Opinions

Ron Paul’s heartless stance on health care

Published

13 years ago

September 16, 2011

Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul apparently learned nothing from the death of his 2008 campaign chairman, a gay man named Kent Snyder.

Snyder, 49, died of pneumonia in 2008. He was uninsured and left about $400,000 in unpaid medical bills to his surviving mother. Paul was criticized at the time for failing to offer his campaign staffers medical insurance. The Blade covered the story extensively back then and interviewed Paul about it. His lame defense was that no campaign offered health insurance, a false claim — Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and John McCain’s campaigns all offered health insurance to staff.

At last week’s Tea Party debate, CNN’s Wolf Blitzer asked Paul what should happen to an uninsured 30-year-old man who needed six months of hospitalization.

“In a society that you accept socialism and welfarism, he expects the government to take care of him … he should assume responsibility for himself,” came Paul’s heartless response.

Blitzer replied, “Are you saying society should just let him die?”

In response, the bloodthirsty, unsympathetic crowd yelled, “Yeah!”

You’d think that the death of a trusted campaign aide — who Paul said was instrumental in helping him decide to run in 2008 — would prompt some soul-searching and deeper thinking about the state of America’s health care system. But obviously that’s not the case for Paul, who happens to be a medical doctor.

The full 2008 Blade story is re-posted below:

Ron Paul supporters mourn death of gay campaign chair

With no health insurance, Snyder leaves $400K in hospital bills

By LOU CHIBBARO JR.

Activists belonging to the libertarian wing of the Republican Party continue to mourn the loss of Kent Snyder, a 49-year-old gay political operative credited with propelling the presidential campaign of U.S. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) into a national, grassroots movement that raised more than $35 million.

Snyder, who served as Paul’s campaign chair, died of pneumonia on June 26 after being hospitalized for about two months and after running up medical bills exceeding $400,000, according to friends and family members, who said he did not have health insurance.

Gay staffers from the Paul campaign, some speaking on condition that they not be identified, said they learned about Snyder’s unpaid medical bills from a web site created by his friends that calls on Paul supporters to contribute to a special fund to help Snyder’s family pay the bills, which come mostly from a two-month hospitalization. So far, the site (kentsnyder.com) has raised about $32,000.

“I can’t believe he didn’t have health insurance,” said one political activist who read about Snyder’s unpaid medical bills in a story published last month in the Wall Street Journal. “I can’t believe that Ron Paul didn’t give him health insurance,” said the activist, who asked not to be identified.

The Journal story did not identify Snyder as gay; a Washington Post obituary reported Snyder died of viral pneumonia but did not mention his sexual orientation.

Craig Max, a D.C. gay Republican activist who sought to become a Ron Paul delegate to the Republican National Convention, said news of Snyder’s death and his lack of health insurance has triggered a behind-the-scenes debate among Paul supporters and libertarian activists over whether or not the Paul campaign should have provided health insurance to its staff.

Among the points raised, according to Max and others involved in the Paul campaign, is the fact that Paul is a practicing physician. Some of the Paul supporters are asking why a medical doctor, whose campaign raised $35 million in contributions, chose not to offer health insurance for his staff.

When asked at the Capitol in Washington on Wednesday about concerns raised by critics that his presidential campaign did not provide employee health insurance, Paul said only that he doesn’t believe any political campaigns offer health insurance.

“I don’t know of any campaign that has health insurance for temporary and other employees,” he said. “I’ve never had it and I’ve been in this business for 30 years. I don’t know any campaign that does.”

At least three gay Paul supporters said it was well known among Paul campaign insiders that Snyder was gay. Although Snyder shunned the public spotlight, activists and political operatives working on the campaigns of rival GOP presidential candidates, including officials with the McCain campaign, recognized Snyder’s efforts in building a major campaign operation for Paul, Paul’s gay supporters said.

“As far as his being out, I don’t think that he was ever in or anything like that,” said Jesse Benton, who served as communications director for the Paul presidential campaign. “But his romantic life was just not something that was discussed. He was the boss and that was that.”

Benton said Snyder confided in him that he had a chronic blood disorder. He said that Snyder told him the name of the disorder but Benton said he does not remember it.

“To my knowledge, Kent did not have HIV,” Benton said. “He expressed to me a couple of times what his blood disorder was, but I believe [the HIV speculation] to just be a rumor.”

Benton said it was Snyder himself who made the decision not to provide health insurance to the campaign staff.

“Kent Snyder as the chairman of the campaign ran the business operation,” Benton said. “So it was his decision as to what would be offered to employees.”

Benton said Snyder’s decision was not unusual in the realm of political campaigns.

“As a general practice, virtually no political campaigns offer health insurance,” Benton said. “It’s just not done. A campaign is a temporary organization that could disband at any minute.”

But gay Democratic activist and political consultant Steve Elmendorf disputes Benton’s assessment, saying that in recent years, a growing number of campaigns have begun providing health insurance to paid staffers, with the campaigns of Democratic candidates offering medical coverage in greater numbers than Republican candidates.

Jordan Lieberman, publisher of Campaigns and Elections’ Politics Magazine, which is considered an authority on American political campaigns, said that in the recent past, health insurance was almost never offered by campaigns operated by either Republicans or Democrats. Now, Lieberman said, the trend among larger campaigns, especially presidential campaigns, is to offer health insurance benefits.

Spokespersons for the presidential campaigns of Barack Obama and John McCain said both campaigns provide full health insurance coverage to their paid staff. A spokesperson for the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign said Clinton also provided health insurance coverage to campaign staffers before she ended her campaign in early June.

On his own web site, Paul called Snyder’s death a “great loss” to the libertarian movement.

“Kent poured every ounce of his being into our fight for freedom,” Paul said. “He will always hold a place in my heart and in the hearts of my family. We deeply mourn his loss.”

Paul praised Snyder for playing a key role in advancing libertarian causes and noted that Snyder began his association with him in 1987, when he worked on Paul’s first run for president.

“Over the next 20 years, we worked together on countless projects in the name of freedom,” Paul said. “It was Kent, more than anyone else, who urged me to run again for president” in 2008.

Gay libertarian activists have praised Paul for his longstanding views calling for all Americans to be free from government intrusion into their private lives through laws and regulations. Paul voted against a proposed U.S. constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.

But according to a scorecard on the voting records of members of Congress on gay-related issues, Paul voted against the interests of gays on all issues other than the marriage amendment. In the Human Rights Campaign scorecard for the 109th Congress (2005-2006), the latest scorecard that the group has issued, Paul received a score of 38 on a scale from 0 to 100. According to HRC, Paul received a score of 25 for the 108th Congress (2003-2004) and a 0 in the 107^th Congress (2000-2002).

Similar to most libertarians, Paul opposed bills like the Employment Non- Discrimination Act, or ENDA, which would ban employment discrimination based on sexual orientation, and a hate crimes bill, which would authorize the federal government to prosecute anti-gay hate crimes, on grounds that such legislation improperly expands government powers.

Liberal blogger Rob Kall, in a July 5 posting on Opednews.com, called Kent Snyder’s death and his unpaid medical bills an ironic twist to Snyder’s libertarian philosophy.

“What a testament to the libertarian creed, which abhors the idea of universal health care,” Kall wrote. “This loyal, passionate man who died too young left his family a debt of $400,000 in medical bills,” he said. “Sadly, the libertarian heart apparently does not include health care.”

Benton and others who knew Snyder said he gave up a lucrative career as a telecommunications industry executive to work for one of Paul’s libertarian organizations before becoming the head of the Paul for president campaign. Benton said Snyder’s friends and associates from the campaign are now especially concerned that Snyder’s unpaid medical bills could adversely impact Snyder’s mother.

“I do know that Kent was an extremely proud man and he was basically financially supporting his mother and allowing her to live in a property he owned,” Benton said. “As someone who respected him very much — he had a lot of people who respected him a lot — we all know that he would turn over in his grave if his mother has to leave that property.

“So it was important for us to do what we could,” Benton said. “And I’m not a wealthy man but I made a small contribution, Dr. Paul has made a personal contribution, and a lot of the campaign staff have given what they could,” he said, referring to the special fund to help pay off Snyder’s medical bills.

Up Next

WGAY podcast: Sept. 16

Don't Miss

President Obama finally finds his voice

FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM

Opinions

Fact: The next president will be Biden or Trump

One candidate is clearly better for the future of the world

Published

9 hours ago

April 25, 2024

Peter Rosenstein

(Washington Blade file photos by Michael Key)

Like it or not, the next president will be either Joe Biden or Donald Trump. In our system, third-party candidates are simply spoilers, they don’t win. The last time a third-party candidate won was 1856. It has been 36 years since a third-party candidate even got more than 5% of the vote. So, it’s time to face reality and choose; for your future, do you want Biden or Trump?

I was prompted to write this column because I see the media interviewing young people about who they want as their president. I have great respect for the young people of today. In many ways, they are smarter than my generation was. But it’s clear, some don’t fully understand the presidential election process. I hear many complain about Biden, and then follow that up and say they will never vote for Trump. Some then say they will vote for a third-party candidate. They need to understand their third-party candidate will not win, but their vote could help elect Trump. I hate to say it, but in 2024, voting for a third-party candidate is the equivalent to flushing your ballot down the toilet.

I am an unabashed Biden supporter. I see the great things he has done, including: getting us through the fallout from the pandemic, passing an infrastructure bill, forgiving billions in student loans, ensuring our economy is the best in the world with more than 13 million jobs created, and increasing wages. He supports unions, being the first president to walk a picket line with the UAW. His administration is working to deal with climate change. He is fighting for a woman’s right to control her own body and healthcare, and supports full equality for the LGBTQ community. In this dangerous world he has kept our troops out of war.

Then there is Trump. To be clear; I see him as a racist, sexist, misogynistic, homophobic, pig. OK, so maybe I don’t have strong feelings about him. Trump has been found liable for sexual assault and has been indicted on 91 counts. He proudly claims credit for having taken away control of their body and healthcare from women, when the justices he appointed ended Roe v. Wade. He supports states making decisions on abortion, and we see what recently happened in Arizona. He is a climate change denier and is opposed to wind and solar power. He wants to give more tax deductions to the rich and to corporations, while opposing any increase in the minimum wage. He opposes equality for the LGBTQ community, refusing to endorse the Equality Act. He opposes student debt relief.

You may see these candidates differently, and that is OK. But if you like one more than the other, fear one more than the other, or just aren’t enamored by either, you must still make a choice and vote for one of them. Staying home is abrogating your civic responsibility, and especially if you would never vote for Trump, understand your staying home helps him.

Young voters, like all voters, should take the time to do the research on both candidates. Then match what you find as close as possible to what you want to see as your future. If you want student loan relief, equality for the LGBTQ community, women having control of their body and healthcare, equal pay for women, efforts to ameliorate the impact of climate change, then clearly Trump is not your candidate.

I hear some young people say they won’t vote for Biden because of his positions on the Israel/Hamas war. I, too, have called for Israel to recalibrate how they fight this war. But I ask you to look again at Trump’s history of attachment to Netanyahu, even going so far as relocating the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem. If you want a chance for the Palestinian people to live in peace and prosperity, for Israel to remove their settlements from the West Bank, your chance of having that happen is clearly better with Biden than Trump. Don’t let your emotions today, cloud the reality of the future.

Yes, Biden is old, but so is Trump. He apparently can’t even stay awake at his own trial having nodded off two days in a row. So, since one of them will be president, with no third-party candidate having a chance, I urge you to look at them again, in a realistic way. Then make your choice. I think you may come to the same conclusion I have. Though not perfect, and no one is, Biden is the better candidate for your future, and for the future of the world.

Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist. He writes regularly for the Blade.

Opinions

Don’t avoid drug education on 4/20 day

Cannabis culture continues to grow in the District

Published

5 days ago

April 20, 2024

Marcel Gemme

In 2023, the law was signed to expand the District’s medical cannabis program. It also made permanent provisions allowing residents ages 21 and older to self-certify as medical cannabis patients. Overall, cannabis is fully legal in D.C. for medical and recreational use, and 4/20 Day is widely celebrated.

Medical cannabis, for example, has a long history with the LGBTQ community, and they have often been one of the oldest supporters of marijuana and some of the most enthusiastic consumers. Cannabis use also has a long history of easing the pain of the LGBTQ community as relief from HIV symptoms and as a method of coping with rejection from society.

The cannabis culture continues to grow in the District, and as a result, so does the influence on younger people, even youth within the LGBTQ community. Drug education can play an important role and should not be avoided during 4/20 Day. Parents and educators can use drug education to help their kids understand the risks involved with using marijuana at a young age.

According to DC Health Matters, marijuana use among high school students has been on the decline in the District since 2017. In 2021, it was estimated that around 20% of high school students use marijuana, a drop from 33% in 2017. Nationally, in 2020, approximately 41.3% of sexual minority adults 18 and older reported past-year marijuana use, compared to 18.7% of the overall adult population.

When parents and educators engage with their kids about marijuana, consider keeping the conversations age appropriate. Speaking with a five-year-old is much different than speaking with a teenager. Use language and examples a child or teen would understand.

The goal is to educate them about the risks and dangers of using cannabis at a young age and what to avoid, such as edibles.

Most important, put yourself in your kid’s shoes. This can be especially important for teenagers as they face different social pressures and situations at school, with peer groups, or through social media. Make a point of understanding what they are up against.

When speaking to them about cannabis, stay calm and relaxed, stay positive, don’t lecture, and be clear and concise about boundaries without using scare tactics or threats.

Yet, it’s OK to set rules, guidelines, and expectations; create rules together as a family or class. Parents and educators can be clear about the consequences without lecturing but clearly stating what is expected regarding cannabis use.

Moreover, choose informal times to have conversations about cannabis and do not make a big thing about it. Yet, continue talking to them as they age, and let them know you are always there for them.

Finally, speak to them about peer pressure and talk with them about having an exit plan when they are offered marijuana. Peer pressure is powerful among youth, and having a plan to avoid drug use helps children and students make better choices. Ultimately, it is about assisting them in making good choices as they age.

Members of the LGBTQ community often enter treatment with more severe substance use disorders. Preventative measures involving drug education are effective in helping youth make good choices and learn about the risks.

Marcel Gemme is the founder of SUPE and has been helping people struggling with substance use for over 20 years. His work focuses on a threefold approach: education, prevention, and rehabilitation.

Opinions

Walking the pathway to national cannabis legalization

Social equity needs to be front and center in our efforts

Published

6 days ago

April 19, 2024

Nina Parks

(Photo by HannaKuprevich/Bigstock)

As we gear up for a major election year, the buzz around cannabis legalization is getting louder. Policymakers are starting to see the need for comprehensive reform, while advocates and small business owners in the industry are cautiously optimistic about the future. But let’s not kid ourselves, this system was designed to keep certain communities out, and it’s crucial that we continue to address these deep-rooted inequities as we blaze the trail forward. A step toward legalization that doesn’t prioritize equity and dismantle the barriers that have held back marginalized groups would be a major bummer. In this op-ed, we’re going to take a groovy journey through the evolution of grassroots organizing in the cannabis industry and highlight the importance of social equity in achieving true national cannabis legalization and boosting our humanity along the way.

Over the years, I’ve been right in the thick of it, helping to build grassroots organizations like Supernova Woman and Equity Trade Network. These groups have been on the frontlines, fighting for cannabis programs in Oakland and San Francisco. I’ve also rocked my own brand, Gift of Doja, and organized the first Cannabis Garden at a major neighborhood street fair, Carnaval San Francisco. I even served as chair of the first Cannabis Oversight Committee in the nation. But the real magic has always happened in when working in coalitions. Each individual and organization brings a unique piece to the puzzle. Grassroots organizing is as challenging as crafting a democratic society but is worth the effort in generating workable implementable solutions. Collective efforts have been game-changers in shifting public opinion and paving the way for major policy changes at both the state and local levels.

As we navigate the path toward cannabis legalization, lobbyists and lawmakers can’t forget about the small business owners who have been grinding to build their dreams. Political advocacy and lobbying are important, but if we’re not uplifting the voices and experiences of those who have been fighting on the ground, we’re missing the mark. Big companies can hire lobbyists, but small business owners don’t have that luxury and if we are not in the room we are on the table. Coalitions allow for us to be in the room when we can’t physically be there. Our communities, especially people of color, have been hit hard by systemic oppression, from over-policing to mass incarceration and limited economic opportunities to limit our ability to be in the room of power and decision making.

Social equity needs to be front and center in any cannabis legalization efforts. It’s not enough to just remove criminal penalties or create a legal market. We need to actively work on repairing the damage caused by years of prohibition. That means fighting for resources, investment, and low-interest loans for small businesses. It means creating a tiered fee and tax structure that doesn’t crush the little guys. And it means opening up equity programs to all industries, not just cannabis. Social justice without economic access and repair is like a joint without a lighter – it just won’t spark the change we need. We have a responsibility to evolve the economy and break down unnecessary barriers. Activism, social justice, and economic reform are all connected, man.

Industry leaders, culture creators, advocates, and consumers alike, we all need to step up and promote social equity. It’s on us to support initiatives that provide resources, mentorship, and funding for individuals from affected communities to enter the legal cannabis market. And let’s not forget the power of our wallets. Buying from companies that align with our values and support the work we believe in can send a powerful message. Voting with our dollars might just be more impactful than showing up at the ballot box.

As we head into a major election year, the cannabis industry is at a crossroads. It’s a time for drumming up voter interest and for candidates to make promises that grassroots organizations have fought hard for. Small business owners will be navigating a tricky landscape, but we can’t lose sight of the power of collective work. By keeping social equity at the forefront, we can undo the harms of the past while building new frameworks that will shape a brighter future for all.

In conclusion, grassroots organizing has been the driving force behind shifting public perception and pushing for policy changes in the cannabis industry. But let’s not forget that true national cannabis legalization can only be achieved if we address social equity. It’s time for us to come together, listen to the voices of those most impacted, and walk the high road towards a future where cannabis legalization isn’t just about business opportunities, but also about healing and empowerment for all communities. Let’s light up a joint of social justice and blaze a trail towards a better tomorrow.

Nina Parks is co-founder of Equity Trade Network & Supernova Women. Reach her at [email protected].