News
Praise, criticism as HRC heads into new era
Some laud Solmonese for state focus, others say marriage crowding out other priorities
HRC President Joe Solmonese will step down at the end of March.(Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)
The Human Rights Campaign’s search for a new president began in full force on Nov. 22 when an executive recruiting firm retained by the HRC board issued an eight-page job announcement describing the qualifications and experience sought for the next leader of the nation’s largest LGBT advocacy group.
The release of the job announcement, which is posted on the HRC website, followed an Oct. 3 announcement by HRC that its board had retained Russell Reynolds Associates, a nationally known executive recruitment firm, to assist the board in its search for the replacement of Joe Solmonese.
Solmonese has held the post of president and CEO of HRC and the HRC Foundation since 2005. He announced in August that he would step down from his position when his current contract expires on March 30, 2012.
“The entire HRC board understands the importance of this search to our community, to our continued progress as a movement and to our organization,” said HRC Board Co-Chair Rebecca Tillet.
“That’s why we will run a process that is inclusive and respects the importance of diversity in the candidate pool,” said Andy Linsky, co-chair of the board of the HRC Foundation, HRC’s research and educational arm.
Since Solmonese announced he was stepping down, LGBT activists have been debating HRC’s role in the movement its effectiveness during Solmonese’s tenure.
In an informal survey of LGBT activists in Washington and across the country over the past week, the Blade has found that most believe HRC has done a good job of advocating for LGBT equality on the federal and state level. Leaders of at least seven state and local LGBT organizations said HRC worked cooperatively with their respective groups on joint projects.
Others, including two nationally recognized transgender rights advocates, expressed concern that HRC – as well as other national LGBT organizations – have devoted too much of their time and resources to same-sex marriage efforts at the expense of pushing for non-discrimination laws on the federal, state and local levels. Those expressing this position say non-discrimination laws would have a beneficial impact on far more LGBT people than laws seeking to legalize same-sex marriage.
While they don’t object to spending resources on marriage equality, those expressing this view say HRC and other national LGBT groups are devoting far too little attention to non-discrimination measures, including the Employment Non-Discrimination Act or ENDA, a bill pending in Congress that would ban employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
“I hope the HRC board of directors thinks about this,” said Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality. “They do some very great things. But they are moving in the direction of marriage being their primary focus,” she said.
Keisling’s view was echoed by Maryland transgender advocate Dana Beyer, a former HRC board member, who said HRC appears to be evolving into a “marriage all the time” organization.
HRC officials have said it is devoting its resources to a wide range of programs and projects in addition to marriage equality. They say many of the projects are aimed at changing the minds of voters and lawmakers in an effort to line up the small number of additional votes in the U.S. House and Senate needed to pass ENDA.
Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the gay lawmaker and lead sponsor of ENDA in the House, has said the bill has no chance of passing until Democrats regain control of the House. Frank says Republican House leaders won’t allow the bill to come up for a vote, even though a sizable number of House Republicans are expected to vote for ENDA.
HRC supporters acknowledge that many in the LGBT community have questioned HRC’s capabilities and effectiveness, often fueled by HRC critics who say the group hasn’t been able to secure passage of ENDA. Some critics say HRC should have done more 2009 and 2010, when Democrats controlled the House and Senate with a Democratic president in the White House.
Arlington, Va., gay activist Bob Mialovich, an HRC member and contributor who retired recently as a federal government official, called such criticism unfair.
“I can understand peoples’ frustration, but the reality is we don’t have a majority of support in Congress to pass the bills we need to pass,” he said. “If you are not directly involved, you may not be aware of what HRC is doing. What I know is they are doing a lot.”
HRC spokesperson Fred Sainz has said HRC played a key role, along with other gay advocacy groups, in lobbying for passage of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which authorizes the federal government to prosecute hate crimes targeting LGBT people. Sainz also points to the success HRC and its partner groups have had in lobbying for repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
He said HRC worked closely with other groups to facilitate the Obama administration’s issuance of a large number of regulatory changes and federal agency rules that ban discrimination against LGBT people in healthcare, housing and other areas.
In addition to lobbying Congress, the White House and state and local governments on LGBT supportive bills and policies, and its election-related work on behalf of LGBT supportive candidates, HRC supporters point to a wide range of projects carried out by the HRC Foundation. Among them is the HRC Corporate Equality Index, which rates the nation’s Fortune 500 companies on whether their internal personnel policies ban discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
In its latest criteria for companies to obtain HRC’s highest rating in the Corporate Equality Index, the group raised the bar by calling for companies to include gender reassignment surgery for transgender employees in the companies’ health insurance plans. A large number of them have agreed to do so.
Other projects include a Healthcare Equality Index, which rates hospitals and other healthcare facilities on their treatment of LGBT people; a Welcoming Schools Program, that pushes for anti-bullying and other LGBT-supportive school policies; an All Children-All Families project that trains and sensitizes adoption agencies on LGBT families; and a Religion and Faith Program, which encourages LGBT-supportive clergy to speak out on LGBT issues, including same-sex marriage efforts.
Another program trains LGBT students enrolled in the nation’s historically black colleges to become student leaders in an effort to advance LGBT equality on their campuses.
HRC supporters also point to the group’s aggressive press and communications operation, which responds quickly and on a 24-hour basis to breaking developments by providing the media with statements and information on a wide range of issues, including responses to anti-LGBT groups or public officials.
The group’s 990 IRS finance report for 2010, the most recent one filed, shows that HRC and the HRC Foundation had a combined income of $39.8 million for the fiscal year running from April 1, 2010 to March 31, 2011.
With a staff of 150 full-time employees, the group’s revenue of close to $40 million makes HRC the largest national LGBT advocacy group. The group also owns its own office building in downtown Washington, an investment HRC officials and supporters have said helps the group advance its mission.
The building, among other things, houses a community event space that HRC calls the Equality Center, which often is used by local D.C. area LGBT organizations. The building includes a multimedia production facility. HRC says the building also generates income through the renting of surplus office space to outside groups and firms. The D.C. Office of Tax and Revenue has assessed the value of the building for 2012 at $16.6 million, an increase from its 2011 assessed value of $14.4 million.
‘Surplus of ill will’
Despite its income and broad range of programs, some critics say HRC has worked at cross purposes with other national and state LGBT organizations. In a development that created a stir among some activists, veteran gay rights advocate Matt Foreman, the former executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and former head of New York’s statewide LGBT group Empire State Pride Agenda, wrote a strongly worded critique of HRC that was published last month in two widely read LGBT blogs.
“The reality is that we are two separate movements: the Human Rights Campaign and everyone else,” Foreman wrote. He said that while HRC and its leaders and staff have accomplished many important things, “the cause of LGBT equality has suffered because of a deficit of trust and a surplus of ill will between HRC and the rest of the movement.”
Foreman did not respond to a call from the Blade seeking to discuss further his criticism of HRC.
Leaders of statewide LGBT advocacy groups contacted by the Blade in California, Illinois, Texas, Georgia, Florida, Pennsylvania and D.C. each said they have an amicable working relationship with HRC. Although they declined to comment directly on Foreman’s views about HRC, the officials said it was not uncommon for LGBT advocates to disagree over strategy and tactics but that the groups they work with – including HRC – have always worked through the disagreements.
Rebecca Isaacs, the recently named executive director of the Equality Federation, a national group that represents LGBT advocacy organizations in the states, has been involved in LGBT movement groups on the national level since the 1980s, including her role as political director for the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.
“HRC is part of the world of people with expertise on a lot of things,” Isaacs said, adding that Equality Federation is working with HRC on a number important issues occurring in the states. “We are dealing with 50 states, each with different people doing different things. My question is who wants to help? I’m not in any camp.”
Bil Browning, publisher of the Bilerico Project, an LGBT blog that published Foreman’s commentary criticizing HRC, said he was among HRC’s strongest critics in past years. But he said he has seen what he considers a major change for the better by HRC under Solmonese’s leadership.
Among other things, Browning said Solmonese greatly improved HRC’s relations with state LGBT organizations and significantly boosted HRC support for state and local initiatives. He said he saw this first hand as one of the leaders of the state LGBT group in Indiana, where Browning lived before moving to D.C.
