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

National

White House orders warning signs at Smithsonian over gender identity exhibits

Administration criticizes National Museum of American History

Published

on

Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum is expected to install warning signs outside the National Museum of American History warning visitors of supposedly anti-American content. (Photo courtesy of the Office of the Governor of North Dakota)

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)

Continue Reading

National

Trump ends direct HIV prevention funding to community groups

Advocates say transfer of funds to states may disrupt local programs

Published

on

The Trump administration will discontinue direct federal funding of community-based organizations that provide HIV prevention services. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

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.

Continue Reading

National

At Alliance Defending Freedom’s summit, church and state are one

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) among speakers

Published

on

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

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.

Continue Reading

Popular