Connect with us

National

Obama to end ‘Don’t Ask’ this year

Pledges to implement repeal in State of the Union address

Published

on

President Obama (Blade photo by Michael Key).

President Obama earned praise from many LGBT advocates on Tuesday for pledging during his State of the Union address to implement an end to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” before the year is out.

In his speech, Obama observed that members of the U.S. military come from “every corner of this country” and are black, white, Christian, Jewish and Muslim.

“And, yes, we know that some of them are gay,” Obama said. “Starting this year, no American will be forbidden from serving the country they love because of who they love.”

In the House chamber, where Obama delivered the speech before a joint session of Congress, lawmakers reacted to the remarks largely along party lines — with Democrats applauding the comments and Republicans taking no action.

Among those who stood as they applauded were House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), who were both seen as key in pushing forward legislation allowing for repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” last year.

Notably, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the leading opponent in the U.S. Senate last year of repealing the military’s gay ban, also applauded following Obama’s remarks on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

The president’s remarks suggested that he will issue certification for repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” before the end of the year. Under the law Obama signed on Dec. 22, repeal won’t take effect until he, the defense secretary and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certify the U.S. military is ready for repeal.

Asked via e-mail to clarify whether the remarks indeed mean Obama is committed to issuing certification before the year is out, Shin Inouye, a White House spokesperson, confirmed that indeed is the president’s plan.

In a statement, Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, said his organization is “pleased” the president expects that gays will be able to serve openly in the U.S. military by the end of the year.

“In fact, we think there should be certification from the president, Secretary Robert Gates and JCS Chairman Michael Mullen in this quarter,” Sarvis said. “We need to make ‘Don’t Ask’ repeal a reality sooner rather than later.”

Obama immediately followed his remarks on allowing gays to serve in the military by stating that the time has come for colleges to allow military recruiters and ROTC programs back on campus. Some schools had prohibited the military from recruiting on campus because “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” conflicts with their non-discrimination policies.

“And with that change, I call on all our college campuses to open their doors to our military recruiters and ROTC,” Obama said. “It is time to leave behind the divisive battles of the past. It is time to move forward as one nation.”

But Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, said schools with non-discrimination policies protecting LGBT people should continue prohibiting the military from coming to campus — even after repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” — because openly transgender people still aren’t allowed in the armed forces.

“Students on campuses like Stanford and Harvard have already pointed out that the repeal of this policy, while an improvement, still does not allow transgender people to serve openly or to join the military,” she said. “We support the organizing efforts of students on those campuses and others in continuing to advocate for the exclusion of the military from their campuses as long as the military continues to discriminate.”

Obama mentioned other initiatives during his speech that were welcome news for LGBT advocates — even though they weren’t specifically LGBT-related — because they represented opportunities to pass pro-gay legislation.

During his address, the president said he “strongly believe[s]” Congress should “take on” the issue of illegal immigration and renewed his call for the passage of comprehensive immigration reform.

“I am prepared to work with Republicans and Democrats to protect our borders, enforce our laws and address the millions of undocumented workers who are now living in the shadows,” he said. “And let’s stop expelling talented, responsible young people who could be staffing our research labs or starting a new business, who could be further enriching this nation.”

Passage of immigration reform could present an opportunity to include the Uniting American Families Act — legislation that would end restrictions prohibiting bi-national same-sex couples from staying together in the United States.

Steve Ralls, spokesperson for Immigration Equality, said “it’s good to hear” that immigration remains a priority for the administration.

“It is an issue where there is room for bi-partisan agreement,” Ralls said. “I think on both sides of the political aisle, there’s recognition that comprehensive immigration reform needs to be tackled.”

Ralls said a UAFA-inclusive comprehensive immigration reform bill “does provide the best opportunity to move UAFA forward” in Congress.

Also during his speech, Obama expressed his desire to renew education laws that are currently on the books, which could present Congress the opportunity to pass the Student Non-Discrimination Act or the Safe Schools Improvement Act.

Obama said the Bush-era No Child Left Behind law should be replaced “with a law that’s more flexible and focused on what’s best for our kids.”

“You see, we know what’s possible from our children when reform isn’t just a top-down mandate, but the work of local teachers and principals, school boards and communities,” he said.

Passage of federal anti-bullying legislation received renewed attention late last year in the wake of a rash of suicides of gay teens who reportedly took their own lives after they had been bullied.

Despite Obama’s call to update federal education laws, Eliza Byard, executive director of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, said she’s disappointed the president didn’t explicitly address bullying in his speech.

“It was disappointing to hear nothing about the need for schools to foster a culture of respect amid all the talk of high standards and in the wake of seismic waves of tragedy for our community last fall,” Byard said. “Students can’t achieve, innovate and graduate if they’re scared to go to school, and we all lose if they grow up in a culture where difference is despised.”

Other LGBT rights supporters also expressed disappointment that Obama didn’t go further in his speech to address other issues, such as employment non-discrimination and marriage rights.

Rea Carey, executive director of the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, said Obama shouldn’t settle on repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as the final accomplishment for the LGBT community.

“If the president is truly serious about job creation and boosting America’s economic well-being, he must provide leadership and action in helping to pass employment protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people and ending the costly and unjust federal marriage ban,” Carey said.

But the president’s State of the Union address predominantly focused on spurring job growth through education and infrastructure improvements as well as deficit reduction by cutting federal government programs.

“Our free enterprise system is what drives innovation,” Obama said. “But because it’s not always profitable for companies to invest in basic research, throughout our history, our government has provided cutting-edge scientists and inventors with the support that they need. That’s what planted the seeds for the Internet. That’s what helped make possible things like computer chips and GPS.”

Obama called this time for the country a “Sputnik moment,” recalling how even though the Soviet Union launched the first person into space in the 1950s, the United States was able to beat Russia in the space race by landing the first person on the moon.

In an online video response to the State of the Union address, lesbian Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) said the president “put out a challenge not just to compete to the global marketplace, but to win.”

“We know that in order to do that, we need to have the best educated workforce, the most innovative scientists and the most creative entrepreneurs,” Baldwin said. “I’m excited about this challenge because I know we can do it — and I plan on bringing some great Wisconsin ideas to the table as we respond to this challenge.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

National

Antony Blinken, USAID mark World AIDS Day

Officials reiterate Biden-Harris administration’s commitment to end pandemic

Published

on

(Bigstock photo)

Secretary of State Antony Blinken and the U.S. Agency for International Development on Sunday marked World AIDS Day.

Blinken in his statement echoed the Biden-Harris administration’s call “for collective action with partners around the world to sustain and accelerate the great progress we have made toward ending HIV/AIDS as a public health threat by 2030.”

“Over the past four years, the State Department has worked tirelessly to save lives through the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR),” the statement reads. “In partnership with foreign governments, PEPFAR has changed the trajectory of the HIV/AIDS pandemic and now supports more than 20 million people on lifesaving treatment across 55 countries around the world. Independent analyses have documented a direct link of this lifesaving work to economic growth across PEPFAR partner countries. Bipartisan action on a clean, five-year reauthorization of PEPFAR is essential to ending HIV/AIDS as a public health threat and to implementing the program’s plans to sustain success over the long term through partner country and community-led and managed programs.”

Blinken further stressed World AIDS Day “is a day to remember the more than 42 million lives lost to HIV/AIDS — a stark reminder of the threat this virus continues to pose if we do not ensure that partner countries have the vision and capacity to sustain a bold response.”

“We must continue to chart a course together that will help communities stay safe and prosperous by ending HIV/AIDS as a public health threat,” he said.

USAID spokesperson Benjamin Suarato in a statement echoed Blinken.

