Connect with us

Local

New effort to win marriage underway in Md.

‘We are not considering civil unions’

Published

on

Del. Mary Washington (center), a lesbian member of the Maryland House of Delegates, announced plans for a new marriage bill at a news conference Tuesday. At left is Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake. (Washington Blade photo)

BALTIMORE — A diverse coalition of organizations announced plans Tuesday to push for a same-sex marriage bill in Maryland during the 2012 legislative session, which begins in January.

Led by Progressive Maryland, the coalition is dubbed Marylanders for Marriage Equality and includes Equality Maryland, the Human Rights Campaign, ACLU, Service Employees International Union 1199, Maryland Catholics for Equality and a number of other religious organizations.

Coalition members gathered at a sweltering morning news conference in front of Baltimore’s City Hall to announce their plans, just weeks after New York’s legislature approved a marriage equality measure.

“I believe in equality for all Baltimoreans,” said Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake. “Baltimore will continue to stand with you in Annapolis.”

Sen. Rich Madaleno (D-Mont. Co.), when asked by the Washington Blade whether the coalition would consider a civil unions bill in lieu of marriage in the event of a referendum threat, said unequivocally that civil unions are an unacceptable compromise.

“It is marriage and only marriage — we are not considering a civil unions bill,” said Madaleno, the only openly gay member of the state Senate. “We will win a referendum if it gets that far.”

Gov. Martin O’Malley did not attend the news conference, but has said since 2007 that he would sign a marriage equality bill if the legislature can pass it. Del. Maggie McIntosh, a lesbian and the most senior member of the LGBT Caucus in the House of Delegates, said the coalition is in talks with O’Malley about taking a more visible and public role in advocating for the bill. O’Malley was criticized by some marriage rights supporters earlier this year for his perceived lack of visibility on the issue, which comes in stark contrast to New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who is widely credited with championing the issue in the Empire State.

McIntosh said marriage equality supporters have asked O’Malley to include the bill in the administration’s 2012 legislative package and that an answer on that request could come within weeks.

“The governor and the delegates have had discussions about this recently,” O’Malley spokesperson Raquel Guillory told the Blade after the news conference. “He is supportive of the new push and we are reaching out to a broad coalition of folks and discussing what steps we take next.”

Guillory didn’t say whether O’Malley would include the marriage bill in his administrative package.

“The governor was very clear last year that he would sign a marriage bill if it crossed his desk and that position has not changed,” she said. “He remains supportive.”

Asked why O’Malley didn’t attend today’s news conference, Guillory said, “This was an event organized by the delegates and [Rich] Madaleno —  this was their event, it wasn’t the governor’s announcement.”

She added that the difference between the successful New York effort and the very visible role Cuomo played in it and O’Malley’s approach to the issue is merely a matter of style.

“You’re focusing on one issue,” she said, “you need to look at the personalities of the individuals. [Cuomo] is not much more out there [on marriage], he’s more vocal about everything, it’s a matter of style.”

She added that O’Malley “did a lot behind the scenes to work this bill,” and that taking Cuomo’s approach “doesn’t ensure passage.”

A marriage equality bill failed in the House of Delegates in March after the Senate approved it. Multiple factors were cited for its failure, including opposition from conservative black pastors in Prince George’s County and a vigorous and well-funded campaign by the anti-gay National Organization for Marriage to derail the bill.

But supporters noted that they had little time to plan last year, because the bill was bottled up in committee until a sudden reshuffling of committee assignments in December resulted in its Senate passage.

“I’m incredibly optimistic this time,” said lesbian Del. Heather Mizeur (D-Mont. Co.). “Last year, we were caught off guard; this year we have more time to plan.”

Responding to speculation that the bill could be introduced at a special October legislative session on redistricting, Mizeur said that the bill would most likely be considered in January.

Guillory said the focus of the October special session would be on redistricting. “Other options could be put on the table, but our focus is to take care of the redistricting issue,” she said.

Del. Peter Murphy (D-Charles Co.), who came out in an interview with the Blade earlier this year, echoed Mizeur’s confidence.

“I’m very optimistic,” Murphy said, “there is a tremendous effort and organization behind this and I’m confident the citizens of Maryland will support it.”

Rion Dennis, executive director of Progressive Maryland, vowed that Maryland would become the nation’s seventh state to enact marriage equality. His group is leading the marriage coalition. Sultan Shakir, an HRC employee who was loaned to Equality Maryland during the legislative session to work on marriage, is now working with Progressive Maryland.

Equality Maryland fired its executive director after the 2011 legislative session and its board chair later resigned. The group has been plagued by financial and staffing problems, but one board member said Tuesday that things are turning around.

“We have a six-month plan in place and are back on sound financial footing,” said Equality Maryland board member Mark Yost. “We look forward to working with the coalition to bring marriage to all Marylanders.”

Yost said Equality Maryland is planning to hire a new executive director but declined to say when that would occur.

In addition to politicians and activists, the Tuesday news conference highlighted the plight of two lesbian couples from Maryland. Kalima Young and Francine Housier joined Chris Megargee and Barbara McKeefery in addressing the media and taking about the importance of marriage equality to them and their families.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

District of Columbia

D.C. Council gives first approval to amended PrEP insurance bill

Removes weakening language after concerns raised by AIDS group

Published

on

‘This is a win in the fight against HIV/AIDS,’ said Council member Zachary Parker. (File photo courtesy of Earline Budd)

The D.C. Council voted unanimously on Feb. 3 to approve a bill on its first of two required votes that requires health insurance companies to cover the costs of HIV prevention or PrEP drugs for D.C. residents at risk for HIV infection.

 The vote to approve the PrEP D.C. Amendment Act came immediately after the 13-member Council voted unanimously again to approve an amendment that removed language in the bill added last month by the Council’s Committee on Health that would require insurers to fully cover only one PrEP drug.

The amendment, introduced jointly by Council members Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5), who first introduced the bill in February 2025, and Christina Henderson (I-At-Large), who serves as chair of the Health Committee, requires insurers to cover all U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved PrEP drugs.  

Under its rules, the D.C. Council must vote twice to approve all legislation, which must be signed by the D.C. mayor and undergo a 30-day review by Congress before it takes effect as a D.C. law.

Given its unanimous “first reading” vote of approval on Feb. 3, Parker told the Washington Blade he was certain the Council would approve the bill on its second and final vote expected in about two weeks.

Among those who raised concerns about the earlier version of the bill was Carl Schmid, executive director of the D.C.-based HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute, who sent messages to all 13 Council members urging them to remove the language added by the Committee on Health requiring insurers to cover just one PrEP drug.

The change made by the committee, Schmid told Council members, “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 told the Washington Blade that although coverage requirements for insurers are currently provided through coverage standards recommended in the U.S. Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare, AIDS advocacy organizations have called on 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 sticking point was the language in the markup that insurers only had to cover one regimen of PrEP,” Parker told the Blade in a phone interview the night before the Council vote. “And advocates thought that moved the needle back in terms of coverage access, and I agree with them,” he said.

In anticipation that the Council would vote to approve the amendment and the underlying bill, Parker, the Council’s only gay member, added, “I think this is a win for our community. And this is a win in the fight against HIV/AIDS.”

During the Feb. 3 Council session, Henderson called on her fellow Council members to approve both the amendment she and Parker had introduced and the bill itself. But she did not say why her committee approved the changes that advocates say weakened the bill and that her and Parker’s amendment would undo. Schmid speculated that pressure from insurance companies may have played a role in the committee change requiring coverage of only one PrEP drug. 

“My goal for advancing the ‘PrEP DC Amendment Act’ is to ensure that the District is building on the progress made in reducing new HIV infections every year,” Henderson said in a statement released after the Council vote. “On Friday, my office received concerns from advocates and community leaders about language regarding PrEP coverage,” she said.

“My team and I worked with Council member Parker, community leaders, including the HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute and Whitman-Walker, and the Department of Insurance, Securities, and Banking, to craft a solution that clarifies our intent and provides greater access to these life-saving drugs for District residents by reducing consumer costs for any PrEP drug approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration,” her statement concludes.

In his own statement following the Council vote, Schmid thanked Henderson and Parker for initiating the amendment to improve the bill. “This will provide PrEP users with the opportunity to choose the best drug that meets their needs,” he said. “We look forward to the bill’s final reading and implementation.”

Continue Reading

Maryland

4th Circuit dismisses lawsuit against Montgomery County schools’ pronoun policy

Substitute teacher Kimberly Polk challenged regulation in 2024

Published

on

(Photo by Sergei Gnatuk via Bigstock)

A federal appeals court has ruled Montgomery County Public Schools did not violate a substitute teacher’s constitutional rights when it required her to use students’ preferred pronouns in the classroom.

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision it released on Jan. 28 ruled against Kimberly Polk.

The policy states that “all students have the right to be referred to by their identified name and/or pronoun.”

“School staff members should address students by the name and pronoun corresponding to the gender identity that is consistently asserted at school,” it reads. “Students are not required to change their permanent student records as described in the next section (e.g., obtain a court-ordered name and/or new birth certificate) as a prerequisite to being addressed by the name and pronoun that corresponds to their identified name. To the extent possible, and consistent with these guidelines, school personnel will make efforts to maintain the confidentiality of the student’s transgender status.”

The Washington Post reported Polk, who became a substitute teacher in Montgomery County in 2021, in November 2022 requested a “religious accommodation, claiming that the policy went against her ‘sincerely held religious beliefs,’ which are ‘based on her understanding of her Christian religion and the Holy Bible.’”

U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman in January 2025 dismissed Polk’s lawsuit that she filed in federal court in Beltsville. Polk appealed the decision to the 4th Circuit.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

Norton hailed as champion of LGBTQ rights

D.C. congressional delegate to retire after 36 years in U.S. House

Published

on

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton announced she will not seek re-election; her term ends January 2027. (Washington Blade file photo by Drew Brown)

LGBTQ rights advocates reflected on D.C. Congressional Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton’s longstanding advocacy and support for LGBTQ rights in Congress following her decision last month not to run for re-election this year. 

Upon completing her current term in office in January 2027, Norton, a Democrat, will have served 18 two-year terms and 36 years in her role as the city’s non-voting delegate to the U.S. House.

LGBTQ advocates have joined city officials and community leaders in describing Norton as a highly effective advocate for D.C. under the city’s limited representation in Congress where she could not vote on the House floor but stood out in her work on House committees and moving, powerful speeches on the House floor.

 “During her more than three decades in Congress, Eleanor Holmes Norton has been a champion for the District of Columbia and the LGBTQ+ community,” said David Stacy, vice president of government affairs for the Human Rights Campaign, the D.C.-based national LGBTQ advocacy organization.

“When Congress blocked implementation of D.C.’s domestic partnership registry, Norton led the fight to allow it to go into effect,” Stacey said. “When President Bush tried to ban marriage equality in every state and the District, Norton again stood up in opposition. And when Congress blocked HIV prevention efforts, Norton worked to end that interference in local control,” he said.

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) (Washington Blade photo by Jeff Surprenant)

In reflecting the sentiment of many local and national LGBTQ advocates familiar with Norton’s work, Stacy added, “We have been lucky to have such an incredible champion. As her time in Congress comes to an end, we honor her extraordinary impact in the nation’s capital and beyond by standing together in pride and gratitude.”

Norton has been among the lead co-sponsors and outspoken supporters of LGBTQ rights legislation introduced in Congress since first taking office, including the currently pending Equality Act, which would ban employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. 

Activists familiar with Norton’s work also point out that she has played a lead role in opposing and helping to defeat anti-LGBTQ legislation. In 2018, Norton helped lead an effort to defeat a bill called the First Amendment Defense Act introduced by U.S. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), which Norton said included language that could “gut” D.C.’s Human Rights Act’s provisions banning LGBTQ discrimination.

Norton pointed to a provision in the bill not immediately noticed by LGBTQ rights organizations that would define D.C.’s local government as a federal government entity and allow potential discrimination against LGBTQ people based on a “sincerely held religious belief.”

“This bill is the latest outrageous Republican attack on the District, focusing particularly on our LGBT community and the District’s right to self-government,” Norton said shortly after the bill was introduced. “We will not allow Republicans to discriminate against the LGBT community under the guise of religious liberty,” she said. Records show supporters have not secured the votes to pass it in several congressional sessions.

In 2011, Norton was credited with lining up sufficient opposition to plans by some Republican lawmakers to attempt to overturn D.C.’s same-sex marriage law, that the Council passed and the mayor signed in 2010.   

In 2015, Norton also played a lead role opposing attempts by GOP members of  Congress to overturn another D.C. law protecting LGBTQ students at religious schools, including the city’s Catholic University, from discrimination such as the denial of providing meeting space for an LGBTQ organization.

More recently, in 2024 Norton again led efforts to defeat an attempt by Republican House members to amend the D.C. budget bill that Congress must pass to eliminate funding for the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs and to prohibit the city from using its funds to enforce the D.C. Human Rights Act in cases of discrimination against transgender people.

“The Republican amendment that would prohibit funds from being used to enforce anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination regulations and the amendment to defund the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ+ Affairs are disgraceful attempts, in themselves, to discriminate against D.C.’s LGBTQ+ community while denying D.C. residents the limited governance over their local affairs to which they are entitled,” Norton told the Washington Blade.

In addition to pushing for LGBTQ supportive laws and opposing anti-LGBTQ measures Norton has spoken out against anti-LGBTQ hate crimes and called on the office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C. in 2020 to more aggressively prosecute anti-LGBTQ hate crimes.

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton marches in the 1995 AIDS Walk. (Washington Blade archive photo by Clint Steib)

“There is so much to be thankful for Eleanor Holmes Norton’s many years of service to all the citizens and residents of the District of Columbia,” said John Klenert, a member of the board of the LGBTQ Victory Fund. “Whether it was supporting its LGBTQ+ people for equal rights, HIV health issues, home rule protection, statehood for all 700,000 people, we could depend on her,” he said.

Ryan Bos, executive director of Capital Pride Alliance, the group that organizes D.C.’s annual LGBTQ Pride events, called Norton a “staunch” LGBTQ community ally and champion for LGBTQ supportive legislation in Congress.

“For decades, Congresswoman Norton has marched in the annual Capital Pride Parade, showing her pride and using her platform to bring voice and visibility in our fight to advance civil rights, end discrimination, and affirm the dignity of all LGBTQ+ people” Bos said. “We will be forever grateful for her ongoing advocacy and contributions to the LGBTQ+ movement.”

Howard Garrett, president of D.C.’s Capital Stonewall Democrats, called Norton a “consistent and principled advocate” for equality throughout her career. “She supported LGBTQ rights long before it was politically popular, advancing nondiscrimination protections and equal protection under the law,” he said.

“Eleanor was smart, tough, and did not suffer fools gladly,” said Rick Rosendall, former president of the D.C. Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance. “But unlike many Democratic politicians a few decades ago who were not reliable on LGBTQ issues, she was always right there with us,” he said. “We didn’t have to explain our cause to her.”

Longtime D.C. gay Democratic activist Peter Rosenstein said he first met Norton when she served as chair of the New York City Human Rights Commission. “She got her start in the civil rights movement and has always been a brilliant advocate for equality,” Rosenstein said.

“She fought for women and for the LGBTQ community,” he said. “She always stood strong with us in all the battles the LGBTQ community had to fight in Congress. I have been honored to know her, thank her for her lifetime of service, and wish her only the best in a hard-earned retirement.”

Continue Reading

Popular