AUSTIN, Texas _ Cities like Dallas and Austin will have to undo local laws that protect transgender people from discrimination if Texas passes the so-called "bathroom bill" unveiled Thursday, a proposal panned by the business community that's wreaked havoc on other states' economies.
Sen. Lois Kolkhorst, a Republican, will sponsor the bill. She announced her bill Thursday with Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who has made passing a bathroom bill one of his top priorities for this year's legislative session.
"Martin Luther King, Jr. said, 'Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter,'" Patrick said. "This legislation, the Texas Privacy Act, that Sen. Kolkhorst is filing today, is unquestionably one of the things that matters. It's the right thing to do."
The bill takes cues from legislation passed in North Carolina and Indiana in recent years, laws that have caused substantial political headaches for those states' leaders. Indiana's was amended after fears it would allow businesses to discriminate against the LGBT community, and just last month North Carolina's failed to be repealed in a special legislative session.
Both cost their states millions of dollars in lost business investment. Texas business leaders warn any similar efforts here would simply be seen as a discriminatory, a disastrous repeat of North Carolina that could cost the Lone Star State up to $8.5 billion.
Kolkhorst and Patrick said public safety is their No. 1 aim, insisting they would not have had to tackle this issue if the Obama administration had not meddled in state affairs. Their proposal will provide the backdrop for what will likely be the most divisive and politically perilous issue of the legislation session that kicks off Tuesday.
Texas' bill, Senate Bill 6, will affect local laws, public schools and even state agencies, and will increase penalties for crimes only if they're committed in bathrooms or dressing rooms.
If signed into law as it is currently written, the bathroom bill would mean cities couldn't pass local ordinances that require private business to have specific rules for bathroom, changing and locker rooms and shower use. It would also ban local leaders looking to award a government contract from considering a business' bathroom policies in making their decision.
Cities like Dallas that have passed laws allowing transgender people to use the bathroom that corresponds to their gender identity would be kept from enforcing them. Austin, which requires retailers to ensure there is at least one gender-neutral restroom on site, would likely also be kept from enforcing this ordinance if Kolkhorst's bill passes.
But it is unclear how this would affect cities that have passed broadly worded anti-discrimination laws that protect lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. If a city bans discrimination in public accommodations _ which includes public transport, retail businesses and restaurants _ based on gender identity, would it have to amend or repeal its ordinance, or would the whole thing simply be unenforceable under Kolkhorst's bill?
When asked Thursday how his bill would affect local non-discrimination ordinances, Patrick harkened back to his public safety argument, saying, "This bill stops local cities, local governments from passing policies that allow men in women's restrooms."
Under Kolkhorst's bill, students, staff members and those using shared bathrooms in schools and any local or state government buildings would only be allowed to use the restroom or locker room that corresponds to their "biological sex." A school district, state agency or city found in violation could be fined up to $1,500 for a first and $10,500 for any later offenses.
Kids under the age of eight accompanied into a bathroom "by a person caring for the child" would be exempt. So would custodians, medical emergency personnel and people who require assistance in the restroom. Public buildings that are leased out to private businesses or entities _ like convention centers, zoos and stadiums _ would also be exempt from the bill's mandates.
Currently, public schools are already allowed to accommodate transgender students in bathrooms and changing rooms. But Texas has fought federal guidelines aimed at requiring schools to let students use locker and bathrooms that match their gender identity. They recently won in court after a Texas-based federal judge temporarily blocked the guidelines' implementation nationwide.
The issue of transgender student bathroom use was expected to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court next year. But the justices probably won't end up tackling the topic, experts have agreed, since Donald Trump will likely undo these guidelines when he assumes the presidency later this month.
Kolkhorst and Patrick took just a handful of questions at the Thursday conference, and were not asked how they will define "biological sex." It's therefore also unclear whether transgender people who have undergone sex reassignment surgery or who have changed their sex on their government documents could skirt this part of the law.
Finally, certain criminal penalties would be increased by one degree_but only "if the offense was committed on the premises of a bathroom or changing facility." The increased penalty would apply to a host of crimes, including harassment, assault, prostitution, indecent exposure and murder.
When it comes to enforcement, Kolkhorst promised the bill wouldn't result in "bathroom police." Placing the blame on the Obama administration's public school guidelines, she said she was not filing this legislation "to start a controversy, but to end one."
"I listen to all sides and I work really hard," she said, noting Patrick and her had secretly worked on the bill unbeknownst to her staff for six months. "It wasn't that we brought this fight to the people. The fight was brought to us. The solution found is Senate Bill 6 is both thoughtful and unique."
Chuck Smith, head of the LGBT rights group Equality Texas, said Thursday the bill encourages people to "ignore the existence of transgender people and hurt their ability to participate in public life."
"What was described sounds very much like North Carolina's House Bill 2," Smith said. "Clearly, the lieutenant governor and Sen. Kolkhorst are not giving any credence to the damage that has caused in North Carolina, and they're willfully taking Texas down the same path."
In North Carolina, PayPal and Deutsche Bank stopped planned expansions and the city of Charlotte estimates it lost $130 million when two major sporting events were pulled after the state passed a law requiring people to use the restroom that matches their sex as listed on their birth certificate.
The political bickering over the law increased as revenue streamed out of the state, and eventually officials in Charlotte agreed to rescind the city's local non-discrimination rules if lawmakers repealed the law. A special legislative session was called, but no agreement was reached.
And in Indiana, lawmakers expanded the state's Religious Freedom Restoration Act to prohibit cities from passing local LGBT non-discrimination ordinances. That bill was later amended to ensure the government wasn't effectively legalizing discrimination, but not before its capital city racked up $60 million in lost revenue.
Kolkhorst's bill exactly matches neither North Carolina or Indiana's laws, but the Texas business community said Thursday that doesn't matter. The bill is discriminatory, the Texas Business Association said in a statement, and contradicts the state's "open for business" motto.
"All Texans care deeply about safety and privacy, but Senate Bill 6 isn't about either of those things," said TAB President Chris Wallace. "The so-called Texas Privacy Act won't make restrooms any safer for men, women and children, and it will do far more harm to them than good. This legislation will needlessly jeopardize jobs, investment, innovation and tax revenue for our state, and it sullies our reputation as an open, inclusive and welcoming state."
The question now is whether the bill can weather this criticism to become law, and what it will look like if it does.
House Speaker Joe Straus, a Republican, has said passing a bathroom bill is not a top priority for him in a session where child protective services and public education will likely dominate, and Gov. Greg Abbott said changed might be unnecessary if Trump undoes Obama's public school guidelines.
On Thursday, Patrick didn't shy away from that fight. In fact, he welcomed it.
"We know it's going to be a tough fight," said Patrick. "We are on the right side of the issue. We are on the right side of history."
