Connect with us

National

High hopes for Obama’s speech to HRC

Some want president to endorse marriage, denounce N.C. and Minn. anti-gay initiatives

Published

on

President Obama (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

For the second time in three years, President Obama is the scheduled keynote speaker at the Human Rights Campaign National Dinner.

Some LGBT rights supporters are hoping that Obama will take advantage of the opportunity to endorse marriage equality and to denounce initiatives that would ban marriage rights for same-sex couples in Minnesota and North Carolina.

Obama is scheduled to keynote HRC’s 15th annual National Dinner in Washington, D.C. on Saturday. About 3,000 attendees are expected for the event, which will take place at the Washington Convention Center.

Obama has suggested since last year that his views could “evolve” to support same-sex marriage, but he hasn’t yet endorsed marriage rights for gay and lesbian couples.

John Aravosis, the gay editor of AMERICAblog, said the HRC speech is an opportunity for Obama to complete his evolution.

“I want to hear him say that he is once again for marriage equality,” Aravosis said. “And I think it would be big news, and it would help us politically and legally, if he does. If he doesn’t, then it will be just another HRC dinner where important people come to tell us nothing new.”

In 1996, Obama, during his bid to become an Illinois state senator, said in a questionnaire response to the Windy City Times, “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages.”

Obama in June faced pressure to come out for same-sex marriage during an LGBT fundraiser in New York City as marriage legislation was making its way through the New York Legislature. The president didn’t explicitly endorse marriage equality at the time and instead said states such as New York should decide the marriage issue for themselves.

Evan Wolfson, president of Freedom to Marry, said Obama should recommit to backing marriage equality even before his speech on Saturday.

“President Obama should not wait for a dinner to heed Freedom to Marry’s call — joined by more than 117,000 Americans on our ‘Say I Do’ Open Letter — to speak out clearly and authentically in support of the freedom to marry,” Wolfson said.

The “Say I Do” letter is an online open letter from Freedom to Marry to President Obama urging him to endorse same-sex marriage. Among the celebrity signers are lesbian talk show host Ellen DeGeneres and her spouse Portia; gay singer Rufus Wainwright; straight actress Anne Hathaway; and gay media mogul David Geffen.

Wolfson added that Obama should endorse same-sex marriage in some capacity before a non-gay audience to demonstrate the importance of allowing gay couples to marry.

“I’d like to see the president bring his message of support for the freedom to marry to a non-gay audience, or lay it out in an interview with a national journalist, so that Americans can hear him talk about gay families, why marriage matters, and the case for opening their hearts to the values of fairness and treating others as they would want to be treated,” Wolfson said.

While Obama doesn’t support same-sex marriage, his administration has taken steps to extend benefits to same-sex couples and put them on more equal footing with married straight couples.

Obama has called for repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage. In February, after initially defending the anti-gay law against litigation, Obama declared the law unconstitutional and said his administration would no longer defend it in court.

What Obama will ultimately say during his speech remains to be seen. The president is likely to tout the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” which came to an end on Sept. 20 as a result of legislation he signed in December. Shin Inouye, a White House spokesperson, said he didn’t have a preview of the president’s remarks.

It isn’t the first time Obama — or a sitting U.S. president — has addressed the HRC dinner. Obama previously spoke at the dinner in 2009. In 1997, then-President Bill Clinton gave the keynote address.

In 2009, Obama recommitted to repealing the military’s gay ban as he declared, “I will end ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”  Obama has since fulfilled that promise.

But also in 2009, Obama faced pressure during his HRC speech at that time to come out against a referendum in Maine to rescind a law enabling same-sex couples to marry. But Obama didn’t explicitly mention the initiative in his address. The referendum ultimately succeeded in November 2009, taking marriage rights away from gay couples there.

In addition to coming out for marriage equality, some advocates see the HRC speech as an opportunity for Obama to denounce initiatives set for the ballot next year. Both North Carolina and Minnesota are set to vote on amendments that would ban marriage rights for same-sex couples. The North Carolina initiative will come before voters in May and the Minnesota initiative will come before voters in November 2012.

In both places, state law already prohibits same-sex couples from marrying. But the proposed amendment would prevent the state legislatures from legalizing marriage equality at a later time or state courts from ruling in favor of marriage equality.

Wolfson said Obama should take every chance he has, including the HRC speech, to oppose anti-gay attacks such as those underway in Minnesota and North Carolina.

“And he should underscore at every opportunity, in the clearest terms, the moral urgency of voting ‘no’ on anti-gay ballot measures such as North Carolina’s and Minnesota’s,” Wolfson said.

LGBT advocates on the ground in North Carolina and Minnesota have mixed views on whether public opposition from Obama would be beneficial to campaigns against the amendments in those states.

Alex Miller, interim executive director of Equality North Carolina, said Obama should speak out against the North Carolina amendment during his speech because a lot of people from the Tar Heel State will attend the dinner.

“A lot of people feel very invested in this presidency, and gave a lot to make it happen,” Miller said. “I think it’s imperative that the president speak out and defend folks in North Carolina from the amendment that would do so much harm not only to LGBT North Carolinians, but to all unmarried couples, and to everybody that will be exposed to the harsh and ugly rhetoric that’s about to be broadcast across the state from the other side.”

Miller said he doesn’t believe opposition from Obama on its own would be enough to defeat the amendment, but said opposition would be “showing the leadership that we all want from him on the issue.”

Richard Carlbom, who started this week as campaign manager for Minnesotans United for All Families, said he isn’t concerned about whether Obama will speak out against the amendment.

“I’d never recommend what the president should or should not say to a crowd like the HRC dinner,” Carlbom said. “I think President Obama has been pretty clear where he stands, and we’re focused on winning this thing in Minnesota, so I’m not concerned about what he’s going to say on Saturday or what he won’t say.”

Asked whether he wants Obama to speak out at some point against the measure, Carlbom replied, “This is my second day on the job. Obviously, we want everybody to speak out against this amendment, but there’s a lot of work to do on the ground here in Minnesota, and that’s what I remain focused on right now.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Michigan

Mich. Democrats spar over LGBTQ-inclusive hate crimes law

Lawmakers disagree on just what kind of statute to pass

Published

on

Members of the Michigan House Democrats gather to celebrate Pride month in 2023 in the Capitol building. (Photo courtesy of Michigan House Democrats)

Michigan could soon become the latest state to pass an LGBTQ-inclusive hate crime law, but the state’s Democratic lawmakers disagree on just what kind of law they should pass.

Currently, Michigan’s Ethnic Intimidation Act only offers limited protections to victims of crime motivated by their “race, color, religion, gender, or national origin.” Bills proposed by Democratic lawmakers expand the list to include “actual or perceived race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, ethnicity, physical or mental disability, age, national origin, or association or affiliation with any such individuals.” 

Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Attorney General Dana Nessel have both advocated for a hate crime law, but house and senate Democrats have each passed different hate crimes packages, and Nessel has blasted both as being too weak.

Under the house proposal that passed last year (House Bill 4474), a first offense would be punishable with a $2,000 fine, up to two years in prison, or both. Penalties double for a second offense, and if a gun or other dangerous weapons is involved, the maximum penalty is six years in prison and a fine of $7,500. 

But that proposal stalled when it reached the senate, after far-right news outlets and Fox News reported misinformation that the bill only protected LGBTQ people and would make misgendering a trans person a crime. State Rep. Noah Arbit, the bill’s sponsor, was also made the subject of a recall effort, which ultimately failed.

Arbit submitted a new version of the bill (House Bill 5288) that added sections clarifying that misgendering a person, “intentionally or unintentionally” is not a hate crime, although the latest version (House Bill 5400) of the bill omits this language.

That bill has since stalled in a house committee, in part because the Democrats lost their house majority last November, when two Democratic representatives resigned after being elected mayors. The Democrats regained their house majority last night by winning two special elections.

Meanwhile, the senate passed a different package of hate crime bills sponsored by state Sen. Sylvia Santana (Senate Bill 600) in March that includes much lighter sentences, as well as a clause ensuring that misgendering a person is not a hate crime. 

Under the senate bill, if the first offense is only a threat, it would be a misdemeanor punishable by one year in prison and up to $1,000 fine. A subsequent offense or first violent hate crime, including stalking, would be a felony that attracts double the punishment.

Multiple calls and emails from the Washington Blade to both Arbit and Santana requesting comment on the bills for this story went unanswered.

The attorney general’s office sent a statement to the Blade supporting stronger hate crime legislation.

“As a career prosecutor, [Nessel] has seen firsthand how the state’s weak Ethnic Intimidation Act (not updated since the late 1980’s) does not allow for meaningful law enforcement and court intervention before threats become violent and deadly, nor does it consider significant bases for bias.  It is our hope that the legislature will pass robust, much-needed updates to this statute,” the statement says.

But Nessel, who has herself been the victim of racially motivated threats, has also blasted all of the bills presented by Democrats as not going far enough.

“Two years is nothing … Why not just give them a parking ticket?” Nessel told Bridge Michigan.

Nessel blames a bizarre alliance far-right and far-left forces that have doomed tougher laws.

“You have this confluence of forces on the far right … this insistence that the First Amendment protects this language, or that the Second Amendment protects the ability to possess firearms under almost any and all circumstances,” Nessel said. “But then you also have the far left that argues basically no one should go to jail or prison for any offense ever.”

The legislature did manage to pass an “institutional desecration” law last year that penalizes hate-motivated vandalism to churches, schools, museums, and community centers, and is LGBTQ-inclusive.

According to data from the U.S. Department of Justice, reported hate crime incidents have been skyrocketing, with attacks motivated by sexual orientation surging by 70 percent from 2020 to 2022, the last year for which data is available. 

Twenty-two states, D.C., Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have passed LGBTQ-inclusive hate crime laws. Another 11 states have hate crime laws that include protections for “sexual orientation” but not “gender identity.”

Michigan Democrats have advanced several key LGBTQ rights priorities since they took unified control of the legislature in 2023. A long-stalled comprehensive anti-discrimination law was passed last year, as did a conversion therapy ban. Last month the legislature updated family law to make surrogacy easier for all couples, including same-sex couples. 

A bill to ban the “gay panic” defense has passed the state house and was due for a Senate committee hearing on Wednesday.

Continue Reading

Indiana

Drag queen announces run for mayor of Ind. city

Branden Blaettne seeking Fort Wayne’s top office

Published

on

Branden Blaettner being interviewed by a local television station during last year’s Pride month. (WANE screenshot)

In a Facebook post Tuesday, a local drag personality announced he was running for the office of mayor once held by the late Fort Wayne Mayor Tom Henry, who died last month just a few months into his fifth term.

Henry was recently diagnosed with late-stage stomach cancer and experienced an emergency that landed him in hospice care. He died shortly after.

WPTA, a local television station, reported that Fort Wayne resident Branden Blaettne, whose drag name is Della Licious, confirmed he filed paperwork to be one of the candidates seeking to finish out the fifth term of the late mayor.

Blaettner, who is a community organizer, told WPTA he doesn’t want to “get Fort Wayne back on track,” but rather keep the momentum started by Henry going while giving a platform to the disenfranchised groups in the community. Blaettner said he doesn’t think his local fame as a drag queen will hold him back.

“It’s easy to have a platform when you wear platform heels,” Blaettner told WPTA. “The status quo has left a lot of people out in the cold — both figuratively and literally,” Blaettner added.

The Indiana Capital Chronicle reported that state Rep. Phil GiaQuinta, who has led the Indiana House Democratic caucus since 2018, has added his name to a growing list of Fort Wayne politicos who want to be the city’s next mayor. A caucus of precinct committee persons will choose the new mayor.

According to the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, the deadline for residents to file candidacy was 10:30 a.m. on Wednesday. A town hall with the candidates is scheduled for 6 p.m. on Thursday at Franklin School Park. The caucus is set for 10:30 a.m. on April 20 at the Lincoln Financial Event Center at Parkview Field.

At least six candidates so far have announced they will run in the caucus. They include Branden Blaettne, GiaQuinta, City Councilwoman Michelle Chambers, City Councilwoman Sharon Tucker, former city- and county-council candidate Palermo Galindo, and 2023 Democratic primary mayoral candidate Jorge Fernandez.

Continue Reading

Arizona

Ariz. governor vetoes anti-transgender, Ten Commandments bill

Katie Hobbs has pledged to reject anti-LGBTQ bills that reach her desk

Published

on

Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs speaks with reporters at an April 8, 2024 press conference. (Photo courtesy of Hobbs’s Facebook page)

BY CAITLIN SIEVERS | A slew of Republican bills, including those that would have allowed discrimination against transgender people and would have given public school teachers a green light to post the Ten Commandments in their classrooms, were vetoed by Gov. Katie Hobbs on Tuesday. 

Hobbs, who has made it clear that she’ll use her veto power on any bills that don’t have bipartisan support — and especially ones that discriminate against the LGBTQ community — vetoed 13 bills, bringing her count for this year to 42.

Republicans responded with obvious outrage to Hobbs’s veto of their “Arizona Women’s Bill of Rights,” which would have eliminated any mention of gender in state law, replacing it with a strict and inflexible definition of biological sex. The bill would have called for the separation of sports teams, locker rooms, bathrooms, and even domestic violence shelters and sexual assault crisis centers by biological sex, not gender identity, green-lighting discrimination against trans Arizonans.

“As I have said time and again, I will not sign legislation that attacks Arizonans,” Hobbs wrote in a brief letter explaining why she vetoed Senate Bill 1628

The Arizona Senate Republicans’ response to the veto was filled with discriminatory language about trans people and accused them of merely pretending to be a gender different than they were assigned at birth. 

“With the radical Left attempting to force upon society the notion that science doesn’t matter, and biological males can be considered females if they ‘feel’ like they are, Katie Hobbs and Democrats at the Arizona State Legislature are showing their irresponsible disregard for the safety and well-being of women and girls in our state by killing the Arizona Women’s Bill of Rights,” Senate Republicans wrote in a statement. 

The Senate Republicans went on to accuse the Democrats who voted against the bill of endangering women. 

“Instead of helping these confused boys and men, Democrats are only fueling the dysfunction by pretending biological sex doesn’t matter,” Senate President Warren Petersen said in the statement. “Our daughters, granddaughters, nieces, and neighbors are growing up in a dangerous time where they are living with an increased risk of being victimized in public bathrooms, showers, and locker rooms because Democrats are now welcoming biological males into what used to be traditionally safe, single-sex spaces.”

But trans advocates say, and at least one study has found, that there’s no evidence allowing trans people to use the bathroom that aligns with their identity makes those spaces less safe for everyone else who uses them. 

In the statement, the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Sine Kerr (R-Buckeye), claimed that the bill would have stopped trans girls from competing in girls sports, something she said gives them an unfair advantage. But Republicans already passed a law to do just that in 2022, when Republican Gov. Doug Ducey was still in office, though that law is not currently being enforced amidst a court challenge filed by two trans athletes. 

Republicans also clapped back at Hobbs’ veto of Senate Bill 1151, which would have allowed teachers or administrators to teach or post the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms, a measure that some Republicans even questioned as possibly unconstitutional. 

In a statement, the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Anthony Kern (R-Glendale), accused Hobbs of “abandoning God” with her veto. 

“As society increasingly strays away from God and the moral principles our nation was founded upon, Katie Hobbs is contributing to the cultural degradation within Arizona by vetoing legislation today that would have allowed public schools to include the Ten Commandments in classrooms,” Kern said in the statement. 

In her veto letter, Hobbs said she questioned the constitutionality of the bill, and also called it unnecessary. During discussion of the bill in March, several critics pointed out that posting the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms, tenets of Judeo-Christian religions, might make children whose families practice other religions feel uncomfortable. 

“Sadly, Katie Hobbs’ veto is a prime example of Democrats’ efforts to push state-sponsored atheism while robbing Arizona’s children of the opportunity to flourish with a healthy moral compass,” Kern said. 

Another Republican proposal on Hobbs’s veto list was Senate Bill 1097, which would have made school board candidates declare a party affiliation. School board races in Arizona are currently nonpartisan. 

“This bill will further the politicization and polarization of Arizona’s school district governing boards whose focus should remain on making the best decisions for students,” Hobbs wrote in her veto letter. “Partisan politics do not belong in Arizona’s schools.”

******************************************************************************************

Caitlin Sievers

Caitlin joined the Arizona Mirror in 2022 with almost 10 years of experience as a reporter and editor, holding local government leaders accountable from newsrooms across the West and Midwest. She’s won statewide awards in Nebraska, Indiana and Wisconsin for reporting, photography and commentary.

******************************************************************************************

The preceding piece was previously published by the Arizona Mirror and is republished with permission.

Amplifying the voices of Arizonans whose stories are unheard; shining a light on the relationships between people, power and policy; and holding public officials to account.

Arizona Mirror is part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular