Connect with us

National

Gay Calif. mayor seeks U.S. House seat

GOP candidate would be first member of Congress in same-sex marriage

Published

on

Mike Gin (right) and his spouse Christopher Kreidel (Photo courtesy Gin for Congress)

A gay Republican from California could become the first person in a same-sex marriage elected to Congress if he wins a U.S. House seat in an upcoming special election.

Mike Gin, who’s served as mayor of Redondo Beach, Calif., since 2005, said economic and education issues would be his priorities if elected to Congress, but he would welcome any benefit that his visibility as a gay member of Congress in a same-sex marriage would impart to LGBT youth.

“Certainly, we all need role models, and being gay and being married is just a part of who I am,” Gin said. “If somehow my election would provide some inspiration or maybe help a young person that’s very conflicted about being gay, then I think that’s a wonderful thing.”

Gin, 48, married his spouse, Christopher Kreidel, 50, an animator, at the Redondo Beach Historic “Morrell House” three days before Proposition 8 passed in California, eliminating same-sex marriage rights in the state. The couple has been together 16 years.

The California mayor is pursuing a U.S. House seat to represent California’s 36th congressional district, which was vacated when former Rep. Jane Harman left Congress to become head of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

In what is likely to be a difficult race for Gin, an all-party primary is set for May 17. If no candidate wins a majority, the two candidates who receive the most votes, regardless of party, will participate in a run-off election on July 12 to determine who will represent the district in the U.S. House.

If elected, Gin would become the fifth sitting openly gay member of Congress, joining Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.), Jared Polis (D-Colo.) and David Cicilline (D-R.I.). Gin would also be the first openly gay Republican to serve in Congress since former Arizona Congressman Jim Kolbe retired in 2007.

“I look at it just simply as part of who I am,” Gin said. “I’ve been very fortunate to be very open in my community and people have always treated me with tremendous respect and, even though they might agree with me on what they might consider to be a lifestyle, or the particular political positions that I have, I have always been very fortunate in being treated with a great amount of respect.”

Job creation would be the top priority for Gin. To stimulate the economy, Gin said Congress should sustain community block grants funds as well as the Workforce Investment Act, a 1998 law signed by then-President Clinton that created regional Workforce Investment Boards throughout the country to entice business. Gin said House Republicans had proposed to defund the law, but he wants it to continue.

“I view the budget not as a slash-and-burn approach as I think I’ve seen, especially over the past few months,” Gin said. “The Workforce Investment Act has created jobs, particularly in aerospace, and helped us sustain jobs here in the community.”

Another important issue for Gin is investment in education — particularly in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics. A former computer technician for the aerospace and defense industries, Gin said science education forms the foundation of the talent needed in his district for the advanced technical industries and he wants to see federal education grants in these areas.

“We need more young people to get excited about careers in science, engineering and mathematics in order to sustain that base of talent that we need here in our local industries,” Gin said.

Gin’s emphasis on economic issues in his campaign is part of the reason he won an endorsement in his race from the Log Cabin Republicans.

R. Clarke Cooper, Log Cabin’s executive director, said Gin has already proven he’s an effective leader in the course of the time he’s been a public servant.

“It says a lot that Redondo Beach is one of California’s few debt-free cities under his leadership, and that Mike was able to raise more than $100,000 in the first three days of his campaign,” Cooper said. “He is ready and able to join the GOP majority in Congress fighting to create jobs and turn this economy around, and Log Cabin Republicans will work to send him to Washington this summer.”

Gin has also won the endorsement of 10 current or former mayors in the South Bay of California and the Redondo Beach Chamber of Commerce.

Although he’s emphasizing economic issues, Gin said LGBT issues would also be on his agenda if elected to the House. Gin said upon taking his House seat he’d join the LGBT Equality Caucus, which is chaired by the openly gay members of Congress.

“To me, that’s really a non-issue because I strongly believe in the rights affecting our community and legislation affecting our community because it affects my family as well,” Gin said.

Among the bills that Gin said he’s support are the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would bar job discrimination against LGBT people, and the Uniting American Families Act, which would allow gay Americans to sponsor their foreign partners for residency in the United States, as well as legislation to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage.

Gin also said he’d oppose a measure pending before the House that could disrupt the process for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal by expanding the certification requirement to include the four military service chiefs. In December, President Obama signed legislation allowing for an end to the military’s gay ban, but only after he, the defense secretary and the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certify the U.S. military is ready.

“Certainly, the [chair of the] Joint Chief [of Staff] represents all the service chiefs throughout our nation’s armed forces — and with the secretary of defense and the president, the commander-in-chief in particular — I believe those are the three appropriate people that need to certify and would be very competent and knowledgeable about certifying the readiness of our troops,” Gin said.

Mike Gin (photo courtesy Gin for Congress)

Gin’s work as an LGBT advocate has been limited, although he was involved in the fight against Prop 8 in 2008 by taking part and contributing money to a coalition of Republicans that were against the initiative. In 2000, Gin said he was also against Prop 22, which made a ban on same-sex marriage part of the state law.

“Those are issues that I’ve come out in front of because, again, it affects my family as well,” Gin said. “I don’t consider myself an activist, but I’ve certainly been an advocate for legislation that affects our community. Being an out mayor has allowed me to have that voice.”

In the course of his run for Congress, Gin said he hasn’t encountered any anti-gay campaign tactics from his opponents. Still, he said he has endured attacks on his sexual orientation in his previous runs for office as mayor.

“There was a very ultra-conservative social conservative group here in California called the California Republican Assembly, which did an independent expenditure campaign flier against me — a very subtle way with issues regarding the gay agenda,” Gin said. “Very frankly, many people in my community were put off by it, and I believe that actually backfired on them and helped me gain greater support for my election as mayor in 2005.”

Even though upon taking his House seat, Gin would be voting for Republican leadership and joining the Republican caucus — which most Capitol Hill observers agree wouldn’t be willing to advance pro-LGBT legislation — the California mayor said his presence among GOP lawmakers could change minds.

“I would not hesitate at all to tell them my personal story and how this type of legislation affects my family and many families throughout our nation to bring the conversation back to really what I feel Republicanism is about and how it started,” Gin said. “That’s how hearts and minds can change. Whether or not it will happen, I don’t know.”

Gin expressed mixed feelings about House Speaker John Boehner’s (R-Ohio) decision to take up legal defense of the Defense of Marriage Act now that the Obama administration has declared it would no longer litigate on behalf of the statute. Gin said he’s personally against DOMA, but sees advantages to Boehner’s action.

“If you look at it from a constitutional level, sometimes the case, the judicial case, can be strengthened if you have some sort of opposition that’s mounted,” Gin said. “From a personal level, I don’t like the fact that that’s occurring, but also, the silver lining, if it occurs, is that clearly, I think, the courts have been in favor of us to this point. The very strong record should be built that further strengthens our case, if, in fact, counsel is appointed.”

Gin faces an uphill battle in his pursuit of a U.S. House seat as he runs in a Democratic district where two high-profile Democratic candidates are in the running: California Secretary of State Debra Bowen and Los Angeles City Council member Janice Hahn.

Recent polls released from the campaigns of the Democratic challengers indicate the race is neck-and-neck between Bowen and Hahn — with Gin following behind. According to an internal poll published last month by the Bowen campaign, Bowen and Hahn are tied at 20 percent in the race while Gin comes in at 8 percent.

Additionally, Bowen and Hahn are better funded than Gin. According to most recent Federal Election Commission reports, Bowen has raised $195,000 and has $93,000 in cash on hand, while Hahn has raised $275,000 and has $171,000 in cash on hand. Meanwhile, Gin has raised $77,000 and has $42,000 in cash on hand.

At the same time, California’s state equality organization last month threw its support behind Bowen in the race. Jim Carroll, interim executive director for Equality California, cited Bowen’s long-term commitment to the LGBT community in the announcement of the endorsement’s from his organization’s political action committee.

“Equality California PAC only endorses candidates who support full equality for the entire lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community, and Debra Bowen has a long track record of standing with our community when we’ve needed her most,” Carroll said. “We are confident that she will remain a vocal champion for equality in Congress and a committed leader that all Californians can count on.”

Gin said he’s pursuing an endorsement from the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund. Denis Dison, a Victory Fund spokesperson, said he couldn’t comment on candidates that his organization has yet to endorse. The Victory Fund has endorsed Gin in his previous runs for political office as mayor of Redondo Beach.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

National

HRC report: LGBTQ students face ‘far greater challenges’ in non-supportive states

Survey finds anti-LGBTQ school harassment, bullying highest in 17 states

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The Human Rights Campaign Foundation, the educational arm of the national LGBTQ advocacy organization Human Rights Campaign, has released a report showing LGBTQ public school students are more likely to face bullying, harassment, and “other barriers” in states that have less overall supportive LGBTQ laws and policies.

The report is based on the HRC Foundation’s National Educator Survey of School Climate and Bullying, which was released on Sept. 17.

“The report finds that harassment, bullying, and other barriers to LGBTQ+ inclusion are more prevalent in states with limiting policies, where educators report widespread restrictions on LGBTQ+ resources, visible expressions of support, and assistance for transgender students,” a statement released by HRC says.

“As just one example,” the statement adds, “while 59 percent of educators in states with limiting policies report restrictions on supporting their transgender students, just 6 percent to 8 percent of educators in states with supportive policies report the same, underscoring the impact of these policies on school climate, student well-being, and the stakes of the upcoming midterm elections for LGBTQ+ youth and inclusive classrooms.”

The report says the survey consisted of responses by 826 educators in 42 states who worked as teachers, principals, counselors, administrators, and others who worked in support services. All worked at schools with students from pre-kindergarten to 12th grade, most being public schools and a smaller number being charter schools, the report says.

It says the survey was conducted between April 15 and May 21, 2026, and included a survey questionnaire with about 55 questions covering a wide range of LGBTQ related school issues.

According to the report, its classification of LGBTQ supportive and non-LGBTQ supportive states is based on a detailed analysis of the LGBTQ related laws and policies of all 50 states, D.C., and U.S. territories conducted by the Movement Advancement Project, or MAP, which describes itself as an “independent, nonprofit thinktank.”  

The report includes a chart consisting of 51 boxes representing the 50 states and D.C., with 32 plus D.C. colored as blue and said to have overall LGBTQ supportive policies. The 17 boxes colored in red are said to have overall non-LGBTQ supportive policies and laws, Each of the boxes has the initial of a state or D.C. printed inside it.

In addition to D.C., the chart shows Maryland, Virginia, New York, California, and Massachusetts as among the supportive states. Florida, Texas, West Virginia, and Ohio are among the states shown to be non-LGBTQ supportive.  

The HRC statement includes these “key” findings from the survey:

  • In states with restrictive LGBTQ+ inclusion policies, 59 percent of educators report restrictions on supporting transgender students, compared to just 6-8 percent of educators in states with supportive LGBTQ+ inclusion policies.
  • In states with restrictive policies, nearly 50 percent of educators reported restrictions on LGBTQ+ books or resources, compared to just 7 percent of educators in states with supportive policies.
  • Roughly 32 percent of educators in states with restrictive policies reported anti-LGBTQ+ harassment was a moderate or serious problem, compared with 11 percent of educators in states with supportive LGBTQ+ inclusion policies.
  • In states with restrictive LGBTQ+ inclusion policies, 29 percent of educators were very worried about anti-LGBTQ+ harassment, compared to 15 percent in states with supportive LGBTQ+ inclusion policies.
  • In states with restrictive LGBTQ+ inclusion policies, 36 percent of educators witnessed anti-LGBTQ+ student bullying, compared to 27 percent in states with supportive LGBTQ+ inclusion policies.
  • In states with supportive LGBTQ+ inclusion policies, 75 percent of educators reported no restrictions on LGBTQ+-supportive displays, highlighting a substantially more supportive school environment than in states with restrictive policies.
  • Educators in states with restrictive LGBTQ+ inclusion policies also reported significant harassment of students based on appearance (57 percent), race or ethnicity (43 percent), sexual orientation (42 percent), and gender identity or expression (39 percent). (No direct comparison figure from supportive-policy states is provided in the data above.)

“Every young person deserves to feel safe and supportive at school, but this report makes clear that fore too many LGBTQ+ students, especially transgender youth, are being failed by policies designed to exclude them,” said HRC President Kelley Robinson in the HRC statement.

“We know that when students feel seen, supported, and affirmed, they are more likely too thrive, but when schools become places of exclusion or hostility, young people pay the price through lower engagement, missed opportunities to learn, and poorer mental and physical health,” Robinson said.

The HRC statement notes that the survey findings come at a time when a growing number of states have passed laws targeting LGBTQ students and the school officials and teachers who support them. It says that for the first time, the survey found that “educators themselves are also experiencing anti-LGBTQ+ harassment, highlighting the growing impact of these policies on school staff as well as students.”

The full survey findings and report can be accessed here:

Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court

Trump asks Supreme Court to allow restrictions on gender-affirming care in prisons

SCOTUS could further restrict rights of trans inmates

Published

on

The U.S. Supreme Court with an LGBTQ Pride flag flying in front of it. (Washington Blade Photo by Michael Key)

The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to allow its policy limiting gender-affirming treatment for federal inmates to take effect while a legal challenge plays out in court.

U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth ordered the government to continue providing gender-affirming care, such as hormone therapy, which had become policy nearly a decade ago for inmates who were transitioning.

The Trump administration argues in its application that its policy restricting transgender rights was properly adopted and that the judge overstepped, posing nationwide “security and prison-administrative concerns.”

If allowed, the policy would halt surgeries, hormones and social accommodations such as wigs while allowing mental health therapy to continue as the legality of the policy reversal is litigated.

The government also argues in the application that the Bureau of Prisons had “determined that sex-trait-modification surgeries, hormone interventions in general, and social accommodations could no longer be justified as treatment for gender dysphoria.”

American Civil Liberties Union attorneys for the inmates said the policy is “a direct threat to the well-being of transgender people in federal custody and an open violation of their fundamental rights,” and said withholding necessary gender-affirming healthcare constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.

The Blade has covered the ongoing developments surrounding changes to Federal Bureau of Prisons transgender inmate policy that went into effect earlier in Trump’s term. The changes primarily focus on rolling back Biden-era protections for trans inmates.

Earlier this year, the Blade published a joint letter from multiple senators in response to the rollback of the policy. Multiple senators — including Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Jeffrey A. Merkley (D-Ore.) and Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii) — sent a letter to Attorney General Todd Blanche and Federal Bureau of Prisons Director William Marshall III calling for them to reverse the policy change, saying it endangers inmates’ health and safety.

The senators described how the policy shift, along with President Trump’s Executive Order 14168, titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” is forcing policy changes they argued are rooted more in political rhetoric than in medical research or evidence-based correctional practices.

Federal Bureau of Prisons responded to the Blade’s request for comment in May, declining to reconsider its transgender inmate policy.

The Blade reached out to the Federal Bureau of Prisons once again over the application to the Supreme Court, but did not hear back before publication.

Continue Reading

Federal Government

Education Department rolls back protections for LGBTQ students under Title IX

The DoE policy rescinds Biden-era protections

Published

on

U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The Department of Education rolled back a Biden-era Title IX interpretation on Monday that secured sex-based discrimination protections for students on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

Title IX was established in 1972 as landmark civil rights law. It prohibits sex-based discrimination in any school or any other education program that receives funding from the federal government.

Education Secretary Linda McMahon spoke about the revision of the policy, claiming the decision would explicitly help “women and girls.”

“Thanks to today’s action, the published Title IX regulations faithfully reflect court orders and congressional intent — reducing confusion for parents, students, and educational institutions. We will continue to relentlessly champion equal opportunity for all Americans and hold accountable any school or college that violates the rights, privacy, or athletic opportunities of our women and girls,” McMahon said via press release.

Prior to her work under the Trump-Vance administration, McMahon was a World Wrestling Federation/World Wrestling Entertainment executive before resigning to pursue a career in politics. She was appointed to the Connecticut State Board of Education by then-Gov. Jodi Rell in January 2009, but resigned from her role shortly afterward to run what ultimately became two failed campaigns for Connecticut’s U.S. Senate seat in 2010 and 2012.

A “fact sheet” provided by the Department of Education also called the inclusive sexual assault and gender identity protections expanded under the Biden-Harris unlawful, saying, “This change is necessary to provide clarity in the Code of Federal Regulations so that institutions, administrations, students, and families can see the rules that are actually in force and to help eliminate public confusion about the Biden administration’s unlawful attempt to stretch Title IX’s legal protections to cover ‘sexual orientation’ and ‘gender identity.’”

This is not the first time this policy has faced judicial hurdles. While Biden was still in office, the plan was struck down in multiple courts in Republican states.

Opponents of the move say it will harm transgender athletes and weaken protections for sexual assault victims.

“Sexual harassment and assault continue to be pervasive in schools and, to the fullest extent possible, we should be working to enforce the laws that protect student survivors of sexual violence. Yet, Education Secretary Linda McMahon and the Trump administration have decided to ignore what survivors need, instead weaponizing Title IX to attack trans students,” said Shiwali Patel, senior director of education justice at the National Women’s Law Center.

This is a return to a first Trump term policy after Biden issued an executive order to attempt to curb discrimination for all — especially those with different sexual orientations and gender identities — that had been given a pass during Trump’s first term. Much of Title IX’s policy has a narrow vision of what sex protections look like that often and enthusiastically leave gender-diverse and non-heterosexual people out.

In March 2021, President Joe Biden signed Executive Order 14021, “Guaranteeing an Educational Environment Free From Discrimination on the Basis of Sex, Including Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity,” to attempt to undo some of the flagrantly anti-LGBTQ policy the Trump-Pence administration had set forth relating to Title IX protections for LGBTQ students and sexual assault survivors.

The secretary focused this “win” for the administration as one more step toward restricting transgender students from competing in women’s sports, but the 2020 rule, completed under former Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, didn’t explicitly ban trans students from participating on sports teams consistent with their gender identity. It did limit the types of sexual harassment and assault complaints that schools had to investigate and required live hearings so male students could respond to accusations.

McMahon didn’t discuss those aspects in her statement or in requests for comment. The 2020 rule drew praise from conservatives and intense opposition from advocates who said it downplayed sexual abuse and left victims unprotected.

In a statement, U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.), who chairs the House Education Committee, said, “Returning to the 2020 regulations restores longstanding protections for women and girls that the Biden-Harris administration attempted to dismantle and realigns Title IX policy with court precedents.”

LGBTQ activists have called this decision a direct attack on LGBTQ safety — particularly for trans students who continue to face a barrage of legislative, executive, and judicial attacks in recent years from the Trump-Vance administration.

Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBTQ advocacy group in the world, released a statement following the DoE’s announcement.

“Title IX is, quite simply, about protecting students and ensuring that they are safe from abuse, harassment, and discrimination while they pursue their education. But Donald Trump and his cronies aren’t interested in any of that,” Robinson said. “Donald Trump’s Department of Education has completely lost sight of that mission. Instead of enforcing protections for students, they’re rescinding them. They don’t care if sexual harassment and assault go unaddressed. And they’re happy to strip funding away from school districts and states that are actually trying to keep students safe.

“We know who will be hurt: women, girls, and others who are vulnerable to sexual harassment, assault and abuse — including LGBTQ+ students. The fact that they’re dropping this rule into place abruptly, without a comment period, denying families, educators, loved ones, and the students themselves a say in how they should be treated, shows how little they care about the safety of our students.

“This is a monstrous injustice, and it drives home how essential it is that we take action at the polls this November to start bringing some accountability to an administration that has turned its back on the very students Title IX was written to protect,” she added.

The Washington Blade reached out to the DoE for comment and questions on whether Title IX protections still included LGBTQ students, and received this email response from Education Spokesman Sabin Sidney:

“Your questions indicate you are clearly missing the entire point of this Final Rule. The Biden Administration illegally rewrote Title IX to include ‘sexual orientation’ and ‘gender identification’ in the definition of sex-based discrimination. The Trump Administration is rescinding this rule—only after every federal court that heard legal challenges rejected it as unlawful.

“Since January 2025, the Department has been enforcing Title IX consistent with the President’s Executive Order grounded in biological truth that there are only two sexes. The Trump Administration is restoring the original promise of Title IX and providing clarity to students, parents, and educational institutions. We will vigorously defend equal opportunity consistent with the law’s intended purpose.”

Continue Reading

Popular