The House today did not, as expected, debate the Rule governing consideration of ENDA. Our sources on Capitol Hil inform us that the turmoil over the non-inclusion of gender identity has caused a vote to be pushed to "next week or even later."

Yesterday, Rep. Anthony David Weiner (D-NY) demonstrated the depth of the divide when he said on the House floor:

But the question has come up: If we can't include gender identity in this bill, should we do anything at all? Should we take half a loaf.

My colleagues, I think the answer is no. I think we cannot toss this element of an important civil rights coalition to the side. We have to make sure, particularly in the context of us doing what is largely symbolic, there is no sense that the Senate is going to act on this, and certainly no sense that the President of the United States and this administration is going to. Maybe what we should say is we are in this together.

If we are going to make a symbolic stand, the symbolic stand should be let's pass a one House bill with only part of the protections. Let's let the symbolic message be that we are sticking together, that when we say ``GLBT,'' we mean it. And we should do something else. We should also make it very clear to those watching this discussion that we are not going to negotiate against ourselves. We are not going to say if we toss this element or that element off to the side, maybe we will be able to get what we need. There are some things that are immutable, some civil rights that are immutable. This is one of them.

We are going to stick together and pass an inclusive ENDA, or we are going to come back again and do it right.

• WATCH LIST: Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2007