Politics
Gay GOP former congressman calls for UAFA passage
Kolbe testifies before the Senate on LGBT-inclusive immigration reform

Former congressman Jim Kolbe testified before the Senate on UAFA (Blade file photo by Michael Key)
A gay Republican former U.S. House member testified before the Senate on Monday in favor of including bi-national same-sex couples as part of comprehensive immigration reform — an issue that affects him personally.
Jim Kolbe, who represented Arizona in Congress from 1985 to 2007, spoke during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing about LGBT-inclusion in immigration reform both in personal terms and economic benefits for the country.
“While the bill you are considering is an excellent starting point for reform, I submit to you that it is still incomplete,” Kolbe said. “Families like mine are left behind as part of this proposal.”
Language to enable gay Americans to sponsor a same-sex partner for residency in the United States wasn’t included as part of the 844-page base bill for comprehensive immigration reform that was produced by the “Gang of Eight.”
Standalone legislation along these lines is known as the Uniting American Families Act. LGBT advocates say they’ve received assurances such language would be offered as an amendment — possibly by Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) — when the committee marks up the reform legislation.
Kolbe is in an eight-year relationship with Panama native Hector Alfonso, who came to the United States on Fulbright scholarship to pursue studies in special education and has been a teacher for two decades. The couple had to endure a year-long separation when Alfonso had to return to Panama while immigration issues were being sorted out, although he’s now in the United States on a green card.
“It was a long process; it was an expensive far beyond the reach of most families,” Kolbe said. “We are immensely fortunate that Hector has now secured an investment visa that allows him to remain here with me. Many other couples, however, are not so fortunate. Their ability to secure a solution that will allow them to build a home, family and business together is elusive and difficult to realize.”
Kolbe, a trade expert who works at the German Marshall Fund think tank, also addressed economic benefits of passing language for bi-national same-sex couples as part of immigration reform — particularly support for the provision among U.S. businesses.
“The comprehensive immigration reform bill now under consideration by this Committee includes important provisions to make U.S. businesses more competitive,” Kolbe said. “UAFA does the same, which is why it is supported by Fortune 500 companies like Intel, Marriott, Texas Instruments and US Airways, who have called on lawmakers of both parties to support its passage. The failure to recognize lesbian and gay families in our immigration laws has a direct impact on American business.”
As part of his testimony, Kolbe read a letter signed by 28 prominent American businesses calling for UAFA citing loss of productivity, costs of transferring and retaining employees and missed opportunities to bring talent into the United States as a result of the current system.
“It is time, Chairman Leahy and members of the Committee, to fix this part of our immigration law,” Kolbe concluded. “The opportunity is too rare, and the positive impact too great to leave anyone behind. Adding UAFA to the committee bill would be a big step toward making it a truly comprehensive bill.”
Kolbe and Alfonso plan to wed in D.C. on May 18. While straight Americans are able to sponsor their foreign spouses for residency within the United States, Kolbe doesn’t have that option because of the Defense of Marriage Act, which he voted for as a member of Congress in 1996. The U.S. Supreme Court could address this problem if justices issue a ruling by June striking down Section 3 of DOMA as a result of pending litigation.
Steve Ralls, a spokesperson for the LGBT group Immigration Equality, said Kolbe’s personal story and background as a member of Congress make him an excellent spokesperson for UAFA.
“Congressman Kolbe is the perfect messenger to remind Senators that this is about families, not partisan politics,” Ralls said. “This issue impacts Republicans and Democrats, and it UAFA’s inclusion in the bill should garner bipartisan support, too.”
A number of Democratic senators on the panel expressed support for Kolbe and including UAFA as part of immigration reform, such as Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) and Al Franken (D-Minn.). Republicans were present during the hearing — including Ranking Member Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) — but didn’t address Kolbe’s testimony or UAFA.
Franken, a UAFA co-sponsor, was among those who expressed support for including UAFA as part of immigration reform, saying he and colleagues will do “everything we can” to amend reform to include the measure.
“You’re not alone,” Franken said. “I’ve heard many stories from my LGBT constituents about how our immigration system is tearing their families apart.”
Franken cited a story from a constituent, whom he called “Mark,” a Fortune 500 company worker who has an Italian partner, Alberto, that intended to move to Minnesota under a waiver program for Europeans.
According to Franken, when they were identified as a same-sex couple by Customs & Border Protection at the airport, Alberto was interrogated, forced to surrender his personal email password and was eventually he couldn’t remain in the country. Alberto is now in the United States on a visa, but that’s only a temporary solution.
“Mark is prohibited from sponsoring Alberto for permanent residency,” Franken said. “Under current law, Mark must choose between his career and the person he loves. It isn’t fair, it’s wrong and I just wanted to tell you that I and many others senators on this panel are going to do everything we can to try to see that we amend this bill to protect all families, including those of all LGBT Americans.”
Another question came from Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), another UAFA co-sponsor, who asked how the issue for bi-national same-sex couples would be affected if the Supreme Court strikes down DOMA. Kolbe said it’s not clear what the ruling of the Supreme Court would be in June, but emphasized the legislation isn’t about marriage.
“This bill does not deal with the issue of marriage at all,” Kolbe replied. “While DOMA defines marriage as between a man and a woman for federal purposes, this legislation simply says for immigration purposes, an individual can immigrate into the United States.”
Following the hearing, Kolbe told the Washington Blade that nothing the senators said surprised him and other issues related to immigration reform, such as temporary employment for migrant workers, were more controversial than same-sex couples.
“There was nothing that was terribly surprising in the questions,” Kolbe said. “I think it went pretty much as expected. I think all the members are really focused very heavily on this H-1B program and how that’s going to be made to work.”
Kolbe said he believes the committee has the votes to amend the immigration legislation, but whether that will remain in the bill as the legislative process goes forward remains in question.
“I think it’s very likely that it will be included in the bill when it goes to the Senate floor,” Kolbe said. “What will happen on the floor — and even more critically, what will happen in the House of Representatives — I think it’s just way to early to tell yet.”
Read Kolbe’s written testimony here.
Congress
Van Hollen speaks at ‘ICE Out for Good’ protest in D.C.
ICE agent killed Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis on Jan. 7
U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) is among those who spoke at an “ICE Out for Good” protest that took place outside U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s headquarters in D.C. on Tuesday.
The protest took place six days after a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent shot and killed Renee Nicole Good, a 37-year-old woman in Minneapolis.
Good left behind her wife and three children.
(Video by Michael K. Lavers)
Congress
Advocates say MTG bill threatens trans youth, families, and doctors
The “Protect Children’s Innocence” Act passed in the House
Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene has a long history of targeting the transgender community as part of her political agenda. Now, after announcing her resignation from the U.S. House of Representatives, attempting to take away trans rights may be the last thing she does in her official capacity.
The proposed legislation, dubbed “Protect Children’s Innocence Act” is among the most extreme anti-trans measures to move through Congress. It would put doctors in jail for up to 10 years if they provide gender-affirming care to minors — including prescribing hormone replacement therapy to adolescents or puberty blockers to younger children. The bill also aims to halt gender-affirming surgeries for minors, though those procedures are rare.
Greene herself described the bill on X, saying if passed, “it would make it a Class C felony to trans a child under 18.”
According to KFF, a nonpartisan source for health policy research, polling, and journalism, 27 states have enacted policies limiting youth access to gender-affirming care. Roughly half of all trans youth ages 13–17 live in a state with such restrictions, and 24 states impose professional or legal penalties on health care practitioners who provide that care.
Greene has repeatedly introduced the bill since 2021, the year she entered Congress, but it failed to advance. Now, in exchange for her support for the National Defense Authorization Act, the legislation reached the House floor for the first time.
According to the 19th, U.S. Rep. Sarah McBride (D-Del.), the first trans member of Congress, rebuked Republicans on the Capitol steps Wednesday for advancing anti-trans legislation while allowing Affordable Care Act tax credits to expire — a move expected to raise health care costs for millions of Americans.
“They would rather have us focus in and debate a misunderstood and vulnerable one percent of the population, instead of focusing in on the fact that they are raiding everyone’s health care,” McBride said. “They are obsessed with trans people … they are consumed with this.”
Polling suggests the public largely opposes criminalizing gender-affirming care.
A recent survey by the Human Rights Campaign and Global Strategy Group found that 73 percent of voters in U.S. House battleground districts oppose laws that would jail doctors or parents for providing transition-related care. Additionally, 77 percent oppose forcing trans people off medically recommended medication. Nearly seven in 10 Americans said politicians are not informed enough to make decisions about medical care for trans youth.
The bill passed the House and now heads to the U.S. Senate for further consideration.
According to reporting by Erin Reed of Erin In The Morning, three Democrats — U.S. Reps. Henry Cuellar and Vicente Gonzalez of Texas and Don Davis of North Carolina — crossed party lines to vote in favor of the felony ban, joining 213 Republicans. A total of 207 Democrats voted against the bill, while three lawmakers from both parties abstained.
Advocates and lawmakers warned the bill is dangerous and unprecedented during a multi-organizational press call Tuesday. Leaders from the Human Rights Campaign and the Trevor Project joined U.S. Rep. Becca Balint (D-Vt.), Dr. Kenneth Haller, and parents of trans youth to discuss the potential impact of restrictive policies like Greene’s — particularly in contrast to President Donald Trump’s leniency toward certain criminals, with more than 1,500 pardons issued this year.
“Our MAGA GOP government has pardoned drug traffickers. They’ve pardoned people who tried to overthrow the government on January 6, but now they want to put pediatricians and parents into a jail cell for caring for their kids,” said Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson. “No one asked for Marjorie Taylor Greene or Dan Crenshaw or any politician to be in their doctor’s office, and they should mind their own business.”
Balint, co-chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, questioned why medical decisions are being made by lawmakers with no clinical expertise.
“Parents and doctors already have to worry about state laws banning care for their kids, and this bill would introduce the risk of federal criminal prosecution,” Balint said. “We’re talking about jail time. We’re talking about locking people up for basic medical care, care that is evidence-based, age-appropriate and life-saving.”
“These are decisions that should be made by doctors and parents and those kids that need this gender-affirming care, not certainly by Marjorie Taylor Greene.”
Haller, an emeritus professor of pediatrics at St. Louis University School of Medicine, described the legislation as rooted in ideology rather than medicine.
“It is not science, it is just blind ideology,” Haller said.
“The doctor tells you that as parents, as well as the doctor themselves, could be convicted of a felony and be sentenced up to 10 years in prison just for pursuing a course of action that will give your child their only chance for a happy and healthy future,” he added. “It is not in the state’s best interests, and certainly not in the interests of us, the citizens of this country, to interfere with medical decisions that people make about their own bodies and their own lives.”
Haller’s sentiment is echoed by doctors across the country.
The American Medical Association, the nation’s largest organization that represents doctors across the country in various parts of medicine has a longstanding support for gender-affirming care.
“The AMA supports public and private health insurance coverage for treatment of gender dysphoria and opposes the denial of health insurance based on sexual orientation or gender identity,” their website reads.
Rodrigo Heng-Lehtinen, senior vice president of public engagement campaigns at the Trevor Project, agreed.
“In Marjorie Taylor Greene’s bill [it] even goes so far as to criminalize and throw a parent in jail for this,” Heng-Lehtinen said. “Medical decisions should be between patients, families, and their doctors.”
Rachel Gonzalez, a parent of a transgender teen and LGBTQ advocate, said the bill would harm families trying to act in their children’s best interests.
“No politician should be in any doctor’s office or in our living room making private health care decisions — especially not Marjorie Taylor Greene,” Gonzalez said. “My daughter and no trans youth should ever be used as a political pawn.”
Other LGBTQ rights activists also condemned the legislation.
Tyler Hack, executive director of the Christopher Street Project, called the bill “an abominable attack on the transgender community.”
“Marjorie Taylor Greene’s last-ditch effort to bring her 3-times failed bill to a vote is an abominable attack on the transgender community and further cements a Congressional career defined by hate and bigotry,” they said. “We are counting down the days until she’s off Capitol Hill — but as the bill goes to the floor this week, our leaders must stand up one last time to her BS and protect the safety of queer kids and medical providers. Full stop.”
Hack added that “healthcare is a right, not a privilege” in the U.S., and this attack on trans healthcare is an attack on queer rights altogether.
“Marjorie Taylor Greene has no place in deciding what care is necessary,” Hack added. “This is another attempt to legislate trans and queer people out of existence while peddling an agenda rooted in pseudoscience and extremism.”
U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.), chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus, also denounced the legislation.
“This bill is the most extreme anti-transgender legislation to ever pass through the House of Representatives and a direct attack on the rights of parents to work with their children and their doctors to provide them with the medical care they need,” Takano said. “This bill is beyond cruel and its passage will forever be a stain on the institution of the United States Congress.”
The bill is unlikely to advance in the Senate, where it would need 60 votes to pass.
Politics
LGBTQ Democrats say they’re ready to fight to win in 2026
DNC winter meetings took place last weekend in Los Angeles
The Democratic National Committee held its annual winter meetings in Downtown Los Angeles over the weekend, and queer Democrats showed up with a clear message for the national organization: don’t abandon queer and transgender people.
Following last year’s disastrous presidential and congressional elections, many influential pundits and some powerful lawmakers called on Democrats to distance the party from unpopular positions on trans rights, in order to win swing districts by wooing more conservative voters.
But members of the DNC’s LGBTQ Caucus say that’s actually a losing strategy.
“There are still parts of our party saying we need to abandon trans people in order to win elections, which is just not provable, actually. It’s just some feelings from some old consultants in DC,” LGBTQ Caucus Chair Sean Meloy says.
Some national Democrats are already backtracking from suggestions that they walk back on trans rights.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom grabbed national attention in March when he suggested that it was “deeply unfair” for trans girls to play in women’s sports. But last week, he doubled down on support for trans rights, claiming to have signed more trans-rights legislation than any governor in the country, and entering into feuds on X with Elon Musk and Nicki Minaj over his support for trans kids.
Democrats are also clearly feeling the wind in their sails recently after major election victories in Virginia and New Jersey last month, as well as victories in dozens of local and state legislative elections across the country in 2025.
“[Abigail] Spanberger in Virginia didn’t win by dodging the trans question. She won by attacking it, confronting it, and that’s how she got ahead,” says Vivian Smotherman, a trans activist and at-large member of the DNC’s LGBTQ Caucus.
“Trans people are not a problem. We are a resource,” Smotherman says. “For my community, surviving into adulthood is not a guarantee, it’s an accomplishment. You don’t walk through a survival gauntlet without learning things … I’m not begging the DNC to protect my community. I’m here to remind you that we are the warriors tempered by fire, and we are fully capable of helping this party win.”
At its own meeting on Friday, the LGBTQ Caucus announced several new initiatives to ensure that queer and trans issues stay top of mind for the DNC as it gears up for the midterm elections next year.
One plan is to formalize the DNC’s Trans Advisory Board as distinct from the LGBTQ Caucus, to help introduce candidates across the country to trans people and trans issues.
“One in three people in this country know a trans person. Two-thirds of Americans don’t think they do,” Smotherman says. “So the real problem is not being trans, it’s that you don’t know us. You cannot authentically support a trans person if you’ve never met one.
“That’s why my first goal with this Trans Advisory Board is to host a monthly Meet a Trans Person webinar. Not as a spectacle, as a debate, but as a human connection, and I will be charging every state chair with asking every one of their candidates up and down the board if they know a trans person. And if that person doesn’t know a trans person, I’m gonna have that state chair put them on that webinar.”
The LGBTQ caucus is also opening up associate membership to allies who do not identify as LGBTQ, in order to broaden support and connections over queer issues.
It’s also preparing for the inevitable attacks Republicans will throw at queer candidates and supporters of LGBTQ issues.
“These attacks are going to come. You have to budget money proactively. You have to be ready to fight,” Meloy says. “There are some local party chairs who don’t want to recruit LGBTQ candidates to run because these issues might come up, right? That’s an absolutely ludicrous statement, but there are still people who need support in how to be ready and how to respond to these things that inevitably come.”
“The oldest joke is that Democrats don’t have a spine. And when they come after us, and we do not reply, we play right into that.”
Meloy also alluded to anti-LGBTQ tropes that queer people are out to harm children, and said that Democrats should be prepared to make the case that it’s actually Republicans who are protecting child abusers – for example, by suppressing the Epstein files.
“They are weak on this issue. Take the fight, empower your parties to say, ‘These people have nothing to stand on,’” Meloy says.
