Connect with us

National

Gay lawmakers back Pelosi’s leadership bid

But some advocates unhappy with decision to pursue post

Published

on

U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) decision to pursue a bid as minority leader in the upcoming Congress is being met with unanimous support among the openly gay members of Congress as some LGBT advocates expressed regret that more pro-gay legislation didn’t pass during her tenure as presiding officer.

After Pelosi announced her decision to run for House minority leader last week, openly gay members of Congress declared their support for her decision and praised her work representing San Francisco in Congress for 23 years and her work in the last four years as speaker.

Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), the only out lesbian in Congress, said in a statement to the Blade that she’s among those endorsing Pelosi in her decision to become Democratic leader in the next Congress.

“I remain loyal to Nancy Pelosi,” Baldwin said. “In the last two years, she accomplished things that we’ve been trying to do for decades. Without her unique leadership passing health care reform, [the stimulus package], higher education reform, Wall Street reform, the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Act, and the House-passed Energy and Climate Change bill would never have happened.”

In an interview with the Washington Blade on Monday, Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the longest-serving openly gay member of Congress, also said he backs Pelosi’s decision to stay on as Democratic leader. He’s often spoken highly of her commitment to LGBT issues.

“I’m supporting her; I think she’ll win,” Frank told the Blade.

Also among those expressing support for Pelosi’s continued leadership is Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.), a gay lawmaker who last week issued a statement praising Pelosi’s decision and her support for the LGBT community.

“I strongly support the speaker and her decision to run for Democratic leader,” Polis said. “She has been a longstanding and ardent supporter of the LGBT community and I will do anything to help continue her leadership. The speaker has led the Democrats out of the wilderness before and I am confident she can do it again.”

David Cicilline, the Rhode Island politician who last week was elected to become the fourth openly gay member of Congress, also endorses Pelosi’s move. Richard Luchette, a spokesperson for Cicilline, said the congressman-elect “will be supporting Nancy Pelosi for minority leader.”

During the course of her tenure as speaker since 2007, Pelosi has pushed through a number of pro-LGBT bills through the U.S. House. The chamber passed hate crimes protections legislation in 2007 and again in 2009.

Pelosi also mustered enough votes in 2007 to pass through the House a version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act that later died. This year, a measure that would lead to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal passed the House by a 40-vote majority.

The health care reform legislation that Pelosi dragged to the finish line earlier this year increases access to Medicaid for people with HIV and improves Medicare Part D by closing the “donut-hole” for people participating in AIDS Drug Assistance Programs. Additionally, the law prohibits insurance companies from discriminating based on pre-existing conditions, such as HIV status.

But despite Pelosi’s success in the House with pro-LGBT legislation, only hate crimes legislation also successfully passed through the Senate during her time as speaker. Additionally, Pelosi has endured criticism for not moving forward with a trans-inclusive ENDA during the 111th Congress.

Drew Hammill, who’s gay and a Pelosi spokesperson, said the California lawmaker has been “a staunch advocate” for LGBT people during her more than 20 year in Congress. Among the positions she’s taken that he cited are leading the fight against HIV/AIDS, opposing a U.S. constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and speaking out against Proposition 8 in California.

“Nancy Pelosi will continue to be a friend, advocate and staunch ally to the community and the leading voice in the Congress for LGBT equality,” Hammill said.

House Democrats will vote at the start of the lame duck session next week on who will become minority leader in the 112th Congress as well as which members will assume other positions in Democratic leadership. As of Blade deadline, no other House member has challenged Pelosi in her bid to become Democratic leader.

The more contentious battle will likely be over who will take the No. 2 position in the Democratic caucus. Both current House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) are vying to become House minority whip. Hoyer is expected to have the backing of more moderate members of Congress, while Clyburn will likely have support from progressives as well as the Congressional Black Caucus and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.

Although Pelosi thus far is running unopposed as minority leader, the speaker’s decision to continue to lead the House Democratic caucus has irked some conservative Blue Dogs who distanced themselves from the speaker during the campaign and barely survived the Republican onslaught on Election Day.

Among the U.S. House members who’ve publicly said they wouldn’t vote for Pelosi as minority leader are Reps. Larry Kissell (D-N.C.), Jim Matheson (D-Utah), Health Shuler (D-N.C.) and Dan Boren (D-Okla.).

Eager to tie Democrats to Pelosi again in the 2012 election, the Republican National Committee last week draped a red banner across the front of its headquarters reading, “Hire Pelosi.” Prior to Election Day, as Republican candidates hammered House Democrats belonging to the caucus that voted Pelosi into power, a similar banner hung on the face of the building reading, “Fire Pelosi.”

One Democratic lobbyist, who spoke to the Blade on the condition of anonymity, expressed disappointment with Pelosi’s decision to stay on as minority leader and said the move doesn’t bode well for Democrats.

The lobbyist noted that fewer Democrats will be in the House next year than the number that were present in the minority prior to Pelosi’s ascension to speaker in 2006.

“Her polarizing history as leader will severely hamper Democratic recruitment efforts in the districts we just lost; couple that with what will almost certainly be additional Democratic losses after redistricting next year and it makes Democrats’ road to reclaiming the House — and her speakership — nearly impossible in the foreseeable future,” the lobbyist said.

Among LGBT rights supporters, Pelosi’s decision to continue as Democratic leader in the 112th Congress is inspiring mixed reactions. Some commend her for pushing through pro-gay bills while others said she could have done more.

Fred Sainz, the Human Rights Campaign’s vice president of communications, said the decision on whether Pelosi would be able to stay on as minority leader is up to the Democratic caucus and “not any one group.” Still, he praised the Democratic lawmaker for her support for the LGBT community.

“Speaker Pelosi has been a consistent ally and advocate not just for LGBT people but for all fair-minded Americans throughout her congressional career,” Sainz said. “She has vigorously supported full and equal rights for LGBT people long before it was politically acceptable to do so.”

But John Aravosis, the gay editor of AMERICAblog, said Pelosi is responsible in part for the lack of progress on pro-LGBT legislation during the first two years of President Obama’s administration. Still, while he said he’s not completely satisfied with Pelosi, Aravosis said other LGBT advocates in power deserve worse job evaluations.

“All of our leaders let us down: HRC, Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi,” Aravosis said. “Having said that, Nancy Pelosi strikes me as the least culpable of the four. I’m not happy that she wasn’t able to even get ENDA through committee, but I’m a lot less happy at the moment with HRC, President Obama and Harry Reid. Pelosi at least came through for us part-way, the others have been MIA the last two years.”

GetEQUAL, the LGBT organization responsible for civil disobedience acts across the country, is calling on Pelosi to make public a plan for moving forward with LGBT legislation to win the group’s endorsement in her bid to become minority leader. The organization has protested the speaker both on Capitol Hill and in her home district of San Francisco for not moving forward with ENDA in the 111th Congress.

Heather Cronk, managing director for GetEQUAL, maintained her organization is “interested in full equality for all LGBT Americans” and “happy to endorse” any member of Congress that can “commit to carrying the mantle of full federal LGBT equality.”

“While GetEQUAL has protested Rep. Pelosi throughout 2010 to hold her accountable to her promises to the LGBT community, we’d be happy to endorse her if we see a concrete and realistic plan for moving pro-equality legislation through the House,” Cronk said. “We would also be happy to endorse any other representative who can offer such a plan. We’re seeking bold action for equality — and we’re far more interested in that end than in the political horse race that started the day after Election Day.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

The White House

Trump tells Fox News he won the ‘gay vote’ — but polls tell a different story

Trump falsely claims LGBTQ support on Fox despite polling showing overwhelming opposition.

Published

on

President Donald Trump at the State of the Union in February 2025. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

President Donald Trump claimed he won the “gay vote” in 2024, despite evidence showing otherwise.

While appearing by phone on Fox News’s panel show “The Five” on Thursday, Trump falsely claimed he performed particularly well among gay voters while discussing the ongoing war in Iran — a conflict he initiated without formal congressional approval.

“Now I think I did very well with the gay vote, OK? I even played the gay national anthem as my walk-off, OK?” Trump said on air.

“And I think it probably helped me. But I did great. No Republican’s ever gotten the gay vote like I did and I’m very proud of it, I think it’s great. Perhaps it’s because I’m from New York City, I don’t know…”

His claim contradicts 2024 polling from NBC News, which found that the GOP presidential ticket captured fewer than 1 in 5 LGBTQ male voters — a figure that may also include bisexual and transgender men. Trump’s support among LGBTQ female voters was even lower, at just 8%.

White LGBTQ voters favored Vice President Kamala Harris over Trump by a margin of 82% to 16%, while LGBTQ voters of color backed Harris by an even wider 91% to 5%.

Trump also used the appearance to criticize “Gays for Palestine,” saying: “Look at ‘Gays for Palestine’… they kill gays, they kill them instantly, they throw them off buildings, and I’m saying, ‘Who are the gays for Palestine?’”

He further pointed to his campaign’s use of the song “Y.M.C.A.” by the Village People — which he has repeatedly described as a “gay national anthem” — noting that it was frequently used as a walk-off song at rallies, as an indication that he and his campaign were supported by the gay community. The track, long associated with camp and hyper-masculine gay imagery, became a staple of Trump campaign events.

The Village People were later booked to perform at Turning Point USA’s inaugural ball celebrating Trump’s second inauguration. Lead singer Victor Willis previously criticized Trump’s use of the song dating back to 2020 and considered legal action to block it, but ultimately said there was “not much he can do about it.” He later acknowledged the renewed exposure was “beneficial” and “good for business,” boosting the song’s popularity and chart performance.

Despite Trump’s claims of strong support from gay voters, polling has consistently shown otherwise — even as several prominent gay men have held roles in or around his orbit, sometimes dubbed the “A-gays.” These include Richard Grenell, former executive director of the Kennedy Center and Special Presidential Envoy for Special Missions; Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent; Under Secretary of State Jacob Helberg; Department of Energy official Charles T. Moran; and longtime supporter Peter Thiel, co-founder and CEO of Palantir.

His efforts to portray himself as aligned with the gay community stand in conflict with policies advanced under his leadership. These include removing LGBTQ-related data from State Department reports, attempting to narrowly redefine gender identity in federal policy, restricting access to gender-affirming health care, and rolling back anti-discrimination protections. His administration also rescinded initiatives focused on LGBTQ health equity, data collection, and nondiscrimination in health care and education — moves advocates say contribute to stigma and worsen mental health outcomes.

Additionally, some HIV programs and community health centers have lost funding from the federal government after supporting initiatives inclusive of transgender people as a direct result of Trump-Vance policies.

Continue Reading

National

Anti-trans visa ruling echoes Nazi regime destroying trans documents

Trump administration escalates attacks on queer community

Published

on

The Trump administration has moved from identifying trans people as as threat to the family to claiming that trans people are a threat to the spiritual health of the nation. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention and Human Security earlier this month released its third Red Flag Alert for the United States about the Trump administration’s anti-trans legislation. As the Lemkin Institute shared in the press release, “the Administration has moved from identifying transgender people as as threat to the family and to the nation’s military prowess to claiming that transgender people constitute a cosmic threat to the spiritual health of the nation and the great direct threat to the US national security in the world.”

The news came the same day that the State Department issued a new rule, “Enhancing Vetting and Combatting Fraud in the Immigrant Visa Program.” Under this new guidance, all visa applicants are required to disclose their “biological sex at birth” during all stages of the process, “even if that differs from the sex listed on the applicant’s foreign passport or identifying documentation.” 

This rule also orders that applicants to the green card lottery program share their passport information, so in knowingly collecting passport information that the agency knows will not match a person’s biological sex at birth, it’s creating grounds to deny trans peoples’ biases on the basis of “fraud,” Aleksandra Vaca of Transitics explains.

As is written in the new ruling, “the Department is replacing ‘gender’ with ‘sex’ in accordance with E.O. 14168, Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government, which provides that the term ‘sex’ shall refer to an individual’s sex at birth. Only male and female sex options are available for entrants completing the Diversity Visa entry form.” 

Along with outright denying the existence of nonbinary, genderqueer and gender expansive people, this policy creates a precedence for trans people to be stripped of their visas and deported because under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i), any foreigner found to have obtained or possess a visa “by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact” will have their visa revoked and face deportation. 

By requesting information on “biological sex at birth,” the State Department is forcing a mismatch between documents and enabling officials to accuse trans, nonbinary, and gender expansive immigrants of fraud. Thus, trans and nonbinary immigrants can have their visas revoked and can be deported, and information gathered from immigrants during the visa request process can be added to federal databases and used by immigration authorities, including ICE agents. 

With the Supreme Court’s decision this past year allowing ICE officers to use racial profiling, Vaca argues that “now, The Trump administration has given ICE the reason it needs. Under this rule, ICE agents now have the enforcement rationale to assert that trans people–especially those belonging to racial minority groups–are more likely than cis people to have ‘misrepresented’ themselves during the visa process, and therefore, are more likely to enter the country ‘unlawfully.’”

This would enable ICE agents to target trans individuals specifically for being trans. If the goal of this were unclear, a day later the Trump administration released its statement for Women’s History Month 2026, writing that “we are keeping men out of women’s sports, enforcing Title IX as it was originally written and ensuring colleges preserve–and, where possible, expand–scholarships and roster opportunities for female athletes. We are restoring public safety and upholding the rule of law in every city so women, children, and families can feel safe and secure.”

And this is not the first time that ICE has targeted and harmed trans and nonbinary immigrants. Last June, Vera reported that ICE is not including trans people in detection in their public reports, and back in 2020, AFSC reported that trans people held in ICE detention faced “dreadful, ugly” conditions. 

While it seems like a new development in Trump’s anti-trans escalation, it echoes a deeply upsetting history of denying and destroying transgender people’s documents following members of the Nazi party seizing power in 1933. 

In the early 20th century, Weimar, Germany was an epicenter for gender affirming care with Maganus Hirschfeld’s Institute for Sexual Science. One of the first book burnings of the rising Nazi regime destroyed the Institute’s extensive clinical records and library on trans health and history by Nazi students and stormtroopers. In doing so, the Nazis effectively destroyed the world’s first trans health clinic and one of the richest and most comprehensive collective of information about trans healthcare. 

Similarly, the Nazi government invalidated or refused to recognize what was called “transvestite passes,” or passing certificates that allowed trans people to avoid arrest under Paragraph 175 which prohibited cross-dressing. During the Weimar Republic — the regime that preceded the Third Reich — recognized and affirmed the identities of trans people (in limited ways) with specific documentation that helped prevent them from arrest. Invalidating and disregarding these passes allowed police and Nazi officials to target trans people and harass, extort and arrest them, and the record of passes themselves helped officials target trans people. 

The changes to visa guidelines — alongside Kansas’s move to revoke trans drivers’ licenses last month — is reflective of this escalation of violence against trans people during the Nazi’s rise to power, which scholars like Dr. Laurie Marhoefer is just beginning to uncover. And along with the revocation of identification documents this past week, a recent Fourth Circuit Court ruled that states can deny Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgery.

The Fourth Circuit Court decision affirmed the Supreme Court’s decision in Skrmetti, which ruled that bans on gender affirming healthcare for young people are constitutional. This ruling extends this ban to include adult healthcare bans, allowing West Virginia’s exclusion of Medicaid coverage for adult gender affirming healthcare to take full effect. Even more upsetting was what the ruling itself said, calling gender affirming healthcare “dangerous.” 

As was written in the Fourth Circuit Opinion, “it’s not irrational for a legislature to encourage citizens ‘to appreciate their sex’ and not ‘become disdainful of their sex’ by refusing to fund experimental procedures that may have the opposite effect.” 

In reality, what this ruling and the opinion reflect, is the next step in government regulation and oversight over marginalized peoples’ bodies. From the overturn of Roe v. Wade, which removed federal protection of access to abortion, this next step represents the denial of people’s access to vital, lifesaving care–and to be clear, gender affirming care is not just for trans, nonbinary, and intersex people. It’s a dangerous escalation and one that echoes previous violence against trans people under fascist regimes; the Lemkin Institute is right to raise concern.

Continue Reading

Pennsylvania

Pa. House passes bill to codify marriage equality in state law

Governor supports gay state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta’s measure

Published

on

Pennsylvania Capitol Building (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

The Pennsylvania House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a bill that would codify marriage equality in state law.

House Bill 1800 passed by a 127-72 vote margin. Twenty-six Republicans voted for the measure.

The Republican-controlled Pennsylvania Senate will now consider the bill that state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta (D-Philadelphia), who is the first openly gay person of color elected to the state’s General Assembly, introduced. Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro supports the measure.

“Here in Pennsylvania, we believe in your freedom to marry who you love,” said Shapiro on Wednesday. “Today, the House has stepped up to protect that right.”

Continue Reading

Popular