National
Gay troops tell personal stories at Pentagon Pride
Event marks first such celebration since ‘Don’t Ask’ repeal
The personal story of a gay service member warmed the hearts of attendees during a panel discussion at the first ever Pentagon event celebrating June as Pride month.
Marine Corps Capt. M. Matthew Phelps, who serves as a commanding officer at the Marine Corps Recruit Depot in San Diego was among the three panelists who talked about the difficulties of serving in the closet before “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was lifted.
Phelps said the situation was particularly difficult for him in 2007 when he was deployed to Iraq and fellow Marines would meet on Saturday to smoke cigars, watch movies and talk about their families at home.
“I sat there in the back of the room not talking to anybody because not only was it so hard to have left somebody at home — just like it was hard for everybody else — but when everyone was getting together and growing closer as a unit, by virtue of the fact that I wasn’t allowed to say anything, I was actually growing more distant from my unit,” Phelps said.
After graduating from the University of Rochester in November 2001 with a degree in applied music, Phelps said he enlisted in the Marine Corps after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, because he felt the need to serve his country. But Phelps said “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was a strain on him until the ban was lifted on Sept. 20.
“I went into work on the 20th of September thinking that my life was going to change, and I went in and I sat down at my desk and I braced myself on the desk waiting for everyone to come and ask me if I was gay,” Phelps said. “Believe it or not, nobody did. I didn’t get any email. I didn’t get any phone call. In fact, the phone didn’t even ring. I was waiting — saying, ‘Please somebody talk to me today’ — because I felt like I was going to work for the very first time. For almost 10 years, Matthew was going to work as a Marine in uniform doing my job, doing the job that I thought I had been doing for 10 years, but I had only been half doing.”
Phelps was among the attendees at the White House Pride reception earlier this month where for the first time openly gay service members could participate while wearing their uniforms thanks to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal.
Others on the Pentagon panel, which was moderated by Pentagon Director of Press Operations Navy Capt. Jane Campbell were Gordon Tanner, the Air Force’s principal deputy general counsel, and Brenda “Sue” Fulton, a member of the board of visitors at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and communications director for OutServe. All three panelists — Phelps an active duty troop, Tanner a civilian and Fulton a veteran — were gay and selected by word of mouth recommendations.
Tanner said he was supposed to distribute a list of benefits available to gay troops, but opted instead to encourage gay service members to serve as openly as possible because only that can help straight allies bridge their understanding of LGBT people.
“What I really want to talk about today is what each of us can do in our own day-to-day lives to make a difference,” Tanner said. “First of all, and most importantly, we need to be as visible as we can be. Everybody has a different comfort level. Everyone is in a different place. Let me encourage you to be as open and honest as you can possibly be.”
Fulton talked about the commitment she saw from straight allies in the military who wanted to make sure the transition to open service went smoothly and gay troops weren’t harmed. She described a commitment ceremony that took place over the weekend involving gay couples who served in the military.
“In the back of the church … was another chaplain, a senior chaplain Air Force O-6, Southern Baptist,” Fulton said. “I asked him why he was there and he said, ‘I just want to make sure everything goes smoothly for my airmen. I just want to make sure there aren’t any problems.'”
The one-hour event marks the first time that a Pride celebration has taken place for Defense Department personnel within the Pentagon. This is the first Pride month to have taken place since “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was lifted from the books last year.
More than 350 attendees filled the Pentagon auditorium to capacity. The event was broadcast on the Pentagon channel and Tanner said during his remarks that troops as far away as Afghanistan were interested in watching a video of the event.
Attendees were made up of civilian Defense Department workers, service members who came in their uniforms and LGBT advocates who helped lead the way for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal. The program began after service members “presented the colors” and video messages were shown from President Obama and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta.
Delivering the keynote address at the event was Jeh Johnson, the Pentagon’s general counsel and co-chair of the Pentagon working group that wrote the report leading the way for legislative repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in 2010. He spoke mostly of the process by which he and fellow co-chair Army Gen. Carter Ham, then commanding general of U.S. Army Europe, evaluated the risk of lifting the military’s gay ban.
While they pursued the task at hand without any predetermination on whether the ban should be repealed, Johnson said the group heard stories from gay service members who were eagerly awaiting an end to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
“In communications with gay and lesbian current and former service members, we repeatedly heard a patriotic desire to serve and defend the nation subject to the same rules as everyone else,” Johnson said. “In the words of one gay service member, ‘Repeal would simply take a knife out of my back. You have no idea what it is like to serve in silence.'”
