Gay rights activists are planning to challenge the White House’s decision to delay an executive order prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in federal contracting and plan to launch a “We Can’t Wait” campaign to urge President Obama to reverse course and issue the directive ahead of the November elections. The effort, which co-opts one of the Obama campaign’s own slogans, will be funded by “Jonathan Lewis, son of billionaire Democratic benefactor Peter Lewis”:

[Lewis] said he would spend $100,000 to fund a “We Can’t Wait” campaign targeting Obama, a takeoff on the president’s own slogan for his efforts to use administrative actions as end runs around what he has termed an obstructionist Congress. The donor’s money will be used to fly victims of discrimination at federal contractors to Washington to confront Obama and his aides and gin up public attention. [...]

“[Obama] has not been able to provide a single valid reason for why he is now refusing to sign the executive order protecting LGBT workers,” the younger Lewis added, referring to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. “It has become increasingly clear that this decision is based on cowardice rather than principled leadership.”

The White House insists that it’s putting the executive order on hold in order to build legislative support for the Employment Nondiscrimination Act or ENDA, which would prohibit all employers from discriminating against gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender employees. But the measure stands little chance of passing in a Republican-controlled House of Representatives and some LGBT advocates were left with the impression that the administration punted on the order because it is “wary of imposing additional requirements on businesses ahead of the election.”

One activist who attended a meeting at the White House last week to discuss the matter told SiriusXM’s Michelangelo Signorile that the administration rational “was weak, it was shallow, it was unpersuasive,” Tico Almeida, president of Freedom to Work, said. “It floated back and forth between different reasons. It wasn’t even consistent. There were a few younger, junior staffers who made some arguments that were just laughable. Really embarrassing.”

White House spokesperson Jay Carney sought to explain the administration’s decision to punt on issuing an executive order that would have prohibited discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in federal contracting. Responding to multiple questions from NBC News, Washington Blade, and Metro Weekly, Carney engaged in an eight minute back-and-forth with reporters and insisted that Obama had decided against issuing the protections so he could turn his attention to building support for the more-comprehensive Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA), which would prohibit all employers from discriminating against gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender employees.

Carney insisted that the administration’s legislative approach is similar to its strategy in passing the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell:

Q: Can you make the distinction between ENDA and signing this executive order? In other words, if he does support ENDA, why not sign this executive order which relates to a smaller part of the population to get that policy started?

CARNEY: I think the DADT repeal is instructive here in terms of the approach that we’re taking at this time…We’re deeply committed to working with partners in the LGBT community on a number of fronts to build the case for employment nondiscrimination policies. [...]

Q: Is this a political calculation?

CARNEY: Absolutely not, the president is committed to securing equal rights for LGBT Americans, and that is why he has long supported ENDA….The approach we’re taking at this time is try to build support for passage of this legislation, a comprehensive approach, to legislate on the issue of non-discrimination.

Watch it:

Gay advocacy groups were disappointed with the administration’s decision, particularly since the order had already been approved by the Departments of Labor and Justice and would have expanded employment protections for up to 16 million Americans.

Several activists who attended a meeting at the White House yesterday to discuss the matter told the Wall Street Journal they “left with the impression that the administration is wary of imposing additional requirements on businesses ahead of the election, not that it worries about taking a stand against employment discrimination.” “They want zero new obligations on business before Election Day,” said one gay-rights activist. “This is an artful way of kicking the can down the sidewalk.”

Obama’s decision was also condemned by Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), who issued a statement expressing his disappointment. “I appreciate the President’s support for ENDA and will keep pushing for legislative action. However, an executive order would be a very constructive step forward and help build momentum to pass the bill,” he said. “It’s disappointing that the White House is passing on an opportunity to make immediate gains for equal opportunity in America.”

After months of dodging questions about the progress of an executive order prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in federal contracting, the White House won’t issue the directive, but will instead study whether gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender employees require employment protections, ThinkProgress has learned. The news comes after White House senior advisor Valerie Jarrett held a meeting with LGBT advocates to discuss the matter.

Existing studies suggest that 11 to 16 million additional employees would have gained protections as a result of the measure, since many “federal contractors do not currently have those policies, and they employ millions of workers.” Among them are Jarrod Scarbrough and Les Sewell, a gay couple who attended Monday’s Easter Egg Roll at the White House to ask Obama to sign the order. “Jarrod works for a company that the government contracts through, and we live in New Mexico — we’re actually protected, we don’t have to worry too much about being discriminated against. However, in June we’re moving to Florida where that protection, we’ll no longer have that,” Sewell explained during an appearance on MSNBC. “Without this administrative action, Jarrod could lose his job and then where would this family be?”

Equality advocates who had been working to advance the measure are asking similar questions. “Today’s news that the White House’s Council of Economic Advisors will launch a study to better understand workplace discrimination against gay and transgender Americans is confounding and disappointing,” said Winnie Stachelberg, the Executive Vice President for External Affairs at the Center for American Progress. “The President should use his executive authority to extend existing nondiscrimination requirements of federal contractors to include sexual orientation and gender identity,” she added.

Earlier this month, 72 Congressional lawmakers urged the administration to enact the order, noting that it would “extend important workplace protections to millions of Americans, while at the same time laying the groundwork for Congressional passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA).” Data show that “43 percent of LGB people and 90 percent of transgender people have experienced workplace discrimination” and that the overwhelming majority of Americans — 73 percent — would have supported a measure prohibiting it.

The delay represents a departure for the president who committed to supporting a “formal written policy of non-discrimination that includes sexual orientation and gender identity or expression…for all Federal contractors” as a candidate in 2008 and pledged to fight for the community in 2009 and 2011. “I’m here with a simple message: I’m here with you in that fight,” Obama told the Human Rights Campaign in 2009, adding, “Nobody in America should be fired because they’re gay, despite doing a great job and meeting their responsibilities. It’s not fair. It’s not right. We’re going to put a stop to it.”

A group of 72 lawmakers led by Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ) are calling on President Obama to “sign an executive order that would prohibit federal contractors from discriminating in the workplace based on an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity.” The administration has begun the process of drafting the decree — the Labor and the Justice Departments have reportedly approved the language — but has yet to issue it.

“This order would extend important workplace protections to millions of Americans, while at the same time laying the groundwork for Congressional passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), a goal that we share with you,” the lawmakers write, noting that the initiative would also build on President Johnson’s Executive order “prohibiting federal contractors from discriminating against employees based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin”:

The opportunity to expand protections against workplace discrimination to members of the LGBT community is a critical step that you can take today, especially when data and research tell us that 43 percent of LGB people and 90 percent of transgender people have experienced workplace discrimination. According to the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law, an executive order prohibiting federal contractors from discriminating based on sexual orientation and gender identity would protect more than 16 million additional workers.

Beyond this executive order helping to address the widespread problem of discrimination against LGBT people, it would also help advance what is viewed to be a best practice in corporate America: creating a level playing field for LGBT workers. The majority of the 50 largest corporations in America, for example, say that adopting inclusive workplace practices – such as adding sexual orientation and gender identity to corporate non-discrimination statements – helps attract the best talent, reduce employee turnover, and overall is a plus to their bottom lines.

As a candidate in 2008, Obama committed to supporting a “formal written policy of non-discrimination that includes sexual orientation and gender identity or expression … for all Federal contractors.” Meanwhile, over 100,000 have signed a Freedom To Work Change.org petition urging the President to take action.

Chris Geidener at Metro Weekly has learned that, as a candidate in 2008, President Obama committed to supporting a “formal written policy of non-discrimination that includes sexual orientation and gender identity or expression … for all Federal contractors,” even though the White House now avoids addressing calls for him to sign such an Executive Order. Over 100,000 have signed a Freedom To Work Change.org petition urging the President to take action and both the Justice Department and Labor Department have approved the language, but administration officials refuse to comment on the matter.

The Obama campaign made the commitment in response to a questionnaire from the Houston GLBT Political Caucus:

The proposed executive order would ensure that the federal government only contracts with companies that protect LGBT people from discrimination, which would impact 16 million employees. The Employment Non-Discrimination Act which would prevent such discrimination nationwide and make such a policy unnecessary, but there is no hope that it will advance so long as Republicans control the House of Representatives. This is in spite of the fact that most Americans assume the protections already exist and businesses of all sizes support them.

This is not the first time the President’s actions have not lived up to his commitments for LGBT equality. In 1996, Obama committed as a candidate for the Illinois state Senate that he supported full marriage equality for same-sex couples. His position has fluctuated since then and has been in a holding pattern of “evolving” since October, 2010.

A new survey from the Public Religion Research Institute finds that a sweeping majority of Americans believe that people who are transgender deserve full equality:

• 89 percent agree that transgender people deserve the same rights and protections as other Americans.
• 75 percent believe Congress should protect transgender people from employment discrimination.
• 74 percent support Congress’ expansion of hate crimes protections to the LGBT community.
• 69 percent of Americans understand what “transgender” means without any assistance.

These results confirm a study conducted by the Center for American Progress earlier this year, which found that nine out of 10 Americans believe transgender people already have employment non-discrimination protections, with similar majorities supporting the protections. Unfortunately, such protections do not exist in most states nor at the national level. As long as Republicans control the House of Representatives, they will likely continue to prevent the Employment Non-Discrimination Act from advancing.

Still, with a majority of the public supporting the protections and the endorsement of businesses of all sizes, it’s only a matter of time until transgender people are afforded the protections they deserve to participate fairly in society. Given the harsh consequences the trans community faces because of discrimination, that change can’t come soon enough.