Connect with us

National

Hagel fails to impress some LGBT advocates

White House defers LGBT military policy questions to testimony

Published

on

Chuck Hagel, gay news, Washington Blade
Chuck Hagel, Secretary of Defense, gay news, Washington Blade

Defense secretary nominee Chuck Hagel is still facing questions from advocates on LGBT military policy. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

LGBT rights supporters are seeking more from Defense Secretary nominee Chuck Hagel in the aftermath of testimony in which he expressed a commitment to gay and lesbian troops.

In written testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday, Hagel built upon earlier comments to express support for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal and committed to ā€œmove forward expeditiouslyā€ on the issue of outstanding partner benefits for gay service members.

LGBT advocates say they appreciate Hagel’s commitment, but want him to make good on his promises and act on LGBT military issues that he hasn’t yet addressed.

The Human Rights Campaign emphasized the importance of Hagel taking action upon confirmation to extend benefits to troops with same-sex partners. Among the outstanding benefits that could be extended administratively are military IDs, joint duty assignments and access to family programs.

ā€œWe were glad to see Sen. Hagelā€™s clear statement of support for gay and lesbian service members and their families,” said HRC Vice President of Programs Fred Sainz. “If confirmed, we expect Sen. Hagel to make good on his statements and act immediately to ensure that all military families have equal access to all military benefits available to them under the law.ā€

Rea Carey, executive director of the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, said she’s happy Hagel articulated a commitment to gay troops, but hopes he’ll “exercise future leadership” to lift the barriers for transgender service members.

“Sen. Hagel’s commitment toward full implementation of DADT repeal and providing equal benefits to the same-sex spouses of service members was encouraging,” Carey said. “If confirmed, we hope he will exercise further leadership on LGBT issues and work to remove Defense Department barriers that prevent transgender people from serving their country openly.”

Another request came from Allyson Robinson, executive director of OutServe-SLDN, who issued a statement following the hearing calling on Hagel to extend non-discrimination protections in the military to LGBT troops. Currently, gay service members have no recourse for claims of discrimination and harassment other than their chain of command.

“If Sen. Hagel is confirmed, he must use his authority to ban discrimination and guarantee equal opportunity for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender members of the military,” Robinson said.

GetEQUAL, among the LGBT groups that had come out in opposition to Hagel, seemed to budge a little in the wake of the confirmation hearing, but also was looking for a greater commitment.

Heather Cronk, managing director for GetEQUAL, said she’s glad Hagel made the commitments for gay service members, but is looking now for “specifics behind that commitment” to offer support.

“Our key questions are whether Hagel will implement a non-discrimination policy, since DADT repeal didn’t include one, and whether that policy will immediately allow transgender service members to serve openly,” Cronk said. “If he will answer both of those questions in the affirmative, we’ll be more convinced that his values align with the stated values of the Obama administration.”

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney deferred Blade requests to elaborate on Hagel’s LGBT military policy views to his previously stated testimony:

Washington Blade: Jay, following the confirmation hearing yesterday, the LGBT military group OutServe-SLDN issued a statement saying Sen. Hagel as defense secretary must “use his authority to ban discrimination and guarantee equal opportunity for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender members of the military.” That non-discrimination, unlike the benefits issue, has heretofore gone unaddressed during the confirmation process. Does the White House expect Hagel to make this policy happen if he’s confirmed as defense secretary?

Jay Carney: I would just point you to numerous answers the senator gave in response to questions about his support for the president’s positions on issues regarding LGBT rights, including with regard to service in our military. I don’t have anything more you, but the president’s positions on these issues are clear, and he continues to intend to make progress them as he made clear in his inaugural.

Blade: Sen. Hagel did express in written responses to questions that he’d move “expeditiously” on the benefits issue, and you said last week the issue has the president’s attention. But when will these benefits be enacted?

Carney: Well, I think expeditiously is when they will get attention, as Sen. Hagel rightly answered, and, hopefully, with him at the Pentagon as soon as possible.

Carney’s remarks suggest that LGBT advocates will have to wait for Hagel to take the helm of the Pentagon for action on partner benefits for gay troops as opposed to having them enacted under the watch of outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who’s been under pressure to make the changes.

The time when Hagel will be faced with these issues may come soon.Ā Senate Armed Services Chair Carl Levin (D-Mich.) said during the hearing a committee vote will take place Thursday, and a floor vote should take place soon after.

However, without a single Senate Republican expressing support, questions persist over whether 60 votes are present in the Senate to overcome a filibuster of his nomination.

The Log Cabin Republicans, which took out a full-page ad against Hagel in the New York Times and another in the Washington Post, remains opposed to the Hagel nomination even in the wake of his confirmation hearing.

Gregory Angelo, Log Cabin’s interim executive director, echoed some Republicans who accused Hagel of flip-flopping in his positions as he pursues the position of defense secretary.

“Sen. Hagel did so much flip-flopping, waffling and walking back on his prior statements on Iran, Israel and Iraq yesterday that we find no reason to assume he won’t shift his opinion on his opportunely timed, new-foundĀ support for the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ as well,” Angelo said. “Yesterday’s hearings only underscored what Log Cabin Republicans has been saying all along: Chuck Hagel is the wrong choice for Secretary of Defense.”

One key voice in the LGBT community who hasn’t yet articulated a final position on Hagel one way or the other is lesbian Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) ā€” even though other Democratic senators who have pro-LGBT records like Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Mark Udall (D-Colo.) have come out in favor of the nomination.

During an appearance on MSNBC’s “Hardball” last month, Baldwin said she’d ask Hagel “tough questions” about his vision for the post-“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” military but hasn’t yet commented publicly on the issue further. Her office didn’t respond to a request to comment.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

National

Antony Blinken, USAID mark World AIDS Day

Officials reiterate Biden-Harris administration’s commitment to end pandemic

Published

on

(Bigstock photo)

Secretary of State Antony Blinken and the U.S. Agency for International Development on Sunday marked World AIDS Day.

Blinken in his statement echoed the Biden-Harris administration’s call “for collective action with partners around the world to sustain and accelerate the great progress we have made toward ending HIV/AIDS as a public health threat by 2030.”

“Over the past four years, the State Department has worked tirelessly to save lives through the Presidentā€™s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR),” the statement reads. “In partnership with foreign governments, PEPFAR has changed the trajectory of the HIV/AIDS pandemic and now supports more than 20 million people on lifesaving treatment across 55 countries around the world. Independent analyses have documented a direct link of this lifesaving work to economic growth across PEPFAR partner countries. Bipartisan action on a clean, five-year reauthorization of PEPFAR is essential to ending HIV/AIDS as a public health threat and to implementing the programā€™s plans to sustain success over the long term through partner country and community-led and managed programs.”

Blinken further stressed World AIDS Day “is a day to remember the more than 42 million lives lost to HIV/AIDS ā€” a stark reminder of the threat this virus continues to pose if we do not ensure that partner countries have the vision and capacity to sustain a bold response.”

“We must continue to chart a course together that will help communities stay safe and prosperous by ending HIV/AIDS as a public health threat,” he said.

USAID spokesperson Benjamin Suarato in a statement echoed Blinken.

“Each year, we observe World AIDS Day to honor people living with and affected by HIV, remember those we have lost, and recommit to ending HIV as a public health threat by 2030,” said Suarato. “For decades, USAID has worked to support those affected by HIV, as well as the health workers, scientists, researchers, advocates, and communities dedicated to the HIV response.”

Suarato noted this year’s World AIDS Day’s theme, “Collective Action: Sustain and Accelerate HIV Progress,” “underscores the long-term leadership of the United States to galvanize global solidarity and make critical investments to reduce HIV transmission, improve access to treatment, and advance transformative partnerships to sustain a locally-led HIV response.” Suarato also highlighted PEPFAR has saved “more than 25 million lives and helped more than 5.5 million babies to be born HIV-free across 55 countries.”

“We recognize that ending HIV as a public health threat requires enduring cooperation with partner country governments, civil society, faith-based, and other non-governmental organizations, researchers, and scientists,” said Suarato. “It also requires us to continue to elevate the leadership of communities and individuals living with and affected by HIV. On this World AIDS Day, USAID reaffirms our dedication to collective action.”

President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden on Sunday will commemorate World AIDS Day at the White House. AIDS Memorial Quilt panels will be shown on the White House’s South Lawn for the first time.

The Washington Blade will have further coverage of the White House commemoration.

Continue Reading

Federal Government

HIV positive patients can now receive organs from HIV positive donors

New HHS rule applies to liver and kidney transplants

Published

on

HHS Assistant Health Secretary Adm. Rachel Levine, U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.), and HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra (Washington Blade photo by Christopher Kane)

A new rule announced Tuesday by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services will allow HIV positive patients to receive organs from HIV positive donors, a move that will expand the pool of available organs and reduce wait times.

ā€œThis rule removes unnecessary barriers to kidney and liver transplants, expanding the organ donor pool and improving outcomes for transplant recipients with HIV,” said HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra in a statement.

The agency noted that the final rule also aims to combat stigma and health inequities associated with HIV.

ā€œResearch shows that kidney and liver transplants between donors and recipients with HIV can be performed safely and effectively,ā€ Assistant Secretary for Health Rachel Levine added. ā€œThis policy change reflects our commitment to following the evidence and updating our approaches as we learn more. By removing research requirements where they are no longer needed, we can help more people with HIV access life-saving transplants.ā€

HHS notes that the rule applies to kidney and liver transplants, which correspond with the areas in which the evidence from biomedical research is the most “robust.”



Continue Reading

Federal Government

LGBTQ federal workers face tough decisions, big worries amid Trump transition

‘I plan to leave after the inauguration’

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Donald Trump’s return to the White House promises to shake up Washington in ways not seen even during the norm-shattering Trump 1.0 years: on the table are blueprints for radically reforming the federal civil service into a more partisan institution where loyalty is prized at the expense of expertise and competence; off the table, among other things, are anti-discrimination protections that had long bolstered the rights and welfare of LGBTQ federal government employees.

