National
Calif. man could become first openly gay dad in Congress
The mayor of Palm Springs is making a bid to become the first openly gay member of Congress who’s married with children.
Steve Pougnet, 46, a Democrat, is seeking to oust Republican incumbent Mary Bono Mack next year to represent California’s 45th district in the U.S. House. A win for Pougnet would make him the fourth sitting openly gay member of Congress.
Pougnet, who’s currently mayor of Palm Springs and a former city council member for the city, said in an interview with DC Agenda that he’s running for a House seat because he’s always had a “huge passion” for public service.
“I’ve always had the ability to lead, to bring people together,” he said. “And I think that’s why I moved pretty quickly in my young political career, because I’ve always had the ability to bring people together and to lead.”
Pougnet said he’ll need about $2.5 million to win and “a lot of hard, hard work” that relies heavily on grassroots outreach. He has secured an endorsement from the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund and applied for support from the Human Rights Campaign.
He currently has no Democratic challenger for his primary in June, and would face Bono Mack in November 2010.
No stranger to helping the state’s LGBT community, Pougnet was involved last year in the fight against Proposition 8, which ended marriage rights for same-sex couples in the Golden State. He helped Equality California raise hundreds of thousands of dollars to preserve same-sex marriage and married 118 same-sex couples — more than any mayor in California.
“So, I have stood up for the issue of marriage equality,” he said. “I’m the mayor who married more couples than any other mayor in the state of California. One hundred eighteen — on our own time — we don’t get paid to do that because it was the right thing to do.”
Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, said Pougnet was “a great leader” in the fight to protect same-sex marriage.
“Steve chaired our Equality California’s Equality Awards in Palm Springs last year, and helped raised several hundred thousand dollars with us in the fight against Prop 8 at that dinner,” Kors said. “And he’s been involved in the cause for as long as I’ve known him.”
Kors said Equality California hasn’t traditionally endorsed candidates in federal elections, but that policy may change next year, and it would be difficult for his organization’s political action committee to support someone other than Pougnet.
“I think his victory would demonstrate that an openly gay candidate can win in a district that still is on the conservative side,” Kors said.
Pougnet was among the couples married last year in California. He wed his partner of 18 years, Christopher Green, who’s worked for more than 20 years in sales and marketing at Amgen, a biotech company. They have 3-year-old twins, Julia and Beckham.
During the course of his political career — as well as his current bid for Congress — Pougnet said his sexual orientation hasn’t been a major issue.
“Every once in a while you get a piece of hate mail, especially over Proposition 8, because I was very public,” he said. “Honestly, I think when you serve the people and all the people, and you’re working on the issues that are important to many different segments of the community, people respond to that.”
One of Pougnet’s priorities if he’s elected to Congress is improving the economic conditions for his constituents. He noted that his district has an unemployment rate of more than 15 percent and home foreclosures per capita are among the highest in the country.
But Pougnet also said he’s committed to advancing LGBT issues, should he be elected to Congress. He pledged to vote in favor of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and a bill that would allow gay Americans to sponsor their foreign partners for residency, as well as backing repeals of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the Defense of Marriage Act.
“Those issues are no-brainers for me,” he said. “For me, the issues are something I wholeheartedly believe in and don’t have a problem supporting.”
Asked whether Congress and President Obama have moved quickly enough on LGBT issues, Pougnet said the administration has been dealing with a host of problems left over from the Bush years, but that lawmakers could have acted more quickly on overturning “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
“I do think that one issue that could have been done quickly is ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ because when you have an issue like that where when you start looking at the polls, the majority are firmly in favor of repeal,” he said.
Pougnet said he wants Obama to issue a stop-loss order to prevent the discharge of more LGBT service members until Congress can accomplish repeal.
“There certainly might be some initial, ‘My God, what’s he done to the military?’ type of thing, which is ridiculous, but that moves away very quickly,” he said. “And I think this issue we’re talking about is protecting American soldiers, men and women. That repeal would end up saving lives.”
Gay conservatives back Bono Mack
Even though he enjoys support from many LGBT groups, Pougnet is running against an incumbent lawmaker that some describe as a pro-gay Republican.
Jimmy LaSalvia, executive director of gay conservative group GOProud said his organization is among those supporting Bono Mack.
“She’s been a strong advocate for gay and lesbian Americans in Congress and she’s exactly who we need in that seat,” he said.
Bono Mack has often taken pro-LGBT stances throughout her tenure in the House. She voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2004 and 2006, voted twice in favor of hates crimes protections legislation, and in 2007 voted in support of ENDA.
Ryan Watkins, campaign manager for Bono Mack, said her record shows her commitment to fairness.
“Congresswoman Bono Mack’s entire career has demonstrated her belief that individuals should be judged on their own merit,” he said.
“Tolerance and diversity are fundamental values that she embraces.”
LaSalvia criticized Pougnet for not taking a position on the estate tax, which LaSalvia said is discriminatory because it means inheritance from an LGBT person to their same-sex partner could be taxed, unlike the inheritance between straight married couples.
“He needs to realize that this is a congressional campaign and not a beauty pageant,” LaSalvia said. “If he doesn’t want to take positions on issues, he should run for Date Festival princess instead of Congress.”
Jordan Marks, campaign manager for Pougnet, said in an e-mail that Pougnet is focused on plans to create jobs in his district and is not responding to such criticism from Washington groups.
“The reality is residents of the district are facing a very difficult economy and that is what this campaign will be about. Bono Mack should disavow cynical attacks like this. This all just shows we need new leadership in Washington,” Marks said.
Even with her votes in favor of the LGBT priorities, Pougnet criticized Bono Mack for not taking a stand last year on Prop 8 as well as not stating her position on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
“For her, she kind of wavers, waffles,” Pougnet said. “She didn’t want to upset one half and not the other half. My issue with that is come clean.”
Watkins said Bono Mack hasn’t taken a position on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” because she feels “military personnel decisions should be made by the leaders of our Armed Forces, not Congress.”
“If military commanders believe a change is warranted, she will revisit the issue,” he said.
As for Prop 8, Watkins said Bono Mack didn’t declare her position because it was a state issue and more properly left to the voters to decide.
But Pougnet said Bono Mack has taken a position on a state issue that will have significant impact on the people of California by endorsing Republican candidate Meg Whitman — an opponent of same-sex marriage — in next year’s gubernatorial election.
“She’s now very involved in the biggest state issue that we have, which is the next governor of the state of California, because Sacramento is such a mess,” Pougnet said. “She’s endorsed Meg Whitman, who is not a marriage equality person. Not at all.”
In uphill battle, Pougnet trails in campaign funds
Pougnet faces a significant challenge in his bid for Congress. A Republican has held the seat for California’s 45th congressional district since at least 1982, and Bono Mack won the seat last year by taking more than 60 percent of the vote.
Still, Pougnet has filled his coffers with significant funds. According to the most recent information on the Federal Elections Committee web site, he’s thus far secured $443,330 for his campaign. It’s short of Bono Mack, who’s raised $664,775, but his supporters say it’s enough for him to mount a serious challenge.
Andy Stone, spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said Pougnet has a good shot at winning because the demographics in the district are changing and the area has had particular growth in non-white residents.
“If you look specifically at the voter registration numbers, the margin of difference between registered Republicans and registered Democrats has declined by more than half from just a couple years ago to today,” he said.
Stone also said Pougnet is a strong candidate because of his background as a public official.
State Department
Rubio mum on Hungary’s Pride ban
Lawmakers on April 30 urged secretary of state to condemn anti-LGBTQ bill, constitutional amendment
More than 20 members of Congress have urged Secretary of State Marco Rubio to publicly condemn a Hungarian law that bans Pride events.
California Congressman Mark Takano, a Democrat who co-chairs the Congressional Equality Caucus, and U.S. Rep. Bill Keating (D-Mass.), who is the ranking member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s Europe Subcommittee, spearheaded the letter that lawmakers sent to Rubio on April 30.
Hungarian lawmakers in March passed a bill that bans Pride events and allow authorities to use facial recognition technology to identify those who participate in them. MPs last month amended the Hungarian constitution to ban public LGBTQ events.
“As a NATO ally which hosts U.S. service members, we expect the Hungarian government to abide by certain values which underpin the historic U.S.-Hungary bilateral relationship,” reads the letter. “Unfortunately, this new legislation and constitutional amendment disproportionately and arbitrarily target sexual and gender minorities.”
Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s government over the last decade has moved to curtail LGBTQ and intersex rights in Hungary.
A law that bans legal recognition of transgender and intersex people took effect in 2020. Hungarian MPs that year also effectively banned same-sex couples from adopting children and defined marriage in the constitution as between a man and a woman.
An anti-LGBTQ propaganda law took effect in 2021. The European Commission sued Hungary, which is a member of the European Union, over it.
MPs in 2023 approved the “snitch on your gay neighbor” bill that would have allowed Hungarians to anonymously report same-sex couples who are raising children. The Budapest Metropolitan Government Office in 2023 fined Lira Konyv, the country’s second-largest bookstore chain, 12 million forints ($33,733.67), for selling copies of British author Alice Oseman’s “Heartstopper.”
Former U.S. Ambassador to Hungary David Pressman, who is gay, participated in the Budapest Pride march in 2024 and 2023. Pressman was also a vocal critic of Hungary’s anti-LGBTQ crackdown.
“Along with years of democratic backsliding in Hungary, it flies in the face of those values and the passage of this legislation deserves quick and decisive criticism and action in response by the Department of State,” reads the letter, referring to the Pride ban and constitutional amendment against public LGBTQ events. “Therefore, we strongly urge you to publicly condemn this legislation and constitutional change which targets the LGBTQ community and undermines the rights of Hungarians to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.”
U.S. Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Sarah McBride (D-Del.), Jim Costa (D-Calif.), James McGovern (D-Mass.), Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), Summer Lee (D-Pa.), Joaquin Castro (D-Texas), Julie Johnson (D-Texas), Ami Bera (D-Calif.), Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas), Becca Balint (D-Vt.), Gabe Amo (D-R.I.), Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), Dina Titus (D-Nev.), Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) and Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) signed the letter alongside Takano and Keating.
A State Department spokesperson on Wednesday declined to comment.
Federal Government
HRC memo details threats to LGBTQ community in Trump budget
‘It’s a direct attack on LGBTQ+ lives’
A memo issued Monday by the Human Rights Campaign details threats to LGBTQ people from the “skinny” budget proposal issued by President Donald Trump on May 2.
HRC estimates the total cost of “funding cuts, program eliminations, and policy changes” impacting the community will exceed approximately $2.6 billion.
Matthew Rose, the organization’s senior public policy advocate, said in a statement that “This budget is more than cuts on a page—it’s a direct attack on LGBTQ+ lives.”
“Trump is taking away life-saving healthcare, support for LGBTQ-owned businesses, protections against hate crimes, and even housing help for people living with HIV,” he said. “Stripping away more than $2 billion in support sends one clear message: we don’t matter. But we’ve fought back before, and we’ll do it again—we’re not going anywhere.”
Proposed rollbacks or changes at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services will target the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program, other programs related to STI prevention, viral hepatitis, and HIV, initiatives housed under the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, and research by the National Institutes of Health and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
Other agencies whose work on behalf of LGBTQ populations would be jeopardized or eliminated under Trump’s budget include the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the U.S. Department of Justice, the U.S. Small Business Administration, and the U.S. Department of Education.
U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court allows Trump admin to enforce trans military ban
Litigation challenging the policy continues in the 9th Circuit
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed the Trump-Vance administration to enforce a ban on transgender personnel serving in the U.S. Armed Forces pending the outcome of litigation challenging the policy.
The brief order staying a March 27 preliminary injunction issued by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington notes the dissents from liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
On the first day of his second term, President Donald Trump issued an executive order requiring Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to effectuate a ban against transgender individuals, going further than efforts under his first administration — which did not target those currently serving.
The DoD’s Feb. 26 ban argued that “the medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on individuals who have a current diagnosis or history of, or exhibit symptoms with, gender dysphoria are incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service.”
The case challenging the Pentagon’s policy is currently on appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The lead plaintiff is U.S. Navy Commander Emily Shilling, who is joined in the litigation by other current transgender members of the armed forces, one transgender person who would like to join, and a nonprofit whose members either are transgender troops or would like to be.
Lambda Legal and the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, both representing the plaintiffs, issued a statement Tuesday in response to the Supreme Court’s decision:
“Today’s Supreme Court ruling is a devastating blow to transgender servicemembers who have demonstrated their capabilities and commitment to our nation’s defense.
“By allowing this discriminatory ban to take effect while our challenge continues, the Court has temporarily sanctioned a policy that has nothing to do with military readiness and everything to do with prejudice.
“Transgender individuals meet the same standards and demonstrate the same values as all who serve. We remain steadfast in our belief that this ban violates constitutional guarantees of equal protection and will ultimately be struck down.”
U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer noted that courts must show “substantial deference” to DoD decision making on military issues.
“The Supreme Court’s decision to allow the military ban to go into effect is devastating for the thousands of qualified transgender servicemembers who have met the standards and are serving honorably, putting their lives on the line for their country every single day,” said GLAD Law Senior Director of Transgender and Queer Rights Jennifer Levi. “Today’s decision only adds to the chaos and destruction caused by this administration. It’s not the end of the case, but the havoc it will wreak is devastating and irreparable. History will confirm the weight of the injustice done today.”
“The Court has upended the lives of thousands of servicemembers without even the decency of explaining why,” said NCLR Legal Director Shannon Minter. “As a result of this decision, reached without benefit of full briefing or argument, brave troops who have dedicated their lives to the service of our country will be targeted and forced into harsh administrative separation process usually reserved for misconduct. They have proven themselves time and time again and met the same standards as every other soldier, deploying in critical positions around the globe. This is a deeply sad day for our country.”
Levi and Minter are the lead attorneys in the first two transgender military ban cases to be heard in federal court, Talbott v. Trump and Ireland v. Hegseth.
U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) issued a statement on behalf of the Congressional Equality Caucus, where he serves as chair.
“By lifting the lower court’s preliminary injunction and allowing Trump to enforce his trans troop ban as litigation continues, the Supreme Court is causing real harm to brave Americans who simply want to serve their nation in uniform.
“The difference between Donald Trump, a draft dodger, and the countless brave Americans serving their country who just happen to be trans couldn’t be starker. Let me be clear: Trump’s ban isn’t going to make our country safer—it will needlessly create gaps in critical chains of military command and actively undermine our national security.
“The Supreme Court was absolutely wrong to allow this ban to take effect. I hope that lower courts move swiftly so this ban can ultimately be struck down.”
SPARTA Pride also issued a statement:
“The Roberts Court’s decision staying the preliminary injunction will allow the Trump purge of transgender service members from the military to proceed.
“Transgender Americans have served openly, honorably, and effectively in the U.S. Armed Forces for nearly a decade. Thousands of transgender troops are currently serving, and are fully qualified for the positions in which they serve.
“Every court up to now has found that this order is unconstitutional. Nevertheless, the Roberts Court – without hearing any evidence or argument – decided to allow it to go forward. So while the case continues to be argued, thousands of trans troops will be purged from the Armed Forces.
“They will lose their jobs. They will lose their commands, their promotions, their training, pay and benefits, and time. Their units will lose key players; the mission will be disrupted. This is the very definition of irreparable harm.”
Imara Jones, CEO of TransLash Media, issued the following statement:
“The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold Trump’s ban on transgender soldiers in the military, even as the judicial process works its way through the overall question of service, signals that open discrimination against trans people is fair game across American society.
“It will allow the Trump Administration to further advance its larger goal of pushing trans people from mainstream society by discharging transgender military members who are currently serving their country, even at a time when the military has struggled recently to meet its recruiting goals.
“But even more than this, all of my reporting tells me that this is a further slide down the mountain towards authoritarianism. The hard truth is that governments with authoritarian ambitions have to separate citizens between who is worthy of protection and who’s not. Trans people are clearly in the later category. And this separation justifies the authoritarian quest for more and more power. This appears to be what we are witnessing here and targeting trans people in the military is just a means to an end.”
No olvidar el 11 de mayo
Blade names Delaware journalism fellowship recipient
Impact of federal gov’t RIF on D.C.’s rental market
A trip ‘through media, memory to examine cultural imperialism’
My chance encounter with a pope and why goodness still matters
American cardinal chosen as next pope
Your guide to the many Pride celebrations in D.C. region
Gideon Glick steals the show in Amazon Prime’s ‘Étoile’
Council must approve new Commanders stadium deal
