Those seeking to oust lawmakers from office are hoping that public support for ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” — which a CNN poll taken before congressional votes last month found nearly 80 percent of Americans favor overturning — will help build opposition to lawmakers who opposed the repeal compromise.

The votes on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal were taken May 27 in the U.S. House and the Senate Armed Services Committee to attach the measure as part of pending defense budget legislation.

Among the candidates capitalizing on votes against repeal is Steve Pougnet, the gay Democratic mayor of Palm Springs, Calif. who’s seeking to oust Rep. Mary Bono Mack (R-Calif.) from office.

Jordan Marks, campaign manager for Pougnet, said Bono Mack’s vote against repeal contributes to dispelling the perceived notion that she’s a moderate Republican.

“On ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ for so long, Mary Bono Mack had to have it both ways to show that she was a friend to the gay and lesbian community,” he said.

In a statement published shortly after the vote, the lawmaker defended her vote against the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal measure by saying she wants to wait until the Pentagon completes its study on the issue at the end of the year.

“I care deeply about our men and women in uniform and believe it is essential that a thorough review be completed by our military commanders prior to Congress enacting such a sweeping change,” she said. “This vote should have happened after that review.”

Bono Mack also noted opposition to the repeal measure voiced by the four service chiefs before the vote took place. She said lawmakers do these military leaders “a great disservice if we ignore their advice on this important issue.”

Until the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” vote, Bono Mack had been regarded in some circles as a pro-gay Republican because of her voting record. Bono Mack had voted twice against the Federal Marriage Amendment and in favor of hate crimes legislation and a version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

After the vote against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal tarnished her record on May 27, the Human Rights Campaign endorsed Pougnet.

Although Pougnet is running in a traditionally Republican district, a boost from the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” vote could be enough to give Pougnet the necessary edge to topple Bono Mack in what’s seen as a competitive race.

Pougnet is credited with being a powerhouse fundraiser and, according to Marks, will report $1.2 million in fundraising at the end of the second quarter. As of mid-May, Bono Mack has about $1.5 million in net receipts, according to Federal Election Campaign records.

Additionally, a June report in the Politico revealed that the National Republican Congressional Committee identified Bono Mack as one of nine potentially vulnerable Republican congressional lawmakers.

Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, said Bono Mack’s “no” vote on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” provides “clear proof” to supporters of repeal that she’s waffling on the issue.

“She always said if the military was OK with repealing it, she was fine,” Kors said. “The bill that went forward requires the military to finish its process and say that it won’t harm our military to repeal it, yet she still voted against it.”

Kors said Bono Mack’s vote has “riled up” those who thought she supported LGBT rights and “intensifies people’s belief that it’s time for her to go.”

On the other side of the country, Ed Potosnak, a Democrat running against incumbent Rep. Leonard Lance (R-N.J.) to represent New Jersey’s 7th congressional district, is similarly capitalizing on his opponent’s vote against overturning “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Potosnak, a former staffer for Rep. Mike Honda (D-Calif.) and public school teacher, said Lance’s vote is evidence the lawmaker has changed since he was elected to office.

“The vote against repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ really goes a long way in demonstrating that Lance is just out of touch,” Potosnak said.

Potosnak said Lance’s vote on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” — as well as other votes the lawmaker has cast in his career — show he’s “on the wrong side of history.”

As the campaign progresses, Potosnak said voters “will have the opportunity to see how much he has changed since going down to Washington.”

Lance’s campaign didn’t respond to the Blade’s request to explain the lawmaker’s vote against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal.

While the lawmaker’s vote against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal could give Potosnak an edge in the race, he still faces an uphill battle. He’s running in a traditionally Republican district, and recent campaign finance reports show that he has around $51,000 in cash-on-hand compared to the $500,000 in Lance’s coffers.

Jimmy LaSalvia, executive director of GOProud, a gay conservative group that advocates for repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” defended lawmakers who voted “no” by noting results of the Pentagon study have yet to be revealed.

“We had a plan to look at this and get rid of it, and now you’re telling [us] to scrap that plan and vote on it now,” LaSalvia said. “The reason for many of those votes were the result of the Democrats changing the strategy in mid-stream, and it couldn’t have been more poorly handled.”

Another gay candidate seeking congressional office won’t be to draw attention to an opponent’s vote against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal in his campaign. David Cicilline, the Democratic mayor of Providence, R.I., who’s seeking to represent Rhode Island’s 1st congressional district, isn’t running against an incumbent candidate.

The lawmaker that Cicilline is seeking to succeed is Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.), who announced his planned retirement from the House earlier this year. Kennedy voted in favor of the repeal measure.

During her weekly press conference, Pelosi said in response to a Blade inquiry on ENDA’s prospects that lawmakers “still have to finish ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’”

Referencing the successful House vote May 27 to attach repeal to Defense Department budget legislation, she said, “And now, of course, we’ll go — after the bill passes in the Senate — we’ll go to conference. But our work is not finished in that regard, so one thing at a time.”

A Democratic leadership aide, speaking on condition of anonymity, later affirmed that ENDA would not see a vote until work on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is complete.

“It’s very important that we finish ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ before we move on to ENDA,” the source said. “We must ensure the community remains focused on getting ['Don't Ask, Don't Tell'] done and maintaining strong pressure to get the Defense bill done in light of filibuster threats in the Senate. Then we can move on to continuing to assess the votes on ENDA.”

Supporters of ENDA have been pushing Pelosi to move forward with the legislation. At the same time, others have been concerned about a legislative maneuver known as the motion to recommit, which could derail the measure.

Pelosi called ENDA a “personal priority,” but said the House took up “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” because bringing the fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill to the floor presented an opportunity for repeal.

“But because the defense bill came up now, we did ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ first,” she said. “But we want to finish that.”

It could take several months for Congress to finish legislative action on repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” The full Senate has yet to vote on the defense authorization bill, and differences in the House and Senate versions would have to be hammered out in conference committee before the measure is sent to President Obama’s desk.

Still, Pelosi said, “we’re very proud” of the House vote to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in the House, calling it a “historic” action.

She chided Republicans for voting against the legislation and said she’s “disappointed” only five voted for the repeal measure and nine voted for the defense bill as a whole when it came to the floor.

“It’s nothing to take for granted in terms of nine Republicans voted for the defense authorization bill,” she said. “Five Republicans voted for the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ Only four more voted for the [Department of Defense] bill, which is something they usually vote for 100 percent.”

The exchange between the Blade and Pelosi follows:

Blade: Madame Speaker, a question on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. How confident are you that if that measure came to the floor there would be enough votes for passage and to overcome a motion to recommit?

Pelosi: Well, first of all, we still have to finish “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” We were able to pass the bill with a 40-vote majority in the House of Representatives last Thursday before the break. We’re very proud of that vote.

I was disappointed, however, the next day, when the full measure came to the floor to pass the defense authorization bill. Only nine Republicans voted to pass the defense bill. This is historic. Republicans are now voting against the defense authorization bill — only nine did — because “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was in the bill.

And now, of course, we’ll go — after the bill passes in the Senate — we’ll go to conference. But our work is not finished in that regard, so one thing at a time.

ENDA is personal priority for me, and I [understand] the focus for that, but because the defense bill came up now, we did “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” first. But we want to finish that.

It’s nothing to take for granted in terms of nine Republicans voted for the defense authorization bill. Five Republicans voted for the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Only four more voted for the DOD bill, which is something they usually vote for 100 percent.

In what could be an uphill battle, Claudia Wright, a retired high school teacher, is seeking to steal the Democratic nomination from five-term incumbent Rep. Jim Matheson (D-Utah) in a primary election set for June 22.

Wright said she pursued a run against Matheson because she was displeased with his opposition to health care reform legislation, and doesn’t think he is accurately representing voters in the congressional district.

“As this became a gerrymandered district, his attitude was he’d have to move further to the right, but he’s now further to the right — especially on things like health care — he’s now further to the right than [Republican Sen. Bob] Bennett was,” Wright said. “I think he’s too far to the right to represent most of Utah.”

Wright forced a runoff in the race after Matheson failed to secure 60 percent of the vote from delegates at the Utah State Democratic Convention on May 8. Matheson received 55 percent of the vote; Wright received 45 percent.

This marks the first time Matheson hasn’t received enough support from delegates and has faced a primary runoff, according to the Utah-based Deseret News.

Wright said she believes she can beat Matheson in the primary because she’s focusing on issues of concern to Democrats and Republicans. She cited as two priorities public financing of campaigns and reform eliminating “too big to fail” safeguards for banks.

“I think that does appeal to moderates, and I think it does appeal to independents,” she said. “So I think I have a really good shot at perhaps getting the nomination and also winning in the fall.”

An out lesbian, Wright has been in a relationship for 13 years with Stephanie Pace, a retired college professor.

Wright said she has a limited portfolio in LGBT activism, but she contributed to the Utah Pride Center when it first opened in Salt Lake City and is a member of the Human Rights Campaign. She’s received support from a number of LGBT groups and associations within Utah, including an endorsement from the Stonewall Democrats of Utah Caucus.

Bruce Bastian, a gay billionaire philanthropist known for supporting many LGBT organizations, also has thrown his support behind Wright.

Wright has the distinction of being the great, great granddaughter of Brigham Young, an early leader of the Church of Latter-day Saints. He became church president in 1847. Wright said while that lineage may be impressive to people who live outside of Utah, “it’s not unusual” among people within the state because Young was known to have 55 wives and many descendants.

“So about every fourth person in the state is Brigham Young’s descendant,” she said. “Outside of the state, that sounds like a really big deal; inside of the state, it doesn’t get you very far.”

Wright, who said she was a Mormon but now doesn’t belong to any organized religion, is critical of the Mormon Church’s tenet that “sexuality is entirely choice.”

The church is recognized as having played a significant role in backing anti-gay initiatives, most notably Proposition 8, which ended same-sex marriage in California in 2008.

“I felt very out of place, first, as a single women, and then, as a lesbian, later on in the church,” she said. “I haven’t been an active member of the LDS Church in over 20 years.”

Still, Wright said she doesn’t “have any animosity” and that members of both sides of her family subscribe to the Mormon faith.

“I think eventually they’ll have to come around — just like the Catholic Church will, the Baptist Church will, and the Methodist Church will over time,” she said. “And they will. They’ll come to understand the issue better.”

Matheson is known for having a mixed voting record on LGBT issues during his tenure in Congress. He voted in favor of the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2004 and 2006.

The lawmaker voted in favor of hate crimes legislation and a version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act in 2007, but he also voted in favor of a motion of recommit to kill ENDA.

Still, Matheson was vocal in his support last week for legislation to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Before voting in favor of the measure, he spoke on the House floor in support of it.

“Anyone who’s willing to put on this country’s uniform and put his or her life on the line to protect our freedoms deserves our respect and should not be subject to discrimination,” he said. “Repealing this flawed policy is an important way for us to show that respect.”

But Wright said she considers Matheson’s vote on the matter — as well as his co-sponsorship of an environmental bill — a way to appease more liberal voices in his district.

“He is trying to win back some of the environmentalists that endorsed me and he’s trying to do the same thing with the LGBT community,” she said. “I think he’s having limited success with both of those.”

Overtaking Matheson in the primary could be a challenge for Wright as his financial resources dwarf the amount she’s raised. According to the most recent Federal Election Commission reports, Matheson had more than $1.4 million in cash on hand, while Wright had about $9,000.

Wright dismissed the funding disparity, saying she’s “running a very different campaign” from Matheson.

She said “a lot of people” are working for her campaign across the state on a volunteer basis and would support her plans to go “town by town, county by county through the state” to compete with Matheson on the grassroots level.

“I can’t compete with him in money,” she said. “He’s always going to be able to afford more ads on TV and more ads on the radio, and I hope to do this person to person.”

U.S. Sen. John McCain has pledged to do everything he can to stop ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ from being overturned. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Gay veterans are celebrating congressional action last week to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” 17 years after Congress passed a law banning gays from serving openly in the U.S. military.

The House and Senate took separate actions that would lead to an end of the statute. Both chambers approved amendments repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as part of major defense budget legislation known as the fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill.

On May 27, the House voted 234-194 on the floor in favor of an amendment sponsored by Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-Pa.). The next day, the chamber voted 229-186 in favor of passing the entire defense bill.

Five Republicans voted in the affirmative on the amendment: Reps. Judy Biggert (Ill.), Joseph Cao (La.), Charles Djou (Hawaii), Ron Paul (Texas) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (Fla.). Joining other Republicans to vote against the measure were 26 Democrats.

The Senate Armed Services Committee voted 16-12 in favor of an identical repeal measure sponsored by Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.).

In that chamber, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) was the only Republican to vote in favor of repeal. The sole Democrat who voted against the amendment was Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.). He had earlier told media outlets that he sees no need to preempt the Pentagon’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” study by voting in favor of repeal at this time.

The legislative compromise adopted by both chambers of Congress would repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” only after the Defense Department completes its study on the issue, due Dec. 1.

Additionally, President Barack Obama, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen would have to certify that repeal won’t undermine military readiness — and 60 days would have to pass after this certification before repeal would take effect.

The measure also notably lacks the non-discrimination language for gay, lesbian and bisexual service members that standalone repeal bills contained.

Even with the compromise, though, many gay former service members were delighted with Congress for taking action.

Mike Almy, a gay former Air Force communications officer who was discharged under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in 2006 and recently testified before the Senate on the issue, witnessed the vote in the House chamber.

“The whole floor and the gallery erupted with a cheer,” he said. “There were quite a few tears of joy and disbelief, including myself. I still get choked up when I think about it.”


Following the vote in the Senate Armed Services Committee, Almy said repeal supporters visited the office of Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) to thank him for his vote in favor of ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Nelson told the Blade last month that he wouldn’t vote in favor of a measure repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” But after Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) unveiled his compromise legislation, Nelson signaled he would vote in favor of the measure.

Almy said Nelson’s staffers told repeal supporters that they received 40,000 phone calls in Nebraska for repeal and 1,100 against.

“I was speechless,” Almy said. “I was completely dumbfounded there was that much support in Nebraska for repeal. It was just an incredible week overall.”

Retired Navy Capt. Joan Darrah, a lesbian who retired from service in 2002 because of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” also said she was pleased with Congress, calling the votes “a tremendous effort and a great result.”

But Darrah, who lives in Alexandria, Va., said she’s “distressed” about Webb’s vote against repeal.

“I’ve met and corresponded with Sen. Webb many times and I’m disappointed,” she said.

Darrah said she’s willing to live with the compromise, though, and didn’t think Mullen would delay certification of repeal once the Pentagon study is complete.

“This approach that they’ve come up with allows the study to conclude — and the study is supposed to be how to implement it, not if we should,” she said. “I think that this is an excellent compromise. We need the Senate to vote on it and then get on with getting rid of this, frankly, un-American and discriminatory law.”

Also expressing excitement about the congressional votes was a gay man from Chesapeake, Va. The active duty Navy sailor, who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, spoke to the Blade on the condition of anonymity to avoid to being outed under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

He called the action from Congress “long overdue” and said “it’s been a rough hell” serving in the military for seven of the 17 years since “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was enacted.

He said he’s willing to accept the compromise advanced by Congress because “we’re standing on the right side of history” and didn’t think Obama, Gates or Mullen would delay certification of repeal.

“Adm. Mullen said it best — men and women are serving in an institution where integrity is key, but we’re asking them — asking us — to hide who we are,” said the man. “I don’t think we’ll have any problem at all.”

Following the vote, Obama issued a statement on the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” action. The White House previously said it would support the compromise legislation because it allows the Pentagon to complete its study on the issue.

Obama said he was “pleased” with the outcome while stressing the importance of the Pentagon’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” study due at year’s end.

“I have long advocated that we repeal ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,’ and I am pleased that both the House of Representatives and the Senate Armed Services Committee took important bipartisan steps toward repeal tonight,” Obama said.

The president said the Pentagon’s review was “key to successful repeal” and that he was grateful the amendments approved by Congress “will ensure that the Department of Defense can complete that comprehensive review that will allow our military and their families the opportunity to inform and shape the implementation process.”

Hurdles remain in repeal process

Even with Congress taking action to end “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the legislation approved by the House and the Senate committee still has to make its way to the president’s desk and win his signature before it’s enacted.

And a number of obstacles could prevent the bill from reaching the White House or being signed into law. However, supporters of repeal are saying these roadblocks are less numerous than obstacles before the congressional votes on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Alex Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, said the legislation didn’t “have a lot” of possible roadblocks preventing it from being signed by the president.

Still, one problem that supporters of repeal could face is a filibuster of the defense authorization bill when it reaches the Senate floor.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee and chief opponent of repeal in the Senate, had pledged to find the 60 votes in the Senate necessary to block the bill from moving forward.

Roll Call newspaper reported May 27 that McCain said he’ll “without a doubt” support a filibuster if the bill goes to the floor with repeal language.

“I’ll do everything in my power,” McCain was quoted as saying. “I’m going to do everything I can to support the men and women of the military and to fight what is clearly a political agenda.”

But mustering 60 votes to filibuster the defense bill could prove a challenge for McCain.

Two senators who voted against the inclusion of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal language in the defense bill — Jim Webb (D-Va.) and Scott Brown (R-Mass.) — later voted in favor of reporting out of committee the defense bill as a whole. Their votes could be seen as signs they wouldn’t support filibustering the legislation on the floor.

Nicholson said he believes Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has the votes to shut down McCain’s filibuster threat on the bill, but added it’s “never a guaranteed thing.”

“I personally think Jim Webb and Scott Brown’s votes are still a little volatile,” Nicholson said. “While they voted to report the bill out of committee, I don’t know that they’re solid allies on this. If McCain figures out a way to try to block this with a filibuster, I wouldn’t count Brown and Webb in our camp 100 percent.”

During a press conference last week, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.), hailed as a champion of repeal in the Senate, dismissed the chances of a successful filibuster on the defense authorization bill.

“I think it’s hard to filibuster a defense bill,” Levin said. “There’s so much in here for our troops. The fact that there’s one provision in here that some people don’t like — it seems to me [that] would not be [a] sufficient deal for 41 senators to filibuster a defense bill.”

Levin said he wants to bring the legislation before the full Senate sometime before the August recess.

Nicholson said another threat on the Senate floor could be a strike-and-replace amendment modifying the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” language, such as one that changes the scope of the Pentagon study on the issue.

Conservatives have called for legislation that reconfigures the study so that it would focus on whether repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” would have a significant impact on improving military readiness.

“Something like that could be very appealing, especially if it’s rather moderate in nature,” Nicholson said.

Making the language different in both bills would mean the differences would have to be hashed out by conference committee, which could jeopardize any repeal provision being in the final bill.

An unrelated issue that could preclude Obama from signing the defense bill is funding for an alternate engine program for a next generation military aircraft known as the Joint Strike Fighter.

The House version of the legislation authorizes $485 million in funds for the second engine for the aircraft. Last week, an amendment failed in the House that would have stripped the funding from the legislation. The Senate committee’s version of the legislation authorizes no funding for the program.

In a statement, Obama spoke out against the funds for the alternate engine program in a Statement of Administration Policy on the defense bill as a whole. He subsequently warned Congress he would veto the legislation if it reaches his desk with such funding.

“As the Statement of Administration Policy made clear, our military does not want or need these programs being pushed by the Congress, and should Congress ignore this fact, I will veto any such legislation so that it can be returned to me without those provisions,” Obama said.

The issue of funding for the alternate engine program has perennially been a point of contention between Congress and the White House. According to Reuters, 2010 marks the fourth consecutive year in which the Pentagon has voiced concern about the program.

Nicholson said he didn’t know if the veto threat was “too serious of a problem,” but noted it’s something supporters of repeal should monitor.

He said repeal supporters could either push Congress to take out funding for the alternate engine program or lobby Obama not to veto the bill over the funding.

“In the end, I don’t think that’s going to be a big problem,” Nicholson said. “Even if he did veto it and it went back, I feel certain with the majorities by which we won the House and the way it’s aligned in the Senate, I don’t really fear that the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ language will be threatened or in play.”

Levin, a supporter of funding for the alternate engine program, also said during the press conference last week that Congress and the administration would find a way to work through the disagreement on the issue.

“There’s all kinds of items in this bill,” he said. “It’s difficult for me to believe the president would veto an entire bill over just one provision.”

President Barack Obama's administration endorsed Monday a path to repeal the law that prohibits gays, lesbians and bisexuals from serving openly in the U.S. armed forces. (Photo by Pete Souza, courtesy of White House)

The legislative compromise that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal supporters in Congress unveiled this week has inspired mixed reactions and led LGBT leaders to advocate for its passage even as some expressed disappointment over its shortcomings.

Among those expressing displeasure was Lt. Dan Choi, a gay U.S. Army infantry soldier who was arrested twice for chaining himself to the White House fence in protest of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

In an interview with the Blade on Monday, Choi said the proposal requires LGBT people to compromise themselves without getting much in return.

“In a compromise, it’s insinuated that both sides have given something, and I don’t see that,” he said. “So it’s too generous to call it that. It’s a delay and it’s asking us to further put our political agenda before the needs of the soldiers, and that’s who’s getting compromised.”

Despite his disappointment in the compromise language, Choi said he didn’t want the measure to fail this week when it came before Congress. He noted that “it’s only one step” in the path for non-discrimination in the U.S. military and people should keep fighting.

The measure in the Senate was made public Monday by Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), the sponsor of standalone legislation for repeal in the Senate. On Tuesday, Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-Pa.), champion of standalone repeal legislation in the House, unveiled an identically worded companion bill.

The Senate Armed Services Committee and the full House were expected to vote on the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” measures this week during consideration of Pentagon budget legislation known as the fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill. Neither vote occurred before Blade deadline.

The measures presented by Lieberman and Murphy would repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” statute mandating that openly gay, lesbian and bisexual people be discharged from the U.S. armed forces.

However, the law would only be repealed after the Pentagon completes its study — due Dec. 1 — on how to implement repeal in the U.S. military.

Further, President Barack Obama, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen would have to certify that the U.S. military is ready for the transition and that the change “is consistent with the standards of military readiness, military effectiveness, unit cohesion and recruiting and retention.”

The legislation doesn’t give a timeline when the president, the defense secretary and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff would have to issue the certification. On Monday, the Associated Press reported that meeting those conditions for repeal would allow the Pentagon “perhaps even years” to prepare for repeal.

Notably, the legislation also lacks non-discrimination language and would return authority on discharging LGBT service members to the Pentagon.

Choi said the provisions in the legislation are “essentially compromising the integrity of the soldiers until a time to be determined” and compared the lack of a deadline for certification to a military commander issuing an order without a timeline.

“It’s devastating to the soldiers who don’t know and it leaves a lot of questions out there,” Choi said. “My question back to the president is how long are we going to force our soldiers to lie? Nobody can answer the question when.”

But Choi said “what bothers” him the most is the absence of the non-discrimination language that was contained in the standalone version of the bill.

“I thought the most heinous part of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ was that it enforced discrimination, and now it just says that’s altogether not as important,” Choi said. “I think it’s within everybody’s mandate to get rid of discrimination where it exists.”

Choi said as a result of the compromise, LGBT soldiers could be subject to a policy that’s “turbulent and precarious.”

Also expressing disappointment about the lack of non-discrimination language was Alex Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, who said removal of the non-discrimination language was “unnecessary” to get more support for repeal.

“I think we would have been in the same position had we not made three concessions and only made two,” he said. “Other minority groups have not received statutory non-discrimination protection in the military — this would have been something extra — but it was something we were on track to secure.”

Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, said he’s not sure who initiated the idea of omitting non-discrimination language, but said those supporting repeal thought such a move would improve its chances of passage.

“It’s not anything that SLDN volunteered to give up,” Sarvis said. “I think at the end of the day, we all realized that we would have to live with this new compromise.”

The idea of removing non-discrimination language and returning authority on discharges to the Pentagon was advanced previously by the Palm Center, a think tank on gays in the military. Earlier this month, the Blade reported that the Palm Center had been asking other LGBT groups to support such a move.

But Aaron Belkin, director of the Palm Center, said he didn’t know why the non-discrimination language was removed and noted that Palm wasn’t active in pushing for such a move as part of the compromise measure.

“This was news to me when I was told,” he said. “I was actually in bed when I was told and I promise you we had nothing to do with it.”

Still, Belkin said passing legislation with non-discrimination language is “not politically realistic” and the compromise measure advanced earlier this week is “what we can get.”

But Nicholson said the Palm Center pushed hard to have the non-discrimination language removed from the legislation, noting recent reports in which Belkin advocated the proposal.

Nicholson said Belkin was responsible for Saturday’s opinion piece in the Washington Post in which former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. John Shalikashvili advocated for a return of authority to the Pentagon.

“There’s been no secret about that fact that the Palm Center has lobbied hard to take out the non-discrimination language, including the [Shalikashvili] op-ed and several other pieces of media that the Palm Center has done,” Nicholson said.

Compromise brought White House support

While the compromise fell short of what repeal supporters initially sought, the conditions set forth in the proposal brought support from the White House, which opponents of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” had long sought.

In a letter published Monday, Peter Orzag, director of the Office of Management & Budget, writes the repeal measure adheres to the Pentagon’s request to finish its study on the issue at the end of the year and therefore is supported by the Obama administration.

Orzag says that the Pentagon review would be “ideally” completed before Congress takes action on the issue, but notes the administration “understands that Congress has chosen to move forward with the legislation now and seeks the administration’s views on the proposed amendment.”

In the letter, Orzag says he understands the amendment would ensure implementation of repeal is consistent with “standards of military readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, recruiting and retention.”

“The administration therefore supports the proposed amendment,” Orzag writes.

Geoff Morrell, a Pentagon spokesperson, issued a statement Tuesday saying Gates supports the measure, although he still believes Congress should hold off on tackling the issue until after the Pentagon completes its study.

“Secretary Gates continues to believe that ideally the [Defense Department] review should be completed before there is any legislation to repeal the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ law,” he said. “With Congress having indicated that is not possible, the secretary can accept the language in the proposed amendment.”

Having earned support from the administration, Sarvis said the amendment is “a path to repeal” and predicted that its passage could lead to open service “by the end of the first quarter of next year.”

After the review is complete and certification happens, Sarvis said the Pentagon “would then be free” to implement regulations for open service and Obama could issue an executive order for non-discrimination in the U.S. military.

“In fact, all of the federal policies of non-discrimination have been issued by executive order since 1948,” Sarvis said, referring to the order that President Truman issued to end racial segregation in the armed forces.

Sarvis said he didn’t think a future administration would tamper with such an executive order or “try to tinker with this and make it a political football.”

“For instance, the four executive orders that I’ve referred to since 1948 have not been undone by new administrations,” Sarvis said. “I think that if the president issues an executive order after ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is eliminated — I don’t see a new Congress or a new administration trying to undo an executive order.”

But Choi said he doesn’t want supporters of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal mistaking the Orzag letter in support of the proposal as Obama taking action on the issue. He noted the president could have transmitted repeal language to Congress for the defense budget legislation.

“Obviously, if he would have put the defense authorization bill language through to include the repeal legislation, then we wouldn’t be in this situation where he’s trying to get us to celebrate a win,” Choi said.

To follow-up on his earlier arrests at the White House and put more pressure on the president, Choi said he plans to take part in new acts of civil disobedience to draw attention to the issue of LGBT service members serving openly in the U.S. military.

“I not only plan to, but I encourage everybody else to,” Choi said. “The fact of the matter is so long as telling the truth is considered civil disobedience, we need to be committing civil disobedience every single day.”

Mission accomplished?

Several major LGBT organizations issued statements this week praising the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” compromise shortly after it was announced.

In a statement, Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese said Monday the new support from the administration means people rallying against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” are “on the brink of historic action to both strengthen our military and respect the service of lesbian and gay troops.”

“Today’s announcement paves the path to fulfill the president’s call to end ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ this year and puts us one step closer to removing this stain from the laws of our nation,” Solmonese said.

Nicholson of Servicemembers United said in a statement that Monday’s letter was “long awaited, much needed, and immensely helpful.”

Choi said the organizations apparently had their statements “all set up” to celebrate the compromise regardless of the deal’s content.

“Just from my military perspective, it seems very much like they’re putting a ‘mission accomplished’ banner on top of a carrier, and saying our part is done and we have fulfilled our mission,” Choi said. “For people to revel in this kind of celebration instead of encouraging people to demand the fullness of repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is certainly a misstep.”

Other LGBT groups that advocate for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal as one issue in their portfolios indicated support for the compromise measure, although they acknowledged some shortcomings.

In a statement to the Blade, Rea Carey, executive director of the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, said her organization was “encouraged” that Congress and the administration was “taking a step” to address the legal discrimination of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

“This presents a path that could end in men and women being able to serve openly, honestly and to great benefit of our country, but it falls short of providing clear assurances of protection and a specific timeline for implementation,” she said. “The important action this week is to ensure passage of this step toward full repeal.”


In another statement, Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, offered a similarly lukewarm statement on the compromise measure.

“The amendment and compromise fall short of an outright repeal, which was what we had all been hoping for,” she said. “While we are cautiously optimistic that this agreement will lead to a full repeal, it is not yet time to celebrate the end of this appalling and shameful law.”


Among the organizations to strongly support the White House’s endorsement of the compromise was SLDN. In a statement, Sarvis called the agreement a “dramatic breakthrough.”

In response to Choi’s criticism of the statements of support for reaching an agreement with the White House, Sarvis said he respects Choi’s service and commitment to overturning “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

“His view of the legislative process and the strategy is not a view that I share,” Sarvis said. “On this one, in terms of legislative strategy and timing, I have a different view and my view is I want to get what’s realistic and I want to get something that will ensure that service members can serve openly as soon as possible.”

Sen. Ben Nelson, right, talks with U.S. Army General David Petraeus. Nelson this week said he would vote against a legislative effort to overturn “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” (Photo courtesy of Nelson’s office)

A key U.S. senator has told the Blade that he opposes repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” at this time.

In a brief exchange on Capitol Hill, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) said Tuesday he would vote against an effort next week to overturn the law. He said he wants to adhere to guidance from Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen on holding off on repeal.

Asked whether he would vote in favor of a repeal measure, Nelson replied, “No, I want to follow with the advice and the suggestions of Secretary of Defense Gates to have the study that is underway right now before we make that final decision — because it’s not a question of ‘whether,’ it’s a question of ‘how.’”

A vote on repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as part of major defense budget legislation could take place next week during the Senate Armed Services Committee markup of the fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill. Markup proceedings are scheduled to begin May 26 and are closed to the public.

It remains unclear whether there are enough votes on the committee to make repeal part of the legislation. Mustering enough votes to repeal the statute could be a challenge for opponents of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” following Nelson’s comments.

Repeal efforts were complicated last month after Gates released a letter to Congress saying he would “strongly oppose” repeal before the Pentagon completes at year’s end its study on the issue. Since then, supporters of repeal — including Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) — have advocated for a compromise in which Congress would vote now to repeal the law but delay implementation of repeal until 2011.

Asked whether he would be open to such a measure, Nelson appeared to be unaware that such an approach to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” has been under consideration, but was reluctant to support the idea.

“I don’t know,” Nelson said. “I haven’t seen that legislation. I know there’s probably some support for that, but I think it’s been made pretty clear by Secretary Gates that we shouldn’t take any action until the study is completed, and that’s my position. That’s where I’m going to stay.”

Nelson’s statements came as a disappointment to people who had identified him as an uncommitted vote on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” that could be moved in favor of repeal this year.

He was among six senators that LGBT organizations, including the Human Rights Campaign, had lobbied through a grassroots campaign to vote in favor of repeal. The other five are Sens. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), Scott Brown (R-Mass.), Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), and Jim Webb (D-Va.).

Alex Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, said Ben Nelson is only one of the six key senators and estimated that only two or three votes from those six are needed to advance repeal.

“If Sen. Nelson is entrenching himself that hard on that side of the vote, then I think he risks putting himself down on the wrong side of history,” Nicholson said. “That’s something he’s going to have to live with for the rest of his career, and that’s going to be part of his legacy.”

Nicholson said Nelson’s apparent unfamiliarity with delayed implementation legislation could mean that high-level discussions with him on moving forward with that plan hadn’t yet occurred.

‘Don’t Ask’ opponents push on

Even with Nelson representing a “no” vote on repeal during the committee vote, supporters of ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” are moving forward with plans for a vote next week during the committee markup.

Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), the sponsor of standalone repeal legislation in the Senate, told the Blade that supporters of repeal are “working hard” to find a way forward for passage in the committee.

“Obviously, we were set back somewhat from the letter by Secretary Gates, but we’re talking to every member of the committee,” he said. “We have some, I think, creative ideas about how to deal with … concerns that Secretary Gates expressed.”

Lieberman said he’s uncertain if the votes are there for passage, but noted that “it’s important to get this done this year.”

Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.), another member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and a strong proponent of repeal, said he doesn’t think anyone knows whether the votes are there in the committee for repeal, but he’s “feeling guardedly optimistic” about the prospects.

“It’s crucial that we take this opportunity to lift it,” he said. “There’s different ideas about how to best work with the Pentagon on this approach, but I still think you could study and repeal.”

Nicholson said he thinks supporters “have a really good shot” at getting the two or three votes necessary to win repeal during Senate markup next week.

“It’s really going to come down to some of the one-on-one conversations that Levin and Lieberman are having this week with their colleagues on the committee,” he said.

In the wake of the Gates letter, many repeal supporters see pushing forward with delayed implementation legislation as the optimal path for a successful vote on ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” this year.

Lieberman said supporters are looking at alternatives, including a bill “to enact repeal, but have it not be this year, to have it not be effective until either sometime next year” or until the Pentagon working group issues a certification of its study.

“I think Secretary Gates was really talking about he doesn’t want us to do this until the rank-and-file military has had a chance to be heard,” Lieberman said. “So we’re trying to find a way to take legislative action this year, but still respect the opinions of the military and maybe delay the implementation until sometime next year.”

Lieberman said a number of different ideas are being discussed among committee members, but delayed implementation legislation “seems to be the one that commands the most support.”

Also noting that delayed implementation could have traction is Udall, who said such a bill is “one of the ideas” being discussed.

“That still remains my preferred course,” he said. “In other words, you would make it very clear the law is repealed, and then you put in place the timeframe by which you implement the changes that are necessary.”

Despite this push and work toward a compromise, the six targeted members of the Senate Armed Services Committee have been reluctant to endorse repeal publicly, although none of these six have been as explicit as Ben Nelson in their opposition.

Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) has maintained on several occasions the importance of the Pentagon study as a means to inform Congress on how to approach repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Asked this week whether he’s made a decision on how he’ll vote should an amendment come before him, Webb replied, “I think we need to respect the process that Secretary Gates and Adm. Mullen put in place.”

Webb had a similar response when asked whether his position would be any different for delayed implementation legislation.

“I think we should honor the process that they’ve put in place,” Webb said. “I think people should understand that it’s a pretty significant historical event in terms of what Adm. Mullen said during that hearing in February.”

The offices of Bill Nelson and Bayh sent statements to the Blade that were similarly non-committal in how the senators would vote. The statements were virtually identical to those the offices sent to the Blade last month.

Dan McLaughlin, spokesperson for Bill Nelson, said the senator is “inclined” to support repeal, but “wants to see Secretary Gates’ study on how it would impact the military.”

In a statement, Bayh said his “personal belief” is that people serving their country in the armed forces “ought to be able to serve it openly,” but noted that he wants military leaders to be able to speak up on this issue.

“President Obama is absolutely right to solicit the input and support of his top military commanders about the effects of repealing the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy,” he said. “I will make a final decision after receiving the input of our top commanders.”

Some of the targeted senators were staying mum this week on how they’d vote should an amendment come before them. Byrd’s office declined to comment in response to a Blade inquiry on the issue. Brown’s office didn’t respond to multiple requests for comment.

Obama MIA in repeal effort?

As supporters of repeal work to gather support, one notable absence among those lending a hand is President Barack Obama.

Repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was one of Obama’s campaign promises, but a number of senators say the White House hasn’t contacted them to move them one way or the other on the issue.

In public statements on the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” issue, the White House has consistently refrained from saying Obama supports attaching repeal as part of the defense authorization bill.

Asked whether the White House is being helpful in building support, Lieberman suggested the president could be playing a greater role.

“I mean, they’re obviously for this, so we need their help,” he said.

Nicholson said he didn’t know if the White House had been helpful in moving senators in favor of repeal, but noted that he hasn’t “seen any evidence of that, certainly.”

Each of the targeted senators to whom the Blade spoke said they had not heard from the White House or the Pentagon on the issue.

Asked whether the White House or the Pentagon had contacted him to influence his vote on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” Ben Nelson replied, “No, no.”

Jessica Smith, a Webb spokesperson, echoed those remarks in response to a Blade inquiry.

“As for the White House or the Pentagon contacting our office?” she said. “I don’t believe so.”

Similarly, McLaughlin said he doesn’t believe the White House or the Pentagon has contacted Bill Nelson to inform his vote on the issue.

“To my knowledge, neither the White House nor the Pentagon has recently contacted Bill about this issue,” McLaughlin said.

A White House spokesperson didn’t immediately respond to the Blade’s request for comment on why Obama hasn’t reached out to the senators.

The president spoke at the annual Human Rights Campaign dinner, hate crimes legislation became law, and the Ryan White Care Act was reauthorized. But that last item had been reauthorized by a Republican Congress and a Republican president.

To be sure, the GOP track record on gay issues is abysmal, to say the least. However, it was the Democratic Party that asked for gay dollars and the gay vote, both in 2006 and again in 2008 to give them complete control of both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.

To this end, what has our community seen in terms of real progress as opposed to mere lip service? As we begin the second session of the 111th Congress, we must ask ourselves if we’ve been had. Yes, my liberal brothers and sisters will argue that more has been done in the last year to lay the groundwork on major accomplishments in the coming years.

But they are forgetting the most important tenet of politics: Senators and members of Congress have one simple goal, and that is to get reelected. As we usher in the mid-term election season, most of Congress will be focused on maintaining their jobs and their hold on power.

One of the few shining moments in Congress is the Domestic Partnership Benefits & Obligations Act. It has been passed out of committee in the Senate, and is expected to see floor action early this year, that is, if the Obama administration will stop dragging its feet and come up with offsets — ways to pay for the estimated $63 million per year cost.

Last year, House Speaker Nancy Pelsoi said, “not now” to repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (Defense Secretary Robert Gates said it wasn’t a high priority). The White House sat idly by as marriage equality was repealed in Maine via ballot initiative and was defeated in the New York State Senate. An immigration bill has been introduced in the House that doesn’t allow LGBT Americans to sponsor their foreign partners for residency.

And while New York Gov. David Patterson has aggressively pushed his state Senate to act favorably on marriage equality, Obama has said in no uncertain terms that he would prefer Patterson step aside so someone who has a better chance of retaining the governor’s mansion for Democrats can run.

Instead, Democrats spent their political capital on a Cap & Trade bill in the House, and health care reform that does not address health benefits for our partners. Earlier this month, The Bilerico Project asked two questions: Are we not making our voices heard?  Or are our voices being ignored?

I suspect that if these items don’t get moved through Congress and signed into law before the Memorial Day recess, we will not see any major legislation favorable to our community at all in 2010.

Robert Turner is president of The Turner Group, a D.C.-based government relations firm. Reach him at robert@turner-dc.com.

We celebrated a court-mandated marriage equality win in Iowa and a legislative victory in Maine. Then we lost a Maine ballot initiative. We lost in New York, but won in D.C. We now need to be vigilant to ensure we don’t lose that gain. President Obama had a rocky beginning with the LGBT community.

First there was the Rick Warren fiasco, then that ugly Justice Department brief on DOMA. But he came roaring back with the appointment of John Berry at the Office of Personnel Management, the second DOMA brief, movement on giving some benefits to domestic partners of federal workers and finally the signing at the White House of hate crimes legislation. Maybe that came just in time as hate crimes against the LGBT community are on the rise across the nation.

With five states now having legalized marriage equality and some movement on the Hill on upcoming legislative initiatives, 2009 has to be seen as a positive year for the LGBT community.

As we look to 2010, many are asking what we can expect. I think we could have a good year. I think we can pass the bill giving domestic partners of federal employees health care benefits. I also think that we have a real chance of ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” by handling it the same way we did hate crimes and attaching it to the DOD authorization bill. I am less sanguine about passing ENDA, at least a fully inclusive bill, but think that could happen as well. We do know that rescinding DOMA won’t happen this year.

But 2010 will be especially important in preparing for the future. The Democrats will surely lose seats in both the House and Senate. We will have to work hard to hold those numbers down and ensure that the next Congress won’t move us backwards.

My reading of the country is that we are in a transition period. We are not ready to move back to the place where moral issues dominated elections, but we could end up with more conservatives winning on pocketbook issues. I rarely agree with Newt Gingrich, but he recently said something I do agree with. He talked about Republicans needing to do more than just saying “no” to have an overwhelming victory in the 2010 congressional elections. I hope that they don’t get their act together to do that. But as long as the unemployment rate hovers at around 10 percent and if health care reform passes in the way it looks like it will with the new taxes coming first and the benefits of the bill not taking effect until 2013 or 2014, then Democrats could be in trouble. And if Democrats are in trouble, then the LGBT community will suffer. So 2010 may represent our last hope for a while to make real progress in Congress.

We need to activate our community to lobby their representatives at home and remind them that we vote and are willing to work for politicians who support us. We also need to elect more of our own. It is clear to see the impact that Barney Frank, Tammy Baldwin, and Jared Polis have by just being at the table. We need more people like us at the table.

I think we can do that. We must encourage young members of the LGBT community to get and stay involved. We need to encourage and support involved members of our community to run for office at all levels of government. We have to support organizations like HRC, the Victory Fund, and the Task Force even if we don’t agree with everything they do, because they are the groups that help bring our message to the broader community.

We need to unite as a community and stop criticizing each other at every turn and recognize that each of us has a role to play and that role may be different for each person and each organization. Whether it is joining a march on the statehouse, donating money to an organization or candidate, volunteering for a candidate or cause, all are critical. Each person who is willing to use their particular talent to be a part of the future will together help make that future better for us all.

If we continue to work and to value each other, 2010 will be a year in which we will celebrate continued progress in our fight for equality as we move into the next decade.

Peter Rosenstein is a D.C.-based LGBT rights and Democratic Party activist.

From President Obama’s inauguration to the National Equality March, the last 12 months brought a variety of real and symbolic change for LGBT Americans. Marriage was the top story of the year, but here are the 10 other biggest stories of 2009.

ten

Barack Obama becomes 44th president: Telling a massive National Mall crowd that, “all are equal, all are free,” Barack Obama became the nation’s 44th president Jan. 20. Gays from across the country joined the estimated 1.8 million people on Capitol Hill who watched Obama take the oath of office. Seconds after Obama took the oath, a detailed narrative describing Obama’s support for gay rights legislation was published to the White House web site. The page noted Obama’s support for a gay and transgender inclusive hate crimes bill, an employment non-discrimination bill covering gays and transgender people, and overturning “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” among other issues. The section also mentioned Obama’s call to repeal the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act and his support for new legislation that would provide full marriage-related rights and benefits for same-sex couples joined in civil unions or domestic partnerships.

nine

Nation mourns Kennedy: Sen. Edward Kennedy was remembered as the LGBT community’s “strongest advocate in the United States Senate” when he died in August at age 77. Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese noted that Kennedy championed LGBT issues in Congress before doing so was politically acceptable and offered a strong voice of support in the 1980s when the HIV/AIDS epidemic began taking the lives of gay men. Kennedy went on to become a staunch supporter of same-sex marriage and in 1996 was among 14 senators to vote on the Senate floor against the Defense of Marriage Act. He also spoke on the Senate floor against the anti-gay Federal Marriage Amendment in 2004. “Make no mistake,” he said, “a vote for the federal marriage constitutional amendment is a vote against civil unions, domestic partnerships and other efforts by states to treat gays and lesbians fairly under the law.”

eight

Gay federal workers get limited benefits: President Obama took what activists described as his “first step” on gay civil rights in June when he signed a presidential memorandum granting a limited number of federal employee benefits to the same-sex partners of federal workers. Among the new benefits were long-term care insurance and the use of sick time to care for a domestic partner and non-biological, non-adopted child. Additionally, the same-sex partners of U.S. Foreign Service workers were granted access to the use of medical facilities at overseas posts, medical evacuation privileges from such posts and inclusion of same-sex families in overseas housing allocations. Notably absent from the list was health insurance and retirement benefits. White House officials said the administration is prohibited from providing the perks to the same-sex partners of federal workers without a change in the civil service personnel statute and the Defense of Marriage Act.

seven

Gay man leads U.S. Office of Personnel Management: John Berry became the Obama administration’s highest-ranking openly gay official in May when he was sworn in as director of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. The ceremony notably occurred at OPM headquarters in Northwest Washington — the same building where officials once carried out a policy that allowed them to deny employment to gays seeking federal jobs. On hand for the event was longtime gay civil rights activist Frank Kameny, who was fired by the federal government in 1957 because of his sexual orientation. Berry lauded Kameny, noting that Kameny’s work made Berry’s appointment possible. “For that, Frank, I personally thank you for your leadership, your passion, and your persistence and express our nation’s appreciation for your courage in teaching America to live up to our promise and our potential,” Berry said.

six

Obama cheered at Pride event: President Obama and his wife won cheers and shouts of “I love you!” from lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender activists during a White House celebration in June commemorating Pride and marking the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall Rebellion. The gathering came as many activists urged the president to take greater action on LGBT issues, including the repeal of the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act and “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Obama told the crowd that the nation “cannot — and will not — put aside issues of basic equality” and that he seeks “an America in which no one feels the pain of discrimination based on who you are or who you love.”

five

Lesbian elected mayor of Houston: Gay rights advocates heralded the victory of lesbian Annise Parker in her bid to become Houston’s next mayor as a triumph for LGBT Americans. Parker, a Democrat and city controller for Houston, won the December election after taking 53 percent of the vote. Her win marked the seventh time she’d won a citywide election in Houston and made the city the most populous in the country to elect an openly LGBT mayor. Paul Scott, executive director for Equality Texas, said Parker’s victory was significant on many levels. “I think in some ways, we’ve seen the ceiling being broken, not only within the Houston area and Texas, but also nationally in terms of an open lesbian being elected into the highest-level office in the metropolitan area for the fourth largest city in the country,” he said.

four

Justice Department criticized for DOMA defense: Gay activists were outraged in June when the U.S. Justice Department defended the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act by citing child rearing and procreation as reasons why a court should dismiss a legal challenge of it. Some gay Democratic activists who supported Obama in the 2008 presidential election said administration insiders told them the president was not directly consulted on the brief’s wording, but he nonetheless drew significant criticism. When the Justice Department acted again in August to defend DOMA against a separate challenge, the language was toned down and included a note that “this administration does not support DOMA as a matter of policy, believes that it is discriminatory, and supports its repeal.”

three

Washington Blade ends 40-year run: After chronicling the LGBT community for 40 years, the Washington Blade published its final issue Friday, Nov. 13. Abruptly forced to close as its parent company, Window Media, went into Chapter 7 bankruptcy, the Blade was widely acknowledged as the LGBT community’s newspaper of record. It covered a range of issues — from the outbreak of the HIV/AIDS epidemic to the advent of same-sex marriage — with a depth unmatched by mainstream media outlets. But coverage of local and national LGBT issues did not end when the Blade locked its doors. Strongly supported by Blade advertisers and readers, the newspaper’s staff quickly founded a new publication and distributed the first issue Nov. 20. The DC Agenda, a local, employee-owned business, is now in its seventh week.

two

Obama signs hate crimes bill: Despite several efforts to derail the bill, President Obama signed the Matthew Shepard & James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act into law in October as part of the Fiscal Year 2010 Defense Authorization Act. The act allows the Justice Department to assist in the prosecution of hate crimes based on actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity, among other categories. “After more than a decade of opposition and delay, we passed inclusive hate crimes legislation to help protect our citizens form violence based on what they look like, who they love, how they pray or who they are,” Obama said. Opponents had argued the law was tantamount to creating thought crimes and could limit free speech rights.

one

National Equality March hits Washington: Tens of thousands of protesters descended on the nation’s capital in October to urge Congress and President Obama to extend full legal equality to LGBT people. Featuring a mix of veteran speakers and young faces, the weekend event included a march past the White House that ended outside the U.S. Capitol. Participants carried rainbow-colored flags and held signs calling for immediate action to enact equality. The bright, nearly cloudless sky and unseasonably warm weather welcomed crowds as several high-profile speakers called the participants to action. “If you believe we are equal, then it is time to act like it,” said Cleve Jones, a longtime gay activist and one of the chief organizers of the march. “A free and equal people do not tolerate prioritization of their rights. They do not accept compromises. They do not accept delays.”

There are several LGBT-related bills pending at the federal level, including repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the enactment of employment non-discrimination and extending benefits to the same-sex partners of federal workers.

But the closest to a sure thing will be Congress permitting D.C.’s recently passed same-sex marriage law to stand. Lobbyists on both sides of the issue have said it’s unlikely that the Democratic-controlled Congress would move to derail the law.

Meanwhile, action could come on the Domestic Partnership Benefits & Obligations Act for federal workers with same-sex partners, a priority for Reps. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) and Barney Frank (D-Mass.).

The bill was reported out of a Senate committee with support from ranking Republican Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), which lobbyists saw as a sign it would get the necessary support to pass in the Senate if allowed a vote. The bill has 26 Senate co-sponsors. U.S. Office of Personnel Management Director John Berry is expected to provide offset savings in his department early this year, a necessary precursor to the bill’s Senate floor vote.

The Employment Non-Discrimination Act, meanwhile, has been subject to significant lobbying with high expectations in 2010. Frank previously told the Washington Blade that he expected a vote on the issue “no later than February.”

One gay Republican group said those plans might have hit a snag, however, after Pelosi told freshmen members that House-initiated controversial votes wouldn’t happen in 2010.

“This shows the Democratic leadership has no interest in fulfilling the commitments they made to the LGBT community,” said Charles Moran, a Log Cabin Republicans spokesperson.

The Republican group’s highest priority is repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and Moran said members have become increasingly frustrated with President Obama over the issue. Moran said Log Cabin’s supporters in 2010 will lobby for the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal to be included in the 2011 defense authorization bill.

Separately, Moran said Log Cabin members are hoping that a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” will succeed. The case, which argues that declaring sexual orientation is a protected form of free speech, will see its next hearing in April.

Another effort to overturn “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, currently has 186 co-sponsors in the House and has been referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel. The bill would repeal the ban on openly gay service members and replace it with a non-discrimination policy.

Major federal bills making their way through the legislative process this year are poised to include some LGBT-related provisions.

At DC Agenda deadline, a pending health care reform package was expected to extend recognition of LGBT health issues in several areas, such as research categories. And efforts are ongoing to make LGBT concerns a part of immigration reform, despite the lack of such language in the initial bill.

The Uniting American Families Act, which would recognize same-sex partners for immigration purposes, has 118 co-sponsors in the House and 23 co-sponsors in the Senate. It has stalled in a House subcommittee and Senate committee; it’s unclear how prominently the bill will figure into this year’s immigration debate.

Also unclear is how much closer federal officials will come this year to recognizing the rights of same-sex couples. The Respect for

Marriage Act, an effort to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act that was introduced by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), has 107 House co-sponsors. Nadler recently told DC Agenda he doesn’t expect the bill to pass this year.

Meanwhile, LGBT advocacy organizations have started looking at the November elections to advance their priorities and politicians of choice.

State and local elections of interest include the governor’s races in Maryland, California and New York. Also, all 62 state Senate seats in New York will be up for grabs, and last year’s failed same-sex marriage vote could figure into some of the races.

“Stonewall Democrats’ hope for 2010 is that the LGBT community now understands acutely — after stinging defeats like the one in the New York Senate and in the governor’s mansions in New Jersey and Virginia — that electing pro-equality Democrats is an essential part of fighting for equal rights,” said Michael Mitchell, executive director of Stonewall Democrats.

“We need more people in office who refuse to engage in the politics of fear and instead govern from a place where equality means everyone, and we hope that in 2010, more LGBT people will join the fight to put them there.”

The Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund was upbeat about the role that LGBT voices would play in the 2010 elections, noting that more than 100 openly LGBT candidates are slated for endorsement and assistance.

“The bulk of our candidates will be at the state level, but we’ve already endorsed one candidate for Congress: Steve Pougnet, who is running against [Republican U.S. Rep.] Mary Bono Mack,” said Denis Dison, a Victory Fund vice president.