Living
Tough questioning for Gallagher at marriage hearing
Democratic lawmakers hammer anti-gay activist
Maggie Gallagher, chair of the National Organization for Marriage (Blade photo by Michael Key)
Democratic lawmakers on Friday hammered anti-gay activist Maggie Gallagher during a congressional hearing with questions on why same-sex couples should be excluded from marriage and the extent to which the National Organization for Marriage participated in campaigns to rescind state marriage laws.
In testimony before the House Judiciary subcommittee on the Constitution, Gallagher, NOM’s chair and co-founder, said marriage should restricted to one man and one woman because such unions are the only kind that can produce children and because state voters by referenda have affirmed 31 times that marriage shouldn’t be extended to gay couples.
“Marriage is the union of husband and wife for a reason: these are the only unions that create new life and connect those children in love to their mother and father,” Gallagher said. “This is not necessarily the reason why individuals marry; this is the great reason, the public reason why government gets involved in the first place.”
The hearing, which was titled “Defending Marriage,” took place on the heels of President Obama’s announcement on Feb. 23 that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional and that his administration would no longer defend the anti-gay law against litigation in court. Following a 3-2 party-line vote in March by the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Council, U.S. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) directed the House general counsel to take up defense of DOMA in place of the administration.
Gallagher said the need to raise children by married parents of opposite genders affirms the rationale for having in place DOMA, the 1996 law that prohibits recognition of same-sex marriage, and criticized the Justice Department for dropping defense of the law.
“This is the rationale for the national definition of marriage proposed by Congress in passing DOMA: ‘civil society has an interest in maintaining and protecting the institution of heterosexual marriage because it has a deep and abiding interest in encouraging responsible procreation and child-rearing,'” Gallagher said. “If we accept, as DOMA explicitly does, that this is a core public purpose of marriage, then treating same-sex unions as marriage makes little sense.”
Following her opening statement, Gallagher bore the brunt of tough questioning from Democratic lawmakers during the question-and-answer session of the hearing.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), ranking Democrat on the subcommittee, asked Gallagher if the children of Jen and Dawn BarbouRouske, a married same-sex couple from Iowa who were present during the hearing, should have parents who can receive the full protections of marriage or if she considers these children “expendable.”
“I think no children are expendable,” Gallagher replied. “Gay people have families that are not marital families, but they are families. I myself was an unwed mother, so I have firsthand experience with being in a family that’s not a marital family. I don’t think you need to have a message of stigmatization and exclusion to protect to an ideal.”
Nadler, sponsor of DOMA repeal legislation in the House, interrupted Gallagher, saying “the whole point” of DOMA is stigmatization and exclusion, and pressed Gallagher further on why the institution of marriage benefits when same-sex couples are excluded.
“Because including same-sex unions as marriages denies at a public level that marriage is about an important way for getting together mothers and fathers and children,” Gallagher said.
Nadler continued to question Gallagher on NOM’s involvement in 2010 Iowa campaign that successfully ousted three justices from the state Supreme Court who ruled in favor of same-sex marriage. The lawmaker asked Gallagher, who estimated that NOM contributed between $600,000 and $650,000 to the campaign, why she would criticize the Justice Department for allegedly making a political decision while her organization politicized the judicial process.
“The National Organization of Marriage is political advocacy organization, and so I think it’s appropriate for us to be politically involved in ways that Department of Justice is not,” Gallagher replied.
Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), a co-sponsor of the DOMA repeal bill, asked Gallagher whether reports were true that her organization contributed $1.9 million to the 2009 campaign in Maine to abrogate the states’s same-sex marriage law. Opponents of same-sex marriage succeeded in nullifying the marriage law in the state before gay couples could marry there.
“I don’t have those figures in front of me, but we were involved in the [effort],” Gallagher said. “But that’s probably on the order [of our contributions].”
NOM has repeatedly come under fire for failing to disclose their donors during the campaign against the Maine marriage law. State courts have ordered the organization to reveal their donors in accordance with the law, but NOM has yet to do so.
Following the hearing, Dan Fotou, eastern regional field director for GetEQUAL, praised Democratic lawmakers for hammering Gallagher with tough questions after her testimony.
“I think it was good to hear the Democrats standing up and challenging Maggie Gallagher’s position,” Fotou said. “Fifty-two percent of Americans think that marriage equality is OK, so I think today was good in terms of putting a face on hate once again, and Maggie does a really great job of that.”
Democratic lawmakers’ criticisms during the hearing weren’t limited to Gallagher. Conyers questioned Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), chair of the subcommittee, why no witnesses from the Justice Department were present to defend Obama’s decision to drop defense of DOMA.
“What bothers me about this hearing at this subcommittee is that the Department of Justice is not present,” Conyers said. “I was informed that they were not invited. … We have one of the leaders of the country, Ms. Gallagher, who’s raised hundreds of thousands of dollars against judges … but there’s nobody here from the Justice Department.”
In response, Franks said the Justice Department would be invited to come during an upcoming hearing in May before the House Oversight & Government Reform Committee on the DOMA decision. Upon further questioning, Franks maintained the panel was fair because its makeup included witnesses on both sides of the issue.
But Franks’ response apparently didn’t allay the concerns of Conyers, who said he hopes Congress can hear the Justice Department to respond to the criticisms of Gallagher.
“There’s a political tone in this hearing that I want to diminish as much as possible,” Conyers said. “The fact of the matter is this is not in regular order and I do not approve the way that we’re starting out this subcommittee [hearing].”
Despite the general tone in favor of DOMA during the hearing, several panel members known for having anti-gay views — including Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), who’s railed against same-sex marriage in home state, and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), who’s leading the effort to eliminate gay nuptials in D.C. — didn’t make an appearance. Neither the office for King nor Jordan responded to the Washington Blade’s request to comment on why the lawmakers didn’t attend the hearing.
Ian Thompson, who’s gay and legislative representative for the American Civil Liberties Union, said the lack of presence by anti-gay lawmakers was telling that the they were uncomfortable with their positions.
“The thing that was particularly striking to me was the fact that so few DOMA supporters on the committee actually were in attendance,” Thompson said. “So, from my perspective, if the hearing was intended to demonstrate the support of the House of Representatives for DOMA, from the attendance alone, it was a complete and total flop.”
Rep. Trent Franks (Blade photo by Michael Key)
But a few anti-gay Republicans did make an appearance to rebuke the notion of extending marriage rights to gay couples and to criticize the Justice Department for dropping defense of DOMA.
Franks called Obama’s decision to discontinue defense of the anti-gay law an “edict” that “failed to show the caution and respect for Congress and the courts.”
“When the President unilaterally declares a duly enacted law unconstitutional, he cuts Congress and the American people out of the lawmaking process,” Franks said. “Such heavy-handed presidential action undermines the separation of powers and the principle that America is a constitutional republic predicated on the rule of law.”
Franks continued that the arguments in favor of DOMA are “reasonable and right” because marriage between one man and one woman is the best union for raising children.
“Traditional marriage has proven to be the most successful institution in humanity’s history for the propagation and preparation of the next generation,” Franks said. “The traditional family has proven to be the best department of welfare, the best department of education, the best department of crime prevention, and the best department of economic security that there has ever been.”
Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), a lawmaker known for anti-gay views, also made an appearance at the hearing and railed against what he called the government altering the definition of marriage. Smith, chair of the full House Judiciary Committee, offered an opening statement during the hearing even though he’s not a member of the subcommittee.
“If we tamper with the definition of marriage, harmful unintended consequences could follow,” Smith said. “The ability of religious institutions to define marriage for themselves to promote their sincerely held beliefs could be threatened.”
Smith said the will the people is for continued definition of marriage between one man and one woman — noting the 31 successful ballot initiatives that restricted marriage to such unions — and said the U.S. Constitution doesn’t provide protections for same-sex couples seeking to marry.
“No one can seriously believe that the Constitution’s founders intended to create a right to same-sex marriage,” Smith said. “By refusing to defend the Defense of Marriage Act against legal challenges, the administration has allowed the courts to overrule that popular law.”
Franks and Smith’s opening statements were countered by initial remarks from Nadler, who called arguments that Justice Department acted inappropriately by dropping defense of DOMA a “red herring” and said the real question should be whether anyone — either the Obama administration or Congress — should defend the law.
“Far from demeaning, trivializing or destroying the institution of marriage, [gay] couples have embraced this time-honored tradition and the commitment and serious legal duties of marriage,” Nadler said. “Rather than defending DOMA in court, Congress should be working to repeal it.”
Two legal experts on the panel presented opposing views on whether the administration acted within bounds in its decision to discontinue defense of DOMA in court.
Edward Whelan, president of the Ethics & Public Policy Center, said the Justice Department’s decision is in violation of its policy.
“The Obama administration’s decision to abandon defense of DOMA — or more precisely, to abandon its charade of pretending to defend DOMA — departs sharply from the Department of Justice’s long-standing practice,” Whelan said.
Whelan said Obama dropped defense of the anti-gay law to appease a political constituency and to induce the courts to “invent the constitutional right to same-sex marriage.”
“With the exception of laws that intrude on the executive branch’s power, the long-standing practice of the Department of Justice is to vigorously defend the constitutionality of any law where a reasonable may be made,” Whelan said. “This ‘reasonable standard’ is a very low bar. It basically means that the Department of Justice will defend a federal law against constitutional challenge when it can offer non-frivolous grounds in support of the law.”
Carlos Ball, a gay law professor at Rutgers Law School (Blade photo by Michael Key)
But Carlos Ball, a gay law professor from Rutgers Law School, testified that Obama acted within his authority because another statute exists saying that the attorney general must inform Congress if the administration decides to no longer defend a law.
“The existence of that statute seems to be a recognition by the Congress of the reality that the executive branch sometimes, in rare cases, can not defend the constitutionality of a law,” Ball said. “The executive branch, as a co-equal branch of government, has the authority and obligation to make independent assessment’s regarding a law’s constitutionality.”
Ball noted precedent for an administration declaring an existing law unconstitutional and dropping defense of the statute in court — the 1990 case of Metro Broadcasting v. FCC. Then-acting U.S. Solicitor General John Roberts, now Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, argued that a law providing for minority preferences in broadcast licensing was unconstitutional. Despite the position of the Bush administration, the Supreme Court later upheld the law.
Real Estate
Tips for buying a house in Rehoboth Beach
And why it’s a great fit for the LGBTQ community
If you’ve ever dreamed of owning a charming beach house where flip-flops are considered formalwear and sunsets are your daily entertainment, Rehoboth Beach, Del., might just be your dream come true. It’s not just a beautiful coastal town—it’s also a long celebrated safe haven and vibrant hub for the LGBTQ community. Let’s dive into why Rehoboth Beach is a fabulous choice and how to make a savvy beach house purchase.
Why Rehoboth Is a Vibe (especially for the LGBTQ community)
1. A Welcoming, Inclusive Community
Rehoboth Beach has been lovingly nicknamed the “Nation’s Summer Capital,” and it’s not just because of its proximity to D.C. For decades, Rehoboth has built a reputation as a warm, inclusive, and LGBTQ-friendly destination. From gay-owned businesses to LGBTQ events and nightlife, this is a town where you can truly be yourself.
2. Packed Social Calendar
Poodle Beach, the LGBTQ beach hangout just south of the boardwalk, is always buzzing in the summer. Events like Rehoboth Beach Bear Weekend, Women’s FEST, and CAMP Rehoboth’s myriad of social and wellness events bring people together all year round. That’s right—you’ll never be bored here unless you want to be.
3. Small Town Charm Meets Big City Culture
You get art galleries, drag brunches, live theater, eclectic cuisine, and adorable boutiques—basically everything your soul craves—without the chaos and crowds of major cities. It’s quaint but never boring. Think: Key West vibes with a Delaware zip code.
Tips for Buying Your Dream Beach House
1. Know Your Budget and Think Long Term. Beachfront and near-beach properties come at a premium. Expect to pay a bit more for proximity to the sand and ocean views.
2. Choose Your Neighborhood Wisely. Do you want to be walking distance from the action on the boardwalk? Or do you prefer something more secluded in areas like North Shores or Henlopen Acres?
3. Rental Potential. If you’re not living there full time, your beach house could work overtime as a vacation rental. Rehoboth Beach has a healthy short-term rental market, especially in peak summer. Often times LGBTQ travelers actively seek inclusive, affirming places to stay.
4. Weather the Weather. Like all coastal areas, Rehoboth comes with a side of salt air and occasional storms. Invest in a good home inspection, especially for older homes, and be prepared for the maintenance that comes with beachfront living (yes, that includes sand everywhere).
5. Work With a Local Real Estate Agent. Look for an agent who knows Rehoboth inside and out and understands the unique needs of LGBTQ buyers. This isn’t just a house — it’s your happy place. You want someone who sees that and says, “Let’s find your sanctuary.”
Buying a beach house in Rehoboth Beach isn’t just about real estate — it’s about finding a space that reflects your lifestyle, values, and need for both community and calm. Whether it becomes your full-time home, your weekend escape, or your Airbnb side hustle, Rehoboth welcomes you with open arms (and maybe a mimosa).
Want personalized tips on navigating the Rehoboth Beach real estate market? Let’s chat! I’ll bring the listings if you bring the sunscreen.
Justin Noble is a Realtor with The Burns & Noble Group with Sotheby’s International Realty, licensed in D.C., Maryland, and Delaware. Reach him at [email protected] or 202-234-3344.
Real Estate
Impact of federal gov’t RIF on D.C.’s rental market
A seismic economic change for local property owners
In a move that could redefine the federal government workforce and reshape the economic fabric of Washington, D.C., President Donald Trump has announced his intentions to significantly reduce federal government spending as well as the number of people the federal government employs.
Calling the federal bureaucracy “bloated” and “out of control,” Trump has repeatedly expressed his desire to cut thousands of federal jobs. While these cuts align with his long-standing push to “drain the swamp,” they come with potential and real collateral damage, especially for landlords in the D.C. area who have relied on government employees as some of their most reliable and long-term tenants.
The potential reduction of thousands of jobs in a city built around government work is not just a political shift—it’s a seismic economic change for the city government as well as for local property owners who have invested in the predictability of a near-constant demand for workers in the federal government agencies, government contractors and the economic ecosystem they sustain.
For landlords, government workers have represented ideal tenants: strong income, long-term leases, and responsible rental histories. Now, that foundation is being shaken in a battle by the Administration against a workforce which is the backbone of the Washington area’s overall economy, and especially its rental market.
With uncertainty looming, landlords are left in a difficult position. If widespread layoffs come to fruition, rental vacancies could spike, rental prices would drop, and previously secure investment properties might become financial liabilities. The sudden shift forces landlords to consider their next moves: how to support tenants facing job losses, how to adapt to a changing market, and how to ensure their own financial stability amid the uncertainty.
For D.C. landlords, this isn’t just about policy shifts or budget cuts, it’s about economic livelihood. The challenge ahead isn’t about just reacting to change, but proactively preparing for it, ensuring they can weather the storm of political maneuvering.
Potential Consequences for D.C. Landlords
- 1. Increased Risk of Non-Payment of Rent
- Job losses may lead to late or missed rent payments
- As affected tenants struggle financially, they may ask to break their lease to live elsewhere or even move out of the region
- Eviction lawsuits may rise, leading to a long and expensive process for landlords, all while not being able to rent their property to paying tenants.
- 2. Higher Vacancy Rates
- If many government employees leave the D.C. region in search of work elsewhere, the rental demand could decline significantly
- Rental properties may sit empty longer, requiring landlords to lower rents to attract new tenants and creating even more financial loss
3. More Competition from Other Landlords
- As many more units are vacant on the market, all competing for the same pool of potential tenants, older and smaller rentals, and those located further out from the core of the city will all struggle to find quality renters.
- Landlords will need to offer other ways to attract and retain tenants, such as incentives, which could quickly overwhelm the finances of smaller landlords who cannot keep up.
Proactive Strategies for Landlords
To mitigate risks and ensure future rental success, landlords should consider these defensive measures:
1. Strengthen Tenant Relationships and Communication
- Encourage tenants to communicate if they anticipate financial hardship due to job loss.
- Work out temporary payment plans or partial payments to prevent full non-payment or eviction.
- Provide guidance on rental assistance programs available in D.C.
2. Offer Flexible Lease Terms
- Consider shorter-term leases than a full 12-month term to accommodate the needs of tenants who may be uncertain about their long-term employment status.
- Offer lease renewals at the same rent amount to keep stable tenants and avoid turnover
3. Diversify Tenant Base
- If a large portion of tenants are government workers, a landlord may want to market to a broader audience or professionals in private industries.
- Advertise on platforms that cater to diverse tenant pools, including students and international workers.
4. Adjust Screening Criteria Thoughtfully
- While it’s important to ensure financial stability, consider creditworthiness, assets, and rental history rather than just employment status.
- Consider alternative income sources, like family members assisting, part-time work or freelance gigs.
5. Protect Cash Flow with Rent Guarantee Options
- Explore rental insurance policies or rent guarantee services to cover losses in case of non-payment.
- Consider co-signers or guarantors on leases for new tenants in vulnerable industries, just in case.
6. Adjust Rental Pricing to Stay Competitive
- Monitor the D.C. rental market and adjust pricing accordingly to attract new tenants.
- Consider offering move-in incentives as a way to stand out. Be creative! Sometimes things you can offer are different and may catch someone’s eye
Long-Term Planning for Rental Success
- Build reserves to cover expenses during potential vacancies or rent shortfalls.
- Invest in property upgrades to make rentals more attractive to a broader audience, such as young professionals or remote workers.
- Consider diversifying property holdings to include areas that are less reliant on government employment.
By taking proactive steps, landlords can safeguard their investments while supporting tenants through economic uncertainty, ultimately leading to a more stable and resilient rental business.
Scott Bloom is owner and senior property manager at Columbia Property Management. For more information, visit ColumbiaPM.com.
As the spring market hits its stride, we are beginning to see more inventory and an increase in days on the market in parts of the DMV. This may result in professional home inspections becoming routine parts of contract offers again. A thorough home inspection can help catch safety issues early and is an opportunity to learn about the operation and maintenance of items in your home.
Pay attention to flickering lights, frequently tripped breakers, and discolored outlets—these are signs of potential electrical hazards. Outdated wiring, overloaded outlets, and faulty appliances can lead to electrical fires.
Structural issues are often overlooked until it’s too late. Crumbling foundations, weak or damaged stairs, loose railings, and uneven flooring can cause trips and falls. Water damage from leaks or flooding can weaken the integrity of floors and walls, creating a risk of collapse.
Toxic chemicals can pose serious threats to health and safety, often without obvious warning signs. Understanding and addressing these risks is crucial for maintaining a safe living environment for you and your loved ones.
Household products such as cleaners, pesticides, air fresheners, and even cosmetics can emit volatile organic compounds (VOCs). These compounds, when inhaled regularly, can cause a range of health issues including headaches, respiratory problems, hormonal disruptions, and in some cases, even cancer. To minimize these risks, homeowners should opt for low-VOC or VOC-free products, ventilate regularly, and consider investing in an air purifier.
Formaldehyde is another common toxin found in pressed wood products, insulation, and certain paints. Long-term exposure can lead to chronic respiratory problems and has been linked to cancer.
Radon gas, another possible carcinogen, is prevalent in the DMV. Your home inspector can do a radon test or there are DIY kits available at many hardware stores. If levels are above EPA standards, a professional remediation firm can install a system that extracts the radon and vents it safely outdoors.
Carbon monoxide (CO), a colorless, odorless gas, is produced by gas stoves, heaters, and fireplaces. Exposure can lead to headaches, dizziness, nausea, and even death. Install CO detectors near bedrooms and ensure that all fuel-burning appliances are properly maintained and ventilated.
Additionally, older homes may still contain asbestos in insulation, floor tiles, or roofing materials. If disturbed, asbestos fibers can become airborne and are highly dangerous when inhaled, leading to serious diseases such as mesothelioma, so when renovating an older home, it’s critical to have materials tested for asbestos before beginning work.
Mold and mildew thrive in damp, poorly ventilated areas such as bathrooms, basements, and around leaky pipes. While some molds are harmless, others can cause allergic reactions or respiratory problems and aggravate conditions such as asthma. Black mold (Stachybotrys chartarum) is notorious for producing mycotoxins that may lead to severe health issues.
Signs of mold include musty odors, visible growth on walls or ceilings, and excessive humidity. Preventing mold growth requires controlling moisture levels—using dehumidifiers and vapor barriers, fixing leaks promptly, and ensuring adequate ventilation. Professional mold remediation may be necessary for severe infestations.
Though banned in residential paints in 1978, lead-based paint still exists in millions of older homes. Lead exposure is especially dangerous for children, causing developmental delays, learning difficulties, and behavioral issues. Adults are not immune – lead can lead to high blood pressure, kidney damage, and reproductive problems.
Even dust from deteriorating lead-based paint can be hazardous. The EPA recommends professional lead testing for any home built before 1978, especially if renovations are planned. Certified abatement professionals can safely remove or encapsulate lead paint.
Improper use of heating equipment, fireplaces, unattended candles, and cooking accidents are common sources of home fires. Smoke alarms and fire extinguishers are essential for early detection and response. Test smoke detectors monthly and change batteries at least once a year.
Homes that are safe for adults may not be safe for children or pets. Small objects, unsecured cabinets, toxic plants, and open staircases can pose significant risks. Childproofing measures such as outlet covers, safety gates, and cabinet locks, along with safe storage of chemicals and medications, are essential precautions.
The good news is that many of these risks can be mitigated with awareness and action. Here are a few simple steps to enhance home safety:
• Conduct a thorough safety audit using checklists available online.
• Ensure proper ventilation to reduce indoor air pollutants.
• Regularly check for leaks and signs of water damage.
• Keep cleaning and chemical products out of reach of children.
• Educate all household members about emergency procedures, including fire escapes and first aid.
Our homes should protect us, not pose threats to our well-being. By identifying and addressing these toxic and unsafe issues, we can transform our living spaces into truly safe havens.
Valerie M. Blake is a licensed Associate Broker in D.C., Maryland, and Virginia with RLAH @properties. Call or text her at 202-246-8602, email her via DCHomeQuest.com, or follow her on Facebook at TheRealst8ofAffairs.
Calendar: May 23-29
Comings & Goings
New doc chronicles gay hero’s journey from rape to forgiveness
Murdered Israeli embassy officials were supporters of D.C.’s LGBTQ synagogue
US hate groups fuel anti-LGBTQ rights movement in Africa
Looking back at 50 years of Pride in D.C
WorldPride events round-up
Pope Leo XIV: Family based on ‘stable union between a man and a woman’
Wes Moore signs HIV decriminalization bill
