Rep. Skelton (D-MO)

A letter was emailed late last night to Get Equal, sent from Baghdad by a gay, Missouri soldier currently on his second tour of duty, according to Get Equal. The soldier writes that he is facing discharge under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and had asked that Get Equal deliver the letter to Rep. Ike Skelton (D-MO).

Referencing DADT-repeal opponent Skelton’s remarks about a DADT-free world — “What do mommies and daddies say to their 7-year-old child?” — the soldier wrote:

I come in from a long day out in the streets of Baghdad and see on television my representative, my voice, condemning the act of acknowledging my existence. . . .

I will continue fighting for your freedom congressman, will you cease blocking mine?

There’s not much more to be said than that.

The full letter, provided by Get Equal, follows after the jump.

* * * * *

June 17, 2010

Representative Ike Skelton
US House of Representatives
2206 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-2504

Dear Representative Skelton,

It was in Ray County, Missouri that I first decided that I would join the Army. I was sitting on the pond dock at my father’s home, and came to the realization that my life was not heading anywhere that I wanted it to. I had no way to pay for college, and it seemed I would be stuck in that town not amounting to much. I went and spoke with a recruiter in Liberty, Missouri and eleven days later I was sitting at Fort Sill, Oklahoma.

Nearly four years later, I do not regret that decision. I am now sitting in Baghdad preparing to redeploy back to the United States for a second, and final time. I can honestly say I am proud of the work we have done here. I look at the Iraqis that I personally helped train as a member of the Military Transition Team and can rest assured that we are leaving the area in capable hands. Through serving the country in the United States Army I have become more patriotic than I knew possible.

However, my pride in the Army and what we stand for has been yanked away. One of the first lessons that I learned after joining the Army was the importance of Integrity. I have served our great country honorably in two deployments. I have earned eight awards and have a clean record. I was one of the first responders to Muqdadiyah in 2007 when then President Bush ordered the surge, where my unit spent fifteen months in various provinces. I returned again nine months ago to finish what we started and am proud to be a member of the last combat brigade operating in theatre.

Although my record is untarnished, there is one thing separating myself and the rest of ‘America’s hero’s.’ Though I have less than a year left before my contract has been served, I was informed that the Army is considering discharging me under the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law, and this hurts extensively. My command realizes and respects the efforts and contributions to my unit and the fact that we are low-manned. It seems that they are holding out as long as they can on my discharge process, waiting for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to be repealed.

I can understand if your views are against gay and lesbians in general, but sir you must realize your unique role in the United States. Were it not for uncomfortable truths there would be no need for you at all. As a representative of the State of Missouri and a leader in Congress’ role pertaining to the Military, it is imperative that you not succumb to weak leadership. However, I find it disturbingly necessary to remind you today of your job and that is to open national discussions on issues to find the best resolution. That is your job, and were it not, there would be no need for Congress.

Congressman Skelton, I demand that you apologize for your remarks. You need to recognize the disrespect that you issued to the gay and lesbian soldiers, like myself, who are currently serving regardless if we are recognized or not. I demand that you look at this from my perspective. I have spent the majority of my adult life fighting for a war in which you sent me to. I am fighting for your safety and freedom, and for every “mommy and daddies” seven year olds’ freedom and safety. I come in from a long day out in the streets of Baghdad and see on television my representative, my voice, condemning the act of acknowledging my existence.

Congressman regardless of your personal views on the issue, we are serving now. To be disrespectful to us is not only intolerant but ignorant. We deserve at the bare minimum an honest assessment and a fair judgment on the matter. In order for this to happen you, as the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, must allow these discussions to take place. I will continue fighting for your freedom congressman, will you cease blocking mine?

United States Army (Specialist E4)
Baghdad, Iraq

President Barack Obama talks to a Member of Congress on the phone in the Oval Office on Sunday. Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs Phil Schiliro works in the background. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza.)

As folks watch the House on C-SPAN, President Barack Obama nails down the final votes needed to pass his health care reform package in the House on Sunday. The vote for passage is expected this evening.

Rep. Massa (D-NY)

Late last night, technically this morning, my newest at Metro Weekly went up, “A Scent of Scnadal“:

Rep. Eric J.J. Massa (D-N.Y.) told reporters this afternoon that health problems – and not reports of sexual harassment allegations – were keeping him from a second term in Congress. Massa appears to face significant questions in coming days, however, as Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) released a statement Wednesday night saying that his staff had received ”allegations of misconduct” that have since been relayed to the bipartisan House Ethics Committee.

Massa spoke to reporters this afternoon without taking questions after Politico reported allegations that Massa ‘’sexually harassed a male staffer.”

[UPDATE: Fox News reports that the Ethics Committee has released a statement. Per Fox, the statement reads:

“The Committee, pursuant to Rule 18(a), is investigating and gathering additional information concerning matters related to allegations involving Representative Eric Massa.”

Well, that's helpful.]

Rep. Polis (D-CO) (Image from Polis House Web site.)

At Metro Weekly, I discuss, in “A Higher Education,” the bill today introduced by U.S. Rep. Jared Polis (D-CO) to prohibit discrimination and harassment in primary and secondary public schools:

Citing “relentless harassment and discrimination” and “life-threatening violence” faced by students “based on their sexual orientation,” U.S. Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.) today introduced the Student Non-Discrimination Act to prohibit such discrimination, as well as that based on gender identity, in public schools in the United States.

The bill would require that no student in public schools be “excluded from participation in, or be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance” based on the student’s sexual orientation or gender identity. The bill also would prohibit harassment based on either characteristic.

The bill protects LGBT allies as well, prohibiting discrimination based on the sexual orientation or gender identity of the people with whom a student associates.

Read more at Metro Weekly.

The bill aims to provide federal employees, among other things, health benefits for their same-sex partners.

You can watch the hearing live here or follow me on Twitter for live-tweeting of the hearing.

On Wednesday, November 18, the House Education and Labor Committee will vote on legislation to end the widespread practice of employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (H.R. 3017), introduced by Reps. Barney Frank (D-MA) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), would prohibit employment discrimination, preferential treatment, and retaliation on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity by employers with 15 or more employees. Currently, it is legal to discriminate in the workplace based on sexual orientation in 29 states and to discriminate based on gender identity in 38 states.

Barring a strange development, I’ll be there.

* * * * *

In other news, with Senators Kaufman and Kirk’s actions, the Senate’s two remaining targets for ENDA (S. 1584) co-sponsorship that I wrote about when the bill was introduced in the Senate and then again in mid-October are now on board.  That means that we have 43 sponsors or co-sponsors in the Senate.

So, now we need a new list.  Looking at the remaining Democratic senators not on board, and other circumstances, I propose the following seven targets so that ENDA would be at 50 by the time it even gets to the Senate:

• Bayh, IN (D) – (202) 224-5623
• Carper, DE (D) – (202) 224-2441
• Gregg, NH (R) – (202) 224-3324
• McCaskill, MO (D) – (202) 224-6154
• Nelson, Bill, FL – (202) 224-5274
• Voinovich, OH (R) – (202) 224-3353
• Warner, M., VA (D) – (202) 224-2023

My reasoning:  The two Republicans represent states where the state’s other Senator already is a co-sponsor.  Additionally, both have announced that they do not plan to run for re-election in 2010.  Gregg is the only Senate New Englander not already co-sponsoring the bill.

Senators Bayh and Warner constantly desire to be seen as national figures.  As such, Democrats should expect that they would be co-sponsors of such a basic bill as this.  Sen. Carper should take a cue from his state’s junior Senator.  Senators McCaskill and Bill Nelson appear to want to “do the right thing” regarding equality issues and could show leadership by signing on as co-sponsors.

Sen. Bayh is the only Democrat on the list who is up for re-election in 2010, and nothing suggests 2010 — regardless of his position on ENDA — will prove any more difficult than his easy 2006 re-election.

* * * * *

The full list of remaining Democrats are:

• Baucus, MT – (202) 224-2651
• Bayh, IN – (202) 224-5623
• Begich, AK – (202) 224-3004
• Byrd, WV – (202) 224-3954
• Carper, DE – (202) 224-2441
• Conrad, ND – (202) 224-2043
• Dorgan, ND – (202) 224-2551
• Hagan, NC – (202) 224-6432
• Johnson, T., SD – (202) 224-5842
• Lincoln, AR – (202) 224-4843
• McCaskill, MO – (202) 224-6154
• Nelson, Bill, FL – (202) 224-5274
• Nelson, Ben, NE – (202) 224-6551
• Pryor, AR – (202) 224-2353
• Rockefeller, WV – (202) 224-6472
• Tester, MT – (202) 224-2644
• Warner, M., VA – (202) 224-2023
• Webb, VA – (202) 224-4024

Also, call the two recent co-sponsors to thank them:

• Kaufman, DE – (202) 224-5042
• Kirk, MA – (202) 224-4543

Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) (Image from the AP.)

Today, Sen. Arlen Specter caused a bit of a kerfluffle with his announcement at The Huffington Post that he had changed his mind on the Defense of Marriage Act.  He wrote:

The time has come to repeal the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Enacted 13 years ago when the idea of same sex marriage was struggling for acceptance, the Act is a relic of a more tradition-bound time and culture.

He went on to express support for all other legislative priorities of the LGBT community, including the hate crimes measure President Obama is to sign into law on Wednesday, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

Chris Bowers, writing at OpenLeft, criticized this move:

Arlen Specter is engaging in some of the more absurdly bald-faced flips that I have ever seen a candidate engage.  He does not care about policy or ideological consistency–only about getting elected.

This all might be tolerable if Specter was simply saying that he was representing the majority wishes of his constituents.  However, he keeps claiming that these about-faces are based on principle. Again, if Specter were to admit that his highest principle is getting elected, I would agree with him.

I’m certain it’s a political move, but I think that’s missing the point.  When it comes to LGBT issue support, we need to support growth.  We need to embrace evolution.  (That doesn’t mean support his candidacy; there’s a clear difference there.)

In Ohio, there’s a Democratic candidate named Jennifer Garrison who is a state representative running to be Ohio’s Secretary of State.  Garrison originally won her seat, in part, by sending out a mailer criticizing the Republican incumbent for voting against the state’s DOMA bill. Yes, you read that right: The Democrat was the “anti-gay” candidate in the race, while the Republican was the “pro-gay” candidate.  When Rep. Garrison first announced her candidacy for Secretary of state, I wrote that I was unsure whether she’d even be able to emerge victorious from a primary.

Since then, Garrison supported and spoke out in favor of Ohio’s sexual orientation and gender identity non-discrimination bill, attracted the endorsements of a majority of the Democratic caucus in the state House and convinced her primary opponent to drop out of the race.  Having cleared the field, Garrison could have gone into general election mode, but she didn’t.  Garrison and her campaign have begun taking steps to introduce herself to the LGBT community and to discuss the hurtful past the community has had with her.  Though I am not yet a Garrison “fan,” by any stretch, I definitely view her now as far less of an anti-LGBT politician than as one who wasn’t educated on our issues, has moved on them and is capable of further movement.

The same is true across the nation, and we will miss the opportunity of our age if we can’t find a way to remain critical of our politicians without completely demeaning their progression on LGBT issues.

Here are two stark numbers that show why we need to be OK with “flip-floppers” on LGBT issues:

• Only 20 of the DOMA repeal co-sponsors (H.R. 3567) are straight and not from the West Coast, New England or BOS-NY-WASH area.
• More than 60 of the ENDA co-sponsors (H.R. 3017) are from that group.

As the White House readies its signing ceremony for the Defense Authorization Act and President Obama’s remarks on the Hate Crimes Prevention Act becoming law, it is very clear that our movement toward equality is both geography-based and issue-based.  The issues on the coasts are simply in a different place than the issues further inland.

Roughly one-third of the co-sponsors of ENDA are from the South or inland.  Only one-fifth of the co-sponsors of the Respect for Marriage Act come from those areas.

Simply put, “changing hearts and changing minds” will require a lot of “flip-flopping.”

But, as we advance equality, this is flip-flopping I can believe in.

Rep. Hastings (D-FL)

From the member of Congress who’s already sent a letter to President Obama asking for action from the White House on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, a stark development today.  From a statement from Rep. Alcee Hastings of Florida:

“I introduced an amendment to H.R. 3326, now withdrawn, prohibiting the use of funds in this bill to investigate or discharge our dedicated service men and women on the grounds of ‘telling’ their sexual orientation.  The Policy Concerning Homosexuality in the Armed Forces – commonly called ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ – provides that a service member can be separated from the Armed Forces for stating that he or she is a homosexual or bisexual.  Due to pressure from some of my Congressional colleagues and from the White House, I have withdrawn my amendment.  I would, however, like to note that it is most unfortunate that we are not addressing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell at this time.  We should not be appropriating funds to enable qualified service members to be booted out just because they are honest about whom they are.

The amendment was almost classically simple:

TITLE X—ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS 1
SEC. 10001. None of the funds appropriated or other wise made available by this Act may be used to carry out or enforce subsection (b)(2) of section 654 of title 10, United States Code.

The question, of course, is who.

Who in the White House and which of his colleagues believe continued funding is needed so that the military can continue to enforce Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell?

The second question, though of a completely different nature, is:  Why are we only hearing about this after it was withdrawn?  Did anyone note that Hastings was doing this?  Because if so, I totally missed it.

[UPDATE: Alex Nicholson, the executive director of Servicemembers United, said in an e-mail that "the idea to 'cut funding' for DADT is more symbolic than substantive, since DADT is not a line item in the defense budget or a funded initiative to begin with. While there are stepping-stone options that would substantively forward the goal of full repeal and that are politically viable, this is not one of them in its current form."

It appears, at least to some, that the reason we'd not heard about this amendment is that it was not an amendment supported by [all of those] those working on repeal efforts.  While Sean Bugg points the finger at Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel in a “gay avoidance” sense for the pressure to withdraw this amendment, it’s possible that the call to pull it came from people — whether Rahm or otherwise — who strongly support an end to the policy and just didn’t see this as an effort that would help reach that goal.]

[H/T to @HeatherKara.]

U.S. Rep. Jared Polis (D-CO)

Representative Tammy Baldwin was the first person, in 1998, to win election to Congress as openly lesbian, gay bisexual or transgender. It wasn’t until a decade later, when Jared Polis ran for Congress in Colorado’s Second District in 2008, that an openly gay man succeeded in winning a seat in Congress.

But, right from the start of an extended discussion on Saturday about LGBT issues, Polis noted: “We only have three openly gay members of Congress, [so] we rely on our straight allies and with them, we were able to pass the hate crimes bill in the House.”  He cited his reason for coming to Columbus — a fund-raiser for freshman Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy — as an example of one of those “critical” allies.

On the issues, Rep. Polis is, of course, very supportive of efforts at LGBT equality.  But Polis was both more open to blunt assessments and creative solutions than some politicians and more understanding of pragmatic considerations than many outside of the halls of Congress.  More than that, it was clear that Polis is of a new generation of LGBT politicians — unafraid of any closet and assuming that full equality — from immigration rights and equal benefits to employment nondiscrimination, military service and marriage equality — is the end result that is both just and expected.

Polis talked about the legislative agenda, with hopes for action this year on at least two pieces of legislation beyond the hate crimes bill.  He also said that he thought President Obama should have said, as President, that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional and should not have allowed his Justice Department to defend it in court.  He shared his view on what he called the “phase out” of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and spoke with great passion about the role he think he could play as an openly gay, Jewish member of the Board of Visitors of the Air Force Academy.

* * * * *

Polis characterized the hate crimes bill, passed earlier this year by the House and this passed week as an amendment to the Defense reauthorization bill, as “the first real accomplishment in terms of an equality agenda,” saying “the clock is ticking” on the time to go until the measure is sent to President Obama for his signature.  In addition to the hate crimes legislation, Polis talked about both ENDA and the Domestic Partner Benefits and Obligations Act as bills that he expected to have come for a vote in the House this year.

“This fall, we plan to take up, and I hope we have the votes to get out of the House, ENDA, an inclusive version of ENDA that would prevent employment discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity,” Polis said.  “The federal benefits bill is the other piece of legislation that we plan to move this fall . . . but I don’t necessarily expect that they would be combined in the House at least into one piece of legislation. . . . “The timeframe is similar,” though.

This runs counter to the earlier reporting in Roll Call on a meeting between Polis and Reps. Frank (D-MA) and Baldwin (D-WI) and Speaker Pelosi and her leadership team, where a person who attended said that “[l]eaders may try to package workplace discrimination and federal health benefits together into one bill.”

Polis became excited to respond when asked about comments by Rep. Chaffetz (R-UT) that Baldwin’s Domestic Partner Benefits and Obligations Act would grant “special rights” to lesbian and gay couples.

“A very simple solution to the problem that he identified . . . would be to allow gay marriage and that would end that problem right there,” Polis said. “I would call on Rep. Chaffetz to be an outspoken supporter of gay marriage so we don’t have to address this issue of disparity in treatment and straight couples not having access to same-sex partner benefits unless they’re married.  That’s the easiest solution.”

Then, in a bit of a sign that the 34-year-old Polis might be coming from a different generation of LGBT political leaders, he expounded on how the forces on the Right might actually be the ones to send marriage to its “demise.”  Polis said:

I think that the opponents of marriage equality need to realize that they themselves are the ones undermining the institution of marriage because if you go down that road that [Rep.] Jason Chaffetz wants to go down all the sudden the government’s going to say, “Maybe we’ll do opposite-sex domestic partner benefits.”  Sooner or later we’re going to wind up like Europe, where no one gets married and like, 40% of heterosexuals enter domestic partnership agreements. So, unless we can pass marriage equality in this country, and includes gays and lesbians in marriage, I think it will be a death knell of marriage in this country.  And it will be representatives like Jason Chaffetz to blame, who will be at the graveside of marriage celebrating its demise.

But, assuming that national marriage equality isn’t going to happen in this Congress, Polis concurred with a point I made in my post about Chaffetz’s comments.  Of the disparity that would result from Baldwin’s bill only allowing for same-sex domestic partner benefits, and in light of the fact that several states now recognize same-sex marriages, Polis said:

Yeah, I think it’s reasonable to say that gays and lesbians would have to be married in those states to benefit from that if it’s available to them and if it’s denied to opposite-sex partners who aren’t married, I think it would be reasonable to say that if you are allowed to get married in a state that has it, then you have to be married to get that particular set of benefits.

To hear, Rep. Polis’s comments about disparities between opposite-sex and same-sex couples under the Domestic Partner Benefits and Obligations Act, download Polis-Sunday.

* * * * *

Rep. Polis has spoken out against the brief defending the Defense of Marriage Act filed by the Justice Department in the Smelt case, asserting that Obama “could have chosen not to defend it.”  Asked about the historical precedent of the Justice Department defending laws except under certain, very rare circumstances that I and others have discussed at length, Polis responded:

There’s one actor in this case who makes the decision, and that would be the President of the United States, and the President of the United States — We all have the capacity to interpret the Constitution in our own way; sometimes we agree, sometimes we disagree with what different courts decide. The President, in his prerogative can decide how to direct the Attorney General to defend or not defend certain laws because he or she decides — feels they are not constitutional.

So, I would agree with you that the precedent is that usually laws are defended by the Attorney General, but there is absolutely no statutory requirement that the President has to defend a law that he or she feels is unconstitutional.

I don’t agree that this was an appropriate situation for the President to do so, but it was good to hear Polis’s reasoning:  He believes that President Obama — regardless of what any federal judges had previously ruled — should have told his Justice Department that he believes that law is unconstitutional and that the Attorney General was directed not to defend it.  It would have been an astounding move, representing an opinion that Obama has not previously expressed (that he believes DOMA is plainly unconstitutional), but it would have made not defending the law at least fit within the framework of cases the Justice Department has not defended in the past.

In the wake of the DOMA brief, though, the Administration has announced several efforts, including counting same-sex married couples in the Census and extending some benefits to federal employees with same-sex spouses.  Polis pointed out that “many of the efforts that were already under way before this hub-bub came out were nearing fruition at that point, so there have been several very positive steps, which I think would have happened independent of this whole blow-up.”   Regardless, though, he said, “certainly it showed our community is concerned with DOMA, specifically.”

* * * * *

Regarding the military and Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Polis said he supports efforts at a moratorium on enforcement of the law until a repeal is finalized, such as that floated this past week by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand and supported by Majority Leader Harry Reid.  Polis said, “I’d like to see us, in the very, very short-term, stop enforcing it so that we can re-examine and maybe end it, you know, a year later.”

Even in the absence of such a step, though, Polis said, “I’m confident that we’re building a political consensus to terminate that policy and make sure that we have a military that can recruit from the very best across our country, regardless of their sexual orientation.

On a related note, Speaker Pelosi named Polis this past week to the Board of Visitors of the Air Force Academy, which is located near Colorado Springs.  Polis shared that the first meeting of the board that he will be attending actually occurs next weekend.  Polis clearly is thrilled with the opportunity, both to put his educational knowledge to work but also to serve as a “voice of difference” in an institution — the military — that has had more than its share of problems with difference.  Polis said:

I think I can be of particular value to that institution as we phase out the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy. . . . There will be issues that we need to deal with to make sure that LGBT cadets feel comfortable at the Air Force Academy and other educational institutions run by the military.  They’re, of course, currently closeted, which is a very difficult situation for them socially with their friends, because many of them had been out before, and sort-of live in a constant state of fear.

Also, though, Polis said he wants to ensure that the military is open — not only to LGBT cadets but atheist and religious cadets that don’t necessarily fit what he called the “culture” of the Air Force Academy.  He said:

There’s also a number of issues with religious discrimination at the Air Force Academy.  I happen to be Jewish myself, and I look forward to meeting with other cadets who are Jewish, who are atheist, or who are Catholic, who have felt at the short end of that stick as well. There have been many stories of a sort of evangelical bias in the school and culture of that institution.

All of these efforts, he noted were part of an effort to “make sure that our Air Force can recruit and retain the very best officers in the future.”

* * * * *

PREVIOUSLY:

NEW TO CONGRESS, BUT NOT TO POLITICS: Law Dork talks To Rep. Jared Polis about who he is and what he’s doing in Congress.

COMING MONDAY:

MAKING A SPLASH, DISAGREEMENT WITHIN THE PARTY:  Law Dork asks Representative Polis about his efforts this week to oppose a tax in the House health care reform bill and the view of some liberals, specifically Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos, that Polis “is shaping up to be a serious pain in the ass.“

Headlining the meeting was Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who with her leadership team and the three openly gay Members of Congress — Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) and Jared Polis (D-Colo.) — sought to map out a way forward on several key gay rights bills.

According to sources, the Members discussed workplace discrimination, health care benefits for same-sex partners of federal employees and a repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy that bars gays from openly serving in the military. The lawmakers also discussed how to help the Senate pass hate crimes legislation that has already cleared the House.

The article later notes one possible strategy:

Leaders may try to package workplace discrimination and federal health benefits together into one bill, according to one source who attended the leadership meeting. The source said that Pelosi is fine with that plan, and others want to do it as well but “they are always worried about people taking votes, whether we have enough.”

Also, Frank decided that he didn’t want the trans community too happy with him for introducing a trans-inclusive ENDA this year: “‘[T]he transgender community stopped yelling at me and [Pelosi] … and started lobbying sensibly,’ Frank said.”