|
Bob Casey on Civil Rights
Democratic Sr Senator (PA)
|
|
Evolved over time to support gay marriage
Q: Support gay marriage?Lou Barletta (R): No. Opposes gay marriage & Supreme Court decision to redefine marriage.
Says it should be a state decision.
Bob Casey (D): Yes. Position has shifted over time.
Source: 2018 CampusElect.org Issue Guide on Pennsylvania Senate race
, Oct 9, 2018
Right ongoing wrongs in college admissions
On the Supreme Court review of race and college admissions, Casey said he hoped the court would not limit efforts to "right ongoing wrongs." Smith said people should be judged by character, not by skin color.Asked about wage disparities between men
and women, Casey noted his support for a bill that would require employers to prove that differences in pay are not gender-related. He also noted he voted for a 2009 law that expands the ability of a worker to sue over pay inequity.
Source: Cumberlink Sentinel on 2012 PA Senate debate
, Oct 26, 2012
No constitutional ban on gay marriage; civil unions ok
Q: What about gay marriage? A: I don’t support gay marriage, but
I also don’t support a constitutional amendment banning it. That would be tremendously divisive. However, I do support same sex unions that would give gay couples all the rights, privileges and protections of marriage.
Source: The Philadelphia Jewish Voice
, Oct 9, 2005
Supports Defense of Marriage Act, but not Amendment
On the Defense of Marriage Amendment (which would ban same-sex marriage). “I support the Defense of Marriage Act [passed in 1996, it defines marriage as a union of a man and woman]
and a number of states have passed similar measures. But to have a great constitutional debate about this issue is completely unnecessary. This is used to divide people and appeal to bigotry.”
Source: Gar Joseph, Philadelphia Daily News
, Apr 29, 2005
Allow gay couples to adopt & share employment benefits
Q: What is your position on government requiring that benefits be provided to same-sex partners? A: Employers should be permitted to extend domestic partnership benefits to same-sex couples in committed, long-term relationships.
Q: What is your position on legislation prohibiting homosexual couples from adopting children?
A: Oppose
Source: Archdiocese of Philadelphia survey of Treasurer candidates
, Nov 7, 2004
Opposes Legalization of Same-Sex Marriage
Opposes legalization of same-sex marriage
Source: Lancaster County Action 2004 Voter Guide Questionnaire
, Nov 2, 2004
Increased Penalties for Sexual Orientation Hate Crimes
Supports increased penalties for hate crimes committed because of victim’s sexual orientation
Source: Lancaster County Action 2004 Voter Guide Questionnaire
, Nov 2, 2004
Committed to Affirmative Action and diverse workforce
Q: What is your level of commitment to minority communities?A: When people in this state examine my record on commitment to Affirmative Action and commitment to a diverse workforce and a commitment to doing everything possible in the job I have now
to bring that about, I think I’ll win that competition easily. In the process of my department shrinking by 80 to 100 people, the percentages of minorities actually increased. Not enough yet, but it increased. We hired, by now, over 200 people,
and 20 percent of our new hires were minorities. And our rate of increases in terms of promotions have been higher for minorities and women than they have for the rest of the workforce.
Q: : How do you translate that into encouraging diversity
in the workforce for the private sector?
A: A lot of it is leading by example. But we should hold the venture-capital firms accountable for investing in emerging minority-owned firms. That is where you really move the bar.
Source: Interview with Philadelphia City paper
, May 15, 2002
ENDA: prohibit employment discrimination for gays.
Casey signed H.R.3017&S.1584
Prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity by covered entities (employers, employment agencies, labor organizations, or joint labor-management committees). Prohibits preferential treatment or quotas. Allows only disparate treatment claims. Prohibits related retaliation.
Makes this Act inapplicable to: - religious organizations; and
- the relationship between the United States and members of the Armed Forces.
Source: Employment Non-Discrimination Act 09-HR3017 on Jun 24, 2009
Prohibit sexual-identity discrimination at schools.
Casey signed Student Non-Discrimination Act
Student Non-Discrimination Act of 2011:- Prohibits public school students from being excluded from participating in, or subject to discrimination under, any federally-assisted educational program on the basis of their actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity or that of their associates.
- Considers harassment to be a form of discrimination.
- Prohibits retaliation against anyone for opposing conduct they reasonably believe to be unlawful under this Act.
- Authorizes federal departments and agencies to enforce these prohibitions by cutting off the educational assistance of recipients found to be violating them.
-
Allows an aggrieved individual to assert a violation of this Act in a judicial proceeding and recover reasonable attorney`s fees should they prevail.
- Deems a state`s receipt of federal educational assistance for a program to constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity for conduct prohibited under this Act regarding such program.
Source: HR.998&S.555 11-S0555 on Mar 10, 2011
Opposes a DOMA amendment.
Casey opposes the CC Voters Guide question on a DOMA amendment
Christian Coalition publishes a number of special voter educational materials including the Christian Coalition Voter Guides, which provide voters with critical information about where candidates stand on important faith and family issues.
The Christian Coalition Voters Guide summarizes candidate stances on the following topic: "U.S. Constitutional Amendment to prohibit same sex marriage"
Source: Christian Coalition Voter Guide 12-CC-q3a on Oct 31, 2012
Enforce against wage discrimination based on gender.
Casey co-sponsored Paycheck Fairness Act
Congress finds the following: - Women have entered the workforce in record numbers over the past 50 years.
- Despite the enactment of the Equal Pay Act in 1963, many women continue to earn significantly lower pay than men for equal work. These pay disparities exist in both the private and governmental sectors. In many instances, the pay disparities can only be due to continued intentional discrimination or the lingering effects of past discrimination.
- The existence of such pay disparities depresses the wages of working families who rely on the wages of all members of the family to make ends meet; and undermines women`s retirement security.
- Artificial barriers to the elimination of discrimination in the payment of wages on the basis of sex continue to exist decades after the enactment of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. These barriers have resulted because the Equal Pay Act has not worked as Congress originally intended.
-
The Department of Labor and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission have important and unique responsibilities to help ensure that women receive equal pay for equal work.
- The Department of Labor is responsible for investigating and prosecuting equal pay violations, especially systemic violations, and in enforcing all of its mandates.
- The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is the primary enforcement agency for claims made under the Equal Pay Act.
- With a stronger commitment [to enforcement], increased information on wage data and more effective remedies, women will be better able to recognize and enforce their rights.
- Certain employers have already made great strides in eradicating unfair pay disparities in the workplace and their achievements should be recognized.
Source: S.84&H.R.377 13-S0084 on Jan 23, 2013
Enforce against anti-gay discrimination in public schools.
Casey co-sponsored Student Non-Discrimination Act
Congressional Summary:
- Prohibits public school students from being excluded from participating in, or subject to discrimination under, any federally-assisted educational program on the basis of their actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity or that of their associates.
- Considers harassment to be a form of discrimination.
- Prohibits retaliation against anyone for opposing conduct made unlawful under this Act.
- Authorizes federal departments and agencies to enforce these prohibitions by cutting off the educational assistance of recipients found to be violating them.
- Allows an aggrieved individual to assert a violation of this Act in a judicial proceeding and recover reasonable attorney`s fees should they prevail.
Opponent`s argument against bill:(by Cato Institute reported on Fox News): A bill in Congress that would prohibit discrimination in public schools based on sexual orientation or gender identity could
stifle free speech and even lead to `homosexual indoctrination` in the nation`s classrooms, critics say.
`The real danger is how this will be interpreted,` said the associate director of the Center for Educational Freedom at the Cato Institute. `The definition of harassment could be broadly interpreted that anybody who expressed a totally legitimate opinion about homosexual behavior could be made illegal. That`s a violation of those kids who want to express opposition to LGBT opinions or behavior. People have a legitimate reason to be concerned about this--not because they`re `haters` but because you`re now trying to balance different rights.`
Proponent`s argument for bill: (Rep. Jared POLIS, House sponsor): `Hatred has no place in the classroom. Every student has the right to an education free from harassment and violence. This bill will protect the freedoms of our students and enshrine the values of equality and opportunity in the classroom.`
Source: H.R.1652 / S.1088 13-S1088 on Jun 4, 2013
Maintain LGBT health info on federal websites.
Casey signed Letter from 19 Senators to President Trump
We write to you to express serious concerns about the removal of critical LGBT health and scientific information from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) website, and the removal of LGBT population-based data reports from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) website. These actions reveal a pattern of censorship that fosters discrimination and undermines access to evidence-based health care resources that aid millions across the country.
