouse to take responsibility for the aftermath of RFRA and not make the same mistakes, he said.
“A year ago, it was a very painful episode for our state and did a lot of harm for the reputation of our state,” Buttigieg said.
Alexa Chryssovergis contributed reporting
