Connect with us

National

Paul latest to surge as Iowa caucuses approach

Romney, Gingrich remain at top of national polls

Published

on

Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul (photo via wikimedia by R. DeYoung)

The GOP presidential race continues to twist and turn two weeks before the Iowa caucuses as libertarian Rep. Ron Paul surges and hopes to win the first in the series of contests that will determine who will take on President Obama in 2012.

Paul, who’s represented Texas in the U.S. House since 1997, has risen to the top of the pack in the most recent polls asking Iowa Republicans which candidate they prefer as the caucuses approach on Jan. 3.

According to an InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion Research poll published Sunday, Paul has support from 23.9 percent among Iowa Republicans who say they’ll vote in the caucuses. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney comes in second with support from 18.2 percent, followed by Texas Gov. Rick Perry at 15.5 percent and former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich at 12.9 percent.

A victory for Paul in Iowa could complicate matters for other Republican presidential candidates who are enjoying support nationwide. According to a national CNN/ORC International poll published on Monday, Romney and Gingrich are tied for the lead at 28 percent, while Paul comes in third at 14 percent.

Paul’s record is distinctive among other Republicans in the race as being more pro-LGBT than others.

The lawmaker voted on two separate occasions in 2004 and 2006 against a Federal Marriage Amendment that would have banned same-sex marriage throughout the country. Paul was among the five Republicans who voted for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal on the House floor in May even before the Pentagon released its report in November 2010.

Paul has also been unique among his fellow GOP candidates on the issue of same-sex marriage by saying the federal government should get out of the business of regulating marriage — in keeping with his libertarian views. He is one of a few who hasn’t signed the National Organization for Marriage’s pledge to oppose same-sex marriage as president — much to the consternation of the organization.

According to the Boston Globe, Paul articulated his thoughts on marriage on Wednesday while speaking to students at Straight A Academy, a small non-traditional private school in Manchester, N.H., in response to a question from the audience.

“Why should the government be telling you what marriage is all about?” Paul was quoted as saying. “You might have one definition. I have another definition.”

Paul reportedly said he personally believes marriage is between one man and one woman, but said regulations involving marriage should be up to the states. He then advocated creating a secular agreement for relationship recognition in which, “you can go to court to resolve the differences and the arguments over it.” A Paul spokesperson later clarified no federal benefits would be conferred as a result of these contracts such as tax benefits.

But Paul has expressed support for the Defense of Marriage Act and has been been critical of the Obama administration’s decision to no longer defend the anti-gay law in court. Paul issued a statement condemning the announcement when it was made in February.

“Today’s announcement that the Obama administration will abandon its obligation to enforce DOMA is truly disappointing and shows a profound lack of respect for the Constitution and the Rule of Law,” Paul said in a statement at the time.

The lawmaker has also voted against hate crimes protections legislation. Paul didn’t vote on a version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act when it came to the House floor in 2007.

R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, said Paul’s positions on LGBT issues are “founded on his perspective of states’ rights.”

“For him, it’s more of the principle that people should be able to live their lives as they choose without the government impeding on that,” Cooper said.

But Jerame Davis, interim executive director of the National Stonewall Democrats, said Paul’s “constant refrain of states rights” is what is most troubling about his candidacy.

“States don’t have rights in and of themselves — they are just another division of government that derives their power from the people,” Davis said. “The states rights argument has been used to perpetrate some of the worst aspects of American history. It scares the hell out of me to hear someone running for president use this refrain, especially when you consider Ron Paul’s opposition to the Civil Rights Act was based, at least partially, on this notion.”

Anti-gay Iowa leader endorses Santorum

In related news, a leading anti-gay activist in Iowa threw his support behind Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum in an endorsement on Tuesday — a decision that may give the trailing candidate a boost in the polls.

Bob Vander Plaats, CEO of FAMiLY LEADER, said during a news conference that Santorum could be “the Huckabee in this race,” referring to the former Arkansas governor and social conservative favorite Mike Huckabee who won the Iowa caucuses in 2008.

“I saw him as a champion for the family in the U.S. House, I saw him as a champion for the family in the U.S. Senate. I saw him as a champion for the family on the campaign trail,” Vander Plaats said. “So today, I, as an individual, am going to endorse Rick Santorum. I’m going to mobilize whatever resources that I have at my disposal to advocate for him.”

Vander Plaats, who ran unsuccessfully for Iowa governor in 2010, has been working against marriage rights for same-sex couples in Iowa since the State Supreme Court ruled in favor of such rights in 2009. The activist led the successful effort to unseat three justices who ruled in favor of marriage equality during a 2010 referendum.

Chuck Hurley, who heads the FAMiLY LEADER’s Iowa Family Policy Center, also endorsed Santorum. These endorsements are personal and not on behalf of FAMiLY LEADER, they both have said. During the news conference, Vander Plaats said the board “reached unanimity” that the organization wouldn’t endorse any particular candidate during the Iowa caucuses.

Troy Price, executive director of the pro-LGBT group One Iowa, said Vander Plaats’ endorsement of Santorum “comes as no surprise” and demonstrates he’s “out of touch” with what voters want.

“Both Santorum and Vander Plaats have built their careers attacking loving and committed gay and lesbian couples, and the fact is that Vander Plaats caved to the extreme social conservative agenda,” Price said. “With poll numbers lagging, it is clear Rick Santorum does not have a chance against President Obama in November, and Vander Plaats has endorsed a losing candidate.”

Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

According to the Des Moines Register, Santorum was eating a cinnamon roll in Pella, Iowa after a campaign stop when he found out about Vander Plaats’ and Hurley’s endorsement.

“There’s a lot of good people out here running, and I’m sure it was a tough decision. I think it shows that we’re the candidate right now that has the momentum, that has the message that’s resonating to the people of Iowa,” Santorum said.

Santorum has had a long history of anti-gay views and positions, even during the course of his time representing Pennsylvania in the Senate from 1995 to 2006. Santorum was one of the architects of the Federal Marriage Amendment. In an interview with the Associated Press, Santorum made notorious comments equating homosexuality to bestiality and pedophilia.

“In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality,” Santorum was quoted as saying. “That’s not to pick on homosexuality. It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality.”

Following the remarks, Dan Savage, a Seattle-based gay activist, launched an effort to coin the word “santorum” as a sexual neologism. That definition remains the No. 1 result of “santorum” when the word in entered into Google.

Over the course of his campaign, Santorum has been emphasizing anti-gay views and his opposition to same-sex marriage perhaps more than any other presidential candidate. In addition to pledging to reinstate “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” Santorum said “our country will fail” as a result of same-sex marriage. He also raised eyebrows in August when he said same-sex marriage is like “saying this glass of water is a glass of beer.”

Santorum is also among the candidates who has signed a pledge from the National Organization for Marriage committing himself to, among other things, backing the Federal Marriage Amendment and defending the Defense of Marriage Act in court.

Despite Vander Plaat’s endorsement, Santorum trails the other candidates. The CNN/ORC International poll revealed Santorum has support from just 4 percent of Republicans nationwide. The candidate is one of only a few candidates in the Republican field who hasn’t experienced a surge sometime over the course of his campaign.

The polling results are similar in Iowa, despite the strong presence of evangelical voters in the state. The InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion Research found that Santorum has support from just 3.8 percent of registered Republicans who are set to vote in the caucuses.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

New York

Pride flag raised at Stonewall after National Park Service took it down

‘Our flag represents dignity and human rights’

Published

on

(Screen capture via Reuters video on YouTube)

A Pride flag was raised at the site of the Stonewall National Monument days after a National Park Service directive banned flying the flag at the birthplace of the LGBTQ rights movement in the U.S.

The flag-raising was led by Manhattan Borough President Brad Hoylman-Sigal and supported by other elected officials.

“The community should rejoice. We have prevailed,” Hoylman-Sigal said shortly after the flag was hoisted. “Our flag represents dignity and human rights.”

The flag now sits in Christopher Street Park, feet away from the Stonewall Inn, where in 1969 a police raid of the gay bar sparked outrage and led to a rising of LGBTQ people pushing back on NYPD brutality and unjust treatment.

Elected officials brought a new flagpole with them, using plastic zip ties to attach it to the existing pole.

In 2016, President Barack Obama declared the site a national monument.

One day before the planned re-raising of the Pride flag, the National Park Service installed only an American flag on the flagpole, which days prior had flown a rainbow flag bearing the NPS logo.

The directive removing the flag was put forward by Trump-appointed National Park Service Acting Director Jessica Bowron.

This comes one day after more than 20 LGBTQ organizations from across the country co-signed a letter to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and General Services Administrator Ed Forst, demanding the flag be restored to the monument.

“It is our understanding that the policy provides limited exceptions for non-agency flags that provide historical context or play a role in historic reenactments. Simply put, we urge you to grant this flag an exception and raise it once again, immediately,” the letter read. “It also serves as an important reminder to the 30+ million LGBTQ+ Americans, who continue to face disproportionate threats to our lives and our liberty, that the sites and symbols that tell our stories are worth honoring … However, given recent removals of the site’s references to transgender and bisexual people — people who irrefutably played a pivotal role in this history — it is clear that this is not about the preservation of the historical record.”

The letter finished with a message of resilience the LGBTQ community is known for: “The history and the legacy of Stonewall must live on. Our community cannot simply be erased with the removal of a flag. We will continue to stand up and fight to ensure that LGBTQ+ history should not only be protected — it should be celebrated as a milestone in American resilience and progress.”

When asked about the directive, the NPS responded with this statement:

“Current Department of the Interior policy provides that the National Park Service may only fly the U.S. flag, Department of the Interior flags, and the Prisoner of War/Missing in Action flag on flagpoles and public display points. The policy allows limited exceptions, permitting non-agency flags when they serve an official purpose. These include historical context or reenactments, current military branch flags, flags of federally recognized tribal nations affiliated with a park, flags at sites co-managed with other federal, state, or municipal partners, flags required for international park designations, and flags displayed under agreements with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for Naturalization ceremonies.”

An Interior Department spokesperson on Thursday called the move to return the flag to the monument a “political stunt.”

“Today’s political pageantry shows how utterly incompetent and misaligned the New York City officials are with the problems their city is facing,” a department spokesperson said when reached for comment.

The clash comes amid broader efforts by the Trump-Vance administration to minimize LGBTQ history and political power. The White House has spent much of President Donald Trump’s second presidency restricting transgender rights — stopping gender-affirming care for transgender youth, issuing an executive order stating the federal government will recognize only two sexes, male and female, and blocking Medicaid and Medicare from being used for gender-affirming care.

Continue Reading

State Department

FOIA lawsuit filed against State Department for PEPFAR records

Council for Global Equality, Physicians for Human Rights seeking data, documents

Published

on

HIV/AIDS activists place Black Styrofoam coffins in front of the State Department on April 17, 2025, to protest the Trump-Vance administration's foreign aid cuts that impacted PEPFAR-funded programs. The Council for Global Equality and Physicians for Human Rights have filed a FOIA lawsuit that seeks the State Department's PEPFAR-related documents and data. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The Council for Global Equality and Physicians for Human Rights have filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the State Department for PEPFAR-related data and documents.

The groups, which Democracy Forward represents, filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on Wednesday.

Then-President George W. Bush in 2003 signed legislation that created PEPFAR. UNAIDS Executive Director Winnie Byanyima last March said PEPFAR has saved 26 million lives around the world.

The Trump-Vance administration in January 2025 froze nearly all U.S. foreign aid spending for at least 90 days. Secretary of State Marco Rubio later issued a waiver that allowed PEPFAR and other “life-saving humanitarian assistance” programs to continue to operate during the freeze.

The Washington Blade has previously reported PEPFAR-funded programs in Kenya and other African countries have been forced to suspend services and even shut down because of gaps in U.S. funding. HIV/AIDS activists have also sharply criticized the Trump-Vance administration over reported plans it will not fully fund PEPFAR in the current fiscal year.

The lawsuit notes the Council for Global Equality and Physicians for Human Rights have “filed several FOIA requests” with the State Department for PEPFAR-related data and documents. The groups filed their most recent request on Jan. 30.

“On Jan. 30, 2026, plaintiffs, through counsel, sent State a letter asking it to commit to prompt production of the requested records,” reads the lawsuit. “State responded that the request was being processed but did not commit to any timeline for production.”

“Plaintiffs have received no subsequent communication from State regarding this FOIA request,” it notes.

“Transparency and inclusion have been hallmarks of PEPFAR’s success in the last decade,” said Beirne Roose-Snyder, a senior policy fellow at the Council for Global Equality, in a press release that announced the lawsuit. “This unprecedented withholding of data, and concurrent ideological misdirection of foreign assistance to exclude LGBTQI+ people and others who need inclusive programming, has potentially devastating and asymmetrical impacts on already marginalized communities.”

“This data is vital to understanding who’s getting access to care and who’s being left behind,” added Roose-Snyder.

“We filed this lawsuit to seek transparency: the administration’s PEPFAR data blackout withholds information the public, health providers, and affected communities need to track the HIV epidemic and prevent avoidable illness and death, obscuring the true human cost of these policy decisions,” said Physicians for Human Rights Research, Legal, and Advocacy Director Payal Shah.

The State Department has yet to respond to the Blade’s request for comment on the lawsuit.

Continue Reading

New York

N.Y. lawmaker vows ‘Pride flag will fly again’ at Stonewall Monument

After a Jan. 21 policy shift, Pride flags were banned at national parks, prompting backlash from Bottcher and LGBTQ advocates.

Published

on

The now gone Pride flag formerly flying at Stonewall National Monument in 2016. (Photo courtesy of the National Parks Service)

Hours after news broke that the National Park Service would no longer allow Pride flags to fly at the Stonewall National Monument — the birthplace of the modern LGBTQ rights movement in the United States — the Washington Blade spoke with New York State Sen. Erik Bottcher, who represents the area surrounding the Stonewall Inn and the national monument.

During the interview, Bottcher, who is gay, spoke about the policy change and outlined steps he plans to take in the coming days to push for its reversal.

“This is another act of erasure,” Bottcher told the Blade. “It’s a cowardly attempt to rewrite history and to intimidate our community. This is Stonewall — it’s where we fought back, where we ignited a global movement for equality — and we refuse to go back. We’re not going to accept these acts of erasure.”

The Stonewall Inn became a flashpoint in 1969 after NYPD officers raided the bar, part of a longstanding pattern of police harassment of LGBTQ spaces. The raid sparked days of protest and resistance along Christopher Street, now widely recognized as the catalyst for the modern LGBTQ rights movement.

While the events are often referred to as the “Stonewall Riots,” many activists and historians prefer the term “Stonewall Uprising,” emphasizing that the resistance was a response to systemic oppression rather than senseless violence. LGBTQ patrons and community members fought back — shouting “Gay Power!” and “Liberate Christopher Street!” — as crowds grew and frustration with police abuse boiled over.

Since the uprising, LGBTQ people and allies have gathered annually in June to commemorate Stonewall and to celebrate Pride, honoring the movement that placed LGBTQ voices at the center of the fight for equality.

In June 2016, then President Barack Obama officially designated the space as the Stonewall National Monument, making it the United States’s first national monument designated for an LGBTQ historic site.

Now, nearly 10 years later, President Trump’s appointed NPS acting director Jessica Bowron changed policy on Jan. 21 regarding which flags are allowed to be flown in national parks. Many, including Bottcher, say this is part of a larger targeted and deliberate attempt by the administration to erase LGBTQ history.

“It’s clear they’re making a conscious decision to erase the symbols of our community from a monument to our community’s struggle,” he said. “This is a calculated and premeditated decision, and it could be — and should be — reversed.”

“Let’s be clear,” Bottcher added, “they wish we didn’t exist … But we’re not going anywhere. We refuse to go back into the shadows.”

When asked why it is critical to challenge the policy, Bottcher emphasized the importance of visibility in preserving LGBTQ history.

“This is why it’s so important that we not let this stand,” he said. “Visibility is critical. When people see us, learn about us, and get to know us, that’s how we break down prejudice and stereotypes. We cannot allow them to push us back into the shadows.”

Other LGBTQ leaders and elected officials were quick to condemn the removal of the Pride flag, which had flown since the site’s official designation as a national monument.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani called the decision “outrageous.”

“I am outraged by the removal of the Rainbow Pride Flag from Stonewall National Monument,” Mamdani said in a statement. “New York is the birthplace of the modern LGBTQ+ rights movement, and no act of erasure will ever change or silence that history.”

“Our city has a duty not just to honor this legacy, but to live up to it,” he added. “I will always fight for a New York City that invests in our LGBTQ+ community, defends their dignity, and protects every one of our neighbors — without exception.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer also condemned the move.

“The removal of the Pride Rainbow Flag from the Stonewall National Monument is a deeply outrageous action that must be reversed immediately,” Schumer said in a statement to The Advocate. “Stonewall is a landmark because it is the birthplace of the modern LGBTQ rights movement, and symbols of that legacy belong there by both history and principle.”

Cathy Renna, communications director for the National LGBTQ Task Force, said the flag’s removal will not erase the movement it represents.

“They can take down a flag, but they can’t take down our history,” Renna said. “Stonewall is sacred ground rooted in resistance, liberation, and the legacy of trans and queer trailblazers who changed the course of history.”

Human Rights Campaign National Press Secretary Brandon Wolf echoed that sentiment.

“Bad news for the Trump administration: these colors don’t run,” Wolf said. “The Stonewall Inn and Visitors Center are privately owned, their flags are still flying high, and that community is just as queer today as it was yesterday.”

Tyler Hack, executive director of the Christopher Street Project, said the removal was aimed squarely at LGBTQ visibility.

“The Pride flag was removed from Stonewall for one reason: to further erase queer and trans people from public life,” Hack said. “Stonewall marks the moment when queer and trans people fought back and demanded dignity. Our history is not theirs to erase.”

Bottcher closed with a promise to his constituents — and to the broader LGBTQ community — that the Pride flag’s removal would not be permanent.

“We will not be erased. We will not be silenced,” he said. “And the Pride flag will fly again at the birthplace of our movement.”

Continue Reading

Popular