House appropriators approve Transportation-HUD spending bill

A blistering fight over LGBTQ policy erupted in the House on Tuesday, with Democrats accusing GOP members of behaving like "terrorists."

The clash, which sent the House Appropriations Committee into recess three separate times over the course of the day, broke out over a Republican amendment to the Transportation Department funding bill that would strip money from a handful of LGBTQ centers. It’s the latest in a series of culture-war-related amendments offered by House Republicans in recent weeks — and it’s an especially personal furor, since the proposal would strip money requested for specific projects in lawmakers’ districts.

Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) slammed the GOP gambit as “insane" and “bigoted." He accused Republicans of fomenting the kinds of hate crimes he endured during his earlier years as a gay man in politics.

"When I first ran for office, where they wrote dead faggot over your face and sent [the article] to you in the mail. Or the time that when I wasn’t out yet, left the gay bars and people followed me and beat me with a baseball bat until I was bloodied and unconscious and called me a faggot,” Pocan recalled in an emotional moment during Tuesday’s markup of the bill. “This is what you [GOP] guys do by introducing amendments like this.”

The GOP amendment was pitched by Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), who chairs the Appropriations subpanel in charge of federal spending on transportation and housing. Cole’s amendment would cut funding to three LGBTQ-focused community centers — one in Massachusetts and two in Pennsylvania. These centers provide counseling services, networking and social events like art exhibits and other services, and advocate for the LGBTQ community.

The amendment also would prohibit funds from being used to fly Pride flags or to “take discriminatory action” against anyone who speaks or acts in accordance with a belief that marriage is between one man and one woman.

Cole said his amendment would strike "problematic" funding and prohibit funds from being used to "discriminate" against employees. Generally, once earmark requests are vetted, lawmakers have wide leeway to direct funds to approved priorities.

Pocan said he didn’t think Cole believed in the amendment, saying he was a "good person" who had to "put his name on this shit.” Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee, called the GOP proposal “a disgrace” and compared it to "negotiating with terrorists."

Republicans then called for DeLauro's "terrorist" comments to be struck from the markup record, and the proceedings formally paused. When the markup resumed, she asked that her remarks be stricken.

In an interview, DeLauro said she has never opposed a Republican lawmaker's request for funding for a community project back home since she created earmarking guidelines two years ago.

DeLauro said the projects “were vetted” and “found to be eligible,” adding that “the only reason why they were struck is because of the population it was serving, the LGBTQ community, which is totally discriminatory."

Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-Mont.) suggested the community centers have programs that support hormone replacement therapy, drag kings and a youth Communist league. “Appropriations should be appropriate,” he said.

Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), who requested $1.8 million in funding for the William Way Community Center in his district, described it as an “historic building that has been a beacon of hope and support for Philadelphia's LGBTQ community for decades. It has provided vital social services, including employment counseling, meals for seniors, and many other resources.”

Boyle said the project “clearly qualifies” based on merit and that Republicans had targeted it because of “disgusting and ugly bigotry.”

The Republican amendment would also nix two other Democrat-requested earmarks. Pennsylvania Rep. Chrissy Houlahan would lose the $970,000 earmark she secured for an LGBTQ center in Reading, while Massachusetts Rep. Ayanna Pressley would lose $850,000 in dedicated funding her district would receive for a group that supports housing for older Americans in the LGBTQ community.

Cole's amendment was ultimately adopted in a party-line, 32-26 vote, after which Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.), the top Democrat who oversees Transportation funding, offered a provision to replace the money for the LGBTQ centers.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), who earlier said that Cole's amendment proves the “Republican party doesn’t like gay people,” said Quigley's effort to replace the funding “is an opportunity for each of us to demonstrate that we are not arguing and trying to erase the legitimacy and value of LGBTQ+ people.”

During her 18 years on the committee, she said she has never seen such an effort to strip earmarks that were already approved by both parties from a spending bill.

"It’s wrong. It’s targeting a community specifically," she said. "There’s no way to interpret this other than it seems intentionally bigoted and targeting one particular moment because you don’t like their lifestyle. And that’s just not how we do things here."

Cole's amendment is unlikely to survive spending negotiations with Senate Democrats. House Republicans have tucked a swath of contentious provisions into their spending bills for the fiscal year that begins on Oct. 1, such as prohibitions on federal funds for drag shows and other progressive priorities. Those moves have sparked ugly debates in committee ahead of what are certain to be more heated battles on the House floor.

The lower chamber is also marking up their spending bills about $119 billion below the budget totals established by the bipartisan debt ceiling deal that passed Congress last month.

With federal funding set to expire on Sept. 30, the House and Senate will have vast spending and policy differences to resolve if Congress is to fund the government at updated levels for the coming fiscal year.

Caitlin Emma and Jennifer Scholtes contributed to this report.