National
Baldwin front-runner to claim Dem nomination for Senate
But lesbian lawmaker likely faces stiff challenge in general election
Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)
Claiming the Democratic nomination to become the next U.S. senator from Wisconsin — and the first openly gay U.S. senator — just got easier for Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) now that a potential major opponent has announced he won’t seek office in 2012.
Former U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold, who lost his seat during the Republican wave in the 2010 election, said in a message to supporters last week that he wouldn’t run for office in 2012.
“I am grateful for the friendship and support of so many fellow Wisconsinites who suggested I consider running for statewide office in the coming months,” Feingold wrote. “While I may seek elective office again someday, I have decided not to run for public office during 2012.”
Feingold, who since his departure from the Senate founded the group Progressive United, said he instead wants to devote his time to teaching at Marquette University Law School and working to overturn Citizens United, a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing unlimited corporate funding for independent political broadcasts in political campaigns.
He was seen as the favorite to win the Democratic nomination — and likely the seat itself — for the seat Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wisc.) will vacate upon his retirement at the end of next year. With Feingold out of the picture, political observers say Baldwin, who has said she’s “very likely” to pursue a run for Senate, is the front-runner to claim the Democratic nomination. The only out lesbian in Congress, Baldwin has been serving in the U.S. House since 1999.
In a statement to supporters, Baldwin praised Feingold for being what she called “one of the true legends of Wisconsin’s progressive tradition” and said she expects his “political courage” to continue to impact Wisconsin and the country for years to come.
“Lots of you have asked me whether Russ’ announcement will influence my plans,” Baldwin said. “As I’ve said, I’m seriously exploring a race for the U.S. Senate — and I’ll have more to say about that soon. But whoever represents our party in that important election should have the same progressive principles — and the same courage to do what’s right — that Russ Feingold has displayed every day of his distinguished career.”
Baldwin was expected to hold off on announcing any decision to run for U.S. Senate until after the Wisconsin special elections, which took place Aug. 9, and after Feingold revealed his intentions for 2012. Now that the election is over and Feingold has announced his decision, Baldwin is widely expected to make an announcement just after Labor Day.
Denis Dison, spokesperson for the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund, which has been pushing Baldwin to run for the Senate, said Feingold’s announcement is “encouraging.”
“We’re still assuming that there is going to be a competitive primary; somebody is going to pop up,” Dison said. “But I think if her decision had much to do with whether or not Feingold was running, obviously this is a much more encouraging environment and atmosphere to run in.”
Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia, said via e-mail that Feingold’s decision to sit out the race is a “big boost” for Baldwin.
“She could not have gotten the nomination against Feingold — no question he would have defeated her if she had even run, which I doubt,” Sabato said. “Now, she’s got a good chance to be the Democratic nominee, although we have to wait and see who runs against her. The dust hasn’t settled from Feingold’s announcement.”
Other Democrats who are said to be mulling potential bids for the Senate seat include Rep. Ron Kind (D-Wisc.), a seven-term member of the U.S. House, and Steve Kagen, a former U.S. House member from Wisconsin who was unseated in 2010. Kind has publicly said he’s considering jumping in the race.
But according to data published last week from Public Policy Polling, Baldwin would defeat those opponents in a Democratic primary. In a three-way race with Kind and Kagen she leads with 37 percent to 21 percent for Kind and 15 percent for Kagen. Additionally, in just a two-way race with Kagen she leads 48-19.
In addition to favorable polling numbers in the hypothetical primary, Baldwin also has more money on hand compared to either Kind or Kagen. In the most recent Federal Election Commission reports, Baldwin posted $1.1 million in cash on hand after raising more than $600,000 thus far this election cycle. Comparatively, Kind has $478,000 in cash on hand after raising $592,00o this cycle. Kagen has no cash on hand and has only raised $18,000 this cycle.
Dison said potential Democratic challengers to Baldwin will look at those numbers in determining whether to run against her.
“I think if anybody who’s going to consider getting into the race will look at that polling, they’ll look at her fundraising and decide whether it will too much of an uphill battle to challenge her,” Dison said.
But winning the seat against a Republican contender in the general election will be more challenging. Potential GOP opponents — like former Gov. Tommy Thompson or former U.S. Rep. Mark Neumann — are marginally ahead of her in the polls.
The data from PPP shows that in a match-up between Neumann and Baldwin, Neumann would win 44-40, although 15 percent of responders said they were undecided. In a contest between Thompson and Baldwin, Thompson would win 50-42, although eight percent of voters identified as undecided. Fundraising data for Thompson and Neumann wasn’t available on the FEC website.
Sabato said the key for the general election is whether Thompson wins the GOP nomination and, if he does, how handily he wins the Republican mantle.
“He’s viewed as a moderate within the GOP, and as we saw in 2010, that can cause problems,” Sabato said. “Will the Tea Party back Mark Neumann or some other opponent of Thompson? Will Gov. Scott Walker and Sen. Ron Johnson decide to endorse Thompson or an opponent in the GOP primary?”
If Thompson clinches the Republican nomination without too much difficulty, Sabato said he’d give him a slight edge over Baldwin in the general election, but added his prediction could be off because of the timing of the Senate race.
“I hasten to add that Wisconsin is going to be a real battleground presidentially,” Sabato said. “Obama’s large majority in 2008 is less representative of Wisconsin’s contested nature than the 2000 and 2004 presidential results, which were extremely close. Presidential coattails could matter greatly in Wisconsin, as in some other Senate contests. And look at the recent Wisconsin State Senate recall elections — $30 million plus spent on a handful of local races, with emotions running very high.”
Sabato said “things are so unclear on both sides” in the Wisconsin Senate race that his Crystal Ball website will rank the contest as a “Toss Up” in its next edition.
Federal Government
Protesters say SAVE Act targets voters, transgender youth
Bill described as ‘Jim Crow 2.0’
Members of Congress, advocates, and people from across the country gathered outside the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday to protest proposed federal legislation that voting rights activists have deemed “Jim Crow 2.0.”
The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act would amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require in-person proof of citizenship for anyone seeking to vote in U.S. elections.
President Donald Trump has also pushed for the proposed legislation to include a section that would ban gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, even with parental consent, and prohibit trans people from participating in school or professional sports consistent with their gender identity rather than their sex assigned at birth.
In addition to changing voter registration requirements, the bill would limit acceptable forms of identification to documents such as a birth certificate or passport — records that the Brennan Center for Justice estimates more than 21 million Americans do not have — effectively restricting access to the ballot. It would also ban online voter registration, DMV voter registration efforts, and mail-in voter registration.
A 2021 investigation by the Associated Press found that fewer than 475 people voted illegally or improperly, a tiny fraction of the estimated 160 million Americans who voted in the 2020 election.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) spoke at the event.
“It will kick millions of American citizens off the rolls. And they don’t even require you to be told,” the highest-ranking Democrat in the Senate told protesters and reporters outside the Capitol. “If this law passes — and it won’t — you’re gonna show up in November … and they’ll say… sorry, you’re no longer on the voting rolls.”
He, like many other speakers, emphasized the bill in the context of American history, pointing to what he described as its racist roots and its impact on Black and brown Americans.
“I have called this act, over and over again, Jim Crow 2.0 … because they know it’s the truth.”
U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) was one of the lawmakers leading opposition to the legislation and spoke at the rally.
“It’s not just voting rights that are on the line — our democracy is on the line,” the California lawmaker said. “It’s not a voter I.D. bill. It’s a bait and switch bill.”
He added historical context, noting the significance of voting rights legislation passed more than 60 years ago. In 1965, Alabama civil rights activists marched to protest barriers to voter registration. Alabama state troopers violently attacked peaceful demonstrators at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, using tear gas, clubs, and whips against more than 500 — mostly Black — protesters.
“61 years ago — not to the day — but this week, President Lyndon Johnson came to the Capitol and addressed a joint session of Congress in the wake of Bloody Sunday and pushed Congress to pass the Voting Rights Act,” Padilla said. “61 years later, Donald Trump and this Republican majority wants to take us backwards. We’re not gonna let that happen.”
U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) also spoke, emphasizing that he views the effort as a Republican-led and Trump-backed attempt to restrict voting access, particularly among Black, brown, and predominantly Democratic communities.
“President Trump told Republicans when they were meeting behind closed doors that ‘The SAVE Act will guarantee Republicans win the midterms and ensure they do not lose an election for 50 years,’” Luján said. “The first time I think Donald Trump’s been honest … This voter suppression bill is only that. Taking away vote by mail? I hope my Republican colleagues from states that voted for Donald Trump or where vote by mail is popular have the courage and the backbone to stand up and say no to this nonsense, because their constituents are going to push back.”
U.S. Sen. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.) also spoke.
“Our Republican colleagues have already cut Medicaid, Medicare, people don’t know how they’re gonna be able to afford energy,” she said, providing context for the broader political moment. “We’re in the middle of a war that they can’t even get straight while we’re in it and don’t have a way to get out of it. And we are now faced with defending our democracy?”
She then showed the crowd something that she said has been with her throughout her political journey in Washington.
“I brought with me something that I carried on the day that I was sworn into the House of Representatives when I was elected in 2016, and I carried it with me on the day that I was sworn in as United States senator. And I also carried it with me when I was trapped up in the gallery on Jan. 6 and all I could think to do was pray … This document allowed my great great great grandfather, who had been enslaved in Georgia, to have the right to vote. We took this and turned it into a scarf. It is the returns of qualified voters and reconstruction code from 1867. This is my proof of what we’ve been through. This is also our inspiration.”
“I got to travel between the Edmund Pettus Bridge two times. And even as I thought about this moment, I recognized that while we wish we weren’t in it, while we don’t know why we’re in it, I do know we were made for it … So I came today to tell you that, um, just like the leader said, that he calls it Jim Crow 2.0. I call it Jim Crow 2.NO.”
Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBTQ advocacy organization in the U.S., also spoke, highlighting the impact of the bill’s proposed provisions affecting trans people.
“This bill is not about saving America. This bill is about stealing an election. This bill is about suppressing voters,” Robinson said. “This bill not only tries to disenfranchise voters that deserve their right to vote, it also tries to criminalize trans kids and their families … It tries to criminalize doctors providing medically necessary care for our trans youth.”
The SAVE Act passed the U.S. House of Representatives on Feb. 11 but has not yet been considered in the U.S. Senate.
Idaho
Idaho advances bill to restrict bathroom access for transgender residents
HB 752 passed in state House of Representatives on Monday
The Idaho House of Representatives passed House Bill 752 on Monday, a measure that would make it a crime for a person to use a bathroom other than the one designated for their “biological sex.”
The story was first reported by the Idaho Capitol Sun after the bill cleared the House.
House Bill 752 would make it a criminal offense — either a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the number of prior offenses — for individuals who “knowingly and willfully” enter a bathroom or changing room designated for the opposite sex.
The bill would apply to public buildings, including government-owned spaces, and places of “public accommodation,” a category that includes private businesses.
According to the bill’s text, it would “prohibit a person from entering a restroom or changing room designated for the opposite sex; provide a penalty; provide exceptions; define terms; and declare an emergency and provide an effective date.”
A first offense would be a misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in prison. A second or subsequent offense within five years would be a felony, punishable by up to five years in prison.
The bill passed in a 54–15 vote on Monday. Six Republicans broke with their party’s majority to join nine Democrats in opposing the measure.
The bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Cornel Rasor, a Republican from Sagle near the Washington-Idaho border, told House lawmakers that the legislation is intended to protect women and girls.
“It prevents discomfort and voyeurism escalation and assaults, while preserving single-user options and narrow exceptions so no one is denied access for emergency aid,” Rasor said.
State Rep. Chris Mathias, a Democrat from Boise, disagreed, arguing that the legislation would unfairly target transgender Idahoans.
“The truth of the matter is — and I know a lot of people don’t want to say it — but forcing people who don’t look like the sex they were assigned at birth, or transgender folks, to use other people’s bathrooms is going to put a lot of people in danger,” Mathias said.
The Idaho American Civil Liberties Union made a statement about the bill following its passage.
“Idaho lawmakers continue pushing these harmful, invasive bathroom laws, yet cannot present credible evidence that transgender people using gender-aligned bathrooms threaten public safety,” the Idaho ACLU said. “The bill does nothing to address real criminal acts, such as sexual assault or voyeurism, and disregards concerns from law enforcement about the burden enforcement would place on local resources.”
In addition to human rights advocates, who have spoken out against similar bills advancing in state legislatures across the country, Idaho law enforcement groups have also opposed the measure. They argue that the way the legislation is written would “pose significant practical enforcement challenges,” noting that officers are tasked with maintaining public safety — not conducting gender checks or policing bathroom access.
During a committee hearing last week, law enforcement representatives and several trans Idahoans testified that the bill would make many residents less safe.
“Officers responding to a complaint would be placed in the difficult position of determining an individual’s biological sex in order to enforce the statute,” Idaho Fraternal Order of Police President Bryan Lovell wrote. “In many circumstances, there is no clear or reasonable way for officers to make that determination without engaging in questioning or investigative actions that could be viewed as invasive and inappropriate.”
The Idaho Sheriffs’ Association requested that lawmakers amend the bill to require that individuals be given an opportunity to leave a bathroom immediately before facing potential prosecution.
The bill now heads to the Idaho Senate for consideration. To become law, it must pass both chambers and avoid a veto from the governor.
A separate bathroom bill, House Bill 607, which would be enforced through civil lawsuits, passed the House last month but has not yet received a committee hearing in the Senate.
State Department
Report: US to withhold HIV aid to Zambia unless mineral access expanded
New York Times obtained Secretary of State Marco Rubio memo
The State Department is reportedly considering withholding assistance for Zambians with HIV unless the country’s government allows the U.S. to access more of its minerals.
The New York Times on Monday reported Secretary of State Marco Rubio in a memo to State Department’s Bureau of African Affairs staffers wrote the U.S. “will only secure our priorities by demonstrating willingness to publicly take support away from Zambia on a massive scale.” The newspaper said it obtained a copy of the letter.
Zambia is a country in southern Africa that borders Tanzania, Malawi, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Namibia, Angola, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
The Times notes upwards of 1.3 million Zambians receive daily HIV medications through PEPFAR. The newspaper reported Rubio in his memo said the Trump-Vance administration could “significantly cut assistance” as soon as May.
“Reports of (the) State Department withholding lifesaving HIV treatment in return for mining concessions in Zambia does not make us safer, stronger, or more prosperous,” said U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Tuesday. “Monetizing innocent people’s lives further undermines U.S. global leadership and is just plain wrong.”
The Washington Blade has reached out to the State Department for comment.
Zambia received breakthrough HIV prevention drug through PEPFAR
Rubio on Jan. 28, 2025, issued a waiver that allowed PEPFAR and other “life-saving humanitarian assistance” programs to continue to operate during a freeze on nearly all U.S. foreign aid spending. HIV/AIDS service providers around the world with whom the Blade has spoken say PEPFAR cuts and the loss of funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, which officially closed on July 1, 2025, has severely impacted their work.
The State Department last September announced PEPFAR will distribute lenacapavir in countries with high prevalence rates. Zambia two months later received the first doses of the breakthrough HIV prevention drug.
Kenya and Uganda are among the African countries have signed health agreements with the U.S. since the Trump-Vance administration took office.
The Times notes the countries that signed these agreements pledged to increase health spending. The Blade last month reported LGBTQ rights groups have questioned whether these agreements will lead to further exclusion and government-sanctioned discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
Queer American in Israel discusses Iran war’s impact
Housewives take Capitol Hill by storm
Protesters say SAVE Act targets voters, transgender youth
‘It’s Dorothy’ traces lasting influence of a cultural icon
SAVE Act could silence millions of trans voters
Ensuring safer drinking water
PHOTOS: Awesome Con
A season of renewal for D.C. theater
Kennedy Center leadership changes as Trump ally Grenell departs
