Local
‘Strategic blunder of monstrous proportions’
Insiders rip HRC, Gill decision to cancel Maryland vote on marriage
The decision to cancel a March 11 vote on a same-sex marriage bill in the Maryland House of Delegates was a mistake that could hurt rather than help the chances for passing the bill within the next several years, according to Maryland-based advocates who lobbied for the bill.
The advocates who expressed this view, some of whom spoke on condition that they not be identified, said at least four national LGBT groups put pressure on lawmakers through Equality Maryland, the statewide LGBT group, to withdraw the bill rather than risk a losing vote.
One of the advocates called the national groups and their political operatives who came to Maryland to lobby for the bill well intentioned but unfamiliar with the nuances and “rhythms” of the Maryland Legislature.
“I think this was a strategic blunder of monstrous proportions,” said Mark McLaurin, political director of Maryland’s Local 500 of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), which lobbied for the bill.
McLaurin, a gay man who has lobbied the Maryland Legislature for progressive causes for more than 15 years, said many insiders familiar with the legislature don’t think a losing vote by a close margin would hurt the bill’s chances in the future.
On the other hand, McLaurin and others who favored taking a vote on the marriage bill said the legislature has a history of not taking up highly controversial bills two years in a row. McLaurin said he fears that the bill won’t come back for a vote until 2015, even though Speaker of the House Michael Busch (D-Anne Arundel County) said he would try to bring the measure back in 2012.
Busch said supporters appeared to fall just a few votes shy of the 71 votes needed to pass the bill in the 141-member House. However, he said wavering delegates might have chosen to vote “yes,” raising the possibility that the bill could have passed.
Several knowledgeable sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, agreed with McLaurin’s assessment.
“Gill and HRC decided it was detrimental to the larger movement to have the vote go down,” one source said. “Gays and lesbians in Maryland deserved a debate and a vote on legislation that we waited years for.”
Another source criticized Busch’s handling of the bill.

Maryland House of Delegates Majority Leader Kumar Barve and Maryland House Speaker Michael Busch (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)
“[Speaker Michael] Busch could have squeezed harder but didn’t. This is a new House of Delegates and this man didn’t bother to take the temperature of the new House of Delegates. I was shocked. I thought House leadership was more strategic, intelligent and powerful than this and it all evaporated.
“God forbid we put our swing vote Democrats on the line to take a vote for our families. Or maybe the Speaker has lost control of his chamber.”
There was also criticism of Gov. Martin O’Malley, who the sources faulted for not taking a more public stand in support of the bill.
“O’Malley stopped by Friday for a photo op with marriage supporters,” one source said. “What a vacant gesture at the 11th hour. You couldn’t write an op-ed the week before?”
The Civil Marriage Protection Act won approval in the Maryland Senate earlier this month. It died last Friday for at least this year when the House of Delegates approved by voice vote a motion to send it back to committee.
All of the bill’s sponsors, including seven openly gay members of the House of Delegates, appeared to support the motion, a development that stunned LGBT activists watching the proceedings from the visitors’ gallery.
The motion to recommit the bill to committee came after supporters and opponents engaged in an emotional, two-and-a-half hour debate over the bill. Most of the activists for and against the bill watching from the galleries didn’t know that the bill’s sponsors had decided beforehand to cancel the vote.
McLaurin said he learned from those attending strategy meetings that the eight-member LGBT Caucus of the legislature was divided over whether to postpone the House vote.
The caucus includes Sen. Richard Madaleno (D-Montgomery County), and House of Delegates members Maggie McIntosh, Mary Washington, and Luke Clippinger, each Democrats from Baltimore; Heather Mizeur, Bonnie Cullison, and Anne Kaiser, each Democrats from Montgomery County; and Peter Murphy, a Democrat from Charles County.
Spokespersons for Equality Maryland, the statewide LGBT group that led the lobbying effort for the bill, and officials with the national groups Freedom to Marry and Human Rights Campaign defended the decision to withdraw the bill.
They said the decision was made jointly by the bill’s lead sponsors, including the one gay male and six lesbian delegates, who determined it was better to postpone the vote than to risk a losing vote, which they said would be perceived as a defeat.
“This is a strategic effort to give ourselves more time to make the case and win,” said Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry. “And all of us believe we can win. It’s just a matter of nailing down the votes and getting there.”
HRC spokesperson Fred Sainz said the decision to cancel the vote came after it became clear that supporters didn’t have the votes to pass it.
“This was a shared decision by all the stakeholders – Equality Maryland, the state’s LGBT Caucus, Gill Action, Freedom to Marry, and HRC,” he said. “It was the consensus belief that the best way to win marriage in Maryland was by a delay and not by losing a vote.”
Officials with Gill Action, a philanthropic group founded by gay businessman Tim Gill in Colorado that funds LGBT rights causes, did not return a call seeking comment.
An official with the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund, Robin Brand, also pushed for postponing the vote, activists familiar with the legislature said. Brand told the Blade she discussed the issue with the gay delegates in the Victory Fund’s role of working with openly gay elected officials. She said she left it up to them to decide on whether or not a vote should be taken.
McLaurin, a former member of the Equality Maryland board, said the advocates who wanted the vote to go forward believe it would have been worth “a roll of the dice” to determine if supporters had the 71 votes needed to pass the bill.
“In the worst case scenario we would have come up two or three votes short,” he said. “And I think that a loss by two or three votes would be much more galvanizing to the community of supporters that we’re going to need to rally and accomplish this goal.”
McLaurin added, “Either way it was going to get billed as a failure. I’d rather have on record who’s with us and who’s against us.”
Another former Equality Maryland board member, David Toth, wrote in a Facebook posting that the group was deleting messages left on its own Facebook page that were posted by a large number of supporters who expressed outrage over the decision not to have a vote on the bill.
“Anyone who is asking questions of EqMD or its staff is having their posts deleted like crazy,” he wrote. “After donating thousands of dollars and working on the board for over six years I simply find this appalling.”
Wolfson of Freedom to Marry cautioned that a public fight over the decision not to have a vote could hurt efforts to bring the bill back next year.
“This is a temporary pause in the voting and it’s not a pause in the work,” he said. “So we don’t need finger pointing and recriminations, we need redoubling the effort to win.”
Although Equality Maryland, led by executive director, Morgan Meneses-Sheets, was billed as the lead organization calling the shots, insiders say field workers from the national groups like Freedom to Marry, HRC and Gill Action Fund far outnumbered Equality Maryland’s staffers working the halls of the legislature in Annapolis.
It was the national groups, rather than Equality Maryland, that had the ear of supportive lawmakers, including the LGBT Caucus members, during the days leading up to the scheduled vote on the bill in the House, McLaurin and other insiders said.
In a March 10 e-mail sent to LGBT Caucus members and other lawmakers supporting the bill, representatives of Freedom to Marry, Gill Action and HRC urged the lawmakers to postpone the vote.
“With the rights of so many Marylanders on the line, we wanted to flag our serious concern about going to a floor vote tomorrow when it’s not been confirmed we have 71 votes,” the e-mail says. “Various counts have us at 69 or 70 but not 71 or beyond.”
The e-mail adds, “The decision on whether to ask the leadership to move forward or postpone the vote rests with our openly LGBT legislators and other sponsors (in consultation with EQMD) who know their colleagues far better than we do, and who have so courageously led the way.”
The e-mail was signed by Bill Smith and Sarah Vaughn, national political director and deputy political director of Gill Action; Marty Rouse and Sultan Shakir, the lead officials at HRC’s field office; and Marc Solomon, national campaign director for Freedom to Marry.
In a separate e-mail sent the next day to most of the same people, HRC’s Rouse warned of serious political consequences if a vote on the marriage bill were to be taken.
“I plead with you to please delay this vote,” he said. “It would be devastating to suffer a huge loss. There will be vitriol and pain that may take years to soothe.”
Rouse said he also feared that a losing vote would damage relationships between the LGBT community and lawmakers who voted against the bill.
“I am sure that relationships are already frayed, but, if there are impassioned speeches on the floor, and tears shed, and we still lose, those relationships will be damaged even more. The air in the chamber will be toxic for months if not years,” he said.
McLaurin said at least some of the strained relations that Rouse mentioned have already come about, in part, because of the impassioned debate on the House floor that took place on March 11. He said he was puzzled over why those making the decision chose to have the debate and not go one step further to allow a vote to take place.
According to McLaurin, Speaker Busch left it up to the bill’s supporters and Equality Maryland to make the final call on whether to have a vote.
“From what I’ve been told by people in the know, he said, ‘What’s your pleasure? I’ll defer to you.’”
“And so from my understanding, there was a lot of pressure from the national organizations not to pull the trigger on a vote unless you are certain you had 71 votes because apparently it would demoralize our [same-sex marriage] efforts in Rhode Island and New York,” said McLaurin.
“I say poppycock. Pulling the bill from the floor is a defeat every bit as much as a losing vote is,” he said.
McLaurin said he thinks some of the national LGBT officials pushing for a delay in the Maryland vote had a fundamental misunderstanding that the Maryland House of Delegates would act like the New York State Senate acted in 2008, when it defeated a same-same marriage bill by a 38-24 vote.
Most supporters of the New York bill thought the vote would be much closer. Gay State Sen. Tom Duane (D-Manhattan) said he believed he had lined up enough votes to pass the measure. But when a roll-call vote started, a few wavering senators voted no, causing what observers called a cascading or “avalanche” effect, prompting others whose support was shaky to vote no.
McLaurin said such a development could not happen in the Maryland House of Delegates because all votes are cast electronically at the same time. No one knows who votes which way until the final tally is released seconds after the votes are cast. Pages on the floor then distribute a printout showing how the delegates voted.
“That’s why one of my underlying themes is you’ve got to know the Maryland Legislature,” he said. “We can’t have national groups fly in from L.A. and New York and train in from D.C. and conduct this campaign because we’re fundamentally different. We’re a different body.”
If some of the national group representatives had been in Annapolis at the time the legislature debated a highly contentious bill to repeal the state’s death penalty in 2007 or during several abortion related debates in the 1990s they would have seen a great reluctance to revisit these issues a second time, McLaurin said.
“What I fear is next year there’s just not going to be the stomach to do this again,” he said in discussing the marriage bill. “If you listened to the debate on the floor, everyone spoke of how deeply divided the House was, how deeply emotional this was, how it frayed relationships, how people weren’t speaking to each other.
“Do you think they will have the stomach to do that again next year without any reasonable expectation of a different outcome because they’re still pitching the same ideas to the same audience?”
“No one would be happier to be wrong about this than me,” he said. “But I just don’t think that I am. And I know I’m not alone. Some of the chief strategists behind this bill feel the same way I do.”
Wolfson of Freedom to Marry disputes that assessment.
“Anyone who is making comments to you or to anyone else suggesting that somehow this is over and it’s now a cause for finger pointing has failed to understand that it’s not over,” he said. “We’re in the midst of the work and we all should keep our eye on the prize of doing what we can to round up the last few votes and win.”
District of Columbia
Police mental health struggles gain growing attention
‘My body begins to manifest physically, through depression, stress’
When Scott Silverii began his career as a police officer, he faced daily exposure to traumatic incidents with little guidance or support, particularly in distressed neighborhoods where officers were expected to respond decisively under pressure.
“When I started, the only thing they offered was to suck it up and get over it,” Silverii said. “Any indication that you were hurt meant that you were weak, and if you were weak, it meant you could not be trusted.”
Years later, when Silverii became a police chief, he chose a different approach. Rather than reinforcing silence around trauma, he made mental health support a visible part of his leadership.
“In every critical incident that we had, I would bring the critical incident stress debriefing team in — and I would participate in it,” Silverii said. “I wanted to promote it from the top. That’s what it’s going to continue to take to change the culture.”
Silverii’s experience reflects a broader reality in law enforcement. Across the country, police officers face ongoing mental health challenges linked to repeated exposure to violent crime scenes, fatal accidents, and human suffering — experiences that most civilians never encounter. Long shifts and the responsibility of protecting the public have long been documented to further intensify emotional strain, particularly when officers fear making mistakes with serious consequences.
Silverii, former Thibodaux, La., chief of police and current National Law Enforcement Initiative Manager at Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), said coping mechanisms in the past were often unhealthy.
“A lot of officers, they would drink — sometimes prescription drug use, just different ways,” of coping, he said. Today, he said, the trauma can linger long after an incident: “…you become affected by the trauma. It doesn’t have to happen to you. But when officers respond to a crash, you’re involved… You carry this trauma.”
In some cases, he says, the impact resurfaces every year. “My body begins to manifest physically, through depression, through stress… once I realize it’s the anniversary, I can start dealing with it,” he said.
For decades, police culture discouraged officers from seeking mental health support, often treating emotional distress as a weakness rather than an occupational hazard. In recent years, however, departments have begun expanding access to counseling, peer-support programs, and crisis-intervention training.
In Baltimore, a shift in police culture is tackling the long-standing “shrug it off” mentality toward officer mental health. The Baltimore Police Department’s Officer Safety and Wellness Section, started in 2018, changed how the agency handles trauma, depression, and substance abuse by treating these issues as medical needs rather than disciplinary failures.
A core component of the program is its confidential alcohol addiction treatment, which has seen more than 250 officers voluntarily sign themselves in without fear of termination. This proactive approach has led to a dramatic drop in internal interventions — falling from 250 in 2018 to 48 in 2024 — alongside a decrease in citizen complaints and use-of-force incidents.
The need for such programs is underscored by national data from the Police1 2024 State of the Industry report, which found that 76% of officers cite a lack of time due to heavy workloads as the primary barrier to maintaining their health. More than 50% of respondents report that a significant stigma still surrounds seeking mental health services. Perhaps most telling — 12% of officers nationwide report having no access to mental health resources at all, and 33% have considered calling themselves out of service due to emotional distress or exhaustion.
Chris Asplen, executive director of the National Criminal Justice Association, is a former Washington prosecutor who handled child abuse and other high-stakes cases. He said the emotional weight of the work eventually led him to step away after becoming a parent.
“It became too mentally and emotionally difficult after I had my own child,” Asplen said.
Asplen said his understanding of trauma was also shaped in part by his upbringing. Raised by a parent who struggled with mental illness, he described growing up feeling overlooked. “My father’s mental health issues made me essentially invisible to him,” he said — an experience that later informed how he approached victims in the justice system.
Asplen also pointed to disparities in how mental health crises are handled. His family’s middle-class background, he said, afforded protections and support not available to many others. “Mental health issues for people who are not white and middle class are often treated as criminal matters,” he said.
Experts warn that when mental health challenges go unaddressed, they can affect officers’ judgment, job performance, and interactions with the public. In response, lawmakers and communities have begun exploring preventive approaches. In 2023, Congress passed the De-escalation Act, providing funding for training focused on crisis response, de-escalation, and officer wellness.
In addition to legislative efforts, some communities are turning to violence intervention programs aimed at reducing harm before police are required to respond. One such organization, Roca, was founded in Massachusetts in 1988 and has operated in Baltimore since 2018. According to the organization’s impact data, 87% of its participants have had no new incarcerations after entering the program for at least 24 months.
Police officers in Baltimore and several other cities have been trained by Roca’s nonprofit coaching arm, the Roca Impact Institute, to use cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) to regulate their emotions and understand the impact of trauma on officers and community members. The training reduced stress, loss of temper and use of force incidents, according to the institute.
A 2024 report by the D.C. Office of the Attorney General showed the city’s violence intervention program’s efforts contributed to an 18% decrease in shootings and a 26% decrease in gun homicides across its target neighborhoods in 2023. Based on the national Cure Violence Global model, the programs treat violence as a public health epidemic through the use of what it calls “credible messengers” to de-escalate conflicts.
But a Washington Post investigation published Feb. 3 found excessive spending that City Administrator Kevin Donahue called a “completely inappropriate use of public money.” A week later, the publication reported that two DC violence interrupters were charged with murder in the death of a Baltimore man in a DC nightclub in 2023.
When done correctly, these programs can offer a secondary benefit by reducing the volume of high-stress calls handled by law enforcement. Advocates say such approaches can lessen the emotional toll on officers by preventing traumatic encounters altogether.
“If we can reduce the amount of trauma that occurs at the scene,” Asplen said, “then we’re a lot further along.”
(Carl Barbett is a senior at Bard High School Early College DC, one of Youthcast Media Group’s journalism class partners. This story was produced under the mentorship of Edith Mwangi, a Kenyan multimedia journalist based in D.C. with a background in international reporting and politics.)
District of Columbia
Key lifestyle changes can help patients cope with diabetes
Small daily choices make a big difference in one’s health
One Tuesday evening after my family finished dinner, I noticed my grandmother sitting on the couch, sweating more than usual. The family room wasn’t hot, and she hadn’t eaten a lot of salty food that day, so seeing her like that made me worry.
My grandmother, Shirley Mitchell, is a 72-year-old who lives with Type 2 diabetes, and moments like this, when her blood sugar gets dangerously low, can happen without warning. Watching her reach for her glucose tablets reminded me how serious her condition is.
Each day, millions of people living with diabetes face a choice that can either play a role in protecting their health or putting it at risk– namely, what they eat. Nationally, 12 percent of the population lives with diabetes, according to the Centers for Disease Control. In D.C., nine percent of residents are known to have diabetes, with likely many more undiagnosed, said Dr. Marcy Oppenheimer, a family medicine doctor who practices in Northeast D.C.
“It’s super common, especially as you get older,” she said, estimating that 15 to 20 percent of her patients have diabetes, and another 20 percent have pre-diabetes, where blood sugar is higher than normal but not yet at the level to trigger a diabetes diagnosis.
What is diabetes?
Diabetes is a long-term condition that affects how the body controls blood sugar. When blood sugar levels are not managed properly, they can rise too high and cause serious damage to the body. This happens when the body does not make enough insulin or cannot use insulin correctly, which means sugar stays in the blood instead of being moved into the body’s cells where it’s needed for energy.
Having high levels of sugar in the blood over long periods of time causes damage to just about every body system, said Oppenheimer. “It can pretty much cause any part of your body to start failing over the long term, if you have high sugar for a long time.”
While food isn’t the only factor that affects diabetes — genetics play an even bigger role — certain foods can worsen diabetes by spiking the amount of sugar in the blood.
What foods should you eat if you have diabetes?
Healthy food choices play a major role in helping people with diabetes manage their condition. Foods such as vegetables, whole grains, lean proteins like fish and chicken, beans, nuts, and healthy fats digest slowly and provide steady energy. These foods help prevent sudden spikes in blood sugar, which are dangerous for people with diabetes.
Many people with diabetes learn that planning meals, watching portion sizes, and choosing healthier options can make a big difference in how they feel each day.
“I had to slow down and pay attention to what I ate because everything affected my sugar levels,” says Mitchell.
Even small choices, like drinking a lot of soda or eating too much white bread, can cause blood sugar levels to rise quickly, said Oppenheimer.
Which foods can increase the risk or harm of diabetes?
Unhealthy food choices like these can seriously harm those with diabetes. Sugary foods such as candies, cake, cookies, and sweetened drinks cause blood sugar to spike quickly. Processed foods, white bread, and fast food are also harmful because they can be high in unhealthy saturated fats and refined carbohydrates.
When these foods are eaten often, they can lead to weight gain and they make diabetes harder to control and increase the risk of long-term health problems, said Oppenheimer.
Over time, poor eating habits that lead to prolonged high blood sugar can lead to heart disease, nerve damage, kidney problems, and even vision loss.
“Basically, diabetes is an all-body condition or disease, and it just varies from person to person in how it affects you,” said Oppenheimer. “If you have uncontrolled diabetes, it definitely has a negative impact on both your daily life and your long-term health.”
Anyone with diabetes can develop serious complications like blindness — or diabetic retinopathy — and the risk factors are higher for Black, Latino and American Indian or Alaska Native groups, according to the CDC.
What you or a loved one can do to manage diabetes
Mitchell warns others not to ignore the impact of food on their health. “Don’t ignore your health,” she says. “Fix your problems early before they get worse.”
Making lifestyle changes is key because, after all, diabetes changes your entire lifestyle, says Mitchell. “Walking throughout the day has helped me feel better.”
Daniel Dow, a middle school coach at Friendship Blow Pierce Elementary & Middle School in Northeast D.C. who also has diabetes agreed with Mitchell.
“Don’t wait to change your habits, start right away,” he says. “I learned that what I eat before practice affects my sugar for the whole day.”
Mitchell’s and Dow’s experiences show that small daily choices can make a big difference in one’s health. By paying attention to what you eat and how your body responds, you can prevent problems before they get worse. Starting healthy habits early can help you stay strong, focused, and in control of your well-being.
(This article was written by a student in the journalism program at Bard High School Early College DC. This work is part of a partnership between the Washington Blade Foundation and Youthcast Media Group, funded through the FY26 Community Development Grant from the Office of D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser.)
District of Columbia
How Pepper the courthouse dog helps victims of abuse
Reshaping how the legal system balances compassion with procedure
Deborah Kelly’s blind husband, Alton, was dragged for blocks to his death by a hit-and-run driver who had already plowed into her on Alabama Ave., S.E., in June 2024.
But her trauma had only just begun. It took 10 months before the driver, Kenneth Trice, Jr., was arrested, and another six months before he was sentenced to just six months behind bars.
As she heaved and sobbed in the courtroom in November, Kelly had a steady four-legged presence by her side: Pepper the Courthouse Dog, as the black Labrador retriever is known in D.C. Superior Court.
Abby Stavitsky, a former federal prosecutor who now serves as a victims’ advocate, is the owner and handler of nine-year-old Pepper. She says that one of the things that has made Pepper such a great asset in the court in the past six years is the emotional support and comfort she provides to victims.
“She absorbs all of the feelings and the emotions around her, but she’s very good at handling it,” Stavitsky said.
Pepper and Stavitsky started working in Magistrate Judge Mary Grace Rook’s courtroom — and now works in Magistrate Judge Janet Albert’s — to provide support for youth who suffer trauma, especially young survivors of commercial sexual exploitation.
These specially trained dogs offer emotional support to trauma victims of all ages. Courthouse dogs can reduce victims’ and witnesses’ anxiety and stress, making it easier for them to provide clear statements in the courtroom, according to a 2019 report in the Criminal Justice Review.
“Having something to pet and interact with is a distraction that results in victims being calmer when testifying in court,” says Stavitsky. “This gives them an extra level of comfort.”
What brought Stavitsky and Pepper together
Stavitsky, who spent 25 years as an assistant U.S attorney, handled a lot of victim-based crimes, mostly domestic violence and sex offenses. She was also a dog lover, and once she learned about courthouse dogs and their use, she was inspired.
In 2019, Pepper was given to Stavitsky by a Massachusetts-based organization, NEADS, formerly known as the National Education for Assistance Dog Services. Although Pepper was originally trained to be a service dog, evaluators determined her character was best suited for a courthouse dog.
Pepper now works regularly in various treatment court cases involving juveniles, many of whom have experienced trauma or are involved in the child welfare system. She also sits with victims while they are testifying in a trial.
“She loves people, especially children,” Stavitsky said. “She loves that interaction.”
Courthouse dogs have a long history
In courthouses across the U.S. specially trained “facility dogs” are becoming an important part of how the justice system supports vulnerable victims and witnesses.
Since the late 1980s, these dogs were used to help trauma survivors and anxious children during testimonies and interviews. The first dog to make an appearance in a courtroom was Sheba, a German shepherd who assisted child sexual abuse victims in the Queens (N.Y.) District Attorney’s Office. Courthouse dogs help them communicate more clearly, especially in these settings that make them anxious and stressed.
Unlike service dogs, courthouse facility dogs are professionally trained through accredited assistance dog organizations and work daily alongside prosecutors, victim advocates, and forensic interviewers. For example, courthouse dogs can have more social interaction, unlike service dogs.
Courthouse dogs’ growing use has prompted state laws and professional guidelines to recognize the dogs as a trauma-informed tool that helps victims participate in the justice process without compromising courtroom fairness.
As more jurisdictions adopt these programs, courthouse dogs are reshaping how the legal system balances compassion with procedure, ensuring that victims’ voices can be heard in environments that might otherwise silence them.
Pepper makes it easy to see why.
“I really love people, especially kids, and can provide emotional support and comfort during all stages of the court process,” reads the business card Stavitsky hands out with Pepper’s picture. “I’m calm, quiet and can stay in place for several hours.”
(This article was written by a student in the journalism program at Bard High School Early College DC. This work is part of a partnership between the Washington Blade Foundation and Youthcast Media Group, funded through the FY26 Community Development Grant from the Office of D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser.)


