News
Will new voices call on Obama to sign ENDA exec order?
New letter gives Dem leaders, Republicans chance to seek action
A new letter is being circulated among members of Congress urging President Obama to sign an executive order barring discrimination against LGBT workers, raising questions about whether pro-gay lawmakers who have previously made no explicit calls for the directive will take the opportunity to do so.
Key members of the Democratic leadership have yet to call for the executive order as have Republicans who’ve already articulated support for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, legislation that would bar workplace discrimination against LGBT people.
The letter that’s being circulated among lawmakers calls on Obama to sign the order in the wake of his declaration that 2014 will be a “Year of Action” through administrative means if Congress doesn’t act on his legislative agenda.
“As we continue to work towards final passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) with strong bipartisan support, we urge you to take action now to protect millions of workers across the country from the threat of discrimination simply because of who they are or who they love,” the letter states.
A source familiar with the letter said the opportunity to sign it would close at the end of Monday.
Although this is the first letter intended to include signatures from members of both the House and Senate, it’s not the first time lawmakers signed letters calling for the executive order. Last year, 110 House Democrats signed a letter seeking the directive and 37 senators signed a letter to that effect.
But neither of those letters included names of lawmakers in Democratic leadership or Republicans ā even though many had previously articulated support for the executive order or ENDA in some capacity. The newly circulated letter presents an opportunity for those lawmakers to augment the call with powerful voices and create a bipartisan effort to push Obama to take administrative action to protect LGBT workers from discrimination.
The top members of the House Democratic Caucus ā House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and Assistant House Minority Leader Jim Clyburn (D-Calif.) ā each refrained from signing the House version of the letter in 2013. None of the offices for those lawmakers responded to the Washington Blade’s request to comment on whether they’d sign the letter this time around.
[UPDATE: Mariel Saez, a Hoyer spokesperson, told the Washington Blade on Monday following the initial publication of this article that the Democratic Whip “is signing onto the letter.”]
Even though she didn’t sign the letter, Pelosi has been on the record in support of the executive order since 2011, when the Blade asked her during her weekly news conference if she’d support that action. She also said Obama “of course” should sign the directive in January when speaking with The Huffington Post.
Clyburn was quoted as saying by The Huffington Post he feels “very strongly” that Obama should sign the executive order just months ago, reportedly adding “I don’t know where I would be today if the executive order had not been used to get rid of slavery.” The Blade is unaware of any public comments from Hoyer on the LGBT executive order.
At the time the 2013 letter was made public, Pelosi’s office cited a policy that she refrains from signing group letters because of her position in Democratic leadership. However, she had earlier signedĀ her name to letters seeking action from the administration to help bi-national same-sex couples in addition to signing amicus briefs calling on federal courts to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act.
[UPDATE #2: Following publication of this article, Drew Hammill, a Pelosi spokesperson, said his boss won’t sign the letter currently being circulated, noting she rarely signs group letters, and said she’ll instead take her own course of action.
“Leader Pelosi has publicly expressed support for this executive order and will be sending her own private letter to the President on this matter,” Hammill said.]
Also conspicuously absent from the 2013 letter is Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who also serves as chair of the Democratic National Committee and is known for her support of LGBT rights. In the past week, she’s announced the DNC would form a lesbian leadership council and hired a gay operative as the DNC’s national political director.
Neither Wasserman Schultz’s congressional office in D.C. nor the DNC responded to the Blade’s request for comment on whether she’d sign the letter this time around.
In January, Wasserman Schultz told The Huffington Post she broadly supports the idea of Obama using his executive authority, but refused to say whether that principle applies to an executive order for LGBT workers.
Wasserman Schultz’s name was also absent from letters seeking support of bi-national same-sex couples. At the time one letter was signed in 2011, Wasserman Schultz told reporters during an Immigration Equality fundraiser she supported the action, but didn’t feel comfortable making demands on the administration because of her position in the DNC.
“Given that Iām the chair of the DNC, itās a little odd for me to be asking the administration to do specific things,” Wasserman Schultz said at the time. “So I personally support it, but because Iām also the political voice of the president, asking the president to do things publicly can get a little awkward.”
On the Senate side, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) also didn’t sign his chamber’s version of the letter in 2013. His office didn’t respond to a request for comment on whether he’ll add his name this time around.
Reid has offered a nuanced position on the executive order. In February, he told The Huffington Post, “If the president decides to do it, Iād be in favor of it.”
But on either the letter signed by the House or the Senate in 2013, not a single Republican signed their name. If a single one did so this time around, it would represent the first time that a Republican lawmaker had called on Obama to sign an executive order.
None of the offices of 10 Republican senators who voted for ENDA on the Senate floor responded to a request for comment on the letter. Those are Sens. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Dean Heller (R-Nev.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), John McCain (R-Ariz.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.).
Despite being an original co-sponsor of ENDA, Kirk has previously spoken against an executive order prohibiting federal contractors from discriminating against LGBT workers.
āIf we load executive order upon executive order, all of which would be wiped out the day after the president of the other party takes power, you really havenāt advanced the ball much,ā Kirk said in 2011. āThatās why the legislation is absolutely necessary.ā
In the House, six Republicans co-sponsor ENDA: Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), Richard Hanna (R-N.Y.), Charlie Dent (R-Pa.), Michael Grimm (R-N.Y.), Chris Gibson (R-N.Y.) and Jon Runyan (R-N.J.).
According to the Huffington Post, Ros-Lehtinen has said she doesn’t support the executive order. Of those six Republicans, only Dent’s office responded to the Blade’s request to comment on the letter, and the response was negative.
“Congressman Dent believes that the regular legislative process is the best way to proceed in making this critical legislation outlawing workplace discrimination the law of the land,” said Dent spokesperson Shawn Millan.
Gregory Angelo, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, said he doesn’t know whether Republicans will sign the letter, but hopes to see some GOP names calling for the executive order.
“I’m not going to engage in speculation, but with declared GOP support for ENDA among House members of both the House and Senate, I would hope to see some Republican representation on any letter holding the president accountable to a promise he made to Americans six years ago,” Angelo said.
Neither the LGBT Equality Caucus, which is handling circulation of the letter in the House, nor the office of ENDA’s chief sponsor in the Senate Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), which is handling it in the Senate, responded to the Blade’s request for comment over the weekend about expected signers of the letter.
The White House
Karine Jean-Pierre becomes Biden’s fourth openly LGBTQ senior adviser
Press secretary’s promotion was reported on Monday
Following White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre’s promotion to a top role on Monday, four of the 10 officials serving as senior advisers to President Joe Biden are openly LGBTQ.
The other LGBTQ members of the president’s innermost circle are White House Communications Director Ben LaBolt, senior adviser to first lady Jill Biden Anthony Bernal, and White House Director of Political Strategy and Outreach Emmy Ruiz.
Jean-Pierre became the first Black and the first LGBTQ White House press secretary in May 2022. She spoke with the Washington Blade for an exclusive interview last spring, shortly before the two-year anniversary of her appointment to that position.
“Jill and I have known and respected Karine a long time and she will be a strong voice speaking for me and this Administration,” Biden said in 2022 when announcing her as press secretary.
Breaking the news of Jean-Pierre’s promotion on Monday, ABC noted the power and influence of the White House communications and press office, given that LaBolt was appointed in August to succeed Anita Dunn when she left her role as senior adviser to the president.
As press secretary, Jean-Pierre has consistently advocated for the LGBTQ community ā pushing back forcefully on anti-LGBTQ legislation and reaffirming the president and vice president’s commitments to expanding rights and protections.
TEL AVIV, Israel ā I was sound asleep at 11 p.m. (4 p.m. ET) on Monday when Tzofar, an app that notifies users of incoming rockets, started to go off. The blaring alarm woke me up. It indicated a “red alert” for “incoming (missiles and rocket fire.)”
I sat up in bed, opened the app to see whether I was under “red alert.” I was just south of it, so I did not need to seek refuge in the stairwell, which is the building’s designated safe room. Less than a minute later I heard a series of loud booms that shook the building.
Hezbollah launched five ballistic missiles from Lebanon towards an Israel Defense Forces base north of Tel Aviv. The explosions that I heard were Israel’s Iron Dome air defense system intercepting them.
The whole situation was over in less than two minutes ā it was the third “red alert” for “incoming (missiles and rocket fire)” that I received on my phone on Monday, which was a year since Hamas launched its surprise attack against southern Israel.
Hamas at around 11 a.m. (4 a.m. ET) launched five rockets that triggered alerts in southern Tel Aviv. Iron Dome intercepted four of them. Shrapnel from the rocket that hit the ground left two women slightly injured. I heard the interceptions in the distance. I walked onto my balcony a couple of minutes later, and saw a man hugging a young woman who was standing on her balcony across the street. She was clearly upset.
I walked to a nearby coffee shop about half an hour later, and ordered an iced coffee. I walked back to my building and started working again. I called my mother a short time later to let her know that everything was fine. I also sent several text messages to my husband and other loved ones and friends that reiterated that point.
The Houthis in Yemen launched a ballistic missile towards Israel shortly after 5:30 p.m. (10:30 a.m. ET) that the IDF intercepted. I was in Hostage Square outside the Tel Aviv Museum of Art when I heard warning messages on people’s phones. I looked at the Tzofar app, and saw Hostage Square was outside of the “red alert” area. I then logged onto two Israeli media outlets’ ā the Times of Israel and Haaretz ā websites that I have bookmarked on my phone and read the IDF had intercepted the Houthi missile.
More than a thousand people were gathered in Hostage Square less than 90 minutes later, watching an Oct. 7 memorial concert on a large screen that had been set up. The IDF Home Front Command has limited the number of people who can gather in one place in Tel Aviv because of the continued threats of rocket and missile attacks from Gaza and Lebanon.
This limit is 2,000.
The sounds of war have been a constant backdrop of this trip.
I begin every day with a swim in the Mediterranean Sea at Hilton Beach, which is Tel Aviv’s gay beach. These swims help me stay somewhat sane while I am here in Israel.
Israeli fighter jets and helicopters with missiles strapped to them regularly fly north along the coast towards Lebanon. Drones can also be heard. This scene plays out against the context of people swimming, kayaking, and paddleboarding in the water, and others walking and jogging on the nearby beach promenade.
The Nova Music Festival site where Hamas militants killed 360 people and took 40 others hostage on Oct. 7 is located outside of Re’im, a kibbutz that is roughly two miles from the Gaza Strip. It is about an hour and 20 minutes south of Tel Aviv.
I visited the site on Oct. 5.
Large IDF Home Front Command banners warn visitors they had 15 seconds to reach makeshift shelters ā large concrete barriers placed together ā in case of incoming rockets.
“If you receive an alert, lie on the ground and protect your head with your hands for 10 minutes,” the banner reads.
There were no alerts while I was at Nova. I did, however, hear several Israeli airstrikes in Gaza.
I stopped at a roadside restaurant in Yad Mordechai, a kibbutz that is roughly three miles north of the Erez crossing between Israel and Gaza, after I left Nova. I had a sandwich for lunch and ordered an ice coffee for the drive back to Tel Aviv. I was walking to my car and I heard two distant Israeli airstrikes in Gaza. The second one shook the ground beneath my feet.
I was back in Tel Aviv less than an hour later. It was the last day of Rosh Hashanah, and Shabbat. Hilton Beach, where I had taken my morning swim earlier in the day, was packed.
Life, at least for Israelis who live in Tel Aviv, goes on amid the sounds of war.
Politics
Trump, GOP candidates spend $65 million on anti-trans ads
The strategy was unsuccessful for the GOP in key 2022, 2023 races
With just four weeks until Election Day, Donald Trump and Republican candidates in key down-ballot races have spent more than $65 million on anti-trans television ads since the start of August, The New York Times reported on Tuesday.
The move signals that Republicans believe attacking the vice president and other Democratic candidates over their support for trans rights will be an effective strategy along with exploiting their opponents’ perceived weaknesses on issues of immigration and inflation.
However, as Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson told the Times, conservatives had tried using the transgender community as a cudgel to attack Democrats during the 2022 midterms and in the off-year elections in 2023. In most cases, they were unsuccessful.
The GOP’s decision to, nevertheless, revive anti-trans messaging in this election cycle “shows that Republicans are desperate right now,ā she said. “Instead of articulating how theyāre going to make the economy better or our schools safer, theyāre focused on sowing fear and chaos.ā
The Times said most Republican ads focus on issues where they believe their opponents are out of step with the views held by most Americans ā for example, on access to taxpayer funded transition-related healthcare interventions for minors and incarcerated people.
At the same time, there is hardly a clear distinction between ads focusing on divisive policy disagreements and those designed to foment and exploit rank anti-trans bigotry.
For example, the Trump campaign’s most-aired ad about Harris in recent weeks targets her support for providing gender affirming care to inmates (per an interview in 2019, when she was attorney general of California, and a questionnaire from the ACLU that she completed in 2020 when running for president).
The ad “plays on anti-trans prejudices, inviting viewers to recoil from images of Ms. Harris alongside those of people who plainly do not conform to traditional gender norms, to try to portray Ms. Harris herself as out of the ordinary,” the Times wrote in an article last month analyzing the 30-second spot, which had run on television stations in Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina and Wisconsin.