National

Great expectations as Congress returns from recess

Published

15 years ago

January 14, 2010

As lawmakers hash out the 2010 legislative schedule for Congress, LGBT rights supporters are anticipating a House markup for the long-sought Employment Non-Discrimination Act within the next month.

Sources familiar with Capitol Hill said the House Education & Labor Committee will take up ENDA, which would bar job bias against LGBT people in the public and private workforce, shortly after lawmakers return from holiday break.

Last year, House and Senate committees held hearings on legislation that would provide workplace protections for LGBT people. The next step in both committees — the Education & Labor Committee in the House and the Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee in the Senate — is reporting out the legislation so floor votes can take place.

Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.), a gay lawmaker who serves on the House Education & Labor Committee, said he’s expecting a markup of the legislation either this month or in February and a floor vote soon after.

“Once it’s been marked up in committee, it’s simply a matter of scheduling it for the floor, and that of course depends on what else is coming to the floor, whether it’s health care or what[ever] it is, but it shouldn’t take very long,” he said.

Also expecting an ENDA markup in the House shortly is Allison Herwitt, legislative director for the Human Rights Campaign.

“We’re hopeful that it will be either January or February and we’re pushing for that,” she said.

Still, it’s unclear exactly when the House committee will take up the legislation. Aaron Albright, spokesperson for the House & Education Labor Committee, said, “nothing has been scheduled yet.”

Meanwhile, in the Senate, Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), who sponsors ENDA in that chamber, has said the HELP Committee will take up ENDA in the spring, but Herwitt said the timing in the Senate “is a little less clear.”

“I think that we’re going to talk to [Chair Tom] Harkin’s staff people, committee staff and try to figure all of that out, what’s the timeframe that they’re looking at, how will we envision the bill moving forward in the Senate,” she said. “I mean, obviously, the Senate provides us more challenges in moving legislation, especially when it is freestanding.”

Advocates are committed to passing a version of ENDA that provides protections on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

The inclusion of transgender people in ENDA has been a sensitive issue. In 2007, Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) came under fire for pushing a version of ENDA that provided protections only on the basis of sexual orientation, saying at the time that Congress lacked the votes to pass an inclusive bill.

This year, the situation is different. Polis said lawmakers expect to pass “an inclusive ENDA that includes protections based on gender identity.”

Herwitt expressed similar optimism that the House would be able to pass ENDA with protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

“I think that we’re in a really strong place in the House,” she said. “I think that, again, when we look at our vote count for final passage, it looks good for a fully inclusive bill.”

Still, Herwitt said conversations are more nascent on the Senate side regarding ENDA and the inclusion of gender identity provisions.

“We have education that we need to do and have conversations,” she said. “I know that Sen. Merkley and his staff have been really on top of this, and having those conversations staff-to-staff — and the senator is having colleague-to-colleague conversations. And we just need to continue some of that process and then see where we are with the vote count.”

Asked whether the gender identity provisions could be a sticking point in the Senate, Herwitt replied, “I think what I’m saying is we’re still in the process of figuring all of that out. The conversations are still happening, the education process is still ongoing and obviously we want to make sure that the bill moves forward when it can move forward as a fully inclusive bill.”

Activists want DADT repeal in budget request

The repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the 1993 law that prohibits openly gay people from serving in the U.S. military, is also a primary focus for LGBT rights supporters on the Hill.

Advocates are urging President Obama to include language that would overturn the law as part of his defense budget request to Congress for the next fiscal year. The request is expected to be made public early this year.

The Servicemembers Legal Defense Network on Tuesday published a full-page ad in Roll Call newspaper calling on Obama to include repeal in his budget request. Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, writes in the letter that Obama should include repeal in his budget request to stay true to the promise he made to end the ban last year during a speech at an HRC dinner.

“There is no good reason why this White House would pass up this opportunity,” Sarvis said. “It is the logical place to get rid of the discriminatory ban. We urge the president to make good on his words on the campaign trail as well as those said last October when he emphatically declared, ‘I will end Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’”

Herwitt said HRC also wants Obama to include repeal of the ban on open service as part of his defense budget request.

“We have been working to make that a reality,” she said. “We are hopeful and it has been part of our plan. We think that having the White House put the policy recommendations through [the] DOD [budget request] forward is important and key.”

Whether the budget request will, in fact, include language that would repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” remains to be seen. Shin Inouye, a White House spokesperson, wouldn’t confirm whether administration officials would include such language in the budget request.

“As we are in the midst of the policy process for the FY 2011 Budget, it would be premature to comment on its contents,” he said.

Another bill pending in Congress is the Domestic Partnership Benefits & Obligations Act. The legislation — approved late last year by both House and Senate committees — would allow the same-sex partners of LGBT federal workers to receive the same benefits as the spouses of straight workers, including health and pension benefits.

But the timing for a floor vote is not yet clear. Herwitt said she doesn’t know when floor votes would take place and said HRC is “working with our allies in the House and the Senate to try and figure out what is the schedule, what are they looking at.”

Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), the sponsor of the bill in that chamber, said last month a floor vote wouldn’t take place until lawmakers receive cost offset information from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management for implementing the measure within the agency’s existing budget.

Leslie Phillips, spokesperson for the Senate Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs Committee, which has jurisdiction over the legislation, said Tuesday that lawmakers have “not yet received the offset information from OPM.” The agency didn’t respond to DC Agenda’s request for comment.

Up Next

Two Senate retirements mean two losses for gays

Don't Miss

Could an anti-gay Republican take Kennedy’s seat?

FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM

Federal Government

RFK Jr.’s HHS report pushes therapy, not medical interventions, for trans youth

‘Discredited junk science’ — GLAAD

Published

15 hours ago

May 1, 2025

Christopher Kane

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

A 409-page report released Thursday by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services challenges the ethics of medical interventions for youth experiencing gender dysphoria, the treatments that are often collectively called gender-affirming care, instead advocating for psychotherapy alone.

The document comes in response to President Donald Trump’s executive order barring the federal government from supporting gender transitions for anyone younger than 19.

“Our duty is to protect our nation’s children — not expose them to unproven and irreversible medical interventions,” National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya said in a statement. “We must follow the gold standard of science, not activist agendas.”

While the report does not constitute clinical guidance, its findings nevertheless conflict with not just the recommendations of LGBTQ advocacy groups but also those issued by organizations with relevant expertise in science and medicine.

The American Medical Association, for instance, notes that “empirical evidence has demonstrated that trans and non-binary gender identities are normal variations of human identity and expression.”

Gender-affirming care for transgender youth under standards widely used in the U.S. includes supportive talk therapy along with — in some but not all cases — puberty blockers or hormone treatment.

“The suggestion that someone’s authentic self and who they are can be ‘changed’ is discredited junk science,” GLAAD President and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis said in a statement. “This so-called guidance is grossly misleading and in direct contrast to the recommendation of every leading health authority in the world. This report amounts to nothing more than forcing the same discredited idea of conversion therapy that ripped families apart and harmed gay, lesbian, and bisexual young people for decades.”

GLAAD further notes that the “government has not released the names of those involved in consulting or authoring this report.”

Janelle Perez, executive director of LPAC, said, “For decades, every major medical association–including the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics–have affirmed that medical care is the only safe and effective treatment for transgender youth experiencing gender dysphoria.

“This report is simply promoting conversion therapy by a different name – and the American people know better. We know that conversion therapy isn’t actually therapy – it isolates and harms kids, scapegoats parents, and divides families through blame and rejection. These tactics have been used against gay kids for decades, and now the same people want to use them against transgender youth and their families.

“The end result here will be a devastating denial of essential health care for transgender youth, replaced by a dangerous practice that every major U.S. medical and mental health association agree promotes anxiety, depression, and increased risk of suicidal thoughts and attempts.

“Like being gay or lesbian, being transgender is not a choice, and no amount of pressure can force someone to change who they are. We also know that 98% of people who receive transition-related health care continue to receive that health care throughout their lifetime. Trans health care is health care.”

“Today’s report seeks to erase decades of research and learning, replacing it with propaganda. The claims in today’s report would rip health care away from kids and take decision-making out of the hands of parents,” said Shannon Minter, legal director of NCLR. “It promotes the same kind of conversion therapy long used to shame LGBTQ+ people into hating themselves for being unable to change something they can’t change.”

“Like being gay or lesbian, being transgender is not a choice—it’s rooted in biology and genetics,” Minter said. “No amount or talk or pressure will change that.”

Human Rights Campaign Chief of Staff Jay Brown released a statement: “Trans people are who we are. We’re born this way. And we deserve to live our best lives and have a fair shot and equal opportunity at living a good life.

“This report misrepresents the science that has led all mainstream American medical and mental health professionals to declare healthcare for transgender youth to be best practice and instead follows a script predetermined not by experts but by Sec. Kennedy and anti-equality politicians.”

The White House

Trump nominates Mike Waltz to become next UN ambassador

Former Fla. congressman had been national security advisor

Published

15 hours ago

May 1, 2025

Michael K. Lavers

U.N. headquarters in New York (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

President Donald Trump on Thursday announced he will nominate Mike Waltz to become the next U.S. ambassador to the U.N.

Waltz, a former Florida congressman, had been the national security advisor.

Trump announced the nomination amid reports that Waltz and his deputy, Alex Wong, were going to leave the administration after Waltz in March added a journalist to a Signal chat in which he, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and other officials discussed plans to attack Houthi rebels in Yemen.

“I am pleased to announce that I will be nominating Mike Waltz to be the next United States ambassador to the United Nations,” said Trump in a Truth Social post that announced Waltz’s nomination. “From his time in uniform on the battlefield, in Congress and, as my National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz has worked hard to put our nation’s Interests first. I know he will do the same in his new role.”

Trump said Secretary of State Marco Rubio will serve as interim national security advisor, “while continuing his strong leadership at the State Department.”

“Together, we will continue to fight tirelessly to make America, and the world, safe again,” said Trump.

Trump shortly after his election nominated U.S. Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) to become the next U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Trump in March withdrew her nomination in order to ensure Republicans maintained their narrow majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.

U.S. Federal Courts

Second federal lawsuit filed against White House passport policy

Two of seven plaintiffs live in Md.

Published

4 days ago

April 28, 2025

Michael K. Lavers

Lambda Legal on April 25 filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of seven transgender and nonbinary people who are challenging the Trump-Vance administration’s passport policy.

The lawsuit, which Lambda Legal filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland in Baltimore, alleges the policy that bans the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers “has caused and is causing grave and immediate harm to transgender people like plaintiffs, in violation of their constitutional rights to equal protection.”

Two of the seven plaintiffs — Jill Tran and Peter Poe — live in Maryland. The State Department, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and the federal government are defendants.

“The discriminatory passport policy exposes transgender U.S. citizens to harassment, abuse, and discrimination, in some cases endangering them abroad or preventing them from traveling, by forcing them to use identification documents that share private information against their wishes,” said Lambda Legal in a press release.

Zander Schlacter, a New York-based textile artist and designer, is the lead plaintiff.

The lawsuit notes he legally changed his name and gender in New York.

Schlacter less than a week before President Donald Trump’s inauguration “sent an expedited application to update his legal name on his passport, using form DS-5504.”

Trump once he took office signed an executive order that banned the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers. The lawsuit notes Schlacter received his new passport in February.

“The passport has his correct legal name, but now has an incorrect sex marker of ‘F’ or ‘female,'” notes the lawsuit. “Mr. Schlacter also received a letter from the State Department notifying him that ‘the date of birth, place of birth, name, or sex was corrected on your passport application,’ with ‘sex’ circled in red. The stated reason was ‘to correct your information to show your biological sex at birth.'”

“I, like many transgender people, experience fear of harassment or violence when moving through public spaces, especially where a photo ID is required,” said Schlacter in the press release that announced the lawsuit. “My safety is further at risk because of my inaccurate passport. I am unwilling to subject myself and my family to the threat of harassment and discrimination at the hands of border officials or anyone who views my passport.”

Former Secretary of State Antony Blinken in June 2021 announced the State Department would begin to issue gender-neutral passports and documents for American citizens who were born overseas.

Dana Zzyym, an intersex U.S. Navy veteran who identifies as nonbinary, in 2015 filed a federal lawsuit against the State Department after it denied their application for a passport with an “X” gender marker. Zzyym in October 2021 received the first gender-neutral American passport.

Lambda Legal represented Zzyym.

The State Department policy took effect on April 11, 2022.

Trump signed his executive order shortly after he took office in January. Germany, Denmark, Finland, and the Netherlands are among the countries that have issued travel advisories for trans and nonbinary people who plan to visit the U.S.

A federal judge in Boston earlier this month issued a preliminary injunction against the executive order. The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of seven trans and nonbinary people.