Administration officials claim that this online information is integrated elsewhere, being updated, or temporarily down for maintenance. We have seen previous Administrations undermine LGBT health due to ideological pressure from conservative organizations by abruptly deleting online health information--similarly under the guise of site maintenance.
To help us better understand these disturbing developments, please respond to the following questions:- Why did HHS elect to remove or change the LGBT resources on the website?
- What plans do you have to communicate these changes to site users and the public?
- Why were policy papers and reports on sexual orientation and gender identity data collection efforts removed or rendered inaccessible from the OMB website?
- What federal departments were involved in making this decision?
- Will the information on sexual orientation and gender identity data collection from the OMB site be made available on the new website? If so, when?
You have repeatedly broken your campaign promises to support and protect the LGBT community, and this latest assault on a vulnerable population could further compromise the health of more than ten million LGBT people. We are concerned that you are putting politics ahead of science and access to evidence-based health care that is critical for millions, and so we call on you to reverse course to ensure that our federal programs serve the needs of all people.
Source: Letter from 19 Senators to President Trump 18LTR-LGBT on Apr 12, 2018
Sponsored bill for ratifying Equal Rights Amendment.
Casey co-sponsored Removing deadline for ERA ratification
H.J.Res.17: Removing the deadline for the ratification of the equal rights amendment: This joint resolution eliminates the deadline for the ratification of the ERA, which prohibits discrimination based on sex. The amendment was proposed to the states in House Joint Resolution 208 of the 92nd Congress, as agreed to in the Senate on March 22, 1972. The amendment shall be part of the Constitution whenever ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states.
Opinion to vote YES (Rep. Terri Sewell (D-AL-7): The ERA was first proposed in 1923, shortly after women gained the right to vote. [The original] 1979 deadline was later extended before it expired. By the end of 1982, 35 of the 38 required state legislatures had voted to ratify the ERA. Nevada ratified the ERA in 2017, Illinois in 2018 and, in January 2020, Virginia became the 38th and final state required to ratify it. If passed in the Senate, H.J. Res. 79 would remove the arbitrary 1982 deadline.
Opinion to vote NO (Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-CA-1): H. J. Res 17 would retroactively remove the deadline for the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment. Regardless of your thoughts on the ERA, the deadline for the states to ratify the amendment expired four decades ago. By passing this resolution, House Democrats are virtue signaling and trying to take a shortcut around what is required in our constitutional amendment process. Those who want to pass an ERA will need to start this process from the beginning. Today`s vote mocks the intentionally high bar set by our Founders to make changes to our precious Constitution.
Legislative Outcome: Passed House 222-204-4 on 03/17/2021; received in the Senate and read on 3/23. [OnTheIssues notes on the duration for ratification that the 27th Amendment to the United States Constitution was passed by Congress in 1789 and was ratified by 3/4 of the States and became law in 1992, a ratification period of 202 years].
Source: H.J.Res.17 21-HJR17 on Jan 21, 2021
|
Other candidates on Civil Rights: |
Bob Casey on other issues: |
PA Gubernatorial: Doug Mastriano Joe Gale Josh Shapiro Melissa Hart Scott Martin William McSwain PA Senatorial: Carla Sands Conor Lamb Craig Snyder David McCormick Everett Stern Jeff Bartos John Fetterman Kathy Barnette Malcolm Kenyatta Mehmet Oz Sean Parnell Sharif Street Val Arkoosh
PA politicians
PA Archives
|
Senate races 2024:
AZ:
Kyrsten Sinema(I,incumbent)
vs.Ruben Gallego(D)
vs.Kari Lake(R)
vs.Mark Lamb(R)
CA:
Laphonza Butler(D,retiring)
vs.Adam Schiff(D nominee)
vs.Steve Garvey(R nominee)
vs.Gail Lightfoot(L)
vs.Barbara Lee(D, lost primary)
vs.Katie Porter(D, lost primary)
CT:
Chris Murphy(D,incumbent)
vs.John Flynn(R)
vs.Robert Hyde(R)
DE:
Tom Carper(D,retiring)
vs.Eric Hansen(R)
vs.Michael Katz(I)
vs.Lisa Blunt Rochester(D)
FL:
Rick Scott(R,incumbent)
vs.Debbie Mucarsel-Powell(D)
HI:
Mazie Hirono(D,incumbent)
vs.Bob McDermott(R)
IN:
Mike Braun(R,retiring)
vs.Jim Banks(R nominee)
vs.Valerie McCray(D nominee)
vs.Marc Carmichael(D, lost primary)
MA:
Elizabeth Warren(D,incumbent)
vs.Shiva Ayyadurai(R)
vs.John Deaton(R)
MD:
Ben Cardin(D,retiring)
vs.Larry Hogan(R)
vs.Robin Ficker(R)
vs.Angela Alsobrooks(D)
vs.David Trone(D)
ME:
Angus King(I,incumbent)
vs.Demi Kouzounas(R)
vs.David Costello(D)
MI:
Debbie Stabenow(D,retiring)
vs.Leslie Love(D)
vs.Peter Meijer(R)
vs.James Craig(R)
vs.Mike Rogers(R)
vs.Elissa Slotkin(D)
MN:
Amy Klobuchar(DFL,incumbent)
vs.Royce White(R)
vs.Steve Carlson(DFL)
MO:
Josh Hawley(R,incumbent)
vs.Karla May(D)
vs.Lucas Kunce(D)
MS:
Roger Wicker(R,incumbent)
vs.Dan Eubanks(R)
vs.Ty Pinkins(D)
MT:
Jon Tester(D,incumbent)
vs.Tim Sheehy(R)
vs.Brad Johnson(R,lost primary)
ND:
Kevin Cramer(R,incumbent)
vs.Katrina Christiansen(D)
|
NE:
Peter Ricketts(R,incumbent,2-year seat)
vs.Preston Love(D)
Deb Fischer(D,incumbent,6-year seat)
vs.Dan Osborn(I)
NJ:
Bob Menendez(I,incumbent)
vs.Andy Kim(D)
vs.Curtis Bashaw(R)
vs.Tammy Murphy(D,withdrew)
NM:
Martin Heinrich(D,incumbent)
vs.Nella Domenici(R)
NV:
Jacky Rosen(D,incumbent)
vs.Jim Marchant (R)
vs.Sam Brown(R)
NY:
Kirsten Gillibrand(D,incumbent)
vs.Mike Sapraicone(R)
vs.Josh Eisen(R,withdrew May 1)
OH:
Sherrod Brown(D,incumbent)
vs.Bernie Moreno(R nominee)
vs.Frank LaRose(R, lost primary)
vs.Matt Dolan(R, lost primary)
PA:
Bob Casey(D,incumbent)
vs.David McCormick(R)
RI:
Sheldon Whitehouse(D,incumbent)
vs.Patricia Morgan(R)
vs.Allen Waters(R,withdrew)
TN:
Marsha Blackburn(R,incumbent)
vs.Gloria Johnson(D)
vs.Marquita Bradshaw(D)
TX:
Ted Cruz(R,incumbent)
vs.Colin Allred(D)
vs.Roland Gutierrez(D,lost primary)
vs.Carl Sherman(D,lost primary)
UT:
Mitt Romney(R,retiring)
vs.John Curtis(R)
vs.Trent Staggs(R)
vs.Brad Wilson(R)
vs.Caroline Gleich(D)
VA:
Tim Kaine(D,incumbent)
vs.Scott Parkinson(R)
VT:
Bernie Sanders(I,incumbent)
vs.Gerald Malloy(R)
WA:
Maria Cantwell(D,incumbent)
vs.Raul Garcia(R)
WI:
Tammy Baldwin(D,incumbent)
vs.Eric Hovde(R)
vs.Phil Anderson(L)
WV:
Joe Manchin III(D,retiring)
vs.Don Blankenship(D)
vs.Jim Justice(R)
vs.Alex Mooney(R)
vs.Glenn Elliott(D)
WY:
John Barrasso(R,incumbent)
vs.Reid Rasner(R)
vs.Scott Morrow(D)
|
Abortion
Budget/Economy
Civil Rights
Corporations
Crime
Drugs
Education
Energy/Oil
Environment
Families
Foreign Policy
Free Trade
Govt. Reform
Gun Control
Health Care
Homeland Security
Immigration
Jobs
Principles
Social Security
Tax Reform
Technology
War/Peace
Welfare
Other Senators
Senate Votes (analysis)
Bill Sponsorships
Affiliations
Policy Reports
Group Ratings
|
[Title9]
|
Page last updated: Sep 08, 2024; copyright 1999-2022 Jesse Gordon and OnTheIssues.org