Carol Schwartz responds to GLAA 2008 D.C. Council questionnaire

Responses of Carol Schwartz to GLAA 2008 Questionnaire
for DC Council Candidates

GLAA 2008 Rating for Carol Schwartz (Possible range: +/- 10 points total)
Yes/No Substance Record Championship Total
2 4 3 0 9

PUBLIC SAFETY

1. Will you support funding for mandatory gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (GLBT) sensitivity and diversity training for all members of the Metropolitan Police Department and the Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department?

Yes. For as long as I have been involved in public life, I have advocated training all city workers to be sensitive to our diversity, and to be professional and responsive to each and every person regardless of who they are, or how they live their lives. Not only have I supported policies that speak to this, I have also helped to increase funding to make sure that training our employees to be appropriately sensitive to diversity becomes a reality.

As we know, one of the most notorious and horrendous examples of how professional public servants should not act occurred in August of 1995, when a DC firefighter refused treatment to transgender car crash victim Tyra Hunter, and she died. I joined with GLAA and others in demanding that sensitivity and diversity training be made mandatory for all members of the Metropolitan Police Department and the DC Fire/EMS Department, and a diversity training program named for Ms. Hunter was established at Fire/EMS. Unfortunately, implementation of this program has not been as full as it should be, as evidenced by the case of diversity trainer Kenda Kirby, who sued the Department after disparaging and anti-Gay remarks were made about her because she is a Lesbian.

When I learned that the Fire/EMS was refusing to make available copies of diversity training materials a few years ago, I immediately contacted the Fire Chief and urged him to ensure that the material be released, as had been promised. Further, it is unfortunate that resistance to diversity and sensitivity training - and trainers - appears to be a continuing problem at Fire/EMS. While I am pleased that the Kirby case has now been settled, I remain troubled by the fact that probable cause for discrimination was found. Obviously, problems persist, and to me, this is not tolerable. I remain open to suggestions about how we, as a Council, can act to ensure that all our employees are more effectively trained in diversity issues, and would be pleased to work with GLAA and others on legislative efforts to help to bring about improvements. I will continue to push for more diversity training, as well as to encourage the Executive to get rid of workers who behave with intolerance toward anyone.

2. Will you support a budget for the Office of Police Complaints large enough to continue to avoid developing a backlog of cases?

Yes. As an original co-sponsor of the legislation that revived its predecessor entity, the Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB), I have actively supported the Office of Police Complaints. This support has included finding more funding for the Office’s predecessor during the FY 2001 budget process, when I located an additional $100,000 that I had found in agencies under my purview and had it shifted to CCRB. I am certainly open to increasing funding for the Office of Police Complaints and would hope that the Mayor would, in the next budget he presents to the Council, make clearing the Office’s case backlog a priority. As I have said in the past, a case backlog is not only unfair to those who have filed complaints, it also diminishes the effectiveness of the Office – something that we should not allow to happen.

3. Given MPD's controversial Neighborhood Safety Zone initiative (which set up checkpoints and barricades in the Trinidad neighborhood) and Safe Homes initiative (to knock on doors and ask to conduct warrantless gun searches), will you support efforts to rein in police officials who respond to legitimate crime concerns with short-term fixes and public relations gestures that infringe upon Fourth Amendment and other constitutionally protected civil liberties?

Yes. The rights of the District’s citizens must always be maintained. While I understand the desire – and the need – of law enforcement to place intense focus on high-crime areas, people’s rights cannot be trampled upon as a result of that intense focus. Ideally, before the Police Department implements new policies that could possibly infringe on the rights of individuals, those policies should be adequately reviewed both internally and externally by appropriate bodies, and legal opinions should be rendered. However, if such legal review cannot be accomplished before implementation, then I would hope that, at the very least, the review would be performed concurrently and, if found to be illegal, the activity would stop. I agree that we must insist that any complaints or alleged violations of rights that result from the Neighborhood Safety Zone Initiative be properly investigated and acted upon.

4. Given that the Department of Corrections continues to violate the D.C. Human Rights Act by using genitalia as a basis for gender identification rather than an individual’s gender identity or expression, will you support the Council directly adopting a rulemaking to make it unmistakably clear that DOC must stop discriminating against transgender inmates and detainees?

Yes. In fact, on July 23rd, after being made aware of this by the GLAA, I immediately wrote a letter to Mayor Fenty to voice my opposition to a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that seeks to amend Chapter 8 of Title 4 of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations, which pertains to the “gender expression provision” of the DC Human Rights Act.  Of particular concern to me are proposed new Subsections 801.3 and 801.4, which would exempt the DC Department of Corrections from the Human Rights Act as it applies to transgender detainees and prisoners.

In my letter (a copy of which is attached) I wrote, “It has been reported that the Executive’s reasoning for proposing to exempt the Department of Corrections is that it will help the Department protect transgender inmates from possibly being harmed based on who they are. But, the purpose of the law you seek to circumvent with this exemption is precisely that: to protect a certain class of citizens from all kinds of harm, based on who they are.”

I added, “Regulations are supposed to mirror the law, not change the intent of the law.  This change would, in effect, turn the intent of the law upside-down…..Further, I believe the Department can and should work to ensure that the safety of transgender inmates is as assured as it is for every other inmate, and that it can do so without altering the provisions of the Human Rights Act.”

I have always tried to do what I can as a Councilmember to ensure that such issues are satisfactorily addressed, and will continue to do so if re-elected.

AIDS AND PUBLIC HEALTH

5. Do you agree that the drive to make HIV testing routine among District residents should include funding for counseling and referrals to treatment facilities for those testing positive?

Yes. While I support making voluntary HIV testing routine in medical settings, as the CDC has recommended, I believe it is necessary that before a test is administered, the patient should be given adequate information about what HIV/AIDS is, how it can be transmitted, how it can be prevented and explain the meaning of a negative or positive test result. The patient should also be given the opportunity to ask questions and the ability to decline taking the test. If the patient tests positive, they must receive immediate counseling and linkage to treatment. Receiving an HIV positive test result is a life changing traumatic experience, so we must make sure adequate counseling is available. Proper healthcare and treatment is a must. If patients receive a negative test result they should also be counseled. Some may receive a negative test result and, as a result, feel freer to engage in activities that put them at risk. We want to make sure that does not happen. The District of Columbia should commit to ensuring that in addition to making HIV tests readily accessible, that all these critical components are in place with adequate funding for quality care.

I would also note that the recent revised estimate of HIV incidence in the United States has particular resonance for the District of Columbia. The CDC noted that the epidemic continues to disproportionately burden African-Americans and Gay men of all racial and ethnic groups. In addition, we must continue to try to reduce the stigma associated with HIV, which persists in keeping many from getting tested, particularly Latino immigrants. These three populations are significant in the District of Columbia and we should do everything possible to assure their well-being and good health. The fact that one in 20 citizens in the District is believed to be HIV-positive, and that 10% of all children born in the United States with HIV live in the District, indicates in no uncertain terms that we must do more to turn this epidemic around.

6. Are you committed to continuing and expanding the District’s condom distribution program to include water-based lubricant and improved tracking of their distribution to specified locations?

Yes. I have been disappointed in the lack of condom availability throughout the District and the apparent drop in the number of condoms distributed by the HIV/AIDS Administration. I am pleased, however, that increasing condom distribution is a priority for the new Director. For people who are engaged in sexual activity, the most effective means for prevention of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections is the correct and consistent use of condoms. With the high number of HIV infections in the District, I would expect HAA to be increasing not only the number of condoms, but also the number of locations where they are available, such as bars, hotels, social clubs, school nurses’ offices, and public agencies that serve at-risk populations. The District should look to NYC, which branded its own high-quality condoms, as a way to improve social marketing of this important prevention tool. In addition to having condoms and water-based lubricants available, there also needs to be messaging to encourage their use in combination with other HIV and other STI prevention strategies. HAA should issue periodic reports on how many condoms are distributed and to determine where efforts should be expanded or revised. This latter effort must accompany a robust HIV surveillance system which helps to identify hot spots and primary routes of transmission.

7. The District has been forced by the federal government to switch from a unique identifier system to a names reporting system for people testing positive for HIV. Will you support legislation to strengthen our medical privacy laws, such as by creating a private right of action for those whose confidentiality is violated by District government employees or contractors?

Yes, I would support legislation to strengthen our medical privacy laws, but I am not prepared to answer “yes” to allowing for a private right of action against the District government, its employees or contractors. However, I am open to further discussion on this suggestion.

We need a competent HIV reporting system that will give us accurate information on the course of the epidemic in order to spend our resources wisely, and to qualify for our proper share of care, treatment and prevention funds from the federal government. Obviously, our HIV reporting system should not compromise the trust of our citizens in our HIV testing, care and treatment programs. While there have been no reported breaches of the District’s systems, we must remain vigilant that confidentiality be 100% assured; otherwise, we run the risk of people not getting tested out of a fear that they may be exposed.

While federal HIPAA laws require privacy protection for patient records and provide for penalties, I would be concerned that if a private right of action were to be added to the mix, we could run the risk of lawsuits that could drain funds from needed programs and services, including those for people with HIV/AIDS. Once a private right of action is given in one area, it opens the door for all. Still, District laws should certainly be written with the protection of people’s confidentiality in mind, and should allow for violators to be punished if privacy is breached.

HUMAN RIGHTS

8. Will you support a budget for the Office of Human Rights large enough to allow it to keep the discrimination complaint backlog at or below 70 cases and keep at or below 210 days the average time it takes after the filing of a complaint to issue a finding of probable cause?

Yes. I commend the director and staff at the Office of Human Rights for the improvements made thus far, including increased promotion of the Language Access Act. Most importantly, though, is the progress that the Office has made in clearing the backlog of open cases which, in testimony before the Council, was last reported to have been reduced to 60.

As Chair of the Committee on Workforce Development and Government Operations, in the most recent budget cycle I directed that an additional $40,000 be added to the Office’s budget. I will continue to support a funding level that should make it possible not only to clear old cases, but also to keep pace with new ones. As I have said in the past, each case that remains in the backlog represents a problem that has not been rectified, and therefore more likely to be repeated.

As Committee Chair, in addition to increasing funding for the Office, I also acted swiftly to confirm qualified Commissioners for the Human Rights Commission – and to prevent unqualified persons from receiving confirmation.

9. Will you block ceremonial resolutions and otherwise decline to honor individuals or organizations that promote any sort of bigotry?

Yes. I consider each resolution based on its individual merits, and am always open to hearing any concerns about specific resolutions as they come before the Council. I will not knowingly support resolutions that honor organizations or individuals whose views are discriminatory.

10. Are you committed to publicizing and enforcing the provisions of the D.C. Human Rights Act forbidding discrimination on the basis of gender identity or expression?

Yes. The laws of the District of Columbia must be respected, and publicized. I think that everyone should know what the provisions are. Under our law, the provisions of the Human Rights Act are required to be posted in workplaces, just as is the case with other employment laws. Whether or not this is now being done by the Executive would be something worth checking into. Should enforcement of the posting requirement prove to be an issue, then certainly this is something that I will address with the Mayor.

11. Do you agree that the Director of the Office of Human Rights should be required to have professional training and experience in civil rights law enforcement?

It is very important that the chief enforcer of the District’s human rights laws have a strong background that includes relevant training and experience in the many issues that the Office will face. Although I am pleased that the current Director has quickly established a working relationship with GLAA and other groups, it is important that citizen representation and participation be a component of any future efforts to fill this position (and before a nominee is announced).

MARRIAGE AND FAMILY

12. Do you support legal recognition of marriages between partners of the same sex?

Yes. (There – I said it.) In a column for the May 30, 2008, Washington Blade, I wrote: “Do I have any personal, moral or religious issues with same-sex marriage? Absolutely not.” The fact is, I never did have any such issues. However, as I also said in the column, I have never been willing – and am not willing now – to risk sacrificing our domestic partnership laws, which took 10 long years for Congress to allow us to implement. These laws are strong and, thanks to the input from GLAA and others, getting stronger all the time.

I have been a longtime supporter and advocate of providing the same rights and responsibilities for same-sex couples that opposite-sex couples enjoy. That is why I have fought consistently for expanding domestic partnership rights in the District and for overturning Congress’s long-time rider preventing the District from implementing its program. I am proud to have played a role in that fight, and since Congress lifted its rider, I have co-sponsored and supported every legislative effort to expand our domestic partnership law.

While the general public, and hopefully the Congress, are becoming more receptive to same-sex marriage, there are many unfair obstacles we still must overcome as a result of Congress's veto power over our laws. We must continue to work to end Congressional review over District law, and I have been working hard toward that end throughout my nearly 43 years here in DC.

So, I remain reluctant to move forward with same-sex marriage today, but based on both my record and my words, you know where I will be when that time does come. Again, as I wrote in the Blade column (copy attached): “Whether it was ending discrimination against teachers for their sexual orientation (as I worked to accomplish as a member of the Board of Education), or whether it was dealing with the AIDS crisis or other health issues (as I did during my 17 years as a member of the Board of Directors of Whitman-Walker Clinic), or whether it was getting rid of the congressional rider prohibiting Gay adoptions (as I fought vigorously and successfully to achieve), or whether it was adding additional resources to our Commission on Human Rights (which I recently did) – I was there … And when the day comes, and I hope it is very soon, I will be there – as always.”

13. Will you support the legislative and/or regulatory changes necessary to ensure that the District recognizes marriages legally established in other jurisdictions?

Yes, I will. In addition, since other jurisdictions are instituting other legal forms of partnership, such as civil unions, the District should recognize these as well. These relationships are also deserving of all the benefits that our society provides.

However, just as with same-sex marriage itself, the District must still be cautious in its approach on the issue of legal recognition of marriages and other forms of partnerships sanctioned elsewhere. Again, this has to do with the unpleasant fact that Congress could do us harm. We should always be thinking strategically, and that includes when and how we recognize out-of-state unions between two people of the same sex. It would be a shame if our efforts to recognize marriages performed in other jurisdictions led to action by Congress which would impede progress toward providing greater equality to our own Gay and Lesbian couples. But it would be terrific if we could develop a strategy wherein our legal recognition of these couples helps to fuel progress toward our own ultimate goal. As I have always said, it is my hope that the loving, stable and committed relationships of any two people are valued, honored and respected under the law. It’s a shame that strategy has to play a role in when and how we recognize the love that two people share, but that’s a reality we have to deal with here in the District of Columbia.

14. Do you agree that private contractors doing business with the District should be required to provide domestic partner benefits including health insurance?

Since the District does not currently require contractors doing business with the District to carry health insurance for their own employees it would be difficult to require domestic partner benefits, including health insurance. However, if the District were to require health insurance for its private contractors, I believe they should certainly include domestic partner benefits.

I hope that, as with scores of Fortune 500 companies, and hundreds of companies not on that list, that all employers – including all those that contract with the District – will become enlightened to the fact that providing health insurance to all their employees and families, including offering benefits to their employees’ domestic partners, is not only the right thing to do, but also that it fosters greater loyalty and commitment on the part of those employees.

PUBLIC EDUCATION AND YOUTH

15. Do you oppose both federal and local voucher programs that fund students in religious schools that are beyond the protections of the D.C. Human Rights Act?

Yes. I have opposed vouchers. The most recent time that vouchers became an issue of great debate locally, I was vocal in my opposition to having Congress foist them upon us, and I joined with Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton in actively campaigning against vouchers on Capitol Hill. Not only do vouchers drain resources from our public schools, they quite often are used for students to attend schools that discriminate, or schools that reject sexual health education and sound science. Our public dollars should not be used to pay tuitions at such institutions. I am, however, a strong supporter of options being available for parents and students, and that is why I have favored public charter schools.

16. Will you oppose the use of either federal or District taxpayer funds to promote “abstinence only until marriage” sex education that undermines safer-sex programs by discouraging the use of condoms and that effectively tells gay and lesbian students that they must remain celibate forever because they may not legally marry?

Yes. I oppose abstinence-only sex education. However, in comprehensive sex education programs, I am not at all opposed to encouraging abstinence as a useful practice to consider. But, it should never undermine the message of safer sex for teens or young adults who choose to be sexually active, nor should it be taught in such a way that discourages the use of condoms or denigrates GLBT relationships.

CONSUMERS AND BUSINESSES

17. Do you support the right of adults in the District to choose adult-oriented entertainment for themselves, and the right of appropriately licensed and zoned businesses to provide it?

Yes. I am a civil libertarian at heart, and I believe that consenting adults should have the right to make legal choices, and in the District of Columbia, thankfully one of those legal choices includes adult entertainment. Also, I agree with GLAA that as “a city whose hospitality industry generates a sizable portion of its revenue, the District should defend and preserve the place of adult entertainment as part of the mix. Those who disapprove of nude dancing establishments are free to avoid patronizing them, but have no right to deny those choices to other adults.”

On the other hand, I also feel that no residential neighborhood should ever be overburdened with nightspots of any kind, including adult-oriented businesses. But, commercial zones – removed from residential neighborhoods – should largely remain fair game as long as the businesses are operating within the law.

18. Will you support legislation to curb abuses by NIMBYs who are now allowed to file an endless series of baseless complaints to harass or extort bars and restaurants?

Yes. I have always tried to be helpful in working out a balance so that residents can enjoy their homes, while at the same time we provide the type of vibrant and diverse nightlife that characterizes all great cities. Citizens should have a strong voice in their neighborhoods and in the policies of the District of Columbia, and they do. However, this process should not be abused by a tiny minority.

Our laws and regulations must also not allow any group of neighbors to discriminate against a legitimate business because of the owner’s background or any potential clientele conducting its business legally. We must always try to work out the balance needed to create and sustain a welcoming business environment while maintaining reasonable noise levels and other quality-of-life regulations. In addition, oversight of any official agreements between residential neighbors and the businesses in their neighborhoods should always be appropriately reviewed to ensure that no extortion, or any other type of illegality, is occurring.

19. What are your thoughts regarding GLAA’s proposal, as explained in Agenda: 2008, to mitigate the problems associated with prostitution by legalizing, regulating, zoning and taxing it?

I am committed to mitigating the harm of prostitution in our communities and to the women and men who practice it, especially those who have been forced into modern slavery, or those who feel as though their only option for survival is through sex for pay. However, I do not believe a proposal to legalize, regulate, zone and tax prostitution should be considered at this time in the District of Columbia.

Please provide the URL for your campaign website, if you have one. We will include it on our candidate links page.

The URL for my campaign website is www.carol2008.com.

Your record is part of your rating. Please list any actions that you have taken that may help illustrate your record on behalf of gay men, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgenders.

MY RECORD

In addition to the documents I am attaching to the signed questionnaire I am sending in the mail, I would like to list the following as a few examples of my long record of commitment to issues of concern to the GLBT community:

###

Go to GLAA Elections Project Main Page

Page not found – GLAA

Nothing Found

sad-outline
Sorry, the page you tried to access does not exist or has changed address

/