National
Gay Iowa lawmaker fears undoing of marriage rights
McCoy talks Iowa caucuses, future LGBT intiatives

HOUSTON — The only openly gay member of the Iowa State Senate believes marriage equality in the state could “absolutely” be in danger, despite a recent win solidifying a Democratic majority in the chamber for the remainder of the year.
State Sen. Matt McCoy, who’s served in the legislature since 1993 — first as a House member and then as a senator — said marriage rights for gay couples could be in jeopardy in the 2012 election if Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal loses his seat or Democrats lose their majority in the chamber.
“We’ve got to make sure that we win some of those key seats that have allowed us to hold on to a majority,” McCoy told the Blade during an interview in Houston. “So we need to have a very strong Democratic year across the board, so that from the very top of the ticket on down, we’re going to need a strong ticket.”
McCoy made the comments Saturday during the 27th International Gay & Lesbian Leadership Conference sponsored by the Gay & Lesbian Leadership Institute.
Gronstal, whose seat has been targeted by Republicans in the 2012 election, has said he wouldn’t allow a vote on a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage in Iowa, which has had marriage equality since 2009. The Republican-controlled House has already approved such a measure.
The amendment would need to pass in two consecutive sessions of the legislature before it would be sent to voters, so the soonest it could appear before voters is 2014 — even with Republican control of both the House and Senate next year.
Concern over the future makeup of the Iowa Legislature persists despite a recent Democratic win in a special election assuring that Democrats would continue to maintain control of the legislature through next year.
On the upcoming Iowa caucuses, McCoy said some of the lower-tier candidates, such as Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), are doing well and there’s an anybody-but-Romney attitude in the state. But he added that Obama is in a strong position to defeat any challenger.
“I think Obama can beat any of them,” McCoy said. “I believe that, for obvious reasons, I think that Gingrich makes a better nominee for Democrats to beat, although Romney’s been all over the board on his issues. I think it’ll either be Romney or Gingrich, and, I think, of the two, I think, I’d rather run against Gingrich than Romney.”
A transcript of the interview between McCoy and the Blade follows:
Washington Blade: Sen. McCoy, can you tell me what you think the Democratic win in the special election and sustained Democratic majority in Iowa means for marriage equality?
Matt McCoy: Well, it’s a terrific win for us. Obviously, we know that by picking up this additional seat, we hold our majority, and, in addition to that, we can ensure that marriage equality will not be on the ballot at least through 2014. So we’ve got two consecutive sessions that this would have to pass, and that won’t happen under a Democratic-controlled Senate for the next year.
Blade: But do you think the next makeup of the legislature could threaten marriage equality in Iowa?
McCoy: Absolutely. I think we’ve got a terrific battle with our leader, Majority Leader Mike Gronstal. We’re very concerned that he win re-election as a Democrat. He’s personally worked with us to hold up control of that issue. In addition to that, we’ve got to make sure that we win some of those key seats that have allowed us to hold on to a majority. So we need to have a very strong Democratic year across the board, so that from the very top of the ticket on down, we’re going to need a strong ticket.
Blade: Do you think we’ll hear more about marriage from the Republican presidential candidates as we get closer to the caucuses?
McCoy: I think so. I think that they’ve done an artful job trying to dodge it a little bit. Their own polling is indicating that this issue is being more accepted widely among the public, and as long as that continues to occur, that is going to be a major problem for the Republican presidential candidates because as they take those extreme positions on those issues, people are becoming more and more disenfranchised with them, especially independent voters.
Blade: What’s your prediction for what will happen will those caucuses? As a Democrat, do you have a particular favorite?
McCoy: As an Iowan, I’ve had an opportunity to see them all come through, and the circus is definitely in town, let me tell you.
I think that right now, I have to take my hat off to some of the non-traditional candidates running the caucuses. I think Ron Paul is doing very well in Iowa, much better than is indicated in the polls. I think that [Rick] Santorum has a base of support among evangelicals, and I think [Michele] Bachmann has a base of support.
I think there is a very strong anti-Romney, or anybody but [Mitt] Romney attitude and [Newt] Gingrich has a pretty strong hold among some of the more traditional Republicans that are less evangelical-based.
So, I would say overall, it’s a tossup, it’s an early test in January. We’re probably less than, what, four weeks away from actually knowing where Iowa is going to come down on that issue, but at this time, I would say Romney is still not faring well in Iowa, and that’s a problem for him.
Blade: Who do you want to see as the Republican nominee, as a Democrat?
McCoy: I think Obama can beat any of them. I believe that, for obvious reasons, I think that Gingrich makes a better nominee for Democrats to beat, although Romney’s been all over the board on his issues. I think it’ll either be Romney or Gingrich, and, I think, of the two, I think, I’d rather run against Gingrich than Romney.
Blade: Now that Iowa has marriage equality, what do you want to see next in terms of LGBT rights for your state?
McCoy: There’s a couple of issues that I’m working on right now. One of them is related to adoptions and for gay parents having the opportunity to just simply list their name as Parent 1 and Parent 2 on the birth certificate as opposed to mother and father. So that is one of my initiatives right now.
That’s an issue pending before our state Supreme Court. I have no doubt that our court’s is going to make the right decision on that, but I’m going to try to help them out this session by bringing that issue out in the public.
The second issue that I’m working on is a decriminalization issue on HIV exposure. We have stigmatized HIV as a disease that’s a communicable disease, and put a criminalization with it that has, unfortunately, had the consequences of more than 36 people having charges filed against them in the state of Iowa of what could become a Class B felony if they’re convicted with $21 million a year in actual costs associated with that.
So, one of the things I want to see us do is treat HIV exposure, HIV transmission as we would treat any other communicable disease, and not stigmatize it among LGBT folks, saying, “Oh, it’s their disease.” It’s all of our disease, and we need to treat it with prevention, education and outreach, and that’s one of the initiatives I know that World AIDS Day — that they’re trying to reach out to people and really help bring the prevention and education and outreach back into our channels. And so, that’s something we could do a better job on as a community, so as a state leader, that’s one of my top initiatives in terms of our issues, LGBT issues in the state of Iowa.
Blade: And what about your plans for yourself? Do you have plans to run for office outside of the legislature at this time?
McCoy: I just received an opportunity to chair the Commerce Committee. I’m also chairing the Infrastructure Appropriations Committee, and I’m vice chair of the Appropriations Committee in the Senate, which means I got a lot of opportunity to do a lot of work and make a lot of decisions, and right now, that’s a great place to be. I can’t imagine anything else in my life right now, but, in the future, obviously, I want to keep the doors open. I’m a fairly young person, and I see the future is bright for LGBT leaders in the future, and so I hope that there will be a place for me to serve, and I hope there will be a place for other LGBT, out, elected officials to play a role in their state and national government in the future.
Blade: Thanks so much, Senator.
Watch the video of the interview here:
Federal Government
RFK Jr.’s HHS report pushes therapy, not medical interventions, for trans youth
‘Discredited junk science’ — GLAAD

A 409-page report released Thursday by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services challenges the ethics of medical interventions for youth experiencing gender dysphoria, the treatments that are often collectively called gender-affirming care, instead advocating for psychotherapy alone.
The document comes in response to President Donald Trump’s executive order barring the federal government from supporting gender transitions for anyone younger than 19.
“Our duty is to protect our nation’s children — not expose them to unproven and irreversible medical interventions,” National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya said in a statement. “We must follow the gold standard of science, not activist agendas.”
While the report does not constitute clinical guidance, its findings nevertheless conflict with not just the recommendations of LGBTQ advocacy groups but also those issued by organizations with relevant expertise in science and medicine.
The American Medical Association, for instance, notes that “empirical evidence has demonstrated that trans and non-binary gender identities are normal variations of human identity and expression.”
Gender-affirming care for transgender youth under standards widely used in the U.S. includes supportive talk therapy along with — in some but not all cases — puberty blockers or hormone treatment.
“The suggestion that someone’s authentic self and who they are can be ‘changed’ is discredited junk science,” GLAAD President and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis said in a statement. “This so-called guidance is grossly misleading and in direct contrast to the recommendation of every leading health authority in the world. This report amounts to nothing more than forcing the same discredited idea of conversion therapy that ripped families apart and harmed gay, lesbian, and bisexual young people for decades.”
GLAAD further notes that the “government has not released the names of those involved in consulting or authoring this report.”
Janelle Perez, executive director of LPAC, said, “For decades, every major medical association–including the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics–have affirmed that medical care is the only safe and effective treatment for transgender youth experiencing gender dysphoria.
“This report is simply promoting conversion therapy by a different name – and the American people know better. We know that conversion therapy isn’t actually therapy – it isolates and harms kids, scapegoats parents, and divides families through blame and rejection. These tactics have been used against gay kids for decades, and now the same people want to use them against transgender youth and their families.
“The end result here will be a devastating denial of essential health care for transgender youth, replaced by a dangerous practice that every major U.S. medical and mental health association agree promotes anxiety, depression, and increased risk of suicidal thoughts and attempts.
“Like being gay or lesbian, being transgender is not a choice, and no amount of pressure can force someone to change who they are. We also know that 98% of people who receive transition-related health care continue to receive that health care throughout their lifetime. Trans health care is health care.”
“Today’s report seeks to erase decades of research and learning, replacing it with propaganda. The claims in today’s report would rip health care away from kids and take decision-making out of the hands of parents,” said Shannon Minter, legal director of NCLR. “It promotes the same kind of conversion therapy long used to shame LGBTQ+ people into hating themselves for being unable to change something they can’t change.”
“Like being gay or lesbian, being transgender is not a choice—it’s rooted in biology and genetics,” Minter said. “No amount or talk or pressure will change that.”
Human Rights Campaign Chief of Staff Jay Brown released a statement: “Trans people are who we are. We’re born this way. And we deserve to live our best lives and have a fair shot and equal opportunity at living a good life.
“This report misrepresents the science that has led all mainstream American medical and mental health professionals to declare healthcare for transgender youth to be best practice and instead follows a script predetermined not by experts but by Sec. Kennedy and anti-equality politicians.”
The White House
Trump nominates Mike Waltz to become next UN ambassador
Former Fla. congressman had been national security advisor

President Donald Trump on Thursday announced he will nominate Mike Waltz to become the next U.S. ambassador to the U.N.
Waltz, a former Florida congressman, had been the national security advisor.
Trump announced the nomination amid reports that Waltz and his deputy, Alex Wong, were going to leave the administration after Waltz in March added a journalist to a Signal chat in which he, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and other officials discussed plans to attack Houthi rebels in Yemen.
“I am pleased to announce that I will be nominating Mike Waltz to be the next United States ambassador to the United Nations,” said Trump in a Truth Social post that announced Waltz’s nomination. “From his time in uniform on the battlefield, in Congress and, as my National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz has worked hard to put our nation’s Interests first. I know he will do the same in his new role.”
Trump said Secretary of State Marco Rubio will serve as interim national security advisor, “while continuing his strong leadership at the State Department.”
“Together, we will continue to fight tirelessly to make America, and the world, safe again,” said Trump.
Trump shortly after his election nominated U.S. Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) to become the next U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Trump in March withdrew her nomination in order to ensure Republicans maintained their narrow majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.
U.S. Federal Courts
Second federal lawsuit filed against White House passport policy
Two of seven plaintiffs live in Md.

Lambda Legal on April 25 filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of seven transgender and nonbinary people who are challenging the Trump-Vance administration’s passport policy.
The lawsuit, which Lambda Legal filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland in Baltimore, alleges the policy that bans the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers “has caused and is causing grave and immediate harm to transgender people like plaintiffs, in violation of their constitutional rights to equal protection.”
Two of the seven plaintiffs — Jill Tran and Peter Poe — live in Maryland. The State Department, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and the federal government are defendants.
“The discriminatory passport policy exposes transgender U.S. citizens to harassment, abuse, and discrimination, in some cases endangering them abroad or preventing them from traveling, by forcing them to use identification documents that share private information against their wishes,” said Lambda Legal in a press release.
Zander Schlacter, a New York-based textile artist and designer, is the lead plaintiff.
The lawsuit notes he legally changed his name and gender in New York.
Schlacter less than a week before President Donald Trump’s inauguration “sent an expedited application to update his legal name on his passport, using form DS-5504.”
Trump once he took office signed an executive order that banned the State Department from issuing passports with “X” gender markers. The lawsuit notes Schlacter received his new passport in February.
“The passport has his correct legal name, but now has an incorrect sex marker of ‘F’ or ‘female,'” notes the lawsuit. “Mr. Schlacter also received a letter from the State Department notifying him that ‘the date of birth, place of birth, name, or sex was corrected on your passport application,’ with ‘sex’ circled in red. The stated reason was ‘to correct your information to show your biological sex at birth.'”
“I, like many transgender people, experience fear of harassment or violence when moving through public spaces, especially where a photo ID is required,” said Schlacter in the press release that announced the lawsuit. “My safety is further at risk because of my inaccurate passport. I am unwilling to subject myself and my family to the threat of harassment and discrimination at the hands of border officials or anyone who views my passport.”
Former Secretary of State Antony Blinken in June 2021 announced the State Department would begin to issue gender-neutral passports and documents for American citizens who were born overseas.
Dana Zzyym, an intersex U.S. Navy veteran who identifies as nonbinary, in 2015 filed a federal lawsuit against the State Department after it denied their application for a passport with an “X” gender marker. Zzyym in October 2021 received the first gender-neutral American passport.
Lambda Legal represented Zzyym.
The State Department policy took effect on April 11, 2022.
Trump signed his executive order shortly after he took office in January. Germany, Denmark, Finland, and the Netherlands are among the countries that have issued travel advisories for trans and nonbinary people who plan to visit the U.S.
A federal judge in Boston earlier this month issued a preliminary injunction against the executive order. The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of seven trans and nonbinary people.
-
Opinions4 days ago
TRAITOR: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has blood on his hands
-
The Vatican5 days ago
Potential Pope Francis successor views homosexuality as an ‘abomination’
-
Movies5 days ago
Jacob Elordi rides high in ‘On Swift Horses’
-
District of Columbia5 days ago
Welcome home: DC LGBTQ Center opens its doors to healing and hope