Betsy DeVos Continues to Be An Enemy Of LGBT People

The anti-LGBT agenda of the Trump/Pence regime ranges from the petty - the White House posting of  a photo of all the NATO countries' leaders’ spouses  omitted the name of Luxembourg’s Gauthier Destenay, the husband of the only openly gay prime minister in the world, Xavier Bettel - to truly disturbing as embodied by Trump's reversal of Obama administration non-discrimination executive orders.  In the realm of public education things are particularly frightening with Betsy DeVos, a long time religious zealot from a family that has provided millions and millions of dollars to anti-LGBT hate group organizations such as Family Research Council (her mother is on the board of a major contributor to FRC) and continues to support conversion therapy.  Now, DeVos is making it clear that under the smoke screen of "states rights" federal funding will be available to schools that openly discriminate against LGBT students and children of LGBT parents.  DeVos has about as much empathy for members of the LGBT community as the Inquisition had for Jews and supposed heretics.  A piece in Huffington Post looks at the always toxic DeVos.  Here are excerpts (Note, she suggests that racial discrimination might be OK with her as well):

The video of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos confirming that she would allow private schools to receive federal dollars while they blatantly discriminate against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender students is simply stunning. Congresswoman Katherine M. Clark, a Democrat from Massachusetts, asked DeVos point blank in a hearing yesterday if she would allow federal funds to go to a school that bans LGBT students or students with gay or lesbian parents, and she used the Lighthouse Christian Academy in Indiana as an example.

DeVos, in an eerily calm manner, said that it would be up to the states to make the decision to allow “parents to make choices” when it comes to putting their kids in a hostile anti-LGBTQ environment, where lies and distortions that lead to bullying and violence are taught to children about queer people, while receiving federal money in the form of vouchers.

Even when Clark raised the issue of a school that might discriminate against African-Americans, DeVos, after mentioning something vague about civil rights protections being “broadly applicable,” still deferred to “parents making choices” as the most important principle. DeVos made it clear that it was up to the state to decide, and, as Clark pointed out, couldn’t give “one example,” in which a state’s discriminatory practice in education would be stood up to by the Department of Education in the form of withholding money.

This is the same Betsy DeVos who some media outlets told us just before her confirmation hearings had gone through some sort of transformation, or was always, in fact, supportive of LGBTQ rights and was simply misunderstood. It was an odd, convenient narrative coming at a time when she needed it.

As with Trump himself, just because Betsy DeVos might help out her well-off Republican gay friends ― who might return the favor by helping her in other ways ― doesn’t mean she’s not devoted to her family’s longtime goals, nor to putting religious beliefs before LGBTQ rights. While she gave McNalley and his husband a reference letter in their successful effort to adopt a child as gay parents, she also financially contributed to the campaign of GOP legislator Andrea LaFontaine ― a zealous religious conservative ― who spearheaded a draconian Michigan law passed in 2015, weeks before the Supreme Court’s landmark marriage equality ruling, that allows state-funded faith-based adoption agencies to turn away gay and lesbian couples based on their sexual orientation. That law seems right in line with DeVos’ statements yesterday, refusing to rule out giving federal money to schools that discriminate against LGBTQ students and parents.

DeVos has said in the past that she wanted public education to “advance God’s kingdom.”  . . . . she was listed as a vice president of her mother’s foundation, which is a major donor to anti-LGBTQ hate groups Focus on the Family and Family Research Council. 

DeVos claimed during her confirmation hearings, “I fully embrace equality” and rejected “conversion therapy,” which is promoted by many of the groups to which her family donates.  But once in office, DeVos went right along with the Trump administration action of rescinding guidelines for the treatment of transgender students, put in place by the Obama administration.

And now we have her clear statements on allowing schools to get federal funds even if they discriminate against LGBTQ people ― or any group.

Whatever Betsy DeVos might or might not truly believe really doesn’t matter. It is her public statements, and her actions, that are the only important barometers. And so far, she’s proven to be an enemy of LGBTQ people.

Will Cuccinelli's Refusal to Resign as Attorney General Prove Fatal to His Campaign?

For decades the political custom has been that sitting Virginia attorney generals who have run for governor have resigned from the position as attorney general in order to campaign full time and avoid the appearance that (i) the dispensation of justice by the AG's office is political and (ii) that taxpayers are being forced to finance the candidate's campaign via the AG's salary.  Not surprisingly, Ken "Kookinelli" Cuccinelli thinks that he is above the unspoken political rules - actually, rules and even the Virginia and U. S. constitutions in general - and has refused to resign his office.  A piece in Blue Virginia looks at how this might prove fatal to Kookinelli's campaign.  Here are highlights:

But again: appearances matter in the law. Justice is suppose to be blind to such factors. Those responsible for the conduct of our legal system have to accept the importance of this ideal.

Moreover, the AG is by law a full-time position with real authority under the Constitution of Virginia. When the public sees someone campaigning full time for governor - as is required - they naturally want to know why this person is being paid a full-time AG's salary. The media will ask. There is no answer that will pass the "smell" test.

in politics, as in business, the customer is always right in that regard. Thus in politics, the winning candidate tries not to give voters a reason to question their judgment, moreover leave himself or herself vulnerable to the inevitable Murphy's law of politics: "Stuff happens."
Accordingly, AG Jerry Baliles in 1985, Mary Sue Terry in 1993, Jim Gilmore in 1997, Mark Earley in 2001, Jerry Kilgore in 2005 and Bob McDonnell in 2009 all resigned while seeking the governorship. They did it at different times in the election year, each calculating the right moment to make the move depending on how they saw the pluses and minuses of holding the post at any point in time.

But they all did it: because when you do the political math, it is the only smart play given game theory. In that regard, they weren't merely doing the mental math of politics: they had a concrete example of what can happen if you try to outsmart common sense.

In 1981, Republican Attorney General Marshall Coleman refused to resign as AG. There were several reasons for his decision, one having to do with money: He didn't have much of it and thus needed the paycheck. Yet the money issue isn't really that big a thing in VA politics: The voters accept the AG resigning, and joining a law firm, being paid a good salary without actually doing any real work. Yes, there is always the appropriate fig leaf of claiming he or she actually does work to earn the paycheck. But give Virginians a break: we aren't dumb. Besides, the role of big law firms in lobbying and having sway over a governor is known to us. We accept that as part of the realities of politics. So they pay a buddy money to run. If he wins, they were going to get a lot of business from him anyway even if he were independently wealthy.

EVERY AG HAS SEEN THE LIGHT...Because they saw what happened to Coleman. By not resigning, Mr. Coleman gave Democrats - and his opponents inside the GOP - a way to keep him on the defensive for the entire campaign. It was a continuous drip, drip, drip, of criticism, even the biggest boulder can be whittled down to a small rock by such constant erosion.

Finally, after months of the drip, drip, drip, Coleman announced that he was going to accept only half-salary. But instead of ending the debate over his refusal to resign, his actions only proved the point: he couldn't do the AG's job and campaign for governor at the same time. Bottom line: Coleman's refusal to resign showed bad judgment. In political terms, he took a risk way out of proportion with the potential gain.

NOW, 32 YEARS LATER, COMES THE MOMENT OF TRUTH FOR MR. CUCCINELLI. .  .  .  . 
Cuccinelli would show extremely bad judgment, for the post of governor, by failing to resign. Why? Because the only reason for him not to resign is to make some obscure ideological or personal point about some imagined philosophic issue or refusing to be pressured by the media, and the like.

This may make him happy, this may make him a hero to his base, but it doesn't show the judgment to be governor at this point in Virginia's history. He would daring McDonnell to criticize him, and he would be daring Democrats to use McDonnell's words to criticize him.

Net, net: If Cuccinelli actually intends to stay on the job through the election, then it will prove to be a metaphor for his campaign in my view. He will be seen as putting his personal and political ideology ahead of what was good for the people of the state who don't want their legal system drawn into partisan politics if it can be avoided.  In the end, voters wants to see if you see the job as a "me" thing, or a "we" thing.

The perverse side of me hopes that Cuccinelli refuses to resign through until the end.  He is a clear and present danger to Virginia's future and, in my view, belongs in a mental ward, not the Governor's mansion.