The presidential primaries are quickly approaching, and if you’re like me you still haven’t settled upon one specific candidate yet. The polls are tightening and right now there is no clear leader in either Party’s races. This is a good thing: it forces candidates to be very clear on important issues—and that particularly holds true for LGBT issues.
Our community has played a role in this presidential election that is unparalleled in our political history. LGBT issues have been front-and-center for both parties—in debates, speeches, town halls, etc. We have demanded that Democrats and Republicans articulate their positions on issues that are extremely important to our safety, happiness and health. And in many cases (most often in the case of Democratic candidates) we have been able to move candidates when we’ve felt that they haven’t been where they need to be on issues like “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and legal recognition of our families.
One issue in particular, however, tends to get overshadowed by the headlines caused by sexier, more controversial issues such as gay marriage, LGBT people serving openly in the military and the need for a federal hate crimes bill. That issue is HIV/AIDS.
Numerous reports have recently stated that HIV infections are on the rise for young gay men and gay men of color. This is a problem that is not going away. New treatments have made it so that HIV/AIDS is no longer a death sentence, but it is still a very serious and lifelong disease. The next leader of this country needs to have a comprehensive plan for dealing with AIDS—not just globally, but also here in the United States.
Gay Men’s Health Crisis has just put out a report that very closely details where exactly each candidate for president stands on all issues pertaining to HIV/AIDS—from the strategies used to educate about prevention to subsidizing medicine for those who are already infected but cannot otherwise afford treatment. The report is reader-friendly and hopefully will help if you have not yet made up your mind on which candidate to support on Feb. 5, 2008 (for all New Yorkers).
The report was the subject of a recent front-page article in Gay City News. In it, Duncan Osborne discusses how bad Republicans are on HIV/AIDS related policies. Republicans—closely following the Bush Administration line—tend to support ideology-based solutions instead of the obviously more effective strategy of using science-based solutions (like teaching abstinence-only curriculum versus safe-sex practices in sex education classes).
We might also add that Republicans tend to want to talk about HIV/AIDS as being something "over there" (i.e., Africa where transmission is predominately due to heterosexual sex) instead of here at home where they deem transmission pathways as being too hot to talk about on the "Pollyanna" trail of a Presidential campaign.
As far as New York’s two presidential candidates are concerned, Hillary scores towards the top of the chart, ranking among the best candidates on HIV/AIDS issues. And Rudy dwells near the bottom with his fellow Republicans. He didn’t respond to the questionnaire provided by AIDSvote.org for evaluation on this report and his record on HIV/AIDS policy while mayor of New York City was never much to be proud of.
Download a PDF of the report here.
Showing posts with label rudy giuliani. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rudy giuliani. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Monday, December 10, 2007
Rudy Giuliani Then and Now: Marriage, Civil Union & Domestic Partnership
Last week we wrote about Giuliani’s reversal on hate crimes and the question mark over where he is on a non-discrimination bill. Now, we want to bring you up-to-date on how he’s changed his views around marriage, civil union and domestic partnership. Though not equal, all three are legal mechanisms government employs to support families.
As you will see, there has been significant slippage in Giuliani’s positions since he decided to run for President and sometimes he has completely reversed himself.
We continue to pose the question we asked when we launched “The Giuliani Files” two weeks ago: If Rudy Giuliani becomes President which Giuliani will he be on our issues? The Giuliani we knew as Mayor? Or the Giuliani who’s running for President?
Marriage
Rudy Giuliani doesn’t support marriage for same-sex couples and never has. However, on the question of whether or not there should be a constitutional amendment prohibiting marriage for same-sex couples, he has moved from being against it to a position much closer to that of the religious right.
On March 7, 2004 he said on “Meet the Press” about a Constitutional amendment, “I certainly wouldn't support it at this time” and “I don't think this is one of the critical issues.” But this year Giuliani has said he would support an amendment if additional states legalize marriage for same-sex couples. See here and here for more of the specifics on this change in position.
Civil Union
In February 2004, Giuliani said on Fox News's "The O'Reilly Factor” that he was for civil unions. This year, however, his campaign told the New York Sun in a written statement that Giuliani opposes anything that is the equivalent of marriage and specifically said about New Hampshire enacting civil unions, “This goes too far and Mayor Giuliani does not support it.”