According to Browning, HRC provided him with important support when he coordinated a successful effort to pass a non-discrimination ordinance in Indianapolis that includes protections for LGBT people.
“And as Indiana was fighting its marriage amendment battle, who was one of the first groups to stand up and say do you need cash, do you need polling, what do you need? It was HRC,” Browning said.
“I have to admit that for all my quibbles with HRC and some of the various stuff that they’ve done over the years, LGBT rights wouldn’t be as far as it is in Indiana without them,” he said.
Veteran gay Democratic activist Peter Rosenstein of D.C. was among some activists who viewed Foreman’s criticism as reflecting disagreements within the LGBT movement over tactics and strategy.
“While I agree with some of what Matt Foreman writes I think he needs to take some personal responsibility for the movement not being in sync,” said Rosenstein. “As he says, he had the opportunity to lead a national organization and it sounds like he still wants all things his way. I have often criticized HRC and I agree they should be more open and work more closely with the larger LGBT community. My hope is that they first do a truly open and wide ranging search for a replacement for Joe Solmonese.”
Longtime D.C. gay and Ward 8 community activist Phil Pannell, who has advocated for LGBT support within the city’s African-American community, said he’s been an HRC member for many years and thinks HRC does good work on the local and national level.
“I have seen HRC reach out the black community,” he said.
Rick Rosendall, vice president of the Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance of Washington, D.C., said he is troubled over what he called “internecine sniping” over HRC in the LGBT movement.
“The reality is that all LGBT activists and donors do not share the same goals, priorities and approaches.” He said GLAA and HRC “haven’t always seen eye to eye, but we have had a mutually respectful and productive relationship for many years.”
He added, “HRC does a lot of useful things, but if someone doesn’t like them, there are plenty of other groups to support…. HRC has a large and loyal donor base, and its headquarters is not going to crumble because of one more harsh op-ed. Any movement as diverse as ours is inherently messy. Deal with it, folks.”
District of Columbia
Memorial service for trans rights advocate SaVanna Wanzer set for May 17
Beloved activist was founder of D.C. Trans Pride, Black Trans Pride events
A celebration of life for D.C. transgender rights advocate SaVanna Wanzer has been scheduled for 1 p.m. on Sunday, May 17, at D.C.’s Westminster Presbyterian Church, according to statements released by her brother, Lee Livingston Perine and Whitman-Walker Health, the local LGBTQ supportive medical center where Wanzer served as a volunteer for many years.
Wanzer, 63, a lifelong D.C. resident, died April 23 of natural causes, Perine told the Washington Blade.
“Join us as we gather to honor SaVanna Wanzer, a woman whose leadership, vision, and care deeply shaped communities in Washington, D.C. and beyond,” the Whitman-Walker statement says.
“SaVanna created spaces where transgender people, especially Black and Brown transgender individuals could gather, be affirmed, and lead,” the statement adds. “From D.C. Trans Pride to D.C. Black Trans Pride and May Is All About Trans, her impact continues to be felt,” it says in referring to events that Wanzer played a lead role in organizing.
“A longtime member of Westminster Presbyterian Church, home of D.C.’s first Trans Pride, this celebration reflects both her spiritual home and the community she nurtured and serves as a meaningful conclusion to Trans Pride Weekend,” according to the statement.
It says the service will include American Sign Language interpretation and will be livestreamed on the Westminster DC Facebook page.
It also says a celebratory vigil for Wanzer was being planned for Saturday night, May 16, also at Westminster Presbyterian Church to provide an opportunity “for SaVanna’s friends to gather and share their stories, memories, and love for her.”
Perine said the Saturday event will take place from 6:30-8 p.m. and will be led by longtime D.C. LGBTQ rights advocate and event organizer Rayceen Pendarvis. In his statement he describes the Saturday event as an “evening of reflection and fellowship as we honor the life, legacy, and unstoppable spirit of SaVanna Wanzer.”
His statement adds, “Community members are invited to share stories, memories, and testimonies in celebration of SaVanna’s life.
Whitman-Walker spokesperson Lisa Amore said Whitman-Walker is extending support for the memorial events by helping to put out an announcement, but it is not the organizer of the events.
The Whitman-Walker statement says live music will begin at 12:15 p.m. prior to the May 17 memorial service at Westminster Presbyterian Church located at 400 I St., S.W.
It says if Westminster becomes filled to capacity, nearby Riverside Baptist Church at 699 Maine Ave., S.W. has offered to open its doors to host additional guests who will be able to view the service via a livestream arrangement,
It says a “Meal Of Love” will follow the Sunday service at Westminster.
National
Barney Frank on trans rights, 2028, and the need to ‘reform the left’
Gay former congressman starts home hospice care while completing new book
Former U.S. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), who served in the House from 1981 until his retirement in 2013 and who became the first member of Congress to voluntarily come out as gay in 1987, has resurfaced in the news over the past two weeks after announcing he has entered home hospice care and plans to publish a new book on, among other things, how Democrats can and should regain control of Congress.
According to media reports and an interview Frank conducted this week with the Washington Blade, his book, entitled “The Hard Path to Unity: Why We Must Reform the Left to Rescue Democracy,” calls on the Democratic Party’s progressive left leaning members to be more strategic in pushing for laws and policies initially considered “politically unacceptable” to most U.S. voters and the American people.
Frank told the Blade he believes the LGBTQ rights movement has succeeded in advancing most of its agenda seeking protections against discrimination by initially pushing less controversial advances such as the end to the ban on gays in the military and non-discrimination in employment before taking on the more controversial issue of same-sex marriage.
While acknowledging that Congress has yet to pass a national law banning discrimination against LGBTQ people in employment, housing, and public accommodations as 22 states and D.C. have already done, he points to the two landmark U.S. Supreme Court decisions, one legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide in Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015, and the other declaring sexual orientation and gender identity are protected categories for which employment discrimination is prohibited under existing federal law in Bostock v. Clayton County in 2020.
Frank notes that while some in the LGBTQ community are fearful that LGBTQ rights are under attack and may be pulled back under the Trump administration, he believes Republicans in Congress at this time will not attempt to repeal any existing LGBTQ protections, especially those regarding marriage rights and employment protections secured by the Supreme Court rulings.
He says transgender rights are the remaining LGBTQ issue that have yet to be adopted rationally, and he fully supports ongoing efforts to advance trans rights. But like his criticism of the progressive left among Democrats, Frank says the efforts to advance trans rights could be jeopardized by the highly controversial issue of “male to female transgender people playing in women’s sports.”
He added, “That’s the most controversial, the most difficult. It affects the fewest number of people.” While he says trans rights supporters should continue to advocate for that, “they should not make it a litmus test and say well if you’re not for that you’re not a supporter of the rights of transgender people. There are places where people are supportive, and we want to encourage that.”
Frank, 86, told Politico he has entered home hospice care as he deals with ongoing congestive heart failure. He said he is remaining in his home in Ogunquit, Maine, where he has lived with his husband, Jim Ready, since retiring from Congress in 2013.
“I’ve been doing some writing. I wrote this book,” Frank told the Blade. “I’ve relaxed. Meanwhile, my health has been failing. Jim has been a saint in taking care of me,” he said. “And so, I take it easy.”
Frank spoke to the Washington Blade in a phone interview from his home on May 4.
Washington Blade: We’re hearing some interesting reports about the book you’ve been writing. Can you say when it will be published?
Barney Frank: Sept. 15 is the publication date.
Blade: Some of the reports about the book in the media have said you want the far left within the Democratic Party to be more cautious.
Frank: No, I’ll give you this. The job is to defeat populism to keep democracy. Clearly you have to know what caused it. I believe that the essential cause in the surge of populism was economic inequality and the failure of mainstream liberals to address inequality. And beginning in the ‘80s economic growth became less and less fair in its institutions. And that led to all this anger.
So, the mainstream left finally figured that out after [Bernie] Sanders and Trump in ’16. So, we then – because I was working to make that change – got the Democrats to pay attention to economic inequality. And Joe Biden’s program did. The problem is at that point, people on the left who had correctly been critical of the failure to address equality said, OK, that’s not the only problem you guys are missing. There are all these other problems.
And they jumped from being right on the question of inequality and equality to believing in a lot more social changes, some of which were just unacceptable to the public. And the mistake they make is they don’t distinguish – there are a lot of issues I’ve been for in my life, but I had to assert that they were not currently politically survivable.
So, you do two things. Those that are politically survivable work to get them done. Others, you become an advocate. But you don’t make the most controversial part of your agenda litmus tests and drive away your allies. You will remember that on marriage that was an issue and in 2000 they insisted you will be for marriage.
So, my thesis is that while the mainstream understood its mistake on inequality, the most militant and ideological of our left misunderstand public opinion and they are pushing the public to — and they are insisting on acceptance of things that are not politically acceptable.
Blade: Having said what you said, how do you see that impacting gay rights or LGBTQ rights?
Frank: Well in the first place, gay rights – one of the things I want to address – is this fear that gay rights are going to be taken away – rights for LGB people. Nonsense. We’re not going to lose any of those rights. If they tried to undo marriage, for instance, the political reaction they would get would be abortion type sentiment. They are just not going to do that because it causes them too many political problems.
The problem is advances we hope to make in the area of transgender people. But there is no chance of losing – I can’t think of a single right that is in jeopardy. They are not going to reintroduce the ban in the military. They’re not going to tell people their marriages are cancelled. Again, the Republicans are not even trying to do that because they know there would be a terrible backlash.
With regard to LGBT there is one analogy. And that is the most controversial issue we faced over the years on what was the gay-bisexual agenda was same-sex marriage. And we left that until the end. And you remember we did the military. We did ENDA. We moved on to everything else, and it wasn’t until the very end that we went into marriage. [NOTE: ENDA did not ultimately pass.]
I think the analogy to that is male to female transgender people playing in women’s sports. That’s the most controversial, the most difficult. It affects the fewest number of people. And I believe had we deferred on marriage — people who believe that’s important should advocate for it. But they should not make it a litmus test and say well if you’re not for that you’re not a supporter of the rights of transgender people. There are places where people are supportive, and we want to encourage that.
Blade: You said you don’t think we will lose any rights, most of the laws related to nondiscrimination are from the states or municipal laws that were passed.
Frank: Tell me what you think will be lost. You and I always have this problem. I’ve always felt you were cynical and skeptical. Tell me what right we now have that’s in jeopardy.
Blade: One would be if the Supreme Court reverses its decision on same-sex marriage.
Frank: If they do, Congress would now step in on that, which would be the passage of Tammy Baldwin’s bill.
Blade: But what I was going to ask you next is in all the years you’ve been in office and as of now a federal LGBTQ rights bill has not been passed by Congress yet. Is there a chance of that happening?
Frank: I do not think it will happen because the members of Congress do not want to be in the position of voting to cancel people’s marriages. There are valid marriages throughout the country. And the notion that Congress will pass a bill invalidating those, no they won’t. They won’t do anything that’s as disruptive and that will cause a strong reaction. Have you seen a federal bill to do that? I haven’t.
Blade: No, and I am sorry if I’m not putting the question across correctly. I’m talking about the bill that bans discrimination based on employment, public accommodations and other areas for LGBTQ people that Congress has not yet passed. You co-sponsored that for many years.
Frank: I know that, and the Supreme Court did that one. No, I don’t think that – oh, all right, that’s a different question than marriage. If the Supreme Court reverses itself on that – I don’t see any sign that they’re going to, then I think you would see the federal bill passed.
[He is referring to the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court decision that employment discrimination against gay, bi, and trans people was equivalent to sex discrimination, which is prohibited under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.]
Blade: Are you talking about marriage?
Frank: For both for marriage and for non-[discrimination] – I don’t think a marriage bill would pass nationally. To distinguish, I don’t think a bill striking down marriages would pass. Too much violent reaction. As to employment discrimination, where they haven’t acted yet, if the Supreme Court changes that – I think that’s extremely unlikely – then I think Congress would step in.
Blade: Are you saying we may not need an LGBTQ non-discrimination act by Congress for the states that haven’t passed that?
Frank: I would be in favor of that, yes. But again, I think you and I – you have always been pessimistic. There is a political time now that works in our favor. And as I said, on abortion, they burned themselves very badly on abortion. And yes, I’m still for a national anti-discrimination bill. But I do not think the right wing wants to be caught taking rights away that already exist. Because that’s a lot harder than denying them in the first place. And I don’t see any movement for that. You tell me what you are worried about. What bills are you worried about?
Blade: I was simply saying they haven’t yet passed a federal non-discrimination bill.
Frank: No, what’s going to change on the Supreme Court? I don’t see a pretty quick reversal on the Supreme Court. So, I think people are just – they have to have a cause. And they are inflating the likelihood that we are going to lose some rights when I see no evidence of it. And in fact, I see a lot of political reasons why those in Congress don’t want to do that.
I’ll tell you there are a lot of Republicans who would vote for same-sex marriage. For example, the leadership would say for Christ’s sake, don’t bring that up. They don’t want to take a position on it. And they got burned on abortion, badly.
Blade: To the extent that you are observing this, do you think the LGBTQ rights organizations are doing what they should be doing?
Frank: Well, I think some are stressing the negative too much. Because when people believe nothing good ever happens, they may get discouraged. I think they should be concentrating on the transgender issue. And I know the most controversial parts are protecting people’s rights to medical care, their rights selecting their own gender. And that’s what I would be working on.
And yeah, it would be nice to pass the national bill. I don’t think that’s going to happen. Well, if the Democrats get the House, the Senate, and the presidency, maybe it will happen. But I don’t see the urgency of that because I don’t see any movement to reverse the Supreme Court’s decision.
Blade: What message would you have for the LGBTQ community?
Frank: My message is one, we’re in good shape. And two, that what remains in the transgender issue – who is first? Which are those of your issues that are the most politically acceptable. And you work your way through and as you win on some of those the resistance on the tougher ones will diminish. And the other issue is we are – the problem is the stand to protect the rights of transgender people. But the rights for lesbian, gay, and bisexual people, I do not think they are in jeopardy and I do not think a lot of resources should be spent on being what I think is a very small threat.
Blade: For those states and municipalities that do not have laws protecting LGBTQ people from discrimination, do you think attitudes are changing so there would be little or no discrimination?
Frank: Oh, no question. First of all, I think it’s very unlikely that any of the rights they have will be taken away. And secondly, if they had to take some positive steps to take away protections they would not do it. And I think that ship has sailed in our direction and isn’t going back. In the end, you cannot underestimate there’s a big political difference between denying people their rights in the first place and taking it away from them after they’ve enjoyed it.
Anything is theoretically possible, but I don’t see any evidence that’s likely to happen.
Blade: We’re coming up to the midterm elections this year, but is there anyone coming up in the next presidential election who you might be supporting?
Frank: Oh, I think at this point we’re going to have a fairly open Democratic process. And it’s very clear at this point the way American politics is going it will be a basically supportive Democrat against a basically opposed Republican. And I’ll be supporting the Democrat. And so, this Democrat would be the best one, the most electable. And which one, I haven’t decided that. I want to see how people will fare when they start running.
But I think it is inconceivable that the Democrats would nominate someone who is not fully supportive.
Blade: Some people might be asking what you have been doing since you retired from Congress.
Frank: I’ve been doing some writing. I wrote this book. I’ve relaxed. Meanwhile, my health has been failing. Jim [husband Jim Ready] has been a saint in taking care of me. And so, I take it easy. In terms of what I do, I have two rules, two pieces of advice for people who retire. One is that you should make up two lists. One is you should have a bucket list, a list of things you want to do before you’re through. But more important than the bucket list is a list that rhymes with bucket. That’s a very important list. And that’s one that I increasingly defer to.
Blade: And what is the one other than bucket?
Frank: It rhymes with bucket. What rhymes with bucket?
Blade: Oh, OK.
Frank: That’s the list I follow.
Florida
Key West Pride’s state funding pulled
Republican Fla. Gov. Ron DeSantis signed anti-DEI bill
Following the passage of anti-DEI legislation in Florida, Key West will no longer receive any state funding for its future Pride events.
In a letter provided to the Key West Business Guild, the LGBTQ visitor and tourism center for the string of islands, a senior assistant county attorney for Monroe County officially said that the organization would no longer receive funding for its ongoing projects as a result of Senate Bill 1134 and House Bill 1001, starting in 2027.
The popular Key West Pride, gay men–leaning Tropical Heat weekend, and Womenfest will no longer receive any state money. This is something that Gay Key West Visitor Center Executive Director Rob Dougherty highlighted will shift how all the largest LGBTQ events in the Keys will be held after this year.
He said that the explanation is solely a result of SB 1134 and HB 1001, which limits the official actions of local governments by “prohibiting counties and municipalities, respectively, from funding or promoting or taking official action as it relates to diversity, equity, and inclusion …”
The legislation is being used to impose restrictions on funding events that exclude — whereas the events’ true purpose is to uplift already marginalized groups.
“Womenfest lost it [funding] because it’s a women’s-only event. Tropical Heat lost it because it’s a men’s-only event … that’s how this is being applied.”
This will not impact anything this year, Dougherty assured the Washington Blade; however, the future is not as certain.
“The law that (Republican Florida) Gov. DeSantis signed does not go into effect until Jan. 1, so for 2026 we’re okay,” Dougherty told the Blade. “But it impacts Key West Pride 2027, it impacts Tropical Heat 2027 and Womenfest — so we have lost all funding for those three events.”
He said that this will amount to a large chunk of the expected funding for the LGBTQ celebrations, which the Key West tourism board says is “internationally known as a gay mecca.”
“We’re due to lose about $200,000. Not all of that is direct, but the way that the Tourist Development Council (TDC) distributes their money, about $75,000 of it is for Key West Pride, and that helps to pay for things like marketing, swag, and other things that promote the event.”
He went on to explain that marketing to many major metropolitan areas with large LGBTQ populations may not see the same Key West advertisements and push as in years past — and that is the point.
“Our digital marketing, our print marketing, our SEO marketing — all of that is paid for through there, and it targets places with direct flights like Washington, D.C., New York, Philly, Atlanta, Dallas. So it’s definitely going to impact that.”
The money that will stop coming is not just to run events and celebrations, he explained. Money that goes back directly into the community is going to be hardest hit.
“An estimated 250,000 LGBTQ+ travelers make it to Key West on an annual basis, and on a very conservative basis, for every LGBTQ+ person there are two to four allies traveling with the same values.”
“The TDC also estimates that $1,500+ is spent per person per visit … so if you take those figures and multiply those all together, it comes up to about $1.2 billion … that is potentially going to be lost.”
He says that this will intrinsically change how Key West’s tourism — especially the large LGBTQ side of it — will run, especially since gay vacations need a foundation and expectation of safety and support to blossom.
“We travel based upon where we feel most welcome,” Dougherty said. “Key West has always been its own little place … the LGBTQ+ history of Key West and everything about Key West has always been a little bit weird for people, and that’s why they come here.”
The Guild was formed in 1978 to encourage summer tourism and support Key West’s gay community — becoming the nation’s first LGBTQ destination marketing organization. It has grown tremendously from its original membership to now include more than 475 enterprises representing virtually every facet of the island’s business community.
He also went on to say that this should be eye-opening for anywhere considered an LGBTQ destination, regardless of whether it is in a blue state or a red one.
“I think it can be a wake-up call across the country, because if it can happen here, it can happen anywhere.”
Memorial service for trans rights advocate SaVanna Wanzer set for May 17
PHOTOS: Miss Gay Western Maryland
Barney Frank on trans rights, 2028, and the need to ‘reform the left’
Key West Pride’s state funding pulled
DOE investigates Smith College’s trans-inclusive policy
Tennessee’s trans data bill a frightening omen
Lesbifriends Travel to host queer night out
The queer appeal of ‘The Devil Wears Prada’
Diverse cast tackles ‘Aguardiente’ at GALA Hispanic Theatre
