No Action on DOMA Repeal Until 2013

CORRECTION: No real action until 2013! "...lawmakers ... could take up legislation to repeal DOMA — known as the Respect for Marriage Act — at the end of the two-year session starting in 2011."

U.S. Rep. Jerrold Nadler introduced the Respect for Marriage Act (RMA) in September, and if it passes, it will effectively repeal the heinous 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a piece of knee-jerk legislation from Congress fearing that the near success of marriage equality in Hawaii at the time would spread through the nation like some plague.

Don't get me started.

However, up to this point, we haven't had much of a time line for RMA. Last month, Nadler spokesperson John Doty said, "I think there’s three or four gay rights bills that are cued up. The Respect for Marriage Act is a little bit further down that list. It hasn’t been talked about as long or debated as long … as the other bills."

Rep. Barney Frank agreed. "...marriage is the toughest of these issues. That’s why I do not see any chance of any success on marriage in the Congress this year. Neither does anyone else, by the way, no matter what people pretend to make people feel better. But that’s why we’re focusing on these other issues."

Today, the DC Agenda has posted its interview with Nadler and he talks timing. Nadler says a DOMA repeal won't happen in this Congress and instead he will focus on building support for the issue and then take it up in 2011 after elections, and maybe then not until the end of that term. In the meantime, they will focus on other pro-LGBT legislation taking precedence, such as ENDA and DADT repeal, which they hope to accomplish by the end of 2010.

“The Respect for Marriage Act is a bill that we can’t pass right now; we know we can’t pass it right now,” he said. Currently, it has 105 co-sponsors.

Nadler told the DC Agenda that he believes support will grow, and despite not showing too much enthusiasm to the public, he says House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has been quietly encouraging her colleagues to sign on a co-sponsors.

As for Rep. Frank: “We have a disagreement on the strategy on this obviously, as we had a disagreement on the strategy over the non-inclusive ENDA last [Congress] where we no longer have that disagreement,” he said. “And, I presume, in the end, we will not have a disagreement on this.”

Even with Democrats potentially in danger, Nadler said he didn’t think lawmakers would avoid LGBT issues next year to reduce a perceived risk of alienating voters before the election.

“I think we’re going to face most of these issues this Congress, mostly next year,” he said. “I’m assuming that the gay community is going to keep the pressure on. I mean, don’t go to sleep because I said it as that. If the gay community keeps the pressure on, then I think that, yes, we’ll probably face most of these issues.”

Don't worry, Rep. Nadler. We aren't going anywhere.

Obama Administration Defies Judge's Orders on Federal Benefits; Update on Federal LGBT Rights Bills

In late November, a judge ordered Obama's administration to enroll a lesbian federal employee's partner into their health benefits program. With 30 days to comply sprinting by, it appears they won't act on the order.

The administration already has a long history of defending anti-LGBT laws it says are discriminatory but must protect because their "job description" tells them so. However, openly gay Director of the Office of Personnel Management John Berry, who ironically is going along with the administration and told Blue Cross/Blue Shield to not extend the benefits to his fellow gay citizen, says he nor Obama have the authority to follow the judge's order. Huh? He spoke at the International Gay and Lesbian Leadership Conference Saturday.



I guess they're simply hoping that Rep. Tammy Baldwin's Domestic Partnership Benefits & Obligation Act succeeds so that they won't have to take responsibility for anything. That's a rather cowardly strategy in my opinion. And I would bet that the legislation won't pass by the time the 30 days are up. So what is the administration going to say then?

Actually, unless a miracle happens (calling Mr. Chip), I know it won't pass by then. Baldwin recently said that the bill will be voted on in early 2010. Though that's great news, it's not so great news for the administration who's defying a judge's orders.

But here's some actual good news. Openly gay Reps. Baldwin and Jared Polis, "said they are also confident that the House will include in the annual military spending bill next year a provision to repeal the law that bans gays from serving in the U.S. military. All the measures face a harder time in the Senate following the death of longtime ally Sen. Edward Kennedy, but Baldwin and Polis said they remained optimistic Senate leaders would."

“I’m hopeful we will see those three pieces of legislation make it all the way, or damn close,” said Baldwin, referring to the Domestic Partnership Benefits, DADT and ENDA.

Office of Personnel Management director John Berry, the Obama administration’s highest ranking gay appointee, told the conference that the president strongly supports the trio of gay rights measures.

Including transgender workers as part of the legislation to ban job discrimination and lifting the “don’t ask, don’t tell” ban on gay service members may especially meet opposition in Congress, Berry said. But he said that with a Democrat in the White House and Democratic majorities controlling the House and the Senate, victories were “within our grasp.”

I hope they're right. There's been a lot of anger recently about ENDA stalling in congress.

Everyone keeps saying, "Wait for 2010." Though I applaud Baldwin and Polis, their Democratic colleagues better come through on their promises, because with the Don't Ask Don't Give campaign growing momentum, and the recent betrayal in the New York state senate by the Democrats there, they better be doing everything they can to get these pieces of legislation through, or they just may find LGBT citizens supporting their primary opponents.

Oh wait, the LGBT already have begun doing just that in New York. This "bloodbath" is at the state level for now. Don't think it won't go federal.

The Status of LGBT Rights Bills in Congress

The Washington Blade has done an extensive report, interviewing Rep. Barney Frank and more, on the status of several different LGBT rights bills making their way through Congress and when they may actually hit the chambers' floors for voting.

DON'T ASK DON'T TELL

The effort to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” will likely come next year as an amendment to the Defense Department spending bill, rather than through a standalone bill, according to gay Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.).

Frank said in an interview with the Blade that repealing the 1993 law barring gays from serving openly in the military would happen as part of the fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill.

“The House will take up and the Senate will take up ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ repeal,” he said. “That will again, like hate crimes, even more so, will have to be done, I believe, in the context of the defense authorization. You can’t do the standalone bill. It belongs in the defense authorization.”

Currently, Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-Pa.) sponsors the standalone version of legislation in the House, but there is no equivalent for the Senate.

David Stacy, HRC’s senior public policy advocate, noted that Congress enacted “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in 1993 as part of a defense authorization bill, so repealing the law via the same vehicle would mirror the process.

So look for Congress to take on DADT in the summer of 2010.


EMPLOYMENT NON-DISCRIMINATION ACT

"Action on other pro-LGBT legislation seems more imminent," reports the Blade. "Frank said Congress could advance the Employment Non-Discrimination Act . . . in the near future."

Frank, sponsor the the House version of ENDA, says the bill is in good shaped and headed to the House Education & Labor Committee would mark up ENDA before year’s end and then will hit the floor for a vote in February and then to Senate voting in Spring.

Allison Herwitt, legislative director for the Human Rights Campaign, is more optimistic and believes it could all happen before the end of the year.

Frank has concerns though on obtaining the necessary 60 votes in the Senate to overcome a filibuster for ENDA and DADT.


DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP BENEFITS & OBLIGATIONS ACT

This bill would provide partner benefits to LGBT federal employees.

“That one I’m the most confident is going to become law because I think you have Senate support for it — enough to get to the 60” votes needed to overcome a filibuster, Frank said.

Lieberman is sponsor of the Senate version of the legislation while Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), the only out lesbian in Congress, is sponsoring the House version of the bill. Baldwin was recently quoted in The Hill as saying she “absolutely” believes there are enough votes to pass the bill in the House.

Herwitt believes this bill can be taken up along with ENDA.

“The critical question is, given the Republicans getting worse and worse on LGBT issues, whether we’ll get any Republicans voting,” Frank said. “I assume we would have safe senators — [Sen. Olympia] Snowe and [Sen. Susan] Collins, maybe [Sen. George] Voinovich or one or two others — but that’s the key.”


UNITING AMERICAN FAMILIES ACT/IMMIGRATION REFORM

This standalone bill, if passed, would allow LGBT citizens to sponsor a foreign partner for residency.

Immigration advocates hope provisions can be added as part of comprehensive immigration reform that are equal to UAFA.

Steve Ralls, spokesperson for Immigration Equality, said his organization is pushing for inclusion of the provision in immigration reform legislation that Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.), Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) are expected to introduce later this year.

“They are still operating on a timeline of introduction around the end of the year,” Ralls said. “All indications that we have so far is that it’s probably late December, early January in terms of introduction of an actual bill.”

RESPECT FOR MARRIAGE ACT

The full-DOMA repeal, which has 104 sponsors, was introduced by Rep. Jerrold, Nadler. There is no Senate equivalent, though Sen. Russ Feingold has been approached. No hearings or markups have been scheduled.

“I think there’s three or four gay rights bills that are cued up,” said John Doty, a Nadler spokesperson. “The Respect for Marriage Act is a little bit further down that list. It hasn’t been talked about as long or debated as long … as the other bills.”

Frank is not a co-sponsor of the Respect for Marriage Act and said he’s not optimistic about the bill’s chances because “marriage is the toughest of these issues.”

“That’s why I do not see any chance of any success on marriage in the Congress this year,” he said. “Neither does anyone else, by the way, no matter what people pretend to make people feel better. But that’s why we’re focusing on these other issues.”

EVERY CHILD DESERVES A FAMILY ACT/ADOPTION BILL

This bill, introduced by Rep. Pete Stark, would restrict federal funding to states that have adoption restrictions, including those that bar same-sex couples from adopting. Frank intends to sign on as co-sponsor, but right now the bill has none.

Frank's optimistic, but - “Even people from certain states who don’t agree with that policy will be reluctant to vote to deny money to their states. Plus, you have Republican opposition in general. Remember, the Republicans are now almost monolithically against us.”

“I think this bill needs to be seen and viewed positively, most importantly, by the child welfare professionals and have the support of the leading child welfare and children’s rights organizations,” Herwitt said.

Obama May Announce 2010 Push for DADT Repeal and Address Maine's Marriage Battle in HRC Speech

UPDATE 4:29 pm PST: It appears in an update to Kerry Eleveld's piece in the Advocate that she too has been told that Obama plans to discuss the coming weeks and months. But she's heard he'll address the hate crimes bill as well.

A reliable source who wishes to remain anonymous gave me a tip about the content of Obama's speech at the HRC dinner tomorrow night.

