National
House votes again to repeal ‘Don’t Ask’
Will the Senate follow suit before time is up?
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.
Vice President JD Vance and his wife, second lady Usha Vance, will visit Hungary next week.
An announcement the White House released on Thursday said the Vances will be in Budapest, the Hungarian capital, from April 7-8.
JD Vance “will hold bilateral meetings with” Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. The announcement further indicates the vice president “will also deliver remarks on the rich partnership between the United States and Hungary.”
The Vances will travel to Hungary less than a week before the country’s parliamentary elections take place on April 12.
Orbán, who has been in office since 2010, and his Fidesz-KDNP coalition government have faced widespread criticism over its anti-LGBTQ crackdown.
The Associated Press notes polls indicate Orbán is trailing Péter Magyar and his center-right Tisza party.
President Donald Trump removed Attorney General Pam Bondi from her post Thursday, following growing criticism over how she and the Department of Justice handled a range of issues, including matters related to sex offender and Trump ally Jeffrey Epstein.
Trump announced Bondi’s removal on Truth Social, where he also said Todd Blanche will serve as acting head of the Justice Department.
“Pam Bondi is a great American patriot and a loyal friend, who faithfully served as my attorney general over the past year,” Trump wrote on the platform. “Pam did a tremendous job overseeing a massive crackdown on crime across our country, with murders plummeting to their lowest level since 1900.”
Trump was seen as recently as Wednesday with the now-former attorney general at a Supreme Court hearing on citizenship.
The decision contrasts with Trump’s previous public praise of Bondi, the 87th U.S. attorney general and former 37th attorney general of Florida, who served in that role from 2011-2019 before joining the Trump-Vance administration. He has frequently lauded her loyalty and said he speaks with her often. Bondi was also one of president’s defense lawyers during his first impeachment trial.
Privately, however, Trump had grown frustrated that Bondi was not “moving quickly enough” to prosecute critics and political adversaries he wanted to face criminal charges, according to multiple sources. The New York Times reported that her inability to charge former FBI Director James B. Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James with any crimes is a large factor in the president’s choice to fire her from the government’s primary law enforcement agency.
The move comes as Trump has sought to minimize public turmoil within his administration, avoiding the perception of a revolving-door Cabinet that defined his first term.
Lee Zeldin, a former Republican congressman from New York who unsuccessfully ran for governor, has emerged as a leading contender to lead the Justice Department. He has been one of Trump’s most reliable allies.
“He’s our secret weapon,” Trump said of Zeldin in February during a White House event promoting the coal industry, adding, “He’s getting those approvals done in record-setting time.”
Bondi has also growing faced scrutiny from Congress.
The House Oversight Committee recently subpoenaed her to testify about the department’s handling of certain files, where she declined to answer key questions during a contentious House Judiciary Committee hearing in February.
The Tampa native has a long history of opposing LGBTQ rights through her roles in government. As Florida attorney general, she fought against the legalization of same-sex marriage, arguing it would cause “serious public harm,” pushing forward a legal battle that cost taxpayers nearly half a million dollars. She also asked the Florida Supreme Court to overturn a lower court ruling that found the state’s same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional.
More recently, Bondi established a “Title IX Special Investigations Team” within the Justice Department focused on restricting transgender women and girls from participating in women’s and girls’ sports teams and accessing facilities aligned with their gender identity. She also told Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia to turn over the medical records of anyone under 19 who received gender-affirming care.
Her removal follows Trump’s decision last month to oust another controversial female Cabinet figure, Kristi Noem.
The White House
VIDEO: Gay journalist detained for booing Trumps at ‘Chicago’ opening night
Eugene Ramirez booed first family at Kennedy Center
President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump attended the opening night of “Chicago” at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts on Tuesday. They were greeted by a mix of cheers, applause, and some audible boos.
Among them was Eugene Ramirez, a gay Washington resident, who later shared his account of the night after being briefly detained by security for booing the president and giving a thumbs-down gesture — an expression of what many would call a textbook definition of constitutionally protected speech to criticize the government.
Ramirez attended the opening night performance with a group of friends, hoping to catch a final show before the center undergoes two years of major changes under Trump oversight. The musical, based on a 1926 play of the same name, has become synonymous with Broadway success.
With music by John Kander, lyrics by Fred Ebb, and a book by Ebb and Bob Fosse, “Chicago” has cemented itself as a cultural staple — known for its signature Fosse choreography, stripped-down staging, and sleek, campy aesthetic. The story follows Roxie Hart and Velma Kelly, women who murder their husbands but — with the help of the manipulative, charismatic, and narcissistic attorney Billy Flynn — walk away scot-free.
It remains the longest-running American musical in Broadway history, and its 2002 film adaptation famously won the Academy Award for Best Picture. On this night, however, the production also became the backdrop for a very modern moment of political protest.
“I accompanied five friends to opening night of ‘Chicago’, as a way to enjoy a final performance in the Kennedy Center as we know it,” Ramirez began to recount to the Washington Blade, describing the moment his group settled into their seats inside the ornate Opera House theater.
Just before the performance began, the twice impeached president and first lady appeared in the balcony box, drawing immediate attention from the audience below. Theatergoers stood, cheered, clapped, and waved, while Ramirez made a different choice.
While accounts of the crowd’s reaction have varied, Ramirez said his response was intentional, immediate, and within his rights. Moments after booing and giving a thumbs-down while recording on his iPhone, security intervened.
The video of Ramirez booing the Trump’s is here:
“Within moments, the director [of security] and another guard approached and escorted me to a side area where several other security guards were waiting,” he said. “I was detained until everyone was seated and the lights dimmed.”
As he was escorted away, Ramirez said his instincts as a journalist kicked in. A former lead anchor for Sinclair’s national evening news broadcast, he said the situation immediately felt off — or more aptly put — as if he could see the strings being pulled from someone attempting to control the narrative.
“Journalism is a vocation, not just a job. I immediately knew there wasn’t just an uncomfortable interaction with security,” he said. “The Kennedy Center is a federally funded cultural institution, and being questioned about speech related to the president in that setting felt like something the public should know about.”
Ramirez explained the difference between a standard visit by a public official and this performance: the president’s appearance wasn’t just ceremonial; it was very clearly a media moment.
“The White House press pool was there, and it was clear this was an effort to manage the president’s image in the media,” Ramirez continued. “The irony was not lost on me that this was happening on opening night of ‘Chicago’, a musical about manipulating the press to shape public perception.”
According to Ramirez, the explanation he received from Kennedy Center Director of Safety and Security Karles C. Jackson Sr., was brief, but illuminating.
“He said, ‘they don’t want booing,’ and even called out my thumbs-down gesture. He never clarified who ‘they’ were, but whether it was the administration or the Kennedy Center, the distinction felt meaningless,” he explained. “Mr. Jackson ultimately told me he was just trying to do his job, shook my hand, and allowed me to return to my seat once the lights dimmed and the overture started playing.”
Ramirez said he didn’t blame the guard individually, noting the broader context of the Kennedy Center’s uncertain future and the pressures staff were under.
“With the center closing in the coming months, some of these security guards being pressured to restrict our freedom of speech may only have a few weeks of work left.”
He believes the decision to remove him was driven less by disruption than optics, particularly given the presence of the press.
“It was very clearly about protection — whether protecting the president from visible dissent, or his image before the media present. There was no disruption as almost everyone was standing and reacting loudly to the arrival of the president and first lady, with cheers, applause, and hand gestures. The difference was that my reaction, unlike most, was negative.”
Drawing on his experience covering public officials, Ramirez said the incident felt more about controlling perception than security.
“Usually, law enforcement may monitor or intervene if there’s a disruption, but here there was no disruption at all. Simply expressing dissent in a public, cultural space drew the attention of security. It made it feel less like a matter of decorum and more like an effort to control the narrative around the president,” he said. “It’s about what happens when dissent is treated as disruption rather than a right.”
“The show hadn’t started. I threatened no one. Billy Flynn would have approved of the optics. The rest of us should be paying attention.”
Ramirez framed the incident as part of a broader constitutional concern, one that is plaguing the Trump-Vance administration as they continue to reject rules and normalcy set forth by other reserved presidents.
“Being singled out by security at a federally funded institution for expressing dissent shouldn’t be brushed off; it undermines the First Amendment,” he said, looking at it slightly distanced from it now. “Being of Cuban heritage, and a journalist, it’s a right I’m not willing to give up readily.”
“Publicly funded cultural institutions should allow visible dissent, even in politically charged moments,” he added. “Of course, I understand the need to manage disruptions during a performance, but that was not the case here.”
The themes of “Chicago”, a long-running satire about media manipulation and public perception, added another layer of irony to the experience, Ramirez explained.
“The satire truly leapt off the stage! A show about controlling the narrative, manipulating the press, and covering up truths by leaning on showmanship and distractions. The show is decades old, but could’ve been written today. We’re being razzle-dazzled daily and it’s getting harder to tell fact from fiction, no matter where you get your news.”
He, being gay, also acknowledged how hard it must have been for the performers on stage, assuming that at least some in the cast were also members of the LGBTQ community — and artists — two things Trump doesn’t always get along with.
“It was not lost on me that many of the actors on that stage, that the president and first lady presumably applauded, are members of the LGBTQ community which this administration has rolled back protections for under the guise of religious liberty and free speech, resulting in blatant discrimination.”
He pointed to a particular number that felt surreal given the circumstances.
“Its ‘Razzle Dazzle’ number celebrates keeping audiences off balance; at its climax, a massive American flag descends as the song celebrates blinding audiences to what is real. Watching that scene after being detained for a thumbs-down was surreal.”
Ramirez said the show’s closing lines were especially sharp given the presidential audience and what he just experienced.
“At the end of the show,
Velma says: ‘You know, a lot of people have lost faith in America.’
Roxie replies: ‘And for what America stands for.’
Velma: ‘But we are the living examples of what a wonderful country this is.’
Roxie: ‘So we’d just like to say thank you and God bless you.’
They had both just gotten away with murder!”
His closing lines, however, were a bit more pointed than “scintillating sinners” Roxie Hart and Velma Kelly’s were in the show.
“Democracy only works when citizens are allowed to boo,” he said. “Tuesday night at the Kennedy Center, ‘Chicago’ made that point better than I ever could.”
The Blade reached out to the Kennedy Center but did not receive a comment back.
How Pepper the courthouse dog helps victims of abuse
Women’s FEST returns to Rehoboth Beach next week
Belarusian lawmakers approve bill to crackdown on LGBTQ rights
Calendar: April 3-9
How new barriers to health care coverage are hitting D.C.
‘Out for McDuffie’ event held at D.C. gay bar
Thousands attend ‘No Kings’ protests in D.C.
Ghanaian president welcomed to Philadelphia amid backlash over anti-LGBTQ bill
PHOTOS: ‘No Kings’ rally and march
