National
Social conservative summit draws anti-gay rhetoric
GOP presidential hopefuls make their case at convention
Rep. Steve King (Blade photo by Michael Key)
Anti-gay rhetoric pervaded a social conservative convention over the weekend where Republican presidential candidates brandished their credentials for the religious right.
Remarks against gays and marriage equality came from several speakers — including lawmakers and conservative activists — at the 2011 Value Voters Summit in D.C., which was hosted by the anti-gay Family Research Council.
Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), known of being one of the most anti-gay members of the U.S. House, had particularly harsh words on Friday for LGBT advocates seeking to advance same-sex marriage.
“Marriage is the essential foundation stone for civilization,” King said. “It’s under assault today, ladies and gentlemen. It’s under assault even though it is a sacrament. They have decided they are going to assault it and they are doing so because — not because there is an alterior value out there. They will just attack everything that we believe in.”
The Iowa lawmaker, who spoke fondly of his involvement with the 2010 campaign that ousted three Iowa justices who ruled in favor of marriage equality, ridiculed pro-LGBT activists who protested the bus tour in the campaign against the judges.
“They were on the verge of militant,” King said. “They would come out and they would stand in there and they would scream and yell and curse with the worst profanity I’ve heard anywhere, and I spent my life in the construction business. They were the most unhappy people I ever met that called themselves ‘gay.'”
According to the Iowa Independent, King’s description of the bus tour isn’t consistent with what reporters from the media outlet saw. At one bus stop in Cedar Rapids, for example, same-sex marriage advocates outnumbered those who attended in support of the campaign and chose to mostly stand silently while holding signs.
Bryan Fischer, director of issues analysis for the American Family Association, expressed among the strongest anti-gay views during his summit and said on Saturday he wants a president “who will treat homosexuality not as a political cause at all, but as a threat to public health.”
“Homosexual behavior represents the same threat to human health that injection drug use does,” Fischer said. “I believe we need a president who understands that neither homosexual behavior nor injection drug use represent lifestyles that any responsible government ought to normalize, legitimize, legalize, protect, sanction, or subsidize.”
Criticism from Fischer on Saturday came from one of the GOP presidential hopefuls who spoke before him at the event: former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.
“We should remember that decency and civility are values too,” Romney said. “One of the speakers who will follow me today has crossed that line I think. Poisonous language doesn’t advance our cause. It has never softened a single heart or changed a single mind.”
Romney didn’t explicitly name anyone in these remarks, but, according to Politico, a Romney campaign official confirmed the former Massachusetts governor was referring to Fischer. It’s unclear whether Romney was chastising Fischer for being anti-gay. Fischer has also had vitriolic words for Islam as well as Mormonism, the religion to which Romney belongs.
Jimmy LaSalvia, executive director of gay conservative group GOProud, said Romney “is absolutely right” about Fischer and said the anti-gay activist’s comments “are what you would expect from a barbarian like Ahmadinejad not from a man who professes to be a Christian.”
“Gov. Romney should be praised for speaking out courageously against this kind of rhetoric,” LaSalvia continued. “We have a country on the edge of fiscal disaster and it is critical that we have a united conservative movement that can make the case to average Americans about why our vision, our values and our policies are right for this country. The last thing we need is a right wing version of Jeremiah Wright, distracting and dividing us, and that’s exactly what Bryan Fisher is.”
Despite his remarks, Romney also reiterated his pledge to defend in court the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage.
“But marriage is more than a personally rewarding social custom,” Romney said. “It is also critical for the well-being of a civilization. That is why it’s so important to preserve traditional marriage — the joining together of one man and one woman. And that’s why I will appoint an attorney general who will defend the bipartisan law passed by Congress and signed by Bill Clinton — the Defense of Marriage Act.”
The former Massachusetts governor had previously signed a pledge with the National Organization for Marriage promising to defend DOMA against litigation and to back a U.S. constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
Criticism for the Obama administration’s decision to drop the defense of DOMA in court came from several Republican presidential candidates during the Value Voters Summit.
Herman Cain, former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza, was among those saying he would resume the executive branch’s role in defending the law if elected president. He previously spoke out against Obama for no longer defending DOMA in court, but hasn’t signed the NOM pledge.
“I believe that marriage is between one man and one woman,” Cain said. “And I would not have asked the Department of Justice to not enforce it. I would have asked the Department of Justice to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act.”
Cain is wrong is saying that Obama isn’t enforcing DOMA. Although the Justice Department has discontinued defending in DOMA, the administration is still enforcing the law.
House Republican leaders who attended the conference trumpeted their decision to take up defense of DOMA in the Obama administrations. After the administration announced in February it would no longer defend DOMA, the House’s Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group voted on a party-line basis to take up defense of the law.
House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) restated his position before his audience on Friday that funds should be directed from the Justice Department to the House to pay for the cost of defending DOMA.
“I’ve raised my hand to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States and the laws of our country,” Boehner said. “And if the Justice Department was not going to defend this act passed by Congress, well, then we will. And we have defended the law that the Congress passed. We’re going to take the money away from the Justice Department, who’s supposed to enforce it, and we’ll use it to enforce the law.”
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) echoed praise in his speech for the House’s leadership in taking up defense of DOMA now that the Obama administration isn’t defending the law.
“We will continue and stand up for the Defense of Marriage Act as we fight for victory in the Supreme Court this term,” Cantor said.
This week, a contract modification became public revealing that House Republicans had raised the cost cap to $1.5 million to pay private attorney Paul Clement, a former U.S. solicitor general, to defend DOMA in court.
House Republicans cannot unilaterally redirect congressionally allocated funds from the Justice Department to the House for the purposes of defending DOMA. Both the House and the Senate would have to approve the fund redistribution legislatively through the appropriations process — and such a measure would need Obama’s signature for enactment.
Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, criticized House Republican leaders for touting their defense of DOMA — as well as the anti-gay tone of the conference in general.
“This is a clarion call for equality supporters and a sign of just how much influence groups like the Family Research Council hold over anti-LGBT lawmakers,” Solmonese said. “This is a reminder that we have real challenges ahead of us — from repealing DOMA once and for all to making our workplaces safer and more equitable with the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.”
Drew Hammill, spokesperson for House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), also rebuked Boehner for extolling his defense of DOMA and said Americans have other priorities.
“While Speaker Boehner does his best to convince the right-wing that both of his feet are firmly planted on the wrong side of history, the American taxpayers are paying the price,” Hammill said. “It’s time for the Speaker to end the hypocrisy of spending $1.5 million to foster discrimination and make more friends on the right, and get back to Americans’ top priority: creating jobs.”
Federal Government
Protesters say SAVE Act targets voters, transgender youth
Bill described as ‘Jim Crow 2.0’
Members of Congress, advocates, and people from across the country gathered outside the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday to protest proposed federal legislation that voting rights activists have deemed “Jim Crow 2.0.”
The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act would amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require in-person proof of citizenship for anyone seeking to vote in U.S. elections.
President Donald Trump has also pushed for the proposed legislation to include a section that would ban gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, even with parental consent, and prohibit trans people from participating in school or professional sports consistent with their gender identity rather than their sex assigned at birth.
In addition to changing voter registration requirements, the bill would limit acceptable forms of identification to documents such as a birth certificate or passport — records that the Brennan Center for Justice estimates more than 21 million Americans do not have — effectively restricting access to the ballot. It would also ban online voter registration, DMV voter registration efforts, and mail-in voter registration.
A 2021 investigation by the Associated Press found that fewer than 475 people voted illegally or improperly, a tiny fraction of the estimated 160 million Americans who voted in the 2020 election.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) spoke at the event.
“It will kick millions of American citizens off the rolls. And they don’t even require you to be told,” the highest-ranking Democrat in the Senate told protesters and reporters outside the Capitol. “If this law passes — and it won’t — you’re gonna show up in November … and they’ll say… sorry, you’re no longer on the voting rolls.”
He, like many other speakers, emphasized the bill in the context of American history, pointing to what he described as its racist roots and its impact on Black and brown Americans.
“I have called this act, over and over again, Jim Crow 2.0 … because they know it’s the truth.”
U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) was one of the lawmakers leading opposition to the legislation and spoke at the rally.
“It’s not just voting rights that are on the line — our democracy is on the line,” the California lawmaker said. “It’s not a voter I.D. bill. It’s a bait and switch bill.”
He added historical context, noting the significance of voting rights legislation passed more than 60 years ago. In 1965, Alabama civil rights activists marched to protest barriers to voter registration. Alabama state troopers violently attacked peaceful demonstrators at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, using tear gas, clubs, and whips against more than 500 — mostly Black — protesters.
“61 years ago — not to the day — but this week, President Lyndon Johnson came to the Capitol and addressed a joint session of Congress in the wake of Bloody Sunday and pushed Congress to pass the Voting Rights Act,” Padilla said. “61 years later, Donald Trump and this Republican majority wants to take us backwards. We’re not gonna let that happen.”
U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) also spoke, emphasizing that he views the effort as a Republican-led and Trump-backed attempt to restrict voting access, particularly among Black, brown, and predominantly Democratic communities.
“President Trump told Republicans when they were meeting behind closed doors that ‘The SAVE Act will guarantee Republicans win the midterms and ensure they do not lose an election for 50 years,’” Luján said. “The first time I think Donald Trump’s been honest … This voter suppression bill is only that. Taking away vote by mail? I hope my Republican colleagues from states that voted for Donald Trump or where vote by mail is popular have the courage and the backbone to stand up and say no to this nonsense, because their constituents are going to push back.”
U.S. Sen. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.) also spoke.
“Our Republican colleagues have already cut Medicaid, Medicare, people don’t know how they’re gonna be able to afford energy,” she said, providing context for the broader political moment. “We’re in the middle of a war that they can’t even get straight while we’re in it and don’t have a way to get out of it. And we are now faced with defending our democracy?”
She then showed the crowd something that she said has been with her throughout her political journey in Washington.
“I brought with me something that I carried on the day that I was sworn into the House of Representatives when I was elected in 2016, and I carried it with me on the day that I was sworn in as United States senator. And I also carried it with me when I was trapped up in the gallery on Jan. 6 and all I could think to do was pray … This document allowed my great great great grandfather, who had been enslaved in Georgia, to have the right to vote. We took this and turned it into a scarf. It is the returns of qualified voters and reconstruction code from 1867. This is my proof of what we’ve been through. This is also our inspiration.”
“I got to travel between the Edmund Pettus Bridge two times. And even as I thought about this moment, I recognized that while we wish we weren’t in it, while we don’t know why we’re in it, I do know we were made for it … So I came today to tell you that, um, just like the leader said, that he calls it Jim Crow 2.0. I call it Jim Crow 2.NO.”
Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBTQ advocacy organization in the U.S., also spoke, highlighting the impact of the bill’s proposed provisions affecting trans people.
“This bill is not about saving America. This bill is about stealing an election. This bill is about suppressing voters,” Robinson said. “This bill not only tries to disenfranchise voters that deserve their right to vote, it also tries to criminalize trans kids and their families … It tries to criminalize doctors providing medically necessary care for our trans youth.”
The SAVE Act passed the U.S. House of Representatives on Feb. 11 but has not yet been considered in the U.S. Senate.
Idaho
Idaho advances bill to restrict bathroom access for transgender residents
HB 752 passed in state House of Representatives on Monday
The Idaho House of Representatives passed House Bill 752 on Monday, a measure that would make it a crime for a person to use a bathroom other than the one designated for their “biological sex.”
The story was first reported by the Idaho Capitol Sun after the bill cleared the House.
House Bill 752 would make it a criminal offense — either a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the number of prior offenses — for individuals who “knowingly and willfully” enter a bathroom or changing room designated for the opposite sex.
The bill would apply to public buildings, including government-owned spaces, and places of “public accommodation,” a category that includes private businesses.
According to the bill’s text, it would “prohibit a person from entering a restroom or changing room designated for the opposite sex; provide a penalty; provide exceptions; define terms; and declare an emergency and provide an effective date.”
A first offense would be a misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in prison. A second or subsequent offense within five years would be a felony, punishable by up to five years in prison.
The bill passed in a 54–15 vote on Monday. Six Republicans broke with their party’s majority to join nine Democrats in opposing the measure.
The bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Cornel Rasor, a Republican from Sagle near the Washington-Idaho border, told House lawmakers that the legislation is intended to protect women and girls.
“It prevents discomfort and voyeurism escalation and assaults, while preserving single-user options and narrow exceptions so no one is denied access for emergency aid,” Rasor said.
State Rep. Chris Mathias, a Democrat from Boise, disagreed, arguing that the legislation would unfairly target transgender Idahoans.
“The truth of the matter is — and I know a lot of people don’t want to say it — but forcing people who don’t look like the sex they were assigned at birth, or transgender folks, to use other people’s bathrooms is going to put a lot of people in danger,” Mathias said.
The Idaho American Civil Liberties Union made a statement about the bill following its passage.
“Idaho lawmakers continue pushing these harmful, invasive bathroom laws, yet cannot present credible evidence that transgender people using gender-aligned bathrooms threaten public safety,” the Idaho ACLU said. “The bill does nothing to address real criminal acts, such as sexual assault or voyeurism, and disregards concerns from law enforcement about the burden enforcement would place on local resources.”
In addition to human rights advocates, who have spoken out against similar bills advancing in state legislatures across the country, Idaho law enforcement groups have also opposed the measure. They argue that the way the legislation is written would “pose significant practical enforcement challenges,” noting that officers are tasked with maintaining public safety — not conducting gender checks or policing bathroom access.
During a committee hearing last week, law enforcement representatives and several trans Idahoans testified that the bill would make many residents less safe.
“Officers responding to a complaint would be placed in the difficult position of determining an individual’s biological sex in order to enforce the statute,” Idaho Fraternal Order of Police President Bryan Lovell wrote. “In many circumstances, there is no clear or reasonable way for officers to make that determination without engaging in questioning or investigative actions that could be viewed as invasive and inappropriate.”
The Idaho Sheriffs’ Association requested that lawmakers amend the bill to require that individuals be given an opportunity to leave a bathroom immediately before facing potential prosecution.
The bill now heads to the Idaho Senate for consideration. To become law, it must pass both chambers and avoid a veto from the governor.
A separate bathroom bill, House Bill 607, which would be enforced through civil lawsuits, passed the House last month but has not yet received a committee hearing in the Senate.
State Department
Report: US to withhold HIV aid to Zambia unless mineral access expanded
New York Times obtained Secretary of State Marco Rubio memo
The State Department is reportedly considering withholding assistance for Zambians with HIV unless the country’s government allows the U.S. to access more of its minerals.
The New York Times on Monday reported Secretary of State Marco Rubio in a memo to State Department’s Bureau of African Affairs staffers wrote the U.S. “will only secure our priorities by demonstrating willingness to publicly take support away from Zambia on a massive scale.” The newspaper said it obtained a copy of the letter.
Zambia is a country in southern Africa that borders Tanzania, Malawi, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Namibia, Angola, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
The Times notes upwards of 1.3 million Zambians receive daily HIV medications through PEPFAR. The newspaper reported Rubio in his memo said the Trump-Vance administration could “significantly cut assistance” as soon as May.
“Reports of (the) State Department withholding lifesaving HIV treatment in return for mining concessions in Zambia does not make us safer, stronger, or more prosperous,” said U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Tuesday. “Monetizing innocent people’s lives further undermines U.S. global leadership and is just plain wrong.”
The Washington Blade has reached out to the State Department for comment.
Zambia received breakthrough HIV prevention drug through PEPFAR
Rubio on Jan. 28, 2025, issued a waiver that allowed PEPFAR and other “life-saving humanitarian assistance” programs to continue to operate during a freeze on nearly all U.S. foreign aid spending. HIV/AIDS service providers around the world with whom the Blade has spoken say PEPFAR cuts and the loss of funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, which officially closed on July 1, 2025, has severely impacted their work.
The State Department last September announced PEPFAR will distribute lenacapavir in countries with high prevalence rates. Zambia two months later received the first doses of the breakthrough HIV prevention drug.
Kenya and Uganda are among the African countries have signed health agreements with the U.S. since the Trump-Vance administration took office.
The Times notes the countries that signed these agreements pledged to increase health spending. The Blade last month reported LGBTQ rights groups have questioned whether these agreements will lead to further exclusion and government-sanctioned discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
Housewives take Capitol Hill by storm
Protesters say SAVE Act targets voters, transgender youth
‘It’s Dorothy’ traces lasting influence of a cultural icon
SAVE Act could silence millions of trans voters
The frightening rise of antisemitism, Islamophobia
Ensuring safer drinking water
A season of renewal for D.C. theater
PHOTOS: Awesome Con
Kennedy Center leadership changes as Trump ally Grenell departs
