Connect with us

National

With clock ticking, all eyes on Congress

Inaction on LGBT bills likely to trigger ‘anger in the community’

Published

on

President Obama joined families on the White House lawn for this week’s Easter egg roll. LGBT rights supporters are calling on him to be more vocal in his support for several key bills still pending in Congress, including repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ (DC Agenda photo by Michael Key)

Supporters of LGBT rights are turning up the heat on Congress in their efforts to pass several key bills after lawmakers return from recess next week.

Allison Herwitt, legislative director for the Human Rights Campaign, alluded to potential political consequences if the bills don’t advance in this Congress.

“I do think that there will be many LGBT Americans frustrated and disappointed if any of these [bills] don’t move,” she said. “Even though we don’t have a pro-LGBT majority in the House and the Senate — this is our highest majority that we have and we need to obviously capitalize on the members that we have in the House and the Senate to pass legislation. So, in short, I do think that there will be anger in the community.”

Herwitt said this anger would likely manifest itself in LGBT voters feeling disconnected from Congress and from the Obama administration.

This disconnect, Herwitt said, could affect political donations or discourage people from getting involved in re-election campaigns as well as “not door knocking, literature dropping, all that kind of stuff.”

Herwitt also urged a stronger voice from the White House in advocating for legislation like the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and the Domestic Partner Benefits & Obligations Act, as well as repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

“I do think that it is important that the president and the administration do strongly indicate to the House and the Senate their support and their desire to move on ENDA, ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ and DPBO,” she said.

Michael Mitchell, executive director of the National Stonewall Democrats, voiced similar views.

“I think that we’re seeing some — donors are starting to put their money elsewhere or holding off,” he said. “I think that there are rank-and-file folks who are getting frustrated.”

Mitchell said he thinks “we need to remember” that Obama has been in the White House for fewer than 18 months.

“On the other hand, a lot of people have been working on these issues for decades, and people don’t want to wait any longer, and we’ve been laying a lot of groundwork for a very long time and we see this as our window to get this stuff through,” he said.

The November elections are weighing heavily on the minds of LGBT rights advocates. Mitchell said the passage of LGBT bills this Congress is important because of the strong possibility of reduced Democratic majorities.

“The landscape could certainly be more difficult for us, especially if it gets closer in the House,” he said. “I said recently somewhere that [you] only need to look back about 18 months or two years to see how hard it was to pass our agenda when we didn’t have control, and I think it will, again, be like that.”

Key pieces of pro-LGBT legislation in Congress have encountered roadblocks.

Advocates are urging for the inclusion of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal as part of the upcoming defense authorization bill, but whether the votes exist in the Senate Armed Services Committee to attach the provision to the legislation remains to be seen.

President Obama hasn’t spoken publicly in favor of repealing the ban since his mention of the issue in his State of the Union address, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates told reporters in response to a DC Agenda question last month that he doesn’t recommend legislative action this year before the Pentagon working group completes it study of the issue.

For ENDA, a House committee markup of the legislation has been pushed back since late last year and still has yet to be scheduled, although advocates are saying activity could happen in April or May. Multiple sources have told DC Agenda that the Senate lacks the 60 votes needed to overcome any attempted filibuster of ENDA.

Problems also plague legislation that would provide benefits to the same-sex partners of federal employees. Supporters of the bill in the Senate have said they won’t move the bill to a floor vote until the U.S. Office of Personnel Management provides information on how it will offset the bill’s costs.

Months have passed since House and Senate committees marked up the bills late last year and sent them to the floors of their respective chambers, but OPM hasn’t yet made the offset information public. The agency didn’t immediately respond to DC Agenda’s request for an update on the situation.

During a panel discussion last week on the U.S. Census, Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, took time from her remarks to urge advocates on Capitol Hill to redouble their efforts.

“The LGBT community is very, very serious about getting all these three things done and it does not yet appear that Congress is serious about it,” she said.

Keisling later clarified for DC Agenda that her comments were “just me saying, ‘Hey pass these things.’ It wasn’t me saying, ‘You guys aren’t passing them.’”

“The clock is running down, but there is still time to do it and we have to demand they do it,” she said. “It gets harder and harder for them the longer they put it off. Health care is out of the way — start getting stuff done.”

The window of opportunity for Congress to act on these bills before lawmakers break to run their re-election campaigns is steadily becoming smaller.

After lawmakers return this month, Herwitt said they’ll work through July before they break again for August recess and then do more work in September and October before leaving to focus on re-election.

Herwitt said she’s heard talk about a lame duck session following the November election, but said she doesn’t “know if that will play itself out or not.”

While concerned about the passage of these bills before the end of the year, advocates are anticipating some activity in the coming weeks when lawmakers return from spring break.

Herwitt said she’s expecting the House Education & Labor Committee to take up ENDA and send it to the floor sometime in April or May.

That timetable would square with remarks Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.) made to Karen Ocamb, a lesbian Los Angeles-based journalist, that ENDA would pass committee by the end of April and reach the floor a week or two later.

Herwitt said Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass), the House sponsor of ENDA, has said he’s ready to move forward with the legislation and to have a floor vote.

“This is not new — you even wrote a story about it — the Senate is much more of a challenge for us on ENDA, but I think, at least from HRC’s perspective, getting a strong vote in the House will help us push the Senate forward,” Herwitt said.

Regarding “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal, advocates are working to include the language as part of the Senate version of the defense authorization bill when the Senate Armed Services Committee takes up the legislation in May.

“Either it’s in the chairman’s mark or we do it as an amendment, and that’s why we’re focusing very strategically in some of our key states that coincide with many of the members that sit on the Armed Services Committee,” she said.

In the House, Herwitt said gay rights supporters are pushing for an amendment on the floor to include “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal as part of the defense authorization bill after the Senate committee takes it up.

Herwitt said advocates are looking at a floor vote in the House as opposed to a committee vote because they “are challenged” with the number of conservative Democrats on the panel and the virtually non-existent support from Republicans.

Supporters of repeal, Herwitt said, are “in a very good place to move forward with a vote” in the House. Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-Pa.), the sponsor of the House bill, has said he has the votes to pass repeal on the House floor.

“We are always, I think, in a better, or I should say, a stronger position, when both bodies act on whatever provision it is that we’re trying to move forward,” she said. “So I think that we’re in a stronger place if we have the language repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ in the Senate bill and we have a House floor vote.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

California

LGBTQ community calls out Radio Korea over host’s homophobic comments

Station acknowledged controversy, but skirted accountability

Published

on

On Nov. 21st, Radio Korea CEO Michael Kim made an official video statement addressing the Nov. 3rd program. (Screen capture via Radio Korea/YouTube)

On Monday, Nov. 3, Radio Korea aired its regular morning talk show program, where one of its hosts, Julie An, discussed her lack of support for the LGBTQ community, citing her religious beliefs. She also went on to comment that gay people spread HIV and AIDS, and that conversation therapy — which has been linked to PTSD, suicidality, and depression — is a viable practice. Clips of this have since been taken down.

Radio Korea offers Korean language programming to engage local Korean American and Korean immigrant community members. Its reach is broad, as Los Angeles is home to the largest Korean population in the U.S, with over 300,000 residents. As An’s words echoed through the station’s airwaves, queer Korean community members took to social media to voice their concern, hurt, and anger.  

In a now-deleted Instagram post, attorney, activist, and former congressional candidate David Yung Ho Kim demanded accountability from the station. Writer and entertainer Nathan Ramos-Park made videos calling out Radio Korea and An, stating that her comments “embolden” people with misinformation, which has the ability to perpetuate “violence against queer people.”

Community health professional Gavin Kwon also worries about how comments like An’s increase stigma within the Korean immigrant community, which could lead to increased discrimination against queer people and their willingness to seek health care.  

Kwon, who works at a local clinic in Koreatown, told the Los Angeles Blade that comments like An’s prescribe being gay or queer as a “moral failure,” and that this commonly-held belief within the Korean immigrant community, particularly in older generations, strengthens the reticence and avoidance clients hold onto when asked about their gender or sexual orientation. 

“When you stigmatize a group, people don’t avoid the disease — they avoid care,” Kwon explained. “They avoid getting tested, avoid disclosing their status, and avoid talking openly with providers. Stigma pushes people into silence, and silence is the worst possible environment for managing any infectious disease.”

For weeks, Radio Korea did not offer a direct response to the public criticism. Its Instagram feed continued to be updated with shorts, featuring clips of its various hosts — including An. 

On Friday, Radio Korea CEO Michael Kim released an official statement on the station’s YouTube page. In this video, Michael Kim stated that An’s comments “included factual inaccuracies” and that the station “does not endorse or share the personal opinions expressed by individual hosts.” Michael Kim also stated that Radio Korea “welcomes members of the LGBT community to share their perspectives” in order to deepen understanding through dialogue. 

Afterwards, Michael Kim continued that though he acknowledges the “pain” felt by queer community members, he concluded: “I don’t think Radio Korea needs to apologize for what was said any more than Netflix should apologize for what Dave Chappelle says, or any more than Instagram or TikTok should apologize for what people say on their platforms.” 

Michael then offered a justification that An’s statements were “not part of a news report,” and that he was “disappointed” that David Yung Ho Kim, specifically, had been vocal about An’s comments. Michael Kim stated that he was the first person to interview David Yung Ho Kim in 2020 during his congressional campaign, and that he had provided the candidate a platform and opportunity to educate listeners about politics. 

