Connect with us

Politics

President Biden oks change to filibuster for voting rights

Biden and the Vice-President Kamala Harris address the urgent need to pass legislation to protect the constitutional right to vote

Published

on

President Biden and Vice President Harris deliver voting rights speech in Atlanta via NBC News YouTube

ATLANTA – President Biden, after paying tribute to civil rights pioneer Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. by leaving a wreath on his grave, brought the strength of his presidency to bear in a speech Tuesday in an effort to reform U.S. Senate rules to enact voting rights legislation.

“I’m making it clear, to protect our democracy, I support changing Senate rules whichever way they need to changed to prevent a minority of senators from blocking basic voting rights,” Biden said.

Biden has indicated before he supports changes to longstanding rules the Senate requiring 60 votes to end a filibuster and proceed with debate on legislation, but the speech marks an elevation of viewpoint in a more formal way and increases the pressure on fellow Democrats like Joe Manchin (W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.), who oppose such a change.

Based on his words, Biden’s position on filibuster reform appears limited to voting rights legislation, which like so much other legislation has passed in the House and has stalled out in the Senate. The Washington Blade has placed a request in with the White House seeking comment on why, if Biden supports changing the filibuster for voting rights, why hasn’t he made the case for other issues, such as police reform or LGBTQ civil rights.

A major reason cited by Biden to bring the force of his presidency down on this issue: The attack on U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 instigated by President Trump, who falsely claimed he won the 2020 election against Biden.

Biden conjured images of the long road in the civil rights journey in the United States and a “violet riot” at the Capitol that Biden said undermined the process.

The recently enacted voter law in Georgia, which makes mail-in voting illegal, limits hours and locations for ballot drop boxes and bars the delivery of food and water to persons waiting in line to vote, was another major focus for Biden, who pointed out Republican lawmakers in Georgia put it in place after he won the state in 2020 and Trump pressured officials there to find more votes for him.

As a result, Biden said the “threat to democracy is so grave” he supports changes to the filibuster, which came about in use in the Senate from senators seeking to block civili rights legislation.

“If that bare minimum is blocked, we have no choice but change the Senate rules, including getting rid of the filibuster for this,” Biden said.

Biden identified two bills in his speech: the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, which seeks to rectify a U.S. Supreme Court decision undermining the Voting Rights Act and the Freedom of the Vote Act, which would dramatically reform voting process, including the expansion of voting by mail and early voting.

Joining Biden in Atlanta in favor of changing rules to advance voting rights was Vice President Kamala Harris, who said “nowhere — nowhere — does the Constitution give a minority the right to unilaterally block legislation.”

“Over the past few years, we have seen so many anti-voter laws, that there is a danger of becoming accustomed to these laws, a danger of adjusting to these laws as though they are normal, a danger of becoming complacent, complicit,” Harris said. “Anti-voter laws are not new in our nation, but we must not be deceived into thinking they are normal.”

********************

President Biden and Vice President Harris deliver voting rights speech in Atlanta: 

********************

Full text of the president’s remarks:

In our lives and the lives of our nation — the life of our nation, there are moments so stark that they divide all that came before from everything that followed.  They stop time.  They rip away the trivial from the essential.  And they force us to confront hard truths about ourselves, about our institutions, and about our democracy.

In the words of Scripture, they remind us to “hate evil, love good, and establish justice in the gate.”

Last week, [Vice] President Harris and I stood in the United States Capitol to observe one of those “before and after” moments in American history: January 6th insurrection on the citadel of our democracy.

Today, we come to Atlanta — the cradle of civil rights — to make clear what must come after that dreadful day when a dagger was literally held at the throat of American democracy.

We stand on the grounds that connect Clark Atlanta — Atlanta University, Morehouse College, and near Spelman College — the home of generations of advocates, activists, educators and preachers; young people, just like the students here, who have done so much to build a better America. 

We visited the sacred Ebenezer Baptist Church and paused to prayed at the crypt of Dr. and Mrs. King, and spent time with their family.  And here in the district — as was pointed out — represented and reflected the life of beloved friend, John Lewis.

In their lifetimes, time stopped when a bomb blew up the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham and murdered four little girls.

They [Time] stopped when John and many others seeking justice were beaten and bloodied while crossing the bridge at Selma named after the Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan.

They stopped — time stopped, and they forced the country to confront the hard truths and to act — to act to keep the promise of America alive: the promise that holds that we’re all created equal but, more importantly, deserve to be treated equally.  And from those moments of darkness and despair came light and hope.

Democrats, Republicans, and independents worked to pass the historic Civil Rights Act and the voting rights legislation.  And each successive generation continued that ongoing work.

But then the violent mob of January 6th, 2021, empowered and encouraged by a defeated former president, sought to win through violence what he had lost at the ballot box, to impose the will of the mob, to overturn a free and fair election, and, for the first time — the first time in American history, they — to stop the peaceful transfer of power.

They failed.  They failed.  (Applause.)  But democracy’s — but democracy’s visi- — victory was not certain, nor is democracy’s future.

That’s why we’re here today to stand against the forces in America that value power over principle, forces that attempted a coup — a coup against the legally expressed will of the American people — by sowing doubt, inventing charges of fraud, and seeking to steal the 2020 election from the people.

They want chaos to reign.  We want the people to rule. 

But let me be clear: This is not about me or Vice President Harris or our party; it’s about all of us.  It’s about the people.  It’s about America.

Hear me plainly: The battle for the soul of America is not over.  We must stand strong and stand together to make sure January 6th marks not the end of democracy but the beginning of a renaissance of our democracy. 

You know, for the right to vote and to have that vote counted is democracy’s threshold liberty.  Without it, nothing is possible, but with it, anything is possible.

But while the denial of fair and free elections is un-democratic, it is not unprecedented.

Black Americans were denied full citizenship and voting rights until 1965.  Women were denied the right to vote until just 100 years ago.  The United States Supreme Court, in recent years, has weakened the Voting Rights Act.  And now the defeated former president and his supporters use the Big Lie about the 2020 election to fuel torrent and torment and anti-voting laws — new laws designed to suppress your vote, to subvert our elections.

Here in Georgia, for years, you’ve done the hard work of democracy: registering voters, educating voters, getting voters to the polls.  You’ve built a broad coalition of voters: Black, white, Latino, Asian American, urban, suburban, rural, working class, and middle class. 

And it’s worked: You’ve changed the state by bringing more people, legally, to the polls.  That’s how you won the historic elections of Senator Raphael Warnock and Senator Jon Ossoff. 

You did it — you did it the right way, the democratic way.

And what’s been the reaction of Republicans in Georgia?  Choose the wrong way, the undemocratic way.  To them, too many people voting in a democracy is a problem.  So they’re putting up obstacles.

For example, voting by mail is a safe and convenient way to get more people to vote, so they’re making it harder for you to vote by mail. 

The same way, I might add, in the 2020 Election, President Trump voted from behind the desk in the White House — in Florida. 

Dropping your ballots off to secure drop boxes — it’s safe, it’s convenient, and you get more people to vote.  So they’re limiting the number of drop boxes and the hours you can use them. 

Taking away the options has a predictable effect: longer lines at the polls, lines that can last for hours.  You’ve seen it with your own eyes.  People get tired and they get hungry.

When the Bible teaches us to feed the hungry and give water to the thirsty, the new Georgia law actually makes it illegal — think of this — I mean, it’s 2020, and now ’22, going into that election — it makes it illegal to bring your neighbors, your fellow voters food or water while they wait in line to vote.  What in the hell — heck are we talking about?

I mean, think about it.  (Applause.)  That’s not America.  That’s what it looks like when they suppress the right to vote. 

And here’s how they plan to subvert the election: The Georgia Republican Party, the state legislature has now given itself the power to make it easier for partisan actors — their cronies — to remove local election officials. 

Think about that.  What happened in the last election?  The former president and allies pursued, threatened, and intimidated state and local election officials.

Election workers — ordinary citizens — were subject to death threats, menacing phone calls, people stalking them in their homes.

Remember what the defeated former president said to the highest-ranking election official — a Republican — in this state?  He said, quote, “I just want to find 11,780 votes.” 

Pray God. He didn’t say that part. 

He didn’t say, “Count the votes.”  He said, “find votes” that he needed to win.

He failed because of the courageous officials — Democrats, Republicans — who did their duty and upheld the law. 

But with this new law in Georgia, his loyal- — his loyalists will be placed in charge of state elections. What is that going to mean?  Well, the chances for chaos and subversion are even greater as partisans seek the result they want — no matter what the voters have said, no matter what the count.  The votes of nearly 5 million Georgians will be up for grabs if that law holds.

It’s not just here in Georgia.  Last year alone, 19 states not proposed but enacted 34 laws attacking voting rights.  There were nearly 400 additional bills Republican members of state legislatures tried to pass.  And now, Republican legislators in several states have already announced plans to escalate the onslaught this year.

Their endgame?  To turn the will of the voters into a mere suggestion — something states can respect or ignore.

Jim Crow 2.0 is about two insidious things: voter suppression and election subversion.  It’s no longer about who gets to vote; it’s about making it harder to vote.  It’s about who gets to count the vote and whether your vote counts at all.

It’s not hyperbole; this is a fact. 

Look, this matters to all of us.  The goal of the former president and his allies is to disenfranchise anyone who votes against them.  Simple as that.  The facts won’t matter; your vote won’t matter.  They’ll just decide what they want and then do it.

That’s the kind of power you see in totalitarian states, not in democracies. 

We must be vigilant.

And the world is watching.  I know the majority of the world leaders — the good and the bad ones, adversaries and allies alike.  They’re watching American democracy and seeing whether we can meet this moment.  And that’s not hyperbole.

When I showed up at the G7 with seven other world leaders — there were a total of nine present — Vice President Harris and I have spent our careers doing this work — I said, “America is back.”  And the response was, “For how long?”  “For how long?” 

As someone who’s worked in foreign policy my whole life, I never thought I would ever hear our allies say something like that.

Over the past year, we’ve directed federal agencies to promote access to voting, led by the Vice President.  We’ve appointed top civil rights advocates to help the U.S. Department of Justice, which has doubled its voting rights enforcement staff.

And today, we call on Congress to get done what history will judge: Pass the Freedom to Vote Act.  Pass it now — which would prevent voter suppression so that here in Georgia there’s full access to voting by mail, there are enough drop boxes during enough hours so that you can bring food and water as well to people waiting in line. 

The Freedom to Vote Act takes on election subversion to protect nonpartisan electors [election] officials, who are doing their job, from intimidation and interference.

It would get dark money out of politics, create fairer district maps and ending partisan gerrymandering. 

Look, it’s also time to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. 

I’ve been having these quiet conversations with the members of Congress for the last two months.  I’m tired of being quiet! 

Folks, it’ll restore the strength of the Voting Rights Act of ’65 — the one President Johnson signed after John Lewis was beaten, nearly killed on Bloody Sunday, only to have the Supreme Court weaken it multiple times over the past decade.

Restoring the Voting Rights Act would mean the Justice Department can stop discriminatory laws before they go into effect — before they go into effect.  
The Vice President and I have supported voting rights bills since day one of this administration.  But each and every time, Senate Republicans have blocked the way.  Republicans oppose even debating the issue.  You hear me?

I’ve been around the Senate a long time.  I was Vice President for eight years.  I’ve never seen a circumstance where not one single Republican has a voice that’s ready to speak for justice now.

When I was a senator, including when I headed up the Judiciary Committee, I helped reauthorize the Voting [Rights] Act three times.  We held hearings.  We debated.  We voted.  I was able to extend the Voting Rights Act for 25 years.

In 2006, the Voting Rights Act passed 390 to 33 in
the House of Representatives and 98 to 0 in the Senate with votes from 16 current sitting Republicans in this United States Senate.  Sixteen of them voted to extend it.

The last year I was chairman, as some of my friends sitting down here will tell you, Strom Thurmond voted to extend the Voting Rights Act.  Strom Thurmond.

But, folks, then it was signed into law, the last time, by President George W. Bush.

You know, when we got voting rights extended in the 1980s, as I’ve said, even Thurmond supported it.  Think about that.  The man who led the longest filibu- — one of the longest filibusters in history in the United States Senate in 1957 against the Voting Rights Act [Civil Rights Act].  The man who led and sided with the old Southern Bulls in the United States Senate to perpetuate segregation in this nation.  Even Strom Thurmond came to support voting rights.

But Republicans today can’t and won’t.  Not a single Republican has displayed the courage to stand up to a defeated president to protect America’s right to vote.  Not one.  Not one.

We have 50-50 in the United States Senate.  That means we have 51 presidents.  (Laughter.)  You all think I’m kidding. 

I’ve been pretty good at working with senators my whole career.  But, man, when you got 51 presidents, it gets harder.  Any one can change the outcome.

Sadly, the United States Senate — designed to be the world’s greatest deliberative body — has been rendered a shell of its former self.  It gives me no satisfaction in saying that, as an institutionalist, as a man who was honored to serve in the Senate.

But as an institutionalist, I believe that the threat to
our democracy is so grave that we must find a way to pass these voting rights bills, debate them, vote. 

Let the majority prevail.  And if that bare minimum is blocked, we have no option but to change the Senate rules, including getting rid of the filibuster for this.

You know, last year, if I’m not mistaken, the filibuster was used 154 times.  The filibuster has been used to generate compromise in the past and promote some bipartisanship.  But it’s also been used to obstruct — including and especially obstruct civil rights and voting rights.

And when it was used, senators traditionally used to have to stand and speak at their desks for however long it took, and sometimes it took hours.  And when they sat down, if no one immediately stood up, anyone could call for a vote or the debate ended.

But that doesn’t happen today.  Senators no longer even have to speak one word.  The filibuster is not used by Republicans to bring the Senate together but to pull it further apart.

The filibuster has been weaponized and abused.

While the state legislatures’ assault on voting rights is simple — all you need in your House and Senate is a pure majority — in the United States Senate, it takes a supermajority: 60 votes, even to get a vote — instead of 50 — to protect the right to vote.

State legislatures can pass anti-voting laws with simple majorities.  If they can do that, then the United States Senate should be able to protect voting rights by a simple majority. 

Today I’m making it clear: To protect our democracy, I support changing the Senate rules, whichever way they need to be changed — (applause) — to prevent a minority of senators from blocking action on voting rights. 

When it comes to protecting majority rule in America, the majority should rule in the United States Senate.  

I make this announcement with careful deliberation, recognizing the fundamental right to vote is the right from which all other rights flow.

And I make it with an appeal to my Republican colleagues, to those Republicans who believe in the rule of law: Restore the bipartisan tradition of voting rights. 

The people who restored it, who abided by it in the past were Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush.  They all supported the Voting Rights Act.

Don’t let the Republican Party morph into something else.  Restore the institution of the Senate the way it was designed to be.

Senate rules were just changed to raise the debt ceiling so we wouldn’t renege on our debt for the first time in our history and prevent an economic crisis.  That was done by a simple majority.

As Senator Warnock said a few weeks ago in a powerful speech: If we change the rules to protect the full faith and credit of the United States, we should be able to change the rules to protect the heart and soul of our democracy.  He was right.

In the days that followed John Lewis’s death, there was an outpouring of praise and support across the political spectrum.

But as we stand here today, it isn’t enough just to praise his memory.  We must translate eulogy into action.  We need to follow John Lewis’s footsteps.  We need to support the bill in his name.

Just a few days ago, we talked about — up in the Congress and in the White House — the event coming up shortly to celebrate Dr. King’s birthday.  And Americans of all stripes will praise him for the content of his character.

But as Dr. King’s family said before, it’s not enough to praise their father.  They even said: On this holiday, don’t celebrate his birthday unless you’re willing to support what he lived for and what he died for.  The next few days, when these bills come to a vote, will mark a turning point in this nation’s history.

We will choose — the issue is: Will we choose democracy over autocracy, light over shadows, justice over injustice? 

I know where I stand.  I will not yield.  I will not flinch.  I will defend the right to vote, our democracy against all enemies — foreign and, yes, domestic. 

And the question is: Where will the institution of the United States Senate stand?  Every senator — Democrat, Republican, and independent — will have to declare where they stand, not just for the moment, but for the ages.

