National
Democrats find 2010 a tougher sell than 2008
LGBT bloggers wage ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Give’ campaign
Democratic National Committee Executive Director Jennifer O’Malley Dillon acknowledged that for LGBT voters, the ‘pace of change isn’t always fast enough.’ (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
Asking gay Americans to reignite their enthusiasm for the Democratic Party at the same time critics are assailing the party for its handling of federal LGBT legislation is no small challenge.
But that’s exactly what Democratic National Committee Executive Director Jennifer O’Malley Dillon did last week while speaking at the National Stonewall Democrats biennial convention in D.C.
With three months remaining before the midterm elections, Dillon acknowledged that “an enthusiasm gap” exists between how Democratic voters feel this year compared to 2008. And she said that gap must close.
“We are going to hold the House and the Senate,” she said. “I’m very confident about that. But to do that, it’s just going to be incredibly hard. History is against us in this election.”
Also against Dillon’s efforts to rally LGBT voters are increasingly intense criticisms that President Obama and congressional leaders aren’t doing enough to enact promised changes, such as repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and passing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
Dillon recognized that the “pace of change isn’t always fast enough” for LGBT people, but said the DNC is creating new and more substantive ways to engage potential donors and volunteers.
“We want to make sure that the programs we’re building on moving forward aren’t just programs that we’re sitting in D.C. saying, ‘Oh, I think it would be great if we had ruffly stickers with rainbows on them,’ but that we are really building out a substantive program,” she said.
Dillon also said the DNC is developing communications — including material for the DNC website as part of the Your Voice Matters effort — to demonstrate in a clearer way the Obama administration’s broader accomplishments.
But discontent among many LGBT voters persists. And a continuing effort LGBT bloggers launched last year, called “Don’t Ask, Don’t Give,” urges LGBT people to withhold donations from the Democratic Party until more pro-LGBT bills are passed.
Leading the DNC boycott is John Aravosis, editor of Americablog.com, who’s asking readers to sign a pledge saying they will only contribute money to the Democratic Party after President Obama signs ENDA into law, and signs repeals of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the Defense of Marriage Act.
Aravosis said at the start of this year that he didn’t feel inclined to whip the effort because signs had emerged that Congress would pass “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal and ENDA. The situation changed, though, as the year progressed.
“ENDA is now nowhere to be seen and no one thinks it’s passing both houses by the election — even though we were promised,” he said. “On ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ the legislation being discussed isn’t full repeal. It isn’t the repeal at all, even though it’s being sold that way. It’s not even clear if the legislation is going to pass anyway at this point.”
Aravosis dismissed the notion that outreach from the Democratic National Committee could be any substitute for the advancement of these issues.
“It’s a very 1990s strategy from the DNC,” he said. “They think showing face to the gay community — simply showing up at our events is going to buy our voters and buy our money because we should be so honored that they would deign to visit us.”
Aravosis estimated about 10,000 readers of Americablog.com have pledged to withhold donations to the Democratic Party as part of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Give” initiative.
“‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Give’ was, I think, part of a larger effort of the gay Netroots and, I would say, the community in general showing their ire at the Democrats,” Aravosis said. “I think it did change things for a while, but I think now the Democrats have backed off yet again.”
Dillon told the Blade that she hopes the DNC’s engagement with LGBT people will convince those who haven’t been satisfied to maintain their support.
“Of course, we’d like to see everyone feel like they can contribute to the party and feel good about that,” she said. “We obviously hope that people see us as a party that’s growing and building our commitment and our connection to the LGBT community, and that this is a place where people feel like their money will be well spent.”
‘We’re going to have disappointments’
Despite some disappointment, many LGBT Democrats who attended the Stonewall convention said they remain committed to the Democratic Party.
Rick Stafford, a veteran gay activist from Minnesota and chair of the Democratic Party’s LGBT caucus, said the Democratic Party is worth supporting because of the dramatic strides it’s taken in support of LGBT rights during the last decades.
“I can remember not more than 25 years ago, the Democratic Party and their leadership officials basically said to the LGBT community, ‘Go away,’” Stafford said. “We were held up as the poster child for the special interests. And in 25 years, if you told me back then that the issue that we would be fighting on disappointment was marriage equality, I would have told you [that] you were nuts.”
Stafford said LGBT critics of the Democratic Party should take care with the tone of their discussion because disagreement and discontent among Democrats led to the Republican takeover of Congress in 1994.
“We’re going to have disappointments, and not all Democratic elected officials are going to be supportive,” Stafford said. “But I think the leadership of Obama, Pelosi and even Harry Reid will be light years [ahead of] seeing Sarah Palin, Mitch McConnell or John Boehner setting the agenda for our country.”
Jerame Davis, who’s gay and co-owner of the Indiana-based LGBT website Bilerico Project, also expressed discontent about the amount of progress the party has made recently on LGBT issues.
“The one thing that has concerned me has been President Obama said he was going to be a ‘fierce advocate’ for our issues, and I’ve had trouble seeing where the advocacy was coming along, let alone the fierceness,” Davis said.
Still, Davis said the alternative to Democrats running the legislative branch of the federal government would be “far, far worse.”
“The idea of turning either of those [chambers] over to the Republicans scares me far worse than trying to continue to push our friends to be more supportive and to advocate harder for our issues,” Davis said.
Also urging continued support for Democrats was Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.), a gay lawmaker who spoke at the convention. He told the Blade that people who were in doubt over supporting the Democratic Party should look closely at Democratic candidates and their Republican opponents.
“The Democratic Party is the only party that stands for equality,” he said. “I think it’s important that voters weigh where both candidates are on issues like marriage equality, ENDA — and 99 times out of 100, you’ll come out in favor of the Democrat.”
Polis has been active in raising funds not only for his own his re-election, but for other Democratic candidates. He’s set up two joint fundraising committees — the Jared Polis Majority Fund and the Jared Polis Victory Fund — that have raised substantial funds for Democrats seeking election.
The Jared Polis Majority Fund has raised $26,000 over the course of this Congress, while the Jared Polis Victory Fund has raised $150,000, according to Federal Election Commission reports.
Notable donations from the Jared Polis Majority Fund in the second quarter of this year included $1,500 to David Cicilline, the gay mayor of Providence, R.I. who’s running for Congress, and $1,500 to Rep. Scott Murphy (D-N.Y.), who last year replaced Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) upon her appointment to the U.S. Senate. The Jared Polis Victory Fund in the second quarter donated $4,000 to Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), who’s seeking to retain his U.S. Senate seat.
“We’ve been very active in helping to build a pro-equality majority in the House and I’ve focused a lot of national fundraising in helping to achieve that,” Polis said.
The notion that LGBT voters should directly support candidates they see as supportive versus supporting the Democratic Party infrastructure is a common view among many advocates.
Aravosis said the best donation tactic that LGBT people can use as the November election approaches is to support candidates “who are proven to be pro-gay and proven to have come through for us.”
“That means support Democrats who actually have fought for us, or, [get behind] those Republicans who have fought for us, although I’m not convinced there’s too many,” he said.
Davis said this approach is the best way to ensure that a majority in Congress supportive of LGBT rights is in place.
“So, the way I see it is this: find a good friend that you think is going to advocate for our issues well, and that’s where you should put your money,” Davis said.
Federal Government
Protesters say SAVE Act targets voters, transgender youth
Bill described as ‘Jim Crow 2.0’
Members of Congress, advocates, and people from across the country gathered outside the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday to protest proposed federal legislation that voting rights activists have deemed “Jim Crow 2.0.”
The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act would amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require in-person proof of citizenship for anyone seeking to vote in U.S. elections.
President Donald Trump has also pushed for the proposed legislation to include a section that would ban gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, even with parental consent, and prohibit trans people from participating in school or professional sports consistent with their gender identity rather than their sex assigned at birth.
In addition to changing voter registration requirements, the bill would limit acceptable forms of identification to documents such as a birth certificate or passport — records that the Brennan Center for Justice estimates more than 21 million Americans do not have — effectively restricting access to the ballot. It would also ban online voter registration, DMV voter registration efforts, and mail-in voter registration.
A 2021 investigation by the Associated Press found that fewer than 475 people voted illegally or improperly, a tiny fraction of the estimated 160 million Americans who voted in the 2020 election.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) spoke at the event.
“It will kick millions of American citizens off the rolls. And they don’t even require you to be told,” the highest-ranking Democrat in the Senate told protesters and reporters outside the Capitol. “If this law passes — and it won’t — you’re gonna show up in November … and they’ll say… sorry, you’re no longer on the voting rolls.”
He, like many other speakers, emphasized the bill in the context of American history, pointing to what he described as its racist roots and its impact on Black and brown Americans.
“I have called this act, over and over again, Jim Crow 2.0 … because they know it’s the truth.”
