U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin is seen as a leader on gay and AIDS issues not just in his home state of Illinois, but also nationally. His opposition to John Ashcroft's nomination for U.S. Attorney General put him on the radar screens of gay activists around the country. And his work on the local and global AIDS epidemic has helped create major funding and support programs.
Just hours after his courageous vote against giving President Bush more war powers, Durbin spoke with Windy City Times about his re-election campaign.
While most people see his seat as relatively secure, his opponent's similar-sounding name ( Jim Durkin ) could confuse voters even more than the Jim Ryan/George Ryan debate.
"I voted against the resolution," Durbin explained about his vote at 1:30 that morning. "I think the best course for us to follow is to work with the United Nations and put inspectors on the ground, and to disarm Iraq. The idea of a go-it-alone land invasion by the U.S. is very dangerous. I hope we never reach that point."
It seemed almost trivial to ask Durbin about other issues when the prospect of war looms so heavily after Bush won his increased powers. But Durbin sees civil rights in the U.S. as still very important and connected to this overall struggle for a more just society.
"I am a co-sponsor of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and federal hate-crimes legislation. To give you an indication of how deep the opposition is—when I introduced a resolution after Sept. 11 about Sikh Americans having the right not to be discriminated against, I used the phrase 'hate crimes' in the resolution. The Republican leadership refused to allow the resolution to come to the floor with that phrase included. They don't want to debate this."
After taking a Congressional fact-finding trip to Sub-Saharan Africa several years ago, Durbin has increased his commitment in the international battle against AIDS. At the same time, he also made sure Illinois AIDS organizations were also getting the funding and tools they needed, making personal visits to such institutions as Howard Brown Health Center.
"I have focused on global AIDS funding—I am really disappointed, the U.S. should be leading the world in investing in prevention, education and treatment. The president vetoed the supplemental appropriations bill for $200 million for AIDS. The verdict of history is going to be very harsh on this."
Durbin's Republican opponent, Durkin, has voted against the state gay bill, while Durbin, even though he is a U.S. Senator, helped lobby for the bill among Democrats in Springfield. "I felt it was the right thing to do. I am sorry Mr. Durkin did not support it."
As a downstate Congressman, Durbin became educated on gay rights and AIDS issues around the same period of time, particularly during the gays-in-the-military debate of the early 1990s. "As a member of Congress from a downstate, rural and conservative district, a number of people came to me, and around the same time I was sensitized to the AIDS epidemic. Those two things really came together around the issue of human rights.
"As for the military ban, my feeling is you should never penalize a person for who they are, but for what they do. If you are guilty of conduct as a heterosexual or homosexual, that should be subject to discipline. But I believe discrimination based on sexual orientation is wrong."
On the issue of a woman's right to reproductive choice, Durbin noted that as a member of the Judiciary Committee, he faces off against anti-choice judicial nominees from Bush. "We have a 10-9 majority. Time and again we have been called to vote on judges who are adamantly opposed to Roe v. Wade. Bush wants these lifetime appointments to fight for a conservative agenda. They have worked so hard on this. I look back at the Clinton years and see how they were holding up [ Clinton's appointments ] ; these new candidates are stopping in the Senate, and [ the Republicans ] will not let committees meet. Bush and the Republicans do not want to deal head-on with this. Rarely do we face an abortion vote—they decided to go to the courts for change."
With a possible Supreme Court vacancy, and dozens of federal court posts open, the Democratic control of the Senate may be the only way to fend off some of the most right-wing judicial nominees, he said.
As with other Democratic incumbents with strong GLBT support, the toughest challenge election day is making sure voters turn out to vote. On non-presidential election years, Republicans tend to have a higher voter turnout, hence the first mid-term elections during Clinton's White House, when Newt Gingrich took over control and held Washington hostage. This election cycle, even more is at stake. If the Democrats don't keep control of the Senate [ they are highly unlikely to get back the House ] , all levels of federal government will be controlled by one party. With the House and Senate rubber-stamping Republican judicial nominees, as well as other Bush policies, the next two years could well see major set-backs on everything from gay rights and abortion access to Title IX, affirmative action, and overall civil rights.
