Connect with us

Politics

Md. Legislative LGBTQ+ Caucus slams Hogan’s LGBTQ rights record

Former Maryland governor faces a competitive race for U.S. Senate seat

Published

on

Former Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan (Photo courtesy of Hogan's campaign)

Five Democratic lawmakers of the Maryland House of Delegates, representing a majority of the state’s nine-member legislative LGBTQ caucus, will issue a statement on Friday criticizing Republican former Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan’s record on LGBTQ rights.

Hogan is currently running against Angela Alsobrooks, the Democratic county executive of Prince George’s County, to represent Maryland in one of the most closely watched U.S. Senate races of the 2024 election cycle.

Over the course of his two-term, eight-year tenure as governor, “Hogan has made it clear that he is not an ally for the LGBTQ+ community,” the Maryland legislators wrote in their statement, per an advance copy previewed by the Washington Blade on Thursday.

The authors, out state Dels. Kris Fair, Anne Kaiser, Joe Vogel, Ashanti Martinez, and Bonnie Cullison, also objected in their statement to the “dismissive” manner in which Hogan addressed criticism of his governing record vis-a-vis LGBTQ rights, as witnessed during a recent virtual town hall event organized by his Senate campaign.

The exchange, which was first reported by the Advocate on Saturday, was kicked off when a caller said, “I am a gay Marylander, and I’m very aware that as an ex-governor, there were many LGBTQ rights bills that passed without your signature, including laws that outlawed the LGBTQ panic defense.”

Other examples of pro-LGBTQ legislation that Hogan declined to sign after they were passed by the state house’s Democratic majority include a measure expanding hate crimes protections to cover victims who are targeted over their gender identity, an LGBTQ-inclusive nondiscrimination bill focused on medical providers and facilities, and a proposal to establish gender identity as a protected characteristic under Maryland law. The governor did, however, manage to sign a ban on medical interventions for transgender youth.

Hogan responded to the caller first by arguing the issue was moot because each of the bills is now law, and then by denying that he ever opposed them, and then by pleading ignorance: “Bills passed, and they became law, and I did not oppose them, and so I don’t know exactly which bills you’re referring to or when they passed.”

In their statement, the delegates said the former governor’s answer was not just “an overt over-simplification of the meaning behind refusing to sign legislation” but also “shameful and a slap in the face to our community.”

“This is why it is critical that we protect the Democratic majority in the Senate by electing Angela Alsobrooks this November,” they wrote. “If Republicans get a majority in the Senate they will continue to not only ignore the needs of our community, but could roll back the protections we fought so hard for.”

Criticism of Hogan’s track record on LGBTQ rights predates his time in the governor’s mansion. For example, during his 2014 gubernatorial campaign, he came out against a trans-inclusive bill prohibiting discrimination in housing, employment, and public accommodations.

As Axios reported in May, the messaging strategy deployed by Hogan’s Democratic opponents has focused to a significant extent on chipping away at the Republican candidate’s reputation as a political moderate — which, to some extent, is buttressed by his public disagreements with Donald Trump, including over some of the hardline immigration policies that came out of his administration.

Along with their efforts to draw attention to Hogan’s record on LGBTQ rights, Democrats have sought to highlight right-wing actions and positions he has taken on other matters, such as issues involving reproductive freedom — again, in hopes of sowing doubt among voters about the Republican’s centrist bonafides.

For example, the Maryland Democratic Party has pointed to the former governor’s decision to veto measures that were designed to expand access to abortion as well as his refusal to release funding that would have been used to train abortion providers in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned the protections established with Roe v. Wade in 1973.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Congress

House Democrats oppose Bessent’s removal of SOGI from discrimination complaint forms

Congressional Equality Caucus sharply criticized move

Published

on

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

A letter issued last week by a group of House Democrats objects to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s removal of sexual orientation and gender identity as bases for sex discrimination complaints in several Equal Employment Opportunity forms.

Bessent, who is gay, is the highest ranking openly LGBTQ official in American history and the second out Cabinet member next to Pete Buttigieg, who served as transportation secretary during the Biden-Harris administration.

The signatories to the letter include a few out members of Congress, Congressional Equality Caucus chair and co-chairs Mark Takano (Calif.), Ritchie Torres (N.Y.), and Becca Balint (Vt.), along with U.S. Reps. Nikema Williams (Ga.), Hank Johnson (Ga.), Raja Krishnamoorthi (Ill.), Delia Ramirez (Ill.), Joyce Beatty (Ohio), Lloyd Doggett (Texas), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D.C.), Josh Gottheimer (N.J.), and Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas).

The letter explains the “critical role” played by the EEO given the strictures and limits on how federal employees can find recourse for unlawful workplace discrimination — namely, without the ability to file complaints directly with the Employment Opportunity Commission or otherwise engage with the agency unless the complainant “appeal[s] an agency’s decision following the agency’s investigation or request[s] a hearing before an administrative judge.”

“Your attempt to remove ‘gender identity’ and ‘sexual orientation’ as bases for sex discrimination complaints in numerous Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) forms will create unnecessary hurdles to employees filing EEO complaints and undermine enforcement of federal employee’s nondiscrimination protections,” the members wrote in their letter.

They further explain the legal basis behind LGBTQ inclusive nondiscrimination protections for federal employees in the EEOC’s decisions in Macy v. Holder (2012) and Baldwin v. Foxx (2015) and the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020).

“It appears that these changes may be an attempt by the department to dissuade employees from reporting gender identity and sexual orientation discrimination,” the lawmakers wrote. “Without forms clearly enumerating gender identity and sexual orientation as forms of sex discrimination, the average employee who experiences these forms of discrimination may see these forms and not realize that the discrimination they experienced was unlawful and something that they can report and seek recourse for.”

“A more alarming view would be that the department no longer plans to fulfill its legal obligations to investigate complaints of gender identity and sexual orientation and ensure its
employees are working in an environment free from these forms of discrimination,” they added.

Continue Reading

Congress

Senate parliamentarian orders removal of gender-affirming care ban from GOP reconciliation bill

GOP Senate Leader John Thune (S.D.) hoped to pass the bill by end-of-week

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Restrictions on the use of federal funds for gender-affirming care will be stripped from the Republican-led Senate reconciliation bill, following a ruling by the Senate parliamentarian on Tuesday that struck down a number of health related provisions.

The legislation banned coverage for transgender medical care through Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program, language that was also included in the House version of the bill passed on May 22 with a vote of 215-214.

The parliamentarian’s decision also rejected Republican proposals for a Medicaid provider tax framework, which allows states to charge health care providers and use the funds to support their programs, along with broader cuts to Medicaid.

Amid calls to override Tuesday’s ruling from Republicans like U.S. Rep. Greg Steube (Fla.), GOP Senate Majority Leader John Thune (S.D.) told reporters “That would not be a good outcome for getting a bill done.”

He also acknowledged that the timing and schedule might have to be adjusted. Senate Republicans had hoped to pass the reconciliation bill by the end of this week, though this was not a legal or procedural deadline.

Dubbed the “one big, beautiful bill” by President Donald Trump, the legislation would extend tax breaks from 2017 that overwhelmingly benefit the wealthiest Americans and corporations. To cover the cost, which is estimated to exceed $4 trillion over 10 years, the bill would make drastic cuts to social welfare programs, particularly Medicaid.

Democrats are not in a position to negotiate across the aisle with Republicans holding majorities in both chambers of Congress, but for months they have been calling attention to the effort by their GOP colleagues to strip Americans of their health insurance to pay for the tax breaks.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that 10.9 million people would lose their coverage, either through Medicaid or the Affordable Care Act marketplaces. Some Republicans like U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley (Mo.) are pushing back against the deep cuts to Medicaid, arguing they would be devastating for many of their constituents and also to hospitals, nursing homes, and community health care providers in rural areas.

In a statement emailed to the Washington Blade on Tuesday, U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.) said, “Anti-trans extremists are attempting to use the full power of the government to hurt kids, and recent Supreme Court decisions in Skrmetti and Medina are enabling their quest.”

While today’s ruling by the Senate parliamentarian is a temporary win, I will keep pushing back on these shameful attempts to harm trans kids and their families for trying to live authentically,” said the senator, who also serves as ranking member of the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee.

U.S. Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.), who is gay and chairs the Congressional Equality Caucus, also shared a statement with the Washington Blade addressing the parliamentarian’s ruling:

“This ruling by the Senate Parliamentarian is a win for the transgender people who rely on Medicaid and CHIP to access the healthcare they need to live fuller, happier, and healthier lives—but the fight is not over yet,” the congressman said.

 “Republican Senators must abide by her ruling and remove the ban from the final version of Trump’s Big Ugly Bill,” he said. “Yet, even with this provision removed, this bill is terrible for the American people, including trans Americans. Every Equality Caucus member voted against it in the House and we’re ready to do so again if the Senate sends it back to the House.”

The Human Rights Campaign issued a press release with a statement from the organization’s vice president for government affairs, David Stacy:

“The fact remains that this bill belongs in the trash. It continues to include devastating cuts to health care programs — including Medicaid — that would disproportionately harm the LGBTQ+ community, all so the already rich can receive huge tax cuts,” Stacy said.

“While it comes as a relief that the Senate parliamentarian concluded that one provision in the nightmarish reconciliation bill that would have denied essential, best practice health care to transgender adults does not belong, we aren’t done fighting,” he said. “With attacks on our community coming from many directions, including the Supreme Court, we will work to defeat this bill with everything we’ve got.”


Continue Reading

Congress

Murkowski, Shaheen reintroduce Global Respect Act

Bill would sanction foreign nationals who commit anti-LGBTQ human rights abuses

Published

on

Then-U.S. Ambassador to Hungary David Pressman marches in the 2024 Budapest Pride parade that took place against the backdrop of the Hungarian government's continued anti-LGBTQ crackdown. The Global Respect Act would sanction foreign nationals who carry out human rights abuses against LGBTQ and intersex people. (Photo courtesy of Pressman's X account)

U.S. Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) on Wednesday once again introduced a bill that would sanction foreign nationals who carry out human rights abuses against LGBTQ and intersex people.

The two senators have previously introduced the Global Respect Act. Co-sponsors include U.S. Sens. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)

“Around the world, individuals who are part of the LGBTQ+ community are in danger for simply existing,” said Murkowski in a press release. “Hate and violence cannot and should not be tolerated. I’m hopeful that this legislation will establish actionable consequences for these inexcusable human rights violations, and create a safer world for all people — regardless of who they are or who they love.” 

Shaheen in the press release notes “the risk of personal harm for LGBTQI individuals for publicly identifying who they are or expressing who they love has tragically increased in recent years.”

“Human rights, as defined by the Universal Declaration of Human rights, recognizes that global freedom, justice, and peace depend on ‘the inherent dignity’ and ‘the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family,” said the New Hampshire Democrat. “LBGTQI human rights are universal human rights. We must ensure that we hold all violators of those rights accountable.” 

The promotion of LGBTQ and intersex rights abroad was a cornerstone of the Biden-Harris administration’s foreign policy.

The current White House has suspended most foreign aid. The elimination of these funds has left the global LGBTQ and intersex rights movement reeling.

Continue Reading

Popular