Connect with us

National

GOProud calls Social Security a ‘Ponzi scheme’ for gays

Paying for benefits we’re ‘prevented from taking advantage of’

Published

on

In advance of last night’s GOP presidential debate, GOProud, a conservative LGBT group, repeated a charge by Texas Gov. Rick Perry characterizing Social Security as a “Ponzi scheme” — at least for LGBT Americans.

“There will be plenty of lively discussion on the stage tonight about Social Security: its history, where it stands today, and its future,” said GOP executive director Jimmy LaSalvia in a statement. “One thing, however, is absolutely clear – for gay and lesbian Americans Social Security is a Ponzi scheme.”

Calling for reform of the system that includes some standard Republican ideas such as private accounts, LaSalvia sounded a tone more like the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force than the Republican National Committee. The announcement appeared to mark a subtle shift in tone from previous press releases that shocked the community by, among other things, praising Ann Coulter after she made anti-gay remarks and criticizing the president’s jobs bill on the eve of the implementation of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal.

“Every Ponzi scheme has its winners and losers, and for gay people in this country we are the losers in the Social Security system,” the release continued.

Though many LGBT activists may not be on the same page with the specific reforms that GOProud advocates in the letter, most will likely agree with the stern condemnation of inequalities faced in federal programs like Social Security due to the Defense of Marriage Act.

“We don’t have any position on whether or not it’s a ‘Ponzi scheme’ in general, what is clear cut is it’s a ‘Ponzi scheme’ for gay people,” GOProud board chair Chris Barron told the Blade. “We’re paying in for benefits that we’re being prevented from taking advantage of.”

GOProud leaders believe the remedy to the inequities in Social Security lies in instituting optional individual personal savings accounts that allow the owner to choose any beneficiary they desire — same-sex or opposite sex spouse.

“If you’re Leona Helmsley and you want to leave it to your dog, you can,” Barron continued. “It’s your money.”

“The Social Security system, as structured today, is state sanctioned institutional discrimination against gay and lesbian people in this country,” Barron said. “Obviously, [GOProud is] a gay organization, and we bring a particular perspective to everything, and we think Social Security is an area where we can put aside our partisan differences and creating something like optional accounts would give gay people the same kind of opportunity and remove the inequities between gay couples and straight couples.”

“There are some things in there that we can agree with,” National Stonewall Democrats’ Michael Mitchell told the Blade. “There are some ways that the law can be tightened up so that Social Security can be available for everyone. But saying we need to do away with Social Security isn’t the right answer.”

“It’s a safety net, it’s not a Ponzi scheme, it looks like that because as gay people we don’t get back what straight people do because of [the Defense of Marriage Act better known as DOMA], but we do get something back,” Mitchell continued in response to GOProud. “Most of Social Security is tied to the marital contract and until we do away with DOMA that’s always going to be an issue.”

Mitchell said the tone of GOProud’s announcement was much different than previous statements from the sometimes provocative organization.

“Maybe they’re learning their lesson that just throwing bombs at the gay press doesn’t endear yourself to anyone,” Mitchell said. “Aligning yourself with Ann Coulter and Andrew Breitbart and people who are against the gay community doesn’t make you friends. They’ve been out and out combative, and you can see that by the comrades they’ve chosen. Coming to common ground entails some trust. I would need to know that they are coming from an honorable place in order to work on something, and they’d expect that from us. That’s not going to happen as long as the demagoguery is going on.”

“I would like to have a conversation about how to make Social Security equitable for gay and lesbian Americans,” Michell continued. “I think that we start with getting rid of DOMA. I don’t think that’s the only answer though because that sets up inequality between states that don’t have marriage and do have marriage.”

Despite seeing an opening for dialogue, Mitchell does not agree with GOProud’s private accounts plan.

“I know that sounds terrible from a ‘free market’ perspective, but this was set up to take care of seniors and other people who were not being taken care of, and I would prefer to err on the side of caution for something like that.”

“How many seniors would we see now that wouldn’t have any Social Security because they gambled it away in bad investments.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Federal Government

Lambda Legal praises Biden-Harris administration’s finalized Title IX regulations

New rules to take effect Aug. 1

Published

on

U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona (Screen capture: AP/YouTube)

The Biden-Harris administration’s revised Title IX policy “protects LGBTQ+ students from discrimination and other abuse,” Lambda Legal said in a statement praising the U.S. Department of Education’s issuance of the final rule on Friday.

Slated to take effect on Aug. 1, the new regulations constitute an expansion of the 1972 Title IX civil rights law, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in education programs that receive federal funding.

Pursuant to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the landmark 2020 Bostock v. Clayton County case, the department’s revised policy clarifies that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity constitutes sex-based discrimination as defined under the law.

“These regulations make it crystal clear that everyone can access schools that are safe, welcoming and that respect their rights,” Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said during a call with reporters on Thursday.

While the new rule does not provide guidance on whether schools must allow transgender students to play on sports teams corresponding with their gender identity to comply with Title IX, the question is addressed in a separate rule proposed by the agency in April.

The administration’s new policy also reverses some Trump-era Title IX rules governing how schools must respond to reports of sexual harassment and sexual assault, which were widely seen as imbalanced in favor of the accused.

Jennifer Klein, the director of the White House Gender Policy Council, said during Thursday’s call that the department sought to strike a balance with respect to these issues, “reaffirming our longstanding commitment to fundamental fairness.”

“We applaud the Biden administration’s action to rescind the legally unsound, cruel, and dangerous sexual harassment and assault rule of the previous administration,” Lambda Legal Nonbinary and Transgender Rights Project Director Sasha Buchert said in the group’s statement on Friday.

“Today’s rule instead appropriately underscores that Title IX’s civil rights protections clearly cover LGBTQ+ students, as well as survivors and pregnant and parenting students across race and gender identity,” she said. “Schools must be places where students can learn and thrive free of harassment, discrimination, and other abuse.”

Continue Reading

Michigan

Mich. Democrats spar over LGBTQ-inclusive hate crimes law

Lawmakers disagree on just what kind of statute to pass

Published

on

Members of the Michigan House Democrats gather to celebrate Pride month in 2023 in the Capitol building. (Photo courtesy of Michigan House Democrats)

Michigan could soon become the latest state to pass an LGBTQ-inclusive hate crime law, but the state’s Democratic lawmakers disagree on just what kind of law they should pass.

Currently, Michigan’s Ethnic Intimidation Act only offers limited protections to victims of crime motivated by their “race, color, religion, gender, or national origin.” Bills proposed by Democratic lawmakers expand the list to include “actual or perceived race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, ethnicity, physical or mental disability, age, national origin, or association or affiliation with any such individuals.” 

Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Attorney General Dana Nessel have both advocated for a hate crime law, but house and senate Democrats have each passed different hate crimes packages, and Nessel has blasted both as being too weak.

Under the house proposal that passed last year (House Bill 4474), a first offense would be punishable with a $2,000 fine, up to two years in prison, or both. Penalties double for a second offense, and if a gun or other dangerous weapons is involved, the maximum penalty is six years in prison and a fine of $7,500. 

But that proposal stalled when it reached the senate, after far-right news outlets and Fox News reported misinformation that the bill only protected LGBTQ people and would make misgendering a trans person a crime. State Rep. Noah Arbit, the bill’s sponsor, was also made the subject of a recall effort, which ultimately failed.

Arbit submitted a new version of the bill (House Bill 5288) that added sections clarifying that misgendering a person, “intentionally or unintentionally” is not a hate crime, although the latest version (House Bill 5400) of the bill omits this language.

That bill has since stalled in a house committee, in part because the Democrats lost their house majority last November, when two Democratic representatives resigned after being elected mayors. The Democrats regained their house majority last night by winning two special elections.

Meanwhile, the senate passed a different package of hate crime bills sponsored by state Sen. Sylvia Santana (Senate Bill 600) in March that includes much lighter sentences, as well as a clause ensuring that misgendering a person is not a hate crime. 

Under the senate bill, if the first offense is only a threat, it would be a misdemeanor punishable by one year in prison and up to $1,000 fine. A subsequent offense or first violent hate crime, including stalking, would be a felony that attracts double the punishment.

Multiple calls and emails from the Washington Blade to both Arbit and Santana requesting comment on the bills for this story went unanswered.

The attorney general’s office sent a statement to the Blade supporting stronger hate crime legislation.

“As a career prosecutor, [Nessel] has seen firsthand how the state’s weak Ethnic Intimidation Act (not updated since the late 1980’s) does not allow for meaningful law enforcement and court intervention before threats become violent and deadly, nor does it consider significant bases for bias.  It is our hope that the legislature will pass robust, much-needed updates to this statute,” the statement says.

But Nessel, who has herself been the victim of racially motivated threats, has also blasted all of the bills presented by Democrats as not going far enough.

“Two years is nothing … Why not just give them a parking ticket?” Nessel told Bridge Michigan.

Nessel blames a bizarre alliance far-right and far-left forces that have doomed tougher laws.

“You have this confluence of forces on the far right … this insistence that the First Amendment protects this language, or that the Second Amendment protects the ability to possess firearms under almost any and all circumstances,” Nessel said. “But then you also have the far left that argues basically no one should go to jail or prison for any offense ever.”

The legislature did manage to pass an “institutional desecration” law last year that penalizes hate-motivated vandalism to churches, schools, museums, and community centers, and is LGBTQ-inclusive.

According to data from the U.S. Department of Justice, reported hate crime incidents have been skyrocketing, with attacks motivated by sexual orientation surging by 70 percent from 2020 to 2022, the last year for which data is available. 

Twenty-two states, D.C., Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have passed LGBTQ-inclusive hate crime laws. Another 11 states have hate crime laws that include protections for “sexual orientation” but not “gender identity.”

Michigan Democrats have advanced several key LGBTQ rights priorities since they took unified control of the legislature in 2023. A long-stalled comprehensive anti-discrimination law was passed last year, as did a conversion therapy ban. Last month the legislature updated family law to make surrogacy easier for all couples, including same-sex couples. 

A bill to ban the “gay panic” defense has passed the state house and was due for a Senate committee hearing on Wednesday.

Continue Reading

Indiana

Drag queen announces run for mayor of Ind. city

Branden Blaettne seeking Fort Wayne’s top office

Published

on

Branden Blaettner being interviewed by a local television station during last year’s Pride month. (WANE screenshot)

In a Facebook post Tuesday, a local drag personality announced he was running for the office of mayor once held by the late Fort Wayne Mayor Tom Henry, who died last month just a few months into his fifth term.

Henry was recently diagnosed with late-stage stomach cancer and experienced an emergency that landed him in hospice care. He died shortly after.

WPTA, a local television station, reported that Fort Wayne resident Branden Blaettne, whose drag name is Della Licious, confirmed he filed paperwork to be one of the candidates seeking to finish out the fifth term of the late mayor.

Blaettner, who is a community organizer, told WPTA he doesn’t want to “get Fort Wayne back on track,” but rather keep the momentum started by Henry going while giving a platform to the disenfranchised groups in the community. Blaettner said he doesn’t think his local fame as a drag queen will hold him back.

“It’s easy to have a platform when you wear platform heels,” Blaettner told WPTA. “The status quo has left a lot of people out in the cold — both figuratively and literally,” Blaettner added.

The Indiana Capital Chronicle reported that state Rep. Phil GiaQuinta, who has led the Indiana House Democratic caucus since 2018, has added his name to a growing list of Fort Wayne politicos who want to be the city’s next mayor. A caucus of precinct committee persons will choose the new mayor.

According to the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, the deadline for residents to file candidacy was 10:30 a.m. on Wednesday. A town hall with the candidates is scheduled for 6 p.m. on Thursday at Franklin School Park. The caucus is set for 10:30 a.m. on April 20 at the Lincoln Financial Event Center at Parkview Field.

At least six candidates so far have announced they will run in the caucus. They include Branden Blaettne, GiaQuinta, City Councilwoman Michelle Chambers, City Councilwoman Sharon Tucker, former city- and county-council candidate Palermo Galindo, and 2023 Democratic primary mayoral candidate Jorge Fernandez.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular