When longtime gay activist Cleve Jones called us several weeks ago to pitch his idea for a national march on Washington, we were skeptical. After all, previous marches were held in the nation's capital and ended with varying degrees of success. The last national gay event, the Millennium March on Washington in 2000, was an extravagant affair that took place amid backbiting and controversy. Media outlets reported that the event ended up with $330,000 in unpaid debt.
Who needs that again in this economy?
But in light of the lack of progress on LGBT-related issues by both President Barack Obama and the Democrats who control Congress, we have come to believe that a march on Washington this fall might not be such a bad idea after all. And to Jones's credit, he has plans for a scaled down event that will not cost the community hundreds of thousands of dollars to produce.
The catalyst that caused us to rethink the October 11 march was the recent Department of Justice brief that defended the federal Defense of Marriage Act in one of the federal lawsuits challenging the law. As we wrote last week, the brief goes far beyond what was required of the attorneys' response. We learned that gay legal groups were not consulted beforehand, as is sometimes the case with these types of lawsuits. And the DOJ brief contains arguments against same-sex marriage that are nonsensical, like stating that federal taxpayers would, in effect, be subsidizing same-sex couples. In reality, gay and lesbian couples pay their fair share of taxes, but DOMA prohibits them from receiving benefits, such as Social Security when a spouse dies, that heterosexual married couples receive.
But even before the DOJ brief, troubling signs were increasing from the White House and the Capitol.
The president and the Pentagon have been going around in circles over who is taking action to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," which prohibits gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military. At least three high-profile discharges have been reported, and this week, the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network estimated that 265 members of the military have been kicked out under the policy since Obama took office. Meanwhile, depending on who is doing the talking, the White House is studying the issue or the Pentagon is researching DADT, but neither is taking the lead on the issue. Congress, for its part, has been stymied. Representative Ellen Tauscher (D-Walnut Creek), who had been working on a repeal bill in the House, soon will depart for her new post at the State Department.
Meanwhile, the hot potato game continues with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) stating last week that he hasn't identified a single senator to sponsor repeal legislation. Not one single Democratic senator. After Reid's comments, New York Senator Kristen Gillibrand said that she would sponsor a repeal measure. Reid said he was waiting for administrative action. The administration is waiting for congressional action. In other words, nothing is being done.
More evidence of Obama's inaction came Tuesday, when the White House responded to a letter from 77 members of Congress calling on the president to suspend DADT until Congress can repeal it. The president remains committed to a legislative repeal of DADT, the White House said. That's just the latest indication that apparently Obama is willing to expend zero political capital on the issue, despite his promise to do so last year during the campaign.
There are other issues besides same-sex marriage and the military. Congress has yet to pass a single piece of LGBT-related legislation, though the hate crimes bill (which needs a vote in the Senate) is closest to reaching the president's desk.
In a small first step, the president last week reiterated his belief that DOMA is discriminatory as he announced that federal employees would be provided some benefits for their same-sex partners. But those benefits are minor and do not include health insurance or retirement. The administration also is working on revising federal rules to add protections for transgender federal employees, another positive development.
Besides LGBT issues, we're also part of the larger population and expect to see bills dealing with immigration reform and health care that also includes provisions which relate to our concerns.
For the march to work
In a recent interview with this newspaper, Jones was clear that his plan for a march isn't the same as prior events. In addition to his pledge to keep costs at a minimum, he will focus on one goal: demand more action by the administration and Congress on our issues. Jones's ultimate goal is to have LGBTs establish a grassroots network with representatives in all 435 congressional districts. That idea is bold and if it comes to fruition, it could be a powerful vehicle for bringing about change. We know members of Congress hear from the right-wing when debate centers on LGBT issues; our representatives need to hear from us, too. Phone calls from gay people living in the district are an effective tool. Mass e-mails from elsewhere in the country? Not so much.
Many in our community are excited about the energy a march would bring to the movement. We certainly saw the success of Meet in the Middle 4 Equality in Fresno last month, where thousands of LGBTs and allies rallied for equal rights. The frustration, anger, and disappointment that many LGBTs feel is palpable and that energy should be put to the service of a productive effort like this march.
There are also criticisms of a march this year and vigorous debate on the subject. Some say it will take resources away from statewide fights over marriage equality. Others say that with many LGBT nonprofits hit hard by the economy, donors need to step in and help agencies that work with the underserved in our communities. Both are valid concerns.
However, no same-sex couple in the country has marriage equality now anyway; DOMA precludes gay couples – whether in a marriage, civil union, or domestic partnership – from receiving an array of federal benefits that are granted to heterosexual married couples.
If a march can focus attention on this blatant inequality, that's a good thing.
We have reached a point where our patience is wearing thin fast. We endorsed Obama for president last year because of his promises to the LGBT community. It is extremely disheartening that as we approach the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall riots, we have a Democratic president in office who hasn't been a force for change for gays and lesbians.