National
Still waiting for first LGBT Cabinet appointment
‘Muted’ pressure as Perez said to be considered for labor secretary

California Assembly Speaker John A. Perez is set to be in contention as labor secretary, but are LGBT groups pushing for his nomination? (Blade file photo by Michael Key)
President Obama is facing a flurry of requests to take administrative action on behalf of the LGBT community at the onset of his second term. One call that has so far been ignored is for the appointment of an openly LGBT Cabinet member.
In recent months, LGBT groups — such as the Human Rights Campaign and the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund — have said the appointment of an openly LGBT Cabinet member is important because it would provide visibility to the community and break a key remaining glass ceiling. No president has ever appointed an openly LGBT Cabinet member.
In November, Fred Sainz, HRC’s vice president of communications, told the Washington Blade the LGBT community is “rightly interested” in a Cabinet appointment as well as a G-20 ambassadorship.
But in comparison to other requests, such as participation in the lawsuit before the U.S. Supreme Court against California’s Proposition 8 or an executive order barring anti-LGBT workplace discrimination among federal contractors, the issue of appointing an LGBT Cabinet member hasn’t yet received significant attention.
Richard Socarides, a gay New York-based advocate and proponent of an LGBT Cabinet appointment, said he couldn’t say whether action from advocacy groups on the appointment is sufficient because he doesn’t know what’s happening behind the scenes, but acknowledged the public pressure is “rather muted.”
“I think that right now the organized political gay community in Washington has a very strong connection with, and relationship with the president, and he has delivered for us in many ways,” Socarides said. “So I think that there is, no doubt, a reluctance to rock the boat for the most part.”
Jim Burroway, a gay editor of the Tuczon, Ariz.-based blog Box Turtle Bulletin, said he hasn’t given the issue the “thought it deserves,” but acknowledged the importance of pushing for high-profile LGBT appointments.
“I’m always reluctant to say that this appointment or that appointment needs to be an LGBT person, but in the general scheme of things, it’s certainly time that an appointment somewhere reflects the diversity of the nation, or even of corporate America, when it comes to LGBT inclusion,” Burroway said.
HRC and the Victory Fund had no comment last month when Obama selected Sally Jewell, a Washington State-based businessperson, for the role of interior secretary, even though that selection meant John Berry, the gay head of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, didn’t get the job. Although Berry was passed over, Jewell is a known advocate of the LGBT community and helped drive business support for marriage equality when it was on the ballot last year in her state.
Media speculation that Berry would be tapped to head the Interior Department was widespread because of his close ties to the administration and his background as a lower-level official in the department during the Clinton years and service as head of the National Wildlife Federation and National Zoo.
Comparatively, LGBT groups like HRC and OutServe-SLDN were aggressive in calling on Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to extend the available benefits to gay troops with same-sex partners, which ultimately led to the Pentagon taking action.
Michael Cole-Schwartz, an HRC spokesperson, said in response to the comparative silence that HRC has “been clear from the start” that it would like high-profile LGBT appointments during Obama’s second term.
“We have not called for any specific position to be filled by any specific individual and it is not our intent to comment on every personnel decision,” Cole-Schwartz said. “As the president continues to make nominations in his second term, there remains an abundance of exceptional LGBT Americans willing and able to serve and it is our hope that we will see an openly gay Cabinet secretary and other historic appointments.”
Denis Dison, a Victory Fund spokesperson, touted the success of the Presidential Appointments Project in response to a similar inquiry. The Project has helped facilitate the appointment of at least 260 openly LGBT officials within the Obama administration.
“The Project continues to advocate for qualified, experienced openly LGBT individuals who are capable of becoming leaders at all levels of government, including at the Cabinet level,” Dison said. “Because personnel decisions are by their nature sensitive, we believe our advocacy is best done privately.”
Even though the position of interior secretary will be off the table once Jewell receives Senate confirmation, other positions are open in the Cabinet that are possibilities for LGBT appointments.
One that has sparked media attention recently is the potential appointment of gay California Assembly Speaker John Perez as a replacement for Hilda Solis as labor secretary.
John O’Connor, executive director of Equality California, said Perez would be an excellent choice as labor secretary because he’s a champion of both LGBT people and the working class.
“Perez has built bridges between the LGBT community and labor,” O’Connor said. “Given his legacy of accomplishment in our state, we are incredibly supportive of his candidacy and would be so proud to see it happen.”
Fred Hochberg, the gay head of the U.S. Export-Import Bank, has been viewed as a potential candidate for the role of commerce secretary. In December, an administration official told the Blade the White House is “looking carefully” at Hochberg for the position. However, he may have been passed over as well if media reports are correct that Obama is close to nominating banker Penny Pritzker for the role.
Shin Inouye, a White House spokesperson, said in response to a Blade inquiry on whether the administration values sexual orientation and gender identity as an element of diversity in high-profile appointments that he has “no personnel announcements.”
Federal Government
Protesters say SAVE Act targets voters, transgender youth
Bill described as ‘Jim Crow 2.0’
Members of Congress, advocates, and people from across the country gathered outside the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday to protest proposed federal legislation that voting rights activists have deemed “Jim Crow 2.0.”
The 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.
President Donald Trump has also pushed for the proposed legislation to include a section that would ban gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, even with parental consent, and prohibit trans people from participating in school or professional sports consistent with their gender identity rather than their sex assigned at birth.
In addition to changing voter registration requirements, the bill would limit acceptable forms of identification to documents such as a birth certificate or passport — records that the Brennan Center for Justice estimates more than 21 million Americans do not have — effectively restricting access to the ballot. It would also ban online voter registration, DMV voter registration efforts, and mail-in voter registration.
A 2021 investigation by the Associated Press found that fewer than 475 people voted illegally or improperly, a tiny fraction of the estimated 160 million Americans who voted in the 2020 election.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) spoke at the event.
“It will kick millions of American citizens off the rolls. And they don’t even require you to be told,” the highest-ranking Democrat in the Senate told protesters and reporters outside the Capitol. “If this law passes — and it won’t — you’re gonna show up in November … and they’ll say… sorry, you’re no longer on the voting rolls.”

