News
Analysis: Bipartisan legislative approach wins out as marriage vote nears
Schumer expects action soon to codify rights into law
Two strategies for passing legislation have emerged within the Democratic caucus: either build support among Republicans or push it through to expose their position. Both were on full display this week over legislation seeking to codify same-sex marriage into law. At the end of the day, the more bipartisan approach appears to have won out.
It started amid reports earlier in the week, which were confirmed by the Washington Blade, that senior Senate Democratic leadership was considering attaching the Respect for Marriage Act to the continuing resolution, a stopgap that would continue funding the government as lawmakers hammer out a budget for the upcoming fiscal year.
It’s unclear why attaching the marriage bill to the continuing resolution was an option. Either as a standalone bill or an amendment, the marriage legislation needs 60 votes to end a filibuster in the Senate. Including the marriage bill in the budget stopgap may have been seen as a way to act swiftly on the marriage bill during a limited legislative calendar before Election Day.
The approach, in fact, could have had the effect of sinking the marriage bill: Republicans who may have been on board could have instead found a reason to vote “no” if the measure were included in the continuing resolution over objections to adding an extraneous issue to the measure.
One thing stands out: The idea of moving forward with the legislation regardless of how Republicans will vote is consistent with the general legislative strategy of Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.). Ever the political animal, Schumer has no qualms about forcing a vote on legislation with no chance of getting 60 votes if it means exposing Republicans, especially when that would occur within two months of Election Day.
Take, for example, Schumer’s decision to bring to the floor after the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs an abortion rights measure with no Republican support as opposed to another more bipartisan measure. Whether or not the measure actually had 60 votes in support is an afterthought.
In other words, the approach of putting the marriage provision in the continuing resolution was more consistent with the legislative model of Build Back Better and the Inflation Reduction Act, which passed without any Republican votes. But the standalone measure is more consistent with approaches seen with the bipartisan infrastructure bill and the gun reform measure. Each made it to Biden’s desk, but in different ways and with different political fallout.
In the case of the marriage bill, the standalone approach appears to have won out. Schumer, speaking with reporters, said he expects the marriage vote “in the coming weeks” and threw cold water on the idea about including it in the continuing resolution: “We would prefer to do it as a separate bill. We hope there are 10 Republicans to help us with that.”
It’s not hard to imagine Schumer getting a call from supporters of the marriage bill who had a problem with including the measure as part of the continuing resolution. Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis), who’s not only the first out lesbian in the U.S. Senate, but a senator with a reputation for seeking to reach the across the aisle, has been in charge of rounding up votes for some time and has signaled that 10 Republicans are within reach. Among the original co-sponsors of the bill is Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who has publicly commented about working her side of the aisle on the bill.
Baldwin and Collins, following news earlier in the week about the possibility of including the marriage bill in the continuing resolution, published a joint op-ed in the Washington Post on the importance of the measure and getting it done on a bipartisan basis.
“We have worked across party lines to bring the Senate together and build support for the Respect for Marriage Act because we should be able to agree that same-sex and interracial couples, regardless of where they live, both need and deserve the assurance that their marriage will be recognized by the federal government and that they will continue to enjoy freedoms, rights and responsibilities that come with all other marriages,” Baldwin and Collins wrote.
Another factor suggesting a bipartisan approach on the marriage legislation has won out: Schumer in the remarks this week name-checked Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) as one of the leaders in the Democratic caucus seeing to build support for the measure. Although Sinema, the only out bisexual in Congress, is vilified among progressives, she was among the leaders in the cadre of lawmakers who obtained sufficient bipartisan support for the infrastructure deal and gun reform measure.
If the marriage bill passes in the Senate, as supporters of the measure are predicting, it appears the credit would go to the old-school approach of working across the aisle to build a consensus for a more durable legislative solution. The strict party-line approach will have to take a back seat and find another legislative vehicle.
Virginia
Arlington LGBTQ bar Freddie’s celebrates 25th anniversary
Owner asks public to support D.C.-area gay bars
An overflowing crowd turned out Sunday night, March 1, for the 25th anniversary celebration of Freddie’s Beach Bar, the LGBTQ bar and restaurant located in the Crystal City section of Arlington, Va.
The celebration began as longtime patrons sitting at tables and at the bar ordered drinks, snacks, and full meals as several of Freddie’s well-known drag queens performed on a decorated stage.
Roland Watkins, an official with Equality NoVa, an LGBTQ advocacy organization based in the Northern Virginia areas of Arlington, Alexandria, and Fairfax County, next told the gathering about the history of Freddie’s Beach Bar and the role he said that owner Freddie Lutz has played in broadening the bar’s role into a community gathering place.
“Twenty-five years ago, opening a gay bar in Arlington was not a given,” Watkins told the crowd from the stage. “It took courage, convincing, and a deep belief that our community belongs openly, visibly, and proudly,” he said. “And that belief came from Freddie.”
Watkins and others familiar with Freddie’s noted that under Lutz’s leadership and support from his staff, Freddie’s provided support and a gathering place for LGBTQ organizations and a place where Virginia elected officials, and candidates running for public office, came to express their support for the LGBTQ community.
“Over the past 25 years, Freddie’s has become more than a bar,” Watkins said. “It has become a community maker.”
Lutz, who spoke next, said he was moved by the outpouring of support from long-time customers. “Thank you all so much for coming tonight and thank you all so much for your support over the past 25 years,” he said. “I can’t tell you how much that means to me and how much it’s kept me going.”
But Lutz then said Freddie’s, like many other D.C. area gay bars, continues to face economic hard times that he said began during the COVID pandemic. He noted that fewer customers are coming to Freddie’s in recent years, with a significant drop in patronage for his once lucrative weekend buffet brunches.
“So, I don’t want to be the daddy downer on my 25-year anniversary,” he said. “But this was actually the worst year we’ve ever had,” he added. “And I guess what I’m asking is please help us out. Not just me, but all the gay bars in the area.” He added, “I’m reaching out and I’m appealing to you not to forget the gay bars.”
Lutz received loud, prolonged applause, with many customers hugging him as he walked off the stage.
The Comings & Goings column is about sharing the professional successes of our community. We want to recognize those landing new jobs, new clients for their business, joining boards of organizations and other achievements. Please share your successes with us at [email protected].
Congratulations to Gil Pontes III on his recent appointment to the Financial Advisory Board for the City of Wilton Manors, Fla. Upon being appointed he said, “I’m honored to join the Financial Advisory Board for the City of Wilton Manors at such an important moment for our community. In my role as Executive Director of the NextGen Chamber of Commerce, I spend much of my time focused on economic growth, fiscal sustainability, and the long-term competitiveness of emerging business leaders. I look forward to bringing that perspective to Wilton Manors — helping ensure responsible stewardship of public resources while supporting a vibrant, inclusive local economy.”
Pontes is a nonprofit executive with years of development, operations, budget, management, and strategic planning experience in 501(c)(3), 501(c)(4), and political organizations. Pontes is currently executive director of NextGen, Chamber of Commerce. NextGen Chamber’s mission is to “empower emerging business leaders by generating insights, encouraging engagement, and nurturing leadership development to shape the future economy.” Prior to that he served as managing director of The Nora Project, and director of development also at The Nora Project. He has held a number of other positions including Major Gifts Officer, Thundermist Health Center, and has worked in both real estate and banking including as Business Solutions Adviser, Ironwood Financial. For three years he was a Selectman, Town of Berkley, Mass. In that role, he managed HR and general governance for town government. There were 200+ staff and 6,500 constituents. He balanced a $20,000,000 budget annually, established an Economic Development Committee, and hired the first town administrator.
Pontes earned his bachelor’s degree in political science from the University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth.
Kansas
ACLU sues Kansas over law invalidating trans residents’ IDs
A new Kansas bill requires transgender residents to have their driver’s licenses reflect their sex assigned at birth, invalidating current licenses.
Transgender people across Kansas received letters in the mail on Wednesday demanding the immediate surrender of their driver’s licenses following passage of one of the harshest transgender bathroom bans in the nation. Now the American Civil Liberties Union is filing a lawsuit to block the ban and protect transgender residents from what advocates describe as “sweeping” and “punitive” consequences.
Independent journalist Erin Reed broke the story Wednesday after lawmakers approved House Substitute for Senate Bill 244. In her reporting, Reed included a photo of the letter sent to transgender Kansans, requiring them to obtain a driver’s license that reflects their sex assigned at birth rather than the gender with which they identify.
According to the reporting, transgender Kansans must surrender their driver’s licenses and that their current credentials — regardless of expiration date — will be considered invalid upon the law’s publication. The move effectively nullifies previously issued identification documents, creating immediate uncertainty for those impacted.
House Substitute for Senate Bill 244 also stipulates that any transgender person caught driving without a valid license could face a class B misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine. That potential penalty adds a criminal dimension to what began as an administrative action. It also compounds the legal risks for transgender Kansans, as the state already requires county jails to house inmates according to sex assigned at birth — a policy that advocates say can place transgender detainees at heightened risk.
Beyond identification issues, SB 244 not only bans transgender people from using restrooms that match their gender identity in government buildings — including libraries, courthouses, state parks, hospitals, and interstate rest stops — with the possibility for criminal penalties, but also allows for what critics have described as a “bathroom bounty hunter” provision. The measure permits anyone who encounters a transgender person in a restroom — including potentially in private businesses — to sue them for large sums of money, dramatically expanding the scope of enforcement beyond government authorities.
The lawsuit challenging SB 244 was filed today in the District Court of Douglas County on behalf of anonymous plaintiffs Daniel Doe and Matthew Moe by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Kansas, and Ballard Spahr LLP. The complaint argues that SB 244 violates the Kansas Constitution’s protections for personal autonomy, privacy, equality under the law, due process, and freedom of speech.
Additionally, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a temporary restraining order on behalf of the anonymous plaintiffs, arguing that the order — followed by a temporary injunction — is necessary to prevent the “irreparable harm” that would result from SB 244.
State Rep. Abi Boatman, a Wichita Democrat and the only transgender member of the Kansas Legislature, told the Kansas City Star on Wednesday that “persecution is the point.”
“This legislation is a direct attack on the dignity and humanity of transgender Kansans,” said Monica Bennett, legal director of the ACLU of Kansas. “It undermines our state’s strong constitutional protections against government overreach and persecution.”
“SB 244 is a cruel and craven threat to public safety all in the name of fostering fear, division, and paranoia,” said Harper Seldin, senior staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Rights Project. “The invalidation of state-issued IDs threatens to out transgender people against their will every time they apply for a job, rent an apartment, or interact with police. Taken as a whole, SB 244 is a transparent attempt to deny transgender people autonomy over their own identities and push them out of public life altogether.”
“SB 244 presents a state-sanctioned attack on transgender people aimed at silencing, dehumanizing, and alienating Kansans whose gender identity does not conform to the state legislature’s preferences,” said Heather St. Clair, a Ballard Spahr litigator working on the case. “Ballard Spahr is committed to standing with the ACLU and the plaintiffs in fighting on behalf of transgender Kansans for a remedy against the injustices presented by SB 244, and is dedicated to protecting the constitutional rights jeopardized by this new law.”