His new position on civil union was widely reported in April and ranks up there with hate crimes in terms of a major policy reversal on an important LGBT issue.
Domestic Partnership
While Giuliani’s backtracking on a marriage amendment and civil unions has been reported in the press, his shift on domestic partnerships – and it is a significant shift – has not been written about anywhere.
We should preface this by saying the domestic partnership (DP) is an umbrella term that, unlike marriage or civil unions, can mean many different things legally. It can be as little as a registry with no rights attached or as strong as California’s DP law, which is essentially civil union, and can also be many things in between.
When Giuliani was Mayor, he was firm in his belief that domestic partnerships and marriages should be treated the same by government in terms of the rights and obligations government provides them. He went out of his way in a 1997 letter to the Pride Agenda to put the two on the same level when he said he would work to have New York City pass a DP law. He also said anything less than equality between domestic partners and married persons would be discriminatory. In 2001, he again speaks about domestic partners and married persons in equivalent terms when he co-signed a letter to President Bush asking for the 9/11 federal victims compensation fund to treat survivors in domestic partner relationships the same as survivors who were married.
Today, there is strong evidence that his view of domestic partnership has shrunk to it being nothing more than a simple registry that gives two people a document that states they’re partners who live together in a committed relationship. No rights or responsibilities provided by government – only a piece of paper to shop around in the event some entity might honor it, such as an employer who provides DP health coverage and requires documentation to validate the relationship.
Why do we say this?
This summer, the Boston Globe pressed Giuliani on what rights should accompany domestic partnership for same-sex couples. The campaign refused to answer the question. Then on October 16 on Fox News’ Hannity & Colmes, Giuliani answered the question himself by saying benefits for same-sex couples “should be contractual.”
A favorite talking point by the religious right when arguing against marriage for same-sex couples is that we can already get the rights of marriage contractually by going to an attorney. In fact any two people in America can go to an attorney and get a very limited number of rights by filling out the necessary legal paperwork. In New York State of the almost 2,500 rights and responsibilities that come with a marriage license (1,138 federal-based, 1,324 state-based and in the case of NYC another 20 or so), two people can get just about five of those rights contractually and you don’t need to be domestic partners to get them. And even in these five areas, which include power of attorney and health care proxy, blood relatives can challenge these agreements and if they push hard enough can often have them broken in a court of law.
Here's the transcript from Hannity & Colmes and below is the clip:
We believe Rudy Giuliani knew what he was doing when he said on Fox News that rights “should be contractual.” Sadly, this would also mean his view of domestic partnership is now a simple registry with no rights attached, which is very different from his position in 1997 when he equated DP to marriage in terms of how government should treat the two.
As you will see, there has been significant slippage in Giuliani’s positions since he decided to run for President and sometimes he has completely reversed himself.
We continue to pose the question we asked when we launched “The Giuliani Files” two weeks ago: If Rudy Giuliani becomes President which Giuliani will he be on our issues? The Giuliani we knew as Mayor? Or the Giuliani who’s running for President?
Marriage
Rudy Giuliani doesn’t support marriage for same-sex couples and never has. However, on the question of whether or not there should be a constitutional amendment prohibiting marriage for same-sex couples, he has moved from being against it to a position much closer to that of the religious right.
On March 7, 2004 he said on “Meet the Press” about a Constitutional amendment, “I certainly wouldn't support it at this time” and “I don't think this is one of the critical issues.” But this year Giuliani has said he would support an amendment if additional states legalize marriage for same-sex couples. See here and here for more of the specifics on this change in position.
Civil Union
In February 2004, Giuliani said on Fox News's "The O'Reilly Factor” that he was for civil unions. This year, however, his campaign told the New York Sun in a written statement that Giuliani opposes anything that is the equivalent of marriage and specifically said about New Hampshire enacting civil unions, “This goes too far and Mayor Giuliani does not support it.”
His new position on civil union was widely reported in April and ranks up there with hate crimes in terms of a major policy reversal on an important LGBT issue.
Domestic Partnership
While Giuliani’s backtracking on a marriage amendment and civil unions has been reported in the press, his shift on domestic partnerships – and it is a significant shift – has not been written about anywhere.
We should preface this by saying the domestic partnership (DP) is an umbrella term that, unlike marriage or civil unions, can mean many different things legally. It can be as little as a registry with no rights attached or as strong as California’s DP law, which is essentially civil union, and can also be many things in between.
When Giuliani was Mayor, he was firm in his belief that domestic partnerships and marriages should be treated the same by government in terms of the rights and obligations government provides them. He went out of his way in a 1997 letter to the Pride Agenda to put the two on the same level when he said he would work to have New York City pass a DP law. He also said anything less than equality between domestic partners and married persons would be discriminatory. In 2001, he again speaks about domestic partners and married persons in equivalent terms when he co-signed a letter to President Bush asking for the 9/11 federal victims compensation fund to treat survivors in domestic partner relationships the same as survivors who were married.
Today, there is strong evidence that his view of domestic partnership has shrunk to it being nothing more than a simple registry that gives two people a document that states they’re partners who live together in a committed relationship. No rights or responsibilities provided by government – only a piece of paper to shop around in the event some entity might honor it, such as an employer who provides DP health coverage and requires documentation to validate the relationship.
Why do we say this?
This summer, the Boston Globe pressed Giuliani on what rights should accompany domestic partnership for same-sex couples. The campaign refused to answer the question. Then on October 16 on Fox News’ Hannity & Colmes, Giuliani answered the question himself by saying benefits for same-sex couples “should be contractual.”
A favorite talking point by the religious right when arguing against marriage for same-sex couples is that we can already get the rights of marriage contractually by going to an attorney. In fact any two people in America can go to an attorney and get a very limited number of rights by filling out the necessary legal paperwork. In New York State of the almost 2,500 rights and responsibilities that come with a marriage license (1,138 federal-based, 1,324 state-based and in the case of NYC another 20 or so), two people can get just about five of those rights contractually and you don’t need to be domestic partners to get them. And even in these five areas, which include power of attorney and health care proxy, blood relatives can challenge these agreements and if they push hard enough can often have them broken in a court of law.
Here's the transcript from Hannity & Colmes and below is the clip:
We believe Rudy Giuliani knew what he was doing when he said on Fox News that rights “should be contractual.” Sadly, this would also mean his view of domestic partnership is now a simple registry with no rights attached, which is very different from his position in 1997 when he equated DP to marriage in terms of how government should treat the two.
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Rudy Giuliani Then and Now: Hate Crimes and Non-Discrimination
Hate Crimes
Rudy Giuliani’s reversal on the need for a federal hate crimes law is one of our biggest disappointments in where he now stands on LGBT issues as a candidate for President. In case you missed it, here’s one of his campaign operatives telling the Christian Broadcasting Network that Giuliani no longer supports passage of a federal law.
A former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, a former Associate Attorney General at the U.S. Justice Department responsible for supervising all the U.S. attorney offices’ law enforcement agencies, and a Mayor who made fighting crime a centerpiece of his time in office, Giuliani’s new position on hate crimes seems antithetical to everything he stood for in the past.
We posted his 2000 press release where he announced his own hate crimes initiative, which came just a few months before New York State finally passed a statewide law. In the press conference he held (that we attended to show our support), Giuliani announced the formation of a Hate Crimes Task Force for NYC and put over $5.0 million in taxpayer dollars behind it so that the NYPD and the City’s District Attorneys would have the funding they needed to investigate and prosecute possible crimes motivated by bias. He also said, as you can read in his release, “I call upon the State Legislature and Congress to enact hate crimes legislation that recognizes the severity of hate crimes and imposes the appropriate penalties.”
Given that hate crimes legislation passed the House of Representatives this year by a vote of 237-180, the Senate by a vote of 60-39 and the White House has said it will veto the measure, this is no academic issue. It’s before our federal government right now.
Hate crimes against LGBT people continue to spike up across America and we need Republican voices speaking up on why a federal law is important, but Rudy Giuliani’s voice is no longer there because he changed his position during the heat of the campaign primary season.
What does this say about Rudy Giuliani? We’ll leave that to you to decide, but I think you can figure out what we think about it.
Non-Discrimination
While NYC already had a law banning discrimination based upon sexual orientation when Giuliani was Mayor, we did not have protections in NYC for transgender people or a statewide law addressing either sexual orientation or gender identity and expression discrimination.
As Mayor, Giuliani frequently spoke about his support for the then-pending statewide Sexual Orientation Non-Discrimination Act (SONDA). I myself heard him state his support for SONDA each time I attended his annual Pride event in June at Gracie Mansion. And you can hear a reporter and one his openly gay political appointees, Chris Lynn, talk about Giuliani’s support for SONDA and hate crimes legislation in this video clip we posted last week on YouTube.
While support for non-discrimination legislation was a major part of his schpiel on gay issues whenever he spoke to our community, support for transgender non-discrimination protections was not. He and NYC Council Speaker Vallone blocked pending legislation amending the City’s human rights law to provide protections based upon gender identity and expression. It took Bloomberg becoming Mayor for trans discrimination to be outlawed.
So where is Rudy Giuliani on pending federal non-discrimination legislation for LGBT Americans, known as ENDA, another issue that is before Congress right now?
He’s silent. Despite the many times he spoke passionately as Mayor about there being no room in NYC for discrimination and the need for a statewide non-discrimination law, he’s nowhere to be found on federal non-discrimination legislation protecting LGBT Americans.
Perhaps he'll still articulate his views on this critically important civil rights issue. We hope so. We’ll be sure and let you know if he does.
For more on Rudy Giuliani, go to “The Giuliani Files” on the Pride Agenda website.
Rudy Giuliani’s reversal on the need for a federal hate crimes law is one of our biggest disappointments in where he now stands on LGBT issues as a candidate for President. In case you missed it, here’s one of his campaign operatives telling the Christian Broadcasting Network that Giuliani no longer supports passage of a federal law.
A former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, a former Associate Attorney General at the U.S. Justice Department responsible for supervising all the U.S. attorney offices’ law enforcement agencies, and a Mayor who made fighting crime a centerpiece of his time in office, Giuliani’s new position on hate crimes seems antithetical to everything he stood for in the past.
We posted his 2000 press release where he announced his own hate crimes initiative, which came just a few months before New York State finally passed a statewide law. In the press conference he held (that we attended to show our support), Giuliani announced the formation of a Hate Crimes Task Force for NYC and put over $5.0 million in taxpayer dollars behind it so that the NYPD and the City’s District Attorneys would have the funding they needed to investigate and prosecute possible crimes motivated by bias. He also said, as you can read in his release, “I call upon the State Legislature and Congress to enact hate crimes legislation that recognizes the severity of hate crimes and imposes the appropriate penalties.”
Given that hate crimes legislation passed the House of Representatives this year by a vote of 237-180, the Senate by a vote of 60-39 and the White House has said it will veto the measure, this is no academic issue. It’s before our federal government right now.
Hate crimes against LGBT people continue to spike up across America and we need Republican voices speaking up on why a federal law is important, but Rudy Giuliani’s voice is no longer there because he changed his position during the heat of the campaign primary season.
What does this say about Rudy Giuliani? We’ll leave that to you to decide, but I think you can figure out what we think about it.
Non-Discrimination
While NYC already had a law banning discrimination based upon sexual orientation when Giuliani was Mayor, we did not have protections in NYC for transgender people or a statewide law addressing either sexual orientation or gender identity and expression discrimination.
As Mayor, Giuliani frequently spoke about his support for the then-pending statewide Sexual Orientation Non-Discrimination Act (SONDA). I myself heard him state his support for SONDA each time I attended his annual Pride event in June at Gracie Mansion. And you can hear a reporter and one his openly gay political appointees, Chris Lynn, talk about Giuliani’s support for SONDA and hate crimes legislation in this video clip we posted last week on YouTube.
While support for non-discrimination legislation was a major part of his schpiel on gay issues whenever he spoke to our community, support for transgender non-discrimination protections was not. He and NYC Council Speaker Vallone blocked pending legislation amending the City’s human rights law to provide protections based upon gender identity and expression. It took Bloomberg becoming Mayor for trans discrimination to be outlawed.
So where is Rudy Giuliani on pending federal non-discrimination legislation for LGBT Americans, known as ENDA, another issue that is before Congress right now?
He’s silent. Despite the many times he spoke passionately as Mayor about there being no room in NYC for discrimination and the need for a statewide non-discrimination law, he’s nowhere to be found on federal non-discrimination legislation protecting LGBT Americans.
Perhaps he'll still articulate his views on this critically important civil rights issue. We hope so. We’ll be sure and let you know if he does.
For more on Rudy Giuliani, go to “The Giuliani Files” on the Pride Agenda website.
