Sorry, kiddos, but despite all the progress individual states are making with marriage equality, it looks like the federal government will continue to lag behind — and keep the Defense of Marriage Act on the books. It’s just not a top priority for Democrats — or rather, for majority leader Nancy Pelosi. But there is an upside: Her LGBT focus is on two other pieces of terribly important legislation.
Passing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and a federal hate crimes bill trump DOMA, Pelosi says. Both worthy causes, but does this mean America should sit on its hands and endure marriage discrimination in the meantime?
Pelosi’s stance appears to conflict with New York Gov. David Paterson’s moving speech yesterday, where he introduced his own marriage equality bill. “For too long, the gay and lesbian community have been told that their rights and freedoms have to wait,” Paterson said at the presser. “For too long, New Yorkers have been told that this dysfunctional government is going to make them wait for openness and real transparency. This is the real reform. The time has come to act. The time has come for leadership.”
Paterson might be speaking about New York specifically, but the message rings true across the country. And while Pelosi, if she’s not just giving lip service, should be commended for her efforts to pass ENDA and a hate crimes bill, should the type of “leadership” we permit be telling us to wait for equality?
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
So where do you stand? Is it enough to accomplish one piece of GLBT legislation at a time? Or should all hands be on deck to stamp out discrimination across the board … immediately?
afrolito
DOMA is not a priority for this administration, nor should it be in this economic climate. Obama has way more important issues to be dealing with.
Alec
@afrolito: There will always be an excuse. Of course it should be a priority, and the administration is not excused from living up to its promises simply because times are tough. The Democratic near-supermajority in the senate won’t be around forever. Move now or regret it later.
David
Nancy Pelosi’s approach is appropriate. Let’s get ENDA and federal hate crime legislation through. Both things we can surely win. There is already legal action to get rid of a part of DOMA. Once we get these three wins it will be much easier to repeal all of DOMA. If we go for DOMA now, we can be certain of a backlash by our opponents asking for a Federal Marriage Ammendment. Also legal action in federal court would most likely result in a loss for marriage equality as well due to the membership of the Supreme Court. I don’t want to take a chance losing that battle. I would like to see marriage equality in my lifetime not 2 or 3 generations from now.
RichardR
@David: I agree, David. It’s a matter of political pragmatics. Speaker Pelosi can get votes for ENDA and hate crimes legislation, plus there’s broad public support for those as well as DADT.
Despite Iowa and Vermont, nobody will touch DOMA now. DOMA ultimately will fall only with a newly-conformed Supreme Court’s ruling for marriage equality. Inevitable, but not possible now.
In the meantime, everyone should write Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and our elected reps about ENDA, hate crimes legislation, and DADT. Yeah, they’re all busy, but they need to hear from us.
InExile
Politicians used to tell the black community it was not a good time and they should wait! WE HAVE ALREADY WAITED LONG ENOUGH!!! While I commend Nancy Pelosi for her determination on passing ENDA and hate crimes legislation, she is just doing what she thinks will pass, not taking a stand. The fact is she NEVER took a stand over the last 8 years with the Bush administration, she is just weak!
Landon Bryce
I’m with Pelosi, although I did call her office today to request the impeachment of pro-torture Mormon federal judge Jay Bybee. DOMA is important, but those things are more important. I want peoples lives and livelihoods protected first. I want us to be legally safe to be gay and trans individuals more than I want equal recognition for gay marriage. Besides which, America is with us now on ENDA. We would do well to put our focus on passing it while that is the case. I assume that things will only get more favorable for our rights as time goes on, but a storm is coming, right? There may be significant backlash in the general population in the months or years ahead.
Landon’s suggested timeline:
ENDA today.
Don’t Ask Don’t Tell tomorrow.
Fight to prevent any new tragedies in 2010 election.
2010-2012 focus on fighting anti-gay initiatives, electing GLBT reps, shaming Democrats into being more on our side.
Obama’s Second Term: Full marriage equality
Rob
I’d like to see the Speaker take the lead on DADT repeal.
I’d also like to see the LGBT community call for Defense Secretary Gates to resign.
http://www.365gay.com/news/gates-still-not-ready-to-sign-on-to-dadt-repeal/
Chitown Kev
@Landon Bryce:
I completely agree with that, Landon. It might be a better strategy, for now, to let DOMA play out in the courts.
And don’t forget the hate crimes bill. I put that with ENDA too.
And yes, some of these protections will come with marriage equality alone, but what about those of us that don’t want to marry, are too young to marry, or just don’t have a boyfriend or girlfriend to marry?
rogue dandelion
if she gets any one thing done, i’ll be more patient when it comes to the others, as of yet all we’ve got from the democrats is rick warren.
InExile
@Chitown Kev: Regarding people that do not want to marry or are too young to marry.
I never really cared much about marriage until I was in a long term relationship and needed those rights, when you do not need them they are not important. But when you own a home together or have a partner that is sick and the company you work for refuses to add your partner to your health insurance, it is a wake up call. Another example is when you are in a long term relationship with someone from another country and their work visa is not renewed after having one for 15 years and you have to move to another country just to stay together. At this point you realize the rights you do not have.
I am an American citizen living in France.
Chitown Kev
@InExile:
I understand what you are saying, and I am not saying that marriage equality is a priority that I want achieved as soon as possible.
To be crude about it, I am saying that things like ENDA or the hate crimes bill will benefit everyone in the gay community, regardless of their maritial status. To simply have the right to marry will confer a limited number of those protections (health insurance, for example), true enough, but then those who are not (or don’t want to be) married will be left high and dry in terms of the law if we simply pursue marriage equality.
Chitown Kev
@Chitown Kev:
rather, I would like marriage equality achieved as soon as possible.
InExile
@Chitown Kev: I think our community need to focus on ALL of it at the same time. Unequal is unequal and heterosexual citizens are no better than anyone else. We all pay Federal Taxes but receive none of the rights and benefits that our heterosexual citizens receive.
i understand what you are saying as far as not wanting to get married, I was not looking for it when it happened it just did. You do not have to be looking when “the one” appears before you!
InExile
@InExile: We have been together for 14 years, who would have thought? And I must say it has been very good.
petted
Its a bit more complicated then saying repeal it now or focus on other priorities quite frankly given how long its taken and is taking to repeal DADT, which if it were up to a public vote would be a shoo in, its important to start identifying the views and attitudes that politicians have towards marriage equality now because generally speaking most congressmen tend to hold onto their seats for several terms so making sure we can identify supporters and potential supporters early on is important. And no we can’t rely on how they vote on other LGBT related legislation.
However of course given our recent successes in Vermont and Iowa it would be a dicey PR situation to loose a DOMA vote in congress – we could rally our side but the bigots (they meet the definition in the dictionary so spare me) could use it as a rallying cry and as a sound bite/talking point. Considering all of that repealing DOMA, at least this term, isn’t our priority its making sure hearings are held in congress on DOMA – this should allow us to identify our fair weather friends without giving the far right too much of a boost. A partial repeal would also be something to push for this term.
Chitown Kev
@InExile:
Congrats on the 14 years!
And, yes, we need to focus on all our rights. marriage Equality is not THE civil right.
rigs
I wish dems would take some guts, this is our chance to pass these things, we can’t be sure we’ll be anywhere NEAR where we are in terms of votes after 2010 elections. Pelosi is a fool, and as a rep. from SF area, she should really lose out to a more forward thinking primary challenger at some point.
Brian
Just a slight correction to Chitown Kev’s statement on the universal benefits of ENDA/hate crimes vs marriage equality helping only a few. Actually people like me or In Exile wouldn’t get any benefit from them. Those laws would only have an impact within the US, while those of us in long term relationships with foreigners can’t live in the US and therefore get no benefit from the laws. If we all want to be selfish about it, we can pick which legislation benefits our narrow interests, but a much better position is to advocate strongly for both marriage equality and the other gay rights legislation.
Cam
To all the people out there saying “We shouldn’t worry about DOMA now, lets get ENDA and Hate crimes through”. The basis for being treated as equals is to be seen as equals. We can get ENDA passed, and then guess what? A court can strike it down because some lawyer can argue “Hey, the Federal government discriminates against gays, so it is unreasonable to expect more out of corporate america. The fact is, Both of those issues don’t deal directly with our civil rights.
However, if we get rid of DOMA and Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, we have gotten rid of the two federal laws that directly make us “Less Than”. Those are the two laws that tell people that in the eyes of the Federal Government we do not deserve equality. Those are the laws that need to go. However, Pelosi is in HRC’s pocket and HRC only lobbies for ENDA and HAte Crimes…why? Well because if we ever GOT full civil rights there is no reason for the existance of HRC anymore and all their bloated salaries would go away. So instead they would rather spend another 10 years pushing for ENDA and Hate Crimes then for our real civil rights.
Ryan
@afrolito:
WTF is that? Not a priority? What about for all the gays losing their jobs — and health insurance? If they were married, they wouldn’t have to worry about the insurance from their job, because they could get it with their partner’s work. With 650,000 people losing their jobs a month, that means there’s thousands and thousands of gay people losing their jobs, too.
We can kill two birds with one stone, chew gum and walk at the same time. There’s no reason why this country can’t work on the economy and on getting rid of DOMA, too.
Nancy Pelosi and Obama should be ashamed. They talk a good game, but have yet to pass one thing that helps our community – whilst continually slapping us on the face in a very public and rude manner, from Rick Warren to this latest flap.
InExile
@Cam: Brian—-Great Post! Cam, you are right on! Those two laws do establish us as second class citizens, they need to go. And if we wait for BO’s second term, what if there is not a second term and Jeb Bush is the President or Sarah Palin??? Then what? Who would have thought Bush would have a second term?
Ryan
2 words: OMNIBUS bill.
Period.
Chitown Kev
@Ryan:
Key word, IF they were married. Your sentence carries the assumption that every gay person is married or wants to be married. It also assumes that at least one of the spouses is employed. Other than that, I agree with what you stated.
Chitown Kev
@Ryan:
Yep. Go for it ALL!
With the understanding at the outset that we, more than likely, won’t get it all but it will be on stark display just what type of second-class citizens we are.
InExile
We need it ALL and should work for ALL. If we even wait to President Obama’s second year, it is too close to the next election. The time is now, right NOW~!
dukie
@afrolito: Hi, I would agree if they were not thousands of bi national same sex couples being torn apart all over the country. It doesn’t help to be in this difficult situation and have to deal with the recession at the same time.
BrianZ
Personally I think that Pelosi and Reid both should resign their posts in favor of someone who actually has the balls to do something. They did not reign in the retard in his last two years and they have managed a rubber-stamp policy for the Obama administration for the most part. The most things “change” the more they seem to stay the same, or am I just being jaded tonight?
I think my inner diva went on vaca and left the bitch alone to tear the place up 😉
Dan
Passing ENDA would make it easier to pass all the other legislation. Many LGBT people live in fear that they’ll get fired, so they can’t openly support legislation to protect their rights. They can’t voice their opinion or come out of the closet so others will get to know them and support them. So I would pass ENDA first, followed by hate crimes legislation since both have widespread popular support and could pass fairly quickly.
I read recently that the democrats in congress are working on changes to DOMA that would allow full marriage rights. Some are saying that people need those rights wherever they live. Others are arguing that everyone will soon have at least civil partnerships within a short distance, so the important thing is to attach marriage rights to whatever arrangements are provided locally.
International same-sex couples have it tougher than other same-sex couples. The democrats are planning to introduce legislation for them as well. I wish it could all pass at the same time, but politics doesn’t work that way. The more difficult legislation on DOMA and international couples’ rights would probably be lost. I think we should move as quickly – way ahead of the next election – but not so quickly that we set ourselves back.
Ryan
@Chitown Kev: Indeed. If we have to compromise, I’d rather compromise from the position of asking for everything, than just one tiny, teensy little thing. It would be wonderful to get half of an entire omnibus bill passed rather than half of ENDA as a singular bill.
Plus, in life, the people who demand more end up being the people who are in better position to demand *even* more in the future. The groups and interests that are meek or quiet or willing to do it piece mail get run over every time and politicians feel as though they don’t have to respect those constituencies. Alas, these are concepts HRC could never understand.
Alec
Re: DOMA.
You can chip away at DOMA without a full scale repeal. You just need to get some of these measures passed:
Uniting Families Act
Family Medical Leave Inclusiveness Act
Tax Equity for Domestic Partners
Domestic Partnerships and Obligations for Federal Employees
(HRC has the legislation and info here: http://www.hrc.org/laws_and_elections/4732.htm)
This was the approach used in CA, and it was an incremental approach, but not a gradual one (took place in under a decade, which is pretty rapid). It serves to undermine arguments that restrictions on the use of the word “marriage” serves a rational basis, btw, because it undercuts arguments used to distinguish same-sex and opposite-relationships legally. The government is left defending a word. Particularly helpful where DOMA purportedly serves already invalid state interests (promoting traditional morality, for example) and rational basis is the review standard for sexual orientation.
Think long term.
John in CA
I understand the fustration with Pelosi. She’s a decent politician. But she’s not a natural born leader in the same vein as a Tip O’Neill or – dare I say it – Newt Gingrich. She got the job through a combination of backdoor horse trading, personal wealth (i.e. she has access to the top corporate fundraisers), and plain old luck. But to those who keep on saying we should replace her, I must ask:
To what end? How does that further our goals?
The alternatives are Hoyer, Van Hollen, Murtha, Boehner, McCarthy, and Cantor. Does anyone seriously believe any of these folks would be more gay friendly as Speaker than Pelosi?
Chris
@Alec:
That’s exactly the right way to go.
But the Speaker didn’t mention any of these as a priority….as an aside, it’s pretty amazing to see the the Gov of New York being more progessive than Pelosi.
Chris
@John in CA:
Boehner and Cantor?!!? Fat chance…..to get the congress back the GOP would need to moderate, not have leaders like these Eric “Britney Spears” Cantor, and John “teabag” Boner, ahh “Bainer”.
BrianZ
@John in CA: “To what end? How does that further our goals?”
Well to the end of making the point to any, and all, politicians that simply “getting by” is not good enough anymore.
I do understand your point that the potential replacements are just as dubious, and agree. However, I don’t buy in to the whole notion of sticking with the turd you have in hand because you ‘might’ end up with something that smells even worse. So, at the end of the day we keep re-electing the same idiots who do little to nothing except take up space that might be otherwise put to good use.
The biggest fear that politicians have is that the people will actually get involved, start paying attention. Unfortunately, I think they are in little danger of that.
Landon Bryce
The comments here depress me enough to trot out a wacky conspiracy theory: I think the focus on marriage has been a deliberate rightwing effort to sidetrack into us into focusing on the battle we can’t win today rather than putting all our energy into the battles we can.
If we had put all of the energy we have put into gay marriage into ENDA, repealing DADT, and hate crimes legislation, I’m pretty sure they all would have been First Hundred Days issues for Obama and would all be law by now. Yes, state marriage laws would be even worse, and that would be awful. But I think people have to see how anti-discrimination law does not hurt them at all in order for them to laugh at the claim that marriage will. And we would have the legal groundwork begun to make same sax marriage US law, which is what will have to happen to undo all the crap that’s been done with us putting all on our attention on this and everything else on the back burner.
We’ve done valiant work treading water in the marriage war. I just think if we had picked ENDA as our most important destination, we’d be there now. If we pushed on nothing else until it passed, it would pass this year.
Alex is absolutely right, but California passed legislation making discrimination against gays in employment and housing FIRST. I think we would do wise to follow the same course nationally.
John in CA
@Chris: I’m humoring the conservatves a bit. Given Obama’s popularity and the Democratic Congress’ relatively high – by congressional standards any way – approval ratings, I doubt the GOP will win next year’s mid-term elections. But politics isn’t an exact science. There’s a remote possibility the Republicans could pull off a surprise victory. Very remote. Very, very remote.
Geoff
I was a young kid in 1987 but I remembered the DC gay parade/march of that year and when I looked it up on youtube, I was surprised to see Nancy Pelosi smiling and being interviewd and giving her support for gay rights.
Michael (from atlanta)
As a 16 year old in GA who was just fired from his job for coming out of the closet, I think Employment Non-Discrimination is MUCH more important than repealing DOMA. I now am searching in a hopeless job market for something that will help me pay for college next year. I understand it frustrates people like you who live in state that already have equal employment laws, but not all do. Being able to have a job and feel secure in it is more important than being able to get married. Period.
mick
Good, while I hope everyone who wants to get married can – I don’t believe in traditional marriage so for me Employment Non-Discrimination is more important.
Thanks Nancy!
TANK
because it’s an either/or, genius. Fuck nancy pelosi.
Brian Miller
Passing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and a federal hate crimes bill trump DOMA, Pelosi says.
Sorry Nancy, give me equal rights (repealing DOMA) before you start tossing me special rights in employment (ENDA) or law enforcement (“hate crimes”).
Brian Miller
Being able to have a job and feel secure in it is more important than being able to get married.
So if I drop you in a work environment where everyone hates you because you’re gay, but you’re able to hold on to your job because of ENDA, how long do you think you’ll enjoy that job?
Find a job or line of work where people appreciate you for your talent and the value you create, and you don’t need to worry about such things.
Brian Miller
We’ve done valiant work treading water in the marriage war. I just think if we had picked ENDA as our most important destination, we’d be there now. If we pushed on nothing else until it passed, it would pass this year.
ENDA means nothing to me, in fact, I oppose it on principled ground… I don’t believe in elevating myself with special rights, and ENDA does just that.
Rather, I prefer *equal* rights, where I’m treated equally by government in marriage, adoption, immigration, and military service.
Abandoning equal treatment for a meal at the Gummint Cafe strikes me as awfully shortsighted, especially when people realize the entrees they’ll be getting aren’t as tasty as they expect.
Michael (from atlanta)
@Brian Miller: ENDA does give EQUAL rights. If women or senior citizens or Blacks or Hispanics or Asians or Veterans can’t get fired for their status and I can, that is unequal. And it isn’t black and white like you make it out to be. I work with children; they obviously don’t dislike me. It’s the parents, whom I rarely see, who had me fired from my $11.50 an hour job that I worked everyday after school and on weekends so that I can afford to go to college. That seems a hell of a lot more unfair than not being able to get married.
Landon Bryce
@Brian Miller:
Brian, you don’t come off here as being very concerned for the most vulnerable members of the GLBT community. I can understand the mixed feelings on hate crimes, and have left it out of most of my discussions of this issue as a result. But I care much less about the equality of those who cannot imagine having to keep a job that they could get fired from being gay than I do for the livelihoods of those less fortunate than you. Gay single parents need to be able to rent places. Gay kids need to be able to keep jobs in homophobic shitholes while they save money to get the hell out of there. I think comparing either of those to “a meal at the Gummint Cafe” makes you look about as with it as Michale Steele. It is not possible to rationally propound heartless Republican ideology at this point, not even if you’re gay. Give it up.
Michael (from atlanta)
@Landon Bryce: THANK YOU sir!
Landon Bryce
@Michael (from atlanta):
You’re welcome, Michael. Hang in there.