“Each year, we observe World AIDS Day to honor people living with and affected by HIV, remember those we have lost, and recommit to ending HIV as a public health threat by 2030,” said Suarato. “For decades, USAID has worked to support those affected by HIV, as well as the health workers, scientists, researchers, advocates, and communities dedicated to the HIV response.”

Suarato noted this year’s World AIDS Day’s theme, “Collective Action: Sustain and Accelerate HIV Progress,” “underscores the long-term leadership of the United States to galvanize global solidarity and make critical investments to reduce HIV transmission, improve access to treatment, and advance transformative partnerships to sustain a locally-led HIV response.” Suarato also highlighted PEPFAR has saved “more than 25 million lives and helped more than 5.5 million babies to be born HIV-free across 55 countries.”

“We recognize that ending HIV as a public health threat requires enduring cooperation with partner country governments, civil society, faith-based, and other non-governmental organizations, researchers, and scientists,” said Suarato. “It also requires us to continue to elevate the leadership of communities and individuals living with and affected by HIV. On this World AIDS Day, USAID reaffirms our dedication to collective action.”

President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden on Sunday will commemorate World AIDS Day at the White House. AIDS Memorial Quilt panels will be shown on the White House’s South Lawn for the first time.

The Washington Blade will have further coverage of the White House commemoration.

Continue Reading

Federal Government

HIV positive patients can now receive organs from HIV positive donors

New HHS rule applies to liver and kidney transplants

Published

on

HHS Assistant Health Secretary Adm. Rachel Levine, U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.), and HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra (Washington Blade photo by Christopher Kane)

A new rule announced Tuesday by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services will allow HIV positive patients to receive organs from HIV positive donors, a move that will expand the pool of available organs and reduce wait times.

“This rule removes unnecessary barriers to kidney and liver transplants, expanding the organ donor pool and improving outcomes for transplant recipients with HIV,” said HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra in a statement.

The agency noted that the final rule also aims to combat stigma and health inequities associated with HIV.

“Research shows that kidney and liver transplants between donors and recipients with HIV can be performed safely and effectively,” Assistant Secretary for Health Rachel Levine added. “This policy change reflects our commitment to following the evidence and updating our approaches as we learn more. By removing research requirements where they are no longer needed, we can help more people with HIV access life-saving transplants.”

HHS notes that the rule applies to kidney and liver transplants, which correspond with the areas in which the evidence from biomedical research is the most “robust.”



Continue Reading

Federal Government

LGBTQ federal workers face tough decisions, big worries amid Trump transition

‘I plan to leave after the inauguration’

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Donald Trump’s return to the White House promises to shake up Washington in ways not seen even during the norm-shattering Trump 1.0 years: on the table are blueprints for radically reforming the federal civil service into a more partisan institution where loyalty is prized at the expense of expertise and competence; off the table, among other things, are anti-discrimination protections that had long bolstered the rights and welfare of LGBTQ federal government employees.

Washington proudly boasts, per-capita, the highest LGBTQ population of any city in any state in America. Ninety-two percent of the city’s 678,000+ residents voted for Vice President Kamala Harris. So, according to exit polls, did 86 percent of LGBTQ voters.

Many of D.C.’s LGBTQ residents who work for the federal government find themselves, now, at an unenviable crossroads. Some stood to lose their jobs regardless of who won in November because they serve in higher-ranking “political” roles that typically turn over administration-to-administration, but more are “career” employees with experience serving with both parties in charge of the White House.

Many find themselves choosing whether to wade into a hyperlocal job market that is, at the moment, competitive for job seekers — or continue, if they can, working under institutions run by Republicans who have vowed to destroy them (or at least shake them up, whatever that will mean).

The Washington Blade has spoken with LGBTQ employees in the federal government who worry about the welfare of gay, queer, and trans colleagues they plan to leave behind for jobs in the private sector. They share a deep concern, too, for the LGBTQ Americans who, they believe, will suffer harmful consequences of policy and governance under the incoming administration.

A lesbian attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice and a gay senior official for the U.S. Department of Commerce spoke anonymously with the Blade to share experiences and observations at their respective agencies.

Do you expect to be working elsewhere when Trump 2.0 begins in January

[Justice Department]: I plan to leave shortly after the inauguration.

[Commerce Department]: I hope to be working elsewhere by the next term. The job market is incredibly competitive, but that’s because the Biden administration hired the best and brightest public servants that represent every community in America. It’s particularly important that companies and nonprofits seek out the great early/mid-career staff from the administration. Many finished college remotely during the pandemic, to then immediately serve their country. They have exceptional work experience, but can be at a hiring disadvantage behind their classmates who immediately entered the workforce.

Would you be (or might you be) allowed to continue in your role under the next administration if you wished to do so?

[Justice]: Probably not.

Under the next administration, if you were allowed to continue in your role or serve in a different position at your agency or perhaps work elsewhere in the federal government, would you? Why or why not?

[Justice]: No—risk of doxing is too high; did it once before and not interested in doing it again.

[Commerce]: I would not work in the Trump administration, even if allowed. To work for someone who believes in retribution over public service would violate the oath I took to my country and the Constitution he refuses to respect. I look forward to doing what queer people have done for all of American history: shining brightly in the face of hate and being a success in spite of every attempt to shame.

What can you tell me about the post-election turnover at your agency that you’ve seen so far or expect to see in the coming months, as compared to that which you might have experienced during previous transitions?

[Justice]: I expect to see many more people leave than in any previous admin change.

[Commerce]: Experienced career staff who survived the first Trump years are burned out and leaving. This is a horrible loss for the American people who are losing the dedicated subject matter experts who do the hard work of making their lives easier, safer, and healthier. So many of them work for the federal government because of how it can be used to help people in big ways. They’re horrified to think of all the people, especially minorities, women, and queer people, will, instead, be targeted. They don’t want to be a part of that. They can’t live with that.

Are any of your LGBTQ colleagues staying in their jobs? If so, what can you share about the reasons you’ve heard for their decision to stay?

[Justice]: Yes; many will stay because they don’t have the luxury of leaving without a job lined up. 

What are some of your biggest concerns specific to how your agency might be run under the Trump 2.0 regime?

[Justice]: They will dismantle the civil rights division at DOJ or completely shift its focus. 

[Commerce]: I’m horrified at how data may be weaponized against vulnerable people.  So much work has been done to help communities by building close-knit relationships with leaders across the countries. Will all these programs focused on supporting the most vulnerable and underserved among us be turned on them to identify easy targets to victimize? 

Broadly speaking, what concerns do you have about the rights, safety, and wellbeing of LGBTQ folks who will remain in the civil service post-January, or those who might join the federal government’s civilian workforce after Trump takes over?

[Justice]: LGBTQ+ people will be at greater risk of doxing; bathroom flexibilities will disappear; harassment will go unchecked.

[Commerce]: We are barely out of the shadow of the Lavender Scare, where thousands of queer American public servants were harassed, humiliated, and often fired in shame. It starts with removing Pride flags, then the photos of our partners on our desks, and then we’re escorted from the building for being security risks. LGBTQ Americans are the soldiers, and scientists, and civil servants and should never, ever have to worry if their mere existence could suddenly cost them their security clearance, their career path, or their safety.

How do you think staff turnover at your agency will impact its work under the next administration? 

[Justice]: Staff turnover will severely undermine DOJ’s work and protecting the rule of law. 

If, ultimately, a disproportionate number of LGBTQ workers leave for jobs in the private sector, are you concerned about harms that might result from the loss of voices representing the community in the federal government and/or in your agency specifically?

[Justice]: Re: loss of voices, yes. The federal government cannot function as effectively when it doesn’t reflect the public it serves.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular