National
Incumbents hope LGBT support boosts chances
Murphy, Gillibrand have advantages in re-election bids
Is going gay good for your re-election prospects?
Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-Pa.) and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) are among the incumbents seeking re-election hoping that their support of LGBT rights will translate to campaign donations and victory in November.
Both lawmakers championed repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as one of their signature issues, and both have promising prospects for their re-election chances even though they’re competing in challenging races.
In the House, Murphy has been outspoken on the issue of repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and sponsored repeal legislation. He’s made numerous media appearances to denounce the law and was featured last year on the cover of The Advocate.
Upon taking up repeal legislation last year, the Iraq war veteran took a bill with about 150 co-sponsors and brought a measure to the floor of the House that earned 234 votes.
Similarly, Gillibrand has been a strong proponent of repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” since her appointment last year to the U.S. Senate.
She last year floated the idea of introducing an amendment that would have instituted an 18-month moratorium on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Additionally, Gillibrand is credited with working with Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Carl Levin to initiate hearings on the issue.
Matt Canter, a Gillibrand spokesperson, said the senator’s advocacy work on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is based on a strong personal conviction.
“My boss has helped champion the issue because she felt that now is the time to right this wrong,” he said. “She felt we needed leadership in the Senate to breathe life into this issue, to begin the debate on this issue.”
Michael Cole, a Human Rights Campaign spokesperson, called Murphy and Gillibrand “real champions of repeal” and emphasized the importance of Murphy’s status as an Iraq war veteran on the issue.
“Our campaign has been about putting veterans front and center, and when you have someone like the congressman — with a distinguished history of military service — it is profoundly impactful on both his colleagues and public opinion,” Cole said.
As LGBT civil rights advocates have expressed gratitude for Murphy and Gillibrand for tackling “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the lawmakers are facing a more favorable climate as they seek re-election this fall than many other incumbents.
Murphy is running in Pennsylvania’s 8th congressional district, which, prior to his election in 2006, had been represented by a Republican since 1993. Murphy is facing in the general election Republican Mike Fitzpatrick, the former U.S. House member whom Murphy unseated by less than 1 percentage point.
Still, many political observers are predicting that the Democratic congressman is likely to achieve victory this fall.
The Cook Report identifies the race as “lean Democratic” and the Rothenberg Political Report calls it “Democrat favored.” Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball identifies the race as a “toss-up.”
Meanwhile, Gillibrand is looking at a relatively smooth race this fall even though she was once considered vulnerable because she had been appointed to her seat last year by New York Gov. David Paterson and has never won statewide election.
One by one, possible serious challengers have decided they wouldn’t throw their hats in the ring — despite earlier speculation that they would do so.
Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.), who had earlier sought to challenge Gillibrand for the Democratic nomination, announced late last year that she wouldn’t pursue a run. Earlier this year, Harold Ford Jr., a Democratic former U.S. House member who represented Tennessee, said he was considering running, but later decided against it.
On the Republican side, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and former New York Gov. George Pataki were once seen as possible Gillibrand challengers, but both announced they wouldn’t pursue the seat.
Rev. Al Sharpton, a black civil rights activist and former Democratic candidate for president, reportedly told the New York Times earlier this year that Gillibrand has seen a remarkable amount of good fortune in her re-election bid.
“I think Gillibrand either has mystical powers or the best luck I have ever seen in politics,” he was quoted as saying in an April article.
But how much impact advocating for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal is having on these incumbent lawmakers remains in question.
Canter expressed skepticism about a correlation between Gillibrand’s position on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and her lack of serious competition this fall.
“I don’t know why Rudy Giuliani decided not to run for Senate,” Canter said. “I don’t know if ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is the reason.”
Trevor Thomas, a spokesperson for the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, said the impact of supporting “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal has so far been minimal on incumbents.
“SLDN looked at those [lawmakers] who voted for the Murphy amendment and are also facing tough re-election fights,” Thomas said. “We understand that includes about 25 members, and only two of them have been hit by their opponents for voting for ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ repeal.”
Thomas said that attacking an incumbent House member for their “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” stance isn’t “the strongest winning point by Republican opponents in this election season.”
But Dan Pinello, a gay government professor at the City University of New York, said advocating for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal helped put both Murphy and Gillibrand into more favorable positions this fall.
“Taking a highly public leadership role in attacking [‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’] is likely to reap substantial political reward in the form of campaign contributions from the national LGBT community,” Pinello said.
Pinello noted that Murphy’s advocacy on repeal made him particularly attractive to LGBT donors seeking to advance their cause.
“Murphy has appeared on ‘The Rachel Maddow Show’ and other liberal media outlets as this hunky straight knight in shining armor coming to the rescue of lesbian and gay damsels in distress,” Pinello said. “How in the world can they not reward him with anything less than tens, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions?”
Pinello likewise called Gillibrand a “wily fundraiser” and said he expects that she would use her advocacy against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to “her campaign’s best financial advantage.”
Still, Pinello noted a distinction between taking on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” a law that polls show an overwhelming number of Americans oppose, as opposed to taking on more challenging LGBT issues, such as repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act.
Pinello said he doesn’t believe any member of Congress is taking on DOMA as forcefully as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” even though the federal law prohibiting recognition of same-sex marriage affects more LGBT Americans.
“The principal reason for such [a] legislative leadership vacuum is that attacking DOMA would appear to most constituents to be endorsing same-sex marriage, which only about a third of Americans support outright,” he said. “So only Democratic incumbents in extremely safe districts or states would risk acting so boldly. And there are relatively few of those in this election cycle.”
Tennessee
Tenn. lawmakers pass transgender “watch list” bill
State Senate to consider measure on Wednesday
The Tennessee House of Representatives passed a bill last week to create a transgender “watch list” that also pushes detransition medical treatment. The state Senate will consider it on Wednesday.
House Bill 754/State Bill 676 has been deemed “ugly” by LGBTQ advocates and criticized by healthcare information litigators as a major privacy concern.
The bill would require “gender clinics accepting funds from this state to perform gender transition procedures to also perform detransition procedures; requires insurance entities providing coverage of gender transition procedures to also cover detransition procedures; requires certain gender clinics and insurance entities to report information regarding detransition procedures to the department of health.”
It would require that any gender-affirming care-providing clinics share the date, age, and sex of patients; any drugs prescribed (dosage, frequency, duration, and method administered); the state and county; the name, contact information, and medical specialty of the healthcare professional who prescribed the treatment; and any past medical history related to “neurological, behavioral, or mental health conditions.” It would also mandate additional information if surgical intervention is prescribed, including details on which healthcare professional made a referral and when.
HB 0754 would also require the state to produce a “comprehensive annual statistical report,” with all collected data shared with the heads of the legislature and the legislative librarian, and eventually published online for public access.
The bill also reframes detransitioning as a major focus of gender-affirming healthcare — despite studies showing that the number of trans people who detransition is statistically quite low, around 13 percent, and is often the result of external pressures (such as discrimination or family) rather than an issue with their gender identity.
This legislation stands in sharp contrast to federal protections restricting what healthcare information can be shared. In 1996, Congress passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, requiring protections for all “individually identifiable health information,” including medical records, conversations, billing information, and other patient data.
Margaret Riley, professor of law, public health sciences, and public policy at the University of Virginia, has written about similar efforts at the federal level, noting the Trump-Vance administration’s push to subpoena multiple hospitals’ records of gender-affirming care for trans patients despite no claims — or proof — that a crime was committed.
It has “sown fear and concern, both among people whose information is sought and among the doctors and other providers who offer such care. Some health providers have reportedly decided to no longer provide gender-affirming care to minors as a result of the inquiries, even in states where that care is legal.” She wrote in an article on the Conversation, where she goes further, pointing out that the push, mostly from conservative members of the government, are pushing extracting this private information “while giving no inkling of any alleged crimes that may have been committed.”
State Rep. Jeremy Faison (R-Cosby), the bill’s sponsor, said in a press conference two weeks ago that he has met dozens of individuals who sought to transition genders and ultimately detransitioned. In committee, an individual testified in support of the bill, claiming that while insurance paid for gender-affirming care, detransition care was not covered.
“I believe that we as a society are going to look back on this time that really burst out in 2014 and think, ‘Dear God, What were we thinking? This was as dumb as frontal lobotomies,’” Faison said of gender-affirming care. “I think we’re going to look back on society one day and think that.”
Jennifer Levi, GLAD Law’s senior director of Transgender and Queer Rights, shared with PBS last year that legislation like this changes the entire concept of HIPAA rights for trans Americans in ways that are invasive and unnecessary.
“It turns doctor-patient confidentiality into government surveillance,” Levi said, later emphasizing this will cause fewer people to seek out the care that they need. “It’s chilling.”
The Washington Blade reached out to the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, which shared this statement from Executive Director Miriam Nemeth:
“HB 754/SB 676 continues the ugly legacy of Tennessee legislators’ attacks on the lives of transgender Tennesseans. Most Tennesseans, regardless of political views, oppose government databases tracking medical decisions made between patients and their doctors. The same should be true here. The state does not threaten to end the livelihood of doctors and fine them $150,000 for safeguarding the sensitive information of people with diabetes, depression, cancer, or other conditions. Trans people and intersex people deserve the same safety, privacy, and equal treatment under the law as everyone else.”
National
Glisten’s 30th annual Day of Silence to take place April 10
Campaign began as student-led protests against anti-LGBTQ bullying, discrimination
Glisten’s 30th annual Day of Silence will take place on April 10.
The annual Day of Silence began as a student-led protest in response to bullying and discrimination that LGBTQ students face. It is now a national campaign for the LGBTQ community and their allies to come together for LGBTQ youth.
It takes place annually and has multiple ways for supporters to get involved in the movement.
Glisten, originally GLSEN, champions LGBTQ issues in schools, grades K-12. Glisten’s mission is to create more inclusive and accepting environments for LGBTQ students through curriculum, supportive measures, education campaigns, and engagement, such as the Day of Silence.
There are three main ways for the community to get involved in the Day of Silence.
Glisten has a Day of Silence frame, a series of pictures used as profile photos across social media that feature individuals holding signs. The signs allow for personalization, by providing a space to put the individual’s name, followed by filling in the prompt “ … and I am ENDING the silence by…”
Participants are encouraged to post the photo on social media and use it as a profile picture. The templates can be found on Google Drive through this link.
Using #DayOfSilence and #NSCS, as well as tagging Glisten’s official Page @glistencommunity, is another way to participate in the Day of Silence.
Glisten also encourages participants to tag creators, friends, family and use a call to action in their caption, to call attention to the facts and stories behind the Day of Silence.
“Today’s administration in the U.S. wants us to stay silent, submit to their biased and hurtful conformity, and stop fighting for our right to be authentically ourselves,” said Glisten CEO Melanie Willingham-Jaggers. “We urge supporters to use their social platforms and check in with local chapters to be boots on the ground to help LGBTQ+ students feel seen, heard, supported, and less alone. By participating in the ‘Day of Silence,’ you are showing solidarity with young people as they navigate identity, safety, and belonging. Our voices matter.”
South Carolina
Man faces first S.C. ‘hate intimidation’ charge
Timothy Truett allegedly shot at gay club in Myrtle Beach on April 1
A South Carolina man remains in custody on a more than $300,000 bond after he allegedly opened fire at a Myrtle Beach nightclub on April 1, according to WMBF.
Reports say 37-year-old Timothy James Truett Jr., of Clover, S.C., was detained by the Myrtle Beach Police Department after the April 1 incident outside Pulse Ultra Club. He was later arrested and charged with possession of a weapon during a violent crime, discharging a firearm into a dwelling, discharging a firearm within city limits, malicious injury to real property valued over $5,000, and assault or intimidation due to political opinions or the exercise of civil rights.
At 10:57 a.m. on April 1, officers responded to a call about a possible shooting at Pulse Ultra Club, located in the 2700 block of South Kings Highway.
In an affidavit released later, the club’s owner, Ken Phillips, said he was doing paperwork that morning when he heard “five or six” gunshots. He went outside and found a window and the windshield of his SUV shattered by bullets. An SUV with blue plastic covering one window was left at the scene.
Police later reviewed footage that showed a silver vehicle stopping in the middle of the road. The video appeared to capture muzzle flashes coming from the passenger-side window.
According to the affidavit, an officer later pulled over a vehicle driven by Truett and found spent shell casings in the back seat, along with a gun.
Documents do not detail why Truett was ultimately charged under the state law covering assault or intimidation tied to political opinions or the exercise of civil rights.
As of April 1, records show Truett is being held in Horry County on a combined bond of more than $312,000.
WMBF spoke with Phillips after the incident and asked whether there was any prior conflict that might have led to the shooting.
“I don’t know if it’s personal, I don’t know if it’s related to being gay, I don’t know if it’s related to the bar issues,” Phillips told WMBF. “Anybody with a mindset of pulling out a weapon in broad daylight is not right.”
“My primary concern has and always will be the safety of my community and my customers,” he added. “It’s given me great concern … as to how far people will go.”
WMBF also spoke with Adam Hayes, vice chair of Myrtle Beach’s Human Rights Coalition, who was involved in pushing for the ordinance. He said that while the incident itself is troubling, it shows the policy is being put to use.
The ordinance is intended to deter “crimes that are motivated by bias or hate towards any person or persons, in whole or in part, because of the actual or perceived” identity, in the absence of a statewide hate crime law.
“It’s nice to see that something we put into policy is not just a piece of paper, that it’s actually being used,” said Hayes.
He said the shooting underscores the need for a statewide hate crime law in South Carolina and added that the incident has left the local LGBTQ community shaken.
South Carolina and Wyoming are the only two states in the U.S. without a comprehensive statewide hate crime law.
Truett remains in jail as of publication.
Trump’s war threats trigger rare 25th Amendment discussion
A Sondheim masterpiece ‘Merrily’ rolls onto Netflix
ROSENSTEIN: Vote McDuffie for mayor of D.C.
New book celebrates 1970s dance music icons
Report: Grenell wants Russian ambassadorship
Risking it all for love during World War II
D.C. is the place for the Democratic Socialists of America
PHOTOS: The Bonnet Ball
Key lifestyle changes can help patients cope with diabetes
