National
Bracing for cuts after supercommittee’s failure
LGBT, HIV/AIDS programs could face reductions
LGBT and HIV/AIDS advocates are bracing for potential cuts as a result of the congressional supercommittee’s failure this week to come up with a deficit reduction deal.
On Monday, members of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction — comprised of six Democrats and six Republicans — announced that they were unable to come up with an agreement on $1.5 trillion in budget cuts by the Wednesday deadline as established by legislation signed by President Obama in August.
As a result of the supercommittee’s failure to come up with a plan for deficit reduction, a sequester will kick in that will lower spending by $1.2 trillion beginning in fiscal year 2013 by $109.3 billion in cuts per year. Half of the cuts — $54.7 billion — will come from the Defense Department and the other half from mandatory and discretionary domestic spending — including HIV/AIDS programs and certain government programs that help LGBT people.
MORE IN THE BLADE: GAY MEN SHOULD BE SCREENED FOR HPV RELATED CANCERS
According to the Congressional Budget Office, reductions in discretionary appropriations for non-defense programs — including HIV/AIDS programs — would range from from 7.8 percent in 2013 to 5.5 percent in 2021, resulting in savings of $294 billion.
AIDS Institute Deputy Executive Director Carl Schmid (Blade file photo by Michael Key)
Carl Schmid, deputy executive director for the AIDS Institute, said the mandatory cuts that will occur in 2013 “will certainly impact funding levels” for discretionary HIV/AIDS programs such as the Ryan White Care Act, AIDS Drug Assistance Programs and research spending.
“We’re going to try to work to make sure that doesn’t happen, but if it does happen, there’ll be less money for prevention, less money for drugs to keep people healthy, less for care and treatment and less money for research,” Schmid said.
Schmid added the potential cuts are of particular concern because the number of people living with HIV/AIDS continues to grow.
“There’s more and more people living with HIV than ever before,” Schmid said. “There’s more accessing the AIDS Drug Assistance Program than ever before, so it’s at a time when there’s more and more people with HIV, and at a time that we know treatment is a way to cut transmission.”
According to a CDC report published in August, HIV in the United States continues to disproportionately impact young gay and bisexual men, although as a whole, infection rates have been relatively stable in recent years. New infections among among young men who have sex with men increased 34 percent between 2006 and 2009, while infections among young, black men who have sex with men increased 48 percent from 4,400 in 2006 to 6,500 in 2009.
MORE IN THE BLADE: NATIONAL AIDS POLICY DIRECTOR STEPS DOWN
Brian Hujdich, executive director for HealthHIV, also said the failure of the supercommittee may jeopardize federal programs on which low-income Americans depend for medical coverage.
“We are disappointed but not surprised at the supercommittee’s inaction,” Hujdich said. “They had both the latitude and responsibility to make hard decisions, but once again chose to do nothing. The weight of congressional indecision now falls on the backs of the most vulnerable and medically under-served communities, whose health care coverage may be impacted in 2013.”
Other programs at risk could include some that LGBT Americans rely on in greater numbers than their straight counterparts.
Last week, Kellan Baker and Zach Britt of the Center for American Progress wrote a report that detailed how either action or inaction by the supercommittee could have significant impact on programs affecting LGBT people.
“Gay and transgender communities most at risk include families with children and gay and transgender people who are doubly marginalized in American society, such as gay and transgender people of color, those living in poverty, immigrants, homeless youth, elders, and those with disabilities,” Baker and Britt wrote.
Among the programs identified that could be cut include planned data collection by the Department of Health & Human Services on sexual orientation and gender identity; mental health services that help LGBT youth and adults cope with depression, bullying and discrimination; and programs that support out-of-home gay and transgender youth.
Despite the failure of the committee, many were unhappy with plans the committee was proposing and thankful an agreement wasn’t made on any one of them.
MORE IN THE BLADE: ONE AIDS MARCH THAT SHOULD END
According to the CAP report, Democrats proposed cutting $400 billion from Medicare, $75 billion from Medicaid and $1.3 trillion in discretionary spending — while increasing revenue by $1.3 trillion. Republicans, on the other hand, proposed to cut $500 billion from Medicare and $185 billion from Medicaid, with $1.2 trillion more in discretionary cuts and only $40 billion in revenue increases.
Laurie Young, director of aging and economic security at the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, said the plans the supercommittee was proposing were “really not good” and the failure to come up with a plan is better than an agreement on a bad one.
“No deal today is better than them having agreed upon a bad deal that would have cut benefits to people who are already receiving them and relying on them,” Young said.
Moreover, the two largest programs providing HIV/AIDS care to low-income people — Medicare and Medicaid — won’t see immediate cuts as a result of the supercommittee’s failure. Social Security and Medicaid are immune from cuts under the sequester. Medicare would see, at most, a 2 percent reduction in payments, but those cuts would only affect providers and would not raise co-pays or premiums on people covered under this program.
Young said the exemption of these programs is important because LGBT people are particularly dependent on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security as they age.
“We don’t have the same ability to access economic security and retirement that our heterosexual counterparts do,” Young said. “And so, we’re twice as likely to age alone and four times less likely to have children who would take care of us.”
But Schmid said the protection of Medicare and Medicaid from the sequester “doesn’t mean all the problems are solved” and those programs could be affected as Congress makes the decisions for cuts.
“There’s still going to be pressure to cut Medicare and Medicaid in the future, so we have to remain vigilant,” Schmid said.
Since the cuts won’t begin until Jan. 2, 2013, Congress has the opportunity to come up with an alternative for deficit reduction rather than the sequestration imposed the supercommittee’s failure to come up with a plan.
Young predicted Congress would work to come up with an alternative because Republicans won’t want to see drastic cuts to defense and Democrats won’t want to see drastic cuts to domestic programs.
“We’re going to have to work over the next year to make sure that we get a balanced plan that doesn’t depend on just slashing benefits or slashing cuts in federal agencies, but also really looks to raising revenues,” Young said. “The chore for next year is making sure that we can get a balanced plan, which was never really considered by the supercommittee.”
Schmid said advocates are going to fight to include HIV/AIDS among the programs that won’t receive cuts, but acknowledged they’re facing an uphill battle.
“These are supposed to be across the board cuts, but there are some other low-income programs that are exempt by the law to sequestration and, I think, we will fight to be included in them as well,” Schmid said. “That will be our job over the next year before these cuts take place in 2013.”
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.
Housewives take Capitol Hill by storm
Protesters say SAVE Act targets voters, transgender youth
‘It’s Dorothy’ traces lasting influence of a cultural icon
SAVE Act could silence millions of trans voters
The frightening rise of antisemitism, Islamophobia
Ensuring safer drinking water
A season of renewal for D.C. theater
PHOTOS: Awesome Con
Kennedy Center leadership changes as Trump ally Grenell departs
