Connect with us

News

Analysis: Bipartisan legislative approach wins out as marriage vote nears

Schumer expects action soon to codify rights into law

Published

on

Sen. Charles Schumer (left) has appeared to yield to the bipartisan approach to marriage bill proposed by Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine). (Blade file photos by Michael Key)

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: ā€œWe would prefer to do it as a separate bill. We hope there are 10 Republicans to help us with that.ā€

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.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Congress

Sens. Butler, Smith introduce Pride in Mental Health Act to aid at-risk LGBTQ youth

Bill is backed by Democrats in both chambers

Published

on

U.S. Sen. Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.) speaks at the International LGBTQ Leaders Conference on Nov. 30, 2023. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

U.S. Sens. Laphonza Butler (D-Calif.) and Tina Smith (D-Minn.) introduced the Pride in Mental Health Act on Thursday, legislation that would strengthen resources in mental health and crisis intervention for at-risk LGBTQ youth.

ā€œAccessing mental health care and support has become increasingly difficult in nearly every state in the country,ā€Ā said Butler, who is the first Black LGBTQ senator. ā€œBarriers get even more difficult if you are a young person who lacks a supportive community or is fearful of being outed, harassed, or threatened.”

“I am introducing the Pride in Mental Health Act to help equip LGBTQ+ youth with the resources to get the affirming and often life-saving care they need,” she said.

ā€œMental health care is health care,” said Smith. “And for some LGBTQ+ youth, receiving access to the mental health care they need can mean the difference between living in safety and dignity, and suffering alone through discrimination, bullying, and even violence.ā€Ā 

The Minnesota senator added that data shows LGBTQ students are experiencing “an epidemic” of “anxiety, depression and other serious mental health conditions.”

For example, a 2023 study by The Trevor Project found that 54 percent of LGBTQ youth reported symptoms of depression, compared to 35 percent of their heterosexual counterparts.

Joining the senators as cosponsors are Democratic U.S. Sens. Ed Markey (Mass.), Bob Casey (Penn.), Peter Welch (Vt.), Alex Padilla (Calif.), Jeff Merkley (Ore.), Cory Booker (N.J.), and Tammy Baldwin (Wis.). Baldwin was the first LGBTQ woman elected to the House in 1999 and the first LGBTQ woman elected to the Senate in 2013.

Leading the House version of the bill are LGBTQ Democratic U.S. Reps. Sharice Davids (Kan.), Eric Sorensen (Ill.), and Ritchie Torres (N.Y.), along with 163 other House members.

Organizations that have backed the Pride in Mental Health Act include the Human Rights Campaign, GLSEN, American Academy of Pediatrics, National Education Association (NEA), National Center for Transgender Equality, Seattle Indian Health Board, PFLAG National, The Trevor Project, American Psychological Association, Whitman-Walker Institute, InterACT: Advocates for Intersex Youth, National Alliance on Mental Illness, American Federation of Teachers (AFT), Mental Health America, and Center for Law and Social Policy.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

D.C. mayorĀ honors 10th anniversary of Team Rayceen Productions

LGBTQ entertainment, advocacy organization praised for ā€˜vital workā€™

Published

on

Rayceen Pendarvis co-founded Team Rayceen Productions. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser today issued an official proclamation declaring Monday, March 18, 2024, as Team Rayceen Day in honor of the local LGBTQ entertainment and advocacy organization Team Rayceen Productions named after its co-founder Rayceen Pendarvis.

ā€œWhereas Rayceen, along with Team Rayceen Productions co-founder, Zar, have spent 10 years advocating for the Black LGBTQI+ community using various forms including in-person events, social media, and YouTube,ā€ the proclamation states.

The proclamation adds that through its YouTube Channel, Team Rayceen Productions created a platform for ā€œBlack LGBTQIA+ individuals to discuss various topics including spotlighting nonprofit organizations and small businesses, voter registration and participation, the state of LGBTQIA+ rights and resources in D.C, gender equality and equity, and the amplification of opportunities to bring the community together.ā€

It also praises Team Rayceen Productions for its partnership with the Mayorā€™s Office of LGBTQ Affairs in helping to produce ā€œexciting events like the District of Pride talent showcase held each June and the iconic 17th Street High Heel Race celebrated in October.ā€

ā€œWhereas I thank Team Rayceen Productions for its vital and necessary work and am #DCProud to wish you all the best as you continue to support Black LGBTQIA+ residents across all 8 Wards,ā€ the proclamation continues.

ā€œNow, therefore, I, the Mayor of Washington, D.C., do hereby proclaim March 18, 2024, as TEAM RAYCEEN DAY in Washington, D.C. and do commit this observance to all Washingtonians,ā€ it concludes.

ā€œWe thank Mayor Bowser for this special proclamation, which highlights where it all began, with the Black LGBTQIA+ community of Washington, D.C,ā€ Team Rayceen Productions says in a statement. ā€œStarting with The Ask Rayceen Show, Reel Affirmation, and events with D.C. Public Library to Art All Night, Silver Pride by Whitman-Walker, and events with the Mayorā€™s Office of LGBTQ Affairs, we are #dcproud of what we have accomplished in the Nationā€™s Capital,ā€ the statement says. 

“For TEAM RAYCEEN DAY, we thank the diverse group of individuals who have made everything we have done possible by volunteering their time and talents over the past decade ā€“ as online co-hosts, event staff, performers, DJs, photographers, and more,ā€ says the statement.

Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court declines to hear case over drag show at Texas university

Students argue First Amendment protects performance

Published

on

The U.S. Supreme Court justices on June 30, 2022. ((Photo by Fred Schilling of the U.S. Supreme Court)

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday declined to hear a First Amendment case over a public university president’s refusal to allow an LGBTQ student group to host a drag show on campus.

The group’s application was denied without the justices providing their reasoning or issuing dissenting opinions, as is custom for such requests for emergency review.

When plaintiffs sought to organize the drag performance to raise money for suicide prevention in March 2023, West Texas A&M University President Walter Wendler cancelled the event, citing the Bible and other religious texts.

The students sued, arguing the move constituted prior restraint and viewpoint-based discrimination, in violation of the First Amendment. Wendler had called drag shows ā€œderisive, divisive and demoralizing misogyny,” adding that “a harmless drag show” was “not possible.”

The notoriously conservative Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, who former President Donald Trump appointed to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, ruled against the plaintiffs in September, writing that ā€œit is not clearly established that all drag shows are inherently expressive.”

Kacsmaryk further argued that the High Court’s precedent-setting opinions protecting stage performances and establishing that “speech may not be banned on the ground that it expresses ideas that offend” was inconsistent with constitutional interpretation based on ā€œtext, history and tradition.”

Plaintiffs appealed to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is by far the most conservative of the nation’s 12 appellate circuit courts. They sought emergency review by the Supreme Court because the 5th Circuit refused to fast-track their case, so arguments were scheduled to begin after the date of their drag show.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular