A scandalous report surfaced earlier this month claiming HRC’s Joe Solmonese was advising the Obama administration to hold off on repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell to make room for more “doable” gay legislation, like the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. The allegations had Solmonese on the defensive. The HRC director insisted he never had a secret plan with the White House — because if he did, that would make him a turncoat on gay rights, placing the priorities of one group ahead of others. (It wouldn’t have been the first time HRC turned its back on some GLBTs; it advocated a non-trans-inclusive ENDA at one point.) But a new report, with new sources, says Solmonese lied to us, and that he did indeed tell Democrats to wait on DADT. Who’s telling the truth?
HRC will likely stand by its claim that it didn’t tell the Obama administration to push ahead on one piece of legislation while ignoring another. But the military newspaper Stars & Stripes on Monday reported such a deal was (and is) in place.
An official with the House Democratic leadership said the House is committed to repealing “don’t ask” but has agreed with civil rights groups to put new hate crime legislation and a workplace nondiscrimination bill on the legislative calendar before taking up the military issue.
White House officials declined comment on their plans, and on whether the president will send his own “don’t ask” legislation to Capitol Hill.
Perhaps hoping to avoid criticism the first time around, Solmonese last week penned a strongly worded letter to the White House demanding action. Too bad HRC returned quickly to Obama’s camp and applauded the president’s barely identifiable efforts on gay rights.
But even if HRC isn’t telling Democrats to punt on DADT, it’s a sham to think we’ll see any real action. As Queerty shared last week, everybody in a position to enact change is pointing the finger about who needs to make the first move to repeal the policy.
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.
The White House says it needs legislators to act; the Senate says the House needs to make a move; and the House says it’s the White House that needs to do something. Just listen to this game of hot potato:
Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said that lawmakers are waiting on a legislative proposal from the White House before moving on the issue, saying they need “presidential leadership and direction” on how to approach a repeal.
The House of Representatives has had a bill to overturn the law pending since March, but no hearings have been scheduled on the measure. Bill sponsor Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Calif., collected 147 co-sponsors for the legislation but publicly said she wouldn’t push for passage without support from the president.
And if this daisy chain ends up in the hands of the White House, well, expect zero progress. S&S:
White House spokesmen have declined to name any of the lawmakers or military officials with whom Obama has discussed the issue, other than Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen.
On Thursday, Gates said the Defense Department position is clear: Congress must act first on “don’t ask” before service leaders will make any changes.
“Until the law is changed, our ability to change the policy is extremely limited, if not nonexistent,” he said.
(And don’t get us started on Obama enabling same-sex benefits for federal employees, but all but prohibiting gay servicemembers from taking advantage, since applying for benefits would violate DADT.)
All of which leaves us in a precarious situation: NOBODY IS DOING SHIT ABOUT DON’T ASK DON’T TELL. Not the White House, not legislators, not the Pentagon, and not our gay rights groups. If the allegations against HRC are true, it means Solmonese is actively working against repealing DADT. And even the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, one of the most critical voices of Obama’s DADT inaction, still plans on supporting the DNC’s gay fundraiser.
It’s an embarrassment of riches — where the currency is ineptitude.
schlukitz
Mind-boggling! What a fucking circus.
M
While this is unfortunate that a gay leader would tell the administration to slow down on anything, I do actually agree that ENDA is much more important for the gay community than repealing DADT if one is forced to prioritize. ENDA affects every GLBT person, especially during a time of recession in which people are being fired. Repealing DADT is also important b/c it’s unfair for my tax dollars to go to an institution which discriminates against gay people, but frankly if I have the choice between being drafted to go to Baghdad or calling in “gay”, I’d choose the latter.
Fully inclusive ENDA now!
Rob
@M: I agree that ENDA should be a higher priority than DADT, but I really don’t understand why we can’t be working on both of them at the same time. Both of these measures have the support of a fairly large majority of the population. There’s no reason to treat them like hot potatoes.
John K.
I have to disagree that ENDA is more important. ENDA is certainly important, but I think that ending ACTIVE GOVERNMENT DISCRIMINATION (DADT) is more important than the government being proactive and passing a law that governs what private businesses can do as far as hiring and firing. How can the government credibly tell private employers they can’t discriminate in hiring against LGBTs when the government discriminates against us? (Please, realize, I agree that both need to be done, and soon, but DADT is a disgrace and a basic affirmative affront to LGBT rights and dignity; it’s our government telling us we’re not good enough…ENDA is above and beyond).
timncguy
why is everything a damned “SECRET” with Joe Solmonese?
First he announces in May after a meeting with the White House that “they have a plan, a vision”. Joe is happy. But, he WON’T TELL US what the plan, the vision is. It’s a SECRET PLAN. All he tells us is there will be GOOD THINGS happening in June to coiincide with Primde Month and the Stonewall anniversary.
And, what did we get in June? A Pride Proclamation and an upcoming Stonewall cocktail party. Ohh, that’s certainly a worthwhile secret plan and vision. I wonder if the DOJ DOMA brief was also part of the secret plan.
Now Joe has supposedly given SECRET advice to the White House on prioritizing ENDA over DADT.
What’s with all the SECRETS Joe?
Duck & Cover
The article refers to “groups” – – who’s to say that SLDN isn’t one of them – – or the main one they’re using as an excuse. SLDN’s been doing more begging and cooing about how much they know Massa’s heart is in the right place than storming the barricades and their head guy Aubrey Sarvis told the Washington Times last November:
“I think 2009 is about foundation building and reaching consensus,” ……Mr. Sarvis told The Washington Times that he has held “informal discussions” with the Obama transition team on how the new president should proceed on the potentially explosive issue. Mr. Sarvis said not to look for the debate to begin until late next year or 2010.
“What’s the reality for the new administration?” he said. “Financial crisis. Economic upheaval. Health care reform. Environmental challenges. Where does ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ fall in all this? I would say it is not in the top five priorities of national issues.”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/nov/21/obama-to-delay-repeal-of-dont-ask-dont-tell/
schlukitz
@timncguy:
What’s with all the SECRETS Joe?
He’s really the Secret Agent Man (Johnny Rivers).
But don’t tell anyone. 😉
Frankster
Could the Obama administration be playing with Joe like the rest of us? Just because Joe is in charge of the = organization doesn’t mean the rest of us can’t voice our opinion to our leaders. I am also thinking dance pinnocio make your nose grow and make the fellow marrinets follow.
andy_d
@schlukitz: It’s called politics. Unfortunately this happens all too often where any kind of progressive legislation is concerned.
schlukitz
@andy_d:
Very true, Andy_D.
Jaroslaw
What is the source of the report? I clicked on some of the links and they just keep referring to “reports surfaced.”
Now, I’m not defending HRC, but you guys here at Queerty keep implying Joe & the HRC has not clout, now all of sudden he does have influence? At least make up your minds, please!
GSH
If they really want to tackle the basic stuff first, then they are right to pick legislation on discrimination and hate crimes first. Trying to get everything in one go is the safest recipe for disaster. On the other hand I really hope this is not just making excuses and provaricating.
Queens in the army should wait in line. The most important stuff is passing legislation that concerns everyone in the community first.
galefan2004
@John K.: I agree that the government can’t tell the private sector who to hire while discriminating itself without looking like a hypocrite. Looking at it logically though, I can completely see that case being made in the argument to repeal DADT. I personally put ENDA first, and I’m also willing to throw the transgenders under the bus if it means we get ENDA faster. The transgenders I know have done pretty well for themselves working in the gay networks though.
mikeandrewsdantescove
It wouldn’t surprise me if Joe lied to everyone about this. It’s hurting Barack’s administration not overturning Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Just because you do something else that impacts very few GLBTQ people doesn’t make it all right.
Mike
Gay Pride – http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewAlbum?id=317967133&s=143441
Duck & Cover
With respect, this keeps playing more and more like a tired TV crime show where there are multiple fingerprints on the body and no eyewitnesses but the local Barney Fife insists, “I got my man! Billy Jo did it! I’m gonna nip this in the bud. Sarah, get me Andy at the diner. No, I wouldn’t just rather call Thelma Lou back!”
At best it’s a junk TV rerun that distracts us from what’s happening live and in color.
Note the article refers to “civil rights groupS” – plural – AND in reference to the House of Representatives not the WHITE House …just as the original “scandalous report” did, and Belkin referred to “lobbying on the hill for Congress not to…” on Signorile’s show at the time.
The White House has made clear they don’t NEED anyone making up excuses for them…they have the balls to do it themselves…the only thing they have balls for in relation to LGBT equality.
I’m NOT saying that gay “leaders” – plural – haven’t failed until recently to attempt to put any real pressure on either Congress or the President. They did. But we aren’t helped in staying coherent while riding this Tilt-a-Whirl of events inside the Beltway’s House of Mirrors by poor reporting in a wannabe military-adjunct paper.
Stars & Stripes hasn’t “confirmed” anything, merely quoted one unnamed “official with the House Democratic leadership”-when did such singular, unidentified claims equate to professional journalism? The subject is too important to build any part of our house upon such sand.
IT’S JUST AS LIKELY that they are merely echoing the early Bellini report-also about Congress, not the White House-or one of the many echoes of it.
In any case, is one more iteration going to result in any group dependent on gay donations jumping up and recanting their earlier denials? And if they did, HOW would that help us dump DADT? What’s the priority here?
Of far more concern than reheating old leftovers, and and suggestive that Stars’ reporting is shoddy, is their assertion that repeal “bill sponsor Rep. Ellen Tauscher… publicly said she wouldn’t push for passage without support from the president.”
She referenced already having Presidential support in her forceful remarks during the press conference in March when she re-introduced the bill: “We have one thing that we have needed for a long time, which is a president that will sign it.”
Further, Stars failed to mention [do they know?] the unfortunate for us fact that barely two weeks after that press conference learned she was being considered for a State Department post which has been another dip and whirl on this unamusing ride. [No, it’s unlikely to be a “divide and conquer” move by WH because someone else will take over lead for the bill when she leaves.]
Let’s shelve the “gotcha games” about what might or might not have happened in the past. Today they only serve to distract from what we all should focus on NOW: demanding the Ring Master freeze discharges and that Congress recharge the repeal ride.
“Freedom’s name is mighty sweet
And soon we’re gonna meet
Keep your eyes on the prize, hold on
Now only thing I did was wrong
Stayin’ in the wilderness too long
Keep your eyes on the prize, hold on
The only thing we did was right
Was the day we started to fight
Keep your eyes on the prize, hold on”
[img]http://www.policecatalog.com/osc/images/71222.jpg[/img]
Robert, NYC
I agree, ENDA first and immediately after, DADT!
Cam
@M: You said
“While this is unfortunate that a gay leader would tell the administration to slow down on anything, I do actually agree that ENDA is much more important for the gay community than repealing DADT if one is forced to prioritize. ENDA affects every GLBT person, especially during a time of recession in which people are being fired. Repealing DADT is also important b/c it’s unfair for my tax dollars to go to an institution which discriminates against gay people, but frankly if I have the choice between being drafted to go to Baghdad or calling in “gay”, I’d choose the latter.
Fully inclusive ENDA now!”
______________________________________________________________
I understand your point. But my concern is that ENDA is protecting employees from being unreasonably fired, something most states and many companies already protect against. Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is a Federal Policy that MANDATES that gays are second class and must be discriminated against. Having that policy codified as law gives employers who fire gay employees an out in the courts. They can use Don’t Ask Don’t Tell as an argument…i.e. “The government has said that gays are bad for an organization, I’m just agreeing with them.” They may not win the case, but it could be a powerful argument for the jury.
Additionally, on a side note, why is it the government can write up an omnibus spending bill that organizes and funds 5000 different laws, programs, and organizations, and yet we are expected to believe that they can only tackle one gay issue at a time? Nearly 70% of the country things that they should get rid of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. There is no reason not to tackle it and ENDA at the same time other than they don’t want to give “The Gays” too much.
billybob
@Cam: something most states and many companies already protect against Um. No.
Its legal to fire b/c of so in 30 states and 37 states for gi.
So definitely not something most states have dealt with.
galefan2004
@billybob: The states that wanted to pass anti-discrimination legislation for the most part already have. That leaves 30-37 states that just simply don’t really want to do it. There are about 10-20 states that just simply won’t do it (the red states).
galefan2004
That being said, there is a measure on the floor in Ohio right now that is basically Ohio’s own version of ENDA. It is being backed by the representative from my area (thank god) after I sent him a letter about a former teacher I had that killed himself. That letter hopefully helped him pick the right side of the fence he was straddling.
John K.
@galefan2004: Well, strategically, it may be better to do ENDA first because more political capital will be needed for that than for ending DADT (the overwhelming majority of the public supports ending it, and really the only strong opposition is coming from fringe groups at this point. It will be repealed sooner than later I think). However, if we do DADT first, perhaps there will be a sense of “well, we’ve done DADT, so ENDA can wait since there may not be as much support). However, in principle, DADT should clearly be taken care of first. Which one, strategy or principle, should be more highly valued? I don’t know. What I do know, is that I’m more outraged when I read about highly skilled gay service members fired by the government for no reason than I am when I read about gays being fired by private businesses (which isn’t really that much, although probably more because it’s not being reported than because it’s not happening).
As far as throwing transgendered people under the bus, I must at least disagree with the tone of your argument. I have to say I wasn’t sure if you were being sarcastic when I first read it (were you?). If anyone needs employment protection, it’s transgendered people. When I do read about people being fired, it’s usually for being transgendered, so the notion that they will be fine on their own is nonsense. Now, I do admit to struggling with the same strategy v. principle dilemma when the issue came up last year. Does passing a transgender NON-inclusive ENDA make it harder to pass the transgender inclusive one later for the same political capital reasons I was discussing in the DADT v. ENDA issue? Likely. Is it worth continuing to deny gays and lesbians job protections in the meantime? I don’t know. Is it more principled to wait and do it all at once or protect as many people as possible as fast as possible? I don’t know. My inclination was to support the partial ENDA because I felt that as a gay man I would support a trans-only ENDA if the tables were turned. I think it’s a close call though, and I certainly wouldn’t justify my decision of support for the partial bill by saying that transgendered people will be fine on their own for a while.
tommytoons
Sounds like the same cluster mind fuck our gay “leaders” tried when deciding on how to handle the ever growing crisis of the HIV/Aids epidemic that was sweeping across our Community as brought out by Randy Shilt in “And The Band Played On”.
M Shane
I don’t know and can’t possibly imagine why on earth the STUPID gay leadership and community allowed that shyster Clinton enact such a clearly damning law in the first place. Now, a day late and a dollar short, youi all come whining at Obama who had nothing to do with it.
It’s a demand that people lie to be in the military : how deranged can you be.
Given all the illegal wars the U.S. is constantly fighting against democratic countries, I should think you would be happy that there is a reason not to go. The terror of a mercinary army has become a reality. They don’t want citizen troops that much anyway.
Pete
The HRC is a money-making juggernaut, but they can’t do shit when it comes to passing legislation. They haven’t passed a single piece of major legislation to advance gay rights since their inception. The HRC is and has alway been inept on matters other than fundraising. Look to other organizations like GLAAD, National Center for Lesbian Rights and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force to get the civil rights job done.
Fr.Scott West
Many of the gay people I know live with valor, and some find the military an expression of that valor in the name of their country, not because they are sexually attracted to uniforms or have dreams of being in a shower full of men.
I was given a general discharge 29 years ago. I have a problem with the statement “through the transgenders under the bus”
It should have said: “through the transgenders AND the military under the bus.”
I wasn’t an officer. I didn’t have a shiny medals or a training that cost the US millions of dollars. We were grunts. We did our job for love of our country. We weren’t crazy, we didn’t fly Airplanes or command troops. We just did our jobs with the other guys doing their jobs.
OH! and we were Gay.
We got kicked out after we were found out. Went quietly home and found lovers and took jobs. Some of us drank ourselves to death. Some took suicide as the only way out. Some took sex. Never, ever think we were stupid, or less important than the rest of the Gay world. We are the men and women who know do blue collar jobs, if we have jobs at all. We are not flashy, we go home to the people we love at the end of the day,take out the dog and the garbage and then do it again the next day.
No, I am sorry. People get fired from the military and it doesn’t help. These are not geeks or freeks, murderous wolverines or mental challenged individuals. These are men and women who have the calling to protect this country. AND they are Gay.
Randy
Thank you Fr.Scott West for your service and your testimony. Which points to exactly why DADT should be removed first, these are members of our community putting there lives on the line for the whole country. Not that ENDA is not important and should not be pushed through immediately as well, but these men and women our heroes, and they deserve to be treated as such.
Mark
HRC doesn’t have a strategy for Equality. They are simply trying to stay on the payroll and “work on matters.”
With each week that passes we understand how ineffective they are.
The equality movement needs new ideas, new strategies and new plans – HRC has nothing but $25 million of our money each year. This is an investment with NO return.
Josh
PLEASE go away HRC!