National
Providence mayor makes bid for Congress
The mayor of Providence, R.I., last weekend announced he is running for Congress, making him one of several openly gay candidates slated to be on ballots this fall.
David Cicilline, who’s served as mayor since 2003 and was the first openly gay mayor of a state capital, formally declared Feb. 13 that he wouldn’t pursue another term as mayor and would instead seek the congressional seat that will be vacated at the end of the year when pro-LGBT lawmaker Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.) retires.
In an interview with DC Agenda, Cicilline said he wanted to pursue a run to represent Rhode Island’s 1st congressional district because of the economic hardships his state is facing and Washington’s slow response in addressing the issue.
“Over the past 18 months, it has become very clear to me that Washington has really lost sight of what is happening to the hard-working middle-class in cities and towns across this country,” he said.
Rhode Island has been hit particularly hard by the recession. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment rate for the state in December 2009 was 12.9 percent, putting it just behind Michigan and Nevada among states with the highest unemployment.
“People are sick of reading about hundreds of billions of dollars being spent on bank bailouts and hundreds of billions of dollars being spent on bailing out the Big Three car companies, and they do not feel like Washington is doing anything to improve their lives,” he said.
Cicilline said he’s heard “every single day” about families in his home state who are concerned about whether they can “keep the job that they have, whether they can be able to find work, or whether they can afford their rent.”
“I think what we need in Washington, what I really bring to this work, is [a] very practical problem solving approach,” he said. “That’s what mayors do. We sit around, we sit down and try to bring people together who have divergent views and deal with the hard issues and fashion solutions to come up with answers to address problems every day.”
But Cicilline isn’t the only Democratic candidate seeking to represent his district in Congress. William Lynch, who recently stepped down as Rhode Island’s state Democratic Party chair after 12 years, also announced on Saturday his candidacy for the seat.
In a Sept. 14 primary, voters in Rhode Island’s first congressional district will decide who will be the Democratic nominee for the general election. The winner of the primary will most likely take on John Loughlin, the Republican candidate whom the GOP seems poised to nominate.
Loughlin is an Army veteran and Rhode Island State House member who has had notable success raising money. According to the Federal Election Commission web site, Loughlin has raised more than $246,000 for his campaign.
As a gay man, Cicilline said he’s “very, very committed” to supporting legislation and issues that would “affect my community and provide for equality at every level of state, local and federal government.”
“I think when you get elected to any office, you bring to that office your — who you are,” he said. “All of your life experiences and who you are as a person contribute to the way you look at issues, the issues that you care about.”
Cicilline said he would vote in favor of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and the Uniting American Families Act, as well as back repeals of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the Defense of Marriage Act.
While saying he would as a member of Congress step up to support the LGBT community, Cicilline said he didn’t think his sexual orientation would provide any additional challenge for him in his campaign. He noted that his sexual orientation wasn’t an issue in his runs for mayor.
The Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund hasn’t yet determined whether to endorse Cicilline in his run for Congress, although the organization had endorsed him in previous mayoral bids and his campaign this year for a third term as mayor.
Denis Dison, a Victory Fund spokesperson, said the process by which the organization determines its endorsements is the same for candidates in all races, but that evaluating whether or not to endorse Cicilline will be “a little bit of an easier load” because the organization is already familiar with him.
“We have endorsed this candidate multiple times; it’s not like we have to get to know him,” Dison said. “It’s a matter of doing the work on the ground and talking to local politicos and party leaders and things like that — just to make sure that we have crossed our T’s and dotted our I’s before we endorse.”
Dison declined to comment on whether the Victory Fund and the Cicilline campaign have held any conversations about an endorsement.
Cicilline said he’s looking for both the Victory Fund and the Human Rights Campaign to endorse him in his bid for Congress.
“They’ve endorsed me for both of my previous races — the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund — so I don’t want to be presumptuous, but I hope to be endorsed by both organizations in this campaign,” he said.
Cicilline’s candidacy means he’s joining other gay candidates who are pursuing a run for Congress. Steve Pougnet, who’s gay and mayor of Palm Springs, is seeking to oust incumbent Rep. Mary Bono Mack (R-Calif.) to represent California’s 45th congressional district.
Should Pougnet succeed, he would be the first openly gay person who’s legally married with children to serve in Congress.
The Victory Fund has endorsed Pougnet, making him the only non-incumbent, openly LGBT person the organization has endorsed in a run for Congress.
Dison said the Democratic Party is looking at this seat as a possible pickup, but it’s too early to determine whether Pougnet will be in a good position to beat Bono Mack in November.
“Nobody’s really in the thick of it yet, and that’ll become clear later on, but he’s been a fantastic fundraiser so far for a non-incumbent, so there’s definitely hope there.”
According to the Federal Election Commission, Pougnet has raised more than $563,000 for his campaign and Bono Mack has raised more than $992,000. While Pougnet is behind in fundraising, challengers typically raise less than incumbents.
Andy Stone, spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said Pougnet is doing what’s needed to mount a serious challenge to Bono Mack this fall.
“Mayor Pougnet is aggressively raising the necessary funds and it’s clear that Congresswoman Bono Mack is already feeling the heat from this formidable challenger,” he said.
Pougnet has been heralded as a supporter for LGBT causes and as a strong fundraiser for the campaign against Proposition 8 in California. When same-sex marriage was available in the Golden State in 2008, Pougnet married 118 couples in his capacity as mayor of Palm Springs, more than any other mayor in the state.
Still, some perceive Pougnet as running against a pro-gay Republican. Bono Mack voted twice against the Federal Marriage Amendment and has supported hate crimes legislation as well as ENDA.
Another openly gay candidate seeking a seat in Congress is Ed Potosnak, a former staffer for Rep. Mike Honda (D-Calif.) and public school teacher who’s running to represent New Jersey’s 7th congressional district.
Potosnak, currently the only Democratic candidate running for the nomination in that district, said he’s pursuing a seat in Congress because of the economic hardship that many people in New Jersey face.
“For me, what really prompted me to run for Congress is the fact that I’m not a career politician,” he said. “I’m someone who has really lived through struggles of the middle class, and I think that real world experience positions me well to address the problems that our families are facing.”
If elected, Potosnak said he’d support ENDA and UAFA, as well as repeals of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and DOMA.
Still, Potosnak is running in a district that Republicans have won consistently since 1980. And the one-term GOP incumbent he’s challenging, Rep. Leonard Lance (R-N.J.) voted in favor of hate crimes legislation last year and is a co-sponsor of ENDA.
But Potosnak said the LGBT community shouldn’t support Lance because the lawmaker has been unhelpful in the struggle to win relationship recognition in New Jersey.
“As a state legislator, before he came to Congress, he didn’t support civil unions and he also is undecided on whether it should be repealed in the state,” he said. “He’s also undecided on whether there should be a constitutional ban or a definition of marriage between in a man and a woman.”
The Lance campaign couldn’t immediately be reached for comment on the lawmaker’s position on relationship recognition.
Steven Goldstein, chair of Garden State Equality, said his organization wishes Potosnak good luck “in a very challenging district.”
“Garden State Equality has made endorsements in federal races,” Goldstein said. “We target districts, based on not just issues, but also electability.”
Since Potosnak has only recently declared his candidacy, his fundraising numbers aren’t yet available on the Federal Election Commission web site. Lance has already raised nearly $584,000 for his campaign.
The incumbent gay lawmakers in Congress — Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) and Jared Polis (D-Colo.) — are expected to seek re-election. Dison said he didn’t know whether the three House members would have any difficulty in retaining their seats.
“I just have not studied the races and seen what the position is,” he said. “We’re preparing for that eventuality, of course.”
Former U.S. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) died on Tuesday. He was 86.
The Massachusetts Democrat served in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1981-2013. Frank in 1987 became the first member of Congress to voluntarily come out as gay.
The Washington Blade earlier this month interviewed Frank after he entered hospice care at his Ogunquit, Maine, home where he lived with his husband, Jim Ready, since 2013. The former congressman, among other things, talked about his new book, “The Hard Path to Unity: Why We Must Reform the Left to Rescue Democracy.”
The book is scheduled for release on Sept. 15.
NBC Boston reported Frank’s sister, Ann Lewis, and a close family friend confirmed his death.
The Blade will update this article.
Federal Government
Texas Children’s Hospital reaches $10 million settlement with DOJ over gender-affirming care
Clinic specializing in detransition care will be established
The Justice Department announced May 15 that it has reached a settlement with Texas Children’s Hospital, one of the nation’s top pediatric hospitals.
Under the agreement, the hospital will pay more than $10 million in damages and civil penalties related to its provision of gender-affirming care and will establish a clinic specializing in detransition care.
The DOJ partnered with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office to resolve allegations that the hospital submitted false billings to public and private insurers to secure coverage for pediatric gender-affirming procedures. The department alleges the conduct violated the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the False Claims Act, and federal fraud and conspiracy laws.
The settlement was reached out of court, meaning neither party formally admitted wrongdoing. Both the DOJ and Texas Children’s Hospital denied liability.
“The Justice Department will use every weapon at its disposal to end the destructive and discredited practice of so-called ‘gender-affirming care’ for children,” Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a DOJ press release. “Today’s resolution protects vulnerable children, holds providers accountable, and ensures those harmed receive the care they need.”
The DOJ’s hardline stance on gender-affirming care sharply contrasts with the positions of major medical organizations, transgender healthcare advocates, and human rights groups, which broadly support gender-affirming care as an evidence-based treatment for gender dysphoria.
Adrian Shanker, former Deputy Assistant Secretary for Health Policy and Senior Advisor on LGBTQI+ Health Equity at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under during the Biden-Harris administration, told the Washington Blade the settlement could have sweeping consequences for trans youth and healthcare providers nationwide.
“The Trump administration’s framing of gender-affirming care is wildly inaccurate, scientifically implausible, and frankly, just mean-spirited,” Shanker told the Blade. “What’s really clear is that the science hasn’t changed, the evidence hasn’t changed — it’s only the politics that have changed. Unfortunately, the people that lose out the most with a settlement like this one are the patients that are denied access to care where they live.”
According to Shanker, the agreement also requires Texas Children’s Hospital to revoke privileges for physicians involved in providing gender-affirming care, potentially limiting their ability to practice elsewhere.
“This is a weaponized Department of Justice doing absurd investigations against providers that are providing care within the established standard of care,” he said. “They’ve come up with an absurd remedy in their settlement to require a so-called ‘detransition clinic’ to open at Texas Children’s. It’s harmful to science, it’s harmful to trans people, and it’s harmful to the medical profession.”
Shanker argued the case reflects a broader politicization of trans healthcare.
“Every American should be concerned about the weaponized Department of Justice and their obsession with trans people and their access to care,” he said. “These hospitals that provide gender-affirming care, the providers of gender-affirming care, have done nothing wrong. They followed the standards of care that are well established and followed the mountain of evidence.”
Karen Loewy, senior counsel and director of constitutional law practice at Lambda Legal, echoed those concerns.
“For Texas Children’s to capitulate to this pressure campaign of both Paxton and the Trump administration and end this care, and go after physicians who had been lawfully and faithfully taking care of their patients, it’s hard to see that as anything other than bending the knee in the face of political pressure,” Loewy told the Blade. “That’s not putting your mission above politics. Your mission is to provide health care for kids that need it.”
Loewy said the settlement reflects years of efforts by Paxton and the Trump-Vance administration to target gender-affirming care providers. Paxton has pursued investigations into providers across Texas since 2022 and supported a 2023 law banning gender-transition-related medical care for minors. Meanwhile, the Trump-Vance administration moved quickly in its second term to restrict trans healthcare access, including through Executive Order 14187, titled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation.”
“This is a perfect storm of Ken Paxton’s own mission to stigmatize and target trans young people and their healthcare in Texas with the Trump administration’s targeting of trans people and gender-affirming medical care,” Loewy said. “It is the two of them together. Without that, you wouldn’t have had this settlement.”
Loewy also emphasized that the settlement is part of a broader legal strategy targeting providers nationwide.
“You can’t view this one in isolation from all of the other administrative subpoenas that have been sent to hospitals or other kinds of medical providers that have provided gender-affirming medical care to trans adolescents,” she said. “It is all part and parcel of the same direct line from the executive orders that were issued in the first days of this Trump administration.”
“Every court that has considered those subpoenas has found them illegitimate and issued for an improper purpose, or at least narrowed them really dramatically,” she added. “Courts agree these hospitals didn’t do anything wrong. It’s the DOJ that has the problem here.”
Shanker also criticized the settlement’s requirement that the hospital establish a detransition clinic, arguing the move contradicts existing medical evidence.
“The irony shouldn’t be lost on anyone that the Trump administration is claiming that gender-affirming care lacks a scientific basis, and then is requiring the opening of a so-called detransition clinic, which certainly lacks a scientific basis,” Shanker said. “There’s less than a 1% regret rate when it comes to gender-affirming care. That’s lower than knee surgery, lower than bariatric surgery, lower than childbirth, lower than breast reconstruction, and lower than tattoos.”
Loewy was similarly blunt in her criticism.
“This is the most craven, political, ridiculous elevation of ideology over evidence,” she said. “They are creating a program built on an outcome that almost never happens. It is unprecedented and politically mandated rather than healthcare mandated.”
She said the settlement’s broader effect will be to intimidate providers and further marginalize trans people.
“The real effect here is to further stigmatize trans people and intimidate healthcare providers,” she said. “This is about sending a message nationwide that the DOJ is coming after the doctors. These are committed, faithful, law-abiding physicians and healthcare providers who just want to provide the healthcare their patients actually need.”
Both Loewy and Shanker warned that restricting access to gender-affirming care could deepen health disparities for trans people.
“We know that when transgender Americans lack the care that they need, we end up with higher rates of depression, higher rates of anxiety, higher rates of self-harm and suicidal ideation,” Shanker said. “We know that gender-affirming care is a medically appropriate, scientifically grounded form of care that resolves these challenges and leads us toward health equity. It’s unfortunate that the Trump administration has politicized not only transgender medicine, but the very basis of public health.”
Shanker said the restrictions are already prompting some trans people to relocate in search of care.
“We’re already seeing medical refugees leave states that have restricted access to care to move to states where it’s still available,” he said. “Frankly, we’ve already seen some trans people go to other countries to receive care or maintain access to care.”
Loewy said the DOJ’s recent subpoenas targeting hospitals, including those issued to NYU Langone Health in New York, suggest the administration is escalating its legal strategy.
“We’ve seen the DOJ escalate this by convening a grand jury and issuing grand jury subpoenas to hospitals,” she said. “That is going to be the next front in this fight.”
In addition to , there has been as large increase in anti-trans legislation in the past few years — with 126 federal pieces of legislation introduced this year and 26 state level policies passed across the country.
Still, Loewy pointed to recent court victories as evidence that challenges to these policies can succeed.
“Just yesterday, a state court in Kansas struck down that state’s ban on gender-affirming medical care in one of the most meticulous recognitions of the medical consensus and the harm of denying care to trans young people,” she said. “When courts actually look at the science and the impacts on trans people, they still can rule the right way.”
Asked whether there is any optimism to be found amid the ongoing legal battles, Loewy said she continues to draw hope from advocates, families, and community organizers fighting back.
“The solidarity of the community is really what brings hope,” she said. “There are incredible lawyers, advocates, families, and organizations fighting every day to protect these kids and their privacy and safety. It is that community strength and collaborative effort that continues to give me hope.”
Commentary
‘Live Your Pride’ is much more than a slogan
Waves Ahead forced to cancel May 17 event in Puerto Rico
On May 5, I spoke by phone with Wilfred Labiosa, executive director of Waves Ahead, a Puerto Rico-based LGBTQ community organization that for years has provided mental health services, support programs, and safe spaces for vulnerable communities across the island. During our conversation, Labiosa confirmed every concern described in the organization’s public statement announcing the cancellation of “Live Your Pride,” an event scheduled for Sunday in the northwestern municipality of Isabela. But beyond the financial struggles and organizational challenges, what stayed with me most was the emotional weight behind his words. There was pain in his voice while describing what it means to watch spaces like these slowly disappear.
This was not simply the cancellation of a community event.
“Live Your Pride” had been envisioned as a celebration and affirming gathering for LGBTQ older adults and their allies in Puerto Rico. In a society where many LGBTQ elders spent decades hiding parts of themselves in order to survive, spaces like this carry enormous emotional and social significance. They become places where people can finally exist openly, without fear, apology, or shame.
That is why this cancellation matters far beyond Isabela.
What is happening in Puerto Rico cannot be separated from the broader political climate unfolding across the U.S. and its territories, where programs connected to diversity, inclusion, education, mental health, and LGBTQ visibility increasingly find themselves under political attack. These changes do not always arrive through dramatic announcements. More often, they happen quietly. Funding disappears. Community organizations weaken. Safe spaces become harder to sustain. Eventually, the absence itself begins to feel normal.
That normalization is dangerous.
For years, organizations like Waves Ahead have stepped into gaps left behind by institutions and governments, particularly in communities where LGBTQ people continue facing discrimination, social isolation, economic instability, and mental health struggles. Their work has never been limited to organizing events. It has involved accompanying people through loneliness, trauma, rejection, depression, aging, and survival itself.
“Live Your Pride” represented much more than entertainment. It represented visibility for LGBTQ older adults, many of whom survived decades of family rejection, religious exclusion, workplace discrimination, violence, and silence. These are individuals who came of age during years when living openly could cost someone employment, housing, relationships, or personal safety. Many learned to survive by making themselves invisible.
When spaces like this disappear, something deeply human is lost.
A gathering is canceled, yes, but so is an opportunity for healing, connection, recognition, and dignity. For many LGBTQ older adults, especially in smaller municipalities across Puerto Rico, these events are not secondary luxuries. They are reminders that their lives still matter in a society that too often treats aging and queer existence as disposable.
There are still political and religious sectors that portray the rainbow as some kind of ideological threat. But the rainbow does not erase anyone. It illuminates people and stories that society has often tried to ignore. It reflects the lives of young people forced out of their homes, transgender individuals targeted by violence, older adults aging in silence, and families that spent years defending their right to exist openly.
Perhaps that is precisely why the rainbow unsettles some people so deeply.
Its colors expose abandonment, hypocrisy, inequality, and fear. They force societies to confront realities that are easier to ignore than to address honestly. They reveal how fragile human dignity becomes when political agendas decide that certain communities are no longer worthy of protection, funding, or visibility.
The greatest concern here is not solely the cancellation of one event in one Puerto Rican town. The deeper concern is the message quietly taking shape behind decisions like these — the idea that some communities can wait, that some lives deserve fewer resources, and that safe spaces for vulnerable people are expendable during moments of political tension.
History has shown repeatedly how social regression begins. Rarely with one dramatic act. More often through exhaustion, silence, budget cuts, and the slow dismantling of organizations doing essential community work.
Even so, Waves Ahead made one thing clear in its statement. Although “Live Your Pride” has been canceled, the organization will continue providing mental health and community support services through its centers across Puerto Rico. That commitment matters because people do not survive on slogans alone. They survive because somewhere there are still open doors, trained professionals, supportive communities, and people willing to remain present when the world becomes colder and more hostile.
Puerto Rico should pay close attention to what this moment represents. No healthy society is built by weakening the organizations that care for vulnerable people. No government should feel comfortable watching community groups struggle to survive while attempting to provide services and compassion that public institutions themselves often fail to offer.
The rainbow has never been the problem.
The real problem is the discomfort created when its colors force society to confront the wounds, inequalities, and human realities that too many people would rather keep hidden.
