Connect with us

22 LGBT Advances That (Probably) Will Disappear Under A President Romney

Published

on

Under a President Mitt Romney, there are at least 22 advances in LGBT civil rights delivered by President Barack Obama that most likely will disappear. While Nancy Pelosi and, to a far lesser extent, Harry Reid, have worked to support civil rights and protections for the gay community, Barack Obama has — sometimes with great fanfare, oftentimes in the shadows — delivered important advances.

Back in 2010, at Change.org, I wrote a somewhat controversial (at the time) article, “Obama’s Gay Rights Come With An Expiration Date,” which stated:

President Obama should know better than to incrementalize gay rights, and tie them to his presidency. And yet, that’s exactly what he’s doing.

…

President Obama has slowly and quietly doled out rights to the LGBTQ community. These are rights we should have by the very nature of our existence, rights that every other American has upon birth, but the president has doled them out cautiously, meekly, without pomp or circumstance, and, worse, he has tied them to his presidency.

This tactic is problematic for two reasons.

First, by expanding our civil rights by issuing executive orders and memoranda, President Obama’s gay civil rights come with an expiration date. Yes, that’s right. The rights he has decreed, without working through Congress, are tied to his presidency. Any of his successors can, simply with the stroke of a pen, wipe out all our hard-earned rights, just because he or she wants to. Do you honestly think the next Republican president won’t do that?

Today, the Washington Blade’s Chris Johnson posts a long list of 21 LGBT advances a President Romney could — with the stroke of a pen or incrementally — make disappear into a more progressive history.

Asking, “Would President Romney undo pro-LGBT advances?,” Johnson notes:

Many of the pro-LGBT advances that have happened under the Obama administration occurred through changes made by the executive branch rather than through legislation. Changes that were made without the consent of Congress could be reversed under an administration that wanted to cozy up to the religious right.

The Washington Blade has identified five regulatory changes and 16 sub-regulatory changes enacted by the Obama administration that could be reversed if Romney were elected to the White House. These changes include giving greater recognition to same-sex couples, protecting federal LGBT workers against discrimination and ensuring the federal government recognizes the correct gender of transgender people.

The one Johnson doesn’t include in his list of “five regulatory changes and 16 sub-regulatory changes” is the most-obvious: Obama’s support of same-sex marriage equality.

Here’s the list from the Blade:

Regulations

The Administrative Procedures Act provides safeguards against politically motivated policy switches. Thus repealing the policies below would involve a multi-year process.

  • The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) adopted a regulation ending the ban on HIV-positive visitors and immigrants.
  • President Obama issued Presidential Memorandum in April 2010 directing HHS to issue regulations requiring all hospitals receiving Medicaid and Medicare to prohibit discrimination in visitation against LGBT people. HHS issued a final regulation that went into effect in early 2011.
  • HUD issued final regulations in January 2012 prohibiting discrimination in federal public housing programs and federally insured mortgage loans.  HUD also requires its grantees to comply with LGBT-inclusive state and local housing discrimination protections.
  • The Office of Personnel Management published final regulations in the Federal Register expanding the eligibility for long-term care coverage to same-sex partners and sick leave to care for a same-sex partner.
  •  The federal Prison Rape Elimination Commission proposed national standards to reduce sexual abuse in correctional facilities, including standards regarding LGBT and intersex inmates. They were later instituted as a rule finalized by the Justice Department last month.

Sub-Regulatory Guidance/Policy Announcements

These are policy advances instituted by — and subject to the will of — the administration.

  • The Department of Health and Human Services revised its funding guidance around abstinence-only-until-marriage sex education programs, requiring that recipient programs are inclusive of and non-stigmatizing toward LGBT youth.
  • HHS, in partnership with the Department of Education and Department of Justice, launched stopbullyingnow.com.
  • The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency recently released new 2011 Performance Based National Detention Standards.  These new standards provide guidance that aims to improve treatment of LGBT and HIV-positive people in detention facilities.
  • In summer 2011, ICE published a memo and clarifying guidance providing that an individual’s family relationships, including a same-sex relationship, would be considered as a factor in labeling certain deportations as low-priority deportations.
  • The U.S. Customs and Border Patrol announced a proposed regulatory change expanding the meaning of “members of a family residing in one household” for the purposes of the customs declaration form, which must be completed prior to re-entry to the United States.
  • The DOJ issued an opinion clarifying that the criminal provisions of the Violence Against Women Act related to stalking and abuse apply equally to same-sex partners.
  • The State Department revised the standards for changing a gender marker on a passport, making the process less burdensome for transgender people.
  • In September 2011, the Social Security Administration confirmed that it ended the practice of allowing gender to be matched in its Social Security Number Verification System (SSNVS). This resulted in the immediate cessation of SSA sending notifications that alert employers when the gender marker on an employee’s W-2 does not match Social Security records.
  • The State Department extended numerous benefits to the partners of Foreign Service officers, including diplomatic passports and access to emergency evacuation.
  • The State Department reversed a Bush administration policy that refused to use a same-sex marriage license as evidence of a name change for passports.
  • The Department of Education issued guidance clarifying when student bullying may violate federal law, distributed a memo outlining key components of strong state anti-bullying laws and policies and made clear to public schools that gay-straight alliances have a right to form and meet.
  • The Department of Education published guidance and, in coordination with the Department of Justice, has pursued Title IX complaints filed by LGBT students experiencing harassment based on sex or sex stereotyping.
  • OPM added gender identity to the equal employment opportunity policy governing all federal jobs.
  • The Department of Labor issued guidance clarifying that an employee can take time off under the Family and Medical Leave Act to care for a same-sex partner’s child.
  • The IRS clarified that domestic partners (and their children) can be designated beneficiaries for VEBA funding/payment purposes.
  • The Census Bureau overturned the Bush administration’s interpretation of the Defense of Marriage Act and agreed to release data on married same-sex couples along with other demographic information from the 2010 Census.

SOURCE: HRC

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘Easy Way’ or ‘Hard Way’: Trump Threatens Greenland Again

Published

1 day ago

on

January 9, 2026

By

President Donald Trump vowed to do “something” with Greenland, the autonomous territory he has threatened to purchase or take over militarily, during his meeting with executives from some of the largest Big Oil companies.

The vast majority of Greenlanders, who are part of the Kingdom of Denmark, have said they do not want the United States to own them. Denmark has also stated Greenland is not up for grabs, and several European leaders have stressed that the United States cannot interfere with Greenland — with at least one, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, warning that if Trump were to engage in a military incursion it would mean the end of NATO.

“I would like to make a deal,” Trump told reporters on Friday afternoon.

“You know, the easy way, but if we don’t do it the easy way we’re gonna do it the hard way,” the president stressed.

“I’m a fan of Denmark, too, I have to tell you, and, you know, they’ve been very nice to me,” he continued. “Uh, I’m a big fan, but, you know, the fact that they had a boat land there 500 years ago doesn’t mean that they own the land, uh, sure, we had lots of boats go there also.”

READ MORE: ‘Hot Ticket’ Big Oil Meeting: Trump Slammed Over Venezuela Policy

“We’re not gonna have Russia or China occupy Greenland, and that’s what they’re gonna do if we don’t,” Trump insisted, seemingly ignoring the role NATO plays.

“So we’re gonna be doing something with Greenland, either the nice way or the more difficult way,” he again said.

Some critics appeared to mock the president.

Marlow Stern, who teaches at the Columbia School of Journalism, asked, “does he know how america was discovered genuine question.”

“If having ‘a boat land there 500 years ago’ isn’t a basis to claim ownership of the land boy do i have some news for the self proclaimed ‘Heritage Americans,'” wrote Rolling Stone’s Nikki McCann Ramírez.

READ MORE: ‘Backroom Strategy Backfired’: Dem Cheers as Jordan Invites Jack Smith to Open Hearing

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

‘Hot Ticket’ Big Oil Meeting: Trump Slammed Over Venezuela Policy

Published

2 days ago

on

January 9, 2026

By

President Donald Trump came under fire after boasting that the biggest names in the oil industry would be joining him on Friday to discuss “Venezuelan Oil, and our longterm relationship with Venezuela, its Security, and People.”

“The largest Oil Companies in the World are coming to the White House at 2:30 P.M.” the president bragged on Truth Social. “Everybody wants to be there. It’s too bad that the Ballroom hasn’t completed because, if it were, it would be PACKED.”

“Today’s meeting will almost exclusively be a discussion on Venezuelan Oil, and our longterm relationship with Venezuela, its Security, and People. A very big factor in this involvement will be the reduction of Oil Prices for the American People. Additionally, and perhaps most importantly of all, will be the stoppage of Drugs and Criminals coming into the United States of America,” Trump added.

Bloomberg News described it as a “Who’s Who” of U.S. oil.

READ MORE: ‘Backroom Strategy Backfired’: Dem Cheers as Jordan Invites Jack Smith to Open Hearing

According to The Guardian, Trump’s goal is to drop the price of oil from about $56 per barrel to $50 per barrel, but “there are doubts about whether Trump will be able to reignite Venezuela’s beleaguered oil industry after decades of underinvestment and corruption.”

One energy private equity investor told the Financial Times, The Guardian reported, “No one wants to go in there when a random f – – tweet can change the entire foreign policy of the country.”

And as The New York Times’ Edward Wong wrote about Trump’s Truth Social post, “What’s notable about Trump’s words too is his intention to enact massive US industrial policy regarding the American oil industry and Venezuela — while the world has an oil glut. Any industry subsidies would likely come from US taxpayer money.”

Critics again charged Trump with not paying attention to domestic policy or democratic interests.

U.S. Rep. Adelita Grijalva (D-AZ) wrote: “Want to know who’s meeting with Trump this morning about Venezuela’s future? Not pro-democracy leaders. Oil and gas executives.”

Pointing to a list of the oil companies invited to the White House, U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) noted, “But they told us this was just a targeted military action to carry out an arrest….”

READ MORE: ‘Double Whammy for Affordability’ Revealed in Trump Jobs Report: Policy Expert

DNC Chairman Ken Martin wrote, “Donald Trump is destroying the job market. You’re paying more than ever just to barely get by. Meanwhile, he’s scheming with oil executives to make them even richer.”

Laura Rozen, a veteran foreign policy journalist wrote that Trump was “portraying a meeting with oil companies summoned to take advantage of his arrest of Maduro as the hot ticket in town.”

“He has not come down to reality that his intervention has not helped most Americans with their real problems, nor his shrinking GOP majority,” she noted.

“Before the U.S. toppled Maduro in Venezuela, Donald Trump tipped off Big Oil companies, but not Congress,” U.S. Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-CA) noted. “Today, he’s meeting with Big Oil again. Congress hasn’t authorized any U.S. action – but Big Oil has a seat at the table. This is what an oligarchy looks like.”

A Democratic National Committee social media account wrote: “Trump is meeting today with oil executives to shape Venezuela policy. These oil companies funneled millions of dollars into his Inauguration Fund and affiliated PACs.”

READ MORE: Trump White House Reached Out to Secret Service About Marjorie Taylor Greene: Report

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

‘Backroom Strategy Backfired’: Dem Cheers as Jordan Invites Jack Smith to Open Hearing

Published

2 days ago

on

January 9, 2026

By

In a surprising about-face, House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan has agreed to allow former Special Counsel Jack Smith to testify before Congress in an open hearing — an outcome Democrats have been pursuing for months.

Smith investigated Trump and brought two federal indictments against President Donald Trump during the Biden era in two separate cases that ultimately ended without trial. In closed-door video testimony, Smith, it was recently revealed, said he had proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” in both cases.

“He’s coming in,” Chairman Jordan said of Smith in an interview on Friday, noting that it could be scheduled for as soon as this month. Politico reported that it “would be a politically high-stakes event for members of both parties and the White House.”

Politico reported Jordan said that one of the “key takeaways” in the transcript of Smith’s closed-door testimony, came when lawmakers asked: “did you [have] any evidence that President Trump was responsible for the violence that took place at the Capitol?’”

READ MORE: ‘Double Whammy for Affordability’ Revealed in Trump Jobs Report: Policy Expert

“He had no evidence of that whatsoever,” Jordan said of the December interview with Smith.

But Smith, in his testimony, noted that the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol “does not happen” without Trump.

Meanwhile, some Democrats were “celebrating” the turn of events.

“After Republicans forced Jack Smith into a backroom interrogation and rejected our calls for an open public hearing, now they decide they want a public hearing with Jack Smith after all,” U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), the Judiciary Committee’s Ranking Member, said in a statement. “Their backroom strategy backfired in historic fashion.”

“Even with many hours of private testimony, Republicans could not lay a glove on Jack Smith, his evidence, or his case,” Raskin added. “That will not change now that they have finally heeded our call to have him come testify publicly.”

“This upcoming hearing is a win for truth-seeking Americans and yet another looming humiliation for Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans, who depend on a daily diet of lies to keep their administration afloat.”

READ MORE: Trump White House Reached Out to Secret Service About Marjorie Taylor Greene: Report

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.