National
HRC scorecard shows drop in support for LGBT rights in Congress
Support for same-sex marriage measured for first time
HRC’s troubling statistics show Congress is less supportive of LGBT issues than in 2010. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
Support for LGBT equality declined significantly in Congress during the past two years compared to the previous two-year period, according to a Congressional Scorecard for the 112th Congress released on Thursday by the Human Rights Campaign.
The scorecard, which HRC has compiled for each two-year session of Congress since 1989, shows that the average score for members of the House of Representatives on LGBT issues dropped from 50.8 percent in the 111th Congress to 40 percent in the current Congress.
For the Senate, the HRC Scorecard shows a drop in support from 57.3 percent in the 111th Congress to 35 percent in the current 112th Congress.
“While we continue to make advancements towards equality in Washington, the 112th Congress has more anti-equality members set on halting our progress,” said HRC President Chad Griffin.
“Still, we continued pushing the envelope and made history with the first ever hearing and Senate Judiciary Committee approval of the Respect for Marriage Act, legislation repealing the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act,” Griffin said.
The HRC Scorecard evaluates all 435 House members and 100 senators based on a rating scale of 0 to 100 on a wide range of LGBT issues, including members’ co-sponsorship of pro-LGBT bills and their votes on bills or amendments deemed LGBT supportive or hostile to LGBT rights.
Similar to its Scorecard ratings of past years, the latest HRC Scorecard shows a breakdown of its ratings along party lines, with a majority of Democrats receiving the highest scores and most Republicans receiving low scores.
In the House, 115 members– all Democrats — received a perfect score of 100. Of the House members that received a “0” score, 211 are Republicans and four are Democrats.
In the Senate, 22 members received a 100 percent score – all Democrats. Of the Senators receiving a “0” score, 14 are Republicans and none are Democrats.
In a statement released Thursday, HRC said the Scorecard for the 112th Congress for the first time asked members of Congress whether they support the legal recognition of civil marriage for same-sex couples.
According to the Scorecard, 144 House members and 26 senators said they support civil marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples. Of the House members expressing support for marriage equality, 143 are Democrats. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) was the only Republican House member to express support for same-sex marriage equality.
Of the 26 senators stating they support same-sex marriage equality, all are Democrats.
“While marriage-related issues can arise in Congress, the baseline question about where a senator or representative stands on this issue is of great importance to all fair-minded Americans,” HRC said in its statement accompanying the Scorecard.
However, HRC spokesperson Paul Guequierre told the Washington Blade that the answers lawmakers gave to the question on whether they support legalizing same-sex civil marriage was not included in the calculation of the scores assigned to House and Senate members.
Among House members representing D.C. area districts, Congressional Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) received a score of 100.
Reps. Donna Edwards and Chris Van Hollen, all Democrats from Maryland, each received a 100 rating and Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) received a 95 rating. Maryland Sens. Barbara Mikulski and Benjamin Cardin, both Democrats, each received a 100 rating.
In Virginia, Democratic U.S. Sens. Mark Warner and Jim Webb each received a 76 rating. Among Virginia’s D.C. area House members, Democrats Jim Moran and Gerald Connolly received a 100. Republican Frank Wolf received a rating of 15.
“LGBT equality was prominent in the 112th Congress, giving us great cause for optimism despite the fact that opponents of equality gained seats halting our progress,” said Allison Herwitt, HRC’s legislative director. “Yet while the American people move forward on these issues, the majority of Congress – particularly the House –continues to be out of touch.”
Among the legislation and votes HRC used to rate Senators and House members on its Congressional Scorecard were the following:
- The Senate votes to confirm openly gay U.S. District Court judge nominee J. Paul Oetken and lesbian U.S. District Court judge nominee Alison Nathan.
- Co-sponsorship of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, or ENDA, which would ban private sector employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
- Co-sponsorship of the Respect for Marriage Act, which calls for repealing the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA that bans federal recognition of same-sex marriage.
- Co-sponsorship of the Uniting American Families Act, which would provide equal immigration rights to foreign born same-sex partners of American citizens.
- Co-sponsorship of the Domestic Partnership Benefits & Obligation Act, which would provide spousal health care and other benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees.
