AZ-SEN: Openly LGBT Kyrsten Sinema Wins!

Congressperson Kyrsten Sinema has won election to the United States  Senate from Arizona, defeating Congresswoman Martha McSally in a very close race. Sinema, 42, is the first female Senator from Arizona, and as a bisexual woman, only the second openly LGBTQ member of the "world's most exclusive deliberative body," following openly lesbian Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin (who was re-elected last Tuesday) in Wisconsin with 55% of the vote. She will also be one of the youngest members of the U.S. Senate.

LOOK: Easiest Visual Explanation of Gerrymandering

The United States Supreme Court had oral arguments in the case of Gill v. Whitford which is about partisan gerrymandering. This sounds boring, but it is fundamentally about the nature of Democracy itself. The image above shows how one can use gerrymandering to completely warp democratic results.

The example shows a "state" with 50 voters where 60% of voters are "blue" and 40% are "red" but through selection of district boundaries one can get results of 5 blue districts and 0 red districts to 2 Blue districts and 3 red districts even though using a "standard" redistricting one would expect 3 blue and 2 red.

This case is from Wisconsin where:

The plans, developed in 2011 by Republican leaders who controlled the legislature and signed by Gov. Scott Walker (R), were effective.

In the election held after the new district maps were adopted,Republican candidates won 48.6 percent of the statewide vote but captured a 60-to-39 seat advantage in the State Assembly. 

Evidence uncovered during lawsuits over the redistricting found that models showed Democrats would have to win about 53 percent of the statewide vote to capture a bare majority of the seats.

The swing vote (as usual) is Justice Anthony Kennedy.

Hat/tip to Wonk Blog

GODLESS WEDNESDAY: Madison, WI Bans Discrimination Against "Non-religious"

Madison, Wisconsin is a well-known bastion of progressive ideas (sorta like a midwest version of Berkeley) so it is pretty surprising that it took so long for someone to think of the idea that maybe it might be a good idea to explicitly protect atheists from discrimination.

Recently, the Madison City Council passed an ordinance doing just that:

In what is believed to be a first in the United States, the Common Council of Madison, Wis., has voted to amend the city's equal opportunities ordinance "to add nonreligion as a protected class."[...]The new legislation inserts the words "or nonreligion" after "religion" in several sections of the city of Madison's legal code.
For example, here's how the city lists its protected class:
"Protected class membership means a group of natural persons, or a natural person, who may be categorized because of their ability to satisfy the definition of one or more of the following groups or classes: sex, race, religion or nonreligion, color, national origin or ancestry, citizenship status, age, handicap/disability, marital status, source of income, arrest record or conviction record, less than honorable discharge, physical appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity, genetic identity, political beliefs, familial status, student, domestic partner, or receipt of rental assistance."

Surely that's a typo that "gender identity" appears twice? (I suspect one of those is "gender expression.") What does seem surprising is that this would be the first ordinance of its kind. Especially considering that the Freedom From Religion Foundation is based in Madison!

SCOTUS Refuses To Hear Marriage Equality Appeals From 4th, 7th and 10th Circuits!

Wow! The Supreme Court today surprised almost all legal observers by refusing to hear ("called denying certiorari") appeals from five states of decisions in three federal appellate circuits that said that bans on marriage equality violated the federal constitution. The nearly immediate effect of the Supreme Court action means that the fight for marriage equality in those states (Oklahoma, Indiana, Utah, Wisconsin and Virginia) is over. Once final orders are issued from the corresponding U.S. appellate circuits (which usually takes a month) same-sex couples will be able to get married in those states. Effectively, it means that as of today there are now 24 states that "have" marriage equality.

Very soon after those orders go into effect the number of states with marriage equality will include the other six states within the 4th, 7th and 10th circuits covered by the previously issued rulings in those marriage equality cases: Colorado, Kansas, Wyoming, North Carolina, South Carolina, and West Virginia.

Evan Wolfson Founder and President of Freedom to Marry issued the following statement:

Today’s decision by the Supreme Court leaves in force five favorable marriage rulings reached in three federal appellate courts, ensuring the freedom to marry for millions more Americans around the country. The Court’s letting stand these victories means that gay couples will soon share in the freedom to marry in 30 states, representing 60% of the American people. But we are one country, with one Constitution, and the Court’s delay in affirming the freedom to marry nationwide prolongs the patchwork of state-to-state discrimination and the harms and indignity that the denial of marriage still inflicts on too many couples in too many places. As waves of freedom to marry litigation continue to surge, we will continue to press the urgency and make the case that America – all of America -- is ready for the freedom to marry, and the Supreme Court should finish the job.

I wonder if this surprising result is an example of the Posner effect, i.e. Judge Richard Posner's evisceration of the arguments against marriage equality in oral arguments and then eloquently in his written decision (upheld today by the Supreme Court) overturning Indiana's and Wisconsin's bans on marriage equality.

Woo hoo!

SCOTUS TO Consider 7(!) Marriage Equality Appeals On Friday September 29

There are now seven(!) marriage equality cases from four different states pending before the United States Supreme Court. On September 29th the Court will likely consider how to dispose of thousands of writs of certiorari that include appeals from the 10th Circuit (Utah and Oklahoma), the 4th Circuit (Virginia) and the 7th Circuit (Indiana and Wisconsin). There currently is no circuit split, because every appellate court decision released since last year's landmark United States v Windsor decision has resulted in a win for the cause of marriage equality.

The 9th Circuit heard oral arguments in two cases on Monday (from Nevada and Idaho) and the 6th Circuit has already heard oral arguments earlier this summer and a decision from either court could be issued at any time. It is thought likely that the Supreme Court may hold over deciding any of the pending certs until the 6th and or 9th circuits release their decisions.

However, regardless it is unlikely the Court will be able to escape resolving the fundamental question of whether marriage equality is part of the United States constitution beyond the end of the 2014-15 term which ends in June.

7th U.S. Circuit Strikes Down WISCONSIN & INDIANA Bans On Marriage Equality

Less than two weeks after hearing oral arguments in the marriage equality cases involving Indiana and Wisconsin a 3-judge panel of the 7th U.S. Circuit unanimously upheld the lower court rulings in Wolf v. Walker (Wisconsin) and Baskin v. Bogan (Indiana), in a scathing opinion written by Judge Richard Posner striking down state marriage bans as violating the federal constitution. The 7th becomes the third federal appellate court, after the 10th in Denver, CO (June 25 and July 18)and the 4th in Richmond, VA (July 28)  to rule in favor of marriage equality this year.

QUEER QUOTE: 7th Circuit Panel Eviscerates IND. & WIS. Arguments Against Marriage Equality

Today's Queer Quote comes from Tuesday's oral arguments before the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in marriage equality cases from Wisconsin (Wolf v. Walker) and Indiana (Baskin v. Bogan) where the three judge panel, which included the eminent jurist Richard Posner, completely demolished the states' arguments for their bans on marriage equality.

Posmer is a conservative judge and the intellectual lodestar of a form of jurisprudence that combines economics and conservative legal principles. He does not countenance fools lightly, and he savaged the lawyers making post hoc arguments to defend their states' marriage bans (when everyone knows that it was animus against gender-variant behavior that is at the root of these laws).

These excerpts, provided by Professor Josh Blackman, are today's Queer Quote:

Posner: What concrete factual arguments do you have against homosexual marriage?
Samuelson: Well, we have, uh, the Burkean argument, that it’s reasonable and rational to proceed slowly.
Posner: That’s the tradition argument. It’s feeble! Look, they could have trotted out Edmund Burke in the Loving case. What’s the difference? [Note: Loving v. Virginia was a 1967 decision striking down bans on interracial marriage] . . . There was a tradition of not allowing black and whites, and, actually, other interracial couples from marrying. It was a tradition. It got swept aside. Why is this tradition better?Samuelson: The tradition is based on experience. And it’s the tradition of western culture.
Posner: What experience! It’s based on hate, isn’t it?Samuelson: No, not at all, your honor.
Posner: You don’t think there’s a history of rather savage discrimination against homosexuals?

Ouch! But, wait, there's more!

• “These people and their adopted children are harmed by your law,” Judge Richard Posner said of gay and lesbian couples who are barred from getting married. “The question is what is the offsetting benefit of your law. Who is being helped?”

• Wisconsin Assistant Attorney General Timothy Samuelson responded that society as a whole benefited by preserving marriage as it has long been defined. Posner pressed on, asking if anyone would be harmed if same-sex couples were allowed to be married.

• But Posner expressed skepticism of the idea that the states were trying to promote procreation. “You allow all these sterile couples to get married,” he said. “Why are you doing that if you’re so interested in procreation?”

• Posner, who at times appeared to lecture the attorneys defending the bans, focused on the ability of same-sex couples to adopt children. He noted adopted children would benefit if their parents could claim the tax breaks and other perks of being married.

• “These children would be better off if their parents could marry, no? It’s obvious,” Posner said.

• “Why do you prefer heterosexual adoption to homosexual adoption?” Judge Posner, appointed to the bench by President Reagan, asked. When Fisher began responding that the marriage laws were unrelated to adoption, Posner was almost vitriolic in his response, saying of the state’s treatment of the children of same-sex couples, “You want them to be worse off.”

• At different times, Posner referred to Fisher’s arguments as “pathetic,” “ridiculous,” and “absurd.”

• “How can tradition be the reason?” he asked, mocking the answer by responding that saying “we’ve been doing a stupid thing” for a long time certainly wouldn’t be enough of a justification to uphold a law or practice.

 And this basically encapsulates why so many federal judges are ruling against state bans on marriage equality. There's no benefit to heterosexuals and there is clearly defined harm to same-sex couples (and their children).

Posner is described as the most cited legal theorist of the 20th century. Most observers expect a unanimous ruling from the 7th circuit upholding the lower court's judgments that state bans on marriage equality are unconstitutional under the federal constitution.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Upholds Domestic Partnership Law Despite 2006 Initiative

The Wisconsin Supreme Court issued a ruling yesterday upholding the constitutionality of that state's domestic partnership law against a challenge that it violated the 2006 statewide initiative that banned marriage equality and any “legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage.”

So, people who oppose same-sex marriage in Wisconsin are also so heartless that they want to oppose domestic partnerships as well. Wisconsin also has a bizarre statute on the books which can subject you to prosecution if you attempt to violate their marriage laws.

Luckily, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that domestic partnerships are distinct from marriage. Remember, we're not talking about civil unions here, which are (or were) another legal entity created on the way from complete non-recognition of same-sex relationships to full marriage equality.

Interestingly, right now Wisconsin is just a federal judge's stay away from having full marriage equality be the law of the land. Until then, same-sex couples at least have access to domestic partnership benefits in the meantime, thanks to the state's highest court.

Hat/tip to Joe.My.God

7th Circuit Sets Auugust 26 For Oral Arguments in WISCONSIN & INDIANA Marriage Equality cases

The 7th U.S. Circuit has announced the date of the oral arguments in marriage equality cases for Indiana and Wisconsin. On June 25th, Indiana's ban on same-sex marriage as struck down by a  judge and the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals later issued a stay on the judge's ruling (when the judge refused to). Similarly, in Wisconsin a federal judge struck down the same-sex marriage ban on June 7 but the judge later stayed her own ruling.

Now comes word that a 3-judge panel of the 7th Circuit will hear oral arguments before the end of the summer:

The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals announced Friday on its online docket that it has rescheduled oral arguments for both states' appeals of federal court decisions for Aug. 26. 

Federal judges in Indiana and Wisconsin overturned each state's gay marriage ban in separate rulings. When both states appealed, the 7th Circuit Court combined the cases and set aside the previous hearing date. 

The 7th Circuit also denied requests that the states' appeals be heard before the full 10-member court instead of a three-judge panel, as is customary.

hat/tip to Joe Jervis

QUEER QUOTE: ACLU Urges Wisconsin To Decide Marriage Equality Appeal Soon

The ACLU of Wisconsin is managing the lawsuit Wolf v. Walker for marriage equality which led to a federal judge striking down the ban on same-sex marriage (and then issued a stay on her order enjoining the state from enforcing her ruling). The state of Wisconsin has 30 days from the date of the judge's ruling (issued 11 days ago) to file its appeal to the 7th U.S. Appellate Circuit, which by my count would be Sunday July 6.

The ACLU has issued a public letter to Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen asking him to make  a decision earlier so that the marriage equality question can be resolved sooner than later and same-sex couples will know whether their marriages will stand or not.

Our clients and other same-sex couples in Wisconsin are faced with the continuing indignity of seeing their families denigrated by the state’s refusal to allow them to marry or to recognize their marriages entered elsewhere... Even if you [Van Hollen] believe you will win, please file your appeal promptly to resolve the uncertainty that same-sex couples, their children, as well as employers and other businesses and government offices who interact with same-sex couples are facing until the constitutionality of Wisconsin’s ban on marriage is resolved.

 Van Hollen is not running for re-election this year, but Republican Governor Scott Walker is. Fellow Republican Governor Tom Corbett (who is also running for re-election but is unlikely to win) earlier this year made his state the 19th state to have permanent marriage equality when he didn't appeal a marriage equality ruling.

WISCONSIN: Federal Judge Issues Stay and Injunction Halting Marriage Equality

Bad news out of Wisconsin! Federal judge Barbara Crabb finally issued a final order implementing her previously issued decision in the same-sex marriage case of Wolf v Walker in favor of marriage equality from last week and included a stay and injunction that makes it clear that no marriage licenses should be issued to same-sex couples while the matter is appealed to the U.S. 7th Circuit.

This means that the multiple counties and big cities like Madison and Milwaukee where same-sex couples were being issued marriage licenses have to stop doing so immediately.

The judge wrote in her final order that the Supreme Court's previous decision this past January to issue a stay in the case of whether Kitchen v. Herbert striking down Utah's ban on marriage equality should go into effect compelled her to do the same since the two cases are indistinguishable from each other. All this year federal judges in various jurisdictions have been striking down laws banning marriage equality in several states (Michigan, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas and Virginia, and many others) usually issuing stays automatically preventing marriages from going into effect.

In some jurisdictions, notably Oregon and Pennsylvania, the state officials agreed with the ruling and thus did not appeal it, causing marriage equality to go into effect immediately in those states. However, in others, like Wisconsin, politicians have continued to battle in court to uphold their discriminatory marriage laws and are appealing to the appropriate federal appellate circuit. The 4th and 10th appellate circuits have heard oral arguments in their marriage equality cases and could issue decisions at any time, although most observers do not expect one to do so until much later this year at the earliest.

Hat/tip to Joe Jervis

QUEER QUOTE: Milwaukee Paper Editorializes In Favor Of Marriage Equality

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel published an editorial today in favor of the state of Wisconsin dropping its appeal of the recent ruling by federal district court judge Barbara Crabb allowing marriage equality in the Badger State. This excerpt is today's Queer Quote:

Nearly a year ago, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which barred the federal government from recognizing or providing federal benefits for same-sex couples married in states where such unions are legal. At the same time, it also declined in a California case to say whether state bans on gay marriage were constitutional or not. While not a clear victory for same-sex marriage advocates, the ruling did mean that California became the 13th state to permit same-sex marriage. 

Since those rulings, federal courts have struck down state bans in 11 states. Now, it's Wisconsin's turn: The decision that same-sex couples in Wisconsin — and all who believe in equality — were awaiting finally came Friday afternoon. U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb ruled that Wisconsin's ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. 

This was not just a victory for gay couples; it was a victory for equal rights for all Americans, and it follows a pattern from the civil rights era, when federal courts played a key role in striking down laws that had imposed second-class citizenship on African-Americans. These bans had done the same to gay couples; it's good to see the bans meeting the same fate. 

[Wisconsin Attorney General] Van Hollen argues that Crabb's ruling should be stayed so as not to create confusion for the nearly 300 couples who have been issued marriage licenses in Milwaukee and Dane counties since Friday's ruling. Other counties are holding off on issuing such licenses, awaiting the state's appeal. And, in truth, Crabb could have been clearer in her ruling, which, unlike other courts' rulings, doesn't explicitly say what county clerks should be doing. Crabb is asking for more information before deciding whether to stay her own decision while it is appealed. There is a chance the ruling will be stayed even though Crabb did deny Van Hollen's request on Monday. 

But Van Hollen only has a point if he appeals Crabb's ruling. If he doesn't, the argument and the confusion are over. He should refrain from such an appeal and recognize that Crabb's ruling — like other such rulings across the country — is a victory for freedom for all Americans.

There is precedent here, of course. Republican Governor Tom Corbett decided not to appeal a similar ruling bringing marriage equality to Pennsylvania. Republican Governor Scott Walker could do the same thing in Wisconsin, but Walker has presidential ambitions, so such a progressive decision is unlikely to occur anytime soon.

Hat/tip to Joe.My.God

Now There Are 20! Wisconsin's Ban on Marriage Equality Struck Down!

Of course, just hours after I wrote a post with a map depicting the 19 states that have marriage equality, a 20th was added when a federal judge ruled in Wolf v. Walker that Wisconsin's state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional.

The lawsuit was filed by the ACLU, which celebrated thusly:

"We are tremendously happy that these loving and committed couples will now be able to access the security and recognition that only marriage provides,” said Larry Dupuis, legal director of the ACLU of Wisconsin. “These discriminatory laws are falling around the country and it is only right that Wisconsin move forward as well.” 

"Wisconsin’s constitutional ban on marriage for same-sex couples is a striking example of intentional discrimination towards lesbians and gay men in Wisconsin,” said John Knight, staff attorney with the ACLU Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender Project. “The marriage ban has sent a powerful message  that same-sex couples are undeserving of the dignity and important legal protections associated with marriage. Judge Crabb’s decision that same-sex couples are equal under the law sends an entirely different message -- one inviting and encouraging fair treatment and respect for these couples."

Couples are getting married in Madison and Milwaukee:

There are now 20 states in which same-sex couples can get legally married and twenty consecutive federal court ruling since last year's Supreme Court ruling in U.. v. Windsor. Apparently Justice Antonin Scalia's dissent in that case was cited no less than a dozen times in Judge Crabb's decision striking down Wisconsin's marriage law!

Hat/tip to Joe Jervis

Lawsuit Filed Against Wisconsin Bizarre Marriage Evasion Law

A lawsuit has been filed in Wisconsin by same-sex couples who want to get married. Wisconsin has a 2006 constitutional amendment that declares same-sex marriage is not valid or recognized in the state as well as any "legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals." The situation for same-sex couples is even more dire because the Badger state also has a "marriage evasion law" which criminalizes any attempt to evade the duly enacted marriage laws of the state. So, if a same-sex couple goes to a neighboring state like Minnesota to get married, not only is there new marriage not recognized by their home state (although it would be recognized by the federal government) and it is possible they could be prosecuted by state officials and face a $10,000 fine and up to 9 months in prison!

The Washington Blade reports:

Like other lawsuits filed throughout the country, the 29-page complaint filed by the groups in Wisconsin alleges the state’s ban on same-sex marriage violates equal protection and due process under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

“Although Wisconsin and this country have taken some steps to reduce discrimination against lesbians and gays, Wisconsin’s ban on marriage for same-sex couples is a striking and continuing vestige of the long history of discrimination toward lesbians and gay men,” the complaint says.

[...]

Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, however, pledged in a statement to the Blade that he would the defend the marriage amendment.

“This constitutional amendment was approved by a large majority of Wisconsin residents,” Van Hollen said. “I believe the amendment is constitutional, and I will vigorously defend it.”

The Wisconsin litigation is among 40 pending lawsuits in 22 states throughout the country seeking marriage rights for gay couples.

Wow. There's as many as 40 lawsuits in 22 states seeking full marriage rights for same-sex couples now. These lawsuits will continue until the law treats same-sex couples equally to opposite-sex couples.

Celebrity Friday: Ontario Now Has Lesbian Premier

Oh Canada! Kathleen Wynne has been elected to head the Ontario Liberal Party, which means that she will become the Premier of the Province of Ontario, Canada. Ontario contains the nation's capital city Ottawa as well as its largest city, Toronto. A Province in Canada is equivalent to a State in America and a Premier is the equivalent to an American governor. However, due to the parliamentary system the people do not directly elect the Premier, Premiers are selected at party convention by members of parliament and other activists in the party or coalition which currently has the most number of seats in the provinicial parliament. It is this election which Ms. Wynne won, making her the first woman and first openly LGBT premier in the history of Canada, according to the Globe and Mail:

A policy wonk with a laid-back, likeable persona, Ms. Wynne successfully pitched herself as a woman ready to govern, promising to bring the legislature back next month and push forward the party’s agenda by working with the opposition.

Despite concerns she was too low-key to fight her way to victory, Ms. Wynne turned in a formidable performance at the convention, with a raucous entrance that saw her supporters dancing on-stage, followed by a speech that combined personal anecdotes with partisan rhetoric.

She also addressed, head-on, the worry some Liberals had expressed that an openly-gay candidate could not win a general election. She pointed out that the other candidates – a Portuguese-Canadian, an Indo-Canadian, a Catholic and a woman – would once have been thought unelectable.

“I don’t believe the people of Ontario judge their leaders on the basis of race, colour or sexual orientation,” she said to loud cheers from her supporters. “I don’t believe they hold that prejudice in their hearts.”

The United States has never had an openly LGBT person elected Governor of a state and there are only a handful of openly LGBT people who have ever been elected to statewide office in this country. I wonder how long before there will be an openly LGBT governor of  a state?

After all, Tammy Baldwin was just elected to the United States Senate in November from Wisconsin. It is very likely that Christine Quinn will be elected Mayor of New York City later this year, which is probably a more powerful position than being governor of certain states. Annise Parker is currently in her second term as Mayor of Houston.

(It should be noted that all the LGBT people who are making significant gains in politics recently have been women, not gay or bisexual men.)

Hat/tip to Joe.My.God

Celebrity Friday: U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin (D)

Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) is the Advocate magazine's Person of the Year for 2012. In the cover story, there is some interesting background about the life story of the person who became the first known non-heterosexual to be elected to the United States Senate. She was valedictorian of her high school class in Madison, Wisconsin and went on to Smith College where she majored in mathematics and political science.

The article summarizes highlights of the Baldwin's long political career:

From her election to the Dane County Board of Supervisors at age 24 to her service in the Wisconsin State Assembly to her election as the first openly gay nonincumbent in the U.S. House of Representatives in 1998, Baldwin, now 50, has always been a trailblazer. Now, with her seat in the U.S. Senate, the granddaughter of the head costume designer for the University of Wisconsin’s theater department moves to her most visible stage to date in what has been called the “world’s most exclusive club.” She joins the Senate as the freshman member with the most seniority.

You can read the article online yourself, or very soon you will again be able to buy copies of The Advocate on news stands around the country!

Tammy Baldwin Sworn In As 1st Openly Gay U.S. Senator

Tammy Baldwin is now officially the first openly gay member of one of the world's most exclusive legislative bodies, the United States Senate!

Baldwin Becomes 1st Openly Lesbian Senator

Tammy Baldwin made history by becoming the first openly LGBT candidate to be elected to the United States Senate tonight. She also became the first woman to be elected statewide in Wisconsin.

And I’m well aware that I will be the first openly gay member of the United States Senate. #Tammy2012 #WIsen
— Tammy Baldwin(@TammyBaldwinWI) November 7, 2012

WI-SEN: Lesbian Tammy Baldwin Takes Lead

Tammy Baldwin is the first openly lesbian person elected to the U.S. House of Representatives. She has represented the 5th Congressional District of Wisconsin surrounding Madison for over a decade but announced this time last year that she would run for the open U.S. Senate seat vacated by retiring Democrat Herb Kohl. Baldwin has done a good job of raising money, easily won the  Democratic nomination and was even able to pass on her congressional seat to another openly LGBT person, Mark Pocan.

However, Wisconsin is the most politically polarized state in the country due to the shenanigans of Republican Governor Scott Walker and the Democratic party's use of recall elections to fight back. This had the effect of energizing Republicans, damaging Baldwin's standing in her U.S. Senate race against 4-time former Governor Tommy Thompson and even putting the entire formerly blue state in play in the presidential contest as well. (Although the latter may be due to the selection of fellow Wisconsin congressman and rabid "Objectivist" Paul Ryan to the presidential ticket.)

Anyway, yesterday came news that for the first time Baldwin is pulling ahead of Thompson in the race, as shown in not one, but two, polls.

The first was an internal poll conducted for the Baldwin campaign which puts her up 50-45 among likely voters, with a margin of error of 3.5 points.

Baldwin leads Thompson, 50 percent to 45 percent, while 5 percent of respondents are undecided. The Democrat's lead is not considered statistically significant because it is inside the poll's margin of error. 

Thompson is considered the favorite in the race, thanks to his history of appealing to independents and moderate Democrats and his four gubernatorial victories. After emerging from a crowded GOP primary last month, Thompson led Baldwin in several independent polls.

The second was a poll by PPP which shows Baldwin ahead 48-45, with a margin of error of 3 points.

In the U.S. Senate race, Baldwin was backed by 48 percent of respondents, while 45 percent supported Thompson. 

The poll found 53 percent of respondents had a negative impression of Thompson, while 40 percent had a favorable view of him. It found Baldwin's favorable-unfavorable split was 44-45.
The survey also found 90 percent of respondents were committed to their choice in the Senate race.

Electing an openly LGBT person to the United States Senate would be an historic moment, and thanks to the rules of that deliberative (and dysfunctional) body would allow Senator Baldwin to thwart almost all anti-LGBT legislation, and perhaps promote pro-LGBT bills as well.

Hat/tip to Gay Politics

Mark Pocan Will Be 8th Openly Gay U.S. Rep. Ever

Mark Pocan turned 48 years old yesterday, the same day he won the Democratic primary in the 2nd Congressional district of Wisconsin last night. Pocan will take the place of Tammy Baldwin who represented the college town of Madison and its environs for 14 years in Congress as the first (and only) openly lesbian member of Congress. Baldwin is giving up her seat to run for open Wisconsin U.S. Senate seat.

Pocan will become only the 8th person in history to serve in Congress as an openly LGBT member of that body when it convenes on January 3, 2013. Other (non-incumbent) openly LGBT candidates hoping to join the U.S. House of Representatives this cycle are Mark Takano (CA-41), Krysten Sinema (AZ-9), Sean Patrick Maloney (NY-18), and Richard Tisei (MA-6). Incumbent U.S. Representatives David Cicilline (RI-1) and Jared Polis (CO-2) are running for re-election. Longtime incumbent Barney Frank (MA-05) is retiring.