As a result of the process, Johnson said the institution of open service in the military has brought some isolated incidents, but “almost no issues or negative effects associated with repeal on unit cohesion, including within warfighting units.”
Even during his remarks, Johnson wouldn’t reveal his personal views on LGBT rights — saying he thinks as Pride is celebrated participants should remember the military is about Americans from a variety of backgrounds coming together to serve the country.
“Within the military, events such as this must occupy a different and qualified place because in the military, individual personal characteristics are subordinate to the good of the unit and the mission — service above self,” Johnson said. “From all that we learned in 2010 about the struggles and the sacrifice to remain in the military, I believe gay men and women in uniform readily agree with this.”
Johnson also said the Pentagon is examining ways to extend additional benefits to gay troops now that open service is in place. Pentagon officials have said they’ve been looking at these possible benefits since “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was lifted last year.
Servicemembers Legal Defense Network and other LGBT groups have been pushing for benefits such as joint duty assignments, military family housing as well as access to certain family programs and free legal services. All are deemed by advocates to be within the authority of the Pentagon even with the Defense of Marriage Act in place.
“Going forward, the personnel and readiness community is now in the midst of reviewing which military family benefits can be extended to the partners and other family members of gay and lesbian service members,” Johnson said. “The repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ exposes certain inequalities between similarly situated couples in the military community. This concerns many of our leaders. On the other hand, we must comply with current law, including the Defense of Marriage Act.”
Aubrey Sarvis, SLDN’s executive director, was among the attendees at the celebration and said he wished Johnson had “been more specific” in his remarks with regard to benefits.
“It’s just taking an inordinate amount of time to bring closure on this,” Sarvis said. “So, the day for a decision and an announcement by Secretary Panetta is here. In fact, it’s overdue.”
Sarvis added the decision to extend these benefits to gay troops should be resolved “within a matter of days,” but predicted more time will pass before an announcement is made.
Despite qualms about the lingering issue of benefits, Sarvis noted the historic nature of the Pride event.
“I think for all of these things to have happened in the past year — having finality on repeal, being here to celebrate — is something that many, many people could not have anticipated, so, yes, this is very much a historic occasion,” Sarvis said. “I think a number of people here are still pinching themselves.”
A number of gay service members who attended said they were elated being able to participate in the first Pride event at the Pentagon after the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
Army Sgt. Bryan LaMadrid, 22, who’s gay, said coming to the event was particularly emotional for him.
“I’m stationed up at Ft. Meade right now, but I’m driving here and I’m kind of tearing up and have shivers going down my back and my neck because two years ago, you would have never imagined this, and now it’s happening this year,” LaMadrid said.
Navy Lt. Kevin Naughton, 32, who’s gay, was among those who helped plan the event and said “it was a big deal” to obtain approval from Panetta’s office to plan the Pride celebration.
“It was just an amazing process that we’ve gone through from going from repeal all the way to being able to have an event where we’re treated equally at work,” Naughton said.
Federal Government
Protesters say SAVE Act targets voters, transgender youth
Bill described as ‘Jim Crow 2.0’
Members of Congress, advocates, and people from across the country gathered outside the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday to protest proposed federal legislation that voting rights activists have deemed “Jim Crow 2.0.”
The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act would amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require in-person proof of citizenship for anyone seeking to vote in U.S. elections.
President Donald Trump has also pushed for the proposed legislation to include a section that would ban gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors, even with parental consent, and prohibit trans people from participating in school or professional sports consistent with their gender identity rather than their sex assigned at birth.
In addition to changing voter registration requirements, the bill would limit acceptable forms of identification to documents such as a birth certificate or passport — records that the Brennan Center for Justice estimates more than 21 million Americans do not have — effectively restricting access to the ballot. It would also ban online voter registration, DMV voter registration efforts, and mail-in voter registration.
A 2021 investigation by the Associated Press found that fewer than 475 people voted illegally or improperly, a tiny fraction of the estimated 160 million Americans who voted in the 2020 election.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) spoke at the event.
“It will kick millions of American citizens off the rolls. And they don’t even require you to be told,” the highest-ranking Democrat in the Senate told protesters and reporters outside the Capitol. “If this law passes — and it won’t — you’re gonna show up in November … and they’ll say… sorry, you’re no longer on the voting rolls.”

He, like many other speakers, emphasized the bill in the context of American history, pointing to what he described as its racist roots and its impact on Black and brown Americans.
“I have called this act, over and over again, Jim Crow 2.0 … because they know it’s the truth.”
U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) was one of the lawmakers leading opposition to the legislation and spoke at the rally.
“It’s not just voting rights that are on the line — our democracy is on the line,” the California lawmaker said. “It’s not a voter I.D. bill. It’s a bait and switch bill.”
He added historical context, noting the significance of voting rights legislation passed more than 60 years ago. In 1965, Alabama civil rights activists marched to protest barriers to voter registration. Alabama state troopers violently attacked peaceful demonstrators at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, using tear gas, clubs, and whips against more than 500 — mostly Black — protesters.

“61 years ago — not to the day — but this week, President Lyndon Johnson came to the Capitol and addressed a joint session of Congress in the wake of Bloody Sunday and pushed Congress to pass the Voting Rights Act,” Padilla said. “61 years later, Donald Trump and this Republican majority wants to take us backwards. We’re not gonna let that happen.”
U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) also spoke, emphasizing that he views the effort as a Republican-led and Trump-backed attempt to restrict voting access, particularly among Black, brown, and predominantly Democratic communities.
“President Trump told Republicans when they were meeting behind closed doors that ‘The SAVE Act will guarantee Republicans win the midterms and ensure they do not lose an election for 50 years,’” Luján said. “The first time I think Donald Trump’s been honest … This voter suppression bill is only that. Taking away vote by mail? I hope my Republican colleagues from states that voted for Donald Trump or where vote by mail is popular have the courage and the backbone to stand up and say no to this nonsense, because their constituents are going to push back.”
U.S. Sen. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.) also spoke.
“Our Republican colleagues have already cut Medicaid, Medicare, people don’t know how they’re gonna be able to afford energy,” she said, providing context for the broader political moment. “We’re in the middle of a war that they can’t even get straight while we’re in it and don’t have a way to get out of it. And we are now faced with defending our democracy?”
She then showed the crowd something that she said has been with her throughout her political journey in Washington.
“I brought with me something that I carried on the day that I was sworn into the House of Representatives when I was elected in 2016, and I carried it with me on the day that I was sworn in as United States senator. And I also carried it with me when I was trapped up in the gallery on Jan. 6 and all I could think to do was pray … This document allowed my great great great grandfather, who had been enslaved in Georgia, to have the right to vote. We took this and turned it into a scarf. It is the returns of qualified voters and reconstruction code from 1867. This is my proof of what we’ve been through. This is also our inspiration.”

“I got to travel between the Edmund Pettus Bridge two times. And even as I thought about this moment, I recognized that while we wish we weren’t in it, while we don’t know why we’re in it, I do know we were made for it … So I came today to tell you that, um, just like the leader said, that he calls it Jim Crow 2.0. I call it Jim Crow 2.NO.”
Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBTQ advocacy organization in the U.S., also spoke, highlighting the impact of the bill’s proposed provisions affecting trans people.
“This bill is not about saving America. This bill is about stealing an election. This bill is about suppressing voters,” Robinson said. “This bill not only tries to disenfranchise voters that deserve their right to vote, it also tries to criminalize trans kids and their families … It tries to criminalize doctors providing medically necessary care for our trans youth.”

The SAVE Act passed the U.S. House of Representatives on Feb. 11 but has not yet been considered in the U.S. Senate.
Idaho
Idaho advances bill to restrict bathroom access for transgender residents
HB 752 passed in state House of Representatives on Monday
The Idaho House of Representatives passed House Bill 752 on Monday, a measure that would make it a crime for a person to use a bathroom other than the one designated for their “biological sex.”
The story was first reported by the Idaho Capitol Sun after the bill cleared the House.
House Bill 752 would make it a criminal offense — either a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the number of prior offenses — for individuals who “knowingly and willfully” enter a bathroom or changing room designated for the opposite sex.
The bill would apply to public buildings, including government-owned spaces, and places of “public accommodation,” a category that includes private businesses.
According to the bill’s text, it would “prohibit a person from entering a restroom or changing room designated for the opposite sex; provide a penalty; provide exceptions; define terms; and declare an emergency and provide an effective date.”
A first offense would be a misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in prison. A second or subsequent offense within five years would be a felony, punishable by up to five years in prison.
The bill passed in a 54–15 vote on Monday. Six Republicans broke with their party’s majority to join nine Democrats in opposing the measure.
The bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Cornel Rasor, a Republican from Sagle near the Washington-Idaho border, told House lawmakers that the legislation is intended to protect women and girls.
“It prevents discomfort and voyeurism escalation and assaults, while preserving single-user options and narrow exceptions so no one is denied access for emergency aid,” Rasor said.
State Rep. Chris Mathias, a Democrat from Boise, disagreed, arguing that the legislation would unfairly target transgender Idahoans.
“The truth of the matter is — and I know a lot of people don’t want to say it — but forcing people who don’t look like the sex they were assigned at birth, or transgender folks, to use other people’s bathrooms is going to put a lot of people in danger,” Mathias said.
The Idaho American Civil Liberties Union made a statement about the bill following its passage.
“Idaho lawmakers continue pushing these harmful, invasive bathroom laws, yet cannot present credible evidence that transgender people using gender-aligned bathrooms threaten public safety,” the Idaho ACLU said. “The bill does nothing to address real criminal acts, such as sexual assault or voyeurism, and disregards concerns from law enforcement about the burden enforcement would place on local resources.”
In addition to human rights advocates, who have spoken out against similar bills advancing in state legislatures across the country, Idaho law enforcement groups have also opposed the measure. They argue that the way the legislation is written would “pose significant practical enforcement challenges,” noting that officers are tasked with maintaining public safety — not conducting gender checks or policing bathroom access.
During a committee hearing last week, law enforcement representatives and several trans Idahoans testified that the bill would make many residents less safe.
“Officers responding to a complaint would be placed in the difficult position of determining an individual’s biological sex in order to enforce the statute,” Idaho Fraternal Order of Police President Bryan Lovell wrote. “In many circumstances, there is no clear or reasonable way for officers to make that determination without engaging in questioning or investigative actions that could be viewed as invasive and inappropriate.”
The Idaho Sheriffs’ Association requested that lawmakers amend the bill to require that individuals be given an opportunity to leave a bathroom immediately before facing potential prosecution.
The bill now heads to the Idaho Senate for consideration. To become law, it must pass both chambers and avoid a veto from the governor.
A separate bathroom bill, House Bill 607, which would be enforced through civil lawsuits, passed the House last month but has not yet received a committee hearing in the Senate.
State Department
Report: US to withhold HIV aid to Zambia unless mineral access expanded
New York Times obtained Secretary of State Marco Rubio memo
The State Department is reportedly considering withholding assistance for Zambians with HIV unless the country’s government allows the U.S. to access more of its minerals.
The New York Times on Monday reported Secretary of State Marco Rubio in a memo to State Department’s Bureau of African Affairs staffers wrote the U.S. “will only secure our priorities by demonstrating willingness to publicly take support away from Zambia on a massive scale.” The newspaper said it obtained a copy of the letter.
Zambia is a country in southern Africa that borders Tanzania, Malawi, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Namibia, Angola, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
The Times notes upwards of 1.3 million Zambians receive daily HIV medications through PEPFAR. The newspaper reported Rubio in his memo said the Trump-Vance administration could “significantly cut assistance” as soon as May.
“Reports of (the) State Department withholding lifesaving HIV treatment in return for mining concessions in Zambia does not make us safer, stronger, or more prosperous,” said U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on Tuesday. “Monetizing innocent people’s lives further undermines U.S. global leadership and is just plain wrong.”
The Washington Blade has reached out to the State Department for comment.
Zambia received breakthrough HIV prevention drug through PEPFAR
Rubio on Jan. 28, 2025, issued a waiver that allowed PEPFAR and other “life-saving humanitarian assistance” programs to continue to operate during a freeze on nearly all U.S. foreign aid spending. HIV/AIDS service providers around the world with whom the Blade has spoken say PEPFAR cuts and the loss of funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, which officially closed on July 1, 2025, has severely impacted their work.
The State Department last September announced PEPFAR will distribute lenacapavir in countries with high prevalence rates. Zambia two months later received the first doses of the breakthrough HIV prevention drug.
Kenya and Uganda are among the African countries have signed health agreements with the U.S. since the Trump-Vance administration took office.
The Times notes the countries that signed these agreements pledged to increase health spending. The Blade last month reported LGBTQ rights groups have questioned whether these agreements will lead to further exclusion and government-sanctioned discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

