Ten Republicans joined all the Democrats present as the U.S. Senate approved the Employment Non-Discrimination Act by 64 votes to 32 (roll call). Ramsey Cox reported for The Hill,

Under the bill, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission would enforce the new workplace rules. Small businesses with fewer than 15 employees would be exempt.

The legislation also contains language that exempts religious organizations.

The Senate on Thursday adopted an amendment from [Republican Rob] Portman that would prevent government retaliation against religious organizations that don’t hire someone because of sexual orientation or identity.

But Democrats rejected an amendment from [Republican Pat] Toomey that would have extended the religious exemption to any employer that is partially owned or funded by a religion or has religious affiliations – including universities.

Both Portman and Toomey voted for the bill. Iowa’s Republican Senator Chuck Grassley voted against the cloture motion to end debate on ENDA as well as against the bill itself. I have not seen any statement from Grassley’s office explaining why he opposes the bill. I will update this post if I see any new comment. House Speaker John Boehner has asserted that codifying workplace protections for LGBT Americans would generate “frivolous lawsuits” against businesses.

Iowa’s Senator Tom Harkin chairs the committee that moved this bill over the summer and has been one of its staunchest advocates. At the Iowa Democratic Party’s Jefferson-Jackson Dinner last Saturday, Senator Chuck Schumer hailed Harkin for allowing first-term Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley to be lead sponsor on the ENDA. Merkley is up for re-election in Oregon next year. After the jump I’ve posted Harkin’s floor speech from Monday’s session and a statement release after today’s vote.  

It may surprise many that in 2013, in some places in America, you can still be fired from your job simply because of who you are or who you love. But it’s

true. And because of dysfunction and backwards thinking in Washington, that injustice may continue.

On Monday, the U.S. Senate overcame a procedural hurdle and set up a crucial vote to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) later this week – 17

years after it was first introduced. In an era when the two parties agree on nothing, to have both Democrats and Republicans voting yes on ENDA in the

Senate should send a message that we all agree it’s time for this injustice to end. But incredibly, Speaker Boehner and the House Republicans vowed to

continue the fight against what’s right.

Five years ago, we passed a very similar law in Iowa, and it is time the rest of the country caught up. Believe me, I know the process can be messy, but I

offer this look back on how we passed the civil rights expansion in 2007 as proof that our shared faith in the right to equality is a powerful thing, and

the fight is worth it.

Senator Tom Harkin promised Iowa Democrats Saturday night that the U.S. Senate would soon approve the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) to protect the workplace rights of LGBT Americans. Today a fifth Republican senator indicated that he will vote for the ENDA. Those five plus the 55 members of the Democratic caucus (including newly sworn-in Cory Booker of New Jersey) will give supporters the 60 votes needed to break the inevitable Republican filibuster. President Barack Obama has called on Congress to pass the law.

Passing ENDA was a priority for Senator Ted Kennedy, the longtime chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pension committee Harkin now leads. In 1996, an earlier version of this legislation fell just short of passage on the Senate floor. Harkin voted yes, while Iowa Republican Chuck Grassley voted no. In recent years, most Congressional Democrats have supported a version of ENDA that protects transgender employees as well as gays, lesbians, and bisexuals. Such a bill passed the U.S. House in 2007 but died in the Senate.

More details on the current bill’s provisions are after the jump. House Speaker John Boehner opposes ENDA and would be unlikely to put it to a vote in the lower chamber.

UPDATE: On Monday night the Senate approved a motion to proceed with debating the bill by 61 votes to 30 (roll call). Grassley was one of the 30 Republicans who attempted to filibuster. After the jump I’ve posted a video of Harkin’s floor statement supporting ENDA, which he called “another step in the direction of opening America up and making our society more inclusive rather than exclusive.”

The latest episode to divide Iowa Republicans is a warning from Republican Party of Iowa officials in response to planned traffic safety checkpoints in Polk County. After the jump I’ve posted more details on that story.

Having grown up during the 1980s, when “card-carrying member of the ACLU” was a term of abuse Republicans used against liberals, I’m still floored whenever Republicans actually care about potential encroachment on civil liberties by law enforcement officials.

That’s far from the most mind-blowing political reality of our day, though. Just for fun, at the end of this post I put up a non-scientific poll for any Bleeding Heartland readers, but especially those “of a certain age.” Think back 20 to 25 years and ask yourself, what reality of 2013 would be most shocking?

This is an open thread: all topics welcome.

Fifty years ago today, the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his most famous speech to a crowd of at least 250,000 people during the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. After the jump I’ve posted the “I Have a Dream” video and other links related to this moment in American history.

Earlier this evening, the U.S. House tried to limit the scope of the NSA's domestic spying, but this amendment failed by 205-217.  It was an unusual cross-party vote, with Democrats voting 111-83, and Republians voting 94-134.  (Here is the full roll call vote).

Bruce Braley and Dave Loebsack voted Yes (to restrict the NSA), while Steve King and Tom Latham voted No.  I haven't been able to find any more detailed statements from any of Iowa's congressmen.

Does anyone know where the 1st district candidates stand on this issue?  It would be a good debate topic.

In a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has determined that the federal Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional. The ruling means that legally married gay and lesbian couples in Iowa and elsewhere will be entitled to equal treatment under federal law. More than 200 Congressional Democrats, including Senator Tom Harkin and Representatives Bruce Braley and Dave Loebsack, signed an amicus curiae brief urging justices to strike down the key provision of the DOMA, adopted in 1996 with overwhelming bipartisan support.  

In a separate case, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that backers of California’s Proposition 8 did not have standing to appeal a lower-court ruling striking down that ballot initiative. The decision means that LGBT couples will be allowed to marry in California. It does not affect other states’ statutory or constitutional bans on same-sex marriage. Braley and Loebsack were among scores of Congressional Democrats who recently posed for the “NoH8” campaign supporting marriage equality and opposing Prop 8.

Excerpts from the DOMA decision and Iowa reaction to today’s rulings are after the jump. I will update this post as needed. At this writing, most of the Congressional delegation has not publicly commented on the Supreme Court decisions.

I also enclose below Democratic State Representative Ako Abdul-Samad’s reaction to yesterday’s disgraceful 5-4 Supreme Court ruling on the Voting Rights Act.

None of Iowa’s four U.S. House members has issued a press release about the National Security Agency’s massive surveillance of phone and online communications, but all have now made some public comment about the controversy. I enclose the details below.

To my knowledge, none of Iowa’s representatives in Congress has issued an official statement on the recent revelations about broad surveillance of phone and electronic communications by the National Security Agency. However, both Democratic Senator Tom Harkin and Republican Senator Chuck Grassley have commented to the media about the story. Notably, Harkin expressed concern about the scope of intelligence gathering and called for President Barack Obama to give better guidance. In contrast to his image as a supporter of whistle-blowers, Grassley has expressed more interest in prosecuting Edward Snowden (the source of the leaks) than in investigating the NSA’s activities. Details are after the jump.

On a related note, here is a must-read post for anyone comforted by the president’s comments last week (“nobody is listening to your telephone calls. That’s not what this program is about”). Sociology professor Kieran Healy pretends to be a security analyst for the King of England in 1772, a period of growing political unrest in the American Colonies. Using “metadata” analysis only–that is, looking at social connections with no information about the content of people’s conversations or writings–Healy was able to identify Paul Revere as a prime suspect in activities disloyal to the crown.

But I say again, if a mere scribe such as I-one who knows nearly nothing-can use the very simplest of these methods to pick the name of a traitor like Paul Revere from those of two hundred and fifty four other men, using nothing but a list of memberships and a portable calculating engine, then just think what weapons we might wield in the defense of liberty one or two centuries from now.

Hat tip to Nathan Yau at Flowing Data.

All week I’ve been meaning to compile news and commentary on the National Security Agency’s massive data collection. Long ago I stopped being surprised or disappointed by President Barack Obama’s policies on surveillance and civil liberties. Nevertheless, the information leaked by Edward Snowden is a big story.

Glenn Thrush remembered that “Snowden was the name of the sacrificial lamb/waist-gunner who haunted Yossarian” in Joseph Heller’s novel Catch-22. Inspired by that coincidence, I offer 22 links related to the NSA revelations after the jump.

Recently-fired Iowa Senate GOP communications director Kirsten Anderson filed a complaint last week with the Iowa Civil Rights Commission, alleging that Senate Minority Leader Bill Dix and three staffers for the GOP Senate caucus subjected her to a sexually hostile work environment and retaliated against her for complaining about the work environment.

A pdf file of Anderson’s complaint can be viewed here. I’ve posted the two-page narrative section after the jump.

Reading the allegations, two points stood out for me. Anderson told WHO-TV’s Dave Price that legislators as well as GOP staffers made inappropriate comments to and about women on staff. But her complaint to the Iowa Civil Rights Commission does not accuse any Republican lawmakers of making such remarks. The only named respondents are Dix (for failing to provide a safe work environment) and three staffers.

