National
EXCLUSIVE: National Stonewall Democrats faces $30,000 budget gap
Organization ‘will likely be forced to close our doors’ if it doesn’t raise money by Dec. 31
The Washington Blade has obtained an e-mail that indicates National Stonewall Democrats will likely shut down if it does not close a $30,000 budget gap by Dec. 31.
“It’s no secret that we’ve struggled with fundraising over the past few years, but today we are at a crossroads and we’re turning to you – our members and supporters,” wrote Jerame Davis, the group’s executive director, in an e-mail he will send to his organization’s e-mail list later on Wednesday. “As the year closes, we’re facing a budget deficit of over $30,000 and if we do not bridge this gap, we will likely be forced to close our doors.”
Davis told the Blade in an exclusive interview on Tuesday night the National Stonewall Democrats’ 2012 budget is between $130,000-$140,000. This figure includes up to $40,000 in organizational debt he inherited when he became executive director in Dec. 2011.
Internal Revenue Service documents indicate the organization reported $223,202 in revenue, while spending $253,133 (a deficit of $19,931) in 2011. These figures were $305,745 and $328,803 (a deficit of $23,058) in 2010 and $346,679 and $425,927 (a deficit of $79,248) in 2009 respectively.
Davis said fundraising picked up “quite a bit” at the beginning of the year – an April fundraiser in D.C. that honored gay Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank, who founded National Stonewall Democrats in 1998, raised nearly $70,000. Davis said the organization was debt-free by the end of July, but it spent roughly $20,000 at the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte in September.
“In doing so we kind of depleted our reserves hoping that we would come out the other side with some fundraising momentum out of that,” he said. “Instead, quite the opposite happened. The campaigns started heating up so a lot of the fundraising started shifting towards President Obama and towards Tammy Baldwin and we took a hit fast and having no reserves coming out of the convention it kind of snowballed to where we are now.”
Organization received anonymous $100,000 donation in 2011
This is not the first time National Stonewall Democrats’ financial problems have threatened to shutter the organization.
The Blade reported in Feb. 2011 that an anonymous donor gave $100,000 to National Stonewall Democrats amid reports then-Executive Director Michael Mitchell did not effectively manage the group’s budget. Davis said the organization was “kind of back in the same boat when I took over” in Nov. 2011 after Mitchell stepped down.
“When I took over the organization, there was $1,800 in the bank and a boat load of debt,” he said. “We were facing eviction from our office; I mean there were all kinds of problems that I had to tackle. I had payroll to make two weeks after I took over and $1,800 in the bank and no donors and that was in November last year, the worst time for a 501c4 to be fundraising.”
Davis noted 2008 was his organization’s best year in terms of fundraising when its budget nearly topped $700,000. IRS records indicate National Stonewall Democrats reported $465,391 in revenue and $435,946 in expenses that year.
A changing political landscape, however, began to take its toll.
“We didn’t adapt to that, especially with the election of President Obama in 2008,” said Davis.
Melissa Sklarz, who co-chaired National Stonewall Democrats Board of Directors from 2009 through early 2011, noted then-President Bill Clinton had signed the ban on openly gay servicemembers and the Defense of Marriage Act into law in the years before Frank created the organization.
“It’s a very different Democratic party,” she told the Blade. “It’s a very different America. So maybe people feel they don’t need to go through national Stonewall. It’s mostly internal.”
The departure of Mitchell and two other executive directors before him has also had an adverse impact on the organization’s ability to raise money.
“That’s a big part of the problem, that kind of turnover, but also decisions that were made in that time, directions the organization took for its messaging, the directions that our programs took, some of them lost their bang so to speak,” said Davis. “We didn’t develop a lot of new programs that appeal to folks. Our fundraising took a hit as a result.”
The latest revelation about National Stonewall Democrats’ uncertain future comes less than a month after Obama, who endorsed marriage rights for same-sex couples in May, won re-election. Wisconsin Congressman Tammy Baldwin became the first openly gay U.S. senator-elect; while gay U.S. Reps. David Cicilline (D-R.I.) and Jared Polis (D-Colo.) won re-election. Voters in New York, California, Wisconsin and Arizona also elected openly gay and bisexual congressional candidates.
The Gertrude Stein Democratic Club in D.C., the Virginia Partisans Gay and Lesbian Democratic Club and the Barbara Gittings Delaware Stonewall Democrats are three of the more than 80 chapters and affiliates throughout the country.
Davis, who has remained National Stonewall Democrats’ only full-time staffer since shortly after he became the group’s executive director, said expenses have been cut to about $10,000 a month. He stressed his organization remains relevant.
“There are a number of state and local Democratic parties that aren’t on board with LGBT equality,” said Davis. “Some of whom are still outwardly hostile in some of the red states and more conservative states. And in a lot of ways its those areas where LGBT equality really hasn’t caught on; the places like Indiana, the places like Alabama, the places like Kentucky. That’s where we really need to do the work because they’re the ones holding us back. It’s the lack of a strong Democratic party, the lack of a strong pro-LGBT party that even the Democrats who are elected from these areas aren’t necessarily fully on board with full LGBT equality.”
He added grassroots organizing among Democrats in the aforementioned states is one of the many ways where “we excel.”
“Our clubs and our affiliates they have special relationships with their local elected leaders because they’re the ones that are out there knocking on doors and raising money and stuffing envelopes and making phone calls for these candidates,” said Davis. “On a national level we have to help coordinate that work, we have to help expand.”
National Stonewall Democrats Board Co-Chair Stephen Driscoll agreed.
“The stuff we do is grassroots, our mission has always been to make the Democratic Party better on our issues,” he said, while acknowledging what he described as ineffective organizational leadership before Davis’ tenure as a contributing factor to National Stonewall Democrats’ current financial situation. “There is no question that we have done that, especially in the national party and in many state orgs around the country we still have a lot of work to do in those diminishing number of states that are less than supportive on LGBT issues.”
“There’s still lots of work to be done in the national legislative arena,” added Sklarz. “National Stonewall is the perfect organization for that. HRC [the Human Rights Campaign] has its niche and Victory Fund has theirs and national Stonewall’s is to elect pro-equality Democrats. And there are lots of places, there is lots of room.”
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.

