Connect with us

UPDATED: In Wake Of Scandalous Resignation, Puerto Rico Senator’s Homophobic Legacy Lives On

Published

on

Guest Author Andrés Duque shares this important story with The New Civil Rights Movement. It is cross posted from his own site, Blabbeando.

 

Last week Republican Puerto Rican Senator Roberto Arango became embroiled in a public scandal when images of a shirtless man who appeared to be him were leaked to the press.

The images were from the gay dating phone app Grindr, which was a tad curious considering Arango’s public image was that of a divorced heterosexual man who was raising a daughter.  The Senator was also known for voting in favor of several anti-gay bills.

Initially, Arango scoffed at suggestions that he was the man in the images. Then he admitted he often took photos of himself shirtless to document a weight-loss regimen but didn’t remember taking those specific images. When more explicit images leaked out, the Senator stopped talking to media altogether.

Yesterday, he resigned from the Senate.

Our favorite Latino gossip site Guanabee, broke the news in the United States.  Since then, several people have asked me if I have documentation of the Senator’s homophobia. It’s been surprisingly tough to find articles and reports because most of it is offline. But, going through my files, I managed to find a few tidbits.

Senator Arango and civil unions / marriage rights for same-sex couples:

In early 2007 reports emerged that a legislative commission studying changes to Puerto Rico’s Civil Code was considering allowing civil unions for all couples regardless of sexual orientation. Conservative religious organizations were outraged and warned that civil unions would weaken marriage and change the family structure. They mounted a campaign against the measure and Senator Arango served as their messenger in the legislature.

From “La Católica contra unions de hecho / The Catholic leadership against civil unions” (El Vocero, March 27, 2007 – No online link):

From his seat in the Senate chamber, Senator Roberto Arango of the New Progressive Party spoke about the recent mandates from the Catholic Church regarding the governing body and announced he would present thousands of signatures against changes to the book of law.
According to his statements, the signatures were given to him on Saturday during a rosary ceremony organized by the Catholic Church on the vicinity of the Capitol building. The signers want to put a stop to the proposed changes to the Civil Code that have received sustained opposition from the more conservative organizations.
“We have received 150,000 petitions signed by people of all orientations in favor of maintaining the current Civil Code,” said Arango during yesterday’s senate session. “We will hand them over to the Secretary of the Senate so they take into consideration the massive support of the people.”

The pressure from conservative groups led the legislative commission to shelve debate on changes to the Civil Code.

Emboldened by their success, religious organizations went a step further and called for an amendment to the state constitution banning legal recognition of any relationship other than marriages between a man and a woman.

A bill was quickly introduced and, on November 7th of 2007, it passed in the Senate by a vote of 20 to 2 and 1 abstention. Senator Arango voted in favor (a tally of those voting in favor can be found in a blog post by leading Puerto Rican LGBT rights advocate Pedro Julio Serrano titled “The New Progressive Party and the LGBT community”).

“Resolución 99”, as the constitutional amendment bill is known in Puerto Rico, was blocked in the House of Representatives that same year and proponents have dropped efforts to re-introduce it for now.

Senator Arango and adoption rights for same-sex couples:

In September of 2009, Senator Kimmey Raschke managed to sneak in a bill banning adoption rights for gays by keeping the language of the bill under wraps until the last day of the legislative session. Arango, a close ally of Raschke, defended the secrecy behind the bill and assured reporters that it would be brought to the Senate floor. From “La adopción en el menú del dia / Adoption on the day’s menu” (El Nuevo Dia, September 25, 2009) :

“You will see the bill. I already spoke with Tommy [Puerto Rican Senate President Thomas Rivera Schatz]”, said Arango, who stated that he had yet to see the amendments despite being a member of the conference committee created to iron out the [bill language] differences between the legislative bodies.

Arango would go on to vote in favor of the adoption ban and the bill. It eventually passed both houses and is currently the law in Puerto Rico.

Senator Arango and the word “pato”:

The allegation that had been the toughest to confirm over the weekend were reports that during his first senate election campaign, Arango had held a rubber duck at a public campaign stop and mocked an opponent’s sexuality by making quaking noises and calling him a “pato” [“Pato”, the Spanish word for “duck”, is used in the island as a pejorative word for gays, akin to calling someone a “faggot” in English].

Lucky for us, today’s print issue Primera Hora includes it in a chronology of the Senator’s career and even provides a photo.

The chronology says that Arango’s political career began in 2004 when he led the Bush – Cheney presidential re-election campaign in Puerto Rico. It was then that Arango decided to run for office and became a strong ally of San Juan mayoral candidate Jorge Santini. And it was at a Santini campaign event that Arango called Santini’s opponent a ‘pato’.

From the chronology:

On October of 2004, at the closing of the San Juan mayoral campaign, rumors of [Eduardo] Bhatia’s homosexuality spread through the New Progressive Party’s rally and its leaders as they danced to a song with a chorus duck quacks. A featherless rubber chicken was thrown at the stage and rescued by Arango who referred to it as a ‘rubber duckie’

A photo caption reads Arango was overheard talking about Bhatia to someone else on the stage and saying “No le vamos a dar donde le gusta… sino hasta dentro del pelo”.  It’s a difficult phrase to translate but could be interpreted to mean “We won’t give it where he likes it… instead we’ll drill it deep inside him.”

Reaction from Puerto Rican LGBT-rights leader Pedro Julio Serrano:

In researching these articles, I reached out to my friend Pedro Julio Serrano, founder of the leading LGBT-rights organization Puerto Rico Para Todos. He sent me this excerpt from a press release he released to Puerto Rican media yesterday (a full Spanish-language statement is available at Pedro Julio’s blog):

This isn’t a moment to kick someone when he’s down, but I have to denounce senator Roberto Arango’s complicity with a fundamentalist agenda that promotes the exclusion and marginalization of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. His votes in favor of Resolution 99 which would have amended Puerto Rico’s constitution to ban the recognition of the freedom to marry for same-sex couples, his homophobic acts such as using a rubber duck to make fun of an opponent because in Puerto Rico the word duck means ‘faggot,’ and violating his constitutional duty to guarantee equality for all should be the real reasons for his resignation.

Senator Arango’s homophobic legacy is still in full effect:

In the meantime, Arango might be gone from the Senate but his legacy remains.

Yesterday’s Primera Hora reports that the legislature seems ready to re-open debate of changes to the Civil Code — except for parts of the draft that address civil unions or partnership rights for same-sex couples (“Family topic postponed in Civil Code debate”).

That sole part of the draft caused so much public controversy that it swallowed the rest of the work that had been done and there was no expectation that we’d get back to it,” said Jennifer Gonzalez, President of the Puerto Rican House of Representatives, “So what did we do? We looked at all the [Civil Code] books and we took out those issues that might generate public controversy and that might block passage of the other books, and we will start with those four.

Allegedly, once there is legislative agreement on the ‘non-controversial’ areas, they will come back to address whether the gays deserve human rights.  In other words, Arango’s homophobic spirit lives on in the Puerto Rican congress.

UPDATE: This is my exact point —

Not one hour after I posted this entry a friend on Twitter alerted me to an article from today’s El Vocero (“Rivera Schatz: Bhatia and Garcia Padilla are the ones who should talk the least“).

While Arango has yet to speak to press about his resignation, it was a close ally, Senate Presdent Thomas Rivera-Schatz who yesterday told reporters he had received the resignation letter from Arango.  Today, in an audio interview posted in El Vocero, Rivera-Schatz goes after Arango’s past political opponents and tells them to watch their words.

So, get this: Arango quacked like a duck when making fun of then mayoral candidate Eduardo Bhadia all those years ago in 2004.  Today, now that he has resigned, we get this from the Senate President:

People are tired of “the bla, bla, bla of the PPD President and the ‘quack’, ‘quack’, ‘quak’ from Bhadia”

So there you have it. The Puerto Rican Senate President calling Bhadia a fag just today. INCREDIBLE.

Pedro Julio has replied (“Rivera Shatz reckless and recurring homophobia condemned“. He states, in part, “It’s not the first time that Rivera Shatz has recklessly used sexist and homophobic comments, as he has called us ‘mentally ill, deviant and criminal.”

Pedro Julio calls for Rivera Shatz to keep his homophobia in check or resign.

Andrés Duque is long-time LGBT-rights advocate and award-winning Latino gay blogger. He writes at Blabbeando.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

MTG, Thomas Massie Join Gaetz’s Call to Release ‘Congressional Sexual Slush Fund List’

Published

on

Representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene and Thomas Massie have joined former Rep. Matt Gaetz’s (R-Fla.) call to release the “congressional sexual slush fund,” a list of congresspeople accused of sexual harassment.

On Thursday, both Greene (R-Ga.) and Massie (R-Ky.), posted to X calling for the release of information from the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights, which handles complaints of harassment by members of Congress.

“Congress has secretly paid out more than $17 million of your money to quietly settle charges of harassment (sexual and other forms) in Congressional offices. Don’t you think we should release the names of the Representatives? I do,” Massie tweeted, along with a video of Massie at the June 14 House Judiciary Committee hearing about former President Donald Trump’s hush money case.

READ MORE: GOP Congressman Who Cost Taxpayers $84,000 in Sexual Harassment Suit Refuses to Quit but Won’t Run for Re-Election

Greene retweeted Massie’s post, adding, “Yes. I want to release the congressional sexual slush fund list. Tax payers should have never had to pay for that. Along with all the other garbage they should not have to pay for.”

Concern about the “slush fund” has been circulating since the story first broke in 2017. However, it has picked up steam recently during the House Ethics Committee’s investigation of Gaetz. Last week, Gaetz suggested that he would show up on the first day of Congress to file a motion calling for the release of this information before resigning.

Someone suggested the following plan to me: 1. Show up 1/3/2025 to congress 2. Participate in Speaker election (I was elected to the 119th Congress, after all…) 3. Take the oath 4. File a privileged motion to expose every ‘me too’ settlement paid using public funds (even of former members) 5. Resign and start my @OANN program at 9pm EST on January 6, 2025,” he posted to X, alongside a “thinking” emoji. 

What Greene calls a “congressional sexual slush fund” refers to the payments made by the OCWR, formerly known as the Office of Compliance. The OCWR was established by the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995. The OCWR is sort of like Congress’ HR department. In addition to handling harassment complaints, it also makes sure that Legislative Branch properties adhere to OSHA regulations, the Americans with Disabilities Act and other administrative concerns.

Though it was reported in 2021 that over $18.2 million had been paid in settlements since 1997, not all of those funds were used in sexual harassment suits. Some of the money has been used to pay for workplace safety and pay disputes, according to RealClear Policy. In addition, some politicians accused of sexual harassment have paid victims out of their own pockets.

That said, the OCWR has not released much information about these settlements, and it’s unclear how much of that money was used specifically on sexual harassment cases. In addition, many harassment claims are settled in mediation, according to CNN, so knowing the amount of money spent on sexual harassment claims could still underreport the number of cases.

Though thanks to Gaetz’s pushing, Republicans have recently embraced requiring the OCWR release this information, it’s had bipartisan support in the past. In 2017, Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) called the OCWR “an enabler of sexual harassment” due to the secrecy, according to Politico.

“Make no mistake that the fault of the current complaint process lies within Congress, which authored and passed this deeply flawed legislation that established the Office of Compliance and its burdensome complaint process,” Speier told Politico at the time. “It is our responsibility to fix this law and do better for our employees.”

Speier, joined by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), proposed the Member and Employee Training and Oversight on (ME TOO) Congress Act in 2017, which would require the OCWR to identify congress members who settled sexual harassment suits and pay back the Treasury for funds paid to their victims, according to Vox.

It was passed in the House that November. The Senate referred it to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, but the bill ultimately died in committee.

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

CORRUPTION

Man Sentenced to Die Over Discredited ‘Shaken Baby Syndrome’ Blocked From Testifying at Texas House

Published

on

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has blocked Robert Roberson, a man given a death sentence based on the discredited “shaken baby syndrome,” from testifying at the Texas House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence.

Roberson’s execution date was set for October 17, but the Texas Supreme Court granted a stay of execution so he could testify, according to the Austin Chronicle. Roberson was scheduled to testify on December 20, but Paxton filed a motion on the 19th, telling prison officials to ignore a subpoena issued by the House committee, declaring it invalid.

Roberson was due to testify about the state’s “junk science law.” That law is supposed to provide new trials when a person is convicted based on flawed forensic evidence, according to the Texas Tribune. However, critics allege the law rarely actually allows new trials, the Chronicle reports. The committee was supposed to hear Roberson’s story to help determine if the law is ineffective.

READ MORE: Texas AG Ken Paxton Threatens Democrat-Leaning Counties Not To Mail Out Voter Registration Forms

Roberson was convicted in 2003 of capital murder following the death of his 2-year-old daughter, according to Newsweek. At the time, a doctor said the girl had died from “shaken baby syndrome,” defined as head trauma due to shaking. Shaken baby syndrome has been controversial since it was first coined. Biomechanics scientists say that shaking a baby can’t create a force strong enough to cause the type of trauma seen in these sorts of cases, according to the New Jersey Monitor. It’s often used as a catchall type diagnosis, when a baby dies but has no other signs of abuse.

In Roberson’s case, the child had been chronically ill, Newsweek reported. She had a fever and respiratory issues, which likely caused her death.

Other cases based on shaken baby syndrome have been overturned. This includes a 2000 case in Dallas, where Andrew Wayne Roark was initially sentenced to 35 years in prison in the death of his girlfriend’s 13-month-old. The Texas Supreme Court overturned Roark’s conviction this year about a week before Roberson was due to be executed, according to KERA-FM.

Despite this, Texas officials have declined to address Roberson’s case. Though Gov. Greg Abbott pardoned four people this week, Roberson was not one of them, according to the Houston Chronicle. In October, Paxton called attempts to delay Roberson’s execution “eleventh-hour, one-sided, extrajudicial stunts that attempt to obscure the facts and rewrite his past,” according to the Tribune. At the time, Abbott agreed, saying the House had “stepped out of line” in its attempts to delay execution so Roberson could testify.

Last year, Paxton was impeached by the state House on 20 separate articles of impeachment. The Texas Senate, which skews Republican 19 to 12, voted to acquit. The charges mostly centered around allegations Paxton used his position to help a campaign donor under investigation by the FBI for fraud.

A new date for Roberson’s execution has not been set.

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

Outgoing Rep. Annie Kuster Says She Decided Not to Run Again After Seeing Biden’s Decline

Published

on

annie kuster

Outgoing Representative Annie Kuster (D-N.H.) said that she made the decision not to run for her seat again after meeting with President Joe Biden early in the campaign and seeing his decline.

Kuster, 68, said this March she would not run for re-election to the House seat she’s held for nearly 12 years. She told the Boston Globe on Thursday that she’d made the decision after flying with Biden on Air Force One. She says that though she felt he was capable of serving the rest of his term as president, she could see the signs of aging.

“Just in my heart, [I] reached the conclusion that this would be a very challenging campaign for him, and to put himself out there for another four-year term was was going to be a struggle,” she told the Globe.

READ MORE: Two-Thirds of Americans Want Age Limits for Politicians, Supreme Court

She also suggested that Biden’s advisers may have tried to hide the effect that the president’s age had on him, but wasn’t sure how much the party had. When the Democratic party first started floating the idea of replacing him on the ticket, she compared it to discussing end-of-life care for loved ones.

“It was painful. I haven’t had these kind of conversations since I talked to my own parents about, you know, their aging and their limitations,” she said.

Kuster hopes other senior citizen politicians follows her lead.

“I’m trying to set a better example,” she said. “I think there are colleagues — and some of whom are still very successful and very productive — but others who just stay forever.”

Kuster’s comments come in the way of debates over some elderly politicians’ abilities. Last week, it was revealed that Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas), 81, despite technically serving in Congress, has been living in a senior living facility for months and missing votes. Her son said Granger has been experiencing symptoms of dementia, according to the Washington Post.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who died last year at 90, served in the Senate until she died. But during the last years of her term, many people, including fellow senators, said that she was unfit to serve, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. Some lawmakers reported having to reintroduce themselves to her several times during a conversation. She also repeated general questions, another symptom of someone experiencing dementia. At the time, her office defended Feinstein and said that she had no problem serving.
The question of age was a big factor in the last two presidential elections. Both in 2020 and the first part of 2024, the two candidates, Biden and President-Elect Donald Trump, were the two oldest nominees in U.S. history. Trump will be 78 when he is inaugurated again next month, the same age Biden was when he was inaugurated.

Image by Tim Pierce via Wikimedia Commons

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.