Local
GOP House members seek repeal of D.C. marriage
Boehner says D.C.-congressional relations improving
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) told the Hill newspaper Tuesday that he’s certain that a group of conservative House Republicans will introduce legislation to overturn D.C.’s same-sex marriage law.
Jordan, who serves as chair of the conservative Republican Study Committee, said the committee would push for a vote on repeal of the D.C. marriage law in the 112th Congress. He did not give a date or specify whether the effort would be in the form of a free-standing bill or an amendment to the D.C. appropriations bill.
“I think the RSC will push for it, and I’m certainly strongly for it,” he told the Hill.”I don’t know if we’ve made a decision if I’ll do it or let another member do it, but I’m 100 percent for it.”
Jordan was the lead sponsor in the 111th Congress for the D.C. Defense of Marriage Act, which called for defining marriage in the District of Columbia as a union only between a man and a woman.
That measure, which received 53-co-sponsors last year, is expected to pull in significantly more co-sponsors this year under the GOP-controlled House.
Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-Ohio) touched on the subject of congressional intervention in D.C. affairs in a news conference Wednesday but did not mention the D.C. same-sex marriage issue.
When asked to respond to critics who say Republicans advocate for state and local control everywhere but D.C., Boehner said, “This is a federal city. Under the constitution the relationship between the federal government and the D.C. government has been a road that’s twisted in many different ways.”
He added, “But I think during the past 10 to 15 years there’s been a pretty healthy relationship between the city and the federal government.”
D.C. Congressional Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, a Democrat, said GOP House members have introduced bills to ban same-sex marriage in the city every year for the past several years and an effort to do so again this year would not surprise her.
But she said she was hopeful that moderate Republicans would join Democrats in blocking such a proposal in the House. She said the Democratic- controlled Senate would be expected to kill such a measure if it clears the House.
“I can tell you that I’ve had a good conversation with an important Republican who’s not interested,” she said, in discussing an expected bill or amendment to overturn D.C.’s same-sex marriage law.
“That doesn’t mean it won’t happen,” she said. “But there are Republicans here who would not like to get all mixed up with social issues. And I was very pleased with this conversation I had because it’s an important Republican operator.”
She said she could not identify the Republican because doing so would jeopardize future conversations with the lawmaker.
Clarke Cooper, executive director of the national gay GOP group Log Cabin Republicans, and Robert Kabel, the openly gay chair of the D.C. Republican Committee, released separate statements urging Jordan not to pursue legislation to repeal the District’s marriage law.
“Just two months ago, Congressman Jordan said to me, ‘Democrats are the party of government; we are the party of principle,’” Cooper said in his statement. “Today I am calling upon him to remember the core Republican principle that respects local government and states’ rights over interference from federal lawmakers.”
Kabel released a joint letter that he and Patrick Mara, a member of the D.C. Republican Committee and a D.C. City Council candidate, sent to Jordan calling on him not to interfere in D.C. affairs.
“As someone who has knocked on thousands of doors and spoken with countless families, marriage equality is an issue that must be preserved and protected,” Mara stated in the letter.
Kabel told Jordan in the letter that Republicans “saw tremendous wins this past November because they stuck with fiscal issues that matter to many Americans.” He called on the Republican Study Committee to reconsider its decision to push for repeal of the D.C. gay marriage law and “work with us on improving our city.”
District of Columbia
D.C. Council urged to improve ‘weakened’ PrEP insurance bill
AIDS group calls for changes before full vote on Feb. 3
The D.C.-based HIV + Hepatitis Policy Institute is calling on the D.C. Council to reverse what it says was the “unfortunate” action by a Council committee to weaken a bill aimed at requiring health insurance companies to cover the costs of HIV prevention or PrEP drugs for D.C. residents at risk for HIV infection.
HIV + HEP Policy Institute Executive Director Carl Schmid points out in a Jan. 30 email message to all 13 D.C. Council members that the Council’s Committee on Health on Dec. 8, 2025, voted to change the PrEP DC Act of 2025, Bill 26-0159, to require insurers to fully cover only one PrEP drug regimen.
Schmid noted the bill as originally written and introduced Feb. 28, 2025, by Council member Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5), the Council’s only gay member, required insurers to cover all PrEP drugs, including the newest PrEP medication taken by injection once every six months.
Schmid’s message to the Council members was sent on Friday, Jan. 30, just days before the Council was scheduled to vote on the bill on Feb. 3. He contacted the Washington Blade about his concerns about the bill as changed by committee that same day.
Spokespersons for Parker and the Committee on Health and its chairperson, Council member Christina Henderson (I-At-Large) didn’t immediately respond to the Blade’s request for comment on the issue, saying they were looking into the matter and would try to provide a response on Monday, Jan. 2.
In his message to Council members, Schmid also noted that he and other AIDS advocacy groups strongly supported the committee’s decision to incorporate into the bill a separate measure introduced by Council member Brooke Pinto (D-Ward 2) that would prohibit insurers, including life insurance companies, from denying coverage to people who are on PrEP.
“We appreciate the Committee’s revisions to the bill that incorporates Bill 26-0101, which prohibits discrimination by insurance carriers based on PrEP use,” Schmid said in his statement to all Council members.