U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) was one of the lawmakers leading opposition to the legislation and spoke at the rally.
“It’s not just voting rights that are on the line — our democracy is on the line,” the California lawmaker said. “It’s not a voter I.D. bill. It’s a bait and switch bill.”
He added historical context, noting the significance of voting rights legislation passed more than 60 years ago. In 1965, Alabama civil rights activists marched to protest barriers to voter registration. Alabama state troopers violently attacked peaceful demonstrators at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, using tear gas, clubs, and whips against more than 500 — mostly Black — protesters.
“61 years ago — not to the day — but this week, President Lyndon Johnson came to the Capitol and addressed a joint session of Congress in the wake of Bloody Sunday and pushed Congress to pass the Voting Rights Act,” Padilla said. “61 years later, Donald Trump and this Republican majority wants to take us backwards. We’re not gonna let that happen.”
U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) also spoke, emphasizing that he views the effort as a Republican-led and Trump-backed attempt to restrict voting access, particularly among Black, brown, and predominantly Democratic communities.
“President Trump told Republicans when they were meeting behind closed doors that ‘The SAVE Act will guarantee Republicans win the midterms and ensure they do not lose an election for 50 years,’” Luján said. “The first time I think Donald Trump’s been honest … This voter suppression bill is only that. Taking away vote by mail? I hope my Republican colleagues from states that voted for Donald Trump or where vote by mail is popular have the courage and the backbone to stand up and say no to this nonsense, because their constituents are going to push back.”
U.S. Sen. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.) also spoke.
“Our Republican colleagues have already cut Medicaid, Medicare, people don’t know how they’re gonna be able to afford energy,” she said, providing context for the broader political moment. “We’re in the middle of a war that they can’t even get straight while we’re in it and don’t have a way to get out of it. And we are now faced with defending our democracy?”
She then showed the crowd something that she said has been with her throughout her political journey in Washington.
“I brought with me something that I carried on the day that I was sworn into the House of Representatives when I was elected in 2016, and I carried it with me on the day that I was sworn in as United States senator. And I also carried it with me when I was trapped up in the gallery on Jan. 6 and all I could think to do was pray … This document allowed my great great great grandfather, who had been enslaved in Georgia, to have the right to vote. We took this and turned it into a scarf. It is the returns of qualified voters and reconstruction code from 1867. This is my proof of what we’ve been through. This is also our inspiration.”
“I got to travel between the Edmund Pettus Bridge two times. And even as I thought about this moment, I recognized that while we wish we weren’t in it, while we don’t know why we’re in it, I do know we were made for it … So I came today to tell you that, um, just like the leader said, that he calls it Jim Crow 2.0. I call it Jim Crow 2.NO.”
Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBTQ advocacy organization in the U.S., also spoke, highlighting the impact of the bill’s proposed provisions affecting trans people.
“This bill is not about saving America. This bill is about stealing an election. This bill is about suppressing voters,” Robinson said. “This bill not only tries to disenfranchise voters that deserve their right to vote, it also tries to criminalize trans kids and their families … It tries to criminalize doctors providing medically necessary care for our trans youth.”
The SAVE Act passed the U.S. House of Representatives on Feb. 11 but has not yet been considered in the U.S. Senate.
Idaho
Idaho advances bill to restrict bathroom access for transgender residents
HB 752 passed in state House of Representatives on Monday
The Idaho House of Representatives passed House Bill 752 on Monday, a measure that would make it a crime for a person to use a bathroom other than the one designated for their “biological sex.”
The story was first reported by the Idaho Capitol Sun after the bill cleared the House.
House Bill 752 would make it a criminal offense — either a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the number of prior offenses — for individuals who “knowingly and willfully” enter a bathroom or changing room designated for the opposite sex.
The bill would apply to public buildings, including government-owned spaces, and places of “public accommodation,” a category that includes private businesses.
According to the bill’s text, it would “prohibit a person from entering a restroom or changing room designated for the opposite sex; provide a penalty; provide exceptions; define terms; and declare an emergency and provide an effective date.”
A first offense would be a misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in prison. A second or subsequent offense within five years would be a felony, punishable by up to five years in prison.
The bill passed in a 54–15 vote on Monday. Six Republicans broke with their party’s majority to join nine Democrats in opposing the measure.
The bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Cornel Rasor, a Republican from Sagle near the Washington-Idaho border, told House lawmakers that the legislation is intended to protect women and girls.
“It prevents discomfort and voyeurism escalation and assaults, while preserving single-user options and narrow exceptions so no one is denied access for emergency aid,” Rasor said.
State Rep. Chris Mathias, a Democrat from Boise, disagreed, arguing that the legislation would unfairly target transgender Idahoans.
“The truth of the matter is — and I know a lot of people don’t want to say it — but forcing people who don’t look like the sex they were assigned at birth, or transgender folks, to use other people’s bathrooms is going to put a lot of people in danger,” Mathias said.
The Idaho American Civil Liberties Union made a statement about the bill following its passage.
“Idaho lawmakers continue pushing these harmful, invasive bathroom laws, yet cannot present credible evidence that transgender people using gender-aligned bathrooms threaten public safety,” the Idaho ACLU said. “The bill does nothing to address real criminal acts, such as sexual assault or voyeurism, and disregards concerns from law enforcement about the burden enforcement would place on local resources.”
In addition to human rights advocates, who have spoken out against similar bills advancing in state legislatures across the country, Idaho law enforcement groups have also opposed the measure. They argue that the way the legislation is written would “pose significant practical enforcement challenges,” noting that officers are tasked with maintaining public safety — not conducting gender checks or policing bathroom access.
During a committee hearing last week, law enforcement representatives and several trans Idahoans testified that the bill would make many residents less safe.
“Officers responding to a complaint would be placed in the difficult position of determining an individual’s biological sex in order to enforce the statute,” Idaho Fraternal Order of Police President Bryan Lovell wrote. “In many circumstances, there is no clear or reasonable way for officers to make that determination without engaging in questioning or investigative actions that could be viewed as invasive and inappropriate.”
The Idaho Sheriffs’ Association requested that lawmakers amend the bill to require that individuals be given an opportunity to leave a bathroom immediately before facing potential prosecution.
The bill now heads to the Idaho Senate for consideration. To become law, it must pass both chambers and avoid a veto from the governor.
A separate bathroom bill, House Bill 607, which would be enforced through civil lawsuits, passed the House last month but has not yet received a committee hearing in the Senate.
State Department
Report: US to withhold HIV aid to Zambia unless mineral access expanded
New York Times obtained Secretary of State Marco Rubio memo
The State Department is reportedly considering withholding assistance for Zambians with HIV unless the country’s government allows the U.S. to access more of its minerals.
The New York Times on Monday reported Secretary of State Marco Rubio in a memo to State Department’s Bureau of African Affairs staffers wrote the U.S. “will only secure our priorities by demonstrating willingness to publicly take support away from Zambia on a massive scale.” The newspaper said it obtained a copy of the letter.
Zambia is a country in southern Africa that borders Tanzania, Malawi, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Namibia, Angola, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
The Times notes upwards of 1.3 million Zambians receive daily HIV medications through PEPFAR. The newspaper reported Rubio in his memo said the Trump-Vance administration could “significantly cut assistance” as soon as May.
“Reports of (the) State Department withholding lifesaving HIV treatment in return for mining concessions in Zambia does not make us safer, stronger, or more prosperous,” said U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Tuesday. “Monetizing innocent people’s lives further undermines U.S. global leadership and is just plain wrong.”
The Washington Blade has reached out to the State Department for comment.
Zambia received breakthrough HIV prevention drug through PEPFAR
Rubio on Jan. 28, 2025, issued a waiver that allowed PEPFAR and other “life-saving humanitarian assistance” programs to continue to operate during a freeze on nearly all U.S. foreign aid spending. HIV/AIDS service providers around the world with whom the Blade has spoken say PEPFAR cuts and the loss of funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, which officially closed on July 1, 2025, has severely impacted their work.
The State Department last September announced PEPFAR will distribute lenacapavir in countries with high prevalence rates. Zambia two months later received the first doses of the breakthrough HIV prevention drug.
Kenya and Uganda are among the African countries have signed health agreements with the U.S. since the Trump-Vance administration took office.
The Times notes the countries that signed these agreements pledged to increase health spending. The Blade last month reported LGBTQ rights groups have questioned whether these agreements will lead to further exclusion and government-sanctioned discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
Housewives take Capitol Hill by storm
Protesters say SAVE Act targets voters, transgender youth
‘It’s Dorothy’ traces lasting influence of a cultural icon
SAVE Act could silence millions of trans voters
The frightening rise of antisemitism, Islamophobia
Ensuring safer drinking water
A season of renewal for D.C. theater
PHOTOS: Awesome Con
Kennedy Center leadership changes as Trump ally Grenell departs
