Despite Protests, Plenty of Gay Dollars for DNC

The DNC gay fundraiser, despite being boycotted by high profiled gay activists, still managed to pull in almost $1 million, exceeding 750K raised last year. All it took was VP Joe Biden repeating President Obama's campaign promises to repeal DOMA and DADT. Of course, no timeline was mentioned as always.

I was disappointed to say the very least. Like David Mixner has said, if we keep forking out money to those who give us nothing but empty promises, how do we expect them to take us seriously? Heck, they might even think the controversy resulted in more doughs for them.

The White House will have a low-key meeting with gay activists next Monday, but I suspect it'd be nothing more than a reiteration of the President's love for the LGBT community, in hope that it'd be sufficient to quiet down the uproar.

There have been many speculations as to why President Obama is moving so painfully slow on gay rights even though society has made great strides. One is that 3/4 of the Obama cabinet are old timers from the Clinton Administration, who have been forever scarred by the early stumbles President Clinton made trying to address gay rights. The other being moderate Democrats in Congress are still reluctant to touch the gay issue. These people have one thing in common: They're still living in the past when the mere mention of the word "gay" would get you into a political mess.

And why bother when the gay community keeps opening their wallets after all these broken promises?

Everything Gay Rights, Just NOT DOMA

According to Roll Call, Nancy Pelosi met with Rep. Barney Frank, Jared Polis and Tammy Baldwin yesterday to map out the House's strategy on gay rights.

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.

Notice something amiss? Oh yeah, they didn't mention DOMA, the one piece that has caused some much grief in the LGBT community. Somehow, despite all the outcry, DOMA Repeal still hasn't been picked up by their incredibly outdated radar.

My other disappointment was that apparently they didn't invite Rep. Jerry Nadler, a champion of gay rights, especially for bi-national couples. Not to mention the fact that Rep Nadler will be introducing a much anticipated DOMA Repeal bill.

Are they ever going to listen to us?

More Conflicting Signals

The mixed signals are getting people all confused.

Before today's White House meeting on immigration, Politico had this piece:"Immigration 'debate' to begin, later", indicating the diminishing prospect of an immigration reform bill this year. Shortly after the meeting concluded and President Obama gave his presser, Politico then said "A start on immigration: Movement by early next year promised" .

Then there's this bit from the Chicago Tribune:

The meeting is happening, Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) said Thursday morning at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast, because "the votes aren't there."

Rahm's management rule: When you have the votes, you don't need a meeting.

And Nancy Pelosi chimed in and said the House is ready to vote on immigration if a Senate bill is passed.

Perhaps this AP article will help clear things up a bit, it quotes Senator Chuck Schumer as saying that Obama told the lawmakers that an overhaul bill had to happen by the end of this year or the early part of 2010.

But the same AP piece also contains some dire warning:

Several lawmakers — Democrats and Republicans — said after the meeting that this year is the last chance to try again, perhaps for decades.

"We've got one more chance to do this," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. "If we fail this time around, no politician is going to take this up in a generation."

My head is about to explode. Probably yours too. But hang on. Because the best analysis comes from the Oh Law Firm. I've followed their "Breaking News" section for quite a while now and consider them to be pretty insightful.

Disappointing news are all over in the media after the summit was over this afternoon. Reportedly, the President even brought up the target date of CIR this year or "early next year." The problem with this schedule is that everyone knows that year 2010 is the election year and history tells that the election years are the worst year to consider CIR. We reminded readers of this reporter's analysis on this issue during the last few days.

What are the "real" sources of problem? Current environment including the economic recession and terrible unemployment rate is inducing the political leaders to act "low key" for fear of being labelled as "alien" amnesty advocates. At the same time, they cannot afford losing the Hispanic constituency and they have been acting "pushed" by the politcal motives rather than "spearheading" the reform. For the reasons, CIR has lately turned into a soccer ball which every political leader wants to kick around to place blame of failure on someone other than himself or herself. News is abound now that the House leaders do not want to act unless the Senate moves and pass a bill first. Republican leaders claim that it is the President who should come forward with a specific bill and they will not act first without the President showing "real" leadership in the CIR. The White House is down playing the chance of CIR in 2009 advancing a theory that there are not enough number of supporters of CIR in the Congress, but advances a position that the legislators in the Congress must first come up with a bill. The Senate majority leader keeps spinning that the CIR is "do-able" in 2009, but is not willing to take it up until "fall" because of the two higher priorities in health care reform and energy reform. Politics abound.

When it comes to the blame for "inaction," every single of them should share a slice of the "sour" pie. Before they kick a soccer ball around to blame eveyone other than himself or herself, they should prove themself to the public and the system that they can "initiate" themselves by proposing and introducing CIR bill. Current problem is that no one wants to "initiate" any specific proposal or legislative bill! When it comes to the word "initiate," each of them points a finger at others. This reporter wants to ask the President whether he brought a proposal to the summit. This reporter wants to ask the legislative members of the summit whether each of them brought any proposal or a draft of a legislative bill. The details of the today's summit discussion has yet to be disclosed, but the indication is "probably not." Next week, we celerate the Fouth of July which will quickly move into the Congress' August summer recess. This year's CIR game shows a phenomena which is distinctively different from previous two or three years. In previous years, the legislators were eager to be prominent in CIR and active in initiating and introducing their CIR proposals and bills. Not this year!? Hmm..........................................................................................................................!

With that I conclude today's update on CIR.

Don't Cry for Him Argentina

Another "Defender of Marriage" bites the dust.

South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford resurfaced today only to reveal that he wasn't hiking in the Appalachian Trail as his aides had indicated, but was in fact in Argentina, with his mistress.

Let's check his conservative "family values" credentials, shall we?

Opposition to civil union? Check.

Define marriage as between one man and one woman? Check.

Voted to ban gay adoption in DC? Check.

Membership in a secretive Christian fellowship on Capitol Hill, known as “C Street”? Check.

Firing a staff who advertised South Carolina as a gay tourist destination? Check.

And of course, chastising and asking for resignation from fellow politicians who can't keep it in their pants? Check.

John Ensign must be so grateful now.

But Gov. Sanford, don't feel bad. Should your wife divorce you and you decide to marry your mistress, you can easily do so and sponsor her for a greencard with no questions asked.

We, on the other hand, are not so lucky.

More on CIR

According to Politico, Sen. Reid believes he has the floor votes to pass an immigration reform bill-the problem is there isn't floor time to do it.

But the real challenge, according to LA Times, is in the House, where Democrats from conservative/swing districts see CIR as a liability:

The biggest obstacle to speedy passage of a citizenship plan, according to interviews with lawmakers and Capitol Hill strategists, is the House. Democrats hold a wide majority there, but at least 40 members represent moderate or conservative swing districts with few Latino voters where legalization plans are unpopular and often derided as "amnesty" for lawbreakers.

"This a very, very difficult issue," said Rep. Jason Altmire, a Democrat elected in 2006 from rural western Pennsylvania. "The Democratic Party is doing everything they can to capture this very fast-growing community, and I understand that. But I'm not in that camp. I made it clear that I was going to take a very hard line on this, and my district takes a hard line."

As it won't be a smooth sail in the Senate either, even though Sen. Reid insists that he's got the votes:

But prior efforts have failed in the Senate. And with the measure's long-standing champions, Sens. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), no longer taking the lead, strategists say that success is possible only if Obama steps in.

So the more reasonable timeline is still 2011, when President Obama will need Hispanic support in swing states such as New Mexico and Nevada. Most likely the White House will start the converstation on Comprehensive Immigration Reform this year and end with just that. The Senate might even introduce a CIR bill, but eventual passage this year in both the House and Senate is a tall order.

Another Update on Partial DOMA Repeal

The Detroit News today confirms that Rep. Nadler is about to introduce an anti-DOMA bill:

What does gay-friendly Rep. Jerry Nadler, chairman of the Judiciary subcommittee on civil rights, need voters to do to help him pass the anti-DOMA bill he'll soon introduce?

"Call your representatives. Meet with them. Pressure them," Nadler told me.
Nadler hopes to quickly get a Senate companion bill.

What's more interesting is this bit:

Gay Rep. Tammy Baldwin says pushing other bills will illuminate the path to repeal.

The House could vote by summer's end on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act -- banning bias based on sexual orientation or gender identity -- and the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act, extending health and pension benefits to federal workers' partners.

"If we do get a roll call vote on ENDA and the domestic partners bill, we are going to get a sense about what this body is thinking about our families and our right to be free from discrimination. That will an indicator we don't currently have on repealing DOMA." Baldwin told me.

The number of gay-friendly lawmakers is rising. The more calls and letters, the more change.

So basically what's holding the White House and Congress back on repealing DOMA is that they don't know whether there's support behind it, and they're hoping ENDA will serve as an indicator.

Because the Democrats have a large majority in the House, the moderate Democrats will hold the key to a Partial DOMA Repeal. I don't think the so-called "Blue Dogs" would have any major issue with a Partial DOMA Repeal, as most of them represent moderate districts where support is strong for gay rights, even though gay marriage is still frowned upon.

Let's get ready to bombard Congress with calls, faxes and emails and make sure they hear us.

Conflicting Signals on CIR

Just after the White House conceded that Comprehensive Immigration Reform is unlikely to happen this year, RollCall reported today both Senator Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer indicated they intend to introduce CIR legislation before the end of the year:

But Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) reiterated his call for doing a comprehensive immigration reform bill this year.

“We have to finish health care and climate change, but being third on the list is pretty good,” Reid said, predicting that he could muster up the votes for a bill later this year.

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), who chairs the immigration subpanel, will deliver an address on immigration at Georgetown University on Wednesday and is expected to outline “the principles that will guide legislation he intends to introduce in the Senate later this year,” according to a release.

Facing a tough reelection and coming from a state with a large and increasing Hispanic population, it's no surprise that Sen. Reid is the most vocal and optimistic member of the Senate on immigration reform. Whether he has the clout to pull it off or it's merely political posturing on his part to get votes remains to seen.

The White House is meeting with several lawmakers on Thursday to discuss immigration policies. The timeline issue will definitely be part of the discussion and hopefully the picture will clear up a bit then.

Senator Chris Dodd Now Supports Gay Marriage

Politico notes how times have changed: gay marriage support used to only come from politicians with no hopes of higher office, now it's a way to drum up support for a difficult reelection campaign. You can read Senator Dodd's letter here.

HRC reports:

Senator Dodd also let us know that he was committed to ensuring that federal rights were portable, so that a same-sex couple married in Connecticut would receive the federal benefits of marriage even if they relocated to a state without marriage equality.

This confirms what the Advocate reported back in April. They listed Dodd as one of the several congressional leaders working on a partial DOMA repeal. We can only hope "soon" means "by the end of the year".

Confirmed: White House Says Immigration Reform Unlikely in ’09

From Roll Call:

The White House on Monday acknowledged that immigration reform is unlikely to move in Congress this year.

“I can see the president’s desire for it to happen but understanding that currently where we sit the math makes that real difficult,” said White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.

Obama will meet with a bipartisan group of lawmakers Thursday to discuss the issue at the White House.

Gibbs added that Obama hopes that “later this year that we can have the beginning of formal debate on that.”

Obama has consistently put other priorities — including energy and health care reform — ahead of an immigration bill, hoping to have both approved in 2009.

Since 2010 is the mid-term election year it's highly unlikely the Democrats would bring Comprehensive Immigration Reform to the table. So we're looking at 2011 at the earliest.

Now that the gAyTM is no longer spitting out money for the Dems, let's hope they wise up and not wait on repealing Section 3 of DOMA. 2011 is simply not acceptable.

Partial DOMA Repeal-How does it work?

If a Partial DOMA Repeal is passed, here's how U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents can sponsor their same-sex partner for immigration:

1. If you and your partner are already in an officially recognized relationship(marriage/civil union/domestic partnership), you'd now enjoy the same federal benefits as a straight couple, including immigration rights;

2. If you and your partner are currently in the U.S. but not in any officially recognized relationship(marriage/civil union/domestic partnership), you can go to any state that grants such unions and enter into any of the aforementioned union. Even if your home state doesn't recognize your union, the Federal Government will do and thus granting you all the federal benefits such as immigration;

3. If you or your partner are not in the U.S. nor in any kind of officially recognized union, there's still the option called the K1 visa, which allows U.S. citizens to bring their fiancé(e) into the country, yes, this is the notorious "mail order bride" visa, but one of the 1100+ federal rights we'd enjoy if the partial repeal is passed. After your fiancé(e) enters the country, you'd need to follow the steps mentioned in No.2.

Partial DOMA Repeal Update

Ever since word leaked out in April that a Partial DOMA Repeal is in the works, I had been eagerly awaiting its introduction. However, no more updates were provided, making me wonder if it was going to happen at all.

My hopes are rekindled today by this article on Pam's Houseblend. In a letter to the LGBT community, Rep. Jan Schakowsky, vice chair of the Equality Caucus in the House, wrote:

Rep. Jerry Nadler, who sits on the Judiciary Committee, is working on a DOMA repeal bill that he plans to introduce after the July 4th recess. I'll be on it.

Even though few details were provided, this is indeed encouraging. Now that the LGBT community is applying so much pressure on the White House, once this legislation is introduced, the community, both the establishment part of it and the grassroots part of it will no doubt push both Congress and the Administration hard to ensure its passage. My only concern is that if it's indeed the Partial DOMA Repeal that's been reported, some in the community who won't accept anything less than a full repeal might refuse to accept or endorse it, making it impossible to form a united front. Let's hope it won't come to that. A sensible approach at this point is our best hope.

Comprehensive Immigration Reform Update

Since it's now all but certain that the only hope for UAFA passage is for it to be included in the Comprehensive Immigration Reform, it's important to keep track of the progress (or the lack of) CIR is making in Congress.

From this LA Times article published yesterday, it's not a rosy picture:

Lawmakers will gather at the White House next week for a working session on immigration reform, a meeting that has been highly anticipated by Latino leaders eager for President Obama to honor his campaign promise to put millions of undocumented workers on a "pathway to citizenship." But many Democrats are now concluding that they may well not have the muscle to pass such a controversial measure -- at least not immediately, and possibly not until after the 2010 midterm election.

For many immigration-related legislations such as UAFA, DREAM Act and RFA(Reuniting Families Act), CIR is both a blessing and a curse. Take UAFA as an example. Being included in CIR will definitely increase its chances of passage, but at the same time it also means that UAFA would be inevitably caught in the controversial illegal immigration debate, a problem it doesn't have to deal with as a stand-alone bill.

It's like trying to cross the Atlantic and being given two options: a small boat and a leaky cruise ship. The former won't be possible without a Herculean effort and an incredible amount of luck. While the latter sounds like a more attractive option, there's no telling if it's going to stay above water long enough to reach shore.

At this point the leaky cruise ship appears to be the only option as Congress has made it abundantly clear that they don't favor a piece-meal approach on immigration, meaning it's all or nothing. It's highly unlikely that individual bills, however urgent and non-controversial, will be brought to a vote.

But the hole on the cruise ship is getting bigger and bigger, even before it leaves port.

Obama and Gay Rights: Part II

So much has happened since I finished the first part of "Obama and Gay Rights", most notably the controversy and uproar created by the DOJ's brief seeking to dismiss a challenge to the "Defense of Marriage Act".

Even the "gay establishment", such as HRC, who had refrained from criticizing the administration so far, wrote scathing letters to voice their frustration and anger. Gay donors started dropping out of a high-profile DNC fundraising event. The grassroots, of course, produced waves of blog posts/comments decrying the president's blunder in the strongest terms.

Howard Dean couldn't have been more right when he said "President Obama is a politician. And he responds to pressure just like all politicians."

Sure enough, as soon as the uproar started, President Obama signed a memorandum granting federal employees who are in same-sex relationships fringe benefits such as long-term care. When this gesture received lukewarm reaction from the LGBT community, his administration went a step further in agreeing to find a way to include same-sex couples in the upcoming census.

I certainly hope that President Obama is not naive enough to believe that with these two small bones thrown at us, we'd happily pick them up, whack our tails and leave him alone. Unless major legislations to repeal injustice such as DOMA and DADT are enacted, the LGBT community will be in his face everyday and reminding him how he has failed to keep his campaign promises. And until we see substantial changes, the Democratic Party can kiss our money goodbye.

Let's keep up the pressure.