Hearing Of The The House Committee On Oversight And Government Reform - Legislative Hearing On: H.R. 4869, The Restroom Gender Parity In Federal Buildings Act

Statement

Chairman Towns, Ranking Member Issa, and members of the Committee. Thank
you for inviting me to testify today about this important legislation. It's also a pleasure to
sit next to Congresswoman Clarke, who worked so hard on this issue in New York.
As the author of Tennessee's restroom gender parity laws, I'm pleased to see this
issue brought to the federal level. About half the States have passed some sort of
restroom parity law and it's about time that the federal government caught up.
Mr. Chairman, talking about so-called "potty parity" sounds like a joke, but this is
actually no laughing matter. We've all seen the long lines at women's public restrooms
while men sprint in and out of the men's room. It's simply a fact that, on average,
women take longer to use the restroom. There are many reasons for this including the
use of stalls, removing clothing and simple biology. But no matter the reason, we should
ensure that our public buildings are properly equipped to accommodate these differences.
I first recognized the need for a restroom parity law in Tennessee while standing
in line at the Starwood Amphitheatre in Nashville. The women's line was tremendously
long and the men's line was barely noticeable. I thought, "This just isn't fair. This is
really an issue of discrimination."
It's not conscious discrimination in most cases, of course. Many of our public
facilities were simply built before we became attuned to this issue as a society. They
were primarily designed by male architects, generally constructed by male engineers, and
most of the regulators who set the building codes were male. Gender parity just did not
occur to them, especially when designing federal buildings that would house a workforce
that was overwhelmingly male as well. But even many newer buildings suffer from a
lack of restroom parity. That's why this legislation is so important.
And this isn't just a question of convenience. There can be serious health
consequences if someone is forced to wait too long to use a restroom. These include
abdominal pain, cystitis, and urinary tract infections. That's why we need the federal
government to step in and ensure proper access for women.
As this Committee considers restroom parity legislation, I would note that it's
useful to keep a degree of flexibility and discretion rather than mandating a set ratio of
men's to women's restrooms. I learned this from my experience writing Tennessee's
restroom parity laws.
The Tennessee Equitable Restrooms Act, which was enacted in 1994, requires
any publicly or privately-owned facilities where the public congregates -- like sports and
entertainment arenas, convention centers, and amusement parks -- to be equipped with
sufficient restrooms. It also requires that more restrooms be provided for women than
men at a ratio to be determined by the state building commission.
When the regulations were issued, they called for a ratio of two women's rooms
for every one men's room, but this strict ratio did not allow for enough flexibility. When
the new Adelphia Coliseum, now called LP Field, was built in Nashville for the
Tennessee Titans in 1999, we found that the number of men at the games so surpassed
the number of women that a two-to-one ratio ended up causing problems for the men.
We had to go back and amend the law to convert certain restrooms in that arena for men.
If possible, restroom parity laws should allow for adjusting the required ratio depending
on the event and the ratio of women to men expected to attend, though I recognize that
this may be difficult to administer.
Of course, the legislation before this Committee applies only to federal buildings
and not to the whole range of facilities covered under Tennessee's law. However, where
possible it is useful to allow for some measure of flexibility and discretion to allow for
special circumstances.
Mr. Chairman, we have made great strides in reducing gender discrimination in
this country, but this is one area where we still have work to do. I think your bill takes an
important first step toward achieving fairness by requiring at least a one-to-one ratio. I
appreciate your legislation and I stand ready to help you in any way I can to see that it
becomes law. Thank you and I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.

Source