Local
Council gives final approval to marriage bill

Same-sex marriage supporters rallied on Monday night in advance of the Council’s historic vote. (DC Agenda photo by Michael Key)
In an action hailed as historic and groundbreaking, the D.C. City Council voted 11-2 this week to give final approval of a bill allowing same-sex marriages to be performed in the nation’s capital.
Tuesday’s vote triggered a burst of applause from dozens of LGBT activists and same-sex couples who packed the Council chambers to watch the debate and final roll-call vote on the Religious Freedom & Civil Marriage Equality Amendment Act of 2009.
“Today is the final step in a long march toward equality in the District of Columbia,” said Council member Phil Mendelson (D-At Large), who chairs the committee that shepherded the bill through the Council.
Alisha Mills, president of the local same-sex marriage advocacy group Campaign for All Families, called the Council’s action “a historic day for the District of Columbia” and its lesbian and gay couples.
“Equality for all D.C. residents has prevailed,” she said. “The Council’s decision today embodies the true essence of leadership. Thanks to their bold work, all D.C. families will have the same protections, opportunities and obligations under the law.”
The bill next goes to Mayor Adrian Fenty, a long-time same-sex marriage supporter who has pledged to sign it. It then goes to Capitol Hill, where it must undergo a required 30 legislative day review by Congress.
Both Democratic and Republican leaders in the House and Senate agree that an attempt by same-sex marriage opponents to overturn the legislation through a disapproval resolution is not expected to succeed in the Democratic controlled Congress. Most Capitol Hill observers expect the legislation to clear the congressional review and become law sometime in March.
But political observers in the District and on Capitol Hill say opponents would have a better shot at killing the bill next year by seeking to attach a repeal amendment to an appropriations bill, possibly the D.C. appropriations bill, which Congress must approve each year.
The city’s same-sex marriage law also is being targeted by a bill introduced earlier this year that would ban same-same marriage in the city. The bill, known as the D.C. Defense of Marriage Act, currently has 61 co-sponsors in the House. It has yet to be introduced in the Senate. Most Capitol Hill observers say it has little or no chance of passing any time soon under a Democratic controlled Congress.
But Brian Brown, executive director of the anti-gay National Organization for Marriage, issued a statement after the Council vote vowing that gay marriage opponents will “win” in their efforts to overturn the law.
“The media would have you believe this fight is over,” Brown said in the statement. “Nothing could be further from the truth.”
Among other things, Brown predicted gay marriage opponents would prevail in a pending court case to force the District to hold a voter referendum calling for banning same-sex marriage in the city, a referendum that he said voters would pass.
If the city’s same-sex marriage bill clears its congressional review and withstands efforts to challenge it through a referendum, D.C. would join Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont and New Hampshire as a U.S. jurisdiction that allows same-sex marriages to be performed within its borders.
Gay Council members David Catania (I-At Large), author of the D.C. same-sex marriage bill, and Jim Graham (D-Ward 1) noted that the Council’s action culminated 40 years of advocacy work in the city by LGBT activists and their straight allies.
“It’s very easy for someone like me to be overcome by the emotion of this action,” said Graham, who was involved in gay activism as head of D.C.’s Whitman-Walker Clinic before winning election to the Council.
Graham called passage of the same-sex marriage bill “the final prize” in the quest for full LGBT equality in the city, although he added that efforts to push for non-discrimination policies would continue.
Gay activist Bob Summersgill, who has coordinated efforts to expand the city’s domestic partnership law and to push for same-sex marriage, said he was hopeful that gay-supportive congressional allies, including Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), would beat back attempts to overturn the law through the appropriations process.
“This was the next big step that we had,” Summersgill said of the Council’s approval of the same-sex marriage bill.
“But now we’re done with the easy part of getting marriage in D.C.,” he said. “We’ve had the ability to get this through the Council for about a decade. The real challenge now is for the Congress not to act, not to hurt us in the 30 days, when no one thinks they will, and the appropriations time, where we’re less sure.”
Same-sex marriage opponents are currently waging a court fight to challenge a decision by the city’s Board of Elections & Ethics against allowing a voter referendum or initiative on the marriage bill. The board ruled that the city’s election law doesn’t allow voter initiatives or referenda if the outcome of such a ballot measure would result in discrimination barred by the city’s Human Rights Act.
The board ruled twice that a ballot measure on the marriage bill would violate the D.C. Human Rights Act’s ban on sexual orientation discrimination. Same-sex marriage opponents have challenged that ruling in D.C. Superior Court and have vowed to take their legal action to the U.S. Supreme Court if they lose in the lower courts.
Meanwhile, Bishop Harry Jackson, pastor of Hope Christian Church in Beltsville, Md., and a leader in the fight to oppose same-sex marriage in the District, told the D.C. Agenda that he and his supporters would file papers next week for yet another referendum to overturn the marriage bill approved Tuesday.
As such, the D.C. Board of Elections & Ethics would once again be asked to rule on whether such a referendum is allowed. Most legal observers believe the board will turn down Jackson’s application for a referendum, just as it has for Jackson’s two similar requests earlier this year.
The first attempt at a referendum was aimed at a bill the Council approved in May that allows the city to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states and countries. That measure became law in July after it cleared its congressional review.
The recognition measure allows same-sex couples in D.C. to travel to other states to marry and to return to the District with full marriage rights under D.C. law. Activists viewed the recognition law as a trial run for the full same-sex marriage bill approved Tuesday, which allows same-sex couples to marry in the city.
But same-sex couples that marry in D.C., just like their counterparts in other states that have legalized same-sex marriage, cannot obtain any of the more than 1,000 federal rights and benefits associated with marriage, such as Social Security survivor benefits. The 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, known as DOMA, bans same-sex couples from receiving federal marital benefits and rights.
Gay advocacy groups are urging Congress to repeal DOMA. Democratic lawmakers supportive of LGBT rights have said, however, that they don’t have the votes to pass a DOMA repeal measure in the immediate future.
Council member and former mayor Marion Barry (D-Ward 8) and Council member Yvette Alexander (D-Ward 7) were the only members of the 13-member Council to vote against the same-sex marriage bill Tuesday.
Both said they support LGBT rights in all other areas but could not back same-sex marriage based on their religious beliefs and strong opposition to the legislation from their constituents.
During the Council debate, Catania called on the LGBT community not to judge Barry and Alexander solely on the gay marriage vote, saying both have strong pro-LGBT records on all other issues.
“They are not the typical individuals that you would find casting votes against the GLBT community,” Catania said.
“That doesn’t mean I’m not disappointed [in their vote],” he said. “But I don’t want their entire service within the GLBT community to be judged by this one vote. I don’t think that’s fair. They are my friends, and they’re decent. This is simply a difference of opinion.”
District of Columbia
How new barriers to health care coverage are hitting D.C.
Federally qualified health centers bracing for influx of newly uninsured patients
Washington, D.C. has the second-lowest rate of people who lack health insurance in the country, but many residents are facing new barriers to health care due to provisions of the sweeping federal law passed in July, which threatens access for thousands.
Changes to insurance eligibility and the rising cost of premiums, which kicked in for some in October and others more recently, are expected to leave many more patients uninsured or unable to afford medical care. Federally qualified health centers, including D.C.’s Whitman-Walker Health, where 10 to 12 percent of patients are uninsured, are bracing for an influx of newly uninsured patients while facing their own financial challenges.
Even in D.C., where uninsured rates have been among the lowest in the country, changes brought on by the passage of the Republican mega bill (known as the “Big Beautiful Bill”) will have major effects.
The changes from the bill affect Medicaid, which is free to low-income patients, and subsidies for insurance that people buy on the health insurance exchanges that were started under the Affordable Care Act, which were allowed to expire on Dec. 31.
Erin Loubier, vice president for access and strategic initiatives at Whitman-Walker Health, says some Whitman-Walker Health patients have received notices about premium increases, including several who say the increases are up to 1,000 percent more than they were paying.
“That is like paying rent,” she says. “We live in an expensive city, so any increases are going to be really, really hard on people.”
Whitman-Walker Health and other healthcare providers are expecting the changes to have multiple effects — some patients may not be able to afford coverage or may avoid going to the doctor and allow health conditions to worsen because they can’t afford care, and many more will be seeking care who don’t have insurance.
“I’m worried that we’re going to not just have people who can’t get care, but that they delay care until they’re really sick, and then the care is not as effective because they might have waited too long, and then we may have a less healthy population,” Loubier says.
Loubier says delaying care, and serving more people without insurance has major implications for Whitman-Walker Health and other health centers serving the community.
“There’s going to be a lot of pressure on us to try to find and raise more money, and that’s going to be harder, because I think all organizations who provide health care are going to be facing this,” she says.
The U.S. health care system is the most expensive in the world, and has much higher out-of-pocket costs for individuals. But in other countries like the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and many others, health care is much less expensive — or even free.
Even though the U.S. has a high-priced healthcare system, critics say there are still ways to bring down costs by forcing insurance and pharmaceutical companies to absorb more of the costs, rather than transferring the costs to patients.
“In the U.S., they end up trying to cut costs at the person’s level, not at the level of the different corporations or structures that are making a lot of money in healthcare,” said Loubier. “Our system is so complicated and there is probably waste in it, but I don’t think that that cost and waste is at the ‘people’ level. I think it’s higher up at the system level, but that is much, much harder to get people to try to make cuts at that end.”
Ultimately at Whitman-Walker Health, healthcare providers and insurance navigators are planning to help with everyday necessities when it comes to healthcare coverage and striving to provide healthcare in partnership with patients, said Loubier.
“The key here is we’re going to have a lot of people who may lose insurance, and they’re going to rely on places like Whitman-Walker Health and other community health centers, so we have to figure out how we keep providing that care,” she said.
(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
Mayor Bowser signs bill requiring insurers to cover PrEP
‘This is a win in the fight against HIV/AIDS’
D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser on March 20 signed a bill approved by the D.C. Council that requires health insurance companies to cover the costs of HIV prevention or PrEP drugs for D.C. residents at risk for HIV infection.
Like all legislation approved by the Council and signed by the mayor, the bill, called the PrEP D.C. Amendment Act, was sent to Capitol Hill for a required 30-day congressional review period before it takes effect as D.C. law.
Gay D.C. Council member Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5) last year introduced the bill.
Insurance coverage for PrEP drugs has been provided through coverage standards included in the Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare. But AIDS advocacy organizations have called on states and D.C. to pass their own legislation requiring insurance coverage of PrEP as a safeguard in case federal policies are weakened or removed by the Trump administration, which has already reduced federal funding for HIV/AIDS-related programs.
Like legislation passed by other states, the PrEP D.C. Amendment Act requires insurers to cover all PrEP drugs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Studies have shown that PrEP drugs, which can be taken as pills or by injection just twice a year, are highly effective in preventing HIV infection.
“I think this is a win for our community,” Parker said after the D.C. Council voted unanimously to approve the bill on its first vote on the measure in February. “And this is a win in the fight against HIV/AIDS.”
District of Columbia
Blade editor to be inducted into D.C. Society of Professional Journalists Hall of Fame
Kevin Naff marks 24 years with publication this year
Longtime Washington Blade Editor Kevin Naff will be inducted into D.C.’s Society of Professional Journalists Hall of Fame in June, the group announced this week.
Hall of Fame honorees are chosen by the Society of Professional Journalists’ Washington, D.C., Pro Chapter. Naff and two other inductees — Seth Borenstein, a Washington-based national science writer for the AP and Cheryl W. Thompson, an award-winning correspondent for National Public Radio — will be celebrated at the chapter’s Dateline Awards dinner on Tuesday, June 9, at the National Press Club. The dinner’s emcee will be Kojo Nnamdi, host of WAMU radio’s weekly “Politics Hour.”
“I am tremendously honored by this recognition,” Naff said. “I have spent a lifetime in the D.C. area learning from so many talented journalists and am humbled to be considered in their company. Thank you to SPJ and to all the LGBTQ pioneers who came before me who made this possible.”
Naff joined the Blade in 2002 after years in print and digital journalism. He worked as a financial reporter for Reuters in New York before moving to Baltimore in 1996 to launch the Baltimore Sun’s website. He spent four years at the Sun before leaving for an internet startup and later joining the mobile data group at Verizon Wireless working on the first generation of mobile apps.
He then moved to the Blade and has served as the publication’s longest-tenured editor. In 2023, Naff published his first book, “How We Won the War for LGBTQ Equality — And How Our Enemies Could Take It All Away.”
Previous Hall of Fame inductees include luminaries in journalism like Wolf Blitzer, Benjamin Bradlee, Bob Woodward, Andrea Mitchell, and Edgar Allen Poe. The Blade’s senior news reporter Lou Chibbaro Jr. was inducted in 2015.
