Since the backlash against North Carolina’s anti-trans law HB2 began, its proponents have tried to blame the city of Charlotte for passing LGBT nondiscrimination protections in the first place, forcing them to respond. This week, that “no, he started it” talking point bubbled over as the Charlotte Chamber of Commerce tried to pressure the city into rescinding its protections as part of some supposed compromise for repealing HB2. It didn’t work.
The blaming of Charlotte has been part of the HB2 story since before HB2 was even a glimmer in its drafters’ eye. When the city was considering the protections earlier this year, Gov. Pat McCrory (R) warned council members that passing an LGBT nondiscrimination ordinance would force the state legislature’s hand. It didn’t matter that 18 states and dozens of cities have the same protections; they weren’t going to be tolerated in North Carolina. And the state did respond — with HB2, which not only overrode Charlotte’s ordinance but included restrictions on transgender people that no state or city has ever passed.
Since then, when McCrory and others have been held to account for the economic backlash over HB2, they have tried to pass the blame to Charlotte. As McCrory said in a radio interview earlier this month, “The national media kind of thinks that North Carolina did this. No, Charlotte wanted to be the bathroom police with their own standards for private business.” In other words, Charlotte’s pro-LGBT ordinance is somehow to blame for all the pro-LGBT businesses, organizations, and entertainers boycotting North Carolina.
This past Sunday, Bob Morgan, president of the Charlotte Chamber, published an op-ed insisting that to find a compromise with state lawmakers to resolve the “crushing economic suffering,” Charlotte should act first as “an overture to begin rebuilding trust.” Though Morgan claimed the Chamber supported statewide LGBT protections, he argued that the only way to move state legislators toward such an outcome is for the city to cave first and repeal its unenforceable LGBT protections. “Inaction by city council followed by inaction at the Legislative Building will not lead to progress by anyone’s definition.”
Letter from @CLTChamberBob @cltchamber asking lawmakers to let cities pass their own #HB2 ordinances pic.twitter.com/TmHluKd9Ar
— Sharon Smith WBTV (@ssmithwbtv) May 24, 2016
LGBT groups were outraged. There was no guarantee that state legislators would fulfill their end of the informal compromise, nor was there any reason to believe that the action they took would be satisfactory. They would leave the bathroom restrictions for transgender people up to the courts to decide, and possibly only allow for sexual orientation protections if voters approved them.
A letter to the city council from Equality NC, the Human Rights Campaign, and the National Center for Transgender Equality read in part, “We urge you to stand firm, to not repeal Charlotte’s ordinance, and to resist putting what’s easy over what’s right. A deal that calls for a repeal of the ordinance would only tarnish the legacy of your city which you have worked so hard to strengthen.” Equality NC also launched a petition asking Charlotte to “stand strong against discrimination.”
Originally, the City Council had planned to discuss the “economic impact of HB2” at its meeting Monday night, which seemed to suggest willingness to consider such a compromise. Mere hours before the meeting, that item was removed from the agenda, indicating that no action would be taken on the ordinance.
At the end of the meeting, the topic came up nevertheless. Republican councilmembers Kenny Smith and Ed Driggs argued that something should be done to “stop the bleeding” of the HB2 boycotts. Other councilmembers countered that HB2 already preempts the city from enforcing its protections, and that it’s HB2 that is hurting the state, not Charlotte’s ordinance. “I don’t know why Charlotte has to do anything,” Councilmember Al Austin (D) said. The motion to consider repeal failed 7–4.
On Tuesday, the Chamber responded by making public the letter it had sent to state lawmakers asking them to adjust HB2 to allow cities like Charlotte to “bolster their nondiscrimination laws” in “limited circumstances.” The letter did not call for the repeal of HB2, but merely “reforms” that would be catalyzed by Charlotte acting first. At a press conference, Chamber Chair Ned Curran explained that the Chamber was hoping to act as a “shuttle diplomat” between the city and the state legislature, suggesting that there was “an impasse between these two bodies.”
Curran said that that the Chamber was “disappointed” in the city council for not taking “some action that would be a signal to the legislature that they are trying to work together with that body. It certainly make efforts such as this hard, but we don’t think it makes them impossible.”
In fact, he kept piling on the blame. When asked if both sides had indicated a willingness to compromise, Curran admitted, “The first group to publicly be asked to demonstrate a willingness to do that was the city council, so it makes it harder that that group chose not to take some formal action in that regard.”
Curran opposed the idea that the Chamber must be subjected to some sort of “litmus test” of supporting the full repeal of HB2, arguing that it would prevent them from having any seat at the table to move state lawmakers to modify it. “Those that are calling for a litmus test are failing to get any traction.”
During the conference, Morgan also boasted that the Chamber has “a formal partnership with the Charlotte LGBT Chamber of Commerce,” but that soon might not be the case. The LGBT Chamber responded Tuesday that it not only opposes the Chamber’s “recent efforts to push for a compromise,” but that it is “reviewing next steps with affiliation.” The statement went on to say, “The LGBT Chamber notes that its mission, core values and best practices do not align with the current positions held by the Charlotte Chamber.”
For all of this sturm und drang, the only apparent outcome is that the Charlotte Chamber of Commerce has alienated itself from the LGBT community and possibly also the businesses it was trying to impress with this stunt. If the Chamber does not support full repeal of HB2, then that tacitly means it supports some aspect of it.
Moreover, if they were truly asking for the city council to compromise on behalf of state lawmakers, it’s further evidence that those lawmakers are trying to avoid taking any responsibility whatsoever for HB2. It seems they won’t be stopping the bleeding anytime soon.