Sen. Tammy Baldwin has made LGBTQ+ history multiple times throughout her political career. In 1998, she became the first openly LGBTQ+ non-incumbent to be elected to the House of Representatives. And in 2012, she became the first openly LGBTQ+ person to be elected to the Senate.
Now, with Sen. Kyrsten Sinema and Sen. Laphonza Butler both not running for reelection, Baldwin could become the only openly LGBTQ+ person in the Senate next term—if she’s reelected this November.
This Pride Month, ELLE.com spoke to Baldwin about her trailblazing career, political leadership on crucial LGBTQ+ issues, and high-profile Senate race, as Wisconsin is seen as one of the crucial swing states that will decide control of the Senate and the White House. “I’m a strong believer that a seat at the table matters, that we’re better governed when we have legislatures that reflect the composition of the U.S. and our constituencies,” Baldwin tells ELLE.com. “There’s an old expression that if you’re not in the room, the conversation’s about you, but if you’re in the room, the conversation is with you.” Below, the senator and candidate goes deep on representation, legislation, and her own determination.
In 2022, you led the movement to pass the Respect for Marriage Act, which mandated federal recognition for same sex marriages, and even garnered bipartisan support for the bill. How did you manage to achieve that?
It became an urgent priority in the wake of the Dobbs decision. Overturning Roe v. Wade took away rights and freedoms from half of all Americans, so that they had fewer than their parents and grandparents. I read the opinion, and it basically said Roe was wrongly decided in the first place, because there is no right to privacy. And then I thought of all the cases I’d studied in law school that were based on a right to privacy. That included interracial marriage, access to contraception, the Lawrence decision, which relates to intimate conduct between consenting adults, and Obergefell, the same-sex marriage case. I started immediately hearing from people who were terrified that their marriages would not be recognized in the future.
So we introduced the Respect for Marriage Act, but the scuttlebutt was, think about how divided our times are, how divided the Congress is, how divided our country is. You don’t really think you can pass the Respect for Marriage Act, do you? And I was like, “Just watch.”
I remember having conversations, one after another, with Republican colleagues who I felt wanted to get to [voting] “yes” but didn’t know how. There were concerns raised about how this would affect religious liberties in the U.S., and we were trying to press the point that it doesn’t expand or contract religious liberties. It simply is an insurance policy that should this Supreme Court overturn Loving [which ruled that laws that ban interracial marriages are unconstitutional] or Obergefell [which guaranteed the fundamental right to marry to same-sex couples] that marriages that have been legally entered into will continue to be recognized by the federal government in all 50 states. Literally, it was one by one, and we got, in the end, 12 Republicans to join all 50 Democrats at the time to pass the Respect for Marriage Act. But it took weeks, and a lot of negotiation.
Ultimately, the reason we prevailed is that we were vocal and visible. There wasn’t a Republican who I was negotiating with that didn’t know somebody, or have somebody in their extended family, or a staff member, or somebody they went to church with who was married [and could potentially be affected]. They got it.
As somebody who’s been a sponsor of the Equality Act—which would expand federal civil rights law to protect LGBTQ people from discrimination—what do you think is the most likely path for passing that legislation?
One of the reasons that I felt we were able to make such headway on the Respect for Marriage Act in the wake of the Dobbs decision was that all the conversations that’d been going on prior to Dobbs were about the Equality Act. I had been meeting with a number of my Republican colleagues who had not signed on to the Equality Act, thinking, “What are their concerns? Why are they not signing on? How can we address any concerns or clarifications?”
One of the things that was heartening about those conversations was that people were very supportive of the employment provisions and the housing provisions. Where we began to encounter opposition and concern was around some of the provisions related to public accommodations and education. And you’re seeing those battles play out in real-time. You can point to the “bathroom battles,” and the other discriminatory legislation that we’re seeing emerge at the state and local level.
This is a time where there’s been a backlash to our progress, and in terms of being an informed voter, look where people stood on the Respect for Marriage Act. Look how they’re coming down on these initiatives at the state and local level. It’s really, really critical that we elect pro-equality candidates up and down the ballot.
You’ve been a trailblazer in terms of LGBTQ representation in government. How have you seen representation change since you entered politics, and what is your read on the current state of that representation?
Well, I’m a strong believer that a seat at the table matters, that we’re better governed when we have legislatures that reflect the composition of the U.S. and our constituencies. There’s an old expression that if you’re not in the room, the conversation’s about you, but if you’re in the room, the conversation is with you. I really believe in that.
When I first ran for office back in 1986 for the Dane County Board of Supervisors and was elected, there were only a couple dozen openly gay or lesbian elected officials in the world. I know because we convened. I participated in 1986 in an early convening of out gay or lesbian elected officials, and there were less than two dozen of us who attended. I think we’re over a thousand now [in the U.S.].
So over the course of a few decades, we’ve seen our numbers grow. We’ve seen every state elect out LGBTQ individuals to some level of office. All of that’s very promising, but again, the seat at the table is so critical to making sure that our voices are heard, our concerns are raised, our challenges are acknowledged. We have a long way to go in terms of parity with regard to representation for sure.
One of the other things I’ve observed over that time is how we’re role models. It’s hard to see yourself, say, in office or in a leadership role, without having seen somebody like you do it. And so the fact that there are more and more of us in the U.S. Senate and Congress, in state legislatures, and now also governors, it’s powerful. It’s powerful for young folks who come after to say, “I can aspire to doing this, too.” I find that inspiring.
You are running for reelection in Wisconsin, which is seen as a pivotal state for deciding control of the White House and the Senate. What is the energy like on the ground?
We had one of the most gerrymandered states in the country, and the legislature has just adopted a new set of maps for our state legislative districts, our State Assembly, and State Senate seats. So there are new districts, and they’re competitive, and they’re fair. So I am seeing candidates who have long dreamed about serving their community and running for office, but they just never did, because the districts were so lopsided they knew they never would have had a chance of winning.
I really think that having fair maps and having contested races for local office is going to bring people out. I think that’s really going to boost participation and boost turnout in a way that’s going to help the top of the ticket, both for my race and the presidential race.
Which issues are most important to you this year?
I think what’s certainly on the minds of most of the voters I know are what I call the “kitchen table issues,” the “pocketbook” issues. The economy. The cost of things is still weighing on people’s minds when they go to the grocery store, when they go to the gas station. The fact that the inflation that we saw some years back has not dissipated. It weighs on people, and they worry about getting by.
Beyond that, some of the issues we were just talking about, that we’ve lost rights and freedoms in the United States. I always think of our country as one where we keep moving forward, where we keep on winning new rights and freedoms, as we have historically for the LGBTQ community, but also with regard to reproductive freedoms. Now we’re at a moment in America where we’re seeing a retreat. We’re going backwards. So I have talked to a lot of folks in Wisconsin for whom winning back reproductive freedoms is a critical issue.
How do you win as a progressive in a purple state?
Showing up matters. I travel Wisconsin tirelessly to try to go to places where people aren’t used to seeing a U.S. senator. I’ll get people saying, “I can’t remember the last time we had a U.S. senator in these parts, especially not a Democrat.” Showing up matters, and listening to people where they’re at matters. You figure out very quickly there’s a lot more that unites us than divides us. When people share their challenges and see me go back to Washington and start working on helping them overcome those, I think that’s recognized. I get credit from voters. Even if they’re voters who are typically Republican voters. They see, well, she showed up, and she listened, and she’s working on our behalf. That matters to people.
This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.