“After all these years, the support Radio Korea has given him,” said Kim, “the support I personally gave him, even the support from other Radio Korea members who donated or even volunteered for him — he dishonestly tried to portray Radio Korea as being an anti-gay organization.”

Michael Kim went on to criticize David Yung Ho Kim’s purported “hurry to condemn others,” and also questioned if David has disowned his father, who he states is a pastor. “What kind of person is David Kim, and is this the kind of person we want in Congress?” Michael Kim asked viewers, noting that Koreatown is “only about three miles from Hollywood, and some people just like to perform.” 

At the end of the video, Michael Kim stated that his duty is to guard the legacy of the station. “My responsibility is to protect what was built before me and ensure that Radio Korea continues serving this community long after today’s momentary controversies disappear,” he said. 

For community members and advocates, this response was unsatisfactory. “The overall tone of the statement felt more defensive than accountable,” Kwon wrote to the Blade. “Instead of a sincere apology to the LGBTQ+ community that was harmed, the message shifts into personal grievances, political dynamics, and side explanations that don’t belong in an official response.”

Michael Kim’s portrayal of the criticism and calls to action by community members as a “momentary controversy” paints a clearer picture of the station’s stance — that the hurt felt and expressed by its queer community members is something that will simply pass until it is forgotten. An continues to be platformed at Radio Korea, and was posted on the station’s social media channels as recently as yesterday. The station has not outlined any other action since Michael Kim’s statement. 

Continue Reading

U.S. Military/Pentagon

Pentagon moves to break with Boy Scouts over LGBTQ and gender inclusion

Leaked memo shows Hegseth rejecting Scouting America’s shift toward broader inclusion

Published

on

Scouts for Equality march in the 2015 Capital Pride Parade. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

The Pentagon is preparing to sever its longstanding partnership with the Boy Scouts of America, now known as Scouting America.

In a draft memo to Congress obtained by NPR, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth criticizes the organization for being “genderless” and for promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion.

“The organization once endorsed by President Theodore Roosevelt no longer supports the future of American boys,” Hegseth wrote, according to Defense Department sources.

Girls have been eligible to join Cub Scouts (grades K–5) since 2018, and since 2019 they have been able to join Scouts BSA troops and earn the organization’s highest rank of Eagle Scout.

A statement on the Scouting America website says the shift toward including girls stemmed from “an expanding demand to join the Boy Scouts” and a commitment to inclusivity. “Throughout the late 20th and early 21st centuries, it has undergone significant changes to become more inclusive of the adult staff and volunteers that drive its programming as well as of scouts and their families,” the organization says.

Part of that broader push included lifting its ban on openly gay members in 2014 and on openly gay adult leaders in 2015.

Once the Pentagon finalizes the break, the U.S. military will no longer provide medical and logistical support to the National Jamboree, the massive annual gathering of scouts in West Virginia that typically draws about 20,000 participants. The memo also states that the military will no longer allow scout troops to meet on U.S. or overseas installations, where many bases host active scout programs.

Hegseth’s memo outlines several justifications for the decision, arguing that Scouting America has strayed from its original mission to “cultivate masculine values” by fostering “gender confusion.” It also cites global conflicts and tightening defense budgets, claiming that deploying troops, doctors and vehicles to a 10-day youth event would “harm national security” by diverting resources from border operations and homeland defense.

“Scouting America has undergone a significant transformation,” the memo states. “It is no longer a meritocracy which holds its members accountable to meet high standards.”

The Pentagon declined NPR’s request for comment. A “War Department official” told the outlet that the memo was a “leaked document that we cannot authenticate and that may be pre-decisional.”

The leaked memo comes roughly one month after nearly every major journalism organization walked out of the Pentagon in protest of new rules requiring reporters to publish only “official” documents released by the department — effectively banning the use of leaked or unpublished materials.

President Donald Trump, who serves as the honorary head of Scouting America by virtue of his office, praised the Jamboree audience during his 2017 visit to West Virginia. “The United States has no better citizens than its Boy Scouts. No better,” he said, noting that 10 members of his Cabinet were former Scouts.

Hegseth was never a scout. He has said he grew up in a church-based youth group focused on memorizing Bible verses. As a Fox News host last year, he criticized the Scouts for changing their name and admitting girls.

“The Boy Scouts has been cratering itself for quite some time,” Hegseth said. “This is an institution the left didn’t control. They didn’t want to improve it. They wanted to destroy it or dilute it into something that stood for nothing.”

NBC News first reported in April that the Pentagon was considering ending the partnership, citing sources familiar with the discussions. In a statement to NBC at the time, Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said, “Secretary Hegseth and his Public Affairs team thoroughly review partnerships and engagements to ensure they align with the President’s agenda and advance our mission.”

The Scouting America organization has has long played a role in military recruiting. According to numbers provided by Scouting America, many as 20 percent of cadets and midshipmen at the various service academies are Eagle Scouts. Enlistees who have earned the Eagle rank also receive advanced entry-level rank and higher pay — a practice that would end under the proposed changes.

Continue Reading

The White House

Trans workers take White House to court over bathroom policy

Federal lawsuit filed Thursday

Published

on

Protesters outside of House Speaker Mike Johnson's (R-La.) office in the Cannon House Office Building last year protesting a similar bathroom ban. (Washington Blade photo by Christopher Kane)

Democracy Forward and the American Civil Liberties Union, two organizations focused on protecting Americans’ constitutional rights, filed a class-action lawsuit Thursday in federal court challenging the Trump-Vance administration’s bathroom ban policies.

The lawsuit, filed on behalf of LeAnne Withrow, a civilian employee of the Illinois National Guard, challenges the administration’s policy prohibiting transgender and intersex federal employees from using restrooms aligned with their gender. The policy claims that allowing trans people in bathrooms would “deprive [women assigned female at birth] of their dignity, safety, and well-being.”

The lawsuit responds to the executive order titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” signed by President Donald Trump on his first day in office. It alleges that the order and its implementation violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits sex discrimination in employment. In 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Title VII protects trans workers from discrimination based on sex.

Since its issuance, the executive order has faced widespread backlash from constitutional rights and LGBTQ advocacy groups for discriminating against trans and intersex people.

The lawsuit asserts that Withrow, along with numerous other trans and intersex federal employees, is forced to choose between performing her duties and being allowed to use the restroom safely.

“There is no credible evidence that allowing transgender people access to restrooms aligning with their gender identity jeopardizes the safety or privacy of non-transgender users,” the lawsuit states, directly challenging claims of safety risks.

Withrow detailed the daily impact of the policy in her statement included in the lawsuit.

“I want to help soldiers, families, veterans — and then I want to go home at the end of the day. At some point in between, I will probably need to use the bathroom,” she said.

The filing notes that Withrow takes extreme measures to avoid using the restroom, which the Cleveland Clinic reports most people need to use anywhere from 1–15 times per day depending on hydration.

“Ms. Withrow almost never eats breakfast, rarely eats lunch, and drinks less than the equivalent of one 17 oz. bottle of water at work on most days.”

In addition to withholding food and water, the policy subjects her to ongoing stress and fear:

“Ms. Withrow would feel unsafe, humiliated, and degraded using a men’s restroom … Individuals seeing her enter the men’s restroom might try to prevent her from doing so or physically harm her,” the lawsuit states. “The actions of defendants have caused Ms. Withrow to suffer physical and emotional distress and have limited her ability to effectively perform her job.”

“No one should have to choose between their career in service and their own dignity,” Withrow added. “I bring respect and honor to the work I do to support military families, and I hope the court will restore dignity to transgender people like me who serve this country every day.”

Withrow is a lead Military and Family Readiness Specialist and civilian employee of the Illinois National Guard. Previously, she served as a staff sergeant and has received multiple commendations, including the Illinois National Guard Abraham Lincoln Medal of Freedom.

The lawsuit cites the American Medical Association, the largest national association of physicians, which has stated that policies excluding trans individuals from facilities consistent with their gender identity have harmful effects on health, safety, and well-being.

“Policies excluding transgender individuals from facilities consistent with their gender identity have detrimental effects on the health, safety and well-being of those individuals,” the lawsuit states on page 32.

Advocates have condemned the policy since its signing in January and continue to push back against the administration. Leaders from ACLU-D.C., ACLU of Illinois, and Democracy Forward all provided comments on the lawsuit and the ongoing fight for trans rights.

“We cannot let the Trump administration target transgender people in the federal government or in public life,” said ACLU-D.C. Senior Staff Attorney Michael Perloff. “An executive order micromanaging which bathroom civil servants use is discrimination, plain and simple, and must be stopped.”

“It is absurd that in her home state of Illinois, LeAnne can use any other restroom consistent with her gender — other than the ones controlled by the federal government,” said Michelle Garcia, deputy legal director at the ACLU of Illinois. “The Trump administration’s reckless policies are discriminatory and must be reversed.”

“This policy is hateful bigotry aimed at denying hardworking federal employees their basic dignity simply because they are transgender,” said Kaitlyn Golden, senior counsel at Democracy Forward. “It is only because of brave individuals like LeAnne that we can push back against this injustice. Democracy Forward is honored to work with our partners in this case and is eager to defeat this insidious effort to discriminate against transgender federal workers.”

Continue Reading

Popular