He, like many other speakers, emphasized the bill in the context of American history, pointing to what he described as its racist roots and its impact on Black and brown Americans.
“I have called this act, over and over again, Jim Crow 2.0 … because they know it’s the truth.”
U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) was one of the lawmakers leading opposition to the legislation and spoke at the rally.
“It’s not just voting rights that are on the line — our democracy is on the line,” the California lawmaker said. “It’s not a voter I.D. bill. It’s a bait and switch bill.”
He added historical context, noting the significance of voting rights legislation passed more than 60 years ago. In 1965, Alabama civil rights activists marched to protest barriers to voter registration. Alabama state troopers violently attacked peaceful demonstrators at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, using tear gas, clubs, and whips against more than 500 — mostly Black — protesters.

“61 years ago — not to the day — but this week, President Lyndon Johnson came to the Capitol and addressed a joint session of Congress in the wake of Bloody Sunday and pushed Congress to pass the Voting Rights Act,” Padilla said. “61 years later, Donald Trump and this Republican majority wants to take us backwards. We’re not gonna let that happen.”
U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) also spoke, emphasizing that he views the effort as a Republican-led and Trump-backed attempt to restrict voting access, particularly among Black, brown, and predominantly Democratic communities.
“President Trump told Republicans when they were meeting behind closed doors that ‘The SAVE Act will guarantee Republicans win the midterms and ensure they do not lose an election for 50 years,’” Luján said. “The first time I think Donald Trump’s been honest … This voter suppression bill is only that. Taking away vote by mail? I hope my Republican colleagues from states that voted for Donald Trump or where vote by mail is popular have the courage and the backbone to stand up and say no to this nonsense, because their constituents are going to push back.”
U.S. Sen. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.) also spoke.
“Our Republican colleagues have already cut Medicaid, Medicare, people don’t know how they’re gonna be able to afford energy,” she said, providing context for the broader political moment. “We’re in the middle of a war that they can’t even get straight while we’re in it and don’t have a way to get out of it. And we are now faced with defending our democracy?”
She then showed the crowd something that she said has been with her throughout her political journey in Washington.
“I brought with me something that I carried on the day that I was sworn into the House of Representatives when I was elected in 2016, and I carried it with me on the day that I was sworn in as United States senator. And I also carried it with me when I was trapped up in the gallery on Jan. 6 and all I could think to do was pray … This document allowed my great great great grandfather, who had been enslaved in Georgia, to have the right to vote. We took this and turned it into a scarf. It is the returns of qualified voters and reconstruction code from 1867. This is my proof of what we’ve been through. This is also our inspiration.”

“I got to travel between the Edmund Pettus Bridge two times. And even as I thought about this moment, I recognized that while we wish we weren’t in it, while we don’t know why we’re in it, I do know we were made for it … So I came today to tell you that, um, just like the leader said, that he calls it Jim Crow 2.0. I call it Jim Crow 2.NO.”
Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBTQ advocacy organization in the U.S., also spoke, highlighting the impact of the bill’s proposed provisions affecting trans people.
“This bill is not about saving America. This bill is about stealing an election. This bill is about suppressing voters,” Robinson said. “This bill not only tries to disenfranchise voters that deserve their right to vote, it also tries to criminalize trans kids and their families … It tries to criminalize doctors providing medically necessary care for our trans youth.”

The SAVE Act passed the U.S. House of Representatives on Feb. 11 but has not yet been considered in the U.S. Senate.
Idaho
Idaho advances bill to restrict bathroom access for transgender residents
HB 752 passed in state House of Representatives on Monday
The Idaho House of Representatives passed House Bill 752 on Monday, a measure that would make it a crime for a person to use a bathroom other than the one designated for their “biological sex.”
The story was first reported by the Idaho Capitol Sun after the bill cleared the House.
House Bill 752 would make it a criminal offense — either a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the number of prior offenses — for individuals who “knowingly and willfully” enter a bathroom or changing room designated for the opposite sex.
The bill would apply to public buildings, including government-owned spaces, and places of “public accommodation,” a category that includes private businesses.
According to the bill’s text, it would “prohibit a person from entering a restroom or changing room designated for the opposite sex; provide a penalty; provide exceptions; define terms; and declare an emergency and provide an effective date.”
A first offense would be a misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in prison. A second or subsequent offense within five years would be a felony, punishable by up to five years in prison.
The bill passed in a 54–15 vote on Monday. Six Republicans broke with their party’s majority to join nine Democrats in opposing the measure.
The bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Cornel Rasor, a Republican from Sagle near the Washington-Idaho border, told House lawmakers that the legislation is intended to protect women and girls.
“It prevents discomfort and voyeurism escalation and assaults, while preserving single-user options and narrow exceptions so no one is denied access for emergency aid,” Rasor said.
State Rep. Chris Mathias, a Democrat from Boise, disagreed, arguing that the legislation would unfairly target transgender Idahoans.
“The truth of the matter is — and I know a lot of people don’t want to say it — but forcing people who don’t look like the sex they were assigned at birth, or transgender folks, to use other people’s bathrooms is going to put a lot of people in danger,” Mathias said.
The Idaho American Civil Liberties Union made a statement about the bill following its passage.
“Idaho lawmakers continue pushing these harmful, invasive bathroom laws, yet cannot present credible evidence that transgender people using gender-aligned bathrooms threaten public safety,” the Idaho ACLU said. “The bill does nothing to address real criminal acts, such as sexual assault or voyeurism, and disregards concerns from law enforcement about the burden enforcement would place on local resources.”
In addition to human rights advocates, who have spoken out against similar bills advancing in state legislatures across the country, Idaho law enforcement groups have also opposed the measure. They argue that the way the legislation is written would “pose significant practical enforcement challenges,” noting that officers are tasked with maintaining public safety — not conducting gender checks or policing bathroom access.
During a committee hearing last week, law enforcement representatives and several trans Idahoans testified that the bill would make many residents less safe.
“Officers responding to a complaint would be placed in the difficult position of determining an individual’s biological sex in order to enforce the statute,” Idaho Fraternal Order of Police President Bryan Lovell wrote. “In many circumstances, there is no clear or reasonable way for officers to make that determination without engaging in questioning or investigative actions that could be viewed as invasive and inappropriate.”
The Idaho Sheriffs’ Association requested that lawmakers amend the bill to require that individuals be given an opportunity to leave a bathroom immediately before facing potential prosecution.
The bill now heads to the Idaho Senate for consideration. To become law, it must pass both chambers and avoid a veto from the governor.
A separate bathroom bill, House Bill 607, which would be enforced through civil lawsuits, passed the House last month but has not yet received a committee hearing in the Senate.
State Department
Report: US to withhold HIV aid to Zambia unless mineral access expanded
New York Times obtained Secretary of State Marco Rubio memo
The State Department is reportedly considering withholding assistance for Zambians with HIV unless the country’s government allows the U.S. to access more of its minerals.
The New York Times on Monday reported Secretary of State Marco Rubio in a memo to State Department’s Bureau of African Affairs staffers wrote the U.S. “will only secure our priorities by demonstrating willingness to publicly take support away from Zambia on a massive scale.” The newspaper said it obtained a copy of the letter.
Zambia is a country in southern Africa that borders Tanzania, Malawi, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Namibia, Angola, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
The Times notes upwards of 1.3 million Zambians receive daily HIV medications through PEPFAR. The newspaper reported Rubio in his memo said the Trump-Vance administration could “significantly cut assistance” as soon as May.
“Reports of (the) State Department withholding lifesaving HIV treatment in return for mining concessions in Zambia does not make us safer, stronger, or more prosperous,” said U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Tuesday. “Monetizing innocent people’s lives further undermines U.S. global leadership and is just plain wrong.”
The Washington Blade has reached out to the State Department for comment.
Zambia received breakthrough HIV prevention drug through PEPFAR
Rubio on Jan. 28, 2025, issued a waiver that allowed PEPFAR and other “life-saving humanitarian assistance” programs to continue to operate during a freeze on nearly all U.S. foreign aid spending. HIV/AIDS service providers around the world with whom the Blade has spoken say PEPFAR cuts and the loss of funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, which officially closed on July 1, 2025, has severely impacted their work.
The State Department last September announced PEPFAR will distribute lenacapavir in countries with high prevalence rates. Zambia two months later received the first doses of the breakthrough HIV prevention drug.
Kenya and Uganda are among the African countries have signed health agreements with the U.S. since the Trump-Vance administration took office.
The Times notes the countries that signed these agreements pledged to increase health spending. The Blade last month reported LGBTQ rights groups have questioned whether these agreements will lead to further exclusion and government-sanctioned discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