Friday, November 30, 2007
Need we say more about Rudy Giuliani? Well maybe we will.
This week we released “The Giuliani Files” and it created a bit of an explosion. There are strong feelings about Rudy. That we knew already.
Quite a few of you welcomed our shining a few rays of sunlight on the pro-gay things he did as Mayor and then comparing them to where he unfortunately is today as a candidate for President. Evidently we’re not the only ones who’ve gotten tired of the mainstream press continuing to call him “pro-gay” even while he has been distancing himself from every pro-LGB (no “T” intended here) position he took as Mayor.
There were a very small number of you who were not happy we didn’t also hash through those areas where Giuliani as Mayor was not particularly pro-gay. Yes, we know about his less-than-stellar record on AIDS and his acrimonious relationship with AIDS advocates over funding. We also know about his support for homophobe Ruben Diaz and his actions and positions on a range of other issues that put him at odds with our community.
“The Giuliani Files” and our comments to the press were about reminding everyone that Giuliani was once relatively “pro-gay” on a number of important issues, but now no longer seems to be. It was not intended to be about areas of his record where he was not great to begin with and still isn't.
To supplement “The Giuliani Files,” we thought we’d post a couple of additional pieces over the next few weeks that provide the nitty-gritty on exactly where and how he's slid away from pro-gay positions he once embraced.
After all, if he’s able to change so quickly on issues like ours, what does this say about Giuliani and his stand on any other issues should he become President? Deciding whether or not an aspirant for the highest elected office in the land has a set of core beliefs should be important to every voter, no matter where we might fall along the political spectrum.
So stay tuned. We’ll give you the dope on Rudy.
Quite a few of you welcomed our shining a few rays of sunlight on the pro-gay things he did as Mayor and then comparing them to where he unfortunately is today as a candidate for President. Evidently we’re not the only ones who’ve gotten tired of the mainstream press continuing to call him “pro-gay” even while he has been distancing himself from every pro-LGB (no “T” intended here) position he took as Mayor.
There were a very small number of you who were not happy we didn’t also hash through those areas where Giuliani as Mayor was not particularly pro-gay. Yes, we know about his less-than-stellar record on AIDS and his acrimonious relationship with AIDS advocates over funding. We also know about his support for homophobe Ruben Diaz and his actions and positions on a range of other issues that put him at odds with our community.
“The Giuliani Files” and our comments to the press were about reminding everyone that Giuliani was once relatively “pro-gay” on a number of important issues, but now no longer seems to be. It was not intended to be about areas of his record where he was not great to begin with and still isn't.
To supplement “The Giuliani Files,” we thought we’d post a couple of additional pieces over the next few weeks that provide the nitty-gritty on exactly where and how he's slid away from pro-gay positions he once embraced.
After all, if he’s able to change so quickly on issues like ours, what does this say about Giuliani and his stand on any other issues should he become President? Deciding whether or not an aspirant for the highest elected office in the land has a set of core beliefs should be important to every voter, no matter where we might fall along the political spectrum.
So stay tuned. We’ll give you the dope on Rudy.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Will the real Rudy Giuliani please stand up?
Who is the real Rudy Giuliani?The Rudy Giuliani we knew was pretty pro-gay. He supported a statewide and a federal Hate Crimes bill. He supported New York's Sexual Orientation Non-Discrimination Act (SONDA) which made it illegal to fire someone from their job, kick someone out of their apartment or deny someone credit simply because of their sexual orientation (much more comprehensive, we should note, than the federal ENDA bill). He also stated several times that he believed that same-sex couples were entitled to all of the same rights and obligations that married couples are entitled to.
Yet recently he has back-pedaled on many of these positions, saying that he's not for federal hate crimes laws, remaining silent on employment non-discrimination and abandoning his support for civil unions--even saying that he might support a constitutional amendment defining marriage as one man and one woman.
We have just opened up a mini-archive of videos and documents that show in his own words exactly what Rudy Giuliani said to/did for LGBT citizens of New York City. The primaries/caucuses are only a few weeks away and we think that our community and voters in general deserve to know who the real Giuliani is.
Is he the fair-minded mayor of New York City who supported LGBT equality? Or is he the Presidential candidate who has distanced himself from all of the major issues that LGBT people care about.
We'd like to know...because you can't be all things to all people...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
