POLITICS

Can the state follow Carmel on LGBT rights?

Chris Sikich, and Stephanie Wang
IndyStar

Carmel's recent vote, adopting anti-discrimination protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity, showed just how difficult it may be to fashion similar legislation statewide.

Passage of the Carmel ordinance on Monday took strong leadership, and considerable political muscle, combined with an ability to create coalitions across ideological lines, political observers say. And those qualities have been in short supply at the state level.

The city's two most powerful elected leaders set aside their ideological differences and pushed heavily for Carmel's law. But even then, after weeks of intense lobbying, political hand-wringing and contentious debate, they struggled to carry the close 4-3 vote to approve the measure.

Lobbyists and the public turned out in droves to make impassioned speeches. And what started as an economic argument boiled down to a matter of morals.

The mayor went into the discussion thinking he had the potential for 6-1 support, but it quickly slipped away, with one of the mayor's traditional supporters going against the measure, and some of his opponents voting with him.

Carmel narrowly passes LGBT protections

As advocates prepare to push similar lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender protections into state law, the obstacles loom larger. It's a volatile and strident issue that experts say demands bipartisanship. The state's already muddied reputation could be at stake.

"If we put our politics aside, we would have very little difficulty in passing a statewide law," said Carmel City Council President Rick Sharp. "If we could do that, we could make it clear we will not condone and permit discrimination in this country."

But the political divide in the Statehouse makes that seem unlikely right now. Republican Gov. Mike Pence is wedged into a corner in an election year on an issue he opposes, political analysts say – a stance that has burned him in the past.

Opponents of adding LGBT anti-discrimination protections say such laws would interfere with the ability of the deeply religious to live by their beliefs. It would, they say, place LGBT rights above religious values.

And so it may be difficult to find Republican legislators willing to lead on an emotional issue dividing social conservatives and moderates within the party. So far, Republican leadership remains silent.

As Pence holds closed-door discussions with business leaders, it's difficult to predict what stance he will take. His office has said for months that he is listening to people on all sides of the issue. Spokesman Matt Lloyd added that Pence is taking the issue very seriously but declined to comment further, saying that remains the governor's public position.

House Speaker Brian Bosma and Senate President Pro Tem David Long have indicated they want to have a discussion on the issue, but it's unclear at this point what measures they – and their supermajority Republican caucuses – would be willing to support.

Can Indiana compromise on LGBT rights, religious liberty?

Their caucus members are split on trying to choose between satisfying business interests and ideological stances on religious liberty and LGBT rights. Some likely will oppose any legislation. Others may seek a compromise with limited protections. It's unclear whether Republicans will be able to come up with a proposal that their caucuses would support.

In all likelihood, they, like Carmel Mayor Jim Brainard, will need support from traditional opponents. In the case of state government, that means leaders may have to reach across the aisle for votes, said Joseph Losco, director of the Bowen Center for Public Affairs at Ball State University. But Democrats are pushing for full protections for LGBT Hoosiers and appear unlikely to back legislation that would only grant limited rights.

Democrats will find persuasive allies in the business community, where large corporations such as Eli Lilly & Co. and Cummins are also advocating for anti-discrimination laws covering employment, housing and public accommodations – and, they say, nothing less.

Senate Democrats unveiled last week a plan to introduce legislation that would secure full protections for LGBT Hoosiers. House Democrats have yet to announce their strategy.

"Unless the Republicans can find some compromise or way of threading the needle here," Losco said, "I think this is going to remain a contentious issue. There's still going to be a lot of debate and concern. I'm not sure it will even be resolved this session."

Andy Downs, a political science professor at Indiana University Purdue University Fort Wayne, said that for any legislation to pass – however strong or weak – lawmakers on both sides will have to make concessions.

"It will be a strange bedfellows scenario," Downs said.

Republican leadership, he said, will want to turn the focus away from the controversial issue as painlessly as they can.

"I bet leadership will be pleased as punch to let it get through as quickly as possible," he said.

Even on Carmel's all-Republican council, Brainard had to reach across political lines for unusual allies. He reached out to Sharp, a long-time political opponent who ran against him in this May's mayoral primary. They worked together to persuade a majority of the council to back the city's ordinance.

They think it will take similarly strong leadership at the Statehouse to pass legislation. And, they said, those leaders will have to clearly explain when LGBT rights and religious liberties are protected.

"I think it's going to take strong Republican and Democratic support at the Statehouse," Brainard said. "It's going to take good public discussion on what the proposal would or would not do. Some people of faith feel that their rights are under attack. Even though they aren't going to be impacted, in my opinion, that's a realistic fear that needs to be dealt with."

Brainard and Sharp said the issue became muddied with same-sex marriage. Each had to continually reaffirm that church services were exempted under the ordinance, and that no one's religious freedom was being limited.

"I think it's just got to be made clear that this isn't about religious freedom," Brainard said. "It's about discrimination. It's about treating everyone equally."

While city leaders in Carmel initially talked about the law as an economic development issue, they ended up arguing that ensuring equal protection for everyone simply was the right thing to do.

"This is the defining question of a generation before us now," Sharp said. "I would never compare sexual orientation with 600 years of slavery, so it's not exactly the same as the Civil Rights movement. But it's as close as we are likely to see in our lifetime."

Socially conservative groups and churches implored council members to vote against the ordinance through a barrage of emails, phone calls, rallies and public remonstrance. Despite the threats of political ramifications, Sharp said his decision came down to taking a moral stance.

"I had a month and a half of dire warnings about what it would do to my career if I voted for this," he said. "My career is as a salesman for commercial laundry products. Politics is a passion. And this was the right thing to do."

Mo Merhoff, president of the local chamber of commerce, believes the ordinance would have failed in Carmel without the support of both the mayor and council president.

"Perhaps this shows there is still hope for bipartisan leadership when an issue is important and people can set aside their political differences," she said.

The question is whether similar cooperation will be possible among the state's deeply divided legislators.

Angie’s List, Salesforce among members of tech coalition to support LGBT rights

Call Star reporter Stephanie Wang at (317) 444-6184. Follow her on Twitter: @stephaniewang.