- Senate vote on the Hutchinson Amendment to the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act, which eliminated provisions from the bill that would have given domestic violence related protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
Tennessee
Tenn. lawmakers pass transgender “watch list” bill
State Senate to consider measure on Wednesday
The Tennessee House of Representatives passed a bill last week to create a transgender “watch list” that also pushes detransition medical treatment. The state Senate will consider it on Wednesday.
House Bill 754/State Bill 676 has been deemed “ugly” by LGBTQ advocates and criticized by healthcare information litigators as a major privacy concern.
The bill would require “gender clinics accepting funds from this state to perform gender transition procedures to also perform detransition procedures; requires insurance entities providing coverage of gender transition procedures to also cover detransition procedures; requires certain gender clinics and insurance entities to report information regarding detransition procedures to the department of health.”
It would require that any gender-affirming care-providing clinics share the date, age, and sex of patients; any drugs prescribed (dosage, frequency, duration, and method administered); the state and county; the name, contact information, and medical specialty of the healthcare professional who prescribed the treatment; and any past medical history related to “neurological, behavioral, or mental health conditions.” It would also mandate additional information if surgical intervention is prescribed, including details on which healthcare professional made a referral and when.
HB 0754 would also require the state to produce a “comprehensive annual statistical report,” with all collected data shared with the heads of the legislature and the legislative librarian, and eventually published online for public access.
The bill also reframes detransitioning as a major focus of gender-affirming healthcare — despite studies showing that the number of trans people who detransition is statistically quite low, around 13 percent, and is often the result of external pressures (such as discrimination or family) rather than an issue with their gender identity.
This legislation stands in sharp contrast to federal protections restricting what healthcare information can be shared. In 1996, Congress passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, requiring protections for all “individually identifiable health information,” including medical records, conversations, billing information, and other patient data.
Margaret Riley, professor of law, public health sciences, and public policy at the University of Virginia, has written about similar efforts at the federal level, noting the Trump-Vance administration’s push to subpoena multiple hospitals’ records of gender-affirming care for trans patients despite no claims — or proof — that a crime was committed.
It has “sown fear and concern, both among people whose information is sought and among the doctors and other providers who offer such care. Some health providers have reportedly decided to no longer provide gender-affirming care to minors as a result of the inquiries, even in states where that care is legal.” She wrote in an article on the Conversation, where she goes further, pointing out that the push, mostly from conservative members of the government, are pushing extracting this private information “while giving no inkling of any alleged crimes that may have been committed.”
State Rep. Jeremy Faison (R-Cosby), the bill’s sponsor, said in a press conference two weeks ago that he has met dozens of individuals who sought to transition genders and ultimately detransitioned. In committee, an individual testified in support of the bill, claiming that while insurance paid for gender-affirming care, detransition care was not covered.
“I believe that we as a society are going to look back on this time that really burst out in 2014 and think, ‘Dear God, What were we thinking? This was as dumb as frontal lobotomies,’” Faison said of gender-affirming care. “I think we’re going to look back on society one day and think that.”
Jennifer Levi, GLAD Law’s senior director of Transgender and Queer Rights, shared with PBS last year that legislation like this changes the entire concept of HIPAA rights for trans Americans in ways that are invasive and unnecessary.
“It turns doctor-patient confidentiality into government surveillance,” Levi said, later emphasizing this will cause fewer people to seek out the care that they need. “It’s chilling.”
The Washington Blade reached out to the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, which shared this statement from Executive Director Miriam Nemeth:
“HB 754/SB 676 continues the ugly legacy of Tennessee legislators’ attacks on the lives of transgender Tennesseans. Most Tennesseans, regardless of political views, oppose government databases tracking medical decisions made between patients and their doctors. The same should be true here. The state does not threaten to end the livelihood of doctors and fine them $150,000 for safeguarding the sensitive information of people with diabetes, depression, cancer, or other conditions. Trans people and intersex people deserve the same safety, privacy, and equal treatment under the law as everyone else.”
National
Glisten’s 30th annual Day of Silence to take place April 10
Campaign began as student-led protests against anti-LGBTQ bullying, discrimination
Glisten’s 30th annual Day of Silence will take place on April 10.
The annual Day of Silence began as a student-led protest in response to bullying and discrimination that LGBTQ students face. It is now a national campaign for the LGBTQ community and their allies to come together for LGBTQ youth.
It takes place annually and has multiple ways for supporters to get involved in the movement.
Glisten, originally GLSEN, champions LGBTQ issues in schools, grades K-12. Glisten’s mission is to create more inclusive and accepting environments for LGBTQ students through curriculum, supportive measures, education campaigns, and engagement, such as the Day of Silence.
There are three main ways for the community to get involved in the Day of Silence.
Glisten has a Day of Silence frame, a series of pictures used as profile photos across social media that feature individuals holding signs. The signs allow for personalization, by providing a space to put the individual’s name, followed by filling in the prompt “ … and I am ENDING the silence by…”
Participants are encouraged to post the photo on social media and use it as a profile picture. The templates can be found on Google Drive through this link.
Using #DayOfSilence and #NSCS, as well as tagging Glisten’s official Page @glistencommunity, is another way to participate in the Day of Silence.
Glisten also encourages participants to tag creators, friends, family and use a call to action in their caption, to call attention to the facts and stories behind the Day of Silence.
“Today’s administration in the U.S. wants us to stay silent, submit to their biased and hurtful conformity, and stop fighting for our right to be authentically ourselves,” said Glisten CEO Melanie Willingham-Jaggers. “We urge supporters to use their social platforms and check in with local chapters to be boots on the ground to help LGBTQ+ students feel seen, heard, supported, and less alone. By participating in the ‘Day of Silence,’ you are showing solidarity with young people as they navigate identity, safety, and belonging. Our voices matter.”
South Carolina
Man faces first S.C. ‘hate intimidation’ charge
Timothy Truett allegedly shot at gay club in Myrtle Beach on April 1
A South Carolina man remains in custody on a more than $300,000 bond after he allegedly opened fire at a Myrtle Beach nightclub on April 1, according to WMBF.
Reports say 37-year-old Timothy James Truett Jr., of Clover, S.C., was detained by the Myrtle Beach Police Department after the April 1 incident outside Pulse Ultra Club. He was later arrested and charged with possession of a weapon during a violent crime, discharging a firearm into a dwelling, discharging a firearm within city limits, malicious injury to real property valued over $5,000, and assault or intimidation due to political opinions or the exercise of civil rights.
At 10:57 a.m. on April 1, officers responded to a call about a possible shooting at Pulse Ultra Club, located in the 2700 block of South Kings Highway.
In an affidavit released later, the club’s owner, Ken Phillips, said he was doing paperwork that morning when he heard “five or six” gunshots. He went outside and found a window and the windshield of his SUV shattered by bullets. An SUV with blue plastic covering one window was left at the scene.
Police later reviewed footage that showed a silver vehicle stopping in the middle of the road. The video appeared to capture muzzle flashes coming from the passenger-side window.
According to the affidavit, an officer later pulled over a vehicle driven by Truett and found spent shell casings in the back seat, along with a gun.
Documents do not detail why Truett was ultimately charged under the state law covering assault or intimidation tied to political opinions or the exercise of civil rights.
As of April 1, records show Truett is being held in Horry County on a combined bond of more than $312,000.
WMBF spoke with Phillips after the incident and asked whether there was any prior conflict that might have led to the shooting.
“I don’t know if it’s personal, I don’t know if it’s related to being gay, I don’t know if it’s related to the bar issues,” Phillips told WMBF. “Anybody with a mindset of pulling out a weapon in broad daylight is not right.”
“My primary concern has and always will be the safety of my community and my customers,” he added. “It’s given me great concern … as to how far people will go.”
WMBF also spoke with Adam Hayes, vice chair of Myrtle Beach’s Human Rights Coalition, who was involved in pushing for the ordinance. He said that while the incident itself is troubling, it shows the policy is being put to use.
The ordinance is intended to deter “crimes that are motivated by bias or hate towards any person or persons, in whole or in part, because of the actual or perceived” identity, in the absence of a statewide hate crime law.
“It’s nice to see that something we put into policy is not just a piece of paper, that it’s actually being used,” said Hayes.
He said the shooting underscores the need for a statewide hate crime law in South Carolina and added that the incident has left the local LGBTQ community shaken.
South Carolina and Wyoming are the only two states in the U.S. without a comprehensive statewide hate crime law.
Truett remains in jail as of publication.
Trump’s war threats trigger rare 25th Amendment discussion
A Sondheim masterpiece ‘Merrily’ rolls onto Netflix
ROSENSTEIN: Vote McDuffie for mayor of D.C.
New book celebrates 1970s dance music icons
