Connect with us

Politics

5 Senate Democrats not sponsoring ENDA

Supporters looking for 60 votes as vote expected this summer

Published

on

5 Democratic U.S. senators don't co-sponsor ENDA (Blade photo compilation by Michael Key)

5 Democratic U.S. senators don’t co-sponsor ENDA (Photos public domain)

Amid renewed attention to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, a total of five Democratic senators have so far declined to co-sponsor the legislation.

During a Pride reception at the White House last week, President Obama gave ENDA a boost when he said “we need to get” the legislation passed. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) broke with tradition when he signed as a co-sponsor of the bill immediately afterward.

Just last week, Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), a conservative Democrat who voted against expanded background checks for gun sales, signed on as a co-sponsor. The office of Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) confirmed to the Washington Blade on Monday he’ll also sign on in support of the bill.

But five Democrats in the Senate still aren’t co-sponsors of the legislation: Sens. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) and Tim Johnson (D-S.D.).

A spokesperson for Sen. Nelson said he is traveling today and unavailable for immediate comment. The other four offices didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

Tico Almeida, president of Freedom to Work, said there’s “simply no valid excuse” for any Democratic senator to withhold their support for ENDA as a full Senate vote on the legislation approaches.

“If any of these senators vote ‘no’ on ENDA, they will betray our American values of fairness and equal opportunity and they will turn their backs on hardworking gay and transgender citizens who simply want a fair shot to hold a job in a really tough economy,” Almeida said.

Four of these Democrats — Nelson, Rockefeller, Johnson, Pryor — voted for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal in 2010. Manchin didn’t vote on the bill, but later said withholding the vote was “wrong.”

Their support could be needed quickly if, as promised by Reid in his Pride statement, the floor vote on ENDA comes up “soon.” Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee Chair Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) is expected to report the legislation out of committee this summer.

Almeida called for action from the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee to persuade these five senators to declare their support for ENDA and make clear a vote in favor of the bill is “a bedrock principle for all Democrats in good standing.”

“It would also be great if President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and the White House legislative team got in the game by aggressively lobbying these hold-out Democrats in the weeks and months to come,” Almeida said. “In fact, President Obama could set a good example for the hold-out Democrats by signing his long overdue executive order, which is not ‘hypothetical’ no matter what some staffers want to pretend.”

Notably, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) is an ENDA co-sponsor even though she’s one of three U.S. Senate Democrats who have not come out in support of marriage equality. The other two are Manchin and Pryor.

Assuming all 54 senators in the Democratic caucus vote for ENDA, a total of six additional Republicans would be needed for 60 votes to end the likely filibuster of the legislation on the Senate floor. Two Republicans are already co-sponsors: Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Mark Kirk (R-Ill.).

The additional Republicans who are seen as the most likely supporters are Sens. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Jeffery Chiesa (R-N.J.), Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), Richard Burr (R-N.C.) and Dean Heller (R-Nev.).

Portman came out for marriage equality earlier this year after learning his son is gay. During an interview at a Buzzfeed Brews Event in May, Portman said he “totally support[s] the concept” of ENDA, but has concerns about “litigation that could result” and “religious freedom.”

Jeffrey Sadosky, a Portman spokesperson, expressed a similar sentiment on the Ohio Republican’s views on ENDA in an email to the Blade on Monday.

“Senator Portman is strongly opposed to discrimination and is looking at proposals to address it,” Sadosky said. “He is concerned about excessive reliance on litigation as a tool for social change, and will continue to review the most recent version of ENDA.”

Murkowski and Burr were two Republicans who voted for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal in 2010. But while Murkowski voted for cloture and to pass the measure, Burr only voted for final passage and withheld his vote for cloture.

Chiesa comes from a traditionally “blue” state that already has a statewide law prohibiting LGBT employment non-discrimination. He hasn’t yet articulated a position on ENDA.

Flake, a relative newcomer to the Senate, is also contender to support ENDA because as U.S. House member, he voted for a version of the legislation that came to the House floor in 2007 (although he also voted for the motion to recommit, which would have killed the bill). Still, Flake recently took an anti-gay position when he said he’d abandon comprehensive immigration reform if a provision for bi-national same-sex couples was included in the bill.

Heller is also a relative newcomer to the Senate, but also in play because he represents a moderate state and twice voted in favor of LGBT-inclusive reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act.

Gregory Angelo, executive director of Log Cabin Republicans, said his organization has been working to lobby Republicans — moderates and conservatives alike — to support ENDA. He declined to comment on the content of the talks.

“In the realm of lobbying, the Log Cabin Republicans mantra is to leave no stone unturned,” Angelo said. “I’m constantly on the Hill outlining our reasons of support for ENDA, both among Republican members of the Senate and members of the House. This isn’t about going after moderates but about making the case to common-sense conservatives that no one should be fired from their job because they happen to be gay.”

Another issue is the upcoming special election for the U.S. Senate seat in Massachusetts on June 25. The winner of that race will likely vote on ENDA instead of the interim U.S. Sen. William Maurice “Mo” Cowan.

Both candidates have expressed support for the bill. But the Democratic candidate, Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), is a co-sponsor of ENDA in the House. The Republican candidate, Gabriel Gomez, came out in support of ENDA in a statement provided to the Washington Blade by his campaign last week.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

The White House

HRC files class action over federal ban on gender-affirming care coverage

Lawsuit filed Monday challenges White House effort to restrict care

Published

on

Gender-affirming care activists outside of the D.C. Attorney General's office on Feb. 13, 2026 in support of care for trans youth. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The Human Rights Campaign Foundation, the nonprofit sister organization to the largest LGBTQ human rights lobbying and advocacy organization in the U.S., along with law firms Correia & Puth and Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, filed a class action lawsuit against the government as it attempts to restrict gender-affirming healthcare for federal employees.

The suit, filed on Monday, alleges that the Office of Personnel Management, run by Trump appointee Scott Kupor, is discriminating against LGBTQ federal employees (and their families and retired employees) by prohibiting health insurance coverage for gender-affirming care under the Federal Employees Health Benefits and Postal Service Health Benefits plans. There are five plaintiffs named in the complaint, but it extends to others who have those healthcare plans.

The document asserts that OPM’s prohibition on coverage for “gender transition” care in the FEHB and PSHB programs violates Title VII, the federal law that prohibits discrimination based on sex, race, color, religion, or national origin.

The policy, which was implemented on Jan. 1 following the 2025 issuing of Program Carrier Letter, mandated that insurance providers in these programs deny any coverage for gender-affirming care. In February, HRC filed a federal complaint with OPM over the change in healthcare policy, which was ultimately passed to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for review. That complaint is now an officially filed class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Research from the Williams Institute at UCLA Law, a think tank that collects data and conducts research on issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity, indicates that this policy denying gender-affirming care will impact healthcare access for at least 39,400 current and former federal employees and their dependents.

Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson released a statement following the lawsuit’s filing.

“Our message to the Trump administration is simple: we’ll see you in court,” said Robinson. “Healthcare access should never be weaponized to advance discrimination — and the denial of coverage for critical healthcare based simply on who you are blatantly violates the rights of all of us.”

Gender-affirming care has been under constant attack by the Trump-Vance administration since its return to the White House, despite the practice being considered as extensively evidence-based but also supported by nearly every major medical organization. This type of care is provided to all people—not just transgender people—and includes things such as social affirmation, including using correct names and pronouns and wearing clothing that matches a person’s gender identity; mental health support, such as counseling to reduce depression and anxiety; and, in some cases, medical interventions such as reversible puberty blockers or hormone therapy when deemed medically appropriate.

“Federal employees have been through the wringer with the Trump administration,” said Cathy Harris, partner at Correia & Puth. “We draw the line at blatant discrimination to deny healthcare to our nation’s dedicated civil servants.”

“This odious policy is the latest example of the Trump administration’s obsession with targeting transgender people, using shameful and cruel tactics to threaten their employment, their health, and the well-being of themselves and their families,” Robinson added. “OPM’s actions will not go unchallenged, and we’ll continue to fight so that federal employees and their families receive the dignity they deserve.”

This is not the first time the White House has directly attacked gender-affirming care.

In January 2025, the administration issued Executive Order 14187, titled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation.” The order directs federal agencies to restrict gender-affirming medical care — including puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgeries — for individuals under the age of 19.

For more information on how to get involved with the lawsuit, visit hrc.org.

Continue Reading

Politics

Buttigieg indicates he may run for president in 2028 

Former Transportation Secretary was in Biden-Harris administration’s Cabinet

Published

on

Former U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg speaking at the 2024 Democratic National Convention in Chicago. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg told a podcaster he is considering throwing his hat in the ring for president once again.

“I don’t know,” Buttigieg told Steven Bartlett, the British host of The Diary of a CEO, the most popular top business and tech podcast on Spotify, which aired Monday. “I think I’m more inclined than not, but there’s so much we don’t know.”

“There’s so much I don’t even know about what’s going to happen this year, let alone … what we need to know later,” he added.

Buttigieg is no stranger to running for the Oval Office.

In 2019, the former South Bend, Ind., mayor was a serious contender in the Democratic primary for the 2020 presidential election but ultimately ended his campaign and endorsed Joe Biden.

In May, an Emerson College Polling survey found Buttigieg at the top of the list of potential presidential contenders, leading California Gov. Gavin Newsom, New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, former Vice President Kamala Harris, and others.

In addition to discussing his future in federal politics, Buttigieg also discussed President Donald Trump’s handling of the Iran war — which reached its 5-month mark two weeks ago — the changing landscape of U.S. jobs due to the rise of artificial intelligence, and the growing national debt, all issues he could face if he ultimately returns to the White House.

Following his 2020 presidential campaign, Buttigieg gained prominence within the Democratic Party, eventually leading to his confirmation as Transportation Secretary. In February 2021, he became the first openly gay Cabinet member to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate.

In addition to his experience as an elected official, the 44-year-old served as a Navy intelligence officer in the reserves from 2009-2017, including a seven-month deployment to Afghanistan in 2014. Buttigieg came out as gay in 2015 and later married his husband, Chasten Glezman, in 2018. The couple now has two children: twins.

Buttigieg also has an extensive educational background.

He graduated from Harvard University with a bachelor’s degree in history and literature and later became a Rhodes Scholar, attending the University of Oxford, where he earned a bachelor’s degree in philosophy, politics, and economics.

This is not the first time Buttigieg has made headlines this year.

In June, he went public about being falsely accused of posing a threat to his children’s safety. An anonymous police report claimed he was a danger to his 4-year-old twins and was not allowed to be with them until after police interviews were conducted.

The police report was later determined to be false. The Washington Blade reached out to the Michigan State Police to ask what course of action, if any, would be taken against the woman who filed the false report, but the agency did not answer the question.

The Blade reached out to Buttigieg’s team for comment on his potential 2028 presidential bid, but did not hear back before publication. 

Continue Reading

Congress

House blocks effort to codify transgender servicemember ban into law

Lawmakers approved two anti-trans NDAA amendments

Published

on

The Pentagon (Photo by icholakov/Bigstock)

The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday rejected an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would have codified a ban transgender servicemembers in the military.

The bipartisan vote was 212-217.

The NDAA is for the 2027 fiscal year and sets policies for the Defense Department programs and activities and the national security programs of the Department of Energy.

U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) proposed the amendment on July 21. It stated that all personnel are required to serve in accordance with their biological sex, citing military readiness and discipline.

Human Rights Campaign Senior Director of Government Affairs Jennifer Pike Bailey stated that she is grateful for the bipartisan vote that rejected President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s “dangerous and discriminatory policy that has kicked brave transgender servicemembers out of the military and weakened our national security.”

“Everyone who meets the same rigorous standards should be able to serve their country. We should honor that patriotism, particularly in this moment where we are witnessing brave servicemembers making the ultimate sacrifice for our country, instead of ending their careers and politicizing their existence. We’re grateful that a permanent extension of this ban failed, and we will keep fighting to reverse this senseless policy,” Bailey said.

Mark Takano, chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, stated that he and his members put in countless hours of work to kill the amendment.

“When Americans know they or their families are going to be targeted by or not supported by the military, that leads them to avoid signing up to serve or staying in the service — making it harder to keep the ranks of the armed services full and our nation safe. My colleagues in the Equality Caucus and I will continue working to prevent these attacks on our servicemembers and their families from becoming law,” Takano said.

According to the Congressional Equality Caucus, two other bills could potentially be passed that would also target the transgender community, both of which were proposed by U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.).

The first was a bill that would have prohibited gender-related medical care under TRICARE and to prevent TRICARE from covering certain gender-related medical procedures and treatments, which was approved in a vote of 219-208.

The second was a bill that would have prohibited male participation in female sports at DoDEA schools. DoDEA schools are Department of Defense Dependents Schools, which is a network of primary and secondary schools.

The amendment was approved in a vote of 221-203. 

Continue Reading

Popular