« The End (and Beginning) of Rove | Main | Domenici & Wilson: Do You Support a Draft to Sustain Bush's Endless War? »
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
(Updated) My Turn: Bill Richardson and GLBT Issues
UPDATE 8.15.07: Two of New Mexico's notable leaders in the GLBT rights effort, Linda Siegel and Liz Stefanics, have recorded a video describing Bill Richardson's long-time support of GLBT issues and people:
************
I'm gay, and I'm also a progressive Democrat. I write this blog and help coordinate a progressive grassroots group. I have both supported and been opposed to any number of Gov. Bill Richardson's actions and positions during his time in office here in New Mexico, whether related to health care, campaign funding, ethics, the environment, energy, education, budget matters or paper ballot voting (where election reform activists worked closely and sucessfully with Richardson and Dem legislators). I haven't decided on a presidential candidate and I'm keeping my options open. I have no axe to grind.
Sometimes I've applauded what Gov. Richardson has accomplished. At times I've been highly critical of him. Sometimes I've lacked trust in what he's saying. But one thing I've learned to trust him on over time is his strong support on issues of importance to the GLBT community -- because I've watched him push through a number of pro-equality initiatives, even when it's been difficult to do so in a state that's conservative in many respects. And I've witnessed him keep trying when a measure like a domestic partnership bill is being bashed by legislators on both sides of the aisle. (During our last legislative sesssion, such a bill lost by one vote.) And as far as I know, he has always interacted with members of the GLBT community with real ease and compassion, whether at pride events, or at a GLBT retirement community ribbon cutting or in other settings.
Do I wish Richardson and every other Democratic politician would just be done with it and proclaim their unequivocal support for gay civil marriage? Of course. I strongly believe that anyone who says they support equal rights for all under the law should have no qualms about doing that. Unfortunately, we're not there yet. I have confidence we will be someday soon, but in the meantime I applaud Democrats for taking positions in support of the fullest domestic partnerships and civil unions that might be achievable legislatively right now. Richardson is one of those Dems.
In other words, despite all the negative punditry about Bill Richardson's performance at last week's GLBT presidential forum on LOGO, I have no fears that he is a bigot in terms of GLBT folks. None whatsoever. We all know that at times he can be verbally clumsy, inarticulate or unclear, especially when he's harried or tired, and I think this was what caused the snafu at last week's GLBT presidential forum on LOGO. I just wanted to get that said publicly so primary voters will make their decisions pro or con based on analyzing other facets of Richardson's character and positions -- but not on any misperception that he's biased against members of the GLBT community.
I think the media and others are giving him a real hard time on this, and I just wanted to say my piece. Bill Richardson is many things, but in no way is he an enemy of the GLBT community -- just the opposite in fact.
More Info: For video clips of the LOGO forum and a view of Richardson and the GLBT presidential forum that differs from that of many of critics, read this. Here's an Advocate article reporting on an interview with Richardson he requested to clarify his positions.
August 14, 2007 at 06:02 AM in 2008 Presidential Primary, GLBT Rights | Permalink
Comments
I had the same thought. Was it a slow news week? Was it just time to pick on him? The reaction seemed way out of line. Gay or not Gay, we see still like to believe we have some lifestyle choices open to us.
Posted by: suz | Aug 14, 2007 9:04:43 AM
I think many GLBT people don't have a choice but I also think there are many people in the "gray areas" of sexuality and gender who are more fluid and essentially choose their paths. As Richardson said, whether it's a choice or not, everyone needs to be treated equally under the law, period.
I also thought Edwards and Hillary were way worse than Richardson on the issues. Edwards never did explain why he is against gay marriage and he pandered by taking back his "religious faith" excuse. Hillary wouldn't commit to much, not even to try and get rid of DOMA.
Basically, though, I believe all of the Democratic candidates would work hard to improve things for GLBT people. Just a matter of degree and what they are prepared to say publicly during the race.
Posted by: GLBT voter | Aug 14, 2007 10:19:38 AM
Thank you for posting this! I think it is incredibly important that we remember as a community our allies and friends. I couldn't agree with your assesment of this situation more! the Governor was tired, and probably uncomfortably so. That said after 14 years of trying in NM to pass Non discrimination in the workplace, he helped us get it, and kept Gender Identity in the bill when many legislators were backing away from that language! The same with Hate Crimes. Executive Order granting DP benefits to state employees, and working hard to keep a DOMA off the books here. The biggest thing to know about our Governor, that has been my experience is that in the GLBT community he has never made a promise he didn't keep, or bust his ass trying!
Thanks for this post!
Posted by: Marshall | Aug 14, 2007 11:39:59 AM
I agree with Richardson when he said that the others were making speeches about gay rights but he has done it-passed bills and issued executive orders to fight for them.
We need full legal rights. What we call the rights I don't care.
I think Gravel was right when he said in 5 years this won't even be much of an issue. America's younger people are all for equality for GLBT people and the older bigots are dying off. Minds have changed so much from even the Clinton presidential terms.
Posted by: Iggy | Aug 14, 2007 1:48:54 PM
What all this pundit jabber does is take the attention off of Hillary who offered nothing concrete at all for the GLBT community. As Melissa Etheridge told her, the Clinton admin threw gays under the bus after taking much money and support from them and making many promises.
I wish as much had been made of Hillary's vow to keep taking lobbyists' money at the Yearly Kos forum as is being made of this nonstory. She defended taking money from corporate lobbyists like it was a pure as the driven snow.
Posted by: Lolly | Aug 14, 2007 2:51:47 PM
I have heard that the Governor has gone out of his way to try and clairfy his statement. With interviews with other gay publications like the Advocate for one. I do hope it does not carry on and on like the infamous scream from Dean. I wish I could say the truth will prevail-but in this world at this time I do not believe this is true.
On the bright side for Richardson maybe some of the people that think it is a choice will now say "hey I like him!"
And then again as a lesbian and in a committed relationship for 18 years, in some cases and times through my lifetime I would have to say it has been somewhat of a choice in a certain way. The pull to live without ridicule and judgement is very alluring. Life could have been easier with a male's salary, and then there is the lifting heavy objects! I guess I could have forced myself to live a more traditional life but I think I would have been miserable. Sorry guys!
I can understand why some women choose to be with a man mainly to have kids. I know you can get turkey basted and other means but how about the old conventional method. And as you grow older as a lesbian and you pass the years of bearing children, I remember struggling with that choice. Maybe some nice feminine quality male is out there?
As for this lesbian though that was not ever a realistic option if I really pictured myself sharing my life with a man.
The truth is it is a complex topic if you really start looking at it.
I am going to state my own opinion on statistics right here on DFNM:
Absolutely positively homo, no way, no how could spend lifetime with opposite sex = 10% of population.
Absolutely positively hetero, no way, no how could spend lifetime with same sex = 50% of population.
Absolutely positively bisexual, no way, no how could spend lifetime with either sex (opposite sex or same sex) = 40% of population.
Trangender and the rest: 2%
What do you think? Sounds about right doesn't it???
Posted by: mary ellen | Aug 14, 2007 5:05:42 PM
I see that two notable GLBT activists in the state, Linda Siegel and Liz Stefanics, have recorded a video describing Richardson's long-time support for GLBT issues:
Posted by: > | Aug 15, 2007 11:10:51 AM
