National
Obama AWOL on ‘Don’t Ask’ repeal?
Activists turn up heat on president to act
Army Lt. Dan Choi and five other LGBT veterans handcuffed themselves to the White House fence Tuesday in protest of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ echoing a similar protest staged one month earlier. (DC Agenda photo by Michael Key)
As activists and lobbyists continue to press for repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” some are losing patience with President Obama and moderate Democrats in Congress.
Obama was heckled at a fundraiser on Monday and a group of six former LGBT service members chained themselves to the White House fence this week to protest what they view as slow progress in overturning the law.
Meanwhile, the Human Rights Campaign and other advocates are working to push six key senators to support repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” this year.
Moderate senators from six states — Florida, Indiana, Massachusetts, Nebraska, Virginia and West Virginia — are the targets of HRC’s grassroots campaign. The renewed push to win their support comes as the Senate Armed Services Committee is poised to tackle the issue May 26 when it takes up the Defense authorization bill.
Allison Herwitt, HRC’s legislative director, said the grassroots effort is being coordinated by about two dozen field workers and includes postcards, phone calls, district office visits, op-ed placements and other media coverage.
“We’re also, where we can, working with some grasstops folks to weigh in with senators, and it’s an ongoing process,” she said.
Marty Rouse, HRC’s national field director, said the campaign builds on the organization’s earlier efforts such as the Voices of Honor tour and involves “identifying and mobilizing veterans” to contact senators and participate in the joint Lobby Day between HRC and Servicemembers United on May 11.
Servicemembers United Executive Director Alex Nicholson said his organization is identifying veterans with HRC’s membership and bringing in new veterans not connected to any organization to advocate for repeal.
“We’re basically setting up a number of events in each of these states with vets to talk about ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ to get the issue to the local media,” he said.
But even with this campaign underway, senators from these six states aren’t yet committed to voting for repeal. Many are saying they want to hear the results of the Pentagon study on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” which is due Dec. 1, before taking action. The mandate of the study, as established by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen, is to examine how the U.S. armed services would implement open service should Congress repeal the ban.
One such senator waiting for the study results is Jim Webb (D-Va.). Asked by DC Agenda on Tuesday whether he favors repeal, Webb emphasized his support for the review currently underway.
“I think what Secretary Gates and Adm. Mullen proposed in terms of the study is very important,” Webb said. “We need to understand that. I support the approach that they’re taking. It’s responsible.”
Pressed on how he would vote on an amendment during the defense authorization markup, Webb reiterated his support for the working group and replied, “I think we need to honor the process that Secretary Gates and Adm. Mullen have put in motion.”
Holding a similar position is Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.). In a statement, Nelson spokesperson Grant Schnell said the senator is interested in the results of the study.
“Sen. Nelson’s inclined to support repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, but wants to see the study Secretary Gates announced of how this would impact the military,” Schnell said.
Also refraining from endorsing repeal was Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.). In a statement, Bayh said he’s “committed to ensuring that our troops are treated with the respect they have earned through their selfless service” and that his personal belief is “those who are willing to take a bullet for their country ought to be able to serve it openly.”
“However, President Obama is absolutely right to solicit the input and support of his top military commanders about the effects of repealing the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy,” Bayh said. “I will make a final decision after receiving the input of our top commanders.”
The offices of Sens. Robert Byrd (D-W.V.), Scott Brown (R-Mass.) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) didn’t respond to DC Agenda’s request for comment.
Asked about the progress in moving these senators to support repeal, Herwitt said the campaign is “a work in progress” and that many lawmakers typically hold out on announcing support for pro-LGBT legislation until just before it comes to a vote.
“You always have that last handful of House members or senators that you’re really looking to secure support from, and they’re typically the ones that don’t declare early,” she said.
Rouse noted that there’s a “significant presence” of mobilized efforts to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in the six states where HRC is working to influence senators.
“If you talk [with] any leaders or politically engaged people in these six states, I think they would acknowledge that there has been significant movement across the states in support of ending ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’” Rouse said.
Nicholson also said “it’s really too early” to tell whether the effort will be successful in moving moderate senators to vote for repeal.
“With these swing vote senators, they’re not going to make up their minds until the last minute, and [then only if they] absolutely have to,” he said. “If they’re not forced to take the vote, I don’t think they’re going to take the risk of coming out one way or the other.”
Still, Nicholson said he’s seen evidence of these senators noticing the campaign’s efforts in their states, citing Nebraska as an example where increased media coverage of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” has come to the attention of Ben Nelson’s staff.
Nicholson said he’s heard members of Ben Nelson’s staff have taken the initiative in conversations with other staff members on Capitol Hill to mention an uptick in newspaper stories coming from Omaha, Neb., and Lincoln, Neb., on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
“What we do know right now, what we are able to see, is that it’s being noticed — that’s for sure,” Nicholson said.
‘Within a vote or two’
But with votes from these key senators still in play, it remains to be seen whether there will be sufficient votes in the Senate Armed Services Committee to advance repeal.
During a press event Tuesday, Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.), a strong proponent of repeal in the Senate, was optimistic about having enough support, noting that “we’re very close” and “we’re within a vote or two.”
“There are certainly a number of senators on [the Democratic] side that are on record as wanting to overturn ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ and there are some who have not made their intentions clear,” Udall said.
Among Republicans, Udall said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), a moderate who often supports LGBT civil rights bills, has “expressed an interest in overturning ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’”
Nicholson estimated that a vote now in the Senate Armed Services Committee to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” would have a 25 to 50 percent chance of succeeding without further intervention from the administration.
“I think that Bayh and Bill Nelson are ‘lean yeses,’” Nicholson said. “They’re undecideds, but they’re undecideds leaning towards ‘yes.’”
One factor that would be seen as a tremendous boon — and perhaps even essential — to moving key senators to support repeal is an explicit endorsement from President Obama to attach an end to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to the upcoming Defense authorization bill.
But the White House and the Pentagon have not come forward with an explicit endorsement of repeal this year. In response to a query from DC Agenda during a press briefing last month, Gates said he doesn’t recommend a change in the law until the Defense Department completes its study implementing open service and that he thinks the president is comfortable with this process.
On Monday, Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, wrote a letter to Obama urging him to come out for repeal. Sarvis said he’s concerned about “multiple reports” that the president’s congressional liaison team “is urging some members of Congress to avoid a vote on repeal this year.”
Among those noticing a lack of support from the Obama administration to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” at this time is Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.). Asked by DC Agenda on Tuesday what the White House and the Pentagon are saying they want from lawmakers on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” Levin replied, “Let them complete the analysis.”
During his press event, Udall called for a stronger voice from Obama. While acknowledging the president made clear in January during his State of the Union address that he wants to work to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” Udall said he wants to see and hear more from Obama on the issue.
“The White House has, in the State of the Union address, made it clear they want to repeal ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’” Udall said. “The timing they continue to leave up to the Congress. That’s why I think it will be very useful if the president weighed in and said that this year is the year to finish the job.”
Anger with Obama for failing to endorse immediate repeal led protesters to interrupt the president’s speech Monday at a Los Angeles fundraising event for Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.).
In another protest, six LGBT veterans handcuffed themselves to the gates of the White House on Tuesday in protest over “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and were subsequently arrested. Among the demonstrators were Lt. Dan Choi and Capt. Jim Pietrangelo, who were arrested last month after handcuffing themselves to the White House fence in a similar protest.
In a statement, Choi said he and other LGBT veterans participated in the action out of concern that the president is wavering on his commitment to push for ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
“We are handcuffing ourselves to the White House gates once again to demand that President Obama show leadership on repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’” Choi said. “If the president were serious about keeping his promise to repeal this year, he would put the repeal language in his Defense authorization budget.”
Following the protest in Los Angeles, White House Deputy Press Secretary Dan Burton wouldn’t say in response to a reporter’s question aboard Air Force One whether Obama supports repeal at this time. Instead, Burton emphasized that “a tremendous amount of progress” has been made on the issue.