Washington proudly boasts, per-capita, the highest LGBTQ population of any city in any state in America. Ninety-two percent of the city’s 678,000+ residents voted for Vice President Kamala Harris. So, according to exit polls, did 86 percent of LGBTQ voters.

Many of D.C.’s LGBTQ residents who work for the federal government find themselves, now, at an unenviable crossroads. Some stood to lose their jobs regardless of who won in November because they serve in higher-ranking “political” roles that typically turn over administration-to-administration, but more are “career” employees with experience serving with both parties in charge of the White House.

Many find themselves choosing whether to wade into a hyperlocal job market that is, at the moment, competitive for job seekers ā€” or continue, if they can, working under institutions run by Republicans who have vowed to destroy them (or at least shake them up, whatever that will mean).

The Washington Blade has spoken with LGBTQ employees in the federal government who worry about the welfare of gay, queer, and trans colleagues they plan to leave behind for jobs in the private sector. They share a deep concern, too, for the LGBTQ Americans who, they believe, will suffer harmful consequences of policy and governance under the incoming administration.

A lesbian attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice and a gay senior official for the U.S. Department of Commerce spoke anonymously with the Blade to share experiences and observations at their respective agencies.

Do you expect to be working elsewhere when Trump 2.0 begins in January

[Justice Department]: I plan to leave shortly after the inauguration.

[Commerce Department]: I hope to be working elsewhere by the next term. The job market is incredibly competitive, but thatā€™s because the Biden administration hired the best and brightest public servants that represent every community in America. Itā€™s particularly important that companies and nonprofits seek out the great early/mid-career staff from the administration. Many finished college remotely during the pandemic, to then immediately serve their country. They have exceptional work experience, but can be at a hiring disadvantage behind their classmates who immediately entered the workforce.

Would you be (or might you be) allowed to continue in your role under the next administration if you wished to do so?

[Justice]: Probably not.

Under the next administration, if you were allowed to continue in your role or serve in a different position at your agency or perhaps work elsewhere in the federal government, would you? Why or why not?

[Justice]: Noā€”risk of doxing is too high; did it once before and not interested in doing it again.

[Commerce]: I would not work in the Trump administration, even if allowed. To work for someone who believes in retribution over public service would violate the oath I took to my country and the Constitution he refuses to respect. I look forward to doing what queer people have done for all of American history: shining brightly in the face of hate and being a success in spite of every attempt to shame.

What can you tell me about the post-election turnover at your agency that youā€™ve seen so far or expect to see in the coming months, as compared to that which you might have experienced during previous transitions?

[Justice]: I expect to see many more people leave than in any previous admin change.

[Commerce]: Experienced career staff who survived the first Trump years are burned out and leaving. This is a horrible loss for the American people who are losing the dedicated subject matter experts who do the hard work of making their lives easier, safer, and healthier. So many of them work for the federal government because of how it can be used to help people in big ways. Theyā€™re horrified to think of all the people, especially minorities, women, and queer people, will, instead, be targeted. They donā€™t want to be a part of that. They canā€™t live with that.

Are any of your LGBTQ colleagues staying in their jobs? If so, what can you share about the reasons youā€™ve heard for their decision to stay?

[Justice]: Yes; many will stay because they donā€™t have the luxury of leaving without a job lined up.Ā 

What are some of your biggest concerns specific to how your agency might be run under the Trump 2.0 regime?

[Justice]: They will dismantle the civil rights division at DOJ or completely shift its focus.Ā 

[Commerce]: I’m horrified at how data may be weaponized against vulnerable people.  So much work has been done to help communities by building close-knit relationships with leaders across the countries. Will all these programs focused on supporting the most vulnerable and underserved among us be turned on them to identify easy targets to victimize? 

Broadly speaking, what concerns do you have about the rights, safety, and wellbeing of LGBTQ folks who will remain in the civil service post-January, or those who might join the federal governmentā€™s civilian workforce after Trump takes over?

[Justice]: LGBTQ+ people will be at greater risk of doxing; bathroom flexibilities will disappear; harassment will go unchecked.

[Commerce]: We are barely out of the shadow of the Lavender Scare, where thousands of queer American public servants were harassed, humiliated, and often fired in shame. It starts with removing Pride flags, then the photos of our partners on our desks, and then weā€™re escorted from the building for being security risks. LGBTQ Americans are the soldiers, and scientists, and civil servants and should never, ever have to worry if their mere existence could suddenly cost them their security clearance, their career path, or their safety.

How do you think staff turnover at your agency will impact its work under the next administration? 

[Justice]: Staff turnover will severely undermine DOJā€™s work and protecting the rule of law.Ā 

If, ultimately, a disproportionate number of LGBTQ workers leave for jobs in the private sector, are you concerned about harms that might result from the loss of voices representing the community in the federal government and/or in your agency specifically?

[Justice]: Re: loss of voices, yes. The federal government cannot function as effectively when it doesnā€™t reflect the public it serves.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular