Connect with us

Living

Tough questioning for Gallagher at marriage hearing

Democratic lawmakers hammer anti-gay activist

Published

on

Maggie Gallagher, chair of the National Organization for Marriage (Blade photo by Michael Key)

Democratic lawmakers on Friday hammered anti-gay activist Maggie Gallagher during a congressional hearing with questions on why same-sex couples should be excluded from marriage and the extent to which the National Organization for Marriage participated in campaigns to rescind state marriage laws.

In testimony before the House Judiciary subcommittee on the Constitution, Gallagher, NOM’s chair and co-founder, said marriage should restricted to one man and one woman because such unions are the only kind that can produce children and because state voters by referenda have affirmed 31 times that marriage shouldn’t be extended to gay couples.

“Marriage is the union of husband and wife for a reason: these are the only unions that create new life and connect those children in love to their mother and father,” Gallagher said. “This is not necessarily the reason why individuals marry; this is the great reason, the public reason why government gets involved in the first place.”

The hearing, which was titled “Defending Marriage,” took place on the heels of President Obama’s announcement on Feb. 23 that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional and that his administration would no longer defend the anti-gay law against litigation in court. Following a 3-2 party-line vote in March by the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Council, U.S. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) directed the House general counsel to take up defense of DOMA in place of the administration.

Gallagher said the need to raise children by married parents of opposite genders affirms the rationale for having in place DOMA, the 1996 law that prohibits recognition of same-sex marriage, and criticized the Justice Department for dropping defense of the law.

“This is the rationale for the national definition of marriage proposed by Congress in passing DOMA: ‘civil society has an interest in maintaining and protecting the institution of heterosexual marriage because it has a deep and abiding interest in encouraging responsible procreation and child-rearing,'” Gallagher said. “If we accept, as DOMA explicitly does, that this is a core public purpose of marriage, then treating same-sex unions as marriage makes little sense.”

Following her opening statement, Gallagher bore the brunt of tough questioning from Democratic lawmakers during the question-and-answer session of the hearing.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), ranking Democrat on the subcommittee, asked Gallagher if the children of Jen and Dawn BarbouRouske, a married same-sex couple from Iowa who were present during the hearing, should have parents who can receive the full protections of marriage or if she considers these children “expendable.”

“I think no children are expendable,” Gallagher replied. “Gay people have families that are not marital families, but they are families. I myself was an unwed mother, so I have firsthand experience with being in a family that’s not a marital family. I don’t think you need to have a message of stigmatization and exclusion to protect to an ideal.”

Nadler, sponsor of DOMA repeal legislation in the House, interrupted Gallagher, saying “the whole point” of DOMA is stigmatization and exclusion, and pressed Gallagher further on why the institution of marriage benefits when same-sex couples are excluded.

“Because including same-sex unions as marriages denies at a public level that marriage is about an important way for getting together mothers and fathers and children,” Gallagher said.

Nadler continued to question Gallagher on NOM’s involvement in 2010 Iowa campaign that successfully ousted three justices from the state Supreme Court who ruled in favor of same-sex marriage. The lawmaker asked Gallagher, who estimated that NOM contributed between $600,000 and $650,000 to the campaign, why she would criticize the Justice Department for allegedly making a political decision while her organization politicized the judicial process.

“The National Organization of Marriage is political advocacy organization, and so I think it’s appropriate for us to be politically involved in ways that Department of Justice is not,” Gallagher replied.

Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), a co-sponsor of the DOMA repeal bill, asked Gallagher whether reports were true that her organization contributed $1.9 million to the 2009 campaign in Maine to abrogate the states’s same-sex marriage law. Opponents of same-sex marriage succeeded in nullifying the marriage law in the state before gay couples could marry there.

“I don’t have those figures in front of me, but we were involved in the [effort],” Gallagher said. “But that’s probably on the order [of our contributions].”

NOM has repeatedly come under fire for failing to disclose their donors during the campaign against the Maine marriage law. State courts have ordered the organization to reveal their donors in accordance with the law, but NOM has yet to do so.

Following the hearing, Dan Fotou, eastern regional field director for GetEQUAL, praised Democratic lawmakers for hammering Gallagher with tough questions after her testimony.

“I think it was good to hear the Democrats standing up and challenging Maggie Gallagher’s position,” Fotou said. “Fifty-two percent of Americans think that marriage equality is OK, so I think today was good in terms of putting a face on hate once again, and Maggie does a really great job of that.”

Democratic lawmakers’ criticisms during the hearing weren’t limited to Gallagher. Conyers questioned Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), chair of the subcommittee, why no witnesses from the Justice Department were present to defend Obama’s decision to drop defense of DOMA.

“What bothers me about this hearing at this subcommittee is that the Department of Justice is not present,” Conyers said. “I was informed that they were not invited. … We have one of the leaders of the country, Ms. Gallagher, who’s raised hundreds of thousands of dollars against judges … but there’s nobody here from the Justice Department.”

In response, Franks said the Justice Department would be invited to come during an upcoming hearing in May before the House Oversight & Government Reform Committee on the DOMA decision. Upon further questioning, Franks maintained the panel was fair because its makeup included witnesses on both sides of the issue.

But Franks’ response apparently didn’t allay the concerns of Conyers, who said he hopes Congress can hear the Justice Department to respond to the criticisms of Gallagher.

“There’s a political tone in this hearing that I want to diminish as much as possible,” Conyers said. “The fact of the matter is this is not in regular order and I do not approve the way that we’re starting out this subcommittee [hearing].”

Despite the general tone in favor of DOMA during the hearing, several panel members known for having anti-gay views — including Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), who’s railed against same-sex marriage in home state, and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), who’s leading the effort to eliminate gay nuptials in D.C. — didn’t make an appearance. Neither the office for King nor Jordan responded to the Washington Blade’s request to comment on why the lawmakers didn’t attend the hearing.

Ian Thompson, who’s gay and legislative representative for the American Civil Liberties Union, said the lack of presence by anti-gay lawmakers was telling that the they were uncomfortable with their positions.

“The thing that was particularly striking to me was the fact that so few DOMA supporters on the committee actually were in attendance,” Thompson said. “So, from my perspective, if the hearing was intended to demonstrate the support of the House of Representatives for DOMA, from the attendance alone, it was a complete and total flop.”

Rep. Trent Franks (Blade photo by Michael Key)

But a few anti-gay Republicans did make an appearance to rebuke the notion of extending marriage rights to gay couples and to criticize the Justice Department for dropping defense of DOMA.

Franks called Obama’s decision to discontinue defense of the anti-gay law an “edict” that “failed to show the caution and respect for Congress and the courts.”

“When the President unilaterally declares a duly enacted law unconstitutional, he cuts Congress and the American people out of the lawmaking process,” Franks said. “Such heavy-handed presidential action undermines the separation of powers and the principle that America is a constitutional republic predicated on the rule of law.”

Franks continued that the arguments in favor of DOMA are “reasonable and right” because marriage between one man and one woman is the best union for raising children.

“Traditional marriage has proven to be the most successful institution in humanity’s history for the propagation and preparation of the next generation,” Franks said. “The traditional family has proven to be the best department of welfare, the best department of education, the best department of crime prevention, and the best department of economic security that there has ever been.”

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), a lawmaker known for anti-gay views, also made an appearance at the hearing and railed against what he called the government altering the definition of marriage. Smith, chair of the full House Judiciary Committee, offered an opening statement during the hearing even though he’s not a member of the subcommittee.

“If we tamper with the definition of marriage, harmful unintended consequences could follow,” Smith said. “The ability of religious institutions to define marriage for themselves to promote their sincerely held beliefs could be threatened.”

Smith said the will the people is for continued definition of marriage between one man and one woman — noting the 31 successful ballot initiatives that restricted marriage to such unions — and said the U.S. Constitution doesn’t provide protections for same-sex couples seeking to marry.

“No one can seriously believe that the Constitution’s founders intended to create a right to same-sex marriage,” Smith said. “By refusing to defend the Defense of Marriage Act against legal challenges, the administration has allowed the courts to overrule that popular law.”

Franks and Smith’s opening statements were countered by initial remarks from Nadler, who called arguments that Justice Department acted inappropriately by dropping defense of DOMA a “red herring” and said the real question should be whether anyone — either the Obama administration or Congress — should defend the law.

“Far from demeaning, trivializing or destroying the institution of marriage, [gay] couples have embraced this time-honored tradition and the commitment and serious legal duties of marriage,” Nadler said. “Rather than defending DOMA in court, Congress should be working to repeal it.”

Two legal experts on the panel presented opposing views on whether the administration acted within bounds in its decision to discontinue defense of DOMA in court.

Edward Whelan, president of the Ethics & Public Policy Center, said the Justice Department’s decision is in violation of its policy.

“The Obama administration’s decision to abandon defense of DOMA — or more precisely, to abandon its charade of pretending to defend DOMA — departs sharply from the Department of Justice’s long-standing practice,” Whelan said.

Whelan said Obama dropped defense of the anti-gay law to appease a political constituency and to induce the courts to “invent the constitutional right to same-sex marriage.”

“With the exception of laws that intrude on the executive branch’s power, the long-standing practice of the Department of Justice is to vigorously defend the constitutionality of any law where a reasonable may be made,” Whelan said. “This ‘reasonable standard’ is a very low bar. It basically means that the Department of Justice will defend a federal law against constitutional challenge when it can offer non-frivolous grounds in support of the law.”

Carlos Ball, a gay law professor at Rutgers Law School (Blade photo by Michael Key)

But Carlos Ball, a gay law professor from Rutgers Law School, testified that Obama acted within his authority because another statute exists saying that the attorney general must inform Congress if the administration decides to no longer defend a law.

“The existence of that statute seems to be a recognition by the Congress of the reality that the executive branch sometimes, in rare cases, can not defend the constitutionality of a law,” Ball said. “The executive branch, as a co-equal branch of government, has the authority and obligation to make independent assessment’s regarding a law’s constitutionality.”

Ball noted precedent for an administration declaring an existing law unconstitutional and dropping defense of the statute in court — the 1990 case of Metro Broadcasting v. FCC. Then-acting U.S. Solicitor General John Roberts, now Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, argued that a law providing for minority preferences in broadcast licensing was unconstitutional. Despite the position of the Bush administration, the Supreme Court later upheld the law.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Real Estate

Down payment strategies: Financing your home purchase 

Understanding the options key to unlocking the door to a dream home

Published

on

Looking for your dream home? First, you need to understand how to make the down payment.

Navigating the path to homeownership can be a complex journey, especially when it comes to accumulating the necessary down payment. For members of our LGBTQ community, understanding the available options for saving and financing this crucial aspect of home buying is key to unlocking the door to their dream home. Let’s explore effective methods and resources specifically designed to support LGBTQ individuals on their path to homeownership.

Traditional Savings Strategies

Saving for a down payment often begins with traditional methods such as setting aside a portion of your income into a dedicated savings account. High-yield savings accounts and automated savings plans, some offering up to 5% interest in today’s market, can expedite the process, providing a disciplined approach to accumulate funds over time. Additionally, exploring investment opportunities that match your risk tolerance can offer potential growth for your down payment savings.

Down Payment Assistance Programs

A variety of down payment assistance programs exist to help homebuyers with their initial costs. These programs often offer grants or low-interest loans to first-time homebuyers or those who haven’t owned a home in the past three years. 

It’s essential to speak with a GayRealEstate.com agent to determine what programs may be available, plus online research into local and state assistance programs, as many are designed to support individuals in specific communities, including the LGBTQ+ community.

For medical professionals, police, teachers, firefighters, and other community heroes, there are several special loan and assistance programs designed to help with home purchases, often offering benefits like down payment assistance, reduced closing costs, and more favorable loan terms.

The Hero Home Loan Program provides first responders, including police officers, firefighters, and paramedics, with benefits such as lower interest rates and reduced closing costs. This program aims to make homeownership more accessible by offering more flexible credit score requirements and down payment assistance .

For educators, firefighters, law enforcement officers, and medical professionals, the Everyday Hero Housing Assistance Fund (EHHAF) offers closing cost assistance through gift funds. This program is designed to support those who serve their communities by making homeownership more affordable, with no repayment required for the grant funds​​.

The HUD Good Neighbor Next Door Program offers up to 50% off the list price of homes for law enforcement officers, pre-Kindergarten through 12th-grade teachers, firefighters, and emergency medical technicians. This initiative aims to encourage community revitalization by assisting these professionals in homeownership within the communities they serve​​.

Homes for Heroes provides assistance specifically to first responders and offers significant savings through Hero Rewards when buying, selling, or refinancing a home. On average, participants save $3,000, with the program offering real estate and mortgage specialist connections tailored to the needs of first responders​​.

LGBTQ-Friendly Lending Options

Finding a lender that understands and supports the unique needs of our LGBTQ community can make a significant difference. Some lenders and organizations specialize in offering inclusive financial products and resources to assist LGBTQ+ homebuyers. These may include specialized mortgage products, financial planning services, and guidance through the home buying process.

The journey to homeownership is a milestone that requires careful planning and support. Remember, every step taken towards saving and financing your home purchase brings you closer to the dream of homeownership.

(GayRealEstate.com offers valuable resources and advice tailored to meet the unique needs of our LGBTQ+ community in their journey towards homeownership. For more comprehensive guidance and support in navigating the home buying process, visit GayRealEstate.com choose an agent and start a no-obligation conversation today.)

Jeff Hammerberg is founding CEO of Hammerberg & Associates, Inc. Reach him at [email protected].

Continue Reading

Autos

Glam rides: BMW X6 and Range Rover Velar

Impressive standard features elevate these lower-priced options

Published

on

BMW X6

Many sport-utes with ho-hum styling still impress me by offering scads of standard features and a low MSRP. But sometimes it’s hard not to be seduced by what I call glam rides—pricier vehicles with plenty of attitude. You know, like something Cassandro might drive. 

BMW X6 

$75,000 

MPG: 23 city/26 highway

0 to 60 mph: 5.2 seconds

Maximum cargo room: 59.6 cu. ft. 

PROS: Outré styling, posh cabin, raw power

CONS: Less rear visibility, limited storage, costly options

IN A NUTSHELL: Trust me, it’s hard not to fall in love with a BMW X6. This recently updated crossover, with its coupe-like profile, swept-back grille and breathtaking acceleration, had me at hello. High ground clearance and oodles of high-tech features turn this high-end hauler into one helluva wild ride.

Sure, the sharply sloped roof hampers rear-seat headroom and cargo capacity. But up front there’s more room than expected, along with a dramatically curved digital dashboard. And the ginormous panoramic moonroof helps make the interior feel quite spacious. 

How good is this BMW? Zipping up to Baltimore last month during a day of downpours and clueless commuters, my husband and I started rethinking our promise to never buy a budget-busting vehicle. For us, bad weather and heavy traffic usually result in clenched teeth, heavy sighs and my swearing like a sailor. Yet the hushed cabin, 16-way power front seats and ability to control the stereo and other functions simply by waving my hand were all very Zen. Ditto the finely tuned suspension, steering and braking, which anticipated my every move. Instead of shying away from rush hour on our return home, I leaned in. 

Myriad safety features — from forward-collision alerts and blind-spot monitors to lane-departure warnings and a 360-degree camera — batted away any concerns about fender benders. Same for the option packages that allow you to park the X6 automatically, store familiar maneuvers and drive hands-free at up to 85 mph.  

Power in the base-model — which is what I test drove — comes from a lively 375-hp turbo, with a 48-volt hybrid system to improve gas mileage. There’s also a smooth eight-speed automatic transmission and all-wheel drive for sure handling on slippery roads. Pricing begins at $75,000, but options on my test car brought it up to—whoa!—88,000. 

For more grit and growl, there’s the xDrive60i, with a 523-hp twin turbo that helps this Bimmer sprint from 0 to 60 mph in 4.2 seconds. And the top-of-the-line X6 M Competition with a 617-hp V8 is even faster at a blistering 3.7 seconds. But I am much too afraid to drive this gnarly high-test model—it starts at $128,000. 

RANGE ROVER VELAR

$63,000 

MPG: 19 city/25 highway

0 to 60 mph: 5.2 seconds

Maximum cargo room: 70.1 cu. ft. 

PROS: Refined design, chic interior, lotsa storage

CONS: Tepid base engine, more sedate handling, pricey

IN A NUTSHELL: While Range Rovers are known for being oh-so-classy, the Velar is much sassier than the rest of the lineup. 

The sweeping front fascia would make Ariana Grande proud: Svelte grille, sporty wraparound headlights and stretched, corset-like air ducts in the bumper.  

Inside, the look is spartan but elegant. All knobs and other switchgear are mostly hidden or activated by an 11.4-inch infotainment touchscreen that seems to hover in front of the dash. Even the ubiquitous cruise control and stereo buttons on the steering wheel seem to have vanished, though look closer and they are tastefully integrated into the design. 

While the Velar may be classified as a compact vehicle, it looks and feels much larger. Compared with the midsize BMW X6, both have ample seating for five people. Front-seat dimensions are practically the same, but the supposedly smaller Range Rover has better back-seat headroom and legroom. It also holds almost 20% more cargo. 

Built on the same platform as the popular Jaguar F-Pace, the Velar has a relaxed ride compared to the more athletic BMW X6. Power is less aggressive on the Range Rover, with choice of two competent but hardly rip-roaring engines. 

Build quality is impressive, including the optional leather-free interior that uses an upscale composite of wool and polyurethane. And while even the base-model comes with interior ambient lighting and a premium Meridian stereo, you can opt for the 17-speaker 3D system for an even more “Maestro”-like experience.  

Overall, the Velar may be less of a rabble rouser than the BMW X6, but there’s still plenty here to dazzle the senses. 

Range Rover Velar
Continue Reading

Dining

New D.C. restaurants opening just in time for spring

Mexican fare, burgers, fancy cocktails, and more on tap

Published

on

Many restaurants, bars, and hotels are planning events across the city for the National Cherry Blossom Festival later this month.

Shaking off winter slumber, the D.C. dining scene this spring is gathering steam. Just a taste of the openings and happenings are below:

Already Open

Pascual (732 Maryland Ave., N.E.): This modern Mexican restaurant is helmed by chefs Isabel Coss and Matt Conroy of Lutèce, and run by The Popal Group (which also owns Lapop and Lapis). Pascual gets its name from the patron saint of cooks and kitchens. The menu, which rests on fire-grilled dishes, is inspired by Coss’s Mexico City roots, and both chefs’ past work at top Mexican restaurants. Pascual plans to add a daytime bakery and coffee shop called Volcán.

Moon Rabbit (927 F St., N.W.): Chef Kevin Tien abruptly closed his Moon Rabbit restaurant on the Wharf a year ago during union negotiations by staff of the Intercontinental Hotel, where the restaurant was located. This reopening represents a welcome comeback of this fine-dining Vietnamese restaurant. The restaurant concept will be the same, but will have new dishes for the new space.

Joia Burger (3213 Mt. Pleasant St., N.W.): It’s smash patties and French fries that make up the entire menu of this fun-filled carryout spot. Run by Purple Patch chef/owner Patrice Cleary, she brings burgers (including veggie burgers) in a family-friendly and homey atmosphere, as well as vibrant ube soft serve as a nod to her Filipino heritage.

Coming soon

Press Club (1506 19th St., N.W.) is an intriguing new spot from industry old-timers including Will Patton (from Bresca and Jônt). Located in Dupont Circle, it will be a new bar and cocktail lounge based on the format of records (i.e. sides A and B). The a la carte “Track List” menu is a cocktail menu that rotates biannually featuring the team’s favorite spirits and techniques. The curated “Play List” menu is a bi-monthly rotating cocktail flights highlighting more seasonal ingredients, presented tableside with supplemental bites. The cocktails will draw inspiration from songs loved by the founders and are arranged to resemble the flow of a record.

Immigrant Food (4245 N. Fairfax Dr.): The restaurant group combining global dishes and advocacy is set to open a new spot in Ballston. Immigrant Food has three locations already: the Planet Word Museum, by the White House and in Union Market. The restaurant will feature both indoor and outdoor dining areas by the Ballston Metro.

 Bar Japonais (1520 14th St., N.W.): This restaurant is still forthcoming in the former Estadio space, set for later this spring. It will be a take on its sister restaurant Bar Chinois in Mount Vernon Square. Bar Japonais will bring together French and Japanese influences. Developed in the izakaya style, the restaurant will have Japanese-leaning food and French-leaning cocktails, and has weekly events in the works.

Dogon, at Salamander Hotel (1330 Maryland Ave., S.W.), is a highly anticipated opening from celebrity chef Kwame Onwauchi. The opening represents his return to D.C. with a concept inspired by D.C. Surveyor Benjamin Banneker and Onwauchi’s heritage to the West African Dogon tribe. Pronounced “Doh-gon,” the restaurant will serve vibrant cuisine through an Afro-Caribbean lens and draw from Onwuachi’s unique Nigerian, Jamaican, Trinidadian, and Creole background. 

Alfreda (2016 P St., N.W.): A pizzeria in Dupont Circle, named for the chef’s grandmother. The pizzas – made on a sourdough crust and including gluten-free options – are based on more traditional techniques, but using global flavors. The menu also includes salads, small plates, and a long wine list.

Beresovsky’s Deli: Gay-owned KNEAD Hospitality + Design is teasing a deli later this year. It will be located inside the preexisting Mah-Ze-Dahr Navy Yard location. 

Events

The Restaurant Association Metropolitan Washington (RAMW), is expanding from its winter and summer Restaurant Weeks to give diners another opportunity to celebrate the change of seasons with Spring Wine Fling. Spring Wine Fling is a platform for local eateries to highlight their wine programs with creative pairings. Participating locations will showcase their wine programs through curated wines paired with two-course prefix $55 menu offered during dinner service. 

National Cherry Blossom Festival: RAMW is also working with the National Cherry Blossom Festival. The National Park Service has anticipated peak bloom dates for 2024 between March 23–26. The festival has developed a full list (called “cherry picks”) of where to eat as part of the celebration. Many restaurants, bars, and hotels have also set up activations and events across the city.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular