Connect with us

National

Gill’s ‘stealthy’ activism to continue under new leader

Fordham maintains contact with former boss Mark Foley

Published

on

Kirk Fordham (right) with his partner Mike Cevarr and their sons Lukas and Levi. (Photo courtesy Fordham)

The Gill Action Fund’s new leader promises to continue the organization’s brand of stealthy, behind-the-scenes activism.

Kirk Fordham, who was named March 1 as head of the Denver-based organization, said in a Washington Blade interview he envisions a “degree of stealthiness” for Gill Action under his leadership in addition to working openly in efforts to advance LGBT rights throughout the country.

“I think it’ll be a hybrid of some deployment of highly trained gay SWAT teams, as I like to call it, and some of us will just be working very transparently with the existing organizations that are already on the ground,” Fordham said.

One of the advantages of Gill Action compared to other LGBT groups, Fordham said, is being able to deploy small teams of activists to regions where “there may be a gap and there may be a need to effect change on a pretty rapid basis.”

“That will allow us to perhaps go into some areas deep into the heartland of this country where there may not have been a lot of focus and activity to advance either non-discrimination or marriage equality or anti-bullying legislation,” Fordham said.

Gill Action — founded by gay billionaire philanthropist Tim Gill in 2005 — has a reputation for secrecy. Fordham will start in his new position April 16.

The group has played a role, without seeking credit, in passing statewide pro-LGBT legislation in various states, including the marriage equality legislation in New York. After an initial 2009 vote on same-sex marriage in the state failed, Gill Action funded a campaign in the state, called Fight Back New York to unseat state senators opposed to marriage equality, which ultimately unseated three senators.

Asked whether Gill Action would seek greater engagement with the media as it undertakes new initiatives, Fordham said the level of public engagement would “depend on the project” the organization is pursuing.

“There are sometimes where it may be to our community’s advantage not to broadcast exactly what our roadmap and our strategy might be on a particular issue or particular state, but I don’t think there’s a desire to speak sparingly with the press because they don’t trust the press or they have a hostile relationship,” Fordham said. “I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that it’s such a strategic decision on perhaps the element of surprise.”

According to a 2008 report in The Advocate, Gill Action in the 2006 election directed $2.8 million in nationwide contributions through its OutGiving program to 68 candidates across 11 states, and 56 of those candidates won. One of the more controversial ads funded by the organization was deployed against former Republican Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, author of the Federal Marriage Amendment. It depicted an actress dressed like her stealing a watch from a corpse in an open coffin, criticizing her for her vote on a tax for funeral homes.

Fordham said Gill Action will take a look at the broader map to determine places other than urban areas and states on the coasts to lay the groundwork “for cementing a better quality of life for LGBT people, even in the most conservative parts of the country.”

“Now that some of the lower hanging fruit has been picked, it’s time to start harvesting in less fertile territory,” Fordham said. “So, I believe, that we have literally millions of people that are living in states that have no protection whatsoever from workplace discrimination, relationship recognition and their schools. And so, I think, we want to start advancing some of those protections in places where they’re most needed.”

Fordham was reluctant to identify any particular areas where Gill Action would focus its attention, saying such decisions haven’t been made yet. But, asked whether Minnesota would be a place where resources could be directed, he said the state would be “high on the list of places that would be on our priority list.”

“My sense is that most Minnesotans are pretty fair-minded folks,” Fordham said. “So I think we’re going to be taking a very close look at that state as a horizon state where there are opportunities to make some progress.”

Assuming the anti-gay marriage amendment that will come before voters in the state in November is defeated, Minesota could be poised to legalize same-sex marriage if the Democrats take control of the legislature. Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton (D) has expressed support for marriage rights for gay couples.

Growing up in a Christian and Republican family, Fordham said he also has experience with parents who initially were unhappy about his sexual orientation, but later came to terms with it, and he knows what it takes to change the hearts and minds of people like them.

“When I first came out, they sent me these Focus on the Family books and tapes and magazines,” Fordham said. “They were praying everyday that I would see a path back to heterosexuality. Now that I’ve been with my partner for 23 years, we’ve adopted two kids, they welcome us as part of the family. They’re a perfect case study of how conservative Republicans who happen to be people of faith can come around and change their attitudes.”

Fordham lives in Coral Gables, Fla., with his partner, Mike Cevarr, and their two sons, Lukas and Levi. The family will relocate to Denver when Fordham takes the helm of Gill Action.

A lifelong Republican, Fordham currently serves as CEO of Everglades Foundation, but has had experience working for several GOP lawmakers on Capitol Hill, even some with anti-gay records. He also worked for former Rep. Mark Foley, who resigned after a scandal involving male pages in 2006. While still a college student, Fordham worked for James Inhofe of Oklahoma, then a member of the U.S. House. He’s also worked for Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida.

Fordham said he “absolutely” plans on reaching out to Republican lawmakers to influence them on LGBT issues and he knows “how to speak their language.”

