Time to Step Up to the Plate

The climate is improving for a gay pro athlete to come out

By Steve Charing

The creaky sound of the closet door opening in pro male sports has been heard too infrequently over the past three decades. It started with pro football player David Kopay in 1975. Then the first major league baseball player to come out, Glenn Burke, did so in 1982. Ten years later another gridiron athlete, Roy Simmons, came out on the Phil Donahue Show.

Keeping the alternating leagues in tact, baseballer Billy Bean stepped out of the closet in 1999, and football player Esera Tuaolo followed suit in 2002. Of course, there was an official—not an athlete—baseball umpire Dave Pallone, who had come out in 1990.

Just a few weeks ago a new sport joined the all-too-modest line-up of pro athletes’ coming out: pro basketball in the person of John Amaechi. The reverberations beyond the creaky closet door from Amaechi’s disclosure are still being heard.

These now "out" pro sports figures—in varying degrees of celebrity and proficiency—have two things in common: they all went public after they retired, and they all announced their sexuality in advance of selling a book.

When Esera Tuaolo came out I praised him for his candor but questioned the usefulness of a retired athlete’s coming out. I said then, and others have repeated the refrain, that it would take "Jackie Robinson-like courage" for an active male player to disclose that he is gay in the testosterone-dominated arena of professional sports.

Sheryl Swoopes, an active female basketball star and three-time Most Valuable Player recipient in the WNBA, came out in 2005, which was seen as brave. The environment was more favorable for her to come out given that a significant portion of the WNBA fan base is comprised of lesbians. And while Swoopes received tremendous support from her team and fans, many gay activists were miffed when she disclosed that her sexuality was a choice.

Locker room reaction

For a male athlete to come out, however, the landscape could be more daunting. The first thing that comes to the mind of a gay athlete is the reaction in the locker room, which in the macho world of professional sports, is not likely to be gay friendly. According to John Amaechi, there are other gay players in the NBA who are terrified to come out because of their teammates’ potential backlash. You know, the shower argument.

Some pro athletes from the NBA and NHL have stated that they would support their teammates because that’s what teammates do. "Anybody who knows me knows I'm a guy who loves his teammates and if anything ever comes up like that, I don't look at that," said Miami Heat star Dwayne Wade. "I look at what guys can do for you on the court. And in the locker room you have great relationships with guys. I don't have any negative views." This was a typical of response from those supportive pros who wanted to weigh in on the record.

A Sports Illustrated survey conducted last year provides more insight. When players from the four major professional sports leagues—MLB, NFL, NBA and NHL—were asked it they would support an openly gay teammate, more than half in the NFL said they would; three out of five approved of a gay teammate in the NBA and Major League Baseball; and a whopping four out of five were supportive in the NHL. This spike in the NHL’s acceptance is most likely attributable to the fact that most of the players are Canadians and Europeans who are more apt to lack the sexual hang-ups of Americans.

Nonetheless, former NBA player Tim Hardaway was repulsed at the thought of a gay teammate and stated during an interview that, among other reasons for not wanting a gay teammate, he hates gays. He later apologized for his comments. The big question is: who more represents the locker room mindset—Wade or Hardaway?

Teammate support may be there, but what’s missing, however, is how these guys would respond when an opponent comes out. Would he be taunted, shunned, harassed, or just left alone?

Fan response
The second consideration for a gay athlete who is contemplating coming out is the reaction of fans. That is a tough one to gauge and may depend on the team’s locale and its social consciousness. On the surface a gay athlete may be better off coming out in New York than in Dallas, but no matter if a state is red or blue, every state has a mix of homophobes and progressives, thus the color purple.

Yet a gay athlete who is a strong performer and/or is popular with the fans will have a better chance of mitigating any backlash. Indeed, studies have already indicated that fans appear to be OK with an openly gay player. According to an online survey by Witeck-Combs Communications and Harris Interactive conducted in 2002, two out of three fans said they would not change their opinions of favorite male or female professional athletes should they come out.

Consequently, four out of five said other fans would have a problem.

Over the past several years, there have been "gay night" events at several baseball parks recognizing the significance of the gay dollar and that being inclusive is good business. And just recently, there was a landmark Pride Night with the Atlanta Thrashers of the NHL.

Endorsement concerns
The third consideration is the potential loss of endorsements if a player comes out, especially when corporations are under extreme pressure from so-called morality groups. But when Sheryl Swoopes came out, Nike did not drop an existing endorsement deal, and she picked up another one as well.

While some see a risk, others see a windfall. "From a marketing perspective, if you're a player who happens to be gay and you want to be incredibly rich, then you should come out, because it would be the best thing that ever happened to you from a marketing and an endorsement perspective," said the NBA’s Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban. "You would be an absolute hero to more Americans than you can ever possibly be as an athlete, and that'll put money in your pocket. On the flip side, if you're the idiot who condemns somebody because they're gay, then you're going to be ostracized, you're going to be picketed and you're going to ruin whatever marketing endorsements you have."

The times, they are a-changin’
The world has evolved dramatically since the day Jackie Robinson endured taunts and death threats from fans and ostracism by teammates and opponents alike. The country wasn’t ready for integration during Robinson’s gallant breaking of the color barrier 60 years ago. Attitude towards gay acceptance is improving albeit slowly. Cultural exposure to gays and lesbians, including more positive portrayals of gays in television and movies, and political debates that push for equality, have contributed to the positive trends.

But the best evidence of a more accepting sports world occurred following Tim Hardaway’s homophobic remarks. Swiftly and unequivocally, NBA Commissioner David Stern rebuked Hardaway and cancelled Hardaway’s representing the NBA during the all-star weekend, and he lost an endorsement, too. Moreover, the Continental Basketball Association terminated Hardaway’s role with the league. These actions sent a powerful message that homophobia—not homosexuality—is a taboo.

Coming out in the world of sports may be a struggle. But the outcome is likely to be successful given that times are changing and intolerance will not be tolerated.

Seek Support Group

Letter published inUSA Today--2/15/2007

Steve Charing, media relations, PFLAG-Howard County - Clarksville, Md.

USA TODAY's cover story "Gay teens coming out earlier to peers and family" presented an accurate overview of the issues surrounding gay and lesbian teens' acknowledgement of their sexual orientation at an earlier age than previous generations did.

But while several key support groups were identified, one of the leading gay and lesbian support groups for parents and gay individuals was omitted: PFLAG, or Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (News, Feb. 8).

This venerable organization has been a valuable source of support to families for more than three decades. PFLAG's goal is to keep families together, and with the help of parents who have experienced their child's coming out, PFLAG members offer guidance and support to other parents in a similar situation. Many chapters provide support to the teens as well.

The article discusses how problematic it could be for teens and their parents in rural areas. PFLAG has grown to more than 500 chapters nationwide, and its reach extends into all areas of the country.

Parents who are trying to come to terms with their child's sexual orientation would be well advised to visit www.pflag.org to locate a chapter in their area. Nobody should feel that they are alone.

Lobby Day Draws Statewide Activists, Politicans

LGBT, allies push for transgender equality; oppose marriage amendment

By Steve Charing

ANNAPOLIS—A couple of hundred lgbt activists from all over the state braved the brisk, misty air to attend Equality Maryland’s 4th annual Lobby Day on February 12. The crowd, while significantly smaller than at previous Lobby Day rallies at Lawyers Mall, was enthusiastic and vociferous and represented a broad segment of Maryland’s lgbt community and its allies.

"We want to show the legislature that we have wide and diverse support for lgbt equality," Sara Ryan, Equality Maryland’s field organizer told Baltimore OUTloud. "We have here gay and straight people, people of faith, non-religious people, union, non-union, all kinds of people."

Gita Deane and Lisa Polyak, two of the original plaintiffs in the Deane and Polyak v. Conaway lawsuit, emceed the rally. The lawsuit is challenging Maryland’s 1973 marriage law that restricts the definition of marriage to be one man and woman and is currently under deliberation by the Maryland Court of Appeals.

Dr. Dana Beyer, a transgendered person who unsuccessfully ran for the House of Delegates, set the tone by arguing for transgender equality. She offered examples of how transgendered individuals are discriminated against; how she—a physician—could lose her job; and how the transgendered are often victims of violence and hate. One of Equality Maryland’s main legislative initiatives this General Assembly will be to add transgendered individuals to the state’s anti-discrimination law.

Delegate Victor Ramirez, a Prince Georges Democrat further fired up the crowd. "[Marriage equality] is a critical issue for all of us, not just some," he exhorted. "This will define us as a state." Del. Ramirez, a strong advocate for immigration rights added, "To those who bring us issues to divide us—shame on you!" He plans to champion a pro-marriage bill in the House of Delegates.

Senator Gwendolyn Britt, another Democrat from Prince Georges County was next by relating the struggle for lgbt equality to that of the civil rights movement. She was a major activist against segregation, having been jailed for her protests.

According to a statement from Equality Maryland, "if the high court in Maryland does not unequivocally rule to end discrimination in civil marriage, [Sen. Britt] will sponsor and shepherd a marriage equality bill in the Maryland Senate."

"I fought against segregation, and I’m equality compelled to speak out for your equal rights in Maryland and in the U.S.," she said to the cheering crowd. "For civil marriage, the time is now."

Other speakers included Fred Mason, Executive Director, Metro DC AFL-CIO with son, Fred Mason III and his son's husband, Philip Lovett. Pro-gay equality supporters in the legislature were sighted at the event, including Sen. Rich Madaleno (D-Montgomery County), the highest elected openly gay person in the state and Del. Elizabeth Bobo (D-Columbia).

A few in the crowd complained that neither Governor O’Malley nor Lt. Governor Brown was present at the rally, which would have signaled a new pro-gay rights climate in Annapolis. However, Equality Maryland’s Sara Ryan confirmed to OUTloud that they had not been invited.

During and after the rally, groups of lgbt folks, supporters, friends and families proceeded to visit with their district delegates and senators. They pressed for an end to transgender discrimination, promoted domestic partner benefits for state employees and other initiatives to ease some financial burdens on Maryland’s lgbt citizens. In addition, they sought to avert yet another attempt by both houses in the General Assembly to amend the state’s constitution that would permanently confine marriage to one man and one woman.

People presented their personal stories to legislators, which always seems to be the most effective strategy. One transgendered person told a receptive delegate of being homeless because she was transgendered. Another teenager said he had hugged his brother who attended the same school and the other kids taunted them with anti-gay jeers.

And in a touching moment, a young married woman explained to a senator how she was raised by her biological father and his male partner since she had been very young and brought in family photographs to show how stable and beneficial her upbringing was.

Some seemed moved by these and other stories; others, such as Gail Bates (R-Howard County) was reported to have said she is "never going to change her mind."

Lobby Day is an important event and may be critical this year. A decision by the Maryland Court of Appeals on the marriage lawsuit is imminent and has the potential for driving the political agenda during this and future General Assembly sessions. Bills that will enshrine discrimination into the state’s constitution have been filed and will be considered by lawmakers.

Despite the clear need to advance pro-lgbt causes, the crowd turnout was disappointing. Many more signed up with Equality Maryland than showed up, which could be explained by the chilly weather and looming forecast. One observer quipped, "I would have been happier if all the gays who attended ‘Wicked’ showed up today. It would have been some rally!"

Even if you did not attend, you can still express your views to your legislators. Visit www.equalitymaryland.org to find out how.

Homophobia Knows No Race

By Steve Charing

Senior Political Analyst

The recent brouhaha stemming from Grey’s Anatomy star Isaiah Washington’s calling fellow co-star T.R. Knight a "faggot" (or the media’s dubbing it as "F-word") during an on-set confrontation spawned criticism over the protests. Several African-American columnists and pundits are questioning the virulent reaction by the lgbt community and some of its organizations by suggesting that the race of Mr. Washington was a primary motivator in the backlash.

They offer that the hostile reaction among gays towards Mr. Washington represents a prevailing perception that African-Americans are more homophobic than whites and, therefore, his use of the "F-Word" is somewhat expected. Implied here is that that the protests by whites within the lgbt community would be less intense if the "F-word" user were white and the calls for his firing would not be so evident.

I disagree.

The unfortunate use of the "F-word" is deplorable whether the individual who said it was black, white Asian, Latino or whatever. The same goes for the target of the insult.

I would be equally outraged, as I am sure most in the lgbt community and its allies would be, no matter what the ethnic background of the person who delivered the slur was or who the recipient of the offense might be. The protests would have been similarly justified had white co-star Patrick Dempsey called T.R. Knight a "faggot."

Homophobia knows no race.

To be sure, there is considerable homophobia among African-Americans. But for every black preacher who condemns homosexuality there are many more white ministers and other religious leaders doing the same. Moreover, there is widespread homophobia among the Latino and Asian communities, not to mention among white socially conservative folks. Consequently, no one particular race or ethnic group corners the market on homophobia or is exempt from it. Perhaps blacks conceal it less, therefore, contributing to the perception.

Not that Latinos and Asians haven’t been discriminated against, but many in the lgbt community feel more disappointed at African-Americans for their homophobia. The main reason is that black preachers use the same Bible that white racists waved against blacks to justify segregation, discrimination and violence. They sermonize from the same pulpits where they previously once stood to condemn past racial injustices, presenting a double standard.

These preachers are aware of the pain and suffering that discrimination brings, and gays believe that African-Americans should be more compassionate as a result of their own tragic experiences. Plus, gays and lesbians had been traditional allies during the peak of the civil rights movement, a fact that fuels more disappointment.

But these writers who speculated there was a more concerted outcry from whites in the gay community over Isaiah Washington’s comments simply because of his race leads me to the world of sports to reject that theory.

The late Reggie White, an African-American professional football star, was a first-rate homophobe. On a number of occasions he made blistering comments about gays. For example, he once said, "I'm offended that homosexuals will say that homosexuals deserve rights." He also accused the U.S. of going away from God by allowing homosexuality to "run rampant" and compared gays to liars and cheaters and those who are malicious. Get the picture? But any protests were relatively tepid.

An uproar did occur when former baseball pitcher John Rocker, a white Southerner, railed against gays and foreigners during an anti-minority, stereotype-laced diatribe while being interviewed for a sports magazine. For his comments, Rocker was vilified for many weeks. The furor forced the Atlanta Braves organization to discredit his comments and pressured Rocker to recant. But his apology was aimed at his racist remarks, not the homophobic part.

He was ostracized in virtually every ballpark the following season and eventually, aided by injuries, ended his once promising career. Rocker will always be defined and remembered by his rant about the eclectic assortment of passengers, including "some queer with AIDS," on New York’s No. 7 subway train.

A correspondingly potent backlash was launched against New York Giants tight end Jeremy Shockey, a white man, for anti-gay comments on the Howard Stern Show and later apologized under pressure.

While Reggie White went on and on publicly for an extended period of time—years, not minutes, as in Rocker’s or Shockey’s case—about how sinful gays are, not so much as a peep was heard from the lgbt community or its African-American components, much less the NFL. Although he did receive rebukes from GLAAD and the media, he was never forced—only requested—to apologize for his anti-gay venom. Yet Rocker and Shockey were broadly condemned for their brief but hurtful tirades.

Therefore, I disagree with those who opined that the reaction against Isaiah Washington was motivated by his race. Reggie White, a black man, more or less received a pass for his ongoing anti-gay comments and was elected to the Hall of Fame. John Rocker, a white man, was shamed out of baseball (and rightly so), and Jeremy Shockey had to eat his words.

Hate is hate, and it must be eradicated. So should racism and homophobia regardless of the source. Isaiah Washington deserved the hostile reaction he received. It was not about race; it was about homophobia. People should be called out for using anti-gay slurs regardless of their race. Nobody should get a free pass when making homophobic comments.

Homophobia knows no race.

Democrat Bumper Stickers

I didn't come up with these, but they are great. I'm not sure why some numbers are missing:

1) (On an infant's shirt) Already Smarter than Bush.
2) 1/20/09: End of an Error
3) That's OK, I Wasn't Using My Civil Liberties Anyway
4) Let's Fix Democracy in This Country First
5) If You Want a Nation Ruled By Religion, Move to Iran
6) Bush. Like a Rock. Only Dumber.
7) You Can't Be Pro-War and Pro-Life At the Same Time
8) If You Can Read This, You're Not Our President
9) Of Course It Hurts: You're Getting Screwed by an Elephant
10) Hey, Bush Supporters: Embarrassed Yet?
11) George Bush: Creating the Terrorists Our kids Will Have to Fight
12) Impeachment: It's Not Just for Blowjobs Anymore
14) America : One Nation, Under Surveillance
15) They Call Him "W" So He Can Spell It
16) Which God Do You Kill For?
17) Cheney/Satan '08
18) Jail to the Chief
19) Who Would Jesus Torture?
20) No, Seriously, Why Did We Invade?
21) Bush: God's Way of Proving Intelligent Design is Full Of Crap
22) Bad president! No Banana.
23) We Need a President Who's Fluent In At Least One Language
24) We're Making Enemies Faster Than We Can Kill Them
26) Rich Man's War, Poor Man's Blood
27) Is It Vietnam Yet?
28) Bush Doesn't Care About White People, Either
29) Where Are We Going? And Why Are We in This Hand-basket?
30) You Elected Him. You Deserve Him.
32) Impeach Cheney First
34) When Bush Took Office, Gas Was $1.46
35) The Republican Party: Our Bridge to the 11th Century

Do Gay Men Really Want Marriage?

By Steve Charing

While the Maryland Court of Appeals deliberates on the constitutionality of the state’s 1973 law, which restricts marriage to between a man and a woman, it is a good time to examine if marriage between a man and a man is what gay men want.

Based on an accumulation of conversations over the past year or two with all age groups —both personal and via the Internet—as well as blogs and other data, I feel comfortable about offering my thoughts pertaining to gay men and same-sex marriage. But I will make this qualification: my comments are not intended to be generalizations or absolute facts nor are they the results of any broad-sample scientific survey. Instead, these points reflect trends and tendencies that I believe portray an accurate picture of many gay men vis-à-vis their attitudes towards same-sex marriage.

Although I count many lesbians as friends, I’m not going to pretend that I can offer any insight regarding the mindset of lesbians other than the fact I strongly believe that they are far more willing to enter the realm of same-sex marriage than gay men are.

Statistics support that theory. In Massachusetts, the only state where same-sex marriage is legal, even though it is believed there are more gay men than lesbians in the state, lesbian marriages outnumbered gay male marriages from May 17, 2004 through November 9, 2006 by a count of 5,642 to 3,122. That’s nearly a 2 to 1 ratio. The following analysis, however, is focused on the male issues surrounding marriage, which may explain, in part, why the Massachusetts experience is what it is.

Gay men are very similar to straight men. Why not? They’re men! Males, being the hunters they are (and that’s the case in virtually all species), seem to relish the conquest. Straight men marry for a variety of reasons, and most have families to keep them together. But we all know—and I’ve been told by a good number of married men—that many still have attraction issues with other women. Nonetheless, those who stick to their marriage (nearly half don’t for a variety of reasons) still wander, if only with their eyes.

But for these married men, a split-up could be both painful and financially draining. The laws are structured that way. They can lose their children and have to pay unseemly sums in alimony and child support. Therefore, divorce isn’t a good option unless it’s better for the family than unhappily remaining together. So while half of marriages disintegrate, imagine how many more would as well if it weren’t for children, divorce laws and their attendant penalties.

Gay men, except the married ones in Massachusetts, generally have the independence that so many straight men can only fantasize about. And the sexual freedom it brings is a major impediment to same-sex marriage. For one thing, there are large numbers of gay men—mostly younger—who eschew long-term relationships, much less marriage, to preserve to some degree their sexual sovereignty. The trend seems to be that the younger one is, the less inclination there is in forming a long-term relationship.

While many claim they want boyfriends, there is significant trepidation, especially among the younger guys, about settling down. And sexual freedom is not the only factor that thwarts a desire for a long-term relationship.

"Being single (or just dating) is very liberating," said one guy in his early thirties. "You don't have to plan your life around someone else's wants or needs. You can do what you want to do, go where you want to go, see who you want to see. Nobody to answer to."

He added that the independence that single life brings reduces dependency on others. "When you're single, there is nobody there to let you down. Less disappointment that way."

Others just don’t trust gay men sufficiently to settle down. Numerous gays are constantly fearful that their partner will cheat on them (a legitimate concern) and impact the relationship and its accompanying emotional investment. "I’ve given everything of myself to my boyfriend, and one day I find out he’s out with another dude," said one twenty-three year-old. "I can’t trust men. They’re ass-----."

And many other men are involved in "open relationships" or engage in "threesomes" to try to have it both ways—a boyfriend and a variety of sexual contacts.

For these men, marriage, if allowed, would clearly not seem to be a desirable or recommended option at this point in their lives.

But there is a different side of the equation. "It's nice to know there is someone out there who is looking forward to seeing you, who misses you, who is thinking about you, who loves you," said one single man in his thirties. "Life feels a little less scary when you know you don't have to shoulder the burden of doing everything by yourself. When you are in a long-term relationship, both partners have each other to fall back on, be it emotionally, physically or economically."

Relationships can also help eliminate some of the games experienced in dating different guys. One tries to put on his best side to impress his would-be partner for fear that anything less desirable would cause an early exit. As one man put it, "When you're in a long-term relationship, most likely you've both seen each other at your worst, and you're still together, so you don't have to pretend anymore. You can just be yourself...as good or as nasty as that is."

Once you truly fall in love with a person and can deal with any foibles, that is the signal to think in terms of a serious relationship. It does take commitment, communication and work. The security and dependability, as well as the elimination of the "games" involved in dating, are strong inducements for long-term-relationships.

Another is family, and that’s where marriage would be paramount. "Marriage is important to us because we're a family just like everyone else, and we deserve the same rights as everyone else," said a member of a gay couple in their late twenties who have adopted a baby boy. "The rights marriage gives us allow our son to be protected if something should happen to us."

When you see gay men in long-term relationships, most appear to be older and have probably experienced enough emotional trauma and drama that are frequently associated with the single life. They are ready to settle down. I know of couples who have been together 20, 30, 40 years. Mine has lasted 27 wonderful years, and I am as happy today as when I first met my partner.

There are also many younger established couples, and marriage would be beneficial and secure for them as well. The over 1,100 rights and benefits that marriage would accrue would only strengthen their partnership and family.

Nonetheless, being in a long-term relationship doesn’t necessarily translate into a desire for marriage. The same issues that beset heterosexual married men could also surface, and men (and women) are mindful of that. And there are financial and other considerations that could preclude marriage.

So, to the question, do gay men really want marriage, it depends on each individual’s circumstance and priorities, as well as his desire to get serious about sharing his life with someone he loves through thick and thin.

If Only He Said Those Two Key Words

Letter published in Washington Blade--1/26/07: "O'Malley's inaugural speech disappoints Maryland gays"

When I saw the clip on the evening news that reported Governor O’Malley’s inaugural speech earlier that afternoon, my heart raced. I heard the new governor of Maryland say, "I take responsibility as one leader for never trying to divide our people by race, class, religion or region." I waited to hear the two words that would have made that statement complete. But, alas, Governor O'Malley shifted abruptly to a different theme of taking responsibility for setting a tone of mutual respect.

Drats! Those two words were never spoken; the speech was not whole. An opportunity lost. I felt unfulfilled.

For when he uttered the phrase "never trying to divide the people," my first impulse was recalling how President Bush, in dutifully complying with the win-at-all cost tactics of Karl Rove, did just that. They divided the people during the 2004 presidential campaign by driving a wedge among America's voters and a stake through the gay community's collective hearts on the matter of "gay marriage."

"Gay marriage is morally wrong." "We need to protect the sanctity of marriage." "Marriage should be defined only as a union between a man and a woman." It divided the nation.
So when Martin O'Malley laid out how he had no intention to divide the people, my fervent hope was that he was going to include those two key words among the others. And those would be "sexual orientation."

What a wonderful message that would have made! If nothing else, it would have sent a clear signal to such homophobic Maryland legislators as Del. Don Dwyer, Del. Emmet Burns, Sen. Janet Greenip, Sen. Alex X. Mooney, Sen. Nancy Jacobs and others: any attempt to amend the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage would certainly not receive any moral backing from this governor, unlike his predecessor, former Governor Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr., who lent his support to such an egregious notion.

What would have been wrong by including "sexual orientation" in the text of that otherwise commendable promise? The state now has laws on the books prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation. This isn't new; those battles seem to be behind us. They survived theconservative Mr. Ehrlich who, some believed, would have sought to overturn the protections, given his shoddy record on LGBT issues.

But Governor O'Malley did not utter those words. It was either an oversight or political calculation; we may never know. It would have been momentous if he had, but given the recent political environment when it comes to gays regardless of Party, it is not surprising. Just disappointing.

We have big voices…let’s hear them

Elected officials and LGBT folks need to speak out for equality

By Steve Charing
Senior Political Analyst

Now that our state legislators have started the 90-day annual ritual of writing laws (see front-page article), this is the time for the lgbt community to step forward and have our big voices heard and our views made known. To help accomplish this, Equality Maryland, the state’s largest lgbt civil rights organization, is sponsoring Lobby Day in Annapolis on February 12.

Among the activities, a rally will be held in downtown Annapolis beginning at 5:00 p.m. (At press time, the speakers and the specific venue have not been announced.) However, in the past two years such notables as Maya Keyes, Judy Shepard and Kweise Mfume took the stage and denounced hate and bigotry and spoke eloquently on the need for equality for the lgbt community. They, as well as others, addressed several hundred cheering people from all over the state—gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgenedered, parents and straight allies—under the curious eye of the media.

This is the time to raise our collective voices and demonstrate we’re not second-class citizens. We turn out for Pride celebrations in vast numbers. We should do the same at Lobby Day. If nothing else, it will help us to gain necessary protections and rights—the same that are afforded heterosexuals.

Besides the rally, there will be opportunities for you to meet with your district legislators to tell your own individual story. You will be able to impress them as to why a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage is not only discriminatory, but also how such unequal treatment affects you and your family. And even if you don’t contemplate marriage you should still fight for the right so that you have that option at some point.

"Personal stories are the most effective means to persuade a legislator," said Delegate Anne Kaiser (District 14-Montgomery County), who is openly gay. She along with three other Howard County delegates recently addressed the Howard County chapter of PFLAG to offer lobbying advice and tips. The other three delegates concurred.

We are finding out more and more that when legislators who are relatively unfamiliar with lgbt individuals and can actually put a human face on the prevailing issues as a result of meetings, there is a shift by varying degrees to their openness on these issues. Hearing our stories and concerns helps removes some barriers.

A message on Equality Maryland’s website states: "As a ‘citizen lobbyist,’ you're not expected to know the ins and outs of a particular bill; you're just expected to speak from your heart."

But we need others to find their voices, too. With the major initiative being the prevention of a constitutional amendment, the posturing and positioning by some politicians is already underway. We hear plenty from homophobic Delegate Donald H. Dwyer, Jr. (District 31-Anne Arundel) who not only was the primary sponsor of the gay marriage ban but also led the movement to impeach Judge M. Brooke Murdock when she ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in the Deane and Polyak v. Conaway lawsuit.

Anytime the "gay marriage" issue surfaces, you can always count on Del. Dwyer to stand before a camera and microphone denouncing marriage for same-sex couples and insisting that it should be put up for a popular vote.

But where are our leaders? Besides the aforementioned Anne Kaiser, there are three other openly gay state legislators. In the House of Delegates we also have Maggie McIntosh (District 43-Baltimore) and freshman Heather Mizeur (District 20-Montgomery County).

And now we have the highest ranking openly gay elected official in Maryland—newly elected Senator Rich Madaleno (District 18-Montgomery County). He enters his first term as Senator, but he has served previously in the House of Delegates.

Sen. Madaleno and other Democrats are taking a wait-and-see stance, preferring to allow the Court of Appeals to render a judgement. Most observers believe that the decision will be handed down following the General Assembly session, thus delaying serious debate until next year.

Nonetheless, I would like to see a more proactive stance by our supporters, particularly from the four gay and lesbian lawmakers. Sen. Madaleno, for example, is in a very safe district politically, and Montgomery County did not send one Republican to Annapolis in the last election. Although a freshman senator, he should speak out loud and clear. It’s frustrating to hear only Dwyer’s comments on the evening news or reading them in the paper without an effective and appropriate response from an elected official.

I realize this is a politically dicey issue, but it is an important one to thousands of Maryland’s citizens. The public must be educated on the merits of recognizing same-sex couples, and allowing it to hear only one side damages our cause, especially if the question ultimately finds its way on a ballot.

Not only does the public need to be educated, the same can be said for our legislators. This is where you come in. Come to the rally on Lobby Day and become a "citizen lobbyist." Join hundreds of other like-minded individuals. It’s easy and fun.

Check with Equality Maryland to find out all the information you need to attend and participate in Lobby Day and sign up.

Speak out. Tell your own story. Let’s use our big voices to push for equality.

2007 General Assembly Underway

LGBT community affected by many bills to be considered

By Steve Charing

Senior Political Analyst

The gavel has dropped signaling the beginning of the 2007 Maryland legislative session known as the General Assembly where some thousand bills will be considered. A new positive mood has enveloped Annapolis as the widening margin of Democratic senators and delegates and the inauguration of a Democratic governor offer hope of a less contentious 90-day session than had been witnessed during the past four years.

When Republican Governor Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr. began his tenure in Annapolis following his historic victory in the 2002 election, the main topic of discussion during the General Assembly was slots. It dominated the first three years of his term and triggered a polemical battle between him and the legislature.

As a result of the bad blood created by this seemingly endless hostile debate as well as the failure of the then governor to reach out and compromise on other key issues, the Ehrlich administration was hamstrung by the Democrat-dominated assembly. Moreover, many initiatives originating from the legislature were vetoed by the governor, and some were overridden, creating more discontent.

This session should lack that type of drama for two reasons. First, Governor Martin O’Malley is a Democrat who has already made nice with many legislators on both sides of the aisle prior to his inauguration, thus securing a more positive personal relationship. Second, no major, sweeping initiatives are expected to be introduced by the Governor in his first session, as both branches of government will feel each other out the first year. What comes out of this session, though, will be a good barometer on the success of this administration.

