Connect with us

National

Which Republican will Baldwin face in Wis. Senate race?

GOP competition comes to an end Tuesday

Published

on

Wisconsin residents will cast their votes on Tuesday in an open primary for one of several contenders seeking the Republican nomination to run for a U.S. Senate seat. The winner will go on to challenge presumptive Democratic nominee Tammy Baldwin in her bid to become the first openly gay U.S. senator.

The four main contenders — former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson, hedge fund manager Eric Hovde, former congressman Mark Neumann and Wisconsin Assembly Speaker Jeff Fitzgerald — have almost uniformly adopted anti-LGBT positions, including support for a U.S. constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage throughout the country.

The exception is Thompson, who stopped short of backing a Federal Marriage Amendment, but said he supports the Defense of Marriage Act. Thompson also said he opposes workplace discrimination, but hasn’t announced support for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

The latest polls give the lead to Hovde, a relative newcomer to the race who’s spent millions of his own money. According to a Public Policy Poll published Friday, Hovde leads with 27 percent support, followed by Thompson at 25, Neumann at 24 and Fitzgerald at 15.

The Wisconsin Senate primary isn’t the only race of interest in the state for the LGBT community. Wisconsin Assembly member Mark Pocan is in a contest with fellow Assembly member Kelda Helen Roys for the Democratic nomination to represent Wisconsin’s 2nd congressional district in Congress. The Washington Blade will have updates Tuesday evening on both of these races.

Former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson (photo public domain)

Tommy Thompson

Past positions: former Wisconsin governor, secretary of Health and Human Services under former President George W. Bush, candidate for Republican nomination for president in 2008 election

Polling with Baldwin: CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac poll, Baldwin ties Thompson, 47-47; Marquette University poll, Thompson leads Baldwin 48-43

Fundraising info: Net receipts: $2,467,185; net expenditures: $2,114,270; Self-financing: $132,500 (5%); cash on hand: $352,915

Positions on LGBT issues:

• In the 2008 presidential debate, Thompson said “yes” when asked if he thinks employers should be able to fire employees for being gay:
“I think that is left up to the individual business. I really sincerely believe that is an issue that business people have to got to make their own determination as to whether or not they should be.”

• Immediately afterward, Thompson retracted the statement in a clarification to CNN. He said he supports Wisconsin statewide law against sexual orientation discrimination, but stopped short of endorsing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act:
“I made a mistake. I misinterpreted the question. I thought that I answered it yes when I should have answered it no. I didn’t hear, I didn’t hear the question properly and I apologize. It’s not my position. There should be no discrimination in the workplace and I have never believed that. And, in fact, Wisconsin has one of the first laws, which I supported.

• Headed former President George W. Bush’s domestic effort against HIV/AIDS as HHS secretary, renewing Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS, announcing approval of rapid testing and directing funds to confront the epidemic.

• On Aug. 3, told CBS 58 in Wisconsin he opposes same-sex marriage and supports “the Defense of the Marriage Act,” but stopped short of supporting a Federal Marriage Amendment:
“I believe very strongly in the Defense of the Marriage Act. Marriage is one man and one woman. I support that. That’s the federal law. I’m a little gun shy of people saying, ‘We got to have constitutional amendments for this or that. I happen to like our Constitution, and, I think, you should not be going around amending constitutions. I am very much in favor of the Defense of the Marriage Act, the federal Defense of the Marriage Act, and that’s what should have, and gay marriage should be left up to the states. This is not a federal thing; this is a state thing. And so let’s leave the constitution out of it, let’s defend the federal law, one man, one woman for marriage, and allow the states to determine what they want to do on this subject.”

 

Hedge fund manager Eric Hovde (photo by WisPolitics.com via wikimedia)

Eric Hovde

Past positions: hedge fund manager, no previous public office

Polling with Baldwin: CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac poll, Baldwin leads Hovde 47-43; Marquette University poll, Baldwin leads Hovde 44-41

Fundraising info: Net receipts: $5,532,185; net expenditures: $4,945,880; Self-financing: $5,100,000 (92%); cash on hand: $586,304

Positions on LGBT issues:

• endorsed by the anti-gay group Wisconsin Family Action

• On Aug. 3, told Wisconsin’s CBS 58 he backs a Federal Marriage Amendment on the grounds of protecting religious liberties:
“Yes, I would. I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. That is my belief. In fact, if you look at the history of marriage, it comes from the church, and I don’t think it’s the government’s position to come in and impose upon religion and tell them how they should believe or what they have to accept. I mean, that’s our First Amendment. It’s freedom of religion, it’s not freedom from religion, it’s freedom of religion. So, when people get married, they’ve always, through history, in front of God in a church. That is the church right to dictate and decide on what they feel is acceptable. So, I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. And saying that, I don’t believe in discriminating against anyone, whether you’re gay or whatever. I don’t believe in any form of discrimination. But I do fundamentally marriage is between a man and a woman.”

 

Former Rep. Mark Neumann (photo by StrongWisconson via wikimedia)

Mark Neumann

Past positions: former U.S. House member, former candidate for governor and U.S. Senate

Polling with Baldwin: CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac poll, Baldwin leads Neumann 48-45; Marquette University poll, Baldwin ties Neumann 44-44

Fundraising info: Net receipts: $2,728,227; net expenditures: $2,537,482 self-financing: $235,000 (9%); cash on hand: $198,235

Positions on LGBT issues:

• As a U.S. House member, Neumann voted for the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996

• In 1996, told the New York Times he wouldn’t allow homosexuality if he were God:
“If I was elected God for a day, homosexuality wouldn’t be permitted, but nobody’s electing me God.”

• According to a 2007 Milwaukee Journal Sentinel story, he’s suggested he wouldn’t hire an openly gay staffer:
“In response to a question at a meeting of the Christian Coalition, Neumann said that if a job applicant came into his office and said he or she was homosexual, ‘I would say that’s inappropriate, and they wouldn’t be hired, because that would mean they are promoting their agenda.”

• On Aug. 3, told Wisconsin’s CBS 58 he supports Federal Marriage Amendment and DOMA, also criticized President Obama for “ignoring” DOMA (Obama actually enforces the law, but doesn’t defend it in court):
“I would certainly support a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman, the way it has been through the whole history of the United States of America. … When I was in Congress I was happy to work to pass the Defense of Marriage Act, which did exactly that, and it’s unfortunate that Barack Obama in his own actions has decided to simply ignore the law that is on the books called the Defense of Marriage Act. … Being president of the United States does not empower you to do as you see fit; there are still laws of the land and you’re sworn to uphold those laws of the land.

 

Wisconsin Assembly Speaker Jeff Fitzgerald (photo by WisPolitics.com via wikimedia)

Jeff Fitzgerald

Past positions: speaker of the Wisconsin Assembly

Polling with Baldwin: CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac poll, Baldwin leads Fitzgerald 51-39; Marquette University poll, Baldwin leads Fitzgerald 45-40

Fundraising info: Net receipts: $159,021; net expenditures: $115,517; self-financing: $0 (0%); cash on hand: $39,368

Positions on LGBT issues:

• Voted for statute against same-sex marriage in 2003 as well as constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage in 2004 and 2006

• Voted to strip domestic partnerships — both the benefits and the registry in the same amendment — from the budget in 2009

• On Aug. 3, told Wisconsin’s CBS 58 that he ‘d back a Federal Marriage Amendment:
“Yeah, and I have in the state. We had a constitutional amendment here in the state. I believe marriage should between one man and one woman and I would stick by that on the federal level as well.”

 

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

The White House

Trump proclamation targets trans rights as State Dept. shifts visa policy

Recent policy actions from the White House limit transgender rights in sports, immigration visas, and overarching federal policy.

Published

on

President Donald Trump stands in the Roosevelt Room in December 2025. (Washington Blade Photo by Joe Reberkenny)

In a proclamation issued by the Trump White House Thursday night, the president said he would, among other things, “restore public safety” and continue “upholding the rule of law,” while promoting policies that restrict the rights of transgender people.

“We are keeping men out of women’s sports, enforcing Title IX as it was originally written, and ensuring colleges preserve — and, where possible, expand — scholarships and roster opportunities for female athletes,” the proclamation reads. “At the same time, we are restoring public safety and upholding the rule of law in every city so women, children, and families can feel safe and secure.”

The statement comes amid a broader series of actions by the Trump administration targeting transgender people across multiple federal policy areas, including education, health care, and immigration. A nearly complete list of policies the current administration has put forward can be found on KFF.org.

One day before the proclamation was issued, the U.S. State Department announced changes to visa regulations that could impact transgender and gender-nonconforming people seeking entry into the United States.

The policy, published March 11 and scheduled to take effect April 10, introduces changes to the Diversity Immigrant Visa Program, commonly known as the “DV Program.” The rule is framed by the department as an effort to strengthen oversight and prevent fraud within the visa lottery system, which allocates a limited number of immigrant visas annually to applicants from countries with historically low rates of immigration to the United States.

However, the updated language also standardizes the use of the term “sex” in federal regulations in place of “gender,” a change that LGBTQ advocates say could create additional barriers for transgender and gender-diverse applicants.

The policy states: “The Department of State (‘Department’) is amending regulations governing the Diversity Immigrant Visa Program (‘DV Program’) to improve the integrity of, and combat fraud in, the program. These amendments require a petitioner to the DV Program to provide valid, unexpired passport information and to upload a scan of the biographic and signature page in the electronic entry form or otherwise indicate that he or she is exempt from this requirement. Additionally, the Department is standardizing and amending its regulations to add the word ‘shall’ to simplify guidance for consular officers; ensure the use of the term ‘sex’ in lieu of ‘gender’; and replace the term ‘age’ in the DV Program regulations with the phrase ‘date of birth’ to accurately reflect the information collected and maintained by the Department during the immigrant visa process.”

Advocates say the shift toward using “sex” rather than “gender” in federal immigration rules reflects a broader push by the administration to roll back recognition of transgender identities in federal policy.

According to the National Center for Transgender Equality, an estimated 15,000 to 50,000 undocumented transgender immigrants currently live in the United States, with many entering the country to seek refuge from persecution and hostile governments in their home countries.

Continue Reading

Florida

Fla. House passes ‘Anti-Diversity’ bill

Measure could open door to overturning local LGBTQ rights protections

Published

on

(Photo by Catella via Bigstock)

The Florida House of Representatives on March 10 voted 77-37 to approve an “Anti-Diversity in Local Government” bill that opponents have called an extreme and sweeping measure that, among other things, could overturn local LGBTQ rights protections.

The House vote came six days after the Florida Senate voted 25-11 to pass the same bill, opening the way to send it to Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis, who supports the bill and has said he would sign it into law.

Equality Florida, a statewide LGBTQ advocacy organization that opposed the legislation, issued a statement saying the bill “would ban, repeal, and defund any local government programming, policy, or activity that provides ‘preferential treatment or special benefits’ or is designed or implemented with respect to race, color, sex, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or gender identity.”

The statement added that the bill would also threaten city and county officials with removal from office “for activities vaguely labeled as DEI,” with only limited exceptions.

“Written in broad and ambiguous language, the bill is the most extreme of its kind in the country, creating confusion and fear for local governments that recognize LGBTQ residents and other communities that contribute to strength and vibrancy of Florida cities,” the group said in a separate statement released on March 10.