Second, in her narrative about alleged retaliation, Anderson describes meetings in May 2013, during which she was told her work was “not where it needed to be.” Those meetings involved Eric Johansen, a named respondent in the complaint who is Iowa GOP Senate staff director, and Tracie Gibler, an assistant to Dix. Anderson did not accuse Gibler of creating a hostile work environment. Representative Steve King’s office just announced yesterday that Gibler will be King’s new Congressional chief of staff, as of June 10. (I’ve posted that press release below.) I can’t blame Gibler for wanting to get out of Dix’s office–or maybe the timing of her departure is a coincidence, just like named respondent Ed Failor, Jr. and Dix have claimed it was a coincidence that Anderson was fired for cause on the very same day she documented complaints about the work environment.  

In a decision announced on Friday, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that it is unconstitutional for the Iowa Department of Public Health to refuse to list a non-birthing lesbian spouse on a child’s birth certificate. Details on this nearly unanimous ruling are after the jump. I was intrigued by how Governor Terry Branstad’s three appointees from 2011 handled this case.

Successful campaigns require money and boots on the ground. Representative Bruce Braley is already trying to recruit the small donor and volunteer army he’ll need for next year’s U.S. Senate election.

Without Democratic primary competition or a Republican candidate to define yet, Braley can’t fire up his base by pointing out his opponent’s flaws. Instead, he is using online petitions to identify and energize supporters. So far, those petitions are narrowly focused on issues important to activist groups–in contrast to the broad themes of Braley’s message to Iowa voters as a whole.  

As expected, President Barack Obama nominated Thomas Perez this week to run the U.S. Department of Labor. Media Matters posted “myths and facts” about the labor nominee here. Adam Serwer summarized Perez’s record and commented that Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa is “chief” among the nominee’s “political enemies.” Other Senate Republicans who have criticized Perez include David Vitter of Louisiana and Jeff Sessions of Alabama. John Gramlich commented in Roll Call,

Perez succeeded in blocking Republican-backed voting laws in South Carolina and Texas that his division deemed racially discriminatory. He pressed racial profiling charges against Joe Arpaio, the Republican sheriff of Maricopa County, Ariz., who is among the most divisive figures in the national immigration debate. His handling of a legal agreement with the city of St. Paul, Minn., in a lending discrimination case has drawn condemnation from Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, who has called it a “quid pro quo” and a “shady deal.”

Senate criticism of Perez so far has come primarily from Grassley and the Judiciary Committee, which oversees the Justice Department and is seen as one of the more-partisan panels in the chamber. Perez’s nomination to the Labor Department will not come before the Judiciary Committee, however. It will come before the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, where Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee is the top Republican.

Republican Senator Roy Blunt of Missouri has put a procedural hold on Gina McCarthy’s nomination as administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.

Spring is just around the corner, so Iowa wildflower Wednesday will return to Bleeding Heartland soon. Meanwhile, enjoy some gorgeous wildflower photos from southern California at La Vida Locavore.

President Barack Obama delivers another State of the Union address tonight, and U.S. Senator Marco Rubio of Florida is set to give the Republican response. I will miss most of the president’s speech but plan to watch the replay later and will update this post with highlights. Meanwhile, feel free to comment on any topics raised during the speeches in this thread.

UPDATE: Highlights from the speeches and reaction from the Iowans in Congress are after the jump.

I find it depressing that when I came home to catch up on the news, the blogosphere and twitterverse were obsessing over Rubio taking a drink of water during his remarks. So sue him, he’s not the most camera-savvy politician in Washington (yet). Who cares?

Time for a new thread to discuss any Obama cabinet appointments. The Senate Intelligence Committee held a confirmation hearing today for John Brennan, President Barack Obama’s nominee for CIA director. I didn’t watch the hearing, but based on reports like this and this, it sounds like he didn’t demonstrate that he deserves to be confirmed.

I loved this story in The Onion: “American Citizens Split On DOJ Memo Authorizing Government To Kill Them.”

The president announced earlier this week that Sally Jewell will be his nominee as interior secretary. She’s an interesting choice. I’ve posted some background after the jump.

The Hill discussed some of the names supposedly on the short list for transportation secretary. Members of the Congressional Black Caucus have urged Obama to consider Representative Jim Clyburn of South Carolina for that job, but Clyburn doesn’t sound interested in leaving the House.

Penny Pritzker, “who made her fortune building Hyatt Hotels” and has been one of Obama’s powerhouse fundraisers, is reportedly the president’s choice to run the Commerce department.

Gretchen Morgenson, one of the best reporters on the finance and banking industries, published a recap of Timothy Geithner’s tenure as Treasury secretary.

Forty years ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision in Roe v Wade. Any relevant comments are welcome in this thread. I’ve posted many links about abortion rights and availability below.  

What’s on your mind this long weekend, Bleeding Heartland readers? This is an open thread. I posted some links below to get a conversation going.

UPDATE: Scroll down for excerpts from the inaugural speech and some reaction from Iowa political figures.

A former Iowa student whose black armband led to an important U.S. Supreme Court decision of the 1960s died last week in Florida, the Des Moines Register reported yesterday. The Iowa Civil Liberties Union sued the Des Moines Independent Community School district on behalf of Christopher Eckhardt and his friends John Tinker and Mary Beth Tinker after all three students were suspended for wearing black armbands to their schools as an anti-war protest. The case eventually made it to the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled in 1969 that the school principals were not justified in limiting the students’ free expression.

Tinker v. Des Moines Ind. Comm. School Dist. may be the most important case from Iowa ever to reach the Supreme Court. Judges have applied the “Tinker standard” in many other First Amendment cases. After the jump I’ve posted links about the case and some reflections on Eckhardt’s role.

The U.S. Senate voted today to extend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) for five more years, allowing “electronic eavesdropping” without a warrant to continue in the U.S. and abroad. President Barack Obama (who at one time opposed the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping policy) will sign the bill sometime before the end of December 31. Follow me after the jump for details on the Senate voting, including how Democrat Tom Harkin and Republican Chuck Grassley voted on various amendments.

When the U.S. House approved this bill in September, four of the five Iowans voted yes: Democrats Dave Loebsack (IA-02) and Leonard Boswell (IA-03) and Republicans Tom Latham (IA-04) and Steve King (IA-05). Democrat Bruce Braley (IA-01) was among 118 House members to oppose the bill.

An Iowa Supreme Court ruling announced last week made news around the country. The seven justices unanimously rejected a gender discrimination claim from a plaintiff whose boss had obviously treated her unfairly.

Earlier this month, U.S. Senators Chuck Grassley and Tom Harkin both voted for the Senate’s version of the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2013. But on Friday the Iowans were among just 14 senators to oppose passage of the final conference agreement on the defense authorization bill.  

Earlier this week, the U.S. Senate approved its version of a National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2013, outlining $631 billion in spending and setting policy in several other areas. The vote on final passage was unanimous, 98 to 0, but during five days of floor debate the Senate considered many amendments. After the jump I’ve summarized the important provisions of the NDAA and how Iowa’s Senators Chuck Grassley and Tom Harkin voted on the most contentious amendments.

A conference committee will work out differences between the Senate’s bill and the defense authorization act the U.S. House approved in May. More details on those differences are below.

UPDATE: Added a statement from Senator Grassley.

What’s on your mind this weekend, Bleeding Heartland readers? More posts related to Tuesday’s elections are going up today and tomorrow, so after the jump I’ve enclosed a few links on stories not related to any political campaigns.

This is an open thread. Don’t forget to turn your clocks back one hour before you go to sleep on Saturday night.

“No Wiggins” campaign materials on display at two churches in Burlington have stirred up a local debate over whether such advocacy is an abuse of tax-exempt status or an exercise of free speech.

The full-time voter fraud investigator hired by Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz produced his second batch of arrests yesterday. In contrast to the first group of people charged (alleged non-citizens who had voted), the latest arrests involve two convicted felons who registered to vote this year but have not cast ballots.

The official affidavits don’t include any evidence that these people intended to vote unlawfully. One believed his voting rights had been restored, while the other claimed she wasn’t paying attention to what was on the voter registration form she signed. Details are after the jump.

State Senator Tom Courtney has requested state and federal audits of Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz’s decision to use federal Help America Vote Act funds to pay for a full-time criminal investigator focusing on suspected voter fraud.

Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation officials announced yesterday that three residents of Council Bluffs have been arrested and charged with election misconduct, a class D felony.  

Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz told the Des Moines Register that he may sue the federal government for access to the Department of Homeland Security’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database. Schultz needs that database to move forward with a new procedure for removing suspected non-citizens from Iowa’s voter rolls in the future.  

A Polk County District Court judge issued a temporary injunction preventing Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz from implementing new rules on removing registered voters before the 2012 general election.

Yesterday a Polk County District Court judge denied Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz’s request to dismiss a lawsuit over emergency rules on checking Iowa’s voter rolls for non-citizens.

Meanwhile, on Tuesday Schultz answered questions about the rules at the Iowa legislature’s Administrative Rules Review Committee meeting. His responses didn’t impress the Democratic lawmakers on that committee.

One of the top international news stories of this week was the criminal conviction of three Russian feminist punk rockers from the group Pussy Riot. Maria Alyokhina, Yekaterina Samutsevich, and Nadezhda Tolokonnikova face two years in prison on trumped-up charges of “hooliganism motivated by religious hatred.” Read the closing statements they delivered at their trial and tell me these women aren’t more brave than anyone you know. They must be missing their families and hating their crummy prison conditions, but the defendants denounced the show trial instead of apologizing and asking for mercy from the court.

Meanwhile, Iowa politics-watchers once again debated whether it’s appropriate to heckle speakers at the Iowa State Fair soapbox.

Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz has asked a Polk County district court judge to dismiss a lawsuit over emergency voter roll maintenance rules and reject the plaintiffs’ efforts to prevent the state from implementing the new procedures. Accompanied by Attorney General Tom Miller at a joint press conference today, Schultz made his case for the new rules and the procedure through which he enacted them. This pdf file contains Schultz’s affidavit and supporting documents filed with the Polk County district court on August 16. The American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa and the League of United Latin American Citizens filed a lawsuit on August 8 challenging the rules.

After the jump I’ve posted the full text of the Secretary of State’s press release and transcribed a timeline Schultz provided to reporters today. I also enclosed details on the normal administrative rulemaking process, which provides opportunities for public comment and legislative review before new rules go into effect. While Miller defends the new rules as a “balance between ensuring voting integrity and preventing voter suppression,” I share the Des Moines Register’s view that Schultz’s proposed procedure “could prompt some legitimately registered voters to withdraw their registration to avoid risking criminal prosecution.”

CORRECTION: The Administrative Rules Review Committee will consider this matter during its next meeting on September 11, due to a scheduling conflict with the Secretary of State’s Office. I enclose below a statement from Joe Royce, the staff to the Administrative Rules Review Committee.

Secretary of State Matt Schultz declined an invitation to speak yesterday at a regularly scheduled meeting of the Iowa legislature’s Administrative Rules Review Committee. Lawmakers had invited Schultz Sarah Reisetter of the Secretary of State’s office to discuss new voter list maintenance procedures, which were not adopted through the normal rulemaking process and have already prompted a lawsuit.

Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz announced new steps last month to remove non-citizens from Iowa voter rolls. He’ll need to defend those actions in court soon against attorneys representing the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa and the League of United Latin American Citizens.

UPDATE: Added Schultz’s statement below.

The five members of the Iowa Racing and Gaming Commission unanimously elected a new chairman yesterday: Jeff Lamberti, a former State Senator and Congressional candidate who is president of the Iowa Barnstormers arena football team.  

Iowa's voting laws made news last week when the Des Moines Register reminded us of who cannot vote here. Iowa has become one of the most difficult places to vote for felons.

It's not clear to me why everyone who is 18 years old cannot vote, criminal record, even presence in jail notwithstanding. Is this a democracy or not?

Reverend Keith Ratliff announced this week that he is resigning as president of the Iowa/Nebraska branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People “due to the NAACP’s position and support of same sex marriage.” A high-profile opponent of marriage equality in Iowa, Ratliff was unhappy last month when the national NAACP board adopted a resolution on civil marriage rights for LGBT couples without informing board members in advance about plans to vote on the issue. He asserted that the organization should focus on other issues of more importance to the African-American community.

On June 6, Ratliff released a statement thanking the NAACP and all those he worked with in that organization. He refused multiple media requests for further comment.

The Iowa/Nebraska NAACP is scheduled to hold its annual statewide conference in Des Moines on June 9. I assume delegates will choose a new president or at least an interim president at that time. Local NAACP branch presidents in Iowa had very different reactions to the national board’s resolution in support of civil marriage rights for same-sex couples.

Reverend Keith Ratliff, president of the Iowa/Nebraska branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, said today that he may leave the organization because of the national board’s public support for same-sex marriage rights.

UPDATE: Comments from two three of the NAACP local branch presidents in Iowa are below.

A Sioux City jury awarded Republican State Senator Rick Bertrand $231,000 over a television commercial that attacked him shortly before the 2010 general election. It is rare for a defamation case based on political advertising to succeed, for reasons explained below.

UPDATE: Governor Terry Branstad suggested on April 9 that this verdict has got him thinking about suing the Democratic Governors Association over their 2010 campaign materials. Details are at the end of this post.

LATER UPDATE: Incredibly, Bertrand is appealing this verdict in order to seek punitive damages as well as the compensatory damages the jury awarded. More comments below.