“However, the revised PrEP coverage provision would actually reduce PrEP options for D.C. residents that are required by current federal law, limit patient choice, and place D.C. behind states that have enacted HIV prevention policies designed to remain in effect regardless of any federal changes,” Schmid added.
He told the Washington Blade that although these protections are currently provided through coverage standards recommended in the U.S. Affordable Care Act, AIDS advocacy organizations have called for D.C. and states to pass their own legislation requiring insurance coverage of PrEP in the event that the federal policies are weakened or removed by the Trump administration, which has already reduced or ended federal funding for HIV/AIDS-related programs.
“The District of Columbia has always been a leader in the fight against HIV,” Schmid said in a statement to Council members. But in a separate statement he sent to the Blade, Schmid said the positive version of the bill as introduced by Parker and the committee’s incorporation of the Pinto bill were in stark contrast to the “bad side — the bill would only require insurers to cover one PrEP drug.”
He added, “That is far worse than current federal requirements. Obviously, the insurers got to them.”
The Committee on Health’s official report on the bill summarizes testimony in support of the bill by health-related organizations, including Whitman-Walker Health, and two D.C. government officials before the committee at an Oct. 30, 2025, public hearing.
Among them were Clover Barnes, Senior Deputy Director of the D.C. HIV/AIDS, Hepatitis, STD, and TB Administration, and Philip Barlow, Associate Commissioner for the D.C. Department of Insurance, Securities, and Banking.
Although both Barnes and Barlow expressed overall support for the bill, Barlow suggested several changes, one of which could be related to the committee’s change of the bill described by Schmid, according to the committee report.
“First, he recommended changing the language that required PrEP and PEP coverage by insurers to instead require that insurers who already cover PrEP and PEP do not impose cost sharing or coverage more restrictive than other treatments,” the committee report states. “He pointed out that D.C. insurers already cover PrEP and PEP as preventive services, and this language would avoid unintended costs for the District,” the report adds.
PEP refers to Post-Exposure Prophylaxis medication, while PrEP stands for Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis medication.
In response to a request from the Blade for comment, Daniel Gleick, Mayor Muriel Bowser’s press secretary, said he would inquire about the issue in the mayor’s office.
Naseema Shafi, Whitman-Walker Health’s CEO, meanwhile, in response to a request by the Blade for comment, released a statement sharing Schmid’s concerns about the current version of the PrEP DC Act of 2025, which the Committee on Health renamed as the PrEP DC Amendment Act of 2025.
“Whitman-Walker Health believes that all residents of the District of Columbia should have access to whatever PrEP method is best for them based on their conversations with their providers,” Shafi said. “We would not want to see limitations on what insurers would cover,” she added. “Those kinds of limitations lead to significantly reduced access and will be a major step backwards, not to mention undermining the critical progress that the Affordable Care Act enabled for HIV prevention,” she said.
The Blade will update this story as soon as additional information is obtained from the D.C. Council members involved with the bill, especially Parker. The Blade will report on whether the full Council makes the changes to the bill requested by Schmid and others before it votes on whether to approve it at its Feb. 3 legislative session.
By PAMELA WOOD | Dan Cox, a Republican who was resoundingly defeated by Democratic Gov. Wes Moore four years ago, has filed to run for governor again this year.
Cox’s candidacy was posted on the Maryland elections board website Friday; he did not immediately respond to an interview request.
Cox listed Rob Krop as his running mate for lieutenant governor.
The rest of this article can be found on the Baltimore Banner’s website.
Maryland
Expanded PrEP access among FreeState Justice’s 2026 legislative priorities
Maryland General Assembly opened on Jan. 14
FreeState Justice this week spoke with the Washington Blade about their priorities during this year’s legislative session in Annapolis that began on Jan. 14.
Ronnie L. Taylor, the group’s community director, on Wednesday said the organization continues to fight against discrimination against people with HIV/AIDS. FreeState Justice is specifically championing a bill in the General Assembly that would expand access to PrEP in Maryland.
Taylor said FreeState Justice is working with state Del. Ashanti Martinez (D-Prince George’s County) and state Sen. Clarence Lam (D-Arundel and Howard Counties) on a bill that would expand the “scope of practice for pharmacists in Maryland to distribute PrEP.” The measure does not have a title or a number, but FreeState Justice expects it will have both in the coming weeks.
FreeState Justice has long been involved in the fight to end the criminalization of HIV in the state.
Governor Wes Moore last year signed House Bill 39, which decriminalized HIV in Maryland.
The bill — the Carlton R. Smith Jr. HIV Modernization Act — is named after Carlton Smith, a long-time LGBTQ activist known as the “mayor” of Baltimore’s Mount Vernon neighborhood who died in 2024. FreeState Justice said Marylanders prosecuted under Maryland Health-General Code § 18-601.1 have already seen their convictions expunged.
Taylor said FreeState Justice will continue to “oppose anti anti-LGBTQ legislation” in the General Assembly. Their website later this week will publish a bill tracker.
The General Assembly’s legislative session is expected to end on April 13.
