National
Gay candidates harp on opponents’ ‘Don’t Ask’ votes
Pougnet, Potosnak running against lawmakers who voted no
Gay candidates seeking congressional office are capitalizing on their incumbent opponents’ votes against overturning “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to build support in their electoral bids.
Those seeking to oust lawmakers from office are hoping that public support for ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” — which a CNN poll taken before congressional votes last month found nearly 80 percent of Americans favor overturning — will help build opposition to lawmakers who opposed the repeal compromise.
The votes on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal were taken May 27 in the U.S. House and the Senate Armed Services Committee to attach the measure as part of pending defense budget legislation.
Among the candidates capitalizing on votes against repeal is Steve Pougnet, the gay Democratic mayor of Palm Springs, Calif. who’s seeking to oust Rep. Mary Bono Mack (R-Calif.) from office.
Jordan Marks, campaign manager for Pougnet, said Bono Mack’s vote against repeal contributes to dispelling the perceived notion that she’s a moderate Republican.
“On ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ for so long, Mary Bono Mack had to have it both ways to show that she was a friend to the gay and lesbian community,” he said.
In a statement published shortly after the vote, the lawmaker defended her vote against the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal measure by saying she wants to wait until the Pentagon completes its study on the issue at the end of the year.
“I care deeply about our men and women in uniform and believe it is essential that a thorough review be completed by our military commanders prior to Congress enacting such a sweeping change,” she said. “This vote should have happened after that review.”
Bono Mack also noted opposition to the repeal measure voiced by the four service chiefs before the vote took place. She said lawmakers do these military leaders “a great disservice if we ignore their advice on this important issue.”
Until the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” vote, Bono Mack had been regarded in some circles as a pro-gay Republican because of her voting record. Bono Mack had voted twice against the Federal Marriage Amendment and in favor of hate crimes legislation and a version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
After the vote against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal tarnished her record on May 27, the Human Rights Campaign endorsed Pougnet.
Although Pougnet is running in a traditionally Republican district, a boost from the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” vote could be enough to give Pougnet the necessary edge to topple Bono Mack in what’s seen as a competitive race.
Pougnet is credited with being a powerhouse fundraiser and, according to Marks, will report $1.2 million in fundraising at the end of the second quarter. As of mid-May, Bono Mack has about $1.5 million in net receipts, according to Federal Election Campaign records.
Additionally, a June report in the Politico revealed that the National Republican Congressional Committee identified Bono Mack as one of nine potentially vulnerable Republican congressional lawmakers.
Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, said Bono Mack’s “no” vote on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” provides “clear proof” to supporters of repeal that she’s waffling on the issue.
“She always said if the military was OK with repealing it, she was fine,” Kors said. “The bill that went forward requires the military to finish its process and say that it won’t harm our military to repeal it, yet she still voted against it.”
Kors said Bono Mack’s vote has “riled up” those who thought she supported LGBT rights and “intensifies people’s belief that it’s time for her to go.”
On the other side of the country, Ed Potosnak, a Democrat running against incumbent Rep. Leonard Lance (R-N.J.) to represent New Jersey’s 7th congressional district, is similarly capitalizing on his opponent’s vote against overturning “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
Potosnak, a former staffer for Rep. Mike Honda (D-Calif.) and public school teacher, said Lance’s vote is evidence the lawmaker has changed since he was elected to office.
“The vote against repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ really goes a long way in demonstrating that Lance is just out of touch,” Potosnak said.
Potosnak said Lance’s vote on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” — as well as other votes the lawmaker has cast in his career — show he’s “on the wrong side of history.”
As the campaign progresses, Potosnak said voters “will have the opportunity to see how much he has changed since going down to Washington.”
Lance’s campaign didn’t respond to the Blade’s request to explain the lawmaker’s vote against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal.
While the lawmaker’s vote against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal could give Potosnak an edge in the race, he still faces an uphill battle. He’s running in a traditionally Republican district, and recent campaign finance reports show that he has around $51,000 in cash-on-hand compared to the $500,000 in Lance’s coffers.
Jimmy LaSalvia, executive director of GOProud, a gay conservative group that advocates for repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” defended lawmakers who voted “no” by noting results of the Pentagon study have yet to be revealed.
“We had a plan to look at this and get rid of it, and now you’re telling [us] to scrap that plan and vote on it now,” LaSalvia said. “The reason for many of those votes were the result of the Democrats changing the strategy in mid-stream, and it couldn’t have been more poorly handled.”
Another gay candidate seeking congressional office won’t be to draw attention to an opponent’s vote against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal in his campaign. David Cicilline, the Democratic mayor of Providence, R.I., who’s seeking to represent Rhode Island’s 1st congressional district, isn’t running against an incumbent candidate.
The lawmaker that Cicilline is seeking to succeed is Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.), who announced his planned retirement from the House earlier this year. Kennedy voted in favor of the repeal measure.
National
White House orders warning signs at Smithsonian over gender identity exhibits
Administration criticizes National Museum of American History
The Trump administration will install temporary warning signs outside the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History after releasing a report accusing the museum of promoting what it calls “radical” gender ideology and other politically biased content.
According to the Executive Order, “For purposes of policy formulation under EO 14253, this review of the National Museum of American History concludes that NMAH, by the intention and at the direction of current Museum and Smithsonian leadership, has become subject to institutional capture by a radical, activist ideology that is fundamentally opposed to telling the noble, honest story of the great country we know and love.”
Executive Order 14253 refers to what the White House has deemed the “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History” order. Therefore, the Trump administration has said it will take all available steps to ensure that the issues in the report are addressed and rectified.
Without specifying, the White House has stated that warnings will be posted along NMAH to alert visitors to sections of the museum it has deemed are in violation according to the report.
“The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National Park Service (NPS) and in coordination with the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, shall install temporary signage along the NPS-maintained sidewalks and walkways used by the public to access the Museum, informing visitors of the findings of the Report and of the policy set forth in section 1 of this order,” the Executive Order states.
The warnings were raised in a 162-page report issued by the Domestic Policy Council. The report detailed ways in which the National Museum of American History (NMAH) has “poorly” portrayed American history and insufficiently highlighted the founding story during America 250th celebrations.
The report outlined key findings of the NMAH. One of these findings was the Center for Restorative History within the museum, which has stated its purpose is to “encourage systemic change” by highlighting diverse groups. However, the report states that it highlights every group of Americans except for straight and white Americans.
The Domestic Policy Council accused the museum of engaging in “transgender activism.” According to the report, examples include referring to “biological men” as women or girls, displaying what it describes as sexually suggestive content, and incorporating discussions of gender fluidity, gender identity, and gender nonconformity into the museum’s educational curriculum, “Becoming US.”
The report also criticizes the curriculum for using the term “transgender” when discussing gender-nonconforming people and encouraging individuals to ask a person’s pronouns when meeting them. It further objects to exhibits stating that “transgender, nonbinary, and cisgender female athletes” continue to struggle for and demand equality.
It also condemns what it refers to as explicit content in an exhibition, “Girlhood (It’s Complicated)”, such as chest binders, questioning gender testing in women’s sports, and referring to biological females as “people inhabiting female bodies.”
Additionally, the report accuses the museum of no longer participating in flag-celebrating ceremonies because it was “too busy” preparing for June Pride and WorldPride events. It states, “As Director Hartig explained in a June 2024 presentation, all her attention was focused on flying the Smithsonian Pride Alliance’s ‘intersexual pride flag during June’ in 2023 and 2024.”
On July 9, the American Historical Association issued a statement rejecting the report’s findings.
In regard to the report, it states, “Its anonymous authors overlook a central lesson of the nation’s founding: the United States was forged by finding common purpose amid intense divisions, conflicts, and disagreements.” They argue that only “honest history” can tell the true history of the nation.
House Republicans led a subcommittee hearing that questioned Smithsonian Director Hartig extensively. A main focus of the questions was on the exhibits related to gender identity and whether they were appropriate. In the hearing, Rep. Nancy Mace asked: “When was your gender revealed to you, Dr. Hartig?”
In response to questioning, Hartig stated that the institution is nonpartisan and does not push a specific agenda.
Hartig published a two-page statement ahead of her hearing outlining her thoughts on the situation. In the report, she states that the institution is always open to criticism and will continue to look for ways to improve, but she sees the report as misleading.
“I can attest that the report does not fairly characterize the full body of work at this museum. I am familiar with the depth and breadth of our collections, exhibits, and programming. And while I recognize there is always room for improvement, I also know the beauty, inspiration, and expertise that exists in our museum,” Hartig wrote.
Democrats created their own 16-page report as a rebuttal to the Domestic Policy Council’s report. It argued that the attacks by the current Trump administration are another example of its attempt to rewrite history. Additionally, the report states that no policy changes were included in the Executive Order, as that is beyond the President’s role. “The Report recommends nothing. That is no accident. To recommend an action, the Report would need to identify who is legally empowered to take it, and its own opening chapter concedes the President’s only power is to ‘urge’,” House Democrats wrote.
It is still unclear when the temporary warnings will be installed or what form they will take beyond the requirements outlined in the executive order.

An exhibit at the Smithsonian. (Washington Blade photo by Landon Shackelford)
National
Trump ends direct HIV prevention funding to community groups
Advocates say transfer of funds to states may disrupt local programs
A decision by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) at the request of the Trump administration to discontinue direct federal funding of community-based organizations and clinics that provide HIV prevention services has raised concern among community health advocates, including LGBTQ advocates.
News surfaced earlier this month that the OMB informed the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that it would not renew $46 million in funding for 96 community-based organizations that provide HIV testing, referrals to medical care, and arrangements for obtaining pre-exposure HIV prevention medication known as PrEP that has been shown to be 99 percent effective in preventing HIV infection.
Under the new policy arranged by OMB, the funds will be redirected to the states to be allocated to state and local health departments. The policy calls for states to encourage but not require their respective state and local health departments to allocate some of those funds for community-based organizations. Under the new policy, the funding is scheduled to last until May of 2027, before a renewal decision is made.
Some political observers have speculated that the decision to end direct federal funding to community-based organizations could be motivated by the Trump administration’s hostility to diversity, equity, and inclusion or DEI programs and organizations that promote those programs, with the belief that some of the groups receiving the federal HIV prevention funds are promoting DEI.
Carl Schmid, executive director of the D.C.-based HIV+ Hepatitis Policy Institute, is among the leaders of many AIDS advocacy organizations expressing strong opposition to the OMB action. Schmid said that in places like D.C. and some states, local officials will be willing to redirect the federal funds to local community-based organizations.
A list of the 96 community-based organizations across the country that are currently receiving the federal AIDS funds includes the D.C.-based Whitman-Walker Health, which has a long history of healthcare support for the LGBTQ community, and La Clinica del Pueblo, which reaches out to the Latino community.
Schmid said Whitman-Walker and La Clinica del Pueblo have longstanding good relationships with the local D.C. government.
“But other states and jurisdictions don’t have that relationship with the community-based organizations,” Schmid said. “It depends on the state,” he said, adding, “Not all states send their money to the communities that really need it most. And not all states are fast in getting money to the community-based organizations.”
Spokespersons for Whitman-Walker and La Clinica del Pueblo couldn’t immediately be reached for comment on whether they think the Trump administration’s latest action related to funding will adversely impact their respective organizations.
Schmid said under the current federal grant program slated to be discontinued, which has been in effect for at least five years, HIV-related health organizations receiving the federal grant funds were eligible for an existing federal policy enabling them to purchase HIV-related medication, including the PrEP prevention medication, at a significant discount from pharmaceutical companies. With the ending of the direct federal HIV funds to community-based organizations, Schmid said it was unclear whether problems may surface in obtaining drug discounts.
“They could still qualify as a sub-grantee from a state,” Schmid said. “But what if they don’t get that grant again? They would not be able to qualify to obtain the drugs” at the discounted price, he said.
Among the organizations expressing strong concern over the decision to discontinue the direct HIV prevention funding to community-based organizations has been the Federal AIDS Policy Institute and its subgroup called the HIV Prevention Action Coalition.
In a July 22 letter bearing the names of 71 community-based organizations from throughout the country sent to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Acting Director Jay Bhattacharya, the group called for the Trump administration to “reconsider” ending the current funding policy.
“Ending this program without a clear plan for what comes next would dismantle prevention infrastructure that has taken more than three decades of federal investment to build and do so just as that long record of measurable returns is accelerating,” the letter states.
It says the initiative by President Trump in his first term as president to end the HIV epidemic and reduce new HIV infections by 90 percent by 2030 was moving ahead by the funding program for community-based organizations that the administration now wants to end.
“Discontinuing this program would also cost far more than it saves,” the letter says. “Every HIV transmission prevented avoids an estimated lifetime treatment cost of roughly half a million dollars per person to the healthcare system – costs that fall heavily on taxpayer-funded programs, including Medicaid, Medicare, and the Ryan White HIV/AIDS program,” the letter continues.
“The choice before the administration is straightforward: a modest, targeted investment in prevention now, or far greater public expense for treatment later,” the letter concludes.
Spokespersons for the OMB and the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the CDC, have not immediately responded to news media requests for comment on the opposition to the funding change policy.
National
At Alliance Defending Freedom’s summit, church and state are one
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) among speakers
Uncloseted Media published this article on July 23.
By SPENCER MACNAUGHTON | Earlier this month, hundreds of people filled a conference room in San Diego. These included Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, Assistant Secretary of Health Admiral Brian Christine, OpenAI executive Dean Ball, and the attorneys general of West Virginia and Idaho.
They all came together for Alliance Defending Freedom’s 2026 Summit. The Christian legal group, also a Southern Poverty Law Center-designated anti-LGBTQ hate group, described the event as a “gathering of leaders from many different spheres, including law, public policy, media, business, education, and Christian leadership.”
Johnson — who has said that “homosexual relationships are inherently unnatural and … society cannot give its stamp of approval to such a dangerous lifestyle” — was a featured speaker.
In his speech, he seemed unconcerned with the separation of church and state: “It is so encouraging to Kelly and I to be among friends and fellow warriors for this cause and people who understand that God is not done with America yet. … ADF’s on the very tip of the spear, front line, defending those very truths and keeping the door open for the spread of the Gospel. This is our moment. I’m telling you, I believe the next season … is going to be the greatest season of this ministry since its inception.”
That ministry is one that has espoused aggressively anti-LGBTQ views since its inception in the early 1990s. It was co-founded by a group of evangelical men, including Alan Sears, who co-authored a book called “The Homosexual Agenda: Exposing the Principal Threat to Religious Freedom Today.” Since then, ADF has opposed gay marriage and supported bans on gay sex and on gender-affirming care for minors.
After helping overturn Roe v. Wade, ADF lawyers have led key victories at the Supreme Court. In 303 Creative v. Elenis, SCOTUS ruled that a website designer could refuse service to gay weddings. And this year they convinced the Court to overturn Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy and to uphold state laws in West Virginia and Idaho that ban trans girls from playing on girls’ sports teams.
At the summit, ADF President Kristen Waggoner, who has promoted conversion therapists and consistently misgenders trans people, interviewed these states’ attorneys general.
“The lawyers who were defending women’s sports were among the best I’ve ever seen in my entire life,” West Virginia Attorney General JB McCuskey told Waggoner.
Similar to Johnson, Trump’s Assistant Secretary of Health Christine showed his commitment to governing based on conservative Christianity. He gave a Bible-thumping speech against gender transition and trans healthcare, saying that it “contradicts … the deeper moral order that is woven into creation itself. For Genesis 1:27 informs us that God created man in his own image. … Male and female” He also said the “complementary relationship between man and woman is divine” and advocated for youth with gender dysphoria to receive care from a pastor.
All of these remarks from politicians made me think of the interview I published earlier this week with Pete Hegseth’s pastor, Doug Wilson. He wants a Christian theocracy in America and told me that: both the perpetrator and the victim should be disciplined in some cases of marital rape; that transgender people are “sad;” that execution is justifiable for certain homosexual acts; and that gay sex should be illegal.
The ADF Summit is glossy and polished. And while its messaging may be less explicit than Pastor Wilson’s, the track record of the organizations shows they have the exact same desires. They’re just deeply strategic in what they say and when and how they say it.
I believe the political power players who attended this year’s summit know this. They know they are endorsing an organization whose members have essentially called for the illegalization of most — if not all ‚ forms of queer behavior and presentation.
In the last few years, these perspectives have become increasingly embedded in the highest rooms of the federal government and they have been effective in stripping away LGBTQ rights. Wilson, who just installed a full-time pastor in Washington to lead services, says there are 10 to 20 government officials who align with his church’s ideology.
It is vital for Americans to keep their eyes wide open to the ultimate goal of groups like ADF: to create a United States that leaves LGBTQ people without rights and that pushes us back in the closet.