The Miami Herald reports that state Sen. Clay Yarborough (R-Jacksonville), the lead sponsor of the bill in the Senate, said he added language to the bill that would allow the city of Orlando to continue to support the Pulse nightclub memorial, a site honoring 49 mostly LGBTQ people killed in the 2016 mass shooting at the LGBTQ nightclub.

But the Equality Florida statement expresses concern that the bill can be used to target LGBTQ programs and protections.

“Debate over the bill made expressly clear that LGBTQ people were a central target of the legislation,” the group’s statement says. “The public record, the bill sponsors’ own statements, and hours of legislative debate revealed the animus driving the effort to pressure local governments into pulling back from recognizing or resourcing programs targeting LGBTQ residents and other historically marginalized communities,” the statement says.

But the statement also notes that following outspoken requests by local officials, sponsors of the bill agreed to several amendments “ensuring local governments can continue to permit Pride festivals, even while navigating new restrictions on supporting or promoting them.”     

The statement adds, “Florida’s LGBTQ community knows all too well how to fight back against unjust laws. Just as we did, following the passage of Florida’s notorious ‘Don’t Say Gay or Trans’ law, we will fight every step of the way to limit the impact of this legislation, including in the courts.”

Continue Reading

The White House

Trump will refuse to sign voting bill without anti-trans provisions

Measure described as ‘Jim Crow 2.0’

Published

on

President Donald Trump speaks at the State of the Union address at the U.S. Capitol on Feb. 24, 2026. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

President Donald Trump said he will refuse to sign any legislation into law unless Congress passes the “SAVE Act,” pressuring lawmakers to move forward with the controversial voting bill.

In posts on Truth Social and other social media platforms, the 47th president emphasized the importance of Republican lawmakers pushing the legislation through while also using the opportunity to denounce gender-affirming care.

“I, as President, will not sign other Bills until this is passed, AND NOT THE WATERED DOWN VERSION — GO FOR THE GOLD,” Trump posted. “MUST SHOW VOTER I.D. & PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP: NO MAIL-IN BALLOTS EXCEPT FOR MILITARY — ILLNESS, DISABILITY, TRAVEL: NO MEN IN WOMEN’S SPORTS: NO TRANSGENDER MUTILIZATION FOR CHILDREN! DO NOT FAIL!!!”

The proposed Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act would amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require in-person proof of citizenship for anyone seeking to vote in U.S. elections. Trump has also called for the legislation to include a ban on gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, even with parental consent.

“This is a huge priority for the president. He added on some priorities to the SAVE America Act in recent days, namely, no transgender transition surgeries for minors. We are not gonna tolerate the mutilation of young children in this country. No men in women’s sports,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said. “The president putting all of these priorities together speaks to how common sense they are.”

The comments mark the first time the White House has publicly confirmed that Trump is pushing to attach anti-trans policies to the SAVE Act.

The bill would also require the removal of undocumented immigrants from existing voter rolls and allow election officials who fail to enforce the proof-of-citizenship requirement to be sued.

It is already illegal for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. Current safeguards include requirements such as providing a Social Security number when registering to vote, cross-checking voter rolls with federal data and, in some states, requiring identification at the polls.

Trump began pushing for the legislation during his State of the Union address last month, where he singled out Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) by name while criticizing the lack of movement on the bill.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has denounced the legislation as “Jim Crow 2.0” and said it has little chance of advancing through the Senate, calling it “dead on arrival.”

In remarks on the Senate floor, Schumer said “the SAVE Act includes such extreme voter registration requirements that, if enacted, could disenfranchise 21 million American citizens.”

Trump has repeatedly used political messaging around trans youth and gender-affirming care as part of broader cultural and policy debates during his presidency — most recently during his State of the Union address, where he cited the case of Sage Blair, a Virginia teenager whose school allegedly encouraged her to transition without her parents’ consent.

LGBTQ advocates — including those familiar with Blair’s story — say the situation was far more complex than described and argue that using a single anecdote to justify sweeping federal restrictions could place trans people, particularly youth, at greater risk.

Continue Reading

Popular