While the question of slots may surface again, it will probably be an adjunct to a broad overhaul of the tax structure that is needed to stem a river of red ink to the tune of $1 billion that is forecast for fiscal year 2008 and beyond. But serious action on slots and weighty budget remedies are not expected until next year’s General Assembly.

Nonetheless, important and controversial measures—many affecting the lgbt community—will be considered in this session. Budget and taxes will still be hot topics even if dramatic changes do not occur this year. The environment will get a close look, especially the toughening of emission standards.

We expect to see reform in the archaic ground rent system. And housing, health care, the death penalty and transportation matters will also be brought to the fore as well as myriad other concerns.

The building momentum surrounding a statewide smoking ban is sure to be a significant issue. This affects the lgbt community (among others) and is one that has divided it. On one hand you have bar owners who fear the loss of business by imposing a ban and smokers who believe it is their right to smoke. On the other hand you have potential customers who avoid bars and clubs because of the health risks associated with second-hand smoke. Based on the positive experiences of other cities and states, such a ban is likely to be enacted, if not this year, then next.

As far as issues that also directly impact the lgbt community are concerned, the volatile matter of same-sex marriage is clearly the most consequential and politically charged. The lawsuit that challenges Maryland’s 1973 marriage law as a violation of the Constitution by nine lgbt couples and a gay widower is the central focus. It had been ruled favorably for the plaintiffs by a Circuit Court Judge. The case is now awaiting a decision by the Court of Appeals.

The timing and nature of the judgment will determine the course of action undertaken by Equality Maryland, the principal lgbt civil right organization in the state. It can come down during the General Assembly session or following it—most likely the latter.

"The ruling could be with us, against us, or a New Jersey-style decision," said Equality Maryland’s Executive Director Dan Furmansky to a gathering of over 60 at a Howard County chapter of PFLAG meeting. Furmansky was referring to the recent decision by the New Jersey courts to provide equal marriage rights to same-sex couples but stopped short of calling it "marriage."

However, should the Court rule while the Assembly is in session and either upholds the lower court decision and grants marriage rights to same-sex couples or directs a New Jersey-type solution, the stuff will definitely hit the fan.

Delegate Don Dwyer (R-Anne Arundel), who eked out a 25-vote victory in November, is on a mission to ensure that same-sex marriage never occurs in Maryland. He already pre-filed a bill that would seek to amend the state’s Constitution that would limit marriage to one man and one woman. Moreover, he believes, at the very least, the voters should decide on the definition of marriage and is pushing for a referendum on the issue.

Thwarting such an amendment or a ballot initiative is the first priority of Equality Maryland. Even with the increased number of Democrats in both chambers and a Governor who has disavowed a constitutional amendment during the campaign, nothing will be left to chance.

In other initiatives, Equality Maryland will push for legislation adding gender identity and expression to the state’s anti-discrimination law. Many observers believe this stands a good chance of passage. As mayor of Baltimore, Martin O’Malley lent his cooperation as the City Council passed similar legislation.

The organization will also seek to expand health coverage requiring health insurance companies to write policies inclusive of unmarried adults in the same household and their children.

Finally, Equality Maryland will attempt to pass legislation allowing individuals who pay the health care costs of another non-dependent adult in their household to deduct those expenses.

Prior to the elections in November, Equality Maryland's Dan Furmansky told OUTloud, "Whoever lives in the Governor's mansion will greatly influence what we are able to accomplish over the next four years."

With Governor O’Malley in place, there is a greater feel for optimism than there was at the beginning of last year’s General Assembly.

Piano Man

Singing and smiling at the piano, Matthew sparkles at Jay’s

By Steve Charing

‘Twas the Saturday before Christmas,
When we showed up at Jay’s;
The crowd was so merry,
While the piano men played.

The pub was aglow,
With its holly and lights;
The music resounding,
All through the night.

First Bill played the tunes,
With precision and style;
Then Matthew sat down,
And we all sang and smiled.

Amidst the cozy, holiday atmosphere at Jay’s on Read—the posh Mt. Vernon piano bar that opened this past summer—the regular crowd shuffles in and takes in the fabulous décor of holly and lights and frosty window decorations that had been created by Wayne from the Drinkery. The festive patrons listened and sang to the spirited music performed by Jay’s superb piano players. Oh, and let’s not forget the cheerful staff who makes everyone feel welcome.

It’s a great combination. "Thank God they opened this bar," said Ed, a veteran of the Mt. Vernon scene.

On the Saturday of the Christmas weekend, Bill Forrest entertained during the cocktail hours preceding the 8:30 change of shift, mixing Christmas tunes with other popular favorites. An accomplished pianist with a long pedigree of performing from the West Coast to Holland America Cruise Lines, the Texan has been a pleasant addition to Jay’s. "Bill is a great pianist," said Jay Lamont, the owner of the pub, which to many possesses a "New York" ambiance.

But on this night, according to the rotating schedule, the next pianist, Matthew Kenworthy, took the small stage at 8:30—a railed-in platform that is dominated by the recently tuned piano and a handy music library. He immediately led off his set with a rousing rendition of "Carols of the Bells," which elicited a loud ovation. After a brief, pleasant greeting, Matthew broke into Cole Porter’s "I’ve Got You Under My Skin" followed immediately by Elton John’s "Your Song," and the growing crowd was captivated.

Jay is enthusiastic about his two popular pianists. "They have similar qualities who are unlike each other. That’s the magic," he explains.

Matthew Kenworthy, 30, also has a solid background in piano bar experience. He has played in a variety of venues in the mid-Atlantic area before coming to Baltimore to work at Jay’s just a few short weeks ago. Since then, he, along with Bill Forrest, is amassing a strong fan base, which is increasing steadily.

And it’s not only gay customers who appreciate Matthew’s performances. "Matty is very talented, very entertaining, and is a sweet guy," said Cindi, who with her husband, enjoyed their night at Jay’s. She has seen him perform in Philadelphia and at Partners in Rehoboth.

The patrons love his easy smile and his uncanny ability to connect with the audience. Jonathan, one of the younger customers that night, also saw Matthew play at Partners. "He accommodates the audience really well," he said. "He tailors his varying musical selections according to the age group in the audience on a given night."

Owner Jay Lamont counts himself as a fan, too. "Matthew’s like a firebug—he glows. He loves playing the piano and the set-up of the room," Jay said. "He has the ability to draw you in and make you laugh." Jay is referring to Matthew’s mischievous injection of comical lyrics in a song when no one is expecting it.

Matthew Kenworthy, born and raised in Southern New Jersey, always tinkered on the piano, but didn’t get his first one in the house until he was 15. He is a self-taught pianist with only 10 lessons. During his spare time at high school and college, he enjoyed playing the instrument he loves, although he was also involved with the clarinet and keyboard percussion instruments like the xylophone.

He went on to college at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh where he was a Design and Fine Arts major. There he learned about musical theater from working with musical theater majors, helping with accompaniment and just having fun in his spare time. Matthew took a small job after college playing piano at a small restaurant and moved on to play at the Raven in New Hope for a year before playing at a variety of venues in Philadelphia for six years.

It was there where Matthew really got it going at piano bar entertainment. "I credit my dear friend John Flynn for showing me how to entertain and have fun with people," he said. John still plays in Philadelphia and Rehoboth Beach.

Matthew spent the next two years at Partners in Rehoboth. He heard about Jay’s when he arrived in Baltimore less than two months ago and was thrilled. "I love the people in Baltimore and the warmth of the atmosphere at work," he beams. "I walked in and felt like the place was really built for me. Everything was just perfect."

He noted that the Baltimore crowd enjoys the old classics. "Gay men are more demanding, er, specific (smiles) in their requests and have a special attachment to Broadway show tunes," Matthew said sipping a cup of coffee prior to his shift. "As they drink more, they tend to sing along." Asked what the most popular requests have been, without hesitation he rattled off, "Cabaret," "Piano Man," and "All That Jazz."

Matthew’s versatility—both in his piano playing and his singing—has been a big plus. "I have learned much about music through actually working it," he says. "Most everything I know has been as a result of learning music from my job—listening to recordings, learning stories and backgrounds about famous musicians and composers." He does not have a great deal of classical training, but he loves listening to classical piano and orchestras.

He is devoted to faith and family. Matthew has a twin brother who is also gay and a musician. He also has a younger married brother. His parents live in Cleveland where he traveled following his stint at Jay’s that Saturday.

"I strongly believe in God, and that each day there are angels present in life which have guided me in a whirlwind of directions so that the excitement and happiness have been and will always be a part of my life."

Matthew feels that doing what he is doing for a living is a truly God-given blessing. "Fame never interested me," he says. "In fact, I never thought ten years ago that this would be my career."

For his growing number of fans it has been fortunate that Matthew is on this path. "I wish to continue to make people smile. I hope people are having fun around me."

That they are.

There must be something in December’s air

By Steve Charing
Senior Political Analyst

Maybe it’s the unusual balmy weather we’re experiencing or that the Ravens seem unstoppable. But whatever the reason, there have been some odd happenings in the political arena during December. Here are just a few:

MARY’S HAVING A LITTLE LAMB. The news that lesbian Mary Cheney is pregnant is a study of irony. I’m happy for her, believe me. But because of her Republican Party’s success in trashing same-sex marriage in Mary’s home state of Virginia and elsewhere, her partner Heather Poe will not enjoy the same legal relationship with the baby as heterosexual couples can have with theirs.

During the 2004 presidential campaign when the GOP bludgeoned gay marriage, Mary Cheney, who was an aide for her dad, was silent and let her party drive a cynical wedge into the electorate to win. Only when she promoted her flopperoo of a book did she finally speak out against a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. Too little, too late. Her child will not receive the same protections and rights as the children of heterosexuals.

Dick Cheney should have used the same degree of influence he had in launching a preposterous war and developing an oil companies-friendly secretive energy policy in staving off the GOP’s opposition to same-sex marriage. But, alas, he didn’t. And Mary and Heather and baby will suffer the consequences.

APPEALING COURT. The Maryland Court of Appeals heard oral arguments from the gay plaintiffs and the state in the case that is trying to overturn the state’s marriage law. Despite the high passions on both sides, there was an eerie, surprising calm both inside and outside the courthouse. The justices seemed so laid back one has to wonder if they had already decided on the issue prior to the proceeding. Outside, there were no jeering or other demonstrations.
My guess is that the opposition is laying low pending a ruling, which is expected during 2007—probably in March or April. Look for a New Jersey-type verdict that would offer civil benefits to same-sex couples but not use the term "marriage." They will order the General assembly to fine-tune the implementation of the decision. That’s when things will heat up.

DWYER’S EEKED OUT VICTORY. Noted homophobe Delegate Don Dwyer managed to win re-election by just 25 votes. Whew! From a strategic and public relations perspective, this isn’t all that bad. Perhaps Equality Maryland’s Executive Director Dan Furmansky said it best: "While we would all obviously prefer to see Del. Dwyer collecting an unemployment check rather than returning to the General Assembly, there is truly no better face of the anti-gay movement in Maryland," he told the Washington Blade. "Del. Dwyer is zealotry personified."

OBAMA FEVER. The buzz surrounding the potential presidential candidacy of Barack Obama is startling. Despite the fact he is a minority and has such a thin resume, I believe he has an excellent shot—not only the Democratic nomination, but also the presidency itself. In a future column I will explain why. Get on the bandwagon now!

MINCING WORDS: Sometimes it is a good idea if politicians think of what they say before they say it. In discussing the need for broad tax reform in Maryland, openly lesbian Delegate Maggie McIntosh made a curious comment as reported by C. Fraser Smith in the Sun: "Why do we keep poking our fingers in holes in the dikes?" Hmmm.

STROKE OF LUCK. Democratic Senator Tim Johnson (SD) was stricken with what originally appeared to be a stroke but later determined to be a congenital arterial malformation that had caused blood vessels in his brain to burst. While he remains in critical but improving condition, there is widespread speculation concerning the fate of Sen. Johnson and the balance of power that was to tip towards the Democrats come January.

Should Sen. Johnson die or resign from office, the vacancy would be filled by the Republican governor of South Dakota. If he selects a member of the GOP to replace Sen. Johnson, the Senate would be split down the middle, 50-50, with VP Cheney breaking the tie. That would mean the coveted chairmanships of the senate committees would fall to Republicans and the re-emergence of the constitutional amendment. Ugh!! Let’s pray for the Senator in more ways than one.

Injustice anywhere offends all of us

Letter Published in Baltimore Sun--

Dec. 26, 2006

Leonard Pitts' column condemning all forms of discrimination is right on the mark ("Black or white, gay or straight, discrimination is still discrimination," Opinion • Commentary, Dec. 17).
Mr. Pitts accurately drew a correlation with the struggle for equal rights for gays and lesbians and the black civil rights movement of the 1960s.

During that era, many gays and lesbians joined arm-in-arm with their black brothers and sisters in taking part in marches in the South.

They also pushed for black voter registration in Selma, Montgomery and other campaigns in the civil rights movement in an effort to expand democracy to all of America's citizens and foster social justice. And often they risked their lives in the effort.

While there are African-Americans who are loath to equate the two movements, a significant number of black civil rights leaders, elected officials, prominent clergy and others recognize the contributions of gays and lesbians in the black civil rights movement and see gay rights as part of the broader quest for human rights.

The Rev. Jesse Jackson, the Rev. Al Sharpton, Kweisi Mfume, Julian Bond, Rep. John Lewis and the late Coretta Scott King come to mind.

Mrs. King, who knew a thing or two about civil rights, once said, "I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people and I should stick to the issue of racial justice. ... But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'"

Mr. Pitts echoes Dr. King's view that discrimination of any kind is unjust, and I applaud him for that.

Steve Charing

Clarksville

Same-Sex Marriage in Maryland

The quest for Marriage Equality taken to Maryland’s Highest Court

By Steve Charing

Senior Political Analyst

ANNAPOLIS—Just before 10:00 a.m. on December 4 in a stark, dimly lit, wood-paneled room in Maryland’s Court of Appeals, the next step in the long, tough journey towards marriage equality was taken.

Before a seven-judge, crimson-robed panel, consisting of two women and five men, the state of Maryland, through the oral arguments presented by Robert Zarnoch, appealed to overturn the decision handed down in January by Baltimore Circuit Court Judge M. Brooke Murdock. That decision determined that the state’s marriage law is unconstitutional based on Maryland’s Equal Rights Amendment. The ruling was stayed pending appeal, which the state promptly filed.

Ken Choe of the American Civil Liberties Union argued on behalf of the plaintiffs. The ACLU with the cooperation of Equality Maryland brought the legal challenges. Both sides had presented to the Court thousands of pages of legal briefs.

The original lawsuit, Deane and Polyak v. Conaway, was filed nearly three years ago by nine gay and lesbian couples and a widowed gay man. It sought relief from Maryland’s 1973 law that defines marriage as solely between a man and a woman. Every plaintiff contributed his or her own unique perspective as to how the current statute, which denies them the rights, benefits, responsibilities and obligations that are accorded to heterosexual couples, harms them and their families.

With Maryland now in the forefront of the same-sex marriage debate, this case is being watched closely by lgbt activists and opponents from all over the country. Thus far, only courts in Massachusetts and New Jersey have ruled favorably on same-sex marriage.

Each attorney presented arguments that lasted approximately 30 minutes in the courtroom that was jammed with 90 spectators. A component of the state’s appeal is that gays and lesbians are not a suspect class, meaning they are not as powerless as the plaintiffs allege and that the matters of marriage and state’s rights should be settled in the state’s General Assembly—not in the courts.

The state’s attorney Mr. Zarnoch as part of his argument to discredit the plaintiffs’ contention that they are of a suspect class had referred to Dan Furmansky, Executive Director of Equality Maryland, but not by name. He said, "We have a gay-rights activist who is incredibly successful with our General Assembly in terms of getting bills passed."

Choe argued that fundamental rights belong to all Maryland’s citizens and the Court should protect them. He maintained that denying gays and lesbians the right to marry is in violation of the state’s constitution and is discriminatory.

Surprisingly, very few questions were asked by the judges, who will now deliberate for an unspecified length of time. Some observers predict it may take at least five months. Lisa Polyak, who along with her partner Gita Deane, is a plaintiff in the case, said, "It’s been three years. We are grateful to reach this threshold."

Another plaintiff, Glen Dehn and his partner Charles Blackburn, felt confident in the arguments presented but could not predict the outcome. "I can’t read the judges," Dehn said. That cautious optimism was echoed by fellow plaintiff Patrick Wojahn and his partner David Kolesar.

Following the hour-long proceeding, about 50 supporters of the plaintiffs and others gathered outside the front of the Robert C. Murphy Courts of Appeals Building. Despite the high level of passion from both sides during the legal struggle and the extensive media coverage, the scene was surprisingly subdued and lacked the "circus" atmosphere that one would have expected. No heckling or vocal demonstrations by either side took place.

The supporters of the plaintiffs clearly outnumbered the opponents. They carried signs and stood behind Dan Furmansky as he addressed the media and other interested parties at a post-hearing press conference.

"They don't want the state of Maryland to redefine what a legal marriage means," said Furmansky, referring to the plaintiff couples in the case. "They want the state of Maryland to open up legal marriage to them and let them be a full part of their communities and this state."

He continued, "No Marylander should ever have to know what it's like to be denied a legal relationship to the person they have chosen to share their life with. No child should ever have to live with the insecurity of having two parents who are legal strangers… We ask our fellow Marylanders to walk a mile in our shoes, and then help us in your hearts to protect our children, help us live longer, help us be healthier, and help us know the stability and security of marriage."

Not everyone present was in agreement. Del. Donald H. Dwyer (R-Anne Arundel), arguably the most outspoken opponent of same-sex marriage in the legislature, predicted the ruling would be overturned. If not, he is prepared to push for a constitutional amendment to go before the General Assembly for a vote. He has already pre-filed a bill to resurrect his previously failed attempts in the legislature to ban same-sex marriage.

"I don’t believe this issue should be before the courts," Dwyer told Baltimore OUTloud. "It belongs in the legislature and even if it doesn’t pass, I would accept it as long as there is a vote." He denied with a straight face that he is homophobic and said he had been "painted that way." Of course, that flies in the face of his past inflammatory rhetoric on the floor of the House of Delegates and his homophobic comments on his website.

Dwyer is among many opponents who have used the Bible as a justification to discriminate against the lgbt community. An important group that has opposed same-sex marriage on those grounds is African-American clergy. "The black churches are not a monolith," said Dr. Alvin Williams during the press conference who with his partner Nigel Simon, are also plaintiffs in the case. "Not all are against same-sex marriage." He added, "Those that oppose same-sex marriage focus on the sin, which is contained in a brief biblical reference. But they fail to consider the rest of the Bible that speaks to love and human dignity."

Nonetheless, this case is about civil recognition of same-sex couples and is not an attempt to force religious sanctification of unions. The arguments presented before the Court by either side made no references to the religious aspects, but it is religion that fuels much of the opposition, which would likely ignite a strong backlash if the ruling is upheld.

At the conclusion of the press conference, Dan Furmansky told Outloud, "I am leaving the arguments really hopeful. The state is grasping at straws to justify the discrimination at hand. We have truth, case law and the amazing families representing us."

Election Aftermath: What it means to Us

By Steve Charing

As you know, the electrifying Democratic nationwide election triumphs saw the takeover of both the House of Representatives and the Senate and the ouster of a popular but anti-gay governor here. But members of the lgbt community should not begin making wedding preparations just yet.

To be sure, these results have ushered in a new era of hope for the lgbt community, families and allies in that the Democratic victories will foster a better chance of moving towards the ultimate goal of equality—one that had evolved from merely tolerance and acceptance.

The Dems’ re-capturing the Senate and House of Representatives put on hold, at least for the next two years, the Karl Rove-driven gay-bashing politics that served the GOP so well in 2004. We no longer have to deal with such homophobes as Rick Santorum, John Hostetler and George Allen.

But the good news surrounding these ousters is tempered by the fact that their replacements, as well as newly elected conservative Democrats, are all opposed to same-sex marriage with some supporting a constitutional amendment. There will be a big push for the new Congress to avoid advocating a left-wing agenda that would include such third rail issues as "gay marriage" and gun control so that the party can be viewed as centrist heading into the 2008 presidential cycle.

The rebuke of Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi by the Democratic caucus by voting in Maryland Congressman Steny Hoyer to the majority leader post over Pelosi’s personal pick, Rep. John Murtha, signaled that the liberal Pelosi will not be able to run Congress from that direction.

On the other hand, with congressional committees being chaired by Democrats, no constitutional amendment that bans same-sex marriage will see the light of day. Instead, the transgender-inclusive Federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which has languished interminably in Congress, may actually move forward according to openly gay, re-elected representative Barney Frank (MA). Moreover, the issue of the military’s "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" policy may get some hearings on the effectiveness of the policy.

This election saw, for the first time ever, the voters in a state (Arizona) rejecting a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. Unfortunately, seven other states passed such an amendment, but some of the margins were tighter than expected, revealing minute progress on that issue. In addition, several pro-lgbt governors were elected, such as Elliot Spitzer in New York, who outwardly supports same-sex marriage.

In Maryland, the victory for Martin O’Malley will return a more lgbt-supportive governor to Annapolis. He has been a constant visitor and speaker at Baltimore Gay Pride and has worked closely with the lgbt community. While he does not embrace same-sex marriage, he would oppose any statewide effort to pass a constitutional amendment that would ban it.

Mr. O’Malley has been fully behind lgbt causes since his days on the city council and as mayor, and he favored the addition of transgendered individuals to the city’s anti-discrimination law. He also supports other pro-lgbt measures, including domestic partner benefits for state employees.

Governor Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr., a staunch opponent of equal rights for same-sex couples, was never a governor with whom any headway towards equality could be realized. His veto of the hard-fought, fair-minded Medical Decision Making Act renewed suspicions that he was too cozy with the religious right.

"Gov. Ehrlich vetoed bills important to the lgbt community, and nothing else could have been accomplished without the capacity to override his vetoes," explained Dan Furmansky, Executive Director of Equality Maryland (http://www.equalitymaryland.org/), the state’s largest lgbt civil rights organization.

"Martin O'Malley, for the lgbt community, is synonymous with possibilities," Mr. Furmansky told Baltimore OUTloud. "We're very excited to have a leader like our Governor-elect who will work with us to take lgbt rights to a new level."

Ben Cardin’s win for the U.S, Senate over the anti-gay Michael Steele was significant. Mr. Cardin opposed the failed Federal Marriage Amendment and is against a similar constitutional amendment in Maryland. He is also a co-sponsor of the repeal of "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell." As in the case of Governor-elect O’Malley, Mr. Cardin opposes same-sex marriage but supports some form of civil union arrangement.

Mr. Steele, by contrast, participated in an anti-gay rally in Annapolis and spoke disparagingly of same-sex marriage to religious leaders. There is nothing in his social conservative make-up to suggest he would have been an ally of the lgbt community. His defeat was welcome news to gay activists.

Locally, LGBT-supportive delegates in the General Assembly won their contests, including Liz Bobo (District 12B), Shane Pendergrass, Frank Turner and Guy Guzzone (District 13). Homophobe Rick Bowers (District 13) lost his bid for a seat in the House of Delegates. Jim Robey, who instituted domestic partner benefits for Howard County employees, unseated Sandra Schrader for Senator representing District 13.

Democrat David "Oz" Osmundson gave anti-gay Gail Bates and Warren Miller a feisty run for their money in District 9. Virulently homophobic Don Dwyer nearly lost his seat in Anne Arundel County as did another anti-gay zealot, Sen. Alex X. Mooney, in Frederick.

Several openly gay candidates won their elections to the General Assembly. Rich Madaleno will become the first ever openly gay senator in Maryland. Democrat delegates Maggie McIntosh, Heather Mizeur and Anne Kaiser were re-elected. Tim Quinn put up a good fight against two Republicans in the conservative Eastern Shore but fell short.

And Ken Ulman became the new Howard County Executive emphasizing" inclusion" and "diversity" in his acceptance speech on election night.

We anticipate the ruling by the Maryland Court of Appeals on the Deane and Polyak v. Conaway lawsuit next year and will be watchful of a potential backlash in the General Assembly. Once again, the lgbt community may have to play defense as the fear of "gay marriage" can cause even supportive politicians’ knees to buckle.

If this election taught us anything, governing from the center of the political spectrum, as opposed to lurching to the left or right, is key to a winning strategy. That is the way to keep swing and independent voters on your side. Accordingly, nothing in these results suggests any significant movement towards same-sex marriage down the road but some progress on other pro-lgbt issues is more possible today than it was on November 6.

Racial politics in the campaign: the big elephant in the room

By Steve Charing
Senior Political Analyst

In a rare Democratic sweep of national and local elections, the country voted on the Bush administration and Republican-led Congress and determined that enough was enough. With some contests still in dispute at deadline, it is clear the Democrats’ victories were stunning and a new direction will be in order. Throughout the campaign, however, one factor—an ugly one—emerged during several key contests. And that factor is race.

Whether the issue of race contributed to the eventual outcome in these elections will undoubtedly be a matter of speculation and analysis by pundits, the media and elected officials. But that element clearly played a significant role in these battles, which is mind boggling considering we are over four decades removed from major national civil rights laws passed in 1965.

Following that landmark legislation that had been initiated by President Kennedy and then stewarded by southerner President Johnson, many disaffected southern Democrats began to search for another home. These "Dixicrats," as they were dubbed, were significantly slower in supporting civil rights than their northern brethren. They began to find more comfort within the Republican Party and some of their segregationist leaders.

While it is true that other conservative issues, such as strong defense, smaller government and so-called family values, were factors in folks’ migrating to the Republican Party, the hushed-up matter of race cannot be understated. Racists and homophobes have found a sanctuary in the GOP. If you disagree, consider this: do you think the uproar over tough immigration reform, led by angry Republicans, would have been as intense if it were white Canadians sneaking over the U.S. border?

GOP operatives have also used race baiting as a means to attract votes—a phenomenon admitted to by Republican National Chairman Ken Mehlman for which he apologized on behalf of the party. They also use gay bashing for the same purpose, but don’t expect any apologies, even from Mehlman.

In 2006, race clearly was one of the most controversial topics in the battle for the U.S. Senate in both Tennessee and Virginia. A distasteful television ad late in the campaign—subsequently pulled—played on the prejudices of Tennessee’s white rural voters by suggesting that Rep. Harold Ford, an African-American Democrat, had no qualms about dating white women. Even if it were true, what this had to do with the competence of the candidate is beyond imagination. But this smear tactic exploited the racial divide for political gain. It worked, although it is still unclear how much of a role race played in the outcome.

In Virginia, not only did Senator Allen inflict damage to his campaign by being caught on camera referring to a dark-skinned Indian staffer of Jim Webb as "Maccaca," a racial slur of some sort, but he was also charged with using the "N" word during his time in college. He was also alleged to have participated in a disgusting racial prank. Throw in the obviously anti-Semitic remarks he made when it was disclosed his mother was Jewish, and one can see that this virulently anti-gay Senator clearly has problems with minorities. This backlash helped to sink Allen although the results may await a recount and other delays.

Here in Maryland, race was a factor as well. Governor Ehrlich sent racially coded messages in his effort to disparage Baltimore City that had been protested by Mayor Martin O’Malley. He also denounced the reliability of the state’s voting machines that may have suppressed votes in Baltimore and Prince George’s County.

A stronger than expected turnout of African-American voters, opposed to the Bush administration and the war in Iraq, would spell doom for Ehrlich. African-Americans supported O’Malley by over 4-1.

The battle between Rep. Ben Cardin and African-American Lt. Governor Michael Steele contained the most overt racial implications in Maryland. Not that there was anything racial said or done between the two candidates, but the issue of race hovered over the campaign like a drop cloth.

There were segments of the black community upset that Kweise Mfume lost to Ben Cardin in the primary and felt the Democrat "machine" was responsible. "I heard many black people voice disappointment and anger regarding the race for Senator," said Meredith Moise, of the National Black Justice Coalition. "Many feel that Mfume was dismissed and Cardin was crowned."

It is important to note that Mfume lost by only 19,000 votes statewide. If black turnout was greater, he could have won. But the African-American community, with their poor turnout, should not be held blameless, although some of it was attributable to snafus at several Baltimore’s polls.

A good number of African-Americans who endorsed Steele and voted for him did so simply because he is black. One needs to get beyond the color of skin when making electoral choices and also examine the policies with respect to the issues to determine if they would be beneficial. For example, Republicans like Steele staunchly oppose affirmative action and an increase to the minimum wage.

Ms. Moise noted that many blacks believed there was a lack of diversity in the candidates nominated for top state offices. But keep in mind that Anthony Brown should have been credited as a black Lt. Governor candidate no less than how Michael Steele was touted four years ago. Plus the Republicans have not fielded any African-Americans in the state legislature, so the diversity argument isn’t compelling.

Steele did, in fact, tap into black anger during his campaign. In doing so he chose to accept the politically dubious endorsements from two convicted felons—Don King and Mike Tyson—as well as a rap industry mogul Russell Simmons.

But it was not enough as African-Americans supported the victorious Cardin by 3 to 1. The war in Iraq and President Bush were the main issues for the electorate, and Cardin did an effective job of tying Steele to the administration.

The Ehrlich and Steele campaigns were accused of using poor black unemployed and homeless people from Philadelphia to hand out fake sample ballots in at least four Prince George’s County polling places in an attempt to dupe largely African-American voters into thinking that the candidates were Democrats. The flier also misled the voters by suggesting that several prominent black Democrats endorsed their elections whereby only one did.

"I think it's pretty low that Ehrlich and Steele would print up a fake ballot and bus in unemployed people and exploit them," said Martin O'Malley on the morning of the election as reported in the Washington Post. "It doesn't get much lower than that."

Race has always been and will be a force to be dealt with in elections. It is forever part of the political landscape. But how it is addressed during the election campaigns from both major parties will signal how far our society has progressed or not.