Most Recent Posts

WARSAW, Poland (AP) — President Barack Obama's administration has taken the U.S. gay rights revolution global, using American embassies across the world as outposts in a struggle that still hasn't been won at home.

Sometimes U.S. advice and encouragement is condemned as unacceptable meddling. And sometimes it can seem to backfire, increasing the pressure on those it is meant to help.

With gay pride parades taking place in many cities across the world this weekend, the U.S. role will be more visible than ever. Diplomats will take part in parades and some embassies will fly the rainbow flag along with the Stars and Stripes.

The United States sent five openly gay ambassadors abroad last year, with a sixth nominee, to Vietnam, now awaiting Senate confirmation. American diplomats are working to support gay rights in countries such as Poland, where prejudice remains deep, and to oppose violence and other abuse in countries like Nigeria and Russia, where gays face life-threatening risks.

"It is incredible. I am amazed by what the U.S. is doing to help us," said Mariusz Kurc, the editor of a Polish gay advocacy magazine, Replika, which has received some U.S. funding and other help. "We are used to struggling and not finding any support."

Former President George W. Bush supported AIDS prevention efforts globally, but it was the Obama administration that launched the push to make lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights an international issue. The watershed moment came in December 2011, when then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton went to the United Nations in Geneva and proclaimed LGBT rights "one of the remaining human rights challenges of our time."

Since then, embassies have been opening their doors to gay rights activists, hosting events and supporting local advocacy work. The State Department has since spent $12 million on the efforts in over 50 countries through the Global Equality Fund, an initiative launched to fund the new work.

Just weeks after the Supreme Court struck down parts of the Defense of Marriage Act last June, consular posts also began issuing immigrant visas to the same-sex spouses of gay Americans.

One beneficiary was Jake Lees, a 27-year-old Englishman who had been forced to spend long periods apart from his American partner, Austin Armacost, since they met six years ago. In May Lees was issued a fiance visa at the U.S. Embassy in London. The couple married two weeks ago and are now starting a new life together in Franklin, Indiana, as they wait for Lees' green card.

"I felt like the officers at the embassy treated us the way they would treat a heterosexual couple," said Armacost, a 26-year-old fitness and nutrition instructor. "It's a mind-boggling change after gay couples were treated like legal strangers for the first three centuries of our country's history."

Some conservative American groups are outraged by the policy. Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, calls it "a slap in the face to the majority of Americans," given that American voters have rejected same-sex marriage in a number of state referendums.

"This is taking a flawed view of what it means to be a human being — male and female — and trying to impose that on countries throughout the world," Brown said. "The administration would like people to believe that this is simply 'live and let live.' No, this is coercion in its worst possible form."

The American efforts are tailored to local conditions, said Scott Busby, the deputy assistant secretary for the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor at the State Department. Ambassadors can decide individually whether to hoist the rainbow flag, as embassies in Tel Aviv, London and Prague have done, or show support in other ways.

The official U.S. delegation to the recent Winter Olympics in Russia included three openly gay athletes. Soon after that the U.S. Embassy in Moscow opened its basketball court for the Open Games, an LGBT sporting event which had been denied access to many of the venues it had counted on. The U.S. Embassy also operates a website where Russian gay and lesbians can publish their personal stories.

While some gay rights activists say support from the U.S. and other Western countries adds moral legitimacy to their cause, it can also cause a backlash.

Rauda Morcos, a prominent Palestinian lesbian activist, said local communities, particularly in the Middle East, have to find their own ways of asserting themselves. She criticized the U.S. and Western efforts in general to help gay communities elsewhere as patronizing.

"It is a colonial approach," she said. "In cases where it was tried, it didn't help local communities and maybe made things even worse."

An extreme case has been Uganda, which in February passed a law making gay sex punishable by a life sentence. In enacting the bill, President Yoweri Museveni said he wanted to deter the West from "promoting" gay rights in Africa, a continent where homosexuals face severe discrimination and even attacks. In response, the U.S. imposed sanctions and Secretary of State John Kerry compared the policies to the anti-Semitic laws in Nazi Germany and apartheid in South Africa.

In Russia, President Vladimir Putin has waged an assault on what he considers the encroachment of decadent Western values and the government last year banned "propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations among minors," making it a crime to hold gay rights rallies or to openly discuss homosexuality in content accessible to children. Afraid for their security, some Russian gay advocates try to keep their contacts with Western officials quiet.

Jessica Stern, executive director of the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission, praised the U.S. policy but said there have been missteps along the way, citing a 2011 U.S. embassy gathering in Pakistan that prompted a group of religious and political leaders to accuse the U.S. of "cultural terrorism."

And in Senegal a year ago, President Macky Sall bluntly rebuked the visiting Obama for urging African leaders to end discrimination against gays. Sall said his country was neither homophobic nor ready to legalize homosexuality, and in an apparent jab at the U.S., he noted Senegal abolished capital punishment years ago.

"The response in the local press was voluminous praise of the Senegalese president, maybe not actually for his stance on LGBT rights, but for effectively asserting Senegal's sovereignty, yet the two became intertwined," Stern said.

Busby, the State Department official, denied that increased harassment by governments is ever the consequence of U.S. advocacy, instead describing it as "a cynical reaction taken by leaders to advance their own political standing."

In some countries, like Poland, the U.S. efforts are a catalyst for change.

The embassy there financed a 2012 visit to Warsaw by Dennis and Judy Shepard, the parents of Matthew Shepard, a gay Wyoming college student who was tortured and murdered in 1998.

A group of parents who heard their story were so shaken by the Shepards' tragedy that they founded a parental advocacy group, Akceptacja, which is fighting homophobia. The parents are now reaching out to their lawmakers personally, in what advocates say is the conscious adoption of an American strategy of families of gays and lesbians appealing to the hearts of officials.

"The killing of Matthew Shepard represents the fear I have that my son could be hurt for being gay," said Tamara Uliasz, 60, one of the group's founders. "I realized that what happened in Wyoming could happen here."

_____

Associated Press writers Ezequiel Abiu Lopez in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic; Rodney Muhumuza in Kampala, Uganda; and Jan M. Olsen in Copenhagen, Denmark, contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON (AP) — A fear of voting has gripped Democratic leaders in the Senate, slowing the chamber's modest productivity this election season to a near halt.

With control of the Senate at risk in November, leaders are going to remarkable lengths to protect endangered Democrats from casting tough votes and to deny Republicans legislative victories in the midst of the campaign. The phobia means even bipartisan legislation to boost energy efficiency, manufacturing, sportsmen's rights and more could be scuttled.

The Senate's masters of process are finding a variety of ways to shut down debate.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., now is requiring an elusive 60-vote supermajority to deal with amendments to spending bills, instead of the usual simple majority, a step that makes it much more difficult to put politically sensitive matters into contention. This was a flip from his approach to Obama administration nominees, when he decided most could be moved ahead with a straight majority instead of the 60 votes needed before.

Reid's principle aim in setting the supermajority rule for spending amendments was to deny archrival Sen. Mitch McConnell a win on protecting his home state coal industry from new regulations limiting carbon emissions from existing power plants. McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, faces a tough re-election in Kentucky.

This hunkering down by Democrats is at odds with the once-vibrant tradition of advancing the 12 annual agency budget bills through open debate. In the Appropriations Committee, long accustomed to a freewheeling process, chairwoman Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., has held up action on three spending bills, apparently to head off politically difficult votes on changes to the divisive health care law as well as potential losses to Republicans on amendments such as McConnell's on the coal industry.

"I just don't think they want their members to have to take any hard votes between now and November," said Sen. Mike Johanns, R-Neb. And there's "just no question that they're worried we're going to win some votes so they just shut us down."

Vote-a-phobia worsens in election years, especially when the majority party is in jeopardy. Republicans need to gain six seats to win control and Democrats must defend 21 seats to the Republicans' 15.

So Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, probably shouldn't have been surprised when his cherished bill to fund the Labor, Education and Health and Human Services departments got yanked from the Appropriations Committee's agenda this month. Word quickly spread that committee Democrats in Republican-leaning states feared a flurry of votes related to "Obamacare."

"It's not as if they haven't voted on them before," Harkin griped. "My way of thinking is, 'Hell, you've already voted on it. Your record's there.'" Harkin blamed Senate Democratic leaders.

Two other appropriations bills have run aground after preliminary votes. The normally non-controversial energy and water bill was pulled from the committee agenda after it became known that McConnell would have an amendment to defend his state's coal mining industry. McConnell is making that defense a centerpiece of his re-election campaign and his amendment appeared on track to prevail with the help of pro-energy Democrats on the committee.

Again, after consulting with Reid, Mikulski struck the bill from the agenda.

McConnell pressed the matter the next day, this time aiming to amend a spending bill paying for five Cabinet departments. Democrats again headed him off.

Democrats privately acknowledge that they're protecting vulnerable senators and don't want McConnell to win on the carbon emissions issue. They also see hypocrisy in McConnell's insistence on a simple majority vote for his top — and controversial — priority while he wants Democrats to produce 60 votes to advance almost everything else.

Another measure, financing the Treasury Department and Internal Revenue Service, failed to get a committee vote last week after speeding through a subcommittee hearing. Mikulski blamed problems with timing. But it was known that Republicans had amendments on hot-button issues coming.

Fear of voting is hardly new. In the last two years of the Clinton administration, Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., blocked Democrats from offering a popular Patients' Bill of Rights, and more. At the time, Charles Schumer of New York and Dick Durbin of Illinois were among the Democrats who cried foul.

These days, Durbin and Schumer hold the No. 2 and No. 3 Democratic Senate leadership posts and now that their party is running the place, they're backing Reid's moves to clamp down on GOP amendments.

"You've always got senators on both sides of the aisle of all political persuasions and all regions whining and complaining how they don't want to vote on this amendment or that amendment," Lott says now. "It always frankly agitated me because I felt like these are big boys and girls." He said "it has gotten worse and worse and worse."

Republicans say Democratic leaders are trying especially to protect Mark Begich of Alaska, Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana. Landrieu says she hasn't asked for such help.

"I've taken so many hard votes up here," Landrieu said. "I could take more."

If it looks like a taco and tastes like a taco, is it still a taco? Reporter Anne Hoffman reports on the mysterious origins of the Navajo taco of Window Rock, Arizona.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Sen. Thad Cochran's GOP primary victory, thanks in part to black Mississippians who turned out to vote for him, exemplifies a new math that politicians of all persuasions may be forced to learn as this country's voting population slowly changes complexion.

Cochran's campaign courted black voters, perceiving their unhappiness with his tea party-supported opponent, Chris McDaniel, and his anti-government rhetoric and scathing criticisms of President Barack Obama. Blacks responded by turning out to help give Cochran an almost 7,000-vote win. The use of Mississippi's open primary to further their agenda showed political maturity by black voters and debunked a longstanding belief that they obediently vote Democratic and not according to their own interests.

They turned out for a primary runoff with no Democratic candidate involved. And they voted Republican even though the smart play for the Democrats would have been to usher McDaniel to victory and create a more winnable contest for Democrat Travis Childers in November.

"I think that Thad Cochran is a shot across the bow to be felt for a long time," said the Rev. Jesse Jackson, who was the first minority presidential candidate to win a statewide primary or caucus in 1984 and 1988. "You cannot win in the new South or win in national elections with all-white primaries. This is a new America today."

Tests of this assertion are coming next month in Alabama and Georgia, also Southern states with large minority populations and open primaries. The Mississippi race may be a harbinger of more strategic voting for minority voters, especially African Americans, said D'Andra Orey, a political science professor at Jackson State University in Jackson, Mississippi.

"This is not a one-time situation," Orey said. "Blacks do recognize their power in the vote, and in this particular case, blacks saw that they could actually defeat or be a strong influence ... in defeating McDaniel."

In Mississippi, which is 38 percent black and on track to become the country's first majority-black state, some black voters said they planned to support Cochran, a six-term incumbent, again in November. Others said they would keep their options open in November or vote for the Democrat, even though they considered Cochran a better choice than McDaniel in the red state.

"I just think that McDaniel did as much for the Cochran turnout in the black community as Cochran people did," said Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson, Mississippi's sole black congressman.

Agitating minority voters may soon prove politically risky anywhere in the nation: The numbers of black, Hispanic, Asian and Native American voters are growing not only in presidential election years but in off-cycle elections as well, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

In presidential election years, the percentage of black voters eclipsed the percentage of whites for the first time in 2012, when 66.2 percent of blacks voted, compared to 64.1 percent of non-Hispanics whites and about 48 percent of Hispanics and Asians.

The number of African-American and other minority voters has also been increasing during off-cycle, non-presidential elections. For example, in the 2010 congressional and statewide elections, 47.8 percent of non-Hispanic whites, 40.7 percent of blacks, 21.3 percent of Asians and 20.5 percent of Hispanics voted.

But the only groups to increase their numbers were blacks and Hispanics, who voted at 38.6 percent and 19.3 percent respectively in 2006 congressional and statewide elections. The white and Asian participation rate dropped during that same time period from 50.5 percent and 21.8 percent.

And black participation in off-year elections has been steadily increasing since 1994, when it was 37.1 percent. In 1998, it 39.6 percent, in 2002 39.7 percent and a slight dip in 2006 at 38.6 percent. No other group showed a similar increase.

Black voting increased during the Mississippi GOP primary. Statewide turnout increased by almost 70,000 votes over the June 3 primary, with turnout in majority-black counties growing by 43 percent, while in counties where blacks are less than a majority, it grew 17 percent.

Carol M. Swain, a law and political science professor at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, doubted those voters would become Republicans but said they could become swing voters in some races. "I believe they may have purchased some influence with the Republican establishment that could benefit blacks in the long run," Swain said.

Democrats, in return, plan to address more African American issues in upcoming campaign, but they have been warned not to take those votes for granted. At a recent meeting with black journalists and advocates, several U.S. senators were warned that some black voters had noticed that Democrats had no problem talking about veterans' issues, women's issues or LBGT issues, but seemed hesitant to talk about and address black issues on the Senate floor.

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., said he could understand how "off-putting" it could be that Democrats "are all about equality and all about the big tent, but we're talking about other folks and not us," a loyal voting base.

"I hadn't really thought about our strong advocacy on these diversity issues actually could have an undercurrent of 'We must not be that important because you're not talking about us the same way,'" Kaine said.

Recognition of that can only be a good thing for minority voters, Swain said.

"The positive thing to come out of this is that more white candidates and incumbents will campaign among black voters, and maybe they will deliver more," she said.

___

Follow Jesse J. Holland on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/jessejholland

___

Associated Press reporters Andrew Taylor and Director of Polling Jennifer Agiesta in Washington, and Emily Wagster Pettus in Jackson, Mississippi, contributed to this report.