House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Massachusetts Democrat Barney Frank delayed a vote on a revised version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act this week. More than 100 organizations protested the revised ENDA, which now excludes protection for transgender people, after Frank omitted it fearing defeat of the bill if it included a transgender provision.

“Insistence on achieving everything at once would be a prescription for achieving nothing ever,” Frank said, explaining his action.

The question, however, is what the politically copasetic revised ENDA will achieve. The new bill makes a case for discrimination – it affords protection for only a segment of the community, gays and lesbians. Among a number of other shortcomings, the revised ENDA leaves transgender people to fend for themselves.

According to Frank, the trans-inclusive ENDA did not have the House support it needed to pass – once the revised version passes, he said, he will work on educating his colleagues, and passing a trans-inclusive act.

But, Mr. Frank, how long do we wait for the masses to become educated? Here’s the lesson: Discrimination is unacceptable.

How difficult is that to understand?

Still, we wait – we wait for something to click with our opposition, some light to flash, some grand epiphany, and all the while we lose momentum.

The revised act, the so-called “achievable” goal, is no achievement – it is a half-hearted attempt at securing basic civil rights, and it is a slap in the face to our transgender community.

We’re led to believe that trans-inclusive language intimidates our elected leaders – but the House of Representatives and the Senate passed the trans-inclusive Matthew Shepard Hate Crime Act. Trans-inclusive language isn’t foreign to our governmental bodies.

Leaders know the president may veto ENDA, regardless of whether it excludes transgender people. In fact, there is only a slim chance that any version of ENDA will become law this year.

For that reason, Matt Foreman at the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, who argued to delay the vote, sees ENDA as largely symbolic – an act, in its current state, that does not represent all members of the GLBT community.

If a non-trans-inclusive version of the act passes, and is vetoed, GLBT organizations will revisit ENDA after the 2008 elections, when, Foreman said, organizations could be focused on marriage equality and other issues.

Not only is the trans-inclusive language absent from Frank’s stripped-down version of ENDA – there are other troubling holes in the bill.

The new version of ENDA, according to Lambda Legal, does not protect any employee who may not conform to an employer’s idea of how a man or woman should look or act. “You can’t be fired for being lesbian, gay or bisexual, but you can be fired if your boss thinks you fit their stereotype of one,” said Kevin Cathcart, Executive Director at Lambda Legal, in response to ENDA’s revision.

Also, an employer’s refusal to extend health insurance benefits that are provided to married couples to domestic partners of employees would not be considered sexual orientation discrimination. The old version of ENDA required employers to offer domestic partner health insurance when such benefits are provided to spouses.

So, not only is a segment of our community, our trans-family, omitted from the new ENDA, the act won’t fully protect anyone from workplace discrimination.

Syndicated columnist Chris Crain, the former editor of The Washington Blade, argues that ENDA was never meant to be a comprehensive civil rights bill, and the delayed vote and potential failure of a trans-inclusive act would betray gays and lesbians who are not afforded protection in the workplace.

But, considering ENDA won’t likely see the light of the day, and considering the revised version is riddled with loopholes, why not hold out for a trans-inclusive bill? Why not fight for a comprehensive civil rights act? Why make second-class citizens of our transgender brothers and sisters?

This is no fair-weather fight for basic civil rights. We cannot exclude anyone from protection against discrimination.

The revised ENDA is not acceptable – it isn’t an achievement for the GLBT community. We’ll stand for nothing less than an inclusive bill that protects every employee and every member of our community from discrimination.