[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


               THERE'S NO PRIDE IN PREJUDICE: ELIMINATING
                  BARRIERS TO FULL ECONOMIC INCLUSION
                        FOR THE LGBTQ+ COMMUNITY

=======================================================================

                            VIRTUAL HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                       SUBCOMMITTEE ON DIVERSITY

                             AND INCLUSION

                                 OF THE

                    COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES

                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                            NOVEMBER 9, 2021

                               __________

       Printed for the use of the Committee on Financial Services

                           Serial No. 117-61
                           
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                               __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
46-300 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2022                     
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------   

                 HOUSE COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES

                 MAXINE WATERS, California, Chairwoman

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York         PATRICK McHENRY, North Carolina, 
NYDIA M. VELAZQUEZ, New York             Ranking Member
BRAD SHERMAN, California             FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma
GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York           BILL POSEY, Florida
DAVID SCOTT, Georgia                 BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri
AL GREEN, Texas                      BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan
EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri            ANN WAGNER, Missouri
ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado              ANDY BARR, Kentucky
JIM A. HIMES, Connecticut            ROGER WILLIAMS, Texas
BILL FOSTER, Illinois                FRENCH HILL, Arkansas
JOYCE BEATTY, Ohio                   TOM EMMER, Minnesota
JUAN VARGAS, California              LEE M. ZELDIN, New York
JOSH GOTTHEIMER, New Jersey          BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia
VICENTE GONZALEZ, Texas              ALEXANDER X. MOONEY, West Virginia
AL LAWSON, Florida                   WARREN DAVIDSON, Ohio
MICHAEL SAN NICOLAS, Guam            TED BUDD, North Carolina
CINDY AXNE, Iowa                     DAVID KUSTOFF, Tennessee
SEAN CASTEN, Illinois                TREY HOLLINGSWORTH, Indiana
AYANNA PRESSLEY, Massachusetts       ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio
RITCHIE TORRES, New York             JOHN ROSE, Tennessee
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts      BRYAN STEIL, Wisconsin
ALMA ADAMS, North Carolina           LANCE GOODEN, Texas
RASHIDA TLAIB, Michigan              WILLIAM TIMMONS, South Carolina
MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania         VAN TAYLOR, Texas
ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, New York   PETE SESSIONS, Texas
JESUS ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
SYLVIA GARCIA, Texas
NIKEMA WILLIAMS, Georgia
JAKE AUCHINCLOSS, Massachusetts

                   Charla Ouertatani, Staff Director
                Subcommittee on Diversity and Inclusion

                     JOYCE BEATTY, Ohio, Chairwoman

AYANNA PRESSLEY, Massachusetts       ANN WAGNER, Missouri, Ranking 
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts          Member
RASHIDA TLAIB, Michigan              FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma
MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania         TED BUDD, North Carolina
SYLVIA GARCIA, Texas                 ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio, Vice 
NIKEMA WILLIAMS, Georgia                 Ranking Member
JAKE AUCHINCLOSS, Massachusetts      JOHN ROSE, Tennessee
                                     LANCE GOODEN, Texas
                                     WILLIAM TIMMONS, South Carolina
                           
                           C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Hearing held on:
    November 9, 2021.............................................     1
Appendix:
    November 9, 2021.............................................    23

                               WITNESSES
                       Tuesday, November 9, 2021

Johns, David J., Executive Director, National Black Justice 
  Coalition (NBJC)...............................................     4
Sears, Todd G., Founder & CEO, Out Leadership....................     9
Walker, Tanya Asapansa-Johnson, Co-Founder, New York Transgender 
  Advocacy Group (NYTAG), and Group Facilitator, Transgender 
  Women's Support Group, SAGE....................................     8
Watson, Spencer, President and Executive Director, Center for 
  LGBTQ Economic Advancement & Research (CLEAR)..................     6

                                APPENDIX

Prepared statements:
    Johns, David J...............................................    24
    Sears, Todd G................................................    36
    Walker, Tanya Asapansa-Johnson...............................    45
    Watson, Spencer..............................................    50

              Additional Material Submitted for the Record

Beatty, Hon. Joyce:
    Written statement of the ACLU................................    54
    Written statement of the Human Rights Campaign...............    56

 
                     THERE'S NO PRIDE IN PREJUDICE:
                      ELIMINATING BARRIERS TO FULL
                         ECONOMIC INCLUSION FOR
                          THE LGBTQ+ COMMUNITY

                              ----------                              


                       Tuesday, November 9, 2021

             U.S. House of Representatives,
                          Subcommittee on Diversity
                                     and Inclusion,
                           Committee on Financial Services,
                                                   Washington, D.C.
    The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 12:05 p.m., 
via Webex, Hon. Joyce Beatty [chairwoman of the subcommittee] 
presiding.
    Members present: Representatives Beatty, Tlaib, Dean, 
Garcia of Texas, Williams of Georgia, Auchincloss; Wagner, and 
Gonzalez of Ohio.
    Ex officio present: Representatives Waters and McHenry.
    Chairwoman Beatty. The Subcommittee on Diversity and 
Inclusion will come to order.
    Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a 
recess of the subcommittee at any time. Also, without 
objection, members of the full Financial Services Committee who 
are not members of this subcommittee are authorized to 
participate in this hearing.
    Today's hearing is entitled, ``There's No Pride in 
Prejudice: Eliminating Barriers to Full Economic Inclusion for 
the LGBTQ+ Community.''
    I now recognize myself for 4 minutes to give an opening 
statement.
    Good afternoon. I am pleased to convene the Subcommittee on 
Diversity and Inclusion for this hearing entitled, ``There's No 
Pride in Prejudice: Eliminating Barriers to Full Economic 
Inclusion for the LGBTQ+ Community.''
    In 27 States, there are no explicit Statewide laws 
protecting people from discrimination on the basis of sexual 
orientation or gender identity in employment, housing, and 
public accommodations.
    And at the Federal level, there are no fair housing or 
credit protections based on expressly sexual orientation or 
gender identity. This puts many LGBTQ+ individuals at risk, and 
youth at risk of experiencing chronic homelessness, 
unemployment, or being unbanked.
    We are a nation of many colors, a rainbow, if you will, and 
today, we will explore the LGBTQ+ community and what it faces: 
Systemic barriers to financial inclusion and employment simply 
because of who they are.
    Just the other day, I was at Metro High School, where young 
students in a science, technology, engineering, and mathematics 
(STEM) program had one of their categories as LGBTQ+, because 
they understood the value of diversity. What a great preview 
for today, for this hearing, and to have so many experts.
    Today, we know it has been documented by a recent Gallup 
poll of 2021 that 18 million adults are self-identified as 
LGBTQ+ individuals. These are our family members, our 
colleagues, and our friends. And every day, these individuals 
face bigotry and discrimination, especially when it comes to 
securing safe and stable housing.
    I joined with my colleagues to pass H.R. 5, the Equality 
Act, that would prohibit discrimination based on sex, sexual 
orientation, and gender identity in any area, including 
employment and housing. This bill is currently pending in the 
Senate, but the founding principles in our community are clear: 
All men and women are created equal and with inalienable rights 
that one does not forfeit due to their sexual orientation or 
identity.
    Yesterday, there was also a young individual there who had 
written an article on racism and diversity, and he stood so 
proudly as he escorted adults to talk about the value of that. 
You will hear more about this young man, as I talk to our 
expert witnesses, and I will give you a quote by him as we talk 
to our witnesses. But let me just say that we have a lot to 
learn about this agenda, and I certainly look forward to the 
testimony of our witnesses, who will not only enumerate the 
depth of the challenges, but also share comprehensive solutions 
to help our country live up to its values.
    Now, I yield back the rest of my time, and it is my honor 
as the Chair to recognize the ranking member of the 
subcommittee, my friend and my colleague, Congresswoman Ann 
Wagner, for 4 minutes for an opening statement.
    Mrs. Wagner. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I want to 
thank all of our witnesses for joining us today as we examine 
policies that promote economic success for all Americans, 
Federal protections against discrimination, the benefits of a 
diverse workforce, and the ways in which corporate culture 
shifts that create a more inclusive environment are proving 
effective throughout the private sector, including the 
financial services sector.
    Research shows that companies with more diverse workforces 
outperform their less-diverse competitors. Specifically, 
companies that implement inclusive workplace practices saw an 
average of a 6.5-percent increase in stock performance, 
compared to industry peers. Additionally, inclusive companies 
are able to better attract talented candidates and to retain 
their workforce. A 2017 study by Deloitte found that 80 percent 
of respondents said that workplace inclusion was an important 
factor when choosing an employer, and the business community 
has taken notice.
    In this subcommittee, we have discussed ways that a 
business can improve retention and develop a more inclusive 
workplace. Those best practices include transparency regarding 
salaries and promotion opportunities, mentoring and sponsorship 
programs, employee resource groups, and flexible work hours for 
working mothers and families, to name just a few. I believe 
that every American should have equal access to economic 
opportunities, and I look forward to hearing from today's 
witnesses.
    I would now like to take this opportunity to yield 1 minute 
to my friend and colleague from North Carolina, the ranking 
member of the full Financial Services Committee, Mr. Patrick 
McHenry.
    Mr. McHenry. Thank you, Ranking Member Wagner. I certainly 
appreciate your leadership on these very important issues and 
how we, more importantly, drive inclusion across our economy.
    The promise of the American Dream is that if you work hard 
and you play by the rules, you can achieve success. 
Unfortunately, we know that dream is not a reality for 
everyone. And where we find barriers to economic inclusion, we 
must knock them down. Where we find discrimination, we must 
eliminate it. Every American deserves access to the 
opportunities, tools, and services that can make the American 
Dream a reality.
    I want to thank our witnesses for being here, and I thank 
the ranking member for yielding.
    And I want to thank the Chair for holding the hearing.
    I yield back.
    Mrs. Wagner. Thank you. I thank the ranking member, and I 
yield back the balance of my time to the Chair. Thank you.
    Chairwoman Beatty. Thank you so much. I now have the great 
honor of recognizing the Chair of the Full Committee, the 
gentlewoman from California, the Honorable Chairwoman Maxine 
Waters, for 1 minute.
    Chairwoman Waters. Thank you so very much for holding this 
important hearing, Chairwoman Beatty.
    The fight for LGBTQ+ rights is far from over. While same-
sex marriage and other milestones of LGBTQ+ equality have 
become a reality within the last 10 years, this community still 
faces discriminatory barriers and financial burdens.
    For example, data shows that individuals within the LGBTQ+ 
community often have more trouble finding affordable, safe, and 
equitable housing. Across America, an estimated 20 to 40 
percent of homeless youth identify as LGBTQ+. Additionally, the 
LGBTQ+ community faces difficulties in accessing employment 
opportunities and being positively included in workplace 
environments compared to other heterosexual and cisgender 
counterparts. I am proud that this committee is ensuring that 
these kinds of disparate impacts are not tolerated.
    Thank you again, and I yield back the balance of my time.
    Chairwoman Beatty. I thank our chairwoman.
    Now, we will welcome the testimony of our distinguished 
witnesses: David Johns, the executive director of the National 
Black Justice Coalition; Spencer Watson, the president and 
executive director of the Center for LGBTQ Economic Advancement 
and Research; Tanya Asapansa-Johnson Walker, the co-founder of 
the New York Transgender Advocacy Group, and the facilitator of 
the Transgender Women's Support Group, SAGE; and Todd Sears, 
the founder and CEO of Out Leadership.
    The witnesses are reminded that their oral testimony will 
be limited to 5 minutes. You should be able to see a timer on 
your screen that will indicate how much time you have left. 
When you have 1 minute remaining, a yellow light will appear. I 
would ask that you be mindful of the timer, and when the red 
light appears, to quickly wrap up your testimony so we can be 
respectful of both the other witnesses' and the subcommittee 
members' time.
    And without objection, your written statements will be made 
a part of the record.
    Mr. Johns, you are now recognized for 5 minutes to give an 
oral presentation of your testimony.

STATEMENT OF DAVID J. JOHNS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL BLACK 
                    JUSTICE COALITION (NBJC)

    Mr. Johns. Thank you, Chairwoman Beatty, Ranking Member 
Wagner, and members of the subcommittee, for allowing me this 
opportunity.
    My name, as has been said, is David Johns, and it is my 
honor to serve as the executive director of the National Black 
Justice Coalition (NBJC), the nation's most preeminent civil 
rights organization focused on empowering Black LGBTQ+ and 
same-gender-loving people, families, and communities.
    If there is one thing I want the subcommittee to hear me 
say, it is that while the beautifully-diverse Black community 
is burdened by the problems caused by racism, Black people with 
intersectional identities are often confronted with additional 
nuanced challenges, too often neglected and ignored. I will not 
read my written testimony, but I think it is important to 
highlight three things.
    First, students who are or who are assumed to be LGBTQ+ 
lack the protections afforded to their peers, and the 
challenges they face in schools make it difficult for them to 
be happy, healthy, and successful later in life. My doctoral 
dissertation entitled, ``By Any Means Necessary: Supporting the 
Learning & Development of Black LGBTQ+/SGL Public School 
Students in the United States,'' calls for increased 
investments in school- and community-based support for LGBTQ+ 
youth, and national, interoperable data sets which acknowledge 
that many of us have intersectional identities that shape how 
we experience public institutions like schools in powerful 
ways.
    When I think about this, I often think about Hope, an Afro-
Latinx trans student who describes her middle- and high-school 
years as, ``treacherous.'' When Hope was beaten in a school 
hallway by three unidentified classmates, surrounded by peers 
who laughed at the sight of blood painting her face and the 
floor, she was suspended until she could prevent the abuse by 
changing her identity. As a former classroom teacher, I know 
that students cannot demonstrate what they know and have 
learned if they do not feel safe. And we know, based on data 
collected with our colleagues at the Gay, Lesbian, & Straight 
Education Network (GLSEN), that Black LGBTQ+ students find 
schools to be hostile and unwelcoming spaces, which often 
results in them failing to develop the skills, experiences, and 
relationships needed to be successful later in life.
    Second, as you know, what happens to students in schools 
has a profound impact upon life opportunities and outcomes, 
especially Black lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, 
intersex, asexual (LGBTQIA+) and same-gender-loving youth, who 
are often forced to begin their journey into adulthood early. 
As a result of familial and social rejection, LGBTQ+ young 
people are overrepresented amongst homeless and foster youth, 
and Black LGBTQ+ are significantly overrepresented in both of 
these spaces. Young people experiencing housing instability are 
less likely to complete school, making it difficult to find 
success as an entrepreneur or to obtain a good job.
    At the Black Institute 2021, an event that NBJC hosts 
annually, members of our community described being denied 
interviews, being let go or laid off, and being denied 
promotion opportunities.
    And when discrimination occurs only due to race, gender, or 
sexual orientation or gender identity, thanks to the recent 
U.S. Supreme Court Bostock decision, filing an EEOC claim is an 
option. However, when one experiences employment discrimination 
or other forms of discrimination based on race and sexual 
orientation or more, the pathway to Federal legal remedy for 
harm is more complicated and not plausible at all. It is 
imperative that we close this legal loophole created by not 
protecting people discriminated against due to marginalized 
intersectional identities.
    And I thank those of you who voted for the Equality Act. 
Once codified, the Equality Act will aid in addressing this 
legal loophole. The Equality Act is also important when 
considering how home ownership and housing stability facilitate 
economic stability in the United States. More than half of the 
States throughout our country still lack laws explicitly 
banning housing discrimination against LGBTQ+ Americans. We 
often face discrimination when working with real estate agents, 
requesting loans for housing, and when seeking shelter.
    NBJC's Deputy Executive Director for Programs and Policy, 
Victoria Kirby York, experienced housing discrimination when 
moving from Florida to Maryland. After meeting with a REALTOR 
to tour a condo in Maryland, she and her wife were assured that 
an apartment was available and that they possessed the 
qualifying credit score. And it was only during a post-tour 
conversation when the two women referenced each other as 
spouses, which made it clear that they were not simply friends 
splitting the rent, that the REALTOR then ceased all 
conversation between the property owner and the couple.
    After that painful experience, Victoria and her wife, who 
is a homelessness prevention social worker, decided to purchase 
a home. And, during their housing search, they received 
dramatically different home mortgage interest rates from banks. 
As many of you know, an APR of 4.25 percent, compared to 3.25 
percent, makes a significant difference in how much an FHA loan 
will cost after 30 years. Their credit score or financial 
situations did not change during this process, only the 
institution and the persons processing their applications.
    To be clear, the Equality Act would provide a Federal 
remedy for couples like the Yorks, and single members of our 
community seeking housing security and stability. And, while 
protections based on race exist, Federal law does not 
explicitly protect same-gender-loving couples or spouses from 
housing discrimination. Poverty and toxic stress caused by 
housing, food, and employment instability and insecurity 
increases the likelihood of significant physical, mental, and 
emotional challenges, and collectively, we have witnessed this 
sequence of actions cripple communities for generations.
    Leveling the playing field to ensure that every American 
has economic opportunities is essential to preserving our 
democracy, and it is especially important for Black LGBTQ+ and 
same-gender-loving people and communities, who 
disproportionately struggle economically, often through no 
fault of our own.
    I hope that somewhere in between these words, I have made 
clear the need to eliminate barriers for full economic 
inclusion for Black and LGBTQ--
    Chairwoman Beatty. Thank you. The gentleman's time has 
expired. Thank you so much, Mr. Johns.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Johns can be found on page 
24 of the appendix.]
    Chairwoman Beatty. Mx. Watson, you are now recognized for 5 
minutes to give an oral presentation of your testimony.

STATEMENT OF SPENCER WATSON, PRESIDENT AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 
    CENTER FOR LGBTQ ECONOMIC ADVANCEMENT & RESEARCH (CLEAR)

    Mx. Watson. Thank you, Chairwoman Beatty, Ranking Member 
Wagner, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the 
opportunity to testify at today's hearing. My name is Spencer 
Watson, and I am the founder, president, and executive director 
of the Center for LGBTQ Economic Advancement and Research, or 
CLEAR. In my testimony today, I will be sharing some of the 
most current knowledge about financial well-being and economic 
opportunities for LGBTQ people and the current state of the 
LGBTQ wealth gap.
    Like other underserved communities, the LGBTQ people 
experience a wealth gap as compared to heterosexual and 
cisgendered peers. LGBTQ people report smaller incomes than 
non-LGBTQ people do and are more likely to live in poverty than 
non-LGBTQ people. One in five LGBTQ adults in the United States 
in 2019 reported earning less than $25,000 a year, which is 1.5 
times more often than for non-LGBTQ people. And 1 in 20 
reported earning less than $5,000 a year, which was 2.5 times 
more often than for non-LGBTQ adults. Transgender people are 4 
times more likely to make less than $10,000 a year than the 
general population.
    To bridge the gap between their income and their expenses, 
LGBTQ people are more likely to make use of government benefits 
and other sources of financial support than are non-LGBTQ 
people. LGBTQ people are 1.8 times more likely to make use of 
the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, than 
non-LGBTQ adults, and are 2 times more likely to make use of 
government housing assistance programs.
    LGBTQ people are more likely to be unemployed or 
underemployed than are non-LGBTQ people. In 2019, LGBTQ adults 
were 1.8 times more likely to report that they were unemployed 
and looking for work than non-LGBTQ adults. And one-third of 
LGBTQ adults who were employed said that they had wanted to 
work more in the previous month. Employment gaps particularly 
affect younger LGBTQ adults. One in 10 LGBTQ adults aged 18- to 
29-years-old were unemployed and looking for work, which was 
much more often than for non-LGBTQ peers.
    LGBTQ people are also less likely to have adequate 
insurance coverage than are non-LGBTQ people. One in 10 LGBTQ 
adults did not have health insurance in 2019, 1.5 times more 
often than non-LGBTQ adults, and more than one in six Black and 
Hispanic LGBTQ adults did not have health insurance coverage. 
Insurers are also less likely to offer inclusive plans that 
cover LGBTQ people's unique health needs, including gender-
affirming care, and family formation costs such as in vitro 
fertilization and surrogacy. And the lack of adequate insurance 
coverage forces many LGBTQ people to forego needed healthcare 
and to also pay more out-of-pocket for the healthcare that they 
do receive. One in five LGBTQ adults without insurance who paid 
out of pocket for their health care paid more than $5,000, 
which was 1.8 times more often than for non-LGBTQ adults.
    Although home ownership is frequently regarded as a 
principal way for U.S. households to build their wealth and 
financial security, LGBTQ people are less likely to obtain the 
benefits of home ownership because they are less likely to own 
their homes. Less than half of LGBTQ adults owned their home in 
2019, as compared to around two-thirds of non-LGBTQ adults. And 
those who do own their homes are more likely to be repaying 
their mortgage instead of owning their home in full. LGBTQ 
renters were more likely to report that they did not own a home 
because they could not afford a down payment or they did not 
think that they would qualify for a mortgage. And LGBTQ women 
and people of color are even less likely to own their homes. In 
2019, only 43 percent of LGBTQ women owned their home, and less 
than a third of Black LGBTQ adults owned their home.
    LGBTQ households are also more likely to be unbanked and 
underbanked than non-LGBTQ households. In 2019, LGBTQ 
households were 1.6 times more likely to be unbanked and were 
also more likely to be underbanked. Overall, more than one in 
five LGBTQ adults were unbanked or underbanked in 2019. 
Inadequate access to traditional financial services means that 
LGBTQ people are more likely to make use of alternative 
financial services such as check cashers, payday loans, pawn 
shops, and title lenders. In 2019, one in five LGBTQ households 
had used one or more alternative financial services in the 
previous year, which is 1.25 times more often than non-LGBTQ 
adults.
    LGBTQ people are also more likely to apply for credit, but 
they are also more likely, when they do apply, to have their 
applications for credit rejected. Over a third of the LGBTQ 
people who applied for credit in 2019 had their applications 
rejected, and they were also 1.25 times more likely to be 
offered less credit than they had wanted. Transgender and 
gender-nonconforming people are also likely to experience 
difficulties with their credit reports when they change their 
names.
    And so, I want to highlight the fact that the LGBTQ 
community is not a monolith, and LGBTQ people come from 
different racial, social, economic, and cultural backgrounds 
that affect their economic--
    Chairwoman Beatty. Thank you. Your time has expired, but 
thank you very much for your testimony.
    [The prepared statement of Mx. Watson can be found on page 
50 of the appendix.]
    Chairwoman Beatty. Ms. Walker, you are now recognized for 5 
minutes to give an oral presentation of your testimony.

  STATEMENT OF TANYA ASAPANSA-JOHNSON WALKER, CO-FOUNDER, NEW 
YORK TRANSGENDER ADVOCACY GROUP (NYTAG), AND GROUP FACILITATOR, 
            TRANSGENDER WOMEN'S SUPPORT GROUP, SAGE

    Ms. Walker. Thank you. Hello, members of the subcommittee, 
and thank you for holding this hearing on an issue that I 
believe impacts the entire LGBTQ community, or lesbian, gay, 
bisexual, transgender, queer, and questioning community, but it 
especially affects those who are transgender, gender-
nonconforming, and nonbinary, or TGNCNB.
    I am a proud Black transgender woman. I am a combat 
engineer Army veteran, and my past has not been an easy one. 
Despite suffering harassment and abuse verbally, physically, 
and sexually in the Army, I received an honorable discharge in 
1984.
    I went on to study social work at the College of Staten 
Island (CSI), where I was constantly misgendered by my 
professors and was eventually run off the campus for protesting 
for an out lesbian judge, Judge Karen Bernstein, in 1994, 
against remarks by the borough president, Guy V. Molinari, that 
because she was an out lesbian, she wasn't fit to serve as 
attorney general of New York State. I was forced to leave 
college, and I wasn't able to finish my education. I was forced 
to leave school abruptly. I was the leader of the lesbian and 
gay group at CSI. I protested for the judge and was then called 
all kinds of names. A couple of carloads of students rode up to 
me and called me all kinds of gay epithets, and so I wasn't 
able to complete my education as a social worker.
    In 1988, I was severely injured in a car accident, which 
served as a catalyst for me to come to terms with my identity 
as a woman, and I decided that life is too short for me to live 
unauthentically. I tried to find medical care to assist with my 
transition but was turned away, laughed at, and, at times, 
declared mentally ill. One of my doctors called me 
schizophrenic and prescribed me pills for a condition I didn't 
have. From 1990 through 2010, it was virtually impossible to 
find doctors or other medical providers who did not overtly 
reject or minimize my issues. They even ridiculed and mocked me 
for my gender identity. I have been laughed at, misgendered, 
and dead-named, which is calling me by the name that was given 
to me at birth. So, that was often a problem in my life.
    This impacted my life greatly, not only with healthcare, 
but with my ability to find work and safe housing. Many of my 
friends and I were unable to find employment because people 
would not hire transgender folks. Despite being a combat 
engineer veteran, I was forced to rely on food pantries and 
kitchens throughout my adult life. I had a lot of problems 
finding hormones and had to resort to the streets to find them.
    Today, I am here to advocate for adequate housing for trans 
folks, who are often misgendered and not able to live 
authentically and not self-actualized in society, as in Abraham 
Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. I am here to advocate for the 
Equality Act and full inclusion of transgender folks into this 
arena.
    Health and finances also impact one's ability to find 
affordable, safe housing. I, myself, have been turned away 
several times and discriminated against when seeking housing. 
And I have heard horror stories from my friends, both through 
my work at Housing Works, but also through TGNC folks all 
around New York State.
    Transgender women either get physically and verbally abused 
when in female shelters, being told they are men and do not 
belong, or they get physically assaulted, verbally assaulted, 
or sexually assaulted. I am here to help get safer spaces 
created for TGNC people, demanding that there be cultural 
sensitivity training for all staff, and even folks doing 
business with the shelters.
    Chairwoman Beatty. I'm sorry, your time has expired, Ms. 
Walker, and thank you for your testimony.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Walker can be found on page 
45 of the appendix.]
    Chairwoman Beatty. And Mr. Sears, you are now recognized 
for 5 minutes to give an oral presentation of your testimony.

   STATEMENT OF TODD G. SEARS, FOUNDER & CEO, OUT LEADERSHIP

    Mr. Sears. Thank you very much. Chairwoman Beatty, Ranking 
Member Wagner, Chairwoman Waters, Ranking Member McHenry, and 
distinguished members of this subcommittee, I want to really 
thank you for holding this important hearing today.
    I sit before you today as a proud, openly gay American, a 
former investment and private banker, a former chief diversity 
offer, and now the founding CEO of Out Leadership, a B 
corporation, and the very first company in the history of the 
United States whose sole product is equality. Our 88 member 
companies are predominantly American and employ over 7 million 
Americans in every State in this country.
    Distinguished members of this committee, my work with over 
1,000 CEOs and hundreds of businesses in the last 20 years has 
shown me that LGBTQ equality and inclusion should not be 
political. It is neither a Democrat nor a Republican issue. 
Equality is a business issue, and it impacts every American, 
gay or straight, and it reaches every corner of the economy of 
our great nation.
    Since 2008, every study has shown that stock prices of 
LGBTQ-friendly companies outperform their peers from 6.5 to 
almost 9 percent. Additionally, LGBTQ-inclusive U.S. companies 
have higher income for employees, more patents, more 
trademarks, and more copyrights, as well as much higher overall 
engagement and retention than their less-inclusive companies 
and counterparts.
    Unfortunately, due to the absence of Federal protections 
for LGBTQ people, the positive benefits of inclusion are not 
felt universally in the United States, leaving the costly 
burden to individual companies to navigate a patchwork of State 
laws. Recent Out Leadership research revealed that almost one-
third of LGBTQ people will take a pay cut to move from one 
State to another State that has more favorable treatment of 
LGBTQ workers.
    Diversity efforts have to be inclusive. Time and again, 
countless Federal and State bills are introduced to promote 
diversity, inclusion, and disclosure that completely omit and 
exclude the LGBTQ community. LGBTQ people are still not a 
federally-protected category, as was mentioned earlier today, 
and that is something most Americans actually don't know.
    Importantly, as my fellow witnesses have noted today, 
racial justice and gender equality must continue to be a core 
and inseparable part of the fight for LGBTQ equality. The most 
vulnerable LGBTQ households in America hold multiple 
intersectional identities, and that compounds the burden of 
discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity 
that they experience.
    Post-pandemic data shows that LGBTQ households report 
economic outcomes that are 2 times worse than heterosexual and 
cisgender peers, including food insecurity, unemployment, 
eviction, and difficulty paying for household expenses, with 
LGBTQ Americans of color suffering the greatest impact.
    This past year, Out Leadership has championed 3 bills at 
the Federal level: H.R. 1187 on inclusive governance; H.R. 1443 
on LGBTQ access to credit; and, of course, the Equality Act, 
which passed the House of Representatives earlier this year. 
And I want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the 
leadership of this committee and thank you for your work on 
this important bill.
    But, on behalf of the members of Out Leadership and the 
entire business community, we advocate specifically for the 
following: First and foremost, the passage of the Equality Act. 
Without it, LGBTQ people will continue to be subject to State-
level discrimination and the constant chipping away of Federal 
protections, even as we saw just last week from a Federal judge 
around Title IX.
    Second, the expansion of diversity definitions for board 
diversity and disclosure mandates to be LGBTQ-exclusive and 
intersectional for all regulated entities and businesses in the 
United States. Currently, just 19 of the Fortune 500 companies 
include LGBTQ leaders in the definition of board diversity, and 
that has resulted in just 29 out board members, or half a 
percent of the entire Fortune 500.
    Third, we advocate for the inclusion of data collection on 
the LGBTQ community and all Federal Government data collection 
surveys as we have just recently seen with the U.S. Census. If 
we count, we matter.
    Fourth, a commitment to the freedom of religion, that does 
not include a religious right to discriminate.
    And finally, the promotion of economic security and 
financial stability of LGBTQ people by fostering inclusive 
labor practices and workplace policies that include access to 
credit and capital.
    Distinguished committee members, LGBTQ-inclusive diversity 
is just simply good for business: 25 years of research has 
shown us that companies with LGBTQ inclusive policies 
outperform their peers on every measure of success from 
increased engagement to decreased turnover to innovation to 
stock price. In a market economy, businesses must invest in 
activities that are in their economic best interests, and 
LGBTQ-inclusive diversity fits that bill.
    There are clear economic consequences to discrimination as 
well, which is why 92 percent of the Fortune 500 already 
protect their LGBTQ employees, and thousands of U.S. companies 
have invested in equality, diversity, and inclusion.
    But individual companies can only do so much. Structural 
challenges that remain must be addressed by the Federal 
Government and, importantly, this very committee. The patchwork 
of State laws across 29 States where LGBTQ Americans are not 
protected stands in the way of progress. I ask this committee 
to undertake this important work, and Out Leadership and our 
company stands ready to support you in it.
    Thank you for the opportunity to appear today, and I look 
forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Sears can be found on page 
36 of the appendix.]
    Chairwoman Beatty. Thank you so much, Mr. Sears, and all of 
the expert witnesses today. I cannot tell you how informative, 
how needed, and how impressive you all were in providing 
information to us.
    And, with that said, I now recognize myself for 5 minutes 
for questions.
    We have heard a lot about the exclusion and the impact as 
it relates to employment, as it relates to housing, as it 
relates to finances and a whole host of things. Earlier in my 
opening statement, I talked about being at the Metro High 
School. There was a young Black man who came up to me, whom I 
had mentored, and he shared his experiences over the last few 
years. And I want to thank him for his work, and thank him for 
his paper, and writing about how we are still dealing with 
racism and how we are still evaluating the efficacy of 
initiatives.
    And let me share with everyone this quote. He said, ``For 
example, financial support of the initiatives is not always 
present in the amount that is needed.'' And we heard that from 
you.
    One of the most frequently-reported suggestions for better 
efficacy and equity is better and more commitment to financial 
support of the initiatives over a long period of time. We need 
to give more support to our topic today. And, hopefully, this 
is just opening the door.
    With that, let me ask Mx. Watson, there are individuals in 
the LGBTQ+ community who feel alienated from accessing 
traditional financial services due to implicit and explicit 
biases from bank employees. Could you recommend some 
suggestions or practices that financial institutions can employ 
or create to be more inclusive?
    Mx. Watson. As you have mentioned, LGBTQ people, and 
particularly transgender and gender-nonconforming people, do 
experience harassing and insensitive treatment frequently from 
customer service representatives and from financial 
professionals when they seek financial services. And, in order 
to address that, I do think that it would behoove many 
financial firms and other professionals to engage in cultural 
competency training in order to increase their understanding 
and awareness of LGBTQ people's identities and how to provide 
sensitive and affirming services for them.
    Chairwoman Beatty. Thank you.
    Ms. Walker, at the Federal level, there are no fair housing 
or credit protections based on sexual orientation or gender 
identity. Can you share with us if you have had any experiences 
with LGBTQ+ individuals [inaudible] due to the absence of these 
protections?
    Ms. Walker. Yes. Many trans people are denied because their 
name might not match their documents, and they can be refused 
housing for that. And most staff do not have cultural 
sensitivity training and are not prepared to meet with the 
transgender person. Some of the ignorance against transgender 
people is willful ignorance, and they misgender trans people, 
which I would consider hate speech. I think more ongoing 
cultural sensitivity training to handle TGNC customers would be 
appropriate. And also to change the documentation, change it in 
the computer. And it is very important to start collecting data 
on us. Currently, data is not being collected on the TGNCNB 
community.
    Chairwoman Beatty. Thank you, Ms. Walker.
    Mr. Johns, there is a poll from the Human Rights Campaign 
which revealed that the COVID-19 pandemic positioned many 
LGBTQ+ individuals at a greater risk of being unemployed. Any 
comments on that?
    Mr. Johns. Yes. We should be clear that Black people 
generally, and Black LGBTQIA people are most likely to be 
unemployed or underemployed or show up in spaces where we are 
exposed to the greatest level of risk. So, providing resources, 
including loan forgiveness and other forms of reparation and 
support, is incredibly important while we continue to work 
through the pandemic.
    Chairwoman Beatty. Thank you so much, and my time is up.
    At this time, I would like to go to the gentlewoman from 
Missouri, Mrs. Wagner, who is now recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Wagner. I thank the Chair.
    Mr. Sears, could you elaborate and tell me why access to 
credit is important in achieving economic freedom and 
prosperity? Just in general, before we set the table here.
    Mr. Sears. Sure. Thank you for the question, and thank you 
for your support of this work. I don't think 5 minutes is going 
to give us nearly enough time to adequately answer that 
question, unfortunately.
    As my colleagues have noted, access to capital in our 
country is the underpinning of literally everything that moves 
our economy. If LGBTQ people can't have access to mortgages, we 
can't own homes. If we end up paying more on APR, as my 
colleague Spencer mentioned, we are literally being taken 
advantage of by the system.
    And so, if we look at even the bill that is under 
discussion, it is about reporting. It is about making sure 
LGBTQ people are listed in that definition of diversity so that 
we can measure access to credit and housing, and how that 
impacts our economic outcomes.
    Mrs. Wagner. And, Mr. Sears, how can our financial 
institutions build relationships to foster financial literacy, 
for instance?
    Mr. Sears. Interestingly, they have been for many, many 
years. One of my favorite programs was at Merrill Lynch many 
years ago, called Investing Pays Off (IPO). That was started 
almost 25 years ago on the idea, actually, that Charlie 
Merrill, who was the founder of Merrill Lynch, started when he 
would write to widows of World War II veterans and offer advice 
for how they could invest in their pensions. And so, the 
opportunity for these financial institutions to expand what 
they have been doing for many years, I think is significant, 
and they actually are doing it.
    If you look at Investing Pays Off for Merrill, or 10,000 
Small Businesses from Goldman Sachs, there are significant 
investments these companies are making, but the challenge is 
that we don't have the numbers. We don't have the ability for 
these institutions to provide the access because we are not 
counted as an LGBTQ community. If Goldman wants to expand their 
10,000 Small Businesses to focus on LGBTQ small businesses, the 
National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce is the only place 
they can go for that data. The Federal Government does not have 
that data. So, once we can actually count, then we can start to 
be a part of it, yes.
    Mrs. Wagner. I thank you for that statement, and that, 
then, kind of tees things up for Mx. Watson, because you talk, 
Mx. Watson, about data collection. And can you elaborate on 
that a little bit more, as Mr. Sears has just kind of teed up 
here?
    Mx. Watson. Yes. There is a significant information gap 
about LGBTQ people because there is inadequate data collection 
of sexual orientation and gender identity in Federal surveys. 
So, it is important for all of the data collections where we 
are examining economic well-being, but really just our 
communities overall, that we include questions that ask people 
about their gender identity and their sex as assigned at birth 
and their sexual orientation. And that would vastly improve our 
understanding of the unique circumstances that LGBTQ people 
experience.
    And, also, it is important to include these in enforcement 
data collections, such as the Mortgage Disclosure Act or the 
forthcoming 1071 data collection for small businesses.
    Mrs. Wagner. Thank you.
    And, Mr. Sears, what steps can financial institutions take 
to support the unbanked and underbanked communities? What are 
some of your thoughts in that arena?
    Mr. Sears. At the very least, looking at the policies. One 
of my colleagues mentioned that LGBTQ people are still excluded 
from so many policies. I would use HSBC Life as a great 
example. They rewrote the definition of insurable interest to 
expand that definition to include LGBTQ families, including in 
places like Asia where gay couples sill have no relationship 
recognition.
    And, if you look at the policies through every single of 
these financial institutions, there are significant 
opportunities to identify those exact same areas. If we are not 
counted in how these companies approach, then they are not 
going to be able to actually include us across-the-board.
    Mrs. Wagner. Right. Thank you very much. And thank you all 
for your testimony here today.
    Madam Chairwoman, I will yield back the brief time that I 
have left. Thank you.
    Chairwoman Beatty. And thank you so much.
    That was our Ranking Member, Congresswoman Ann Waters--
Congresswoman Ann Wagner.
    And I am saying, ``Waters,'' because I now see that our 
Chair of the full Financial Services Committee is in the room. 
And so, at this time, it gives me great pleasure to yield to 
Chairwoman Waters.
    Chairwoman Waters. Thank you very much, Mrs. Beatty. I 
appreciate the opportunity.
    And I just wanted to make clear that, in March of 2021, the 
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued an 
interpretive rule which clarified that the Equal Credit 
Opportunity Act (ECOA), which outlaws discrimination in lending 
and credit decisions, absolutely includes protections against 
sexual orientation discrimination and gender identity 
discrimination.
    I just want to go further with a question about housing 
barriers. A large body of research, as I think has been 
indicated, demonstrates that discrimination threatens access to 
housing and the stability of individuals in the LGBTQ+ 
community. Members of the LGBTQ+ community are more likely to 
experience homelessness while enduring discrimination and 
harassment that extends their length of homelessness.
    There are approximately 8,900 homeless youth in Los Angeles 
County identifying as LGBTQ. Transgender individuals in 
particular are at an increased risk for violence and 
discrimination, which keeps them from accessing necessary 
shelter and services. In April, HUD issued program guidance on 
supporting inclusive housing and shelters for transgender 
people, which includes using transgender-inclusive language, 
intervening in conflicts to promote safety, and holding staff 
and residents accountable for behavior within shelters.
    I just want to go to a point of discussion that was not 
necessarily included in this discussion. And I don't think 
that, when our witnesses came today, they were asked to include 
any information about something that is happening in our 
society today as it relates to transgender. There is a 
discussion going on right now, a big discussion, and it is 
about, ``The Closer,'' and it is about David Chappelle, and it 
is about a woman that we learned about who committed suicide 
after identifying and working with and opening a show that she 
had been invited to participate in by David Chappelle. And I 
have really sad thoughts about her. I think her name is Daphne, 
and it is Dorman, and I tear up when I think about her.
    And, of course, David Chappelle is a brilliant comedian, 
and there is this discussion going on, and I am trying to 
listen to everything that has been said from the transgender 
community or from David Chappelle, on and on and on. I don't 
want to get into that today, but I don't want us to pretend 
that this is not going on and that we are only concerned about 
the housing and the homelessness and all of that. We are 
concerned about all of that, but we are also concerned about 
another kind of discussion that is going on.
    And, while I am not going to ask any particular questions 
about it today, I would ask Ms. Tanya Asapansa-Johnson Walker 
to please give me a call, and I will arrange a meeting with 
myself and Mrs. Beatty, because I want to talk to you, and I 
want you to share with me what is going on, what you think, 
what you feel, and in what way we can show our concern.
    With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
    Chairwoman Beatty. Thank you so much to Chairwoman Waters 
for extending that invitation. Again, thank you.
    The gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Gonzalez, is now recognized 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Gonzalez of Ohio. Thank you, Chairwoman Beatty and 
Ranking Member Wagner, for holding this hearing today, and 
thank you to our witnesses for joining us today. Thank you for 
sharing your stories, and how they have impacted not only your 
lives, but also the lives of the communities for whom you so 
passionately advocate. The work you continue to do to advocate 
for those in similar situations is admirable.
    I think it is fair to say, I certainly hope so, that no one 
on this committee or subcommittee condones any sort of racism, 
hate, or discrimination. I believe that. I believe that people 
should not have to live in fear of any kind of violence being 
perpetrated toward them because of who they are.
    Additionally, I want to extend my thanks to Ms. Walker. 
Veterans Day is coming up, and you served our country quite 
admirably. And I have always believed we owe our deepest 
[inaudible] big sacrifice and one for which we are grateful. 
So, I want to thank you for that.
    In the United States, I think that all people should have 
access to economic opportunities to create a better future for 
themselves and their loved ones. That is one of my top 
priorities here in Congress and on this committee, is how do we 
empower more families, no matter what background you come from, 
to make sure that everybody has an opportunity for the American 
Dream.
    I am the son of immigrants. My family, my father immigrated 
here from Cuba in the 1960s and certainly had to overcome 
barriers throughout his life, and we want to make sure on this 
committee that we eliminate as many of those barriers as 
humanly possible for everybody.
    And, with that, I have proudly supported home ownership 
legislation as one of those initiatives. I have been supportive 
of legislation that would extend protections to people who are 
discriminated against based on sex or sexual orientation. No 
one should be denied housing access because of their sexual 
orientation or gender identity. I simply don't believe that is 
right. It is my hope that we can hear more on that topic and 
find effective bipartisan solutions where problems may exist.
    Ms. Walker, I want to start with you. I think you mentioned 
as well in your testimony--you provided a list of ideas that 
HUD could implement to best benefit the LGBTQ+ community, 
particularly elders. One way was to provide guidance to 
community partners and share best practices. Could you detail 
for our committee just what some of that guidance could look 
like? And what are the best practices that you think would have 
the biggest impact for these communities?
    Ms. Walker. First of all, definitely, we need cultural 
sensitivity training for all staff and folks doing business 
with shelters. We need fully-staffed supportive housing with 
social workers, mental health professionals, and medical care 
on staff. We also need transitional and permanent housing to 
help address the needs of our community. So, we need wraparound 
services, I would say, in these shelters and in this 
transitional housing to adequately provide for the TGNCNB 
community at this point.
    Mr. Gonzalez of Ohio. Just as a follow-up, on the 
sensitivity training side, I think that makes a lot of sense. 
My question is, when confronted with some of the challenges in 
the shelters with folks who may not be--they may not be making 
folks feel as welcome as they otherwise should--is it your 
belief that it is what I would call sort of accidental 
ignorance, like, ``Hey, I just don't know exactly what to say 
and do in this situation; I don't want to be offensive, but I 
don't really know?'' Or do you think it is more willful 
discrimination or sort of a combo of both?
    Ms. Walker. I believe it is a combo of both, and a lack of 
cultural sensitivity training. I think, during COVID, trans 
people who were in the shelter were allowed to stay in their 
own room. I thought that was wonderful, and I like that model, 
and I think we should keep that model. Transgender people are 
not safe in single-sex shelters. I believe that if trans people 
are housed in their own rooms, it is safer for them.
    And I think that they should have wraparound services in 
these shelters to help transgender folks succeed in society and 
not have to return to the shelter, but also to have life skills 
training available so they will learn how to balance a 
checkbook, how to do credit, how to do--
    Chairwoman Beatty. The gentleman's time has expired, but 
thank you.
    And I have a feeling we are going to be coming back and 
asking you a lot of questions again. Thank you.
    And, with that, the gentlewoman from Michigan, Ms. Tlaib, 
is now recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Tlaib. [Inaudible] pathway to bring many of your lived 
experiences to Congress. It is very much missing here, and so I 
appreciate all of you so much for speaking this truth, again, 
that is missing in Congress.
    I want to--give me some time to kind of go down some facts 
that I think are important. One fact is that an average of only 
about 49 percent of LGBTQ+ Americans own a home, which is far 
less than the overall average, which I think is 64 percent. 
These stats are even lower for LGBTQ+ people of color: 35 
percent for LGBTQ Latino Americans; and 30 percent for LGBTQ 
Black Americans.
    Another fact which I think is really dramatic is that 
LGBTQ+ couples are 73 percent more likely to be denied 
residential mortgages compared to their peers, which I know 
Chairwoman Waters wants to hear about.
    The other fact is the National Transgender Discrimination 
Survey found that among transgender individuals of color, 56 
percent of Native Americans, 52 percent of Black folks, and 51 
percent of Latinx respondents moved into a less desirable home 
or apartment because of anti-transgender bias forced on them 
again, even though they could have had, and wanted, better 
housing.
    These are just a few of countless statistics that I think 
are really important. I hate [inaudible] statistics, but this 
is lived experiences, real lives. But, as you can all see, and 
for many of my colleagues, housing discrimination against our 
LGBTQ Americans is a major crisis in our country. Three years 
ago, in Michigan, a person could actually be fired from their 
job simply because of whom they love. Fortunately, Governor 
Whitmer eliminated that gross civil rights violation, but it 
shows just how prevalent these discriminatory laws remain in 
modern times.
    Ms. Walker, first of all, I cannot stress to you how much 
you are inspiring so many who are incredibly excited that you 
are testifying before our subcommittee. And so, I wanted to 
leave some time for you, as well as others on the panel, to 
really talk about things that we didn't ask you about, really, 
the trauma that comes with living as you are in our country, 
and how do you think we should be addressing it in Congress?
    Mr. Johns. If I may, I want to lift up two things.
    I thank you for those comments, Representative Tlaib. One 
is, to my Congresswoman Maxine Waters, thank you for your 
leadership. I want to include a section in our testimony 
describing the silent epidemic of violence that our trans 
siblings are facing, which is often hidden in the shadows of 
the violence that Black people are facing more generally. I 
have already reached out to Chastity, but I welcome the 
opportunity to further that discussion as well.
    And then, very much related to the previous conversation 
about the challenges with shelters, I want to offer up two 
things that are potential remedies that would prevent people 
from needing shelter, and one is decriminalizing sex work. It 
is often the case that Black trans folks, in particular Black 
trans women, are forced into sex work as a result of not being 
able to show up or be offered job interviews or promotion 
opportunities or support in more traditional economies, and so 
we should have more meaningful conversations at the Federal 
level about decriminalizing that work.
    And very much related to that, there are a number of Black 
LGBTQIA+ folks who also face economic hardship as a result of 
cannabis use or distribution. So, decriminalizing cannabis is 
also something that should be considered as we have these 
holistic conversations.
    Ms. Tlaib. If no one else on the panel has more to share, I 
will yield back to the Chair.
    Chairwoman Beatty. Thank you so much for your comments, and 
thank you to the witnesses for responding.
    Ranking Member Wagner, do you have any more Republican 
Members in the queue?
    Mrs. Wagner. Not on yet, but I will let you proceed through 
your ranks, and we will see who joins.
    Chairwoman Beatty. Okay. Thank you so much.
    The gentlewoman from Pennsylvania, Ms. Dean, is now 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Dean. Thank you, Chairwoman Beatty. Thank you very 
much, and thank you to those who have come today to offer your 
powerful testimony.
    I have been thinking a lot about small businesses. I 
represent suburban Philadelphia, Montgomery and Berks Counties 
right outside of Philadelphia. Building a small business is the 
dream of many Americans, and I am particularly interested in, 
what are the obstacles that LGBTQ+ small business owners and 
entrepreneurs face in engaging the financial system?
    Maybe, Mr. Sears, I could start with you and then maybe go 
to Mr. Johns?
    Mr. Sears. Sure. Thank you for that question, and thank you 
for the work that you are doing in Philadelphia. I know my 
friend and colleague, Brian Sims, is doing a lot of great work 
in the State as well. So, I want to thank you for that support.
    Ms. Dean. Yes, in the Pennsylvania House of 
Representatives.
    Mr. Sears. He is quite a tremendous leader in our community 
and in your State.
    So, to your question, I would say several things. I think 
if you look at the number of--I will take it out of LGBTQ for a 
second--minorities in the United States start more businesses 
at a rate that is almost double that of the average population, 
and why is that? Because of discrimination that still exists in 
the corporate America structure, despite the fact that 92 
percent of Fortune 500 companies have nondiscrimination 
policies, we all live and work in States that don't actually 
have that as a trickle down. So, even the trailing spouses of 
people who are protected by the Fortune 500 do not experience 
that same protection in the State in which they live. So, the 
reason for the small businesses, I think, is based on that.
    Then, when they get into the marketplace, you look at the 
access to discrimination that still exists from religious-based 
discrimination all the way through to refusal-of-service laws 
that still allow people to deny service and to deny credit and 
access to people based on, ``sincerely held religious 
beliefs.'' And that is something that we have not talked about 
in this committee yet, but I do think the religious right to 
discriminate has to be addressed by this committee. It is not 
directly related as a financial services, ``issue,'' but it is 
the single-largest reason LGBTQ people experience 
discrimination in our country, and it is a false choice that we 
have created.
    Over half of LGBTQ Americans consider themselves religious. 
It is not pitting religion against LGBTQ people, but it has an 
impact on small businesses. It has an impact on discrimination. 
It has an impact on the laws that Chairwoman Waters mentioned 
and the transgender community. There were 131 anti-trans bills 
in 31 State legislatures in our United States in the last 12 
months. They were driven by religious animus, marginalizing and 
demonizing the most-vulnerable of our communities primarily 
because these young people want to play a sport. So, the 
opportunity for us at the small-business level all the way 
through the Fortune 500 to eradicate this discrimination, I 
think is significant.
    Ms. Dean. I appreciate that.
    Mr. Johns, did you want to add to that? And I am interested 
if you could address, maybe, the problem of accessing capital.
    Mr. Johns. Yes, ma'am. I will say three things related to 
that, and I want to just underscore everything that my 
colleague said. One, I mentioned a little bit about it in the 
testimony, but when I think about the experience that our 
deputy director had with regard to accessing capital for a home 
loan, often the discrimination and the ability for the 
financial services provider or the institution to make 
decisions about capital are--it is the challenge, right? It is 
about a person sitting across the desk from another person or, 
virtually, when we think about COVID, making a determination 
based on things outside of their financial portfolio, the 
things that they can otherwise control. And the one thing that 
I think is most important in this context, acknowledging the 
point that Chairwoman Waters made about the March CFPB 
guidance, is that there is no private right of action. And what 
we know is that often, members of our community are 
discriminated against. We are denied access to capital. We are 
seldom given actual meaningful reasons for that, and there is 
no private recourse or private right of action once that 
happens to members of our community.
    And so, passing the Equality Act, as it has been passed in 
the House, would address that, and ensuring that future civil 
rights legislation includes a private right of action would 
also help to address moments when financial services providers 
and institutions fail to do the thing that they otherwise 
should be doing.
    Ms. Dean. Thank you for all of that important information. 
And, finally, Ms. Walker, I will address this to you. I read a 
very shameful statistic. According to our Philadelphia 
Inquirer, 40 percent or more of people ages 18 to 26 in 
Philadelphia--which is my neighboring district, and it is my 
home City--who experience homelessness identify as LGBTQ. Think 
about that: 40 percent of homeless youth are LGBTQ. What a 
shameful statistic for our country.
    Ms. Walker, what are the best practices for assisting 
LGBTQ+ youth to become connected to permanent housing?
    Ms. Walker. First of all, we need to meet the youth where 
they are. I have worked with Housing Works here in New York 
City, and we used a harm reduction approach to meeting with the 
youth. And, also, we need shelters and transitional and 
permanent housing with wraparound services in these shelters 
and in this transitional housing to support these youth to make 
sure they are getting their nutrition, and they are getting 
their education--
    Ms. Dean. I apologize. My time has expired, so I yield 
back, but I would love to get more information from you 
offline.
    Ms. Walker. Thank you.
    Chairwoman Beatty. Again, to the witness, thank you. You 
are going to be very popular, as well as the other witnesses 
with us today, but the gentlelady's time has expired.
    And now, the gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Garcia, who is 
also the Vice Chair of our Subcommittee on Diversity and 
Inclusion, is now recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Garcia of Texas. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and thank 
you for bringing our attention to this very important hearing. 
And I first want to start by also congratulating and thanking 
Ms. Walker for her years of service. I know Veterans Day is not 
until later this week, but Happy Veterans Day, and thank you 
for your service. And I hope that you completed that social 
work school, because my first degree was in social work, so I 
hope that you finished. But if not, there is still time. We are 
really LGBTQ-friendly in Houston. So, come on down.
    This has been a very interesting discussion this morning 
because we know that the difficulties the LGBTQ community faces 
are not discussed often enough. So thank you, again, Madam 
Chairwoman, for underscoring and highlighting this very 
important issue. Their struggles and how they are treated are 
legitimate. We need to focus on them and make sure that they 
truly do have the economic freedom to build their wealth, to 
build their homes, and, as stated by the ranking member, to 
have the economic freedom that we should have for all 
Americans.
    Of course, all of this is compounded when they coincide 
with other barriers like race, ethnicity, and age, to name a 
few. LGBTQ+ people are more likely to be underbanked and thus 
are more likely to experience barriers to credit access. I have 
said before that access to credit is access to building wealth, 
and, in turn, this lack of access is deeply concerning.
    I want to start with Mr. Sears. Mr. Sears, a 2020 report by 
Equality Texas found that nondiscrimination protections would 
result in the addition of hundreds of thousands of new jobs and 
millions of dollars added to the GDP and tax receipts. I think 
you kind of alluded to that when you mentioned it, and I was 
really surprised. You said that one-third of LGBTQ+ workers 
will take a one-third pay cut to go to a friendlier State. Is 
the reverse true? With Texas passing a really horrible anti-
trans bill this last session, can we expect people to leave the 
State because we are now becoming more and more unfriendly?
    Mr. Sears. The short answer is yes, absolutely. I have just 
spent this last week in California meeting with leaders in the 
tech community, and the Texas bill, in particular--and there 
are eight other States that have passed anti-trans bills 
specifically around youth--those bills specifically came up in 
the tech community in terms of expansion into Texas.
    As we saw in North Carolina, when HB2 passed, so many, 
whether it is PayPal or Salesforce, so many companies decided 
not to invest in North Carolina. Our leadership actually 
convened an investor statement at that time that was replicated 
in Texas. We had almost $4 billion worth of assets that were 
invested in North Carolina, and $6 billion that were invested 
in Texas, which said that discriminatory policies of both North 
Carolina and Texas around trans people increased the risk in 
the marketplace and decreased the return on the assets invested 
in those States. So, there is a direct return on investment for 
equality, and there is a direct economic consequence to 
discrimination.
    So the short answer is yes, absolutely. Companies pay 
attention to this significantly, because their youth, 
especially Gen Z and Gen Y, won't stand for it. They will not 
come to companies that are not LGBTQ-inclusive. And, if those 
companies are based in States that are LGBTQ-unfriendly, which 
so many States increasingly are, it is an economic problem.
    Ms. Garcia of Texas. So there is a benefit, but there is 
also, I don't want to say a penalty, but I guess it is. I think 
that is why it is so important to highlight these issues.
    My next question now is for Mx. Watson. You do important 
work on addressing the barriers that your community faces every 
day. Can you speak to the issues that are created where the 
financial services industry is not actively measuring, 
quantifying, and targeting relief to the LGBTQ community?
    Mx. Watson. Thank you. I do think that the lack of 
attention that financial firms are paying to the LGBTQ 
community and the unique issues that they experience, are 
largely because the financial services industry, as we know, is 
very traditional and is frequently relying on systems that were 
designed with heterosexual, cisgender, and heteronormative 
assumptions in mind. And so, those systems are less able to 
process the unique needs of LGBTQ people and to accommodate 
things such as name changes or to recognize people who are of 
nonnormative genders.
    Chairwoman Beatty. I'm sorry, the gentlelady's time is up.
    But thank you very much to the witness, and thank you to 
our Vice Chair Garcia.
    The gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Auchincloss, who is 
also the Vice Chair of the Full Committee on Financial 
Services, is now recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Auchincloss. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
    Mr. Johns, my question is for you, on housing. A study by 
HUD in 2013 measured the treatment of same-sex couples that 
they received from rental agents when inquiring about 
apartments advertised online as compared to how otherwise 
similar heterosexual couples are treated. And the study, which 
was the first time that HUD had ever studied things like 
housing discrimination, found that same-sex couples received a 
lower response rate when searching for an apartment than 
heterosexual couples using identical emails, trying to keep all 
variables the same except for the sexual orientation of the 
couple.
    The Financial Services Committee has had several hearings 
regarding the importance of housing for employment, health, and 
education for young people. This has been an issue on which 
both the chairwoman of the subcommittee and, of course, the 
chairwoman of the overall committee have been really outspoken 
leaders. How has HUD worked to remedy the discrimination 
unveiled by this 2013 study, and has the agency continued to 
track any rental housing bias for same-sex couples?
    Mr. Johns. I appreciate that. To your first question, what 
has been done, there are two things. One is the provision of 
housing vouchers and otherwise subsidies for housing programs 
for homeless and low-income people. They have not been targeted 
with regard to LGBTQIA+ folks. That is a particular issue when 
we think about the comment that Chairwoman Maxine Waters 
offered acknowledging that a disproportionate share of youth 
were homeless, and the child welfare agency identify as are 
assumed to be LGBTQIA+. And so, I think that is the first part 
of your question.
    The second part of your question, if I understood it 
correctly, is has there been accountability around those 
actions? Was that it?
    Mr. Auchincloss. Well, accountability, but also, has HUD, 
to your knowledge, continued to track any type of bias either 
in rental or actually really in homeowner sales to same-sex 
couples?
    Mr. Johns. I do not have the answer to that question, but I 
will work with our deputy director to circle back and make sure 
that we provide you with one. What we do know is that--and I 
think this comment was made earlier by Mx. Watson--there are 
very few, if any, Federal data collection enterprises that 
account for intersexual identities. And most surveys--and I 
make this point in my formal testimony--will ask about race or 
ethnicity with regard to engaging with public institutions like 
banks or schools but will not then ask questions about sexual 
identity, gender orientation, or expression.
    And then, the converse is true when you think about the CDC 
or the NIH. They might ask questions that include sexual health 
and wellness, but they will not ask questions that also account 
for race and ethnicity. The point here is that we should think 
more meaningfully about Federal data collection and reporting 
efforts that are not only centering on intersectionality but 
that are also interoperable.
    Mr. Auchincloss. I appreciate that response.
    And I want to give anybody else on the panel an opportunity 
to weigh in on housing discrimination against the LGBTQIA 
community.
    Madam Chairwoman, I yield back the balance of my time.
    Chairwoman Beatty. Thank you so much to our Vice Chair.
    And let me say thank you to all of our witnesses today, and 
also to the Chair of the full Financial Services Committee for 
joining us for this hearing.
    Ranking Member Wagner, we have exhausted all of our 
Members, so if you have no other Members coming, in accordance 
with our rules, I can thank our witnesses and adjourn the 
hearing.
    Mrs. Wagner. I thank all of our witnesses. It has been most 
informative. I look forward to things as we move forward, and I 
know that we will continue the dialogues that we have begun 
here today.
    So, I thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I yield back.
    Chairwoman Beatty. Thank you.
    And, again, we thank the witnesses. And I can tell you, by 
the questions from both sides of the aisle, we have a lot more 
that we want to hear from you. And, again, for this first-ever 
Diversity and Inclusion Subcommittee, we are thankful for you 
in helping us grow.
    The Chair notes that some Members may have additional 
questions for these witnesses, which they may wish to submit in 
writing. Without objection, the hearing record will remain open 
for 5 legislative days for Members to submit written questions 
to these witnesses and to place their responses in the record. 
Also, without objection, Members will have 5 legislative days 
to submit extraneous materials to the Chair for inclusion in 
the record.
    Also, without objection, I would like to enter statements 
from the Credit Union National Association and the Human Rights 
Campaign into the record.
    Without objection, it is so ordered.
    The hearing is now adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 1:22 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                            A P P E N D I X


                            November 9, 2021
                            
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                 [all]