Uphill Battle

The Bay Area Reporter has another article on the uphill battle gay immigration legislations face. Most of it is basically a rehash of past articles but a good summary nonetheless. It also provides a perspective on Rep. Mike Honda's Reuniting Families Act:

Nadler said he doesn't know what will happen in the Senate but is hopeful that the House will pass Honda's bill and the pro-gay language "will be in the negotiations for the overall bill" that gets sent to the White House. President Barack Obama has signaled that he supports ending the discriminatory policies toward LGBT binational couples.

Honda has lined up 67 co-sponsors as of this week for his legislation, far short of what is needed to pass it out of the House. At the HRC dinner he said that 34 members of Congress who received 100 percent scores on the national LGBT lobbyist group's congressional scorecard are among those who have yet to sign on to his legislation.

A check this week by the B.A.R. between the listed co-sponsors of Honda's bill and the HRC scorecard for 2008 found only 32 current House members who had perfect scores but had yet to sign on as co-sponsors. The discrepancy is likely due to the resignations this year of both California Representatives Hilda Solis (D-El Monte) and Ellen Tauscher (D-Walnut Creek) for posts in the Obama administration.

Honda's decision to include UAFA in the Reuniting Families Act has raised the ire of the religious groups, who have traditionally been advocates for immigrants. Many speculate that at the end of the day, Congress is unlikely to include pro-LGBT components in the final CIR in fear that it'd kill the overall legislation.

Thoughts on Alan Chambers

Different people have different quirks, mine is listening to Christian radio (usually when the other stations are not playing the music I like). It always fascinates (or amuses) me to hear their point of views, which are of course completely opposite to mine.

My local Christian Station had Alan Chambers, president of Exodus International, on their Primetime America program to promote his new book, "Leaving Homosexuality". He sounded like a real genuine guy, openly admitting to the fact that he still struggles with his attraction to men on a daily basis, which he said is more common than not among the "ex-gays".

He talked about how he keeps his "demons" in check, by always traveling with another person and having the hotels turn off their onDemand movies before he arrives.

Whether he realizes it or not, Chambers is basically refuting with himself as the example the evangelical argument that sexuality is a choice, or a different "life style" that hedonistic people indulge themselves in out of moral corruption. After all, if it's indeed as simple as that, a good Christian like Chambers would have "snapped out of it" long ago. But sadly, the conversation never went there. Not once was he asked, "Were you born gay or did you choose to be gay?"

So basically what Chamber preaches is not the change of a "lifestyle", but rather the suppression of one's sexuality to achieve "christian standards". In other words, he advocates celibacy from gay sex, but doesn't guarantee that one would be free of it.

Listening to him talk I really feel for the guy, for not being able, in this day and age, to accept the fact that being gay has nothing to do with morals. But I don't count on him coming around soon. After all, had he not become a part of the "ex-gay" movement, Chambers would just be a regular gay guy doing whatever makes him happy. Now, he's president of a well-known organization making a bunch of money writing books. Maybe from his perspective it's all worth it. And as long as he's miserable and unfulfilled in love, might as well make sure he's in plenty of company by selling this ridiculous idea of "ex-gay".

HRC Finally Grew a Pair

Risking irrelevance in the face of brave grassroots movement such as the Dallas Principles , HRC has finally come around. They just announced the launch of the "No Excuses" campaign, urging members to meet with lawmakers in their districts to push pro-LGBT legislations. From their website:

OUR DEMANDS:
Repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which denies legally married lesbian and gay couples more than 1,000 federal protections.
Outlaw workplace discrimination by passing an inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA).
Repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to protect our national security.
End the painful separation of families by recognizing permanent same-sex couples under immigration laws.
Provide health benefits equally to millions of federal employees, including same-sex domestic partners.

It's interesting that HRC elevated DOMA Repeal to the top of their list, which in the past had always fallen behind EDNA and DADT on their public agenda. This was done probably in anticipation of the DOMA Repeal bill to be introduced by Rep. Jerry Nadler. HRC is probably counting on this new agenda to win back supporters who have been disappointed by their lack of action so far.

The agenda didn't mention UAFA by name but it's No. 4 on the list. HRC has always been vocal in their support of the legislation, so it's not surprising.

It remains to be seen how effective this campaign would be. With HRC's damaged reputation, people are probably going to view this campaign with skepticism. It's hard to motivate people when they no longer believe in you.

Still, I regard this as a very positive step, and something HRC should have done a long time ago. Now let's wait and see if they can deliver.

More on DOMA Repeal

It's going to be a full repeal, according to the Bay Area Reporter.

A full repeal is impossible at this stage since the wingnuts would go crazy over it, even moderates/independents would be put off by the repeal of the provision that allows the states not to recognize gay marriages performed in other states.

This legislation will face tremendous resistance and is next to impossible to pass. Oh well, all that waiting for nothing.

DOMA Repeal Bill Will Be Introduced Soon, with Little Hope of Passage

It is much different than what we were expecting, in that:

Rep. Jerrold Nadler has told the Bay Area Reporter that the Defense of Marriage Act repeal bill will only recognize married same-sex couples, not those in a civil union or domestic partnership. But the proposed DOMA legislation will be a wholesale repeal of the act.

"It will not include domestic partnerships or civil unions. It is going to be just marriage," said Nadler, who will be the lead sponsor of the bill and chairs the House Judiciary Committee's subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.

Section 2 of DOMA allows states to disregard same-sex marriages that have been legally performed in other states, and Section 3 prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages. According to Nadler, his bill would repeal both sections.

But even with the repeal of Section 2, legal scholars say the bill would not require hostile states to recognize same-sex marriages for state-law purposes.

"While repealing the 'full faith and credit' portions of the Defense of Marriage Act is very important for a number of reasons, it will not have the dramatic and far-reaching effect of 'imposing' same-sex marriage upon other states, as many on both sides of the debate often assume," writes Tobias Wolff, a professor of constitutional law at the University of Pennsylvania.

Nadler said "the time for dumping DOMA is long overdue" but added that he did not know what type of support the legislation would garner. "We have to see what reaction we get. It won't pass this year."

Nadler expects to introduce the bill either this week or after lawmakers return from their August recess.

I have serious doubts that this bill will pass. I am really disappointed that this is not the "DOMA Partial Repeal Plus" that the Advocate reported a while ago, which would only repeal Section 3 but recognize any "marriage like" arrangements registered with the local government.

This, although disappointing, is not unexpected. Recent news articles have reported that LGBT activists differ on how this legislation may look, with many worrying that the "DOMA Repeal Plus" bill would only serve as a counter argument for gay marriage.

I guess that's it then. CIR is basically DOA because the health care debate is taking too long and using up President Obama's political capital. The partial DOMA repeal that I had hoped for is just not going to deliver.

All political realities considered, we're not going to see a solution to the gay immigration debacle until President Obama's second term.

Real bummer for the day.

President Obama's Dwindling Political Capital and What It Means for CIR and Gay Rights

No one said it was going to be easy, but six months into President Obama's term his approval rating has dropped below 60 percent, with more people disapproving his handling of the economy and deficit than not. From his recent pressers and speeches, it appears that President Obama is going to spend the bulk of his remaining political capital on health care reform, a signature issue during his campaign.

With President Obama going "all in" with health care, what does it mean for the other issues, such as comprehensive immigration reform and gay rights?

Well, it's apparent that he'd like to push gay rights further to the back burner, until his second term. As to immigration reform, Congress must pass health care by Labor Day to even have a shot at CIR. Right now with the American public losing faith in President Obama's heath care reform bill, all the stars have to align for it to happen before Labor Day.

Even if health care is taken care of by then, it's not clear if Democrats would still have the stomach to take on an even thornier issue, not with the GOP waiting with glee for the Dems to over-extend themselves.

So most likely the Democrats will try to placate the Hispanic community by introducing CIR, but take their sweet time and drag in on until it's too late for any action.

As for gay rights? Well, Senator Harry Reid and Speaker Nancy Pelosi hope you're happy with the Hate Crime Bill and EDNA and forget about DOMA altogether.

Where Are We Now?

A lot happened during my two-week vacation, the most encouraging being that the State of Massachusetts filed a suit against the Federal Government to overturn DOMA.

Congress, on the other hand, is still lagging behind. I was expecting to see the Partial DOMA repeal legislation on the table when I returned from my vacation, but apparently disagreements over what form the legislation should take are slowing things down. From the Bay Area Reporter:

HRC has yet to take a position on what a DOMA repeal bill should press for, said Solmonese.

"We are having an internal debate in the community," over what form the legislation should take, he said. "There are a lot more people who might support conveyance of federal benefits rather than the portability piece."

But he said others are arguing that "if you convey benefits, why not do it to states with marriage plus those with some form of relationship status," such as Washington, Oregon, and California where LGBT couples can enter into domestic partnerships. "Then you would do a DOMA-plus bill."

Solmonese said some have cautioned that pushing a so-called DOMA-plus bill would compromise efforts in California and other states to undue same-sex marriage bans. Should the federal government extend full marriage rights and benefits to domestic partners, it could hinder efforts to repeal Prop 8 next year.

"It takes away the catalyst for these states to move toward marriage," pointed out Solmonese. "It is a valid point to consider. Look at what the California court decision said, it spoke out against a separate but equal solution."

It goes back to the whole benefits vs. name debate, which I addressed in this earlier post. Sadly the LGBT community, diverse as it is, can rarely reach an united front on anything. And congressional leaders, hoping to avoid controversial topics such as gay marriage and DOMA, are more than happy to take advantage of that. While they often speak passionately about the hate crime bill and EDNA, neither Harry Reid nor Nancy Pelosi has shown any intention or interests to take on DOMA. Even though Harry Reid recently endorsed a DADT memorandum bill proposed by Senator Kristen Gillibrand, it doesn't appear that he is willing to go any further than that.

All of that left us with a disheartening timetable. It's vague, and it differs depending on who you are talking to.

But Polis also suggested that DOMA repeal would not come anytime soon. The need for Congress to act will only grow stronger, he said, as the list of states with full marriage equality grows.

"Repeal of Prop 8 next year certainly would be helpful in repealing DOMA. There is no doubt about that," said Polis.

And according to Rep. Jackie Speier, another pro-gay congresswoman:

As for federal recognition of same-sex marriages, which Speier supports, she predicted it would take several years before LGBT couples received all the same rights and privileges as those granted to heterosexual couples.

"This will happen, I think, in less than 10 years. Now having said that, I fully appreciate that is not fast enough ..."

Of course, the heavyweight of all remains POTUS, who has said more than once that the LGBT community "will be very happy by the end of my term". Many people interpret it as the end of President Obama's second term. That's eight years from now, folks.

There you have it, so according to the politicians, DOMA Repeal will happen in the next eight to ten years. New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn summed it up the best:

“And he said not to worry and that by the end of his term I would be happy with him,” Quinn told everyone.

“He kept saying, ‘Don’t worry. By the end of my term, you’ll be happy.’ Well, it’s not actually about being happy. And I’m not going to wait till the end of anything,”

That's what happens when we wait for action, not push for it. Unless we light a fire under every politician who claims to be pro gay rights, reward those who stand by us and swiftly punish those who don't, no one is going to act on our behalf.

As FDR once said, "I agree with you, I want to do it, now make me do it." We need to stop fighting over details and work together to make them do it.