1. Obama will announce a push to repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell in 2010.
2. Obama intends to say something about the Maine marriage equality battle.
3. The newly appointed openly gay ambassador-designate to New Zealand, David Huebner, will be in attendance.
   

No word of any mention of the Matthew Shepherd Act or ENDA.

At first glance, this may not seem to have a "wow factor", but if you think it over, it could have far-reaching consequences.

First, the importance of the speech itself lies in the fact that Obama is only the second president to address a major LGBT organization after Clinton, who spoke at an HRC dinner in 1997.

Second, to announce he supports a repeal of DADT in 2010 will be the first definitive time-line given by the president and his administration on his DADT campaign promise since he took office. It will also give the LGBT population a benchmark to keep him accountable by.

Third, if Obama clearly states that he is against discrimination of LGBT citizens, promotes equality and denounces the actions of the Yes on 1 campaign in Maine to strip gays and lesbians of their right to marry, not only will this have a major impact on voters, but it will be a killer soundbite for the NO on 1 campaign to use in tv and radio ads. (A game piece that unfortunately, the No on Prop 8 campaign failed to use last year while the Yes hacks used Obama's stance against marriage equality to manipulate voters.)

An article released today by the Washington Post claims that the speech will mainly focus on incremental advancements as progress. However, one can hope that the White House is listening to the loud criticism from the LGBT population who say, "We've heard that before. What else you got?"

Now it remains to be seen if these bullet points make it into the speech. You can find out by watching the speech live on C-Span tomorrow night at 7:55pm EST.

DADT Not a Priority for Congress - Not Looking Good for 2010 Either

It takes a lot to get me upset lately - I'm so used to reading tons of bulls*** from wingnuts and vapid rhetoric from conservatives. But this story from the Politico achieved in riling me up.

Politico reports that Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin prefers a "go-slow" strategy to repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell (DADT) because the Senate is swamped and the lead sponsor, Sen. Ted Kennedy, has died. Plus, there's no Republican co-sponsors. (Shocking!) On top of that, President Obama isn't pushing for action, so why should they work at it?

“We have a very heavy, busy agenda and a few months left to do it,” Durbin told Politico. “So it may not be now, but that doesn’t mean it won’t be soon.”

Openly gay Rep. Barney Frank, a lead opponent of DADT in the House, believes a repeal has better chances next year, but others don't share his view because Congress faces elections in 2010, and they don't want to piss off their conservative supporters.

Other members of Congress are deferring to the Pentagon, waiting to hear back on a drawn out internal review of the policy.

So I'm pissed.

First, I'm appalled that they use Kennedy's death as an excuse for not getting any work on a repeal done. Kennedy, who was a leading LGBT advocate and did amazing work, had been out of commission for almost a year! They knew full well that if any work was to be done, they would have to do it themselves. But instead, they point to a man who can't defend himself to excuse their incompetence.

Second, they don't want to piss off their conservative supporters?! A recent and widely read Gallup Poll showed that a majority of Americans support repealing DADT. Even more telling, a majority of weekly church goers support repealing DADT!

Politico reports, "Rea Carey, executive director for the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, said with the 2010 midterm elections drawing nearer, lawmakers shouldn’t shy away from the battle because when public officials stand up for people in a country who are affected by discrimination, it tends to benefit them.'

"But she added: 'Elected officials always look towards the elections; we feel that is all the more critical to get this done in Congress soon.'"

So the only conclusion I can reach is that members of Congress are more concerned about an imaginary fear of pissing conservative constituents off by repealing DADT (while we're fighting two wars) in their hopes of keeping their jobs instead of doing what is right. But in this case, doing what is right is supported by a majority. So where's the logic?

Yet this is nothing new. We're used to being promised a lot by Congress only for those promises to be broken with illogical and empty excuses. We're also used to broken promises because many in Congress cower to the conservative base. We are a minority after all.

Some say there's always 2011. But nope. That's when Obama will be in reelection mode. And if he's not willing to push for DADT's repeal now, he'll definitely not be willing then.

But I want to leave on a positive note. Sen. Karen Gillibrand plans to have the first public hearing with the Senate Armed Services Committee on DADT this fall. We must stay vigilant and keep on top of our representatives, especially during the hearings, urging them to repeal the discriminatory policy. A hearing can make all the difference in the world.

California Senate Officially Calls for End to ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’

Press release from Equality California:

The California Senate officially endorsed a resolution calling for the repeal of the discriminatory federal policy known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Sponsored by Equality California (EQCA) and introduced by Senator Christine Kehoe (D-San Diego), the resolution calls on the United States Congress to pass and President Barack Obama to immediately sign the Military Readiness Enhancement Act of 2009, which would end the unfair policy and allow gay, lesbian and bisexual Americans to serve openly in the armed forces. The resolution passed the State Senate in a 23-16 vote. The resolution will go before the State Assembly in January.

“The California Senate now joins the growing chorus of current and former service members who have called for the repeal of this discriminatory policy,” said EQCA Executive Director Geoff Kors. “We applaud our representatives in the State Senate for standing up for what is right, and we urge our representatives in the Assembly and ultimately in Washington to do the same. President Obama and Congress must fulfill their promise to stand up for equality and overturn this policy now.”

“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was first authorized in 1994. Since that time, more than 13,000 service members have been discharged under the policy, including hundreds of service members serving in ‘critical operations,’ such as counterintelligence, medicine, and translation. According to a General Accounting Office report, 323 language specialists have been discharged, resulting in a critical shortage of qualified translators in intelligence gathering posts. Currently, 149 members of the U.S. House have signed on as co-sponsors to the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, which would repeal “Don't Ask, Don't Tell” and replace it with a policy of non-discrimination across the armed forces. Earlier this summer 77 members of Congress sent a letter to President Obama requesting he immediately suspend discharges under the discriminatory policy.

“To be a quality soldier you must display courage, patriotism, commitment and ability – none of which have anything to do with sexual orientation,” said Senator Kehoe. “Overturning this shameful policy will help ensure that gay and lesbian Americans will be afforded the same opportunities as any other American who wants to serve our country.”

More than 24 other nations currently allow gay, lesbian and bisexual individuals to serve openly in their militaries, including Canada and the United Kingdom, alongside whom American forces have served in combat. Recent public opinion polls show that a majority of both the American public and active service members believe the policy should be overturned and that gay and lesbian Americans should be allowed to serve openly in the military.

CNN Coverage of Bill Clinton's Netroots Nation Showdown with Blogger Lane Hudson Not Very Forgiving

CNN covered the now widely talked about interruption of Bill Clinton's keynote speech at Netroots Nation. Blogger Lane Hudson stood up and shouted, "Mr. President, will you call for a repeal of DOMA and Don't Ask, Don't Tell? Right now?"

Clinton snapped back, placing blame back on the LGBT population. However, CNN calls Clinton's take "classic Bill Clinton version of history - 'It wasn't my fault.'"



CNN isn't alone.

Blog Godless Liberal Homo takes extreme umbrage with Clinton's portrayal of Don't Ask Don't Tell's passage.

Let's start with the military ban. Bill Clinton claims that the problem with his deceptively labeled "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy was with its implementation despite the fact that he deliberately designed it to increase the number of discharges and witchhunts. Queer veterans groups at the time were warning people that this version was even worse than the version Reagan put in place as an Executive Order.

Clinton also lied about congressional support to sustain a veto of a military ban. In 1993, 35 Senators voted to lift the ban completely with no support from the Clinton White House. It only takes 34 Senators to sustain a veto.

Here are a couple of facts about the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy that you may not know.

1) Military commanders are allowed to launch investigations of sexual orientation without anyone coming out based on any or no evidence. These witchhunts even have involved placing undercover military police in gay bars.

2) If a soldier tells her mother she is a lesbian, she is violating "DADT" and is subject to discharge.

3) If a marine tells his boyfriend he is gay, he is violating "DADT" and is subject to discharge.

(That's why it pisses me off when people call it "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" itself is one of Bill Clinton's homophobic lies.)

Bill Clinton also lied about DOMA. He said he didn't want to sign it, yet he ran campaign ads in 1996 on fundamentalist Christian radio bragging about signing it. Oops!

Given now that we have another president who claimed to be a "fierce advocate" in his campaign but shows less action while in office, this debate about Clinton's legacy seems very timely, especially with talk that Obama hesitates making moves on LGBT rights because he fears making the same mistakes Clinton did.

It's all about context. Like Clinton said at Netroots Nation, that was 16 years ago.

Bill Clinton Interrupted During Netroots Nation Keynote Speech - Answers Demanding DADT and DOMA Questions

While giving his keynote speech at the Netroots Nation plenary in Pittsburgh Thursday night, former president Bill Clinton was interrupted by blogger and activist Lane Hudson, who stood up from the audience and demanded, "Mr. President, will you call for a repeal of DOMA and Don't Ask, Don't Tell? Right now?

Clinton didn't take long to respond by saying that Hudson should to go the unruly town halls on health care. "You'd do really well there," which was met with laughter and some applause.

But Hudson was not deterred and interrupted again. Clinton's tone quickly changed and gave the most direct and painfully honest answer I've ever heard him give, placing a lot of the responsibility of the passage of DADT back on the LGBT population.

"You wanna talk about ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’, I’ll tell you exactly what happened. You couldn’t deliver me any support in the Congress and they voted by a veto-proof majority in both houses against my attempt to let gays serve in the military and the media supported them. They raised all kinds of devilment. And all most of you did was to attack me instead of getting some support in the congress. Now, that’s the truth."



See a video from the view point of the audience by Jeremy Hooper of G-A-Y blog.

Thanks to reporter Rex Wockner, here's a full transcript of the exchange. It also includes Clinton's reasoning behind signing DOMA.

Lane Hudson (screaming from the audience): Mr. President, will you call for a repeal of DOMA and Don't Ask Don't Tell right now? Please.

Bill Clinton: ... You want to talk about Don't Ask Don't Tell, I'll tell you exactly what happened. You couldn't deliver me any support in the Congress and they voted by a veto-proof majority in both houses against my attempt to let gays serve in the military, and the media supported them. They raised all kinds of devilment. And all most of you did was to attack me instead of getting me some support in the Congress. Now that's the truth.

Secondly -- it's true! You know, you may have noticed that presidents aren't dictators. They voted -- they were about to vote for the old policy by margins exceeding 80 percent in the House and exceeding 70 percent in the Senate. The gave test votes out there to send me a message that they were going to reverse any attempt I made by executive order to force them to accept gays in the military. And let me remind you that the public opinion now is more strongly in our favor than it was 16 years ago, and I have continued supporting it. That John Shalikashvili, who was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under me, was against Don't Ask -- was against letting gays serve -- is now in favor of it. This is a different world. That's the point I'm trying to make.

Let me also say something that never got sufficient publicity at the time: When General Colin Powell came up with this Don't Ask Don't Tell, it was defined while he was chairman much differently than it was implemented. He said: 'If you will accept this, here's what we'll do. We will not pursue anyone. Any military members out of uniform will be free to march in gay rights parades, go to gay bars, go to political meetings. Whatever mailings they get, whatever they do in their private lives, none of this will be a basis for dismissal.' It all turned out to be a fraud because of the enormous reaction against it among the middle-level officers and down after it was promulgated and Colin was gone. So nobody regrets how this was implemented any more than I do. But the Congress also put that into law by a veto-proof majority, and many of your friends voted for that, believing the explanation about how it would be eliminated. So, I hated what happened. I regret it. But I didn't have, I didn't think at the time, any choice if I wanted any progress to be made at all. Look, I think it's ridiculous. Can you believe they spent -- whatever they spent -- $150,000 to get rid of a valued Arabic speaker recently?

And, you know, the thing that changed me forever on Don't Ask Don't Tell was when I learned that 130 gay service people were allowed to serve and risk their lives in the first Gulf War, and all their commanders knew they were gay; they let them go out there and risk their lives because they needed them, and then as soon as the first Gulf War was over, they kicked them out. That's all I needed to know, that's all anybody needs to know, to know that this policy should be changed.

Now, while we're at it, let me just say one thing about DOMA, since you -- the reason I signed DOMA was -- and I said when I signed it -- that I thought the question of whether gays should marry should be left up to states and to religious organizations, and if any church or other religious body wanted to recognize gay marriage, they ought to. We were attempting at the time, in a very reactionary Congress, to head off an attempt to send a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage to the states. And if you look at the 11 referenda much later -- in 2004, in the election -- which the Republicans put on the ballot to try to get the base vote for President Bush up, I think it's obvious that something had to be done to try to keep the Republican Congress from presenting that. The President doesn't even get to veto that. The Congress can refer constitutional amendments to the states. I didn't like signing DOMA and I certainly didn't like the constraints that were put on benefits, and I've done everything I could -- and I am proud to say that the State Department was the first federal department to restore benefits to gay partners in the Obama administration, and I think we are going forward in the right direction now for federal employees. ...

But, actually, all these things illustrate the point I'm trying to make. America has rapidly moved to a different place on a lot of these issues, and so what we have to decide is what we are going to do about it. Right now, the Republicans are sitting around rooting for the president to fail, as nearly as I can see.

On UStream, you can listen to the rest of Clinton's speech which touches on the healtch care debate, the Obama administration, the involvement of bloggers and activists and their role in ensuring a progressive future for the nation. (Click on the tag marker to skip directly to Clinton.)

Lane Hudson, the blogger activist who stood up and challenged Clinton, has written a piece on the Huffington Post, "Why I interrupted Bill Clinton's speech at Netroots Nation."

So what do you make of Clinton's response? Did we, the LGBT population, drop the ball when it came to DADT and DOMA? I don't think that anyone can argue that Clinton didn't stick his neck out for us, but has history twisted the story a bit, putting the blame more on him for the passage of DADT and DOMA? Or should we be equally to blame, if not more, for not going full force in stopping them, since those laws directly affect us?

Can we learn something from this? Both HRC and Equality Across America have campaigns (the latter kicking into gear after the National Equality March) in place for us to lobby our representatives. If a DADT or DOMA repeal actually hit the Senate and House floors, will we have learned enough from history to do everything we can to garner support from Congress?

Despite this amazing resurgence of grassroots activity, there's still lots of complacency within our communities. How can we get them to call and email their representatives? What can we do to get them more involved?

At this critical juncture for our rights and the hope of a progressive future, we can't take any chances.

Photo by Andrés Duque of Blabbeando. Additional photos here.

VIDEO: Daily Beast Speaks to Sen. Gillibrand About DADT Hearings; Rep. Hastings Tells Maddow White House Blocked DADT Amendment

Action around Don't Ask Don't Tell has been heating up at the capital. Having been so wrapped up with the Leadership Summit and all the marriage equality news around the nation, I haven't had much time to report on the issue. However, here is a quick video recap with links to accompanying stories.

The Daily Beast talks to Sen. Karen Gillibrand about her unsuccessful attempt to temporarily suspend the enforcement of DADT and her wonderfully successful move to hold the first Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the law since its passing in 1993.



In the House, Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) speaks to Rachel Maddow about how the White House undermined his efforts to pass an amendment that would put an end to funding DADT investigations, a tactic that American Blog says ". . . Republicans have used for years to stop funding of programs they didn't like. For years, Republicans blocked federal funding of DC's domestic partnerships and needle exchange. I'm not sure if this was the best approach, but, sometimes, the only way to make progress is to use (or abuse) the appropriations process. But, a funny (or not so funny) thing happened on the way to the Appropriations bill mark-up. In his own words, Hastings was pressured by the White House and others to drop his amendment."



Also from America Blog:

Last night on Rachel Maddow's show, during her interview with Rep. Alcee Hastings, she read a statement from SLDN's communication director Kevin Nix. I got a copy of the statement. Kevin says a lot here:

We hope it’s not true the White House pressured Rep. Hastings to withdraw his amendment to stop funding “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” investigations. Such a move would go against President Obama’s commitment to end “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Now, we need to see some positive action, some follow through from this White House. The Commander in Chief has a key leadership role in ending this bad law. He should publicly endorse the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, sponsored by Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-PA), that overturns DADT. The President and Congress need to get on the same page and same timeline in ending DADT and both need to act with a sense of urgency. Service members are getting fired literally every day just because they are gay or lesbian, and our national security is at risk because we’re losing some of the best and brightest linguists, medics, pilots, and intelligence analysts under this archaic law.

So, as far as those who know can tell, there's been nothing from the White House. SLDN needs "to see some positive action, some follow through from this White House." They haven't seen any yet. If SLDN doesn't know what the Obama administration's plan is, the plan doesn't exist.

Defense Secretary Gates Echoes Obama's Stance on "Changing" DADT

Recently, President Obama was recently asked about Don't Ask Don't Tell, and he kept referring to "changing" the law instead of "repealing" it, the latter a term he used before switching to "change."

Now, Defense Secretary Gates has begun to use it, too.



He does give some examples of more "humane" ways of dealing with DADT.

One example of that might be — what if we did not take into account third parties trying to harm somebody who may be gay in the service. Somebody who may have a vendetta, or hatred toward somebody, and therefore out them as a way to wreck their career. Is there a way we can not focus on those kinds of reports.

What? If authorities are made aware that a soldier is gay or lesbian, the law demands they discharge them. It doesn't matter if they're made aware of the soldier's orientation if it comes from a third party with a vendetta. So is he proposing they just ignore it?

Gates puts the onus back on Congress to get legislation through to repeal, reminding us that DADT is not just a policy, but a law. But he'll break that law if a personal vendetta is involved?

But I would like to remind him that in the interim, Obama has the authrority to put a stop-loss on discharges. And he won't.

Where's the humanity in that?

VIDEO: Obama Wants to See Don't Ask Don't Tell "Changed"

In the interview with Anderson Cooper, Obama said:

"Look, I've had conversations with Bob Gates as well as Admiral Mullen about the fact that I want to see this law change. I also want to make sure that we are not simply ignoring a congressional law. If Congress passes a law that is constitutionally valid, then it's not appropriate for the Executive Branch simply to say we will not enforce a law. It is our duty to enforce laws. I do think that there is the possibility that we change how the law is being enforced even as we are pursuing a shift in congressional policy.

"But look, the bottom line is, I want to see this changed, and we've already contacted congressional allies. I want to make sure that it's changed in a way that ultimately works well for our military and for the outstanding gay and lesbian soldiers that are both currently enlisted or would like to enlist...I'd like to see it done sooner rather than later. And we've begun a process to not only work it through Congress, but also to make sure that the Pentagon has thought through all the ramifications of how this would be most effective."

Notice he doesn't use the word "repeal" or "overturn" once. We began to see this shift in language ever since the White House took down some of the promises to the LGBT on their website, then after the uproar, put their DADT promise back up, but as "change" the policy, and then after lots of criticism, back to "repeal" the policy.

Obama and his advisers had begun using this new language for some time until recently at the White House Stonewall commemoration where he used the strong word of "repeal" again. Now it's back to "change" with no reference to a repeal.

Words DO matter. "Repeal" and "change" have completely different meanings. Obama is really good with words, but also really good at making nothing sound like something.

What do you mean, Obama? Repeal or change? And if the latter, what possible change to this policy can you make without still making gay and lesbian servicemembers unequal? The only solution - a full repeal.

"Voices of Honor" National Tour Launched by HRC and Servicemembers United Against DADT

The HRC and Servicemembers United have collaborated to form the "Voices of Honor" national tour against Don't Ask Don't Tell. Rep. Patrick Murphy, former West Point professor and Iraq War vet, announced the tour Wednesday as well as announcing that he will be the lead sponsor of legislation to repeal the discriminatory policy.



The tour, stopping in several cities including Philadelphia, PA and Orlando, FL, will feature former Marine Staff Sgt. Eric Alva, the first U.S. soldier wounded in the Iraq war; Jarrod Chlapowski, a former U.S. Army Korean linguist who opted to not re-enlist because of DADT and is currently a public policy advocate at the Human Rights Campaign; Alex Nicholson, a U.S. Army veteran fluent in Arabic discharged under DADT and current executive director of Servicemembers United; Army Staff Sgt. Genevieve Chase, a veteran of Operation Enduring Freedom and Executive Director of American Women Veterans; and others. Many on the tour are straight in order to do outreach to straight soldiers.

Later in the evening, Rep. Patrick Murphy spoke to Rachel Maddow telling her that now is the time to repeal DADT.

Joint Chief of Staff Ad. Mike Mullen Believes in "Measured" Approach to DADT; Colin Powell Withholds Judgment

"I haven't done any kind of extensive review. And what I feel most obligated about is to make sure I tell the president, you know, my - give the president my best advice, should this law change, on the impact on our people and their families at these very challenging times," Mullen said.

So naturally, my response, "What about our families? What about DADT impact on us? I guess we're beside the point of consideration."

See former top Clinton aide and lawyer Richard Socarides response to Mullen's comments at America Blog.

Even more disappointing is Colin Powell, who in 1993 helped get DADT passed.



Michael of Michael-in-Norfolk blog observes, "Powell's comments are particularly ironic since at the time President Harry Truman integrated the military there were many racist whites who viewed blacks much the same way gays are viewed by homophobic bigots. Using Powell's analysis, Truman should not have made the move he did - waiting instead for the country to be ready for the change. Living around the military as I do, it is likely the most anti-change institution there is save perhaps the bitter old queens at the Vatican."

ACTION: Help Lt. Dan Choi By Signing Letter to House Speaker Pelosi Asking For DADT Repeal

On Tuesday the Federal Recognition Board recommended the discharging of Lt. Dan Choi under the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy because he publicly stated that he is gay. However, the final decision is made by senior Army officials which could come within weeks to a year.

Today in an email through the Courage Campaign, and alongside Lt. Choi's organization Knights Out and the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, Lt. Choi asks for the continued support from LGBT and allies by signing a letter to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

"I've made my case to President Obama -- supported by more than 140,000 of your signatures. I've made my case to the Army -- supported by more than 160,000 of your signatures. And I will continue to make my case until they fire me for good.

"Now we need to make our case to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Will you join me in asking Speaker Pelosi to strongly support legislation currently in Congress that would repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"? Please sign on to our letter before July 4th and I'll personally deliver your signatures to the Speaker ASAP."

Go to the Courage Campaign website to read and sign the letter to speaker Nancy Pelosi. Do it by July 4th!

VIDEO: Keith Olbermann Says Obama Is "Goddamn Wrong" on Don't Ask Don't Tell

Army Board Recommends Lt. Dan Choi Be Discharged Under DADT

Today, an Army board in Syracuse at Hancock Air Base recommended that Lt. Dan Choi be discharged under Don't Ask Don't Tell since he publicly stated that he was gay. This despite Choi delivering stacks of letters and petitions from thousands of individuals demanding he should stay in the army.

The recommendation goes to Lt. Gen. Thomas Miller of the First Army Division, and Gen. Craig McKinley, the chief of the National Guard Bureau, who will make the final decision.

Choi pledged to keep fighting to stay in the army. "I'm disappointed," said Choi at a news conference tonight. "Today was a setback for me."

But Choi said he plans to appeal to the higher ranking officers. "I refuse to lie about my love relationship," he said.

The AP reports, "Lt. Dan Choi is the first New York National Guard member discharged for violating the military's policy against homosexual conduct. About 10,500 military and National Guard members have been discharged for violating the policy in the 12 years from 1997 through 2008."

Last month, Lt. Dan spoke to Unite the Fight at Meet in the Middle, reiterating his pledge to keep fighting DADT.

Press Secretary Gibbs Grilled Over DADT While President Recommits to LGBT Issues

Yesterday, before the White House's commemoration of Stonewall, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was grilled yet again in a press briefing about Don't Ask Don't Tell. Keep in mind, shortly after this, President Obama to repealing the law, along with DOMA and many other discriminatory measures.

Thanks to Pam's House Blend for the transcript.

Q: Robert, I have a question on today's event in the East Room. On "don't ask, don't tell," how much is the President personally involved? I mean, I know you've said that he sort of turned that policy change over to the Pentagon and you're letting them and Congress work on that.

MR. GIBBS: I've said that -- I mean, the President hasn't, himself, been involved in meetings with the Pentagon. A solution has to include working with the Pentagon. But it's something that the President has been involved in since coming to this administration.

Q: How much of a priority is this for him?

MR. GIBBS: Well, it's something that --

Q: I mean, is there a timeline or --

MR. GIBBS: When we can get it done. The President has talked about this -- and I've talked about the fact that to have an enduring solution this had to be done legislatively. That, I think most people recognize, is going to take some time to do, working with both Congress and the Pentagon. I think the President will address this in remarks at the event a little bit later today.

Q: Change in policy?

MR. GIBBS: Pardon me?

Q: A change?

MR. GIBBS: No. But, again, in order to have that enduring solution, this is going to have to be done legislatively.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Q: Robert, today the President is going to celebrate Gay Pride at the White House for the first time. Even so, the gay community is somewhat divided over whether or not the President has done enough, the pace of change is enough. What does the President intend to say today, and can you talk a little bit about his thinking about how much he has to mollify a community that's been very supportive during the campaign?

MR. GIBBS: I appreciate the opportunity to comment on mollifying a community, but that's not the way the President looks at important issues. I think if you go back and look at the campaign -- either his campaign for the Senate or his campaign for the presidency -- he takes stands that he believes are consistent with his values.

We didn't play a lot of interest group-based politics in the presidential race, I think that was denoted by the fact that we didn't get a lot of endorsements in the presidential race.

The President makes those decisions, again, based on his values. I won't get ahead of what he's going to say later today, but he will, I think, address a number of issues and reaffirm the commitments that he's made.

Yes, ma'am.

Q: Following on that, the President has talked about repealing "don't ask, don't tell," and also the Defense of Marriage Act. So I'm wondering if you can tell me what specific steps has he taken to do this? What is his timeline for doing it? And also --

MR. GIBBS: I think we got a fairly similar question a minute ago, but I'll try to --

Q: -- there's legislation apparently moving through House to repeal "don't ask, don't tell," I think it's H.R. 1283, and he hasn't endorsed it. Why not?

MR. GIBBS: I can certainly talk to legislative affairs about what that piece of legislation would do. As I said earlier, the President has been involved in, personally, meetings on this topic with stakeholders, including those at the Pentagon.

Q: What about members of Congress?

MR. GIBBS: I don't know if he's met specifically with members of Congress on that. I know that -- I can try to get a list, I know that staff has worked here on the issue. It's a commitment that he intends to keep.

Q: Can you talk a little bit more about the meetings that he's had, what --

MR. GIBBS: No.

Q -- and how recent has he been in these meetings?

MR. GIBBS: Since January 20.

Shortly after the White House Stonewall reception, Gibbs appeared on Hardball and fielded even more questions.



I understand that Gibbs' job isn't a fun one, especially when answering difficult questions from the press. But man, to have a boss that keeps promising to get legislation passed to give rights to an "interest group" and then having to turn around and say nothing's really being done yet - well, I know I'd quit.

Obama Commemorates Stonewall with White House Reception, Reaffirms Commitment to LGBT in Speech

Today, President Obama addressed a crowd of LGBT leaders at the White House's 30-minute reception commemorating the 40th Anniversary of Stonewall, and in a speech he reaffirmed that by the end of his tenure, they would "feel good about the Obama administration."

Obama, in his speech, said that he was still committed to overturning the Don't Ask Don't Tell and the Defense of Marriage Act as well as supporting other gay rights bills including a transgender inclusive ENDA that was introduced by Rep. Barney Frank last week.

In reference to the DOJ's infamous DOMA brief, Obama said, "Now, I want to add we have a duty to uphold existing law, but I believe we must do so in a way that does not exacerbate old divides. And fulfilling this duty in upholding the law in no way lessens my commitment to reversing this law. I've made that clear."

In response to criticism of foot dragging by his administration, Obama stated, "And I know that many in this room don't believe that progress has come fast enough, and I understand that. It's not for me to tell you to be patient any more than it was for others to counsel patience for African-Americans who were petitioning for civil rights a half century ago," he said.

The President's full speech is available in transcript at the White House website.

MSNBC interviewed openly gay U.S. Rep. Jared Polis shortly after the reception. The interview below contains clips from Obama's speech.



For a critical take on today's speech, read Joe Sudbay at America Blog.

See a list of attendees.
Image by Kerry Eleveld of The Advocate.

Lt Dan. Choi Trial Begins Tomorrow Morning - Sign a Letter of Support

Tomorrow, Lt. Dan Choi will face a panel of colonels who will decide whether or not to fire fire him -- to discharge him for "moral and professional dereliction" under the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.

Show your support for Lt. Dan by signing this letter of support that will be given to the members of the board.

So far, 141,262 have signed.

Yesterday, Lt. Dan spoke to CNN about the fight for equal rights and the 40th Anniversary of Stonewall.

VIDEO: Still No Plans from the White House to Act on DADT or DOMA

Monday, the White House is hosting a Stonewall commemoration by having several activists, community leaders and LGBT families come for a reception.

In today's White House Press Briefing, Press Sectretary Gibbs was asked if there will be any substantive announcements at this receptions regarding two big issues hindering the LGBT population - DOMA and DADT.



This next exchange from yesterday regards the Center for American Progress' report "Ending 'Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell': Practical Steps to Repeal the Ban on Openly Gay Men and Women in the U.S. Military."



No. No. No. No. Kind of getting tired of hearing that. Also getting tired of the Obama Administration passing the buck to Congress. When IN FACT they can ACT themselves on both DOMA and DADT.

Earlier I posted about our need to continue to prod our leaders into action, and yes, to criticize them for their inaction. And no, I don't buy the argument that Obama has plenty of time. In about a year, he'll be gearing up for re-election, and if he's not willing to tackle LGBT issues now, I highly doubt he'll be up to the task then.

NOW is the time for him to act. NOW is the time for us to speak up.

The Servicemembers Legal Defense Network plans to march to the White House this Saturday, June 27, urging the Administration to act on DADT. Check out the Facebook Event Page.