Connect with us

National

House votes again to repeal ‘Don’t Ask’

Will the Senate follow suit before time is up?

Published

on

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) speaks at a press conference in the U.S. Capitol on Dec. 15. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The U.S. House today approved by a 75-vote margin a measure that would repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as eyes shift once again to the Senate to see if the chamber will act to lift the military’s gay ban.

The measure to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” passed by a vote of 250-175 after more than an hour of floor debate in which lawmakers engaged in often passionate discourse both in favor and in opposition to the 1993 law.

After lawmakers cast their votes, Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the longest-serving openly gay lawmaker, banged the gavel at the podium and declared the final vote tally for the legislation.

During debate, those who spoke in favor of the repeal said lifting “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” would end a discriminatory policy, while opponents of repeal said open service would jeopardize military effectiveness.

U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said the vote to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” represented an opportunity to “close the door on a fundamental unfairness in our nation.”

“Repealing the discriminatory ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy will honor the service and sacrifice of all who dedicated their lives to protecting the American people,” she said.

Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-Pa.), the sponsor of repeal legislation in the House, said the vote for repeal was necessary to protect U.S. service members in the battlefield.

“Our troops are the best of the best, and they deserve a Congress that puts their safety — and our collective national security — over rigid partisan interests and a close-minded ideology,” Murphy said.

The Pennsylvania lawmaker noted the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen has said open service should be implemented to protect the integrity of the U.S. military.

“Well, this is also about the integrity of this institution — of this Congress,” Murphy said. “This vote is about whether we’re going to continue telling people willing to die for our freedoms that they need to lie in order to do so.”

The vote marks the second time this year that the House has approved a “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal bill. In May, the chamber passed a repeal measure on the floor as an amendment to the fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill by a vote of 234-194. The “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”-inclusive defense legislation failed to pass in the Senate.

Opposition this time around came from many Republicans, including Rep. W. Todd Akin (R-Mo.), who said the vote on repeal represented an attempt fto impose a “social agenda” on the U.S. military during wartime as operations continue in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Akin blamed House leadership for failing to pass a defense authorization bill — which he called an “eclipse of reason” because it has consistently passed in Congress for the past 48 years — and said Congress should pass funds for troops through the defense legislation before moving to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Rep. Buck McKeon (R-Calif.), ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, was also critical of Pelosi for bringing the repeal measure to the floor at this time and said the timing wasn’t right Congress to act on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

“The speaker has decided once more to subvert regular order … and bring to the floor [a measure] to repeal ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” McKeon said.

Among other things, McKeon was critical of how the House was holding a vote on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” before House committees had heard testimony on the Pentagon report on lifting the gay ban. Two days of hearings have already taken place earlier this month in the Senate on the report.

In response to Republicans’ assertions, Frank disputed that proper procedure hasn’t been followed on moving to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and noted that Republicans were responsible for filibustering the defense authorization bill in the Senate.

Frank noted the repeal measure had already passed in May by the full House and the Senate Armed Services Committee and said the notion that the committees of jurisdiction have been deprived on the issue was “delusional.”

“We’ve gone through triple regular order,” he said.

Among the 175 who voted against the repeal measure were 15 members of the Democratic caucus. They include House Armed Services Committee Chair Ike Skelton (D-Mo.), as well as Reps. Solomon Ortiz (D-Texas) and Dan Boren (D-Okla.).

Republicans who voted in favor of passing the legislation tallied out at 15 — which was 10 more Republicans than those who voted in May in favor of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” amendment.

Among the Republicans voting for repeal for the first time were Reps. Mary Bono Mack (D-Calif.), David Dreier (R-Calif.) and Dave Reichert (R-Wash.).

Passage of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal in the House first enables the chamber to send the legislation to the Senate as as “privileged” legislation.

The maneuver means the Senate won’t need 60 votes for the motion to proceed on the legislation, taking off the 30 hours of waiting time that would have been necessary were cloture filed on the measure. That’s significant as time is running out in the lame duck session.

Still, even though the first round 60 votes for the motion to proceed won’t be necessary, 60 votes would still be necessary in the Senate to move to final passage of the bill. Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Mark Udall (D-Colo.) this week pledged commitment to a stand-alone Senate repeal bill.

In a statement, President Obama praised the House for approving — with what he called “bipartisan support” —the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal legislation.

“Moving forward with the repeal is not only the right thing to do, it will also give our military the clarity and certainty it deserves,” Obama said. “We must ensure that Americans who are willing to risk their lives for their country are treated fairly and equally by their country.”

Geoff Morrell, a Pentagon spokeperson, also said Defense Secretary Robert Gates is “pleased” the House has approved a standalone “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal measure.

“He encourages the Senate to pass the legislation this session, enabling the Department of Defense to carefully and responsibly manage a change in this policy instead of risking an abrupt change resulting from a decision in the courts,” Morrell said.

LGBT rights groups heralded the House passage of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal and encouraged the Senate to follow suit to pass the legislation and send it to Obama’s desk.

Joe Solmonese, president of Human Rights Campaign, commended the House for approving the measure to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

“Today the U.S. House of Representatives said, for the second time, what military leaders, the majority of our troops and 80 percent of the American public have been saying all along — the only thing that matters on the battlefield is the ability to do the job.” Solmonese said.

Solmonese was referring to a Washington Post/ABC News poll published Wednesday, which found that 77 percent of Americans support allowing openly gay people to serve in the armed forces.

The director of the OutServe, a group for gay active duty service members, also praised the House vote and called on the Senate to act.

“Our ability to live and work with integrity and honesty is on the line,” said the director, who goes by the acronym J.D Smith. “It now falls to the Senate to follow the House’s example and the Pentagon report’s recommendations, and right the wrong that is being done to thousands of us currently serving.”

Will the Senate act before year’s end?

Now that the House has passed the measure, eyes will turn again to the Senate to see if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will schedule a vote on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal and if 60 votes are present in the chamber for passage.

Anxiety over whether the Senate will address “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as the limited time remaining the legislative session dwindles continues to be a concern for those who are working to end the military’s gay ban.

In a statement to the Blade, Regan Lachapelle, a Reid spokesperson, said the majority leader intends to introduce the legislation sometime before the end of the year, but didn’t offer further details on when the Senate would take up the legislation.

Moving to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal seemed unlikely this week. After finishing work on extension of the Bush-era tax cuts, the Senate proceeded to debate on the START Treaty, a nuclear arms reduction agreement.

The Senate, for the remainder of the week, was expected to tag between debate on the treaty and a continuing resolution for funding for the U.S. government.

One LGBT rights advocate, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said opposition to these measures from Republicans could sap away time that would be needed to address “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

“Both bills have hit procedural/political/substantive snags with Republican senators threatening to have them read out loud,” the activist said. “Whether or not this is a ploy to run out the clock is not known.”

After the START Treaty and the continuing resolution, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal would remain on the legislative calendar as well as passage of the DREAM Act, an immigration-related bill, and legislation to provide benefits to workers who helped at Ground Zero during the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

“There is no word on when or in what order those bills would be considered,” the activist said. “There is no commitment from Senator Reid to bring [‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’] to the floor but the privileged message from the House creates momentum and pressure for its consideration prior to adjournment.”

In a news conference on Tuesday, Reid had threatened to keep the Senate in session until Jan. 4 to take up measures such as the DREAM Act and “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

“Christmas is a week from Saturday,” Reid said. “I understand that.  But I hope the Republicans understand it also, because we are going to complete our work, no matter how long it takes, in this Congress. We have to do the work of the American people.”

But the advocate said this pledge from Reid “is largely useless” because senators whose votes would be needed for repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” would still leave before the session is over.

“He would likely lose senators like [Blanche] Lincoln and [Evan] Bayh who are not returning,” the advocate said. “If the Senate does not work this weekend, they will largely be done.”

Following the House vote, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD.) said during a news conference he doesn’t know when Reid will schedule the vote — even as he acknowledged that talks between House and Senate leadership have taken place.

“I have had conversations with Sen. Reid which indicated that we were going to take this action, and so he anticipated this action,” Hoyer said.

Despite these anxieties, other signs show that sufficient support exists to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” if the legislation moves to the Senate floor.

Multiple sources have told the Blade that 60 votes are present in the Senate to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” now that other legislative items such tax cuts have cleared the table.

At the news conference, Hoyer said he’s spoken many senators about “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” which has led him to believe that sufficient support exists for passage repeal.

“I’ve also had conversations with a number of members of the United States Senate — Republican members,” Hoyer said. “My belief is that there are the requisite number of votes in the United States both to effect cloture and passage of the legislation.”

Several Republicans senators — such as Scott Brown (R-Mass.), Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) and Lisa Murkowki (R-Alaska) — have come out in favor of repeal following the release of the Pentagon report.

On Wednesday, Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) added her name to the list of senators who have come out in favor of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal.

“After careful analysis of the comprehensive report compiled by the Department of Defense and thorough consideration of the testimony provided by the secretary of defense, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the service chiefs, I support repeal of the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ law,” Snowe said in a statement.

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