Though the Senate decided in a procedural vote Tuesday to end debate on a new bill regarding hate crime legislation, critical amendments to current hate crime legislation are still possible.

The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001, sponsored by U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy (D-Mass), removes the requirements, which currently apply to hate crime categories that make them harder to prosecute and also broadens hate crime categories to include sexual orientation, gender and disabilities.

Since 1969, federal law has permitted federal prosecution of a hate crime only when the crime was motivated by race, religion or national origin. It also stipulates that the victim of the hate crime must be engaging in one of the six federally protected activities when the crime is committed, such as voting or attending school, in order for it to fall under hate crime law.

A senior staff member for the bill's lead sponsor said the LLEEA is possible based on constitutional provisions provided through the Thirteenth Amendment and the commerce clause, which give Congress broad powers to combat forms of discrimination. It adds three new categories - sexual orientation, disability and gender - for which the government must prove there was a "nexus between the crime and interstate commerce."

He said a virtually identical bill was discussed in 2000, but after being passed in the Senate, it was thrown out in the conference committee. He said he thinks "things have changed" since then, and that the chances of it being passed in both the Senate and the House of Representatives have increased.

"If we could get the bill to a conference committee there is a very large chance you could see hate crime legislation on the president's desk," he said.

Jeff Sheffo, press secretary for Senator Gordon Smith (R-OR), said the fate of the hate crimes bill depends on "a matter of different factors coming together."

"Obviously it's very important," he said, while adding that the issue being debated during an election year may have an impact.

"Republicans in general have some philosophical and moral problems with the bill," he said, adding that this "hasn't changed" since the bill was debated in 2000.

Despite the political wavering on the issue, Frederick McDonald-Dennis, director of the office of Lesbian, Gender, Bisexual and Transgender affairs, said he thinks a hate crime bill including sexual orientation is a positive and very strong step forward.

"I think the impact would be tremendous," he said.

McDonald-Dennis said he feels it is already difficult to be open and honest about sexual orientation because it could single out individuals as potential targets for hate crimes, but that the steps toward including sexual orientation in hate crime legislation are encouraging.

"It certainly let's us know that the state is concerned," he said.

He said he believes people are more educated now about the need for the inclusion of sexual orientation in hate crime legislation, but it is still "unfortunate" that is has failed to be included thus far.

"I really urge our state government to take this legislation very seriously and make it more broad-based," he said. "When we don't see ourselves in the law, it renders us invisible."

"It says to perpetrators that on some level its okay to do this, that we don't value these people (the LGBT community)," he added.

Ruben Duran, an Engineering junior and a member of Young Americans for Freedom, said he is against the idea of hate crime legislation as a whole because, when prosecuted, hate crimes receive harsher penalties than regular violent crimes.

"Any kind of legislation of this nature is placing one class of human beings above another," he said.

He said that violent crimes are "not by any means acceptable," but that the use of hate crime legislation to combat specific types of violent crime is not the solution. While this type of classification brings crimes of this nature to light, he said, it gives more protection to certain victims than others.

Duran said he felt it was more important to give all violent crimes equal weight in the eyes of the law, regardless of distinctions that might set the victims apart.

"Bad things committed against individuals should be given equal attention," Duran said. "If we want equality, this is this not the way to get it."

Currently, there are 27 states with hate crime laws that include sexual orientation as one of the victim categories, 18 states - including Michigan - that have hate crime laws that only pertain to race, religion and national origin and five states with no form of hate crime law.