“This is a policy that’s been in place for quite a long time, and as we’ve seen on other issues, change is hard,” he said. “But that said, what we’ve seen is the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Secretary of Defense both come out in support of this change, and we’re moving with as much speed as possible to see that it’s done.”
Nicholson said he doesn’t think it’s possible to move senators to vote for an immediate repeal bill without more support from the president. But he noted a bill with delayed implementation, as Servicemembers United previously recommended, is possible.
“I think that’s the best chance we have for getting this because it’s the only thing consistent with what the Pentagon wants and it’s the only … middle ground between what the Pentagon says they want and what we are willing to give up and accept,” Nicholson said.
Nicholson said the repeal legislation currently before the Senate isn’t a delayed implementation bill because it calls for an immediate cessation of discharges while allowing the Pentagon working group to complete its study.
Regardless of the positions of the White House and Pentagon, Herwitt said HRC and other advocates are working to make repeal happen this year in the hopes of moving moderate senators to vote for repeal.
“I think that we are going to continue to push and advocate for these senators’ votes,” she said. “The president said in the State of the Union address that he will work with Congress this year and we are continuing to push forward.”
Tennessee
Charlie Kirk Act advances in Tenn.
Bill would limit protests, protects speakers opposing ‘transgender’ identities
The Tennessee legislature has passed Senate Bill 1741 / House Bill 1476, dubbed the “Charlie Kirk Act,” which, if signed by Republican Gov. Bill Lee, would reshape how public colleges and universities regulate speech on campus.
The measure targets all public higher education institutions and requires them to adopt a “free expression” policy modeled on the University of Chicago’s framework. That framework emphasizes that universities should not shield students from controversial or offensive ideas and requires state schools to formally embrace institutional neutrality — meaning they do not publicly take a stance on political or social issues.
Under the legislation, publicly funded schools cannot disinvite or cancel invited speakers based on their viewpoints or in response to protests from students or faculty. Student organizations, however — like Turning Point USA, an American nonprofit that advocates for conservative politics on high school, college, and university campuses, founded by Charlie Kirk, and often lack widely represented liberal counterparts — would retain broad authority to bring speakers to campus regardless of controversy.
The law includes broad protections for individuals and organizations expressing religious or ideological beliefs, including opposition to abortion, homosexuality, or transgender identity, regardless of whether those views are rooted in religious or secular beliefs. It further prohibits public institutions from retaliating against faculty for protected speech or scholarly work.
The bill, which has been hailed by supporters as an effort to “preserve campus free speech,” ironically also limits protest activity. Shouting down speakers, blocking sightlines, staging disruptive walkouts, or physically preventing entry to events are now considered “substantial interference” under the legislation, making those who engage in such actions subject to discipline.
Some of those disciplinary consequences include probation, suspension, and even expulsion for students, while faculty who protest in ways deemed to violate the policy could face unpaid suspensions and termination after repeated violations.
Supporters of the bill argue it strengthens free expression on campus. State Rep. Gino Bulso (R-Brentwood), the bill’s sponsor, said it reinforces a commitment to “civil and robust” debate at public universities.
“The Charlie Kirk Act creates critical safeguards for students and faculty and renews the idea that our higher education institutions should be centers of intellectual debate,” Bulso told Fox 17. “This legislation honors the legacy of Charlie Kirk by promoting thoughtful engagement and defending religious freedom.”
Critics, including Democratic lawmakers, have raised concerns that the legislation effectively elevates certain ideological viewpoints — particularly those tied to religious objections to LGBTQ identities — while exposing students and faculty to punishment for protest or dissent.
“It’s ironic that this body is talking about free speech when we had professors in Tennessee schools expelled and suspended when they did not mourn the death of Charlie Kirk — when they said that his statements were problematic and that the way he died did not redeem the way he lived,” state Rep. Justin Jones (D-Nashville) told WKRN.
Kirk, the right-wing activist and founder of Turning Point USA, for whom the bill is named, was assassinated in September 2025 at a public event at Utah Valley University. His legacy and rhetoric remain deeply polarizing, particularly among LGBTQ advocates, who have cited his history of anti-LGBTQ statements in opposing his campus appearances.
