by Faiz Shakir, Amanda Terkel, Satyam Khanna, Matt Corley, Benjamin Armbruster, Ali Frick, Ryan Powers, and Pat Garofalo
To receive The Progress Report in your email inbox everyday, click here.
During the campaign, President Obama promised to "build an America that lives up to our founding promise of equality for all -- a promise that extends to our gay brothers and sisters." As president, Obama named Fred Davie, the openly gay president of Public/Private Ventures, to serve on the policy council of the Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. He rehired an attorney fired by President Bush's Justice Department "after a rumor reached former Justice Department official Monica Goodling that she was a lesbian." And he has come out in support of a U.N. measure condemning discrimination based on sexual orientation. But despite these early accomplishments, two particularly discriminatory federal laws -- the military's controversial Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) policy, which prohibits gay men and women from serving openly in the military, and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which bars federal recognition of same-sex marriages -- are still on the books. This week, LGBT activists and their allies in Congress are laying the groundwork for overturning both pieces of legislation.
LAWSUIT TO OVERTURN DOMA: During the campaign, Obama promised to repeal DOMA, noting that "federal law should not discriminate in any way against gay and lesbian couples, which is precisely what DOMA does." Today, Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) filed the first concerted, multi-plaintiff legal challenge to Section 3 of DOMA. GLAD is representing a group of gay plaintiffs who have been harmed by the federal refusal to recognize their marital rights. Under Section 3, legally married same-sex couples are excluded from any federal law or program that benefits other married individuals. The consequence of Section 3 is that gays and lesbians have been denied spousal protections in Social Security, federal income tax, federal employees' and retirees' benefits, and in the issuance of passports. In fact, according to a forthcoming Center for American Progress study by Ben Furnas and Josh Rosenthal, the average same-sex couple "will be denied over $8,000 a year in Social Security survivor benefits upon the death of the higher-earning spouse after retirement." In Gill et al. v. Office of Personnel Management -- filed in federal District Court in Boston -- GLAD is arguing that Section 3 is unconstitutional because it violates the federal constitutional guarantee of equal protection and that it is "an unprecedented intrusion by the federal government into marriage law." "I think one way of looking at it is it's about change and accepting diversity, and I believe that I'm no different than anybody else," one plaintiff in the case explained. "I should get the same benefits as any other spouse of a federal employee for 27 years. I think our relationship may look different but it's ultimately the same." GLAD believes the suit "may ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, which would mark the first time the nation's highest court heard a major DOMA challenge."
LEGISLATION TO OVERTURN DADT: Since 1994, "the military's 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy has resulted in the discharge of more than 13,000 military personnel across the services including approximately 800 with skills deemed "mission critical," such as pilots, combat engineers, and linguists." According to a 2005 report from the Government Accountability Office, "the cost of discharging and replacing service members fired because of their sexual orientation during the policy's first 10 years totaled at least $190.5 million. This amounts to roughly $20,000 per discharged service member." Moreover, as Center for American Progress Senior Fellow Lawrence Korb pointed out, "analysis of GAO's methodology, however, shows that the $190 million figure may be wildly off the mark" A recent study by the Palm Center found that "GAO's analysis total left out several important factors" and concluded that when the high cost of training officers is considered, "the real cost to the American taxpayer jumped to $363.8 million--$173.3 million, or 91 percent, more than originally reported by GAO." During the campaign, Obama said, "there's increasing recognition within the armed forces that this [Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy] is a counterproductive strategy. ... [W]e're spending large sums of money to kick highly qualified gay men or lesbians out of our military, some of whom possess specialties like Arab-language capabilities that we desperately need." Yesterday, during an event at the Center for American Progress Action Fund, Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-CA) announced the filing of legislation repealing the policy. As she explained in an interview with The Progress Report, proponents of the repeal have "amassed a critical argument about not only the benefits for the American people, just on the moral and civil rights issues, but also the benefits for our military to have more people that are absolutely qualified for every reason other than currently their sexual orientation wanting to serve." Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) is also "reportedly working on a Senate bill to repeal the ban and seeking a Republican co-sponsor."
CONSERVATIVE OPPOSITION TO EQUALITY: On Sunday, House Minority Whip Eric Cantor's (R-VA) pledge to return the Republican party "to be one of inclusion, not exclusion." However, most Republicans seem reluctant to support LGBT equality. RNC Chairman Michael Steele for instance, who has also promised that the party would "reach out to new communities," recently rejected the idea of civil unions. "No, no no. What would we do that for? What are you, crazy?," Steele said in response to a question about whether the Republican party "ought to consider" something like civil unions. Asked if her legislation would be a "test" for Republicans like Cantor, Tauscher told The Progress Report, "they're tested every day," but that she's "not sure that they're doing well." She added that they're locked in by their "their very rigid far right" who push arguments that "look more like bigotry and fearmongering."