“Once you move past the first and second-tier states where you have Democratic legislatures and friendly Democratic governors, the list of options starts to get more difficult, we can either wait and hope that someday, those states will have Democratic elected officials that are friendly, or we can start having a conversation with those currently elected Republican leaders in legislatures that have Republican supermajorities,” Fordham said.

Fordham has received congratulations on his new role across the board from groups like the Center for American Progress, the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund and the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force as well as praise from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, including Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and pro-LGBT Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.).

Still, skepticism remains that Fordham will be able to bring change within the Republican Party.

Wayne Besen, executive director of Truth Wins Out, said Fordham is qualified for the position, but questions how effective he can be with Republicans on LGBT issues.

“I take issue with this idea that because he’s a Republican, he can influence Republican votes because that’s utter nonsense,” Besen said. “Republican votes that are not coming our way has nothing to do with the arguments we’re making; it has nothing to do with a lack of effort. It has everything to do with the religious right as the Republicans’ most powerful constituency. They will do what’s necessary to please them.”

Although Fordham has worked for numerous Republicans, his most infamous former employer is former Rep. Mark Foley of Florida, who resigned in 2006 amid media reports he sent inappropriate messages to underage pages on Capitol Hill. Fordham was chief of staff for Foley after having worked on his campaign in 1994. While working for Martinez as the scandal broke, he helped broker agreements with the media on the story and testified before the House Ethics Committee on the issue. Foley later came out as gay.

Reflecting on the Foley scandal, Fordham said it was “one of the great crisis-management experiences” of his life and “a disappointment” because Foley was popular and well-regarded in his Republican caucus.

“It’s a perfect example of how someone through some reckless and irresponsible actions can flush down the toilet a promising political career,” Fordham said.

While working as chief of staff for Foley, Fordham said he had no knowledge of his boss sending inappropriate text and instant messages, but knew that he was engaging with pages and younger staffers.

“What I saw was the same kind of behavior you see among some heterosexual members of Congress: spending time socializing with on the floor of the House or in the halls of the Capitol, paying an inappropriate amount of attention to younger staffers or pages,” Fordham said. “Although that kind of behavior isn’t criminal, it’s certainly something that I thought crossed the line for a member of Congress as far as how they ought to conduct themselves.”

Fordham said he told the Ethics Committee everything and the steps “I took to try to influence my boss’s behavior,” saying the report that was produced in the end was favorable to him. According to media reports, Fordham had informed the staff of then-House Speaker Dennis Hastert about Foley’s behavior, but no action was taken.

Although they didn’t speak for a year after the event, Fordham says he now maintains a personal relationship with Foley and they have periodic phone conversations. Foley is based in West Palm Beach, while Fordham resides near Miami.

“I think he’s trying to rehabilitate himself and he’s now engaged in the community up there,” Fordham said. “We talked about the potential of him running for mayor of West Palm Beach. I gave him my best advice, and in the end, he decided not to run. So, I still hear from him once in a while, but I do believe in forgiveness and redemption for everyone, even when they break the public trust and do things that we consider really bad behavior.”

 

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

New York

Men convicted of murdering two men in NYC gay bar drugging scheme sentenced

One of the victims, John Umberger, was D.C. political consultant

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

A New York judge on Wednesday sentenced three men convicted of killing a D.C. political consultant and another man who they targeted at gay bars in Manhattan.

NBC New York notes a jury in February convicted Jayqwan Hamilton, Jacob Barroso, and Robert DeMaio of murder, robbery, and conspiracy in relation to druggings and robberies that targeted gay bars in Manhattan from March 2021 to June 2022.

John Umberger, a 33-year-old political consultant from D.C., and Julio Ramirez, a 25-year-old social worker, died. Prosecutors said Hamilton, Barroso, and DeMaio targeted three other men at gay bars.

The jury convicted Hamilton and DeMaio of murdering Umberger. State Supreme Court Judge Felicia Mennin sentenced Hamilton and DeMaio to 40 years to life in prison.

Barroso, who was convicted of killing Ramirez, received a 20 years to life sentence.

Continue Reading

National

Medical groups file lawsuit over Trump deletion of health information

Crucial datasets included LGBTQ, HIV resources

Published

on

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is named as a defendant in the lawsuit. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Nine private medical and public health advocacy organizations, including two from D.C., filed a lawsuit on May 20 in federal court in Seattle challenging what it calls the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’s illegal deletion of dozens or more of its webpages containing health related information, including HIV information.

The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, names as defendants Robert F. Kennedy Jr., secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and HHS itself, and several agencies operating under HHS and its directors, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and the Food and Drug Administration.

“This action challenges the widespread deletion of public health resources from federal agencies,” the lawsuit states. “Dozens (if not more) of taxpayer-funded webpages, databases, and other crucial resources have vanished since January 20, 2025, leaving doctors, nurses, researchers, and the public scrambling for information,” it says.

 “These actions have undermined the longstanding, congressionally mandated regime; irreparably harmed Plaintiffs and others who rely on these federal resources; and put the nation’s public health infrastructure in unnecessary jeopardy,” the lawsuit continues.

It adds, “The removal of public health resources was apparently prompted by two recent executive orders – one focused on ‘gender ideology’ and the other targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion (‘DEI’) programs. Defendants implemented these executive orders in a haphazard manner that resulted in the deletion (inadvertent or otherwise) of health-related websites and databases, including information related to pregnancy risks, public health datasets, information about opioid-use disorder, and many other valuable resources.”

 The lawsuit does not mention that it was President Donald Trump who issued the two executive orders in question. 

A White House spokesperson couldn’t immediately be reached for comment on the lawsuit. 

While not mentioning Trump by name, the lawsuit names as defendants in addition to HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr., Matthew Buzzelli, acting director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Jay Bhattacharya, director of the National Institutes of Health; Martin Makary, commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration; Thomas Engels, administrator of the Health Resources and Services Administration; and Charles Ezell, acting director of the Office of Personnel Management. 

The 44-page lawsuit complaint includes an addendum with a chart showing the titles or descriptions of 49 “affected resource” website pages that it says were deleted because of the executive orders. The chart shows that just four of the sites were restored after initially being deleted.

 Of the 49 sites, 15 addressed LGBTQ-related health issues and six others addressed HIV issues, according to the chart.   

“The unannounced and unprecedented deletion of these federal webpages and datasets came as a shock to the medical and scientific communities, which had come to rely on them to monitor and respond to disease outbreaks, assist physicians and other clinicians in daily care, and inform the public about a wide range of healthcare issues,” the lawsuit states.

 “Health professionals, nonprofit organizations, and state and local authorities used the websites and datasets daily in care for their patients, to provide resources to their communities, and promote public health,” it says. 

Jose Zuniga, president and CEO of the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care (IAPAC), one of the organizations that signed on as a plaintiff in the lawsuit, said in a statement that the deleted information from the HHS websites “includes essential information about LGBTQ+ health, gender and reproductive rights, clinical trial data, Mpox and other vaccine guidance and HIV prevention resources.”

 Zuniga added, “IAPAC champions evidence-based, data-informed HIV responses and we reject ideologically driven efforts that undermine public health and erase marginalized communities.”

Lisa Amore, a spokesperson for Whitman-Walker Health, D.C.’s largest LGBTQ supportive health services provider, also expressed concern about the potential impact of the HHS website deletions.

 “As the region’s leader in HIV care and prevention, Whitman-Walker Health relies on scientific data to help us drive our resources and measure our successes,” Amore said in response to a request for comment from  the Washington Blade. 

“The District of Columbia has made great strides in the fight against HIV,” Amore said. “But the removal of public facing information from the HHS website makes our collective work much harder and will set HIV care and prevention backward,” she said. 

The lawsuit calls on the court to issue a declaratory judgement that the “deletion of public health webpages and resources is unlawful and invalid” and to issue a preliminary or permanent injunction ordering government officials named as defendants in the lawsuit “to restore the public health webpages and resources that have been deleted and to maintain their web domains in accordance with their statutory duties.”

It also calls on the court to require defendant government officials to “file a status report with the Court within twenty-four hours of entry of a preliminary injunction, and at regular intervals, thereafter, confirming compliance with these orders.”

The health organizations that joined the lawsuit as plaintiffs include the Washington State Medical Association, Washington State Nurses Association, Washington Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Academy Health, Association of Nurses in AIDS Care, Fast-Track Cities Institute, International Association of Providers of AIDS Care, National LGBT Cancer Network, and Vermont Medical Society. 

The Fast-Track Cities Institute and International Association of Providers of AIDS Care are based in D.C.

Continue Reading

U.S. Federal Courts

Federal judge scraps trans-inclusive workplace discrimination protections

Ruling appears to contradict US Supreme Court precedent

Published

on

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Screen capture: YouTube)

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas has struck down guidelines by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission designed to protect against workplace harassment based on gender identity and sexual orientation.

The EEOC in April 2024 updated its guidelines to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), which determined that discrimination against transgender people constituted sex-based discrimination as proscribed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

To ensure compliance with the law, the agency recommended that employers honor their employees’ preferred pronouns while granting them access to bathrooms and allowing them to wear dress code-compliant clothing that aligns with their gender identities.

While the the guidelines are not legally binding, Kacsmaryk ruled that their issuance created “mandatory standards” exceeding the EEOC’s statutory authority that were “inconsistent with the text, history, and tradition of Title VII and recent Supreme Court precedent.”

“Title VII does not require employers or courts to blind themselves to the biological differences between men and women,” he wrote in the opinion.

The case, which was brought by the conservative think tank behind Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation, presents the greatest setback for LGBTQ inclusive workplace protections since President Donald Trump’s issuance of an executive order on the first day of his second term directing U.S. federal agencies to recognize only two genders as determined by birth sex.

Last month, top Democrats from both chambers of Congress reintroduced the Equality Act, which would codify LGBTQ-inclusive protections against discrimination into federal law, covering employment as well as areas like housing and jury service.

Continue Reading

Popular