The bill now heads to Lee’s desk for his signature.
National
Demonstrators disrupt OMB director hearing over PEPFAR
Capitol Police arrested five protesters
A group of protesters interrupted Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought during his testimony before Congress on Wednesday.
Vought was at the Cannon House Office Building to give testimony to the House Budget Committee.
Committee Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) began the hearing by touting what he described as economic accomplishments of the Trump-Vance administration’s economic accomplishments. Ranking Member Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) disputed those claims in his opening statement.
Boyle went on to admonish Vought for not attending a committee hearing in the previous year.
Vought, the “Project 2025” architect, was invited to speak after Arrington and Boyle made their statements.
Shortly after Vought began reading his statement, Housing Works CEO Charles King stood up in the gallery and began shouting, “PEPFAR saves lives: spend the money!”
The U.S. Capitol Police moved quickly to escort King from the room. Other activists began chanting with King as they unfolded signs bearing a picture of Vought’s face and statements such as, “Vought’s cuts kill people with AIDS,” and “Protect PEPFAR from Vought.”
The group of HIV/AIDS activists included independent activists, former U.S. Agency for International Development and PEPFAR staff, members of Health GAP, Housing Works, and the Treatment Action Group. Six activists were escorted from the hearing and the U.S. Capitol Police detained five of them.
The HIV/AIDS treatment activists protested at the hearing in response to the dismantling of global health programs, including PEPFAR, a federally-funded program credited with saving millions of lives from HIV/AIDS, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa.
“Russell Vought is directly responsible for illegally withholding Congressionally appropriated funds for PEPFAR and related global health initiative,” King said in a statement provided to the Washington Blade. “These funding disruptions have already contributed to preventable deaths and threaten to reverse decades of progress in the fight against HIV worldwide. Enough is enough. Congress must ensure Vought stops this deadly sabotage.”
National
HIV/AIDS group NMAC is ‘destabilized’ and in financial crisis: sources
Organization disputes allegations of mismanagement by new CEO
A statement sent to the Washington Blade by an anonymous source claiming to be a current staff member at NMAC, formerly known as the National Minority AIDS Council, alleges that the prominent HIV/AIDS advocacy organization is facing “a rapid and systemic collapse of leadership, governance, and ethical standards.”
The three-page detailed statement sent on April 4 by someone identifying himself only as “John Doe” includes multiple specific allegations that NMAC CEO Harold Phillips, who began his position in October 2025, “has destabilized the organization at every level,” including hiring nine new high-level appointees with salaries of $220,000 each who are performing “duplicative and unjustifiable roles.”
The Blade was able to corroborate some of the allegations by talking to two other knowledgable sources who spoke on condition of anonymity. Those sources said they had received the John Doe statement and believed many, if not most, of its allegations were accurate.
With a total staff of about 30 to 35 employees, the John Doe statement claims the high salaries of the nine new staff members have added to financial problems NMAC has been facing in recent years. It says that at least two NMAC staffers who raised concerns about Phillips’s actions were terminated on grounds of insubordination.
One of the two anonymous sources who spoke to the Blade said one of the dismissed staff members was considering filing a lawsuit against NMAC in response to the firing.
“An external firm was recently brought in to assess the organizational health,” the John Doe statement to the Blade says. “The findings were staggering — more than 50% of staff reported they are actively seeking employment elsewhere,” it says.
The Blade sent the John Doe statement to NMAC this week and asked for a response to the allegations.
NMAC spokesperson Jennifer Moore Phillips, who serves as chief strategy officer and who is not related to Harold Phillips, sent the Blade a short statement calling the John Doe allegations “false and purposefully misleading,” but which did not comment on each of the specific allegations.
“A recent anonymous letter containing unfounded allegations about NMAC makes claims that are simply false and purposefully misleading,” the NMAC statement says. “Evidenced by our new strategic plan and recent successful Biomedical HIV Prevention Summit in Chicago, NMAC’s new leadership is laser focused on delivering on our mission serving the HIV community with renewed energy and vision,” the statement concludes.
The Biomedical HIV Prevention Summit referred to in the statement, which took place in Chicago April 8-10 of this year, is one of the two largest HIV/AIDS related conferences that NMAC organizes each year. Jennifer Phillips said more than 1,400 people attended the event.
The largest NMAC event, the United States Conference on HIV/AIDS, the most recent of which was held in D.C. Sept. 4-7, drew more than 2,400 participants and was hailed by AIDS activists as a highly successful gathering of a diverse group of experts seeking to push for the end to the HIV/AIDS epidemic.
One of the keynote speakers at that conference was Paul Kawata, who served as executive director and CEO of NMAC for 36 years and who delivered his farewell address at the conference following the announcement that he would retire on Oct. 7, 2025.
Many of the conference speakers praised Kawata, who became NMAC’s leader two years after its founding in 1987, as the leading force behind its growth and evolution into one of the nation’s leading HIV/AIDS advocacy organizations with a special outreach to people of color.
It was at that time that Harold Phillips, who served as director of the White House Office of AIDS Policy under then-President Joe Biden and who later joined NMAC as deputy director before the NMAC board named him Kawata’s successor as CEO, emerged as NMAC’s next leader.
“The Board has exuberantly elected Harold Phillips as our new CEO,” said Lance Toma, chair of the NMAC Board of Directors at the time Phillips’s appointment was announced. “In this unprecedented moment, there is no one more strategically positioned and experienced to lead our movement through what we know will be some of the most tumultuous and complicated times ahead,” the statement said.
The John Doe statement raising questions about Phillips’s actions and leadership says NMAC staff members formally appealed to the board of directors to intervene.
“The Board has remained silent, while Harold arrogantly told the staff that ‘the board has my back,’” the statement says.
The Blade has also attempted to reach out to Kawata by email for comment on how he feels NMAC is doing six months after his retirement. As of April 14, Kawata had not responded to the Blade’s inquiry.
According to the John Doe statement, NMAC officials have recently “sought external financial rescue,” including a visit by an NMAC official to California to request assistance from the pharmaceutical company Gilead Sciences. “Without such intervention, layoffs seem imminent,” the statement says.
“This is not a functioning nonprofit,” the John Doe statement concludes. “It is an organization in crisis – bleeding resources, hemorrhaging staff, and operating without transparency, accountability, or governance,” it says, adding, “The communities NMAC serves, the donors who fund its mission, and the public at large deserve to know what is happening behind closed doors.”
By contrast, the NMAC website describes the organization as a highly functioning nonprofit continuing to lead the fight against HIV/AIDS.
“Launched in 1987 during the early years of the HIV/AIDS crisis in the United States, NMAC is a national HIV organization that offers capacity building, leadership development, policy education, and public engagement to end the HIV epidemic among communities most impacted in the United States,” a statement on the NMAC website says.
“In 2026, we mark 45 years of the HIV movement,” the statement adds. “NMAC continues to pivot to center the needs of people of color impacted by HIV by responding to political challenges that threaten federal funding and programs that have provided an essential survival safety net,” it says. “Simultaneously, as HIV treatment allows people to age with HIV, our whole-person approach extends to achieving optimal quality of life beyond attaining viral suppression.”
In its most recent action, NMAC issued a detailed press release on April 14 criticizing President Donald Trump’s proposed fiscal year 2027 budget provisions that call for cutting more than $1.5 billion in HIV prevention, substance use, housing and other programs. The release provides details on how the cuts would negatively impact important HIV prevention programs and urges Congress to reject the proposed cuts.
Grindr to host first-ever White House Correspondents’ Dinner party
Charlie Kirk Act advances in Tenn.
Belarusian president signs bill to allow LGBTQ rights crackdown
‘The Pitt’ stars discuss what season two gets right about queer representation
My family voted for Trump and I cut off contact
Trump budget targets ‘gender extremism’
Viktor Orbán ousted in Hungarian elections
How to navigate shifting tenant expectations
Court orders Pride flag to return to Stonewall