Will you stand against voter suppression?  Yes or no?  That’s the question they’ll answer.  Will you stand against election subversion?  Yes or no?  Will you stand for democracy?  Yes or no?

And here’s one thing every senator and every American should remember: History has never been kind to those who have sided with voter suppression over voters’ rights.  And it will be even less kind for those who side with election subversion.

So, I ask every elected official in America: How do you want to be remembered? 

At consequential moments in history, they present a choice: Do you want to be the si- — on the side of Dr. King or George Wallace?  Do you want to be on the side of John Lewis or Bull Connor?  Do you want to be on the side of Abraham Lincoln or Jefferson Davis?

This is the moment to decide to defend our elections, to defend our democracy. 

And if you do that, you will not be alone.  That’s because the struggle to protect voting rights has never been borne by one group alone.

We saw Freedom Riders of every race.  Leaders of every faith marching arm in arm.  And, yes, Democrats and Republicans in Congress of the United States and in the presidency.

I did not live the struggle of Douglass, Tubman, King, Lewis, Goodman, Chaney, and Schwerner, and countless others — known and unknown.

I did not walk in the shoes of generations of students who walked these grounds.  But I walked other grounds.  Because I’m so damn old, I was there as well. 

You think I’m kidding, man. It seems like yesterday the first time I got arrested.  Anyway —

But their struggles here — they were the ones that opened my eyes as a high school student in the late — in the late ’50s and early ’60s.  They got me more engaged in the work of my life.

And what we’re talking about today is rooted in the very idea of America — the idea that Annell Ponder, who graduated from Clark Atlanta, captured in a single word.  She was a teacher and librarian who was also an unyielding champion of voting rights.

In 1963 — when I was just starting college at university — after registering voters in Mississippi, she was pulled off a bus, arrested, and jailed, where she was brutally beaten.

In her cell, next to her, was Fannie Lou Hamer, who described the beating this way, and I quote: “I could hear the sounds of [the] licks and [the] horrible screams…They beat her, I don’t know [for] how long.  And after a while, she began to pray, and asked God to have mercy on those people.”

Annell Ponder’s friends visited her the next day.  Her face was badly swollen.  She could hardly talk.

But she managed to whi- — whisper one word: “Freedom.”  “Freedom” — the only word she whispered.

After nearly 250 years since our founding, that singular idea still echoes.  But it’s up to all of us to make sure it never fades, especially the students here — your generation that just started voting — as there are those who are trying to take away that vi- — vote you just started to be able to exercise. 

But the giants we honor today were your age when they made clear who we must be as a nation.  Not a joke.  Think about it.  In the early ’60s, they were sitting where you’re sitting.  They were you.  And like them, you give me much hope for the future.

Before and after in our lives — and in the life of the nation — democracy is who we are, who we must be — now and forever.  So, let’s stand in this breach together.  Let’s love good, establish justice in the gate. 

And remember, as I said, there is one — this is one of those defining moments in American history: Each of those who vote will be remembered by class after class, in the ’50s and ’60s — the 2050s and ’60s.  Each one of the members of the Senate is going to be judged by history on where they stood before the vote and where they stood after the vote. 

There’s no escape.  So, let’s get back to work. 

As my fath- — my grandfather Finnegan used to say every time I walked out the door in Scranton, he’d say, “Joey, keep the faith.”  Then he’d say, “No, Joey, spread it.” 

Let’s spread the faith and get this done. 

May God bless you all.  And may God protect the sacred right to vote. Thank you.  I mean it.  Let’s go get this done.  Thank you. 

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Politics

Tom Steyer and Nithya Raman shift to second place as mail-in ballots turn the tide

Mail-In ballots are changing the shape of key LA races

Published

on

Los Angeles elections

California’s “jungle primary” has caused a lot of interesting political discussion and stress. California’s nonpartisan primary means any of the top two vote-getters can proceed to the general election. This meant ballots that were pages long in the key races for mayor and governor. This also means that there’s the potential for two Democrats running for key positions like mayor and governor. 

The major players are Karen Bass, running for reelection as LA Mayor, who has secured a spot in the general. Former reality personality Spencer Pratt (R) and progressive candidate Nithya Raman (D) are in contention for second place, with Raman securing a lead as of the latest voter count. For Governor, Xavier Becerra (D) has secured his spot. Republican Steve Hilton and Billionaire Tom Steyer are up to run against him. Steyer put up some of his own wealth and has touted himself as a more progressive candidate. On Election Day, he seemed out of the race, but he is currently running in second place. 

The nature of Los Angeles’s primary created some extensive fear over the large number of democrat candidates potentially splitting the vote. Currently, about 80% of the votes have been counted. This has shifted stats with 79.25% of the votes in this election being Vote by Mail. The voter turnout is still a bit low, considering it’s still only 32.21% of 23 million registered voters. 

The post-Covid shift to mail-in ballots has meant that more people can vote. 

Voting officials have 30 days after the election to count all of the remaining ballots. This includes matching the signatures of the envelope to the signature on the ballot, which is the cause of the delay. The final results will be reported to the Secretary of State by July 3, 2026. 

Equality California, the largest statewide LGBTQ+ civil rights organization, was quick to congratulate Democratic candidate Becerra for confirming his place in the general election. Tony Hoang, Executive Director of the organization, says, “These results demonstrate that Californians are looking for experienced, values-driven leadership to guide our state through a challenging moment for our country.”

Hoang adds, “Xavier Becerra has spent his career standing up for civil rights, defending access to healthcare, protecting immigrant families, and fighting for the communities that need it most. We are proud to congratulate him on his primary election victory.” 

As California Attorney General, Becerra defended marriage equality, challenged discriminatory policies targeting LGBTQ+ people, and fought to protect access to healthcare and reproductive freedom. As Secretary of Health and Human Services, he helped defend healthcare access for millions of Americans and strengthened protections for vulnerable communities.

“At a time when LGBTQ+ people are facing coordinated attacks across the country, California needs a governor who has not only spoken out but taken action to defend our community,” Hoang adds. “From standing up to Donald Trump in court to affirming that transgender healthcare is medically necessary at the highest levels of our nation’s health system, Xavier Becerra has used all of his positions of power to defend our community’s rights and dignity.”

Another beneficiary of the wave of mail-in ballots is former West Hollywood mayor John Erickson and his run for California Senate, who jumped from third place to first place, securing 19.58% of the votes.  He told the Blade, “I am grateful to every voter in the 24th State Senate district who chose truth to power over the use of despicable homophobic tropes and malicious attacks on me.  I am humbled by the outcome of the Primary, which, as of today, has me comfortably as the top vote getter, but the road ahead will not be easy.” He adds, “I am sure the same billionaires and powerful special interests who came after me in the Primary will continue through the General—just as I will continue to campaign on my record and experience-based ideas to make California more equitable, affordable, sustainable, and safe for all of us.”

You can stay up-to-date on vote counts by checking the state’s election results. But it is clear that every vote counts, with many of these mail-in votes changing the shape of this election and showing the potential of many different candidates to affect California politics. 

Continue Reading

Congress

Ogles faces bipartisan backlash over anti-gay social media post

Tenn. congressman blamed the comment on staffer

Published

on

U.S. Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) (Photo public domain)

U.S. Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.), who represents Tennessee’s 5th Congressional District, is facing backlash from LGBTQ+ advocates and fellow Republicans after a social media post declared that “homosexuality has no place in America.”

“Homosexuality has no place in America. Happy Nuclear Family Month,” the congressman wrote in a post on X that was later deleted.

According to the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law, an estimated 6.3 percent of U.S. adults identify as LGBTQ+.

Following widespread criticism, Ogles removed the post and blamed it on a staff member.

“The post was stupid, hurtful and a complete distraction from my America First focus. The employee has been reprimanded,” Ogles said in a statement.

The Los Angeles Blade reached out to Ogles’s office for comment but did not receive a response by press time.

Among those condemning the message was U.S. Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.), who called it “absolutely idiotic” in a social media post.

“Homosexuality exists. In America,” Lawler wrote on X. “In fact, Andy, you have family, friends, neighbors, colleagues, and constituents who are gay and lesbian. It doesn’t make them less than or somehow unworthy of being an American.”

U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) also criticized Ogles’s remarks.

“For all of recorded history, homosexuals have been a part of humanity,” Cruz told TMZ DC. “I think the behavior of consenting adults is their business.”

Chris Sanders, the executive director for the Tennessee Equality Project and Tennessee Equality Project Foundation provided a statement to the Blade about Ogles’s comment.

“The Tennessee Nuclear Family Month resolution has really backfired on conservatives by ensnaring Congressman Ogles in scandal. He used the resolution as a pretext to say that our community doesn’t belong in America, resulting in incredible backlash from across the partisan divide,” Sanders said. “It is a good opportunity for him to pause and reflect on whether it’s time for him to resign. Fighting one’s own constituents is not the purpose of serving in Congress.”

Human Rights Campaign Senior Press Secretary Jarred Keller provided a statement to the Blade regarding Ogles’s comments.

“LGBTQ+ people are woven into the fabric of America, and any politician who questions that is severely out of touch with reality. When so many people are worried about whether they can afford gas to get to work or groceries for their families, the last thing we need is right-wing Republicans targeting marginalized communities with hateful attacks,” Keller said. “Representative Ogles should spend less time attacking LGBTQ+ people and start addressing the issues that actually matter, because last I checked, our community isn’t the reason families are struggling to make ends meet.”

The controversy comes as Tennessee continues to advance legislation affecting LGBTQ+ residents. The state already has several laws on the books that LGBTQ+ advocates have criticized, including the Adult Entertainment Act, enacted in 2023, which restricts certain “adult cabaret performances.”

Lawmakers have also introduced additional measures this legislative session, including the “No Pride Flag or Month Act,” which would prohibit state employees, volunteers, and agents from displaying Pride flags or participating in Pride observances while acting in an official capacity.

Another proposal, the “Banning Bostock Act” would seek to limit the application of state anti-discrimination protections based on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County. Tennessee lawmakers have also passed other measures restricting LGBTQ+ rights and access to gender-affirming health care.

Continue Reading

Politics

Los Angeles Primary Election Day results are in

Karen Bass and Spencer Pratt to face off; the Governor’s race is still being called

Published

on

Since Donald Trump became President, each election has become very high-stakes. While to the average voter, primary elections may not seem as important, this year is the first year after California Ballot Measure 50 redistricting map opened up more seats for the House of Representatives. This was to combat the redistricting of Texas to get more conservative Congressional areas. 

Sadly, given our political climate, voting along party lines is not enough. California is unique in that the primary allows two candidates to advance to the general election regardless of party. To people sick of the two-party system or the lack of progressive candidates, primaries are an important moment to vote for different options. Additionally, many races, such as judicial races, government positions, and ballot measures, can be decided by this election alone. 

That being said, the Los Angeles County Registrar shows there was only a 22.38% voter turnout for election day. The 77.62% of registered voters does include some mail-in ballots that are yet to be counted, but also shows that a significant amount of voters did not show up for a pretty important race. Votes will be tallied until June 26th, with any votes postmarked on Tuesday affecting these results.  

Two of the most notable races include the vote for California Governor and Los Angeles City Mayor. The race to replace Gavin Newsom is yet to be called, but of the large list of potential nominees, Democrat Xavier Becerra (28.9% of the vote) and Steve Hilton (23.1%) were in the lead and will move on to the general election. Billionaire and progressive Tom Steyer is in the number three position with 22.29% of the vote. Time will tell if he’ll be included in the next election. But Steyer has famously invested millions of his own money in this election and positioned himself as a “class traitor” willing to push progressive reform.  

Former reality personality Spencer Pratt will join incumbent Karen Bass in the mayoral race. Despite his lack of political experience, Pratt’s use of AI attack ads, extensive media coverage, and celebrity endorsements, including West Hollywood Pride Grand Marshall Kathy Hilton, helped him secure 30.44% of the votes, with incumbent Bass receiving 34.78% of the votes. Nithya Raman received 22.32% of the vote. 

County Measure ER, which would add a .5% increase to sales tax over 5 years to cover any potential federal cuts to medical care, failed, receiving only 46.89% of votes. 

On the State level, Nancy Pelosi’s Senate seat is up for grabs. Two Democrats, Scott Wiener and Connie Chan, will move on to the general election. Chan received Pelosi’s endorsement while Equality California highlights Wiener’s commitment to LGBTQIA rights. “For nearly a decade in the California Legislature, Scott Wiener has been one of the nation’s most effective champions for LGBTQ+ people, leading the fight to expand civil rights, protect vulnerable communities, and defend fundamental freedoms. We are proud to congratulate him on his decisive first-place victory in today’s primary election,” said Tony Hoang, Executive Director of Equality California. 

Non-binary candidate and drag queen Maebe Pudlo received 11.32% of the votes in her race for California State Senate, District 26, with Democrats Sara Hernandez (31.44%) and Sarah Rascón (16.14%) set to face off in the general election. Another State Senate race included former West Hollywood Mayor John M. Erickson, who received 16.38% of the vote. Republican G. Rick Marshall (20.46%) and Democrat Brian Goldsmith (18.48%) are poised to take that race to the general.  

To clarify some of the importance of the primary election, Judge Robert Draper was running for re-election to the Superior Court despite facing multiple ethics violations and potential censure. He received 49.09% of the vote while his challenger, Tal K. Valbuena, received 50.91% of the votes. 

For up-to-date details on votes, check out the LA County Registrar/County Clear tallies

Continue Reading

Pentagon

Federal appeals court rules White House illegally banned trans troops

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says Pentagon will appeal to SCOTUS

Published

on

The Pentagon (Photo by icholakov/Bigstock)

A panel of federal appeals court judges ruled that President Donald Trump’s policy banning transgender troops likely violates their constitutional rights.

The three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled 2-1 that Trump’s Executive Order 14183, also known as “Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness,” was created with the intent to exclude people from the military based on their gender identity.

The policy argues that trans people are inherently incapable of meeting the military’s “high standards of readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity, and integrity,” citing a history of or signs of gender dysphoria as the cause. According to the Defense Department, this creates “medical, surgical, and mental health constraints on [an] individual.”

The policy states that, regardless of the physical or intellectual capabilities of each applicant, it views trans military applicants as a monolith, considering them less qualified than their cisgender peers.

Despite the panel’s majority opinion issued on Monday, the first day of Pride Month, the ban remains in effect. The U.S. Supreme Court allowed the Pentagon to enforce the policy last year and will continue to allow it to remain in place as litigation proceeds.

The panel’s new ruling will prevent the military from discharging current service members named in the lawsuit, but it does not allow new transrecruits to join.

The policy “appears to be driven by the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group: persons who identify as transgender,” Judge Robert Wilkins, a Democratic appointee of President Barack Obama wrote for the majority.

Judge Justin Walker, the author of the dissenting opinion and a Republican Trump appointee, argued that the authority to determine military policy does not rest with the courts. Instead, he wrote, the Constitution grants that power to Congress through legislation and to the president as commander in chief of the armed forces.

“We have neither the expertise nor the authority to decide whether the military can exclude the plaintiffs from its ranks. The Constitution assigns that authority to Congress and the commander-in-chief,” Walker wrote.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth indicated that an appeal is in the works, posting, “See you at SCOTUS” on X on Monday in response to the ruling.

Jennifer Levi, senior director of transgender and queer rights at GLAD Law, which has led the litigation since last November, applauded the decision.

“Today’s decision is a powerful vindication of the plaintiffs’ extraordinary courage and unwavering commitment to their country,” Levi said.

The Los Angeles Blade spoke with Second Lt. Nicolas (Nic) Talbott of the U.S. Army, the lead plaintiff in the case, and Levi from GLAD Law back in November.

While discussing the case and his experiences as a trans service member, Talbott said his identity is an asset rather than a hindrance, particularly when it comes to identifying problems and finding solutions, regardless of what others may think or say.

“Being transgender is not some sad thing that people go through,” Talbott told the Blade. “This is something that has taken years and years and years of dedication and discipline and research and ups and downs to get to the point where I am today … my ability to transition was essential to getting me to that point where I am today.”

He also discussed the impact of removing qualified and dedicated service members from the military, arguing that the consequences will be felt long after Trump leaves office.

“When we’re losing thousands of those qualified, experienced individuals … those are seats that are not just going to be able to be filled by anybody,” he said. “[That’s] military training that’s not going to be able to be replaced for years and years to come.”

“Every person who puts on the uniform is expected to make a tremendous amount of sacrifice,” Talbott said. “Who I am under this uniform should have no bearing on that … We shouldn’t be picking and choosing which veterans are worthy of our thanks on that day.”

Levi characterized the policy as overtly cruel and legally indefensible to the Blade.

“This policy and its rollout is even more cruel than the first in a number of ways,” Levi explained. “For one, the policy itself says that transgender people are dishonest, untrustworthy and undisciplined, which is deeply offensive and degrading and demeaning.”

She also argued that the administration’s cost justification is flawed, saying that removing and replacing trans service members is more expensive than retaining them.

“There’s no legitimate justification relating to cost … it is far more expensive to both purge the military of people who are serving and also to replace people … than to provide the minuscule amount of costs for medications other service members routinely get.”

Continue Reading

Congress

10 HIV/AIDS activists arrested on Capitol Hill

Protesters interrupted Secretary of State Marco Rubio during hearing

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

U.S. Capitol Police on Tuesday arrested 10 HIV/AIDS activists who protested Secretary of State Marco Rubio during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing.

The activists from Housing Works, Health GAP, the Treatment Action Group, and ACT UP held signs and chanted “Rubio’s Cuts Kill People with AIDS, PEPFAR Saves Lives!” before officers removed them from Dirksen Senate Office Building room where the hearing took place.

A media advisory the Los Angeles Blade received before the protest noted “mounting evidence of Rubio’s attempts to sabotage PEPFAR (the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, U.S. bilateral AIDS program) and vital global health programs.” The press release specifically highlighted three specific points:

• Eliminating Centers for Disease Control’s (CDC) lifesaving PEPFAR programs, which currently support approximately 12 million people on HIV treatment across 51 countries. Instead, Rubio intends to dismantle CDC’s current PEPFAR role and stamp out their global footprint in disease outbreak and surveillance for pandemics beyond HIV. Experts including eight former CDC Directors under Republican and Democratic administrations have spoken out against this effort to dismantle PEPFAR. Recent PEPFAR data showed sharp decreases in the numbers of people newly tested, diagnosed, and treated for HIV, but these data would have been even worse if not for CDC’s PEPFAR programs.

• Withholding $2 billion in Congressionally appropriated FY25 funding, including $330 million to combat HIV, $250 million to fight malaria, $320 million for maternal and child health programs, and nearly $650 million in global health security programs.

• Negotiating secret bilateral deals blackmailing African governments by demanding access to critical mineral wealth as a condition of access to HIV treatment and prevention funding.

The groups have staged several protests against the Trump-Vance administration’s HIV/AIDS policies since it took office.

Rubio on Jan. 28, 2025, issued a waiver that allowed PEPFAR and other “life-saving humanitarian assistance” programs to continue to operate during a freeze on nearly all U.S. foreign aid spending. HIV/AIDS service providers around the world with whom the Blade has spoken say PEPFAR cuts and the loss of funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, which officially closed on July 1, 2025, has severely impacted their work.

The State Department last September announced PEPFAR will distribute lenacapavir in countries with high prevalence rates.

The New York Times last summer reported Vought “apportioned” only $2.9 billion of $6 billion that Congress set aside for PEPFAR for fiscal year 2025. (PEPFAR in the coming fiscal year will use funds allocated in fiscal year 2024.)

Bipartisan opposition in the U.S. Senate prompted the Trump-Vance administration last July withdraw a proposal to cut $400 million from PEPFAR’s budget. Vought a few weeks later said he would use a “pocket rescission” to cancel $4.9 billion for HIV/AIDS prevention and global health programs and other foreign aid assistance initiatives that Congress had already approved.

The White House in January expanded the global gag rule to ban U.S. foreign aid for groups that promote “gender ideology.” President Ronald Reagan in 1985 implemented the original regulation, also known as the “Mexico City” policy, which bans U.S. foreign aid for groups that support abortion and/or offer abortion-related services. Advocacy groups insist the expanded rule will adversely impact HIV prevention efforts around the world.

“Congress must stop Secretary Rubio before he dismantles PEPFAR,” said Treatment Action Group’s Kendall Martinez-Wright. “Rubio continues to defy the will of Congress and the American people who want this program restored and repaired. Under his leadership he is diverting funding and trying to eliminate the essential role of technical experts in global HIV and global health, while program performance is flailing.”

Continue Reading

Federal Government

Advocates push back on proposed FCC warning labels

New rating system public notice seeking comments issued on April 22

Published

on

(Photo by REDPIXEL.PL/Bigstock)

The Federal Communications Commission is considering a new rating system that would require a warning label to appear before any television content that includes LGBTQ+ characters.

On April 22, the FCC issued a public notice asking Americans to submit comments on whether the TV Oversight Management Board should create new TV ratings to alert viewers to “transgender and gender nonbinary programming” and “the discussion or promotion of gender identity themes.”

This proposed warning would appear before content, similar to warnings that explain a program contains sexual content, drug use, or violence — categories that Congress explicitly included in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 on the grounds of obscenity and violence that some parents “believe is harmful to their children.”

The public notice says that “recently, parents have raised concerns that controversial gender identity issues are being included or promoted in children’s programs without providing any disclosure or transparency to parents.”

It goes on to say that not having a warning for trans and nonbinary people is “undermining the ability of parents to make informed choices for their families.”

LGBT Tech is an organization that works to provide LGBTQ+ representation in mainstream media or entertainment. The group notes 81 percent of trans respondents it surveyed said these representations had a positive impact on them discovering or learning about their identity.

“These numbers reflect a basic truth: for many people, and especially young people, seeing LGBTQ+ lives represented in ordinary media is not harmful. It is formative, affirming, and often lifesaving.”

Since the public notice’s publication, more than 40 organizations have come out against the proposed alert.

GLAAD President Sarah Kate Ellis issued a statement in May on the proposal, highlighting what she described as a concerted effort by the Trump-Vance administration to other trans and nonbinary people.

“The FCC does not set TV ratings, but under this administration the FCC has repeatedly tried to control what Americans can see on their own televisions. This government overreach is dangerous and a threat to our community and our democracy,” Ellis said.

“LGBTQ+ people and their families deserve to see their lives represented in the media they watch. And media companies must have the freedom to create programming that appeals to their viewers and subscribers without interference from a government pursuing its own anti-LGBTQ+ political agenda.”

Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson pointed out that this is an act of politically motivated policy, not one based on any rhyme or reason.

“LGBTQ+ stories matter and deserve to be told, seen, and heard,” Robinson said. “The Trump administration does not get to use the FCC to try and erase us simply because they want to pretend to live in a world where we don’t exist. This is a brazen form of political interference that will hurt the ability of all people to appreciate, understand, and learn about the world and people around them.”

Brian Dittmeier, director of LGBTQI+ equality at the National Women’s Law Center Action Fund, echoed Robinson’s concerns that this is attempted censorship for the sake of political gain.

“The FCC is cloaking itself in purported concern for parents in an attempt to censor content, intimidate industry, and silence depictions of our trans siblings and neighbors,” Dittmeier wrote. “The FCC is overstepping its authority to undermine the existing ratings system, which is well understood by parents and enjoys broad public support. The FCC’s presumption that it knows better does not reflect parents’ priorities and reeks of government overreach.”

PFLAG National Vice President of Policy and Government Affairs Diego Sanchez said this is federal government overreach into censorship — something the First Amendment protects against.

“The FCC has given us yet another example of what ‘small government’ means: small enough to fit in your living room; to interrupt family movie night; small enough to make home feel unsafe,” Sanchez said. “Parents and families with transgender loved ones in particular know too well how big government actions impact their families directly, because they feel those impacts before everyone else.”

This proposed warning follows a slew of other federal actions targeting trans people in America, including Executive Order 14168, “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” which mandated that only sex assigned at birth be used on federal government documents regardless of gender identity, as well as broad-based restrictions on gender-affirming care, particularly for trans minors.

Continue Reading

Politics

From the desk of Equality California: The legal issues hitting California and beyond this Pride Month

EQCA shares the local and state political developments that affect LGBTQ+ people across California

Published

on

Equality California Equality Brief

Happy Pride Month! This year, we’re excited to Rise Up in community to celebrate queer joy and continue fighting back against attacks on LGBTQ+ people. Equality California will be present at several Pride events throughout the state — including West Hollywood and Los Angeles — so stop by and say hello if you see our table!

Or even better, come volunteer with us! For all things Pride 2026, visit our EQCA x Pride page.

To read more stories and sign up for the weekly Equality Brief, visit eqca.org/equalitybrief.

  • Anti-Trans Sports Ban Fails to Qualify for November Maine Ballot:
    Maine’s Secretary of State announced that a proposed ban on transgender athletes playing sports would not appear on the November ballot following the discovery of signature fraud that disqualified thousands of petitions. The group spearheading the initiative, Protect Girls Sports in Maine, has filed an appeal with the Secretary of State’s office. Similar anti-trans sports ballot initiatives in states like Missouri and Nevada may still make their states’ ballots, pending signature verification.
  • Federal Judge Renews Preliminary Injunction Preventing Transgender Female Inmates From Transfer to Male Prisons:
    U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth once again blocked the Trump administration’s efforts to transfer transgender women in federal custody into male prisons. The case at hand, Doe v. Blanche, was brought in January 2025 after three transgender women incarcerated in federal prison sued over an executive order mandating the federal government only recognize “sex assigned at birth.”
  • Barney Frank, First Out Gay U.S. Congressman, Dies at 86:
    Barney Frank, who represented Massachusetts in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1981-2013, died on May 19 after a prolonged bout with congestive heart failure. Elected to Congress in 1980 following a tenure in the Massachusetts House, Frank came out publicly in 1987, the first Congressman to do so voluntarily. In 2012 he became the first incumbent member of Congress to marry someone of the same sex. While Frank is recognized as a pioneer in politics, many took issue with his more recent statements encouraging Democrats to step away from focusing on issues affecting the transgender community.
  • Trump State Department Rings Death Knell for Global HIV Prevention Program:
    The Department of State has announced that it will end CDC support of PEPFAR (President’s Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief) by September 30 of this year. The program, launched with bipartisan support by President George W. Bush in 2003, has saved the lives of over 26 million people in poor countries living with HIV. PEPFAR had previously suffered a blow in 2025 when the Trump administration dismantled USAID (U.S. Agency for International Development), upending other HIV initiatives in several countries. Critics warn this action could lead to a backslide in prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS.
  • Trevor Project Releases Latest LGBTQ+ Youth Mental Health Report:
    The Trevor Project has released its 2025 U.S. National Survey on the Mental Health of LGBTQ+ Young People, which surveyed 16,000 LGBTQ+ youth ages 13-24 across the U.S. The findings show that rates of suicidality and risks of self-harming behavior have increased over the past year in large part due to growing anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment, particularly from the federal government. Among the key findings, 36% of LGBTQ+ youth say they seriously considered attempting suicide in the past year.

    If you or someone you know is an LGBTQ+ young person in need of support, text ‘START’ to 678-678 to be connected to a trained counselor from The Trevor Project for 100% confidential, 100% free help.
  • Federal Appeals Court Hears Arguments Over Forcibly Outing Trans Students on School Trips:
    A panel of the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in a case challenging a Colorado school district’s policy that allows transgender students to room with peers that share their gender identity. The Alliance Defending Freedom, a notoriously anti-LGBTQ+ legal organization, brought the case on behalf of two parents who sued the Jefferson County Public School District after learning their daughter had shared a hotel room with a transgender girl during a 2023 Washington, D.C. trip. The district’s attorneys argue that any change in policy would single out transgender students for unfair and unequal treatment.
  • Texas Hospital, DOJ Reach $10 Million Settlement With Disturbing Caveat:
    The Department of Justice announced on May 15 that it had reached a $10 million settlement with Texas Children’s Hospital in relation to its provision of transition-related care for minors. While the settlement was reached out of court, with neither party admitting wrongdoing, part of the agreement mandates that the hospital revoke privileges for any physicians involved in providing such care, and also requires the creation of a so-called “detransition clinic.” Both actions stand to have a chilling effect on transgender healthcare providers nationwide.

STATE LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

All of our 2026 priority sponsored bills, with the exception of AB 2014 (Elhawary) — Challenging Unfair Gender Bias in Criminal Trials, moved out of the Appropriations Committee’s “suspense file,” on May 14 alongside hundreds of other measures.

Following that, all Equality California priority legislation passed the “house of origin” deadline on May 29, 2026 — meaning that the bills successfully cleared a floor vote of the full chamber where they were initially introduced. The bills now await scheduling for policy committee hearings in opposite chambers.

To view our entire 2026 state legislative package, visit eqca.org/legislation

UPCOMING EVENTS

Want to join Equality California at an upcoming Pride festival, or march alongside us in a parade? Visit our Mobilize page to see all the events we’re a part of this June!

Our Pride Parties return this summer as we gather in community and celebrate Pride 2026! Rise Up and join us at an event near you! Tickets are on sale now!

Los Angeles: Wednesday, June 10 @ Hi Tops Los Feliz, 6:00-9:00 PM
San Francisco: Tuesday, June 23 @ El Rio, 6:00-9:00 PM
San Diego: Tuesday, July 14 @ InsideOUT, 6:00-9:00 PM

Continue Reading

Politics

Out Rep. Mark Takano recalls fight against the religious right

“We must be unrelenting in the struggle for equality,” says Takano

Published

on

Rep. Mark Takano

U.S. Rep. Mark Takano, a gay Democrat from Riverside, California, has a message for LGBTQ+ people who are despairing under the Trump administration: Keep on fighting.

“This is a moment of real challenge for LGBTQI+ Americans,” Takano said. But based on his experience, he added, “My advice to all LGBTQI+ people is to press on in this moment of adversity and stay true to your values.”

Takano – the first out LGBTQ+ person of color elected to Congress and chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus – recalled in a Friday email interview with LGBTQ+ Freedom Fighters how he was outed in his campaign for Congress in 1994.

It was a fraught time. Newt Gingrich’s “Republican Revolution” was sweeping the country, including reliably Democratic California. Two years earlier, Takano, a trustee of the Riverside Community College District who taught high school history and English, lost to Republican real estate investor Ken Calvert by just over 500 votes. But reports of Calvert owing back taxes and a scandal with a prostitute gave Democrats reason to believe that 33-year- old Takano had a good shot at defeating the lackluster freshman in the conservative 43rd Congressional District.

Then the onslaught began. Newly elected rich Republican State Sen. Robb Hurtt – who funded rabidly anti-gay Traditional Values Coalition leader Rev. Lou Sheldon and co-founded the anti-gay Capitol Resource Institute with fellow Religious Right multimillionaire Howard Ahmanson – contributed heavily to the rough and tumble “Republican Revolution” in California to push back on the Democratic energy generated by Bill Clinton’s presidential victory in 1992.

Former California Republican Party political director Allan Hoffenblum told the Los Angeles Times just before the 1994 midterm elections that he suspected Calvert ally California Assemblymember Ray Haynes outed Takano during a closed-door Republican strategy session to shift negative attention from Calvert and onto Takano.

Haynes told fellow Republicans that Takano was a “liberal homosexual” Democrat. “Everyone knows he’s a homosexual,” Haynes told The Times. “It’s no major-league secret.”

Calvert said he was “surprised” to see the comments later published in the media. However, his campaign sent out a flyer on pink paper that didn’t specifically call Takano “a homosexual” but noted his support for gay rights and said he might make a better representative for San Francisco than Riverside.

Takano said his sexual orientation was irrelevant to voters – but he lost to Calvert and the Gingrich/Hurtt conservative Republican agenda that ran the California Legislature until 1998.

Rep. Mark Takano and Rep. Jared Polis in LA 2017 (Photo by Karen Ocamb)

Fast forward to 2012. Takano ran for Congress again – this time as an openly gay man in a year that saw America’s first Black President, Barack Obama, announce support for marriage equality and still win reelection. Takano beat Republican John Tavaglione in the newly created 41st Congressional District. He had support from other out politicians, including Colorado Rep. Jared Polis and Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank, as well as LGBTQ+ groups such as the Human Rights Campaign and Victory Fund.

Rep. Mark Takano honors contributions of Japanese World War II servicemembers on Memorial Day 2026 (Photo via Takano’s Facebook page)

Of Japanese heritage, Takano was the first out gay person of color and the first Asian American elected to Congress. Takano has been reelected easily ever since. The Cook Political Report favors Takano over Steve Manos (a Republican) in the June 2 Primary in the 39th Congressional District.

But nothing has been easy during Donald Trump’s second term as president. Takano has introduced numerous pro-LGBTQ+ and otherwise progressive bills, but they’ve gone nowhere in the Republican-majority Congress.

One, for instance, would establish a Commission on Equity and Reconciliation in the Uniformed Services to examine the effects of anti-LGBTQ+ policies on members of the military and recommend ways to compensate them for the harm done. As ranking member—the top Democrat—on the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, he has decried the Trump administration’s treatment of out service members.

“I have and will continue to use my position on the Veterans’ Affairs Committee to fight for the rights of LGBTQI+ veterans, including those pushed out of the service by Trump’s trans military ban and those who have lost access to medically necessary VA health care under Secretary [Doug] Collins,” Takano tells us. “I was proud to co-lead the introduction of the Veterans Healthcare Equality Act to ensure the VA does not discriminate on the basis of gender identity when providing health care to our veterans.”

Rep. Mark Takano at California Democratic Convention 2018 (Photo by Karen Ocamb)

Takano is also a member of the House Committee on Education and Workforce, and he noted the Trump administration has been no friend to the Department of Education, which has seen huge staffing cuts, especially for civil rights enforcement.

“I’m working very closely with my colleagues [on the committee] to conduct congressional oversight and demand accountability from Secretary [Linda] McMahon and Trump administration officials who are so hell-bent on undermining the rights of all students, including LGBTQI+—and particularly transgender—students. Under Trump, there have been massive layoffs at the Office for Civil Rights, and OCR has stopped addressing sexual harassment and sexual violence,” he says.

“This administration’s obsession with attacking transgender rights has led them to abandon the Department of Education’s mission of protecting students from harm—that’s unacceptable,” he says. “That’s why I challenged Secretary McMahon directly about her dismantling and weaponization of OCR at a recent oversight hearing.”

Takano did indeed grill McMahon, who implied that she disagreed with the cuts. “They were firing half the staff that you need at OCR, and it took you 10 months to figure out that was a mistake,” he said in the hearing.

Takano has also introduced the long-pending Equality Act, comprehensive legislation to ban anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination nationwide in employment, housing, and more. He said he looks forward to reintroducing the Equality Act in the next session of Congress, when he’s confident Democrats will hold power after this year’s midterm elections.

In addition, he said he’ll work for Supreme Court reform and to restore voting rights protections. “Like millions of Americans, I was outraged by the Supreme Court’s recent decision to gut the Voting Rights Act,” he said. The Equality Caucus has also announced it is exploring ways to fight anti-LGBTQ+ conversion therapy after the high court struck down Colorado’s law against subjecting minors to the practice.

There may be a new crop of feisty LGBTQ+ legislators shaking things up among the old guard in the next session. The LGBTQ+ Victory Fund has endorsed 220 candidates at all levels of government so far this year, including 18 for U.S. House and Senate, although four have already been knocked out in primaries. It will undoubtedly endorse more.

Among the Victory Fund endorsees for U.S. House are two California Democrats who’ll be in Tuesday’s “jungle primary”: Scott Wiener in the San Francisco district long represented by Nancy Pelosi and Marni von Wilpert in a Palm Springs-area district near Takano’s district. He has endorsed her.

Also in the California primary—in which the top two vote recipients advance to the general election, regardless of party—Takano has endorsed Xavier Becerra for governor. Becerra has been a California state legislator, attorney general, and congressman, and he was U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services under President Joe Biden.

In announcing the endorsement in April, Takano praised Becerra’s “leadership abilities in challenging situations” and his “distinguished career in public service.” Becerra, a Democrat, is leading in one of the most recent polls, with Republican Steve Hilton (a former Fox News commentator) and Democrat Tom Steyer (a former hedge fund manager, now an environmental activist) vying for second place.

Republicans are already employing anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric, especially anti-transgender rhetoric, against out candidates and allies, including Democratic U.S. Senate candidate James Talarico of Texas, a straight cisgender man. But Takano doesn’t think this is a winning strategy.

“We saw in election after election in 2025-2026 that Democratic candidates won by not letting anti-trans fearmongering define their races,” Takano told LGBTQ+ Freedom Fighters. In the midterms, he added, “It is my firm belief that Americans will make their voices known loud and clear that they overwhelmingly reject Trump’s disastrous policies.”

Rep. Mark Takano at Riverside Pride (Photo via Facebook)

Written by Trudy King. Karen Ocamb contributed to this story. This is a cross-post from Karen’s LGBTQ+ Freedom Fighters Substack.

Continue Reading

California Politics

Los Angeles LGBTQ+ organizers condemn ‘harmful anti-LGBTQ+ tropes’ in ads targeting John Erickson’s Senate race

Leaders worry about the impact of the ads on the LGBTQ+ community at large

Published

on

John Erickson

Multiple organizations — including Equality California, the nation’s largest statewide LGBTQ+ civil rights organization — condemned a recent string of political ads targeting West Hollywood councilmember John Erickson.

The political ad was mailed out to voters, with AI-generated photos of Erickson. One ad portrays a photo of Erickson, depicted leisurely in Paris with the phrase “John Erickson: Where public service meets room service.”

AI political ad in question / Distributed by Keep California Golden

On the flyer, claims were made saying that Erickson “used taxpayer dollars to fund a trip to Paris,” implying he was there on vacation and or mismanaging funds.

In a joint statement with the Los Angeles County LGBTQ+ Elected Officials, the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund, and the nonpartisan political organization HONOR PAC, Equality California said these ads “have raised serious concerns within the LGBTQ+ community for relying on imagery and stereotypes that evoke harmful anti-LGBTQ+ tropes.”

“Whether intentional or inadvertent, these tactics cause real harm and contribute to a broader climate in which LGBTQ+ people are increasingly being targeted and attacked across the country for who they are,” the statement continued.

Senate District 24, which Erickson is running for, is “among the most LGBTQ+ voters in California,” according to the statement.

“These tactics feel especially harmful and out of touch with a deeply inclusive district,” a portion of the statement said. “We demand that all candidates and committees in this and other races throughout California carefully review these materials and take meaningful steps to ensure future communications reflect the values of dignity, inclusion, and respect.”

The flyer was paid for by Keep California Golden, a coalition of “industry associations, labor unions, and businesses,” according to its website.

Beyond a paragraph as a description and a list of top donors being the California Association of Realtors, California Correctional Peace Officers Association, and California Building Industry Association, the website for Keep California Golden is blank.

On both the physical ads and website, a note says that the ads were “not authorized by a candidate or a committee controlled by a candidate.”

Additional AI political ad / Distributed by Keep California Golden

Keep California Golden has been around since 2017, but didn’t start receiving significant contributions until quarter 2 of 2018, according to Transparency USA, which tracks data on money in state politics.

Its second and third highest expenditures are to the U.S. Postal Service and Red Printing and Mail, at $411,431 and $218,600, respectively, according to Transparency USA.

Erickson’s trips referenced in the flyer were approved by the city council in a public council meeting, were unanimously approved, and went through proper channels, he told the Los Angeles Blade. 

Erickson was elected to the West Hollywood City Council in 2020 and was reelected in 2024. This is his first run for the California Senate, where he’s running for the District 24 seat.

“They’re distorting the facts to make it seem like I’m one person, but in reality, they’re doing it because they’re afraid of what I actually am going to offer,” Erickson said.

His trips were official business, he said, one of which was a trip to meet the late Pope Francis as a West Hollywood representative, for a program that Los Angeles County and the city co-sponsored to foster youth civic engagement through sports.

The ads referenced another approved trip to the most recent Paris Olympics. West Hollywood is hosting Pride House, a housing village for LGBTQ+ Olympians during the upcoming 2028 Olympics.

“We have people here in California that are not only trying to further harm the LGBTQ+ community, but then spending millions of dollars to push it out to voters to mislead them,” Erickson added. “Even here in West Hollywood, we still face homophobia.”

He called the ads “disgusting and reprehensible,” but said he was honored that the community is standing behind him and pushing back.

“Billionaires are spending money against a candidate whom they are deeply afraid of,” Erickson said. “I’m out there calling to tax the billionaires and the corporations to pay their fair share to fund education, health care, social services… and they’re afraid of me, because I’m also supported and endorsed by the California Federation of Labor.”

He feels the ads are aiming to weaken him as a candidate due to his strong labor ties, as a former labor union president, and endorsements by multiple labor unions.

This is also part of a trend of attacking LGBTQ+ rights and existence, he said.

“This is how we’re engaging in politics at a time where LGBTQ+ people are so attacked in every way, shape, and form,” Erickson said. “In states like Kansas and other places, transgender individuals aren’t even able to get a driver’s license. Internationally, Senegal just increased the penalties for LGBTQ+ people to 10 years in prison.”

Whatever the reason, Erickson worries for future openly LGBTQ+ political leaders aiming to make a larger change in higher offices.

“More people need to be aware of how this impacts other LGBTQ+ elected officials or who might want to consider running for office,” Erickson said. “Those are the things that I’m most concerned about, because an attack on me as an out LGBTQ+ elected official is an attack on everyone.”

“Why would someone else want to put themselves up for the scrutiny of running, if all they’re going to do is get lied and distorted about? I think it does more harm to LGBTQ people than we actually know,” he added.

Continue Reading

Politics

Scott Wiener seems headed to run without Pelosi’s endorsement

The gay State Senator is seeking the Speaker Emeritus’ seat

Published

on

Scott Wiener

For a while, it seemed that Scott Wiener, a gay California state senator, would be a shoo-in to succeed Nancy Pelosi in the state’s 11th Congressional District. But Monday, 15 days before the June 2 primary election, Pelosi threw a wrench into the race by endorsing one of his rivals, San Francisco Supervisor Connie Chan.

Wiener remains ahead in the polls; he, Chan, and former software engineer and congressional staffer Saikat Chakrabarti are the leading candidates in the race. They are among eight Democrats running, along with one Republican and one candidate declaring no party preference. In California’s primary system, the two top vote recipients in the primary advance to the general election, regardless of party. The district is heavily Democratic.

Pelosi is retiring after representing the district, which covers all of San Francisco, since 1987. In endorsing Chan, Pelosi said in a video, “She’s a mom who knows her power and knows her why. She has fought tirelessly to rebuild our middle class, strengthen our safety net, and protect our rights.” She also called Chan “the leader best prepared to carry forward the fight for San Francisco in the Congress of the United States.”

Wiener released a statement on the endorsement, saying, “I have tremendous respect for Speaker Emerita Pelosi and deep gratitude for everything she has done for our city and our country. Whoever wins in November will have giant stilettos to fill.” To the San Francisco Chronicle, he added, “I think it’s been crystal clear that I would be honored to have her endorsement, and I respect that she has made a choice, and that is entirely her choice to make, and that she’s made a choice.”

“There’s no longstanding disagreement nor any personal animus behind Pelosi’s decision,” political columnist Joe Garofoli wrote in the Chronicle. But Pelosi “bristled” when Wiener announced his candidacy for the seat last year, before she confirmed that she wouldn’t run again, Garofoli noted. She and Chan are also close allies of organized labor, although Wiener has significant labor support as well. And Pelosi, the first woman to be speaker of the U.S. House, often supports women for public office and urges them to “know their why”—why they’re running.

In a poll this month by the Chronicle, 40 percent of likely voters supported or were leaning toward Wiener, while 18 percent chose Chan and 17 percent preferred Chakrabarti. So Pelosi’s endorsement may not push Chan ahead of Wiener, but it may push her ahead of Chakrabarti, setting up Chan and Wiener to face off in the general election, according to Garofoli.

“This endorsement is more than an adrenaline shot in the arm for Chan’s campaign,” David McCuan, a professor of political science at Sonoma State University, told the columnist.

But Pelosi has not always backed winners. Last year, she called California Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis a particularly great candidate for governor, but Kounalakis soon dropped out of the crowded race. Some of the San Francisco supervisors she’s supported have won their elections, and some have not. She did endorse then-Congressman Adam Schiff for U.S. senator from California in 2024, and he won. Pelosi remains popular in San Francisco, though some constituents wish she had stepped aside earlier in favor of younger pols.

Schiff has endorsed Chan in the 11th District race, along with many high-profile politicians and activists, such as Congresswoman Judy Chu, former San Francisco Mayors Willie Brown and Art Agnos, former California Assemblymember Tom Ammiano (a gay man), and veteran gay activist Cleve Jones. She has also been endorsed by the Harvey Milk LGBTQ Democratic Club, which praises her as a champion of the working class.

Wiener has the endorsement of the California Democratic Party and many LGBTQ+ groups, including the Human Rights Campaign PAC, the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund, Equality California, Equality PAC, and the California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus. He has been endorsed by The Bay Area Reporter, San Francisco’s largest LGBTQ+ publication, as well.

Both Chan and Chakrabarti have positioned themselves to the left of Wiener, who “would be identified as pretty far to the left in most places; in San Francisco, he’s deemed a moderate,” Mother Jones noted. The three share many positions—support for LGBTQ+ rights, opposition to Donald Trump’s brutal treatment of immigrants, and condemnation of his cuts to many federal programs. They differ on new state taxes on the wealthiest residents, with Wiener opposed and Chan and Chakrabarti in support. Wiener does want to reverse Trump’s federal tax cuts for the rich.

However, the biggest problem facing San Francisco is a shortage of housing, at least housing that middle- and working-class people can afford. The three leading candidates have ideas to address that, but they differ on details. Wiener has pushed for more housing for residents of all income levels and for loosening regulations as an incentive to build. Chan opposes deregulation and says the focus should be on “housing that working people can afford,” she recently told local publication The Frisc. Chakrabarti is friendlier to deregulation and has proposed a public national bank to finance housing.

As a state senator, Wiener has put forth several bills calling for the construction of high-density housing near public transit, including in areas where such buildings were not previously allowed; he finally got one passed and signed into law in 2025, and it goes into effect July 1. Previous bills had drawn opposition from those who wanted to keep their neighborhoods exclusive to single-family homes, as well as from groups worried that the new construction would push out low-income residents. The law’s effective date could be delayed because of confusion over how to implement it; Wiener told Politico he’s open to that if it’s based on “good-faith feedback.”

Wiener was involved in another controversy recently, this one over the war in Gaza. At a candidates’ forum in January, he stayed silent when asked if Israel’s actions in the region constituted genocide, while Chan and Chakrabarti had said yes. Less than a week later, he shifted positions, saying the term was appropriate. Criticism from his fellow Jews then led him to resign as co-chair of the California Legislative Jewish Caucus. He went on to call Israel’s government an “abomination” that “is making Israelis less safe,” as quoted by The American Prospect.

A bit more about each candidate: Wiener was first elected to the California Senate in 2016. He previously represented Harvey Milk’s district on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, S.F.’s city council, and before that, practiced law. In the Senate, his persistence has annoyed some colleagues, but he has said it means he gets things done. Chan is a first-generation immigrant, having been born in Hong Kong and coming to the U.S. at age 13. She was an employee in several city departments, including a stint as an aide to then-District Attorney Kamala Harris, before her election as a supervisor. Chakrabarti amassed a fortune with Stripe, a payment processing company, and has put millions into his campaign. He was briefly chief of staff to U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York but offended many in Washington with his criticism that mainstream Democrats weren’t doing enough to fight Trump.

The hard-fought primary campaign will come to a head June 2—but expect another hard-fought campaign leading up to November.

Written by Trudy King, this is a cross-post from Karen Ocamb’s LGBTQ+ Freedom Fighters Substack.

Continue Reading

Popular