Connect with us

Local

GLAA grades Council hopefuls

Candidates get mid-range to low grades; special D.C. election set for April 26

Published

on

GLAA (Blade file photo)

D.C. City Council candidates Sekou Biddle and Bryan Weaver, both Democrats, each received a rating of +5.5 this week from the Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance, the highest score given by the group for the nine Council candidates running in the city’s April 26 special election.

GLAA, a non-partisan political group, rates candidates on LGBT and some non-LGBT issues on a scale of -10 to +10. The group says it bases its ratings on responses given by candidates to a GLAA questionnaire and on their past record on LGBT and AIDS issues.

“No candidates in the April 26 special election for At-Large D.C. Council member approached the ‘perfect tens’ from the Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance that were earned in recent elections by Council members Jack Evans, David Catania, Jim Graham, and Phil Mendelson,” the group said in a statement. Catania and Graham are openly gay.

Republican candidate Patrick Mara and Statehood-Green Party candidate Alan Page each received a +4 rating. Democrat Vincent Orange, a former Ward 5 Council member, received a 3.5 rating; and Democrat Joshua Lopez, an aide to former Mayor Adrian Fenty, received a +2.5.

Democratic candidates Tom Brown and Dorothy Douglas and independent candidate Arkan Haile each received a rating of “0.” GLAA said the three failed to return the questionnaire and the group automatically assigns a 0 rating to such candidates unless it can verify a past record on LGBT related issues.

Each of the candidates that returned the questionnaire expressed support for LGBT rights, including support for the city’s same-sex marriage law.

In a statement accompanying the release of its ratings, GLAA acknowledged that the candidates indicated in their questionnaire responses that they support GLAA’s positions on nearly each of the 14 issues the group raised in its questions. It said most of the candidates lost points by not providing sufficient substance to their responses, which, according to the group, would demonstrate a better grasp and understanding of the issues.

“We just don’t want yes or no answers,” said GLAA Vice President Rick Rosendall. “We want the substance behind the answers.”

Rosendall said the substantive issues surrounding each of the questions asked of the candidates are included in a 24-page GLAA “agenda” briefing paper for the D.C. LGBT community published on the group’s website. He said the group sent each candidate a copy of the paper along with the questionnaire.

The subjects covered in the questionnaire, among other things, include marriage and family, public health, public safety, human rights, youth, and protection for LGBT consumers and businesses – all in connection to how they pertain to the LGBT community, according GLAA.

One question asks what steps the candidates would take to improve the performance of the city’s AIDS office. Another asks, “Do you support the right of adults in the District to choose adult-oriented entertainment for themselves, and the right of appropriately licensed and zoned businesses to provide it?”

All of the candidates answering the questionnaire responded with a “yes” answer to the latter question, although they gave differing explanations of their views on the subject of adult businesses.

Each of the candidates except one — Statehood-Green Party candidate Page — gave a “no” answer to a question asking if they would consider supporting decriminalizing, zoning, taxing, and regulating prostitution in the District. GLAA noted in its questionnaire that marginalized groups such as low-income LGBT and transgender youth sometimes turn to prostitution as a means of economic survival and often are subjected to further difficulties if arrested for engaging in the sex trade.

Page and the other candidates said their favored solution to the problems of LGBT and trans youth is city sponsored job training , substance abuse counseling, and enforcement of non-discrimination laws that would eliminate the need for marginalized groups to turn to prostitution for survival.

GLAA said Biddle’s questionnaire was “generally positive but offered limited substance and was often vague.” The Gertrude Stein Democratic Club, the city’s largest LGBT political group, endorsed Biddle.

Mara, who is currently a member of the city’s board of education from Ward 1, has expressed strong support for LGBT rights, including same-sex marriage. GLAA said he lost points on his rating, among other things, because he lobbied Congress for a federal school voucher program. The program pays D.C. students’ tuition in private, religious elementary and secondary schools that are exempt from the city’s human rights law, which bans discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

In his questionnaire response, Mara said he backs the program because it allows students from low-income familiar to attend schools considered better academically than city public schools.

Mara this week received the endorsement of the GLBT group Log Cabin Republicans of Washington.

Copies of the candidates’ responses to the GLAA questionnaire and a breakdown of their ratings by points can be viewed at www.glaa.org.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

District of Columbia

Norton hailed as champion of LGBTQ rights

D.C. congressional delegate to retire after 36 years in U.S. House

Published

on

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton announced she will not seek re-election; her term ends January 2027. (Washington Blade file photo by Drew Brown)

LGBTQ rights advocates reflected on D.C. Congressional Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton’s longstanding advocacy and support for LGBTQ rights in Congress following her decision last month not to run for re-election this year. 

Upon completing her current term in office in January 2027, Norton, a Democrat, will have served 18 two-year terms and 36 years in her role as the city’s non-voting delegate to the U.S. House.

LGBTQ advocates have joined city officials and community leaders in describing Norton as a highly effective advocate for D.C. under the city’s limited representation in Congress where she could not vote on the House floor but stood out in her work on House committees and moving, powerful speeches on the House floor.

 “During her more than three decades in Congress, Eleanor Holmes Norton has been a champion for the District of Columbia and the LGBTQ+ community,” said David Stacy, vice president of government affairs for the Human Rights Campaign, the D.C.-based national LGBTQ advocacy organization.

“When Congress blocked implementation of D.C.’s domestic partnership registry, Norton led the fight to allow it to go into effect,” Stacey said. “When President Bush tried to ban marriage equality in every state and the District, Norton again stood up in opposition. And when Congress blocked HIV prevention efforts, Norton worked to end that interference in local control,” he said.

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) (Washington Blade photo by Jeff Surprenant)

In reflecting the sentiment of many local and national LGBTQ advocates familiar with Norton’s work, Stacy added, “We have been lucky to have such an incredible champion. As her time in Congress comes to an end, we honor her extraordinary impact in the nation’s capital and beyond by standing together in pride and gratitude.”

Norton has been among the lead co-sponsors and outspoken supporters of LGBTQ rights legislation introduced in Congress since first taking office, including the currently pending Equality Act, which would ban employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. 

Activists familiar with Norton’s work also point out that she has played a lead role in opposing and helping to defeat anti-LGBTQ legislation. In 2018, Norton helped lead an effort to defeat a bill called the First Amendment Defense Act introduced by U.S. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), which Norton said included language that could “gut” D.C.’s Human Rights Act’s provisions banning LGBTQ discrimination.

Norton pointed to a provision in the bill not immediately noticed by LGBTQ rights organizations that would define D.C.’s local government as a federal government entity and allow potential discrimination against LGBTQ people based on a “sincerely held religious belief.”

“This bill is the latest outrageous Republican attack on the District, focusing particularly on our LGBT community and the District’s right to self-government,” Norton said shortly after the bill was introduced. “We will not allow Republicans to discriminate against the LGBT community under the guise of religious liberty,” she said. Records show supporters have not secured the votes to pass it in several congressional sessions.

In 2011, Norton was credited with lining up sufficient opposition to plans by some Republican lawmakers to attempt to overturn D.C.’s same-sex marriage law, that the Council passed and the mayor signed in 2010.   

In 2015, Norton also played a lead role opposing attempts by GOP members of  Congress to overturn another D.C. law protecting LGBTQ students at religious schools, including the city’s Catholic University, from discrimination such as the denial of providing meeting space for an LGBTQ organization.

More recently, in 2024 Norton again led efforts to defeat an attempt by Republican House members to amend the D.C. budget bill that Congress must pass to eliminate funding for the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs and to prohibit the city from using its funds to enforce the D.C. Human Rights Act in cases of discrimination against transgender people.

“The Republican amendment that would prohibit funds from being used to enforce anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination regulations and the amendment to defund the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ+ Affairs are disgraceful attempts, in themselves, to discriminate against D.C.’s LGBTQ+ community while denying D.C. residents the limited governance over their local affairs to which they are entitled,” Norton told the Washington Blade.

In addition to pushing for LGBTQ supportive laws and opposing anti-LGBTQ measures Norton has spoken out against anti-LGBTQ hate crimes and called on the office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C. in 2020 to more aggressively prosecute anti-LGBTQ hate crimes.

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton marches in the 1995 AIDS Walk. (Washington Blade archive photo by Clint Steib)

“There is so much to be thankful for Eleanor Holmes Norton’s many years of service to all the citizens and residents of the District of Columbia,” said John Klenert, a member of the board of the LGBTQ Victory Fund. “Whether it was supporting its LGBTQ+ people for equal rights, HIV health issues, home rule protection, statehood for all 700,000 people, we could depend on her,” he said.

Ryan Bos, executive director of Capital Pride Alliance, the group that organizes D.C.’s annual LGBTQ Pride events, called Norton a “staunch” LGBTQ community ally and champion for LGBTQ supportive legislation in Congress.

“For decades, Congresswoman Norton has marched in the annual Capital Pride Parade, showing her pride and using her platform to bring voice and visibility in our fight to advance civil rights, end discrimination, and affirm the dignity of all LGBTQ+ people” Bos said. “We will be forever grateful for her ongoing advocacy and contributions to the LGBTQ+ movement.”

Howard Garrett, president of D.C.’s Capital Stonewall Democrats, called Norton a “consistent and principled advocate” for equality throughout her career. “She supported LGBTQ rights long before it was politically popular, advancing nondiscrimination protections and equal protection under the law,” he said.

“Eleanor was smart, tough, and did not suffer fools gladly,” said Rick Rosendall, former president of the D.C. Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance. “But unlike many Democratic politicians a few decades ago who were not reliable on LGBTQ issues, she was always right there with us,” he said. “We didn’t have to explain our cause to her.”

Longtime D.C. gay Democratic activist Peter Rosenstein said he first met Norton when she served as chair of the New York City Human Rights Commission. “She got her start in the civil rights movement and has always been a brilliant advocate for equality,” Rosenstein said.

“She fought for women and for the LGBTQ community,” he said. “She always stood strong with us in all the battles the LGBTQ community had to fight in Congress. I have been honored to know her, thank her for her lifetime of service, and wish her only the best in a hard-earned retirement.”

Continue Reading

Virginia

Hashmi speaks at Equality Virginia Lobby Day

Lt. gov. is a vocal LGBTQ ally

Published

on

Virginia Lt. Gov. Ghazala Hashmi (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Lieutenant Gov. Ghazala Hashmi on Monday opened Equality Virginia’s annual Lobby Day in Richmond.

The Lobby Day was held at Virginia’s Capitol and was open to the public by RSVP. The annual event is one of the ways that Equality Virginia urges its supporters to get involved. It also offers informational sessions and calls to action through social media.

Hashmi, a former state senator, has been open about her support for the LGBTQ community and other marginalized groups. Her current advisor is Equality Virginia Executive Director Narissa Rahaman, and the group endorsed her for lieutenant governor. 

Hashmi historically opposes anti-transgender legislation.

She opposed a 2022 bill that sought to take away opportunities from trans athletes.

One of the focuses of this year’s Lobby Day was protecting LGBTQ students. Another was protecting trans youth’s access to gender-affirming care.

Advocates spent their day in meetings and dialogues with state legislators and lawmakers about legislative priorities and concerns. 

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

D.C. Council urged to improve ‘weakened’ PrEP insurance bill

AIDS group calls for changes before full vote on Feb. 3

Published

on

HIV + HEP Policy Institute Executive Director Carl Schmid. (Photo courtesy of Schmid)

The D.C.-based HIV + Hepatitis Policy Institute is calling on the D.C. Council to reverse what it says was the “unfortunate” action by a Council committee to weaken a bill aimed at requiring health insurance companies to cover the costs of HIV prevention or PrEP drugs for D.C. residents at risk for HIV infection.

HIV + HEP Policy Institute Executive Director Carl Schmid points out in a Jan. 30 email message to all 13 D.C. Council members that the Council’s Committee on Health on Dec. 8, 2025, voted to change the PrEP DC Act of 2025, Bill 26-0159, to require insurers to fully cover only one PrEP drug regimen.

Schmid noted the bill as originally written and introduced Feb. 28, 2025, by Council member Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5), the Council’s only gay member, required insurers to cover all PrEP drugs, including the newest PrEP medication taken by injection once every six months. 

Schmid’s message to the Council members was sent on Friday, Jan. 30, just days before the Council was scheduled to vote on the bill on Feb. 3. He contacted the Washington Blade about his concerns about the bill as changed by committee that same day.

 Spokespersons for Parker and the Committee on Health and its chairperson, Council member Christina Henderson (I-At-Large) didn’t immediately respond to the Blade’s request for comment on the issue, saying they were looking into the matter and would try to provide a response on Monday, Jan. 2.

 In his message to Council members, Schmid also noted that he and other AIDS advocacy groups strongly supported the committee’s decision to incorporate into the bill a separate measure introduced by Council member Brooke Pinto (D-Ward 2) that would prohibit insurers, including life insurance companies, from denying coverage to people who are on PrEP.

“We appreciate the Committee’s revisions to the bill that incorporates Bill 26-0101, which prohibits discrimination by insurance carriers based on PrEP use,” Schmid said in his statement to all Council members.

 “However, the revised PrEP coverage provision would actually reduce PrEP options for D.C. residents that are required by current federal law, limit patient choice, and place D.C. behind states that have enacted HIV prevention policies designed to remain in effect regardless of any federal changes,” Schmid added.

He told the Washington Blade that although these protections are currently provided through coverage standards recommended in the U.S. Affordable Care Act, AIDS advocacy organizations have called for D.C. and states to pass their own legislation requiring insurance coverage of PrEP in the event that the federal policies are weakened or removed by the Trump administration, which has already reduced or ended federal funding for HIV/AIDS-related programs.

“The District of Columbia has always been a leader in the fight against HIV,” Schmid said in a statement to Council members. But in a separate statement he sent to the Blade, Schmid said the positive version of the bill as introduced by Parker and the committee’s incorporation of the Pinto bill were in stark contrast to the “bad side  — the bill would only require insurers to cover one PrEP drug.” 

He added, “That is far worse than current federal requirements. Obviously, the insurers got to them.”

  The Committee on Health’s official report on the bill summarizes testimony in support of the bill by health-related organizations, including Whitman-Walker Health, and two D.C. government officials before the committee at an Oct. 30, 2025, public hearing.

 Among them were Clover Barnes, Senior Deputy Director of the D.C. HIV/AIDS, Hepatitis, STD, and TB Administration, and Philip Barlow, Associate Commissioner for the D.C. Department of Insurance, Securities, and Banking.

Although both Barnes and Barlow expressed overall support for the bill, Barlow suggested several changes, one of which could be related to the committee’s change of the bill described by Schmid, according to the committee report.  

“First, he recommended changing the language that required PrEP and PEP coverage by insurers to instead require that insurers who already cover PrEP and PEP do not impose cost sharing or coverage more restrictive than other treatments,” the committee report states. “He pointed out that D.C. insurers already cover PrEP and PEP as preventive services, and this language would avoid unintended costs for the District,” the report adds.

PEP refers to Post-Exposure Prophylaxis medication, while PrEP stands for Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis medication.

 In response to a request from the Blade for comment, Daniel Gleick, Mayor Muriel Bowser’s press secretary, said he would inquire about the issue in the mayor’s office.

Naseema Shafi, Whitman-Walker Health’s CEO, meanwhile, in response to a request by the Blade for comment, released a statement sharing Schmid’s concerns about the current version of the PrEP DC Act of 2025, which the Committee on Health renamed as the PrEP DC Amendment Act of 2025.

 “Whitman-Walker Health believes that all residents of the District of Columbia should have access to whatever PrEP method is best for them based on their conversations with their providers,” Shafi said. “We would not want to see limitations on what insurers would cover,” she added. “Those kinds of limitations lead to significantly reduced access and will be a major step backwards, not to mention undermining the critical progress that the Affordable Care Act enabled for HIV prevention,” she said.     

 The Blade will update this story as soon as additional information is obtained from the D.C. Council members involved with the bill, especially Parker. The Blade will report on whether the full Council makes the changes to the bill requested by Schmid and others before it votes on whether to approve it at its Feb. 3 legislative session. 

Continue Reading

Popular