News
How bad would a GOP Senate takeover be for LGBT people?
Republicans need to pick up six seats to claim majority
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) would likely become majority leader if Republicans win a majority in the Senate. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)
The congressional mid-term elections are more than six months away, but political observers are already warning Democrats they could lose control of the U.S. Senate — an outcome that has tongues wagging over its potential impact on LGBT issues.
While analysts agree that Republicans could claim at least six seats to win control of the chamber — such as by knocking off pro-LGBT senators in New Hampshire and Colorado — the general sense is draconian anti-gay measures like the Federal Marriage Amendment won’t emerge even with GOP control of the Senate.
Dan Pinello, a political scientist at City University of New York, noted seven incumbent Democrats are seeking re-election in states Mitt Romney won in 2012 and conservatives like the Koch brothers and Karl Rove are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars through “Super PACs” to affect those races.
“So I think the prospect of a Republican takeover is very close — a virtual tossup right now,” Pinello said. “Everything will depend on the degree to which Democratic voters turn out at the polls in crucial states.”
Republicans are optimistic about their prospects on Election Day 2014 — and virtually no one is suggesting that Democrats can retake control of the House. In an appearance on “Fox News Sunday,” anti-gay GOP strategist Karl Rove predicted GOP victory in the Senate.
“With 14 seats in play on the Democratic side and a couple of seats in play potentially on the Republican side, I think it’s highly likely that Republicans pick up the majority,” Rove said.
On the same day on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer defied the predictions by saying he believes “we will keep the Senate.” But his former colleague in the White House, Robert Gibbs — who landed in hot water in 2010 by saying Republicans could take control of the House — expressed a contrary view, saying the Senate is “definitely” in danger in 2014.
“So as a consultant, I can say all these things now,” Gibbs said. “They’ve got to pick up six seats, which is not a small number. But what gives them a huge advantage, obviously, is the states that they’re in…Louisiana and in North Carolina, in Montana, places that the president didn’t do well.”
The heads of both political parties are both bullish about their prospects in 2014. On Tuesday, Republican National Committee chair Reince Priebus predicted at a National Press Club breakfast a “tsunami” and said it’s “going to be a very big win, especially at the U.S. Senate level.” Meanwhile, Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz said that Democrats are running “aggressive bottom-up campaigns” and she’s confident her party will hold the Senate.
But political analysts have forecasts more favorable to Republicans. As of Monday, Cook Political Report forecast that Republicans will pick up somewhere between four and six seats, but expected the ultimate gains will be “at the higher end of – and may exceed – that range.”
Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia, said it’s too early to provide a firm prediction on the extent of Republican gains, but said Republicans would net at least four to six seats.
“It’s easy to see how they could get six or even more if President Obama stays in the low 40s and the economy continues to be balky,” Sabato said. “This year, in the sixth-year of President Obama’s administration, you’d much rather be in the GOP’s electoral position than the Democrats’.”
Pro-LGBT Democrats face challenging re-election bids
Democrats elected to the Senate at the start of the Obama administration and who built a reputation for supporting LGBT rights are among those facing uphill re-election bids.
Among them is Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) who has championed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal and the flow of spousal benefits to veterans in same-sex marriages as chief sponsor of the Charlie Morgan Act. A potential challenger for her is former U.S. senator from Massachusetts Scott Brown. Although he voted for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal during his tenure in the Senate, Brown penned an op-ed for Bay Windows suggesting the pursuit of LGBT rights was a “pet project.”
Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) also faces a tough re-election bid now that Rep. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) has announced he will run for the Senate. Udall has championed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal, an end to the Defense of Marriage Act and has written at least two letters to the Obama administration to ensure gay veterans can receive spousal benefits in whichever state they live. Gardner hasn’t articulated a position on same-sex marriage, but voted in favor of an LGBT-inclusive version of the Violence Against Women Act.
The Democrat who’ll likely face the most challenging re-election campaign is Sen. Kay Hagan (D-N.C.). An early supporter of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal, she voted for a repeal amendment in the Senate Armed Services Committee even before the Pentagon report on open service. Hagan came out in favor of same-sex marriage last year on the same day the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on California’s Proposition 8. She could face any one of a number of Republicans vying for the nomination in the state’s primary.
Also of note is the re-election bid of Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), who as chief sponsor of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act oversaw a bipartisan vote in favor of the bill in the Senate late last year. Merkley has also been the leading voice in the Senate calling on President Obama to sign an executive order barring LGBT employment discrimination among federal contractors. A number of Republican candidates have lined up to challenge Merkley, although he’s expected to win re-election in the heavily “blue” state.
The only Republican who’s expected to face a tough re-election challenge is the one who’s likely to handle the floor schedule in the Senate if the GOP ekes out a win: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). In addition to facing a Tea Party challenge, McConnell faces a stiff challenge in the general election from Democratic Kentucky Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes.
Would anti-LGBT legislation move forward?
If the Republicans win control of the Senate, it would create a Congress in which the GOP leads both chambers at a time when the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to deliver a nationwide ruling on marriage equality.
Speaking to the Washington Blade after her event at the National Press Club, Wasserman Schultz initially responded to an inquiry about what a GOP takeover of the Senate would mean for LGBT people by saying, “Oh, God.”
Wasserman Schultz predicted Republicans would curtail the expansion of rights she said are “deserved” by LGBT people in addition to engaging in an “aggressive attempt” to roll them back. But the DNC chair emphasized that won’t happen because Democrats are on track to maintain control of the Senate.
Asked by the Blade whether she thinks Republicans would want to push through a Federal Marriage Amendment, Wasserman Schultz said that “wouldn’t surprise me” because the Republicans endorsed the amendment as part of the 2012 party platform.
But political observers say even with Republicans in control of both chambers, the trend in favor of same-sex marriage — which a recent poll pegged at 59 percent support — would deter Congress from passing a measure that already failed twice under the Bush administration when Republicans had large majorities.
Gregory Angelo, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, said he doesn’t foresee a situation in which Republicans would push forward in either chamber with a U.S. constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
“Considering the move for a Federal Marriage Amendment in the House following the Supreme Court’s DOMA decision last year went absolutely nowhere tells me that there is little appetite among Republicans to engage in culture wars either in the House or the Senate — in this election cycle and in 2016,” Angelo said.
But there are other pieces of anti-gay legislation that could be seen as an alternative to the Federal Marriage Amendment. Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) have introduced legislation known as the Marriage and Religious Freedom Act, which would prohibit the federal government from discriminating against organizations that exercise “religious conscience” against same-sex marriage.
Rep. Randy Forbes (R-Texas) and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) have introduced the State Marriage Defense Act, which would prohibit the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriage in states where it’s not allowed. The bill may be moot in the event of a Supreme Court ruling in favor of marriage equality.
Sabato nonetheless said he doesn’t see much of an opportunity for anti-LGBT legislation of any kind to make it through the Senate – given the growing support for LGBT rights among Republican senators.
“I think it is very unlikely Susan Collins or Rob Portman would support any stand-alone, anti-LGBT legislation,” Sabato said. “I could see other Republicans joining them, such as Lisa Murkowski. I can’t see a single Senate Democrat voting for such legislation. So I doubt the Senate would pass it.”
In the event that an anti-gay bill was approved by both chambers of Congress, Sabato said the legislation would never become law because President Obama would veto it once it reached his desk.
But Republican control over the Senate could mean an end to progress on pro-LGBT legislation. Under Democratic control, the Senate just barely invoked cloture on ENDA by a vote of 61-30 before approving it on final passage. Meanwhile, the Republican-controlled House has yet to take up ENDA months after the Senate voted to approve it as House Speaker John Boehner threw cold water on it during a meeting with the LGBT Equality Caucus.
Pinello said the danger for the LGBT community in the aftermath of a Republican takeover of the Senate lies in the nomination and confirmation of federal judges — perhaps on the Supreme Court in the event of a vacancy before the final ruling on marriage equality.
“The federal bench is now the most hopeful source of remedy for the denial of marriage equality nationwide, and a Senate controlled by the Republican Party might diminish those prospects,” Pinello said. “Thus, there is very good reason for LGBT voters to turn out for Democratic candidates next November.”
Chile
Chilean presidential election outcome to determine future of LGBTQ rights in country
Far-right candidate José Antonio Kast favored to win Dec. 14 runoff.
The results of Chile’s presidential election will likely determine the future of LGBTQ rights in the country.
While Congresswoman Emilia Schneider, the first transgender woman elected to Congress, managed to retain her seat on Sunday, the runoff to determine who will succeed outgoing President Gabriel Boric will take place on Dec. 14 and will pit two diametrically opposed candidates against each other: the far-right José Antonio Kast and Communist Jeannette Jara.
Schneider, an emblematic figure in the LGBTQ rights movement and one of the most visible voices on trans rights in Latin America, won reelection in a polarized environment. Human rights organizations see her continued presence in Congress as a necessary institutional counterweight to the risks that could arise if the far-right comes to power.
Kast v. Jara
The presidential race has become a source of concern for LGBTQ groups in Chile and international observers.
Kast, leader of the Republican Party, has openly expressed his rejection of gender policies, comprehensive sex education, and reforms to anti-discrimination laws.
Throughout his career, he has supported conservative positions aligned with sectors that question LGBTQ rights through rhetoric that activists describe as stigmatizing. Observers say his victory in the second-round of the presidential election that will take place on Dec. 14 could result in regulatory and cultural setbacks.
Jara, who is the presidential candidate for the progressive Unidad por Chile coalition, on the other hand has publicly upheld her commitment to equal rights. She has promised to strengthen mechanisms against discrimination, expand health policies for trans people, and ensure state protection against hate speech.
For Schneider, this new legislative period is shaping up to be a political and symbolic challenge.
Her work has focused on combating gender violence, promoting reform of the Zamudio Law, the country’s LGBTQ-inclusive nondiscrimination and hate crimes law named after Daniel Zamudio, a gay man murdered in Santiago, the Chilean capital, in 2012, and denouncing transphobic rhetoric in Congress and elsewhere.
Schneider’s continued presence in Congress is a sign of continuity in the defense of recently won rights, but also a reminder of the fragility of those advances in a country where ideological tensions have intensified.
LGBTQ organizations point out that Schneider will be key to forging legislative alliances in a potentially divided Congress, especially if Kast consolidates conservative support.
The White House
EXCLUSIVE: Garcia, Markey reintroduce bill to require US promotes LGBTQ rights abroad
International Human Rights Defense Act also calls for permanent special envoy
Two lawmakers on Monday have reintroduced a bill that would require the State Department to promote LGBTQ rights abroad.
A press release notes the International Human Rights Defense Act that U.S. Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and U.S. Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) introduced would “direct” the State Department “to monitor and respond to violence against LGBTQ+ people worldwide, while creating a comprehensive plan to combat discrimination, criminalization, and hate-motivated attacks against LGBTQ+ communities” and “formally establish a special envoy to coordinate LGBTQ+ policies across the State Department.”
“LGBTQ+ people here at home and around the world continue to face escalating violence, discrimination, and rollbacks of their rights, and we must act now,” said Garcia in the press release. “This bill will stand up for LGBTQ+ communities at home and abroad, and show the world that our nation can be a leader when it comes to protecting dignity and human rights once again.”
Markey, Garcia, and U.S. Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) in 2023 introduced the International Human Rights Defense Act. Markey and former California Congressman Alan Lowenthal in 2019 sponsored the same bill.
The promotion of LGBTQ and intersex rights was a cornerstone of the Biden-Harris administration’s overall foreign policy.
The global LGBTQ and intersex rights movement since the Trump-Vance administration froze nearly all U.S. foreign aid has lost more than an estimated $50 million in funding.
The U.S. Agency for International Development, which funded dozens of advocacy groups around the world, officially shut down on July 1. Secretary of State Marco Rubio earlier this year said the State Department would administer the remaining 17 percent of USAID contracts that had not been cancelled.
Then-President Joe Biden in 2021 named Jessica Stern — the former executive director of Outright International — as his administration’s special U.S. envoy for the promotion of LGBTQ and intersex rights.
The Trump-Vance White House has not named anyone to the position.
Stern, who co-founded the Alliance for Diplomacy and Justice after she left the government, is among those who sharply criticized the removal of LGBTQ- and intersex-specific references from the State Department’s 2024 human rights report.
“It is deliberate erasure,” said Stern in August after the State Department released the report.
The Congressional Equality Caucus in a Sept. 9 letter to Rubio urged the State Department to once again include LGBTQ and intersex people in their annual human rights reports. Garcia, U.S. Reps. Julie Johnson (D-Texas), and Sarah McBride (D-Del.), who chair the group’s International LGBTQI+ Rights Task Force, spearheaded the letter.
“We must recommit the United States to the defense of human rights and the promotion of equality and justice around the world,” said Markey in response to the International Human Rights Defense Act that he and Garcia introduced. “It is as important as ever that we stand up and protect LGBTQ+ individuals from the Trump administration’s cruel attempts to further marginalize this community. I will continue to fight alongside LGBTQ+ individuals for a world that recognizes that LGBTQ+ rights are human rights.”
District of Columbia
High cost of living shuts essential workers out, threatens D.C.’s economic stability
City residents don’t always reflect those who keep it running
When Nic Kelly finishes her 6 a.m. shift as a manager at PetSmart, she walks to her bartending job at Alamo Drafthouse in Crystal City to serve cocktails, beers, and milkshakes for hundreds of guests.
Kelly, 26, doesn’t work a combined 60-65 hours per week to pocket extra cash –– she does it to barely make her almost $1,700 rent each month.
“I’m constantly working, and some days I work two jobs in the same day,” Kelly said. “But twice now I’ve had to borrow money from my mother just to make sure I pay my full rent.”
Yesim Sayin, D.C. Policy Center executive director, said this is unfortunately how the D.C. area is structured –– to keep essential workers, service employees, and lower-income people out and those with greater economic mobility in.
The DMV area’s high cost of living makes it near-impossible for employees who keep the area running to make a living, Sayin said. In 2022, only 36% of D.C.’s essential workers lived in the city, according to a D.C. Policy Center report. D.C. is also ranked 13th in the world for highest cost of living as of Nov. 7.
But for Sayin, there’s more work for policymakers to get done than simply acknowledging the high cost of living. Take a look at how current policies are impacting residents, and what long-term solutions could help the DMV thrive.
Feeling the high cost of living
D.C. has the highest unemployment rate in the country at 6.0% as of August. Sayin said the city’s high unemployment rate reflects a lack of geographic mobility in its population, meaning those who can’t find jobs can’t afford to look outside of the DMV area.
Though there are job training groups working to close the unemployment gap, securing a job –– let alone two –– rarely guarantees a comfortable lifestyle for essential and service employees.
A single-person household in D.C. with no children must make at least $25.98 an hour to support themselves, according to the Living Wage Calculator. That number jumps to $51.68 an hour for a single adult with one child. Minimum wage in D.C. is $17.95 an hour and $10 an hour for tipped employees.
Whether it’s utilizing free meals at the Alamo to save on groceries or borrowing money to make rent, every week could bring a different sacrifice for Kelly.
While Kelly lives and works a few minutes south of D.C., Sayin said the connectedness of the DMV means you don’t have to travel far to feel the withering effects of the area’s high cost of living.
“People don’t really care what flag adorns their skies,” Sayin said. “They’re looking for good housing, good schools, cheaper cost of living, and ease of transportation.”
For those that stay in the DMV area, those conditions are hard to come by. This can lead to people working multiple jobs or turning to gigs, such as Uber driving or selling on Etsy, to fill income gaps. Sayin said there are short-term benefits to securing these gigs alongside a primary job, such as helping people weather economic storms, avoid going on government assistance or racking up debt.
But she said the long-term implications of relying on gigs or other jobs can harm someone’s professional aspirations.
“You can spend three extra hours on your own profession every work week, or you can spend three hours driving Uber. One gives you cash, but the other gives you perhaps a different path in your professional life,” Sayin said. “And then 20 years from now, you could be making much more with those additional investments in yourself professionally.”
There’s a strong demand for work in D.C., but when the city starts suffering economically, those who live outside the area –– usually essential or remote workers –– will likely find work elsewhere. Sayin said this negatively impacts those employees’ quality of life, giving them less professional tenure and stability.
D.C.’s cost of living also centralizes power in the city, according to Sayin. When lower-wage employees are priced out, the residents who make up the city don’t always reflect the ones who keep it running.
“Ask your Amazon, Uber or FedEx driver where they live. They’re somewhere in Waldorf. They’re not here,” Sayin said.
Working toward an accessible D.C.
Build more. That’s what Sayin said when thinking of ways to solve D.C.’s affordability crisis.
But it’s not just about building more –– it’s about building smartly and utilizing the space of the city more strategically, Sayin said.
While D.C. has constructed lots of new housing over the years, Sayin noted that they were mostly built in a handful of neighborhoods tailored to middle and upper-class people such as The Wharf. Similarly, building trendy small units to house young professionals moving to the city take up prime real estate from struggling families that have much less geographic mobility, she said.
“The affordability problem is that today’s stock is yesterday’s construction,” Sayin said.
Solving these issues includes ushering in a modern perspective on outdated policies. Sayin cited a D.C. policy that places restrictions on childcare centers built on second floors. Since D.C. parents pay the highest rates in the country for childcare at $47,174 annually, she said loosening unnecessary restrictions could help fuel supply and lower costs for families.
Sayin said policymakers need to consider the economic challenges facing residents today, and whether the incentives and tradeoffs of living in D.C. are valuable enough to keep them in the city.
For Kelly, the incentives and tradeoffs of staying in the DMV area aren’t enough. She’s considered moving back in with her mom a few times given how much she has to work just to get by.
Aside from wanting higher compensation for the work she does –– she noted that businesses can’t operate without employees like her –– Kelly also questioned the value of the tradeoff of moving so close to the city.
“There’s no reason why I’m paying $1,700 for a little studio,” Kelly said. “You also have to pay for parking, utilities aren’t included and a lot of residents have to pay for amenities. We are just giving these property management companies so much money, and we’re not really seeing a whole lot of benefit from it.”
Sayin said placing value on the working people of the city will inject fresh life into D.C.’s economy. Without a valuable tradeoff for living in or around the city, there’s little keeping essential and service employees from staying and doing work taken for granted by policymakers.
PHOTOS: Cheers to Out Sports!
Miss Major Griffin-Gracy paved the way for today’s transgender rights revolution
Chilean presidential election outcome to determine future of LGBTQ rights in country
EXCLUSIVE: Garcia, Markey reintroduce bill to require US promotes LGBTQ rights abroad
Could lower rates, lagging condo sales lure buyers to the table?
Pro-trans candidates triumph despite millions in transphobic ads
Democratic Socialism won’t win the whole country
US bishops ban gender-affirming care at Catholic hospitals
Federal government reopens
