National
Romney’s veep options, from bad to worse
Five potential candidates have records hostile to LGBT rights
Amid the media frenzy over who Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney will select as his running mate, one thing is clear: the leading candidates’ positions on LGBT issues range from bad to downright hostile.
The Washington Blade examined the records of five prospective vice presidential candidates to see where they stand on LGBT issues: former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, U.S. Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal. Each of the potential choices has views on LGBT rights similar to Romney’s, who says he opposes marriage rights for gay couples, but also opposes discrimination — without backing any particular measure to protect LGBT people from discrimination.
One pick that is receiving considerable media attention is Pawlenty, who was a Republican presidential contender early on before he dropped out of the race after his poor showing in the Iowa Ames straw poll. There is media speculation that he tops the list for running mates being vetted by the Romney campaign, although Sunday on CBS’ “Face the Nation” he dismissed the rumors, saying he’s “encouraged people who asked this question in the campaign to look at other prospects.”
Pawlenty took a hardline on marriage over the course of his presidential campaign, signing — albeit belatedly — an anti-gay pledge from the National Organization for Marriage to back a Federal Marriage Amendment, defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court and establish a presidential commission on “religious liberty” to investigate the alleged harassment of opponents of same-sex marriage.
“I don’t think all domestic relationships are the same as traditional marriage,” Pawlenty said on CNN in July. “Marriage between a man and a woman is something that should remain elevated socially, culturally, and practically, legally, morally in our society.”
Another possibility for Romney who is receiving considerable attention is Portman, who’s served for two decades as a public official as a member of Congress, the U.S. Trade Representative and director of the Office of Management & Budget. On Tuesday, Portman appeared to be cozying up to Romney, telling the Washington Reuters Summit the candidate would be “willing to risk being a one-term president in order to make the tough decisions that are going to be required.”
The Ohio senator made headlines when he suggested that he opposes the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, after telling ThinkProgress that he has concerns about litigation that could follow if the legislation were passed.
“What I’m concerned about in Paycheck Fairness and other legislation like that is the fact that it will spawn a lot of litigation the way the legislation is written,” Portman said. “So you don’t want it to be a boon to lawyers, you want it to actually help people. But no one should discriminate.”
Tico Almeida, president of Freedom to Work, said the perception that Portman is opposed to ENDA is inconsistent with what he’s heard based on meetings with the senator’s staff and said Portman — along with “a significant number” of Republican senators — may vote “yes” on the bill.
“Based on Freedom to Work’s conversations with the office of Sen. Portman, we believe he might vote ‘yes’ on ENDA if Sen. Harry Reid brings it to the floor of the Senate for a vote,” Almeida said. “The only way to know for sure is for Reid to fulfill a promise he made three years ago by finally bringing ENDA to the Senate floor.”
Portman’s office didn’t immediately respond to a request to clarify the senator’s position on ENDA. Any such vote in favor of ENDA would represent a change of heart for Portman based on his anti-gay votes while serving as a member of the U.S. House from 1993 to 2005. Portman voted in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act and the Federal Marriage Amendment. In 1999, Portman voted in favor of barring D.C. same-sex couples from adopting children.
Chris Seelbach, a gay Cincinnati City Council member, said he doubts Portman would support LGBT issues if he were elected as vice president based on those votes.
“Based on Sen. Portman’s consistent votes against LGBT families, it seems very clear that he would be no friend to the gay community if elected vice president,” Seelbach said.
Romney is expected to name his running mate prior to the Republican National Convention, which will take place this year during the week of Aug. 27 in Tampa, Fla. Andrea Saul, a Romney campaign spokesperson, declined to comment on any possible selection saying, “We don’t discuss the VP process, sorry.”
The No. 2 person on the Republican presidential ticket could have bearing on how gay Americans who lean conservative may vote in November. Christian Berle, deputy executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, said the selection will impact whether the organization endorses Romney this fall.
“As Log Cabin Republicans considers many factors in making a potential endorsement, we’ll of course take into account whom will be in such a critical position,” Berle said. “If Gov. Romney and Republicans want to be successful in November, they must improve their position among moderates, women and younger voters with a message entirely focused around jobs and the economy.”
It’s for this reason that Berle praised Ryan, who was among the 159 Republicans who voted for a gay-only version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act when it came to the House floor in 2007. Ryan later said he took criticism for his vote, but acknowledged he has gay friends, saying, “They didn’t roll out of bed one morning and choose to be gay. That’s who they are.”
Berle said Ryan’s vote for the non-inclusive ENDA in 2007 demonstrates that he recognizes “like all Americans that the workplace needs to be about meritocracy and productivity.”
But besides this vote, Ryan’s record on LGBT issues has hardly been stellar. Ryan voted in the subsequent Congress against hate crimes protection legislation and “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal. The lawmaker also expressed opposition to same-sex marriage, saying on NBC’s “Meet the Press” last year, “I support the Wisconsin Amendment to define marriage between a man and a woman.”
Katie Belanger, executive director of Fair Wisconsin, dismissed the notion that a Vice President Ryan would be a champion for LGBT equality upon taking the oath of office.
“Rep. Ryan has maintained a consistently anti-fairness voting record on issues of importance to our community, during the last five congressional sessions, including voting in 2002 against a policy that members of Congress voluntarily adopted to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation in their own congressional offices,” she said.
U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio (photo by Gage Skidmore via wikimedia)
Many pundits have speculated that Rubio is on the list of names Romney is considering for his running mate. Romney said earlier this month the senator was being “thoroughly vetted” for a position as No. 2 on his ticket.
New to federal office, Rubio hasn’t been called on to vote on LGBT issues yet, although he’s been closely aligned with the conservative Tea Party movement. Among his “no” votes were against an LGBT-inclusive reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act.
Rubio has expressed differing views from Romney on the Federal Marriage Amendment, saying “ultimately marriage is regulated by states,” but has expressed opposition to same-sex marriage based on his religious beliefs.
“I believe marriage is a unique and specific institution that is the result of thousands of years of wisdom, which concluded that the ideal — not the only way but certainly the ideal — situation to raise children to become productive and healthy humans is in a home with a father and mother married to each other,” Rubio said.
Nadine Smith, executive director of Equality Florida, said the LGBT community wouldn’t be able to trust Rubio if he were vice president during a Romney administration.
“I don’t think he believes the foolishness he says, he’s pandering as fast as he can, and in that sense, he and Romney are made for each other,” Smith said. “They’re both weather vanes.”
Another potential running mate is Jindal, who was considered a potential candidate for president prior to his widely panned response to President Obama’s State of the Union address in 2009. Last month, Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist praised Jindal in an op-ed for Politico, later reportedly saying “Jindal is a leading option” for vice president.
But Jindal is known for having anti-gay views and maintaining close ties with anti-gay figures. Jindal campaigned for governor on rescinding an order put in place by Democratic Gov. Kathleen Blanco protecting gay state workers from discrimination — a pledge he fulfilled upon taking office.
Once elected, Jindal established a Louisiana Commission on Marriage & Family, appointing to the body anti-gay activists such as the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins and the Alliance Defense Fund’s Michael Johnson.
SarahJane Brady, managing director of the Forum For Equality Louisiana, said Jindal has “continuously repressed and ignored the needs” of LGBT people in Louisiana.
“Bobby Jindal has proven himself repeatedly to be an enemy of fairness and equality,” Brady said. “Should Gov. Romney choose Bobby Jindal to be his running mate, that would send a message of open hostility to the LGBT community.”
National
HRC condemns DoE removal of LGBTQ bullying data from federal survey
Organization cites rise in homophobic, transphobic policies, worse mental health outcomes
The Human Rights Campaign is slamming the White House — and the Department of Education — following their removal of some LGBTQ bullying data from federal data collection.
The Civil Rights Data Collection is a mandated survey of all public school districts that collects figures on a wide variety of statistics about students — including demographics that include race, ethnicity, sex, disability status, and English learner status; course-level enrollment data, such as how many students are enrolled in advanced placement or honors classes; and school climate information, such as rates of bullying, harassment, suspensions, and expulsions.
That data collection has been ongoing since 1968 — nearly six decades — but now has a major change in what questions are being asked, or not asked, that advocates are largely attributing to the Trump-Vance administration’s culture war fight on LGBTQ children in the country.
Changes to the 2025-2026 survey questions — approved by the Office of Budget and Management in July — eliminated a space for schools to report how many students identify as nonbinary, how often those students are victims of harassment and bullying, and whether school districts have policies prohibiting gender identity-based incidents.
K-12 Dive, a publication that focuses its reporting on news related to K-12 education, first published a list of these data collection changes from 2024-2025 to 2025-2026.
These questions, as well as others that included LGBTQ student topics on treatment in schools, were added to the CRDC under the Biden-Harris administration. By including these questions, policymakers hoped this would lead to increased investigations into discrimination complaints, initiate compliance reviews, and provide policy guidance to districts, according to Education Department documents.
The CRDC also eliminated the mention of “gender identity” from the definition of rape and sexual assault. The prior collection of data (before the Trump-Vance administration changed it) defined rape as something that could be done to “all students, regardless of sex, or sexual orientation, or gender identity.” Now, the new data collection questions say, “All students, regardless of sex, or sexual orientation can be victims of rape,” removing “gender identity” from the new definition.
By removing and changing definitions, this could have a real-world impact on some of the school’s most vulnerable students. According to CRDC data from 2021-2022, more than 1,800 school districts reported enrolling one or more nonbinary students.
Additional data also shows that the changes to data collection is harming public school students. U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee released a report in April finding that the Trump-Vance administration’s efforts to all but close the Department of Education Office for Civil Rights has left students facing discrimination and harassment throughout the country without the federal recourse they are entitled to under federal law.
The Williams Institute, a think tank that collects data and conducts research on issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity, has data indicating the true number of nonbinary and transgender children is much higher — they estimate that for children ages 13 to 17, nearly 724,000 identify as nonbinary or trans.
This is in line with a slew of policies pushed by the Trump-Vance administration since their federal takeover. Within his first day in office, President Donald Trump signed Executive Order 14168, titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.” This directive attempts to make the federal definition of gender unchangeable, determined by sex assigned at birth alone.
Within his first month of his second term, Trump issued Executive Order 14187, titled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation.” The order directs federal agencies to restrict gender-affirming medical care — including puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgeries — for individuals under the age of 19.
He also pushed multiple anti-trans executive orders, including Executive Order 14201, “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports,” and Executive Order 14183, “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” targeting trans athletes and military members, respectively.
These policies have a real-world impact on trans people.
The Trevor Project, a nonprofit dedicated to crisis and suicide prevention for LGBTQ people under 25, reported that, for the seventh year in a row, LGBTQ youth are at higher risk for suicide as a result of mistreatment and stigmatization.
Trevor Project data showed that nearly 60 percent of LGBTQ young people ages 13-17 said they were bullied in the past year, and that 36 percent of LGBTQ youth seriously considered suicide in the last year. The data shows a bigger discrepancy for trans youth, with that number hovering around 40 percent considering suicide.
HRC President Kelley Robinson issued a statement following the approval of the new data collection questions that leaves LGBTQ students’ bullying statistics under — if not completely unreported.
“If there was even a shadow of a doubt, this latest move by the Trump administration makes it abundantly clear they do not care about the safety of LGBTQ+ students, and trans students in particular,” Robinson said. “These are adults who should be protecting our kids. And instead, they are making sure bullying and harassment are not tracked. If they are not tracked, bullying and harassment cannot be prevented or stopped — which is exactly what the Trump administration wants. Parents deserve to know their kids are safe at school, and every single young person deserves dignity and safety at school. Anything less is plain evil.”
HRC has a “Welcoming Schools” initiative that they say is the “most comprehensive” bias-based bullying prevention program in the nation. The program includes LGBTQ and gender-inclusive resources for schools, help navigating special education and disability resources for LGBTQ-identifying students, and other tools to help schools become more inclusive.
This program has been in effect for nearly two decades and, according to HRC, reaches nearly 750,000 students.
The Washington Blade reached out to both the Department of Education and Office of Management and Budget for comment but did not receive a response by publication time.
Michigan
Progressives score victory as El-Sayed wins Mich. Senate primary
Democratic newcomer will face Rogers in November
Michigan held its primary on Tuesday, allowing the two major political parties to select their nominees to go head-to-head for the state’s U.S. Senate seat.
NBC News called the Democratic race early, giving the victory to physician Abdul El-Sayed over incumbent U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) in an extremely close primary. El-Sayed won 48.5 percent of the primary vote, with Stevens trailing by just one percentage point at 47.5 percent.
Both candidates have campagined on supporting the LGBTQ community through different avenues— for El-Sayed he focused on his past promoting HIV and PrEP funding and research. Stevens focused on her legislative history working to support transgender rights in the state.
This is a major win for progressive Democrats, who have been bearing the brunt of political attacks from President Donald Trump, the Republican Party, and centrist Democrats.
El-Sayed, a former health director in Detroit, ran his campaign largely on making life in the Great Lakes State more affordable amid rising costs. His policies include promoting “Medicare for All,” pushing health policy that targets the regressive efforts of the Trump-Vance administration that rolls back funding for both Women and LGBTQ people, minimizing the growing amount of money in politics, and he was very vocal in his criticism of Stevens for supporting aid to Israel. He was endorsed by two major progressives — U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-N.Y.).
Stevens, the four-term congresswoman, is much closer to establishment Democrats on policy than El-Sayed.
During her time in the federal government, she has consistently supported the Equality Act, which would add sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. She has also emphasized supporting local manufacturing and lowering housing costs in the state.
She was named to Advocates for Trans Equality’s 118th Congressional Champions list for her pro-trans policies and was endorsed by establishment heavy hitters Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).
The contentious race boiled down not only to Michigan affairs but also extended to international conflicts — namely Palestine. (South Africa has filed a case in the International Court of Justice in The Hague that accuses Israel of committing genocide in the Gaza Strip after Oct. 7.) This primary also acted as one of the first major races that pushed back against AIPAC, a lobbying group that works to promote pro-Israel candidates in U.S. elections. The group has been involved in domestic politics since 1954.
AIPAC devoted a massive amount of money to this race.
The Associated Press reported that the pro-Israel lobbying group spent more than $30 million on ads against El-Sayed because of his vocal denunciation of Israel and his continued criticism of its policies towards Palestine.
Michigan has a large Muslim and Arab American population, which could, in part, explain how El-Sayed was able to win.
The Republican side was far less competitive. Former U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) ran unopposed and clinched the GOP nomination. He has consistently held anti-LGBTQ positions, going as far as voting multiple times for a federal constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, voting against repealing the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, and supporting efforts to directly target the attempted expansion of Title IX protections to include trans people.
El-Sayed will face off against Rogers in November for Michigan’s Senate seat — one that could have lasting impacts not only on the state’s politics but also on the Republicans’ narrow Senate majority and Trump’s political agenda.
National
White House orders warning signs at Smithsonian over gender identity exhibits
Administration criticizes National Museum of American History
The Trump administration will install temporary warning signs outside the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History after releasing a report accusing the museum of promoting what it calls “radical” gender ideology and other politically biased content.
According to the Executive Order, “For purposes of policy formulation under EO 14253, this review of the National Museum of American History concludes that NMAH, by the intention and at the direction of current Museum and Smithsonian leadership, has become subject to institutional capture by a radical, activist ideology that is fundamentally opposed to telling the noble, honest story of the great country we know and love.”
Executive Order 14253 refers to what the White House has deemed the “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History” order. Therefore, the Trump administration has said it will take all available steps to ensure that the issues in the report are addressed and rectified.
Without specifying, the White House has stated that warnings will be posted along NMAH to alert visitors to sections of the museum it has deemed are in violation according to the report.
“The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National Park Service (NPS) and in coordination with the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, shall install temporary signage along the NPS-maintained sidewalks and walkways used by the public to access the Museum, informing visitors of the findings of the Report and of the policy set forth in section 1 of this order,” the Executive Order states.
The warnings were raised in a 162-page report issued by the Domestic Policy Council. The report detailed ways in which the National Museum of American History (NMAH) has “poorly” portrayed American history and insufficiently highlighted the founding story during America 250th celebrations.
The report outlined key findings of the NMAH. One of these findings was the Center for Restorative History within the museum, which has stated its purpose is to “encourage systemic change” by highlighting diverse groups. However, the report states that it highlights every group of Americans except for straight and white Americans.
The Domestic Policy Council accused the museum of engaging in “transgender activism.” According to the report, examples include referring to “biological men” as women or girls, displaying what it describes as sexually suggestive content, and incorporating discussions of gender fluidity, gender identity, and gender nonconformity into the museum’s educational curriculum, “Becoming US.”
The report also criticizes the curriculum for using the term “transgender” when discussing gender-nonconforming people and encouraging individuals to ask a person’s pronouns when meeting them. It further objects to exhibits stating that “transgender, nonbinary, and cisgender female athletes” continue to struggle for and demand equality.
It also condemns what it refers to as explicit content in an exhibition, “Girlhood (It’s Complicated)”, such as chest binders, questioning gender testing in women’s sports, and referring to biological females as “people inhabiting female bodies.”
Additionally, the report accuses the museum of no longer participating in flag-celebrating ceremonies because it was “too busy” preparing for June Pride and WorldPride events. It states, “As Director Hartig explained in a June 2024 presentation, all her attention was focused on flying the Smithsonian Pride Alliance’s ‘intersexual pride flag during June’ in 2023 and 2024.”
On July 9, the American Historical Association issued a statement rejecting the report’s findings.
In regard to the report, it states, “Its anonymous authors overlook a central lesson of the nation’s founding: the United States was forged by finding common purpose amid intense divisions, conflicts, and disagreements.” They argue that only “honest history” can tell the true history of the nation.
House Republicans led a subcommittee hearing that questioned Smithsonian Director Hartig extensively. A main focus of the questions was on the exhibits related to gender identity and whether they were appropriate. In the hearing, Rep. Nancy Mace asked: “When was your gender revealed to you, Dr. Hartig?”
In response to questioning, Hartig stated that the institution is nonpartisan and does not push a specific agenda.
Hartig published a two-page statement ahead of her hearing outlining her thoughts on the situation. In the report, she states that the institution is always open to criticism and will continue to look for ways to improve, but she sees the report as misleading.
“I can attest that the report does not fairly characterize the full body of work at this museum. I am familiar with the depth and breadth of our collections, exhibits, and programming. And while I recognize there is always room for improvement, I also know the beauty, inspiration, and expertise that exists in our museum,” Hartig wrote.
Democrats created their own 16-page report as a rebuttal to the Domestic Policy Council’s report. It argued that the attacks by the current Trump administration are another example of its attempt to rewrite history. Additionally, the report states that no policy changes were included in the Executive Order, as that is beyond the President’s role. “The Report recommends nothing. That is no accident. To recommend an action, the Report would need to identify who is legally empowered to take it, and its own opening chapter concedes the President’s only power is to ‘urge’,” House Democrats wrote.
It is still unclear when the temporary warnings will be installed or what form they will take beyond the requirements outlined in the executive order.
An exhibit at the Smithsonian. (Washington Blade photo by Landon Shackelford)
HRC condemns DoE removal of LGBTQ bullying data from federal survey
Dutch PM: More needs to be done to defend trans rights
HRC files class action over federal ban on gender-affirming care coverage
Perez Hilton’s live breakdown reveals social media mental health crisis
Mr. Henry’s to host 60th anniversary party
PHOTOS: Petal Release Party
My evening with Madonna
Remembering Elliot Leonard, generous visionary who helped LGBTQ communities thrive
Buttigieg indicates he may run for president in 2028
