Opinions
‘Spend-more’ groups seek to kill D.C. tax relief, reform
Effort to derail or delay modest promised tax cuts garners scant support

It’s a pittance of relief, representing only slightly more than 1 percent of all locally generated tax monies comprising one-half of a larger total record-setting $13.8 billion proposed annual city budget when federal funding is included.
It’s enough cash, however, to prompt the usual gaggle of “always-tax-and-spend-more” groups to whine in an attempt to create conflict. So far it appears they have failed, with little indication that D.C. Council members are inclined to interrupt promised and long-overdue tax cuts triggered by excessive tax revenues and included in Mayor Muriel Bowser’s budget proposal presented last week.
Although a small amount, it’s a modest measure of reform that tax-weary District residents and businesses hope to have. The dominant current crop of headline-seeking and profligate-spending local politicians typically behaves as if there’s no bottom to the barrels of bounty. Derailing or delaying the pledged tax cuts, though, has garnered scant support.
The $100 million designated for the final scheduled phase-in of tax relief, dwarfed by $250 million in ridiculous funding this year alone toward extending the silly single short streetcar line, has predictably prompted the ire of those pushing for ever-higher city spending.
Some of those groups suggest that no tax cuts are warranted until poverty and homelessness are eradicated.
That translates to never.
These big-spender types reveal an objection to a more rational and fairer taxation system through implementation of individual, family and business rates that make sense and are equitably structured. They strategically deflect attention from the fact that the majority of reductions accrue to lower- and middle-income residents by pointing to the small reduction in sky-high business tax rates.
Let’s not fool ourselves, either – there’s an irony at play as Council members hope to preserve reduced business taxes in a perverse switch-out for other mandates and increased taxation. These include a highest-in-the-nation minimum wage plus the most extravagant and expensive pending paid leave program to be uniquely funded through a business tax instead of employee withholding.
What Caesar gives with one hand is taken with the other.
Notably, in a report this week, the D.C. Policy Center detailed how the District is a national leader in providing strong social supports for the poor. The city’s anti-poverty programs grew by 171 percent during the years 1997 through 2014, outpacing regular per capita government spending. Welfare spending, a proxy gauge for overall funding for the poor, is $25,000 per resident living in poverty.
Although D.C. has historically imposed extraordinarily high tax rates among the very worst in the country, especially for local and small businesses, the tax plan provides one significant improvement. By establishing multi-tier individual tax brackets, the District is building one of the most fair and non-regressive resident tax structures in the nation.
Local tax rates are still too high, for businesses in particular, and will remain so following the additional cuts. Business taxation will drop from a former rate of 9.975 percent, third worst in America, but only to 8.25 percent and still among the highest nationwide. We’ll merely match high-tax Maryland while remaining far above direct economic development competitor Virginia. The enterprise reduction, however, serves to slightly soften D.C.’s longstanding notoriety as an anti-business jurisdiction.
The D.C. Tax Revision Commission recommended in 2014 that lowering enterprise taxes “would signal that the District is ‘open for business’ and, hopefully, boost the city’s tax reputation” by making “tax policy more competitive with surrounding jurisdictions [to] encourage business growth and job creation.”
City officials should focus on still-rampant waste and inefficiencies in agency programs, estimated to equal 10 percent of expenditures. So-called oversight is largely perfunctory, with little critical examination of a lingering legacy of waste, fraud, and abuse.
As D.C. Council finance chair Jack Evans succinctly stated last week during initial budget discussions, “spending more money doesn’t necessarily get you more results. We celebrate the spending … not the end results.”
Until that changes, D.C. won’t get its taxes fixed.
Mark Lee is a long-time entrepreneur and community business advocate. Follow on Twitter: @MarkLeeDC. Reach him at [email protected].

Lately I’ve sensed a deep seated antipathy in the queer population toward fixing systemic issues that sabotage the wellbeing of the queer population. Much of this antipathy is centered around race: wealthy cisgender (and mostly white) gay men feel that much of their needs are taken care of, with the exception of the Trump administration potentially taking away their right to marry. Then, all of a sudden, when reports come out that gay marriage is in jeopardy, these wealthy gay men rally around the flag and start to care. But for the most part, they are busy with their well-off lives renting penthouses in Logan Circle or Dupont, going to mostly all-white gay toga parties, finding casual hookups on Grindr. Their lives are not entirely full of discrimination. They work in offices that celebrate, or at least tolerate, their identity. Because to these office places, a capable, well-dressed, cisgender gay man who knows his business field and can present tidily well is no threat to their corporate good or corporate advance.
White cis gay men who come from lower socioeconomic backgrounds face a larger struggle: They might not be able to afford the wardrobe that fits an elite corporate culture; some middle or lower class folks can’t fit this mold. Moreover, they might not harbor the educational background to fit such job titles at Goldman Sachs, after all, Goldman is looking for Harvard MBAs. Indeed, they are looking for top-tier MBAs — a credential that very few queer people live up to. With poverty and lower socioeconomic class pervading the queer community, it’s hard to find gay or lesbian or — god forbid — trans folk who fit McKinsey’s mold and ethos of work.
Queer people who don’t acquiesce to corporate culture — people who don’t have Ivy League degrees or the best MBA grads from Wharton or Yale or Harvard tend to apply to other jobs. At the lower end of the ladder, queer people who don’t strive to be top tier consultants work barista jobs or retail. I mention “lower end of the ladder” not to deride queer people who choose to be baristas or work in retail — it is their choice, and amazing pro-BLM and pro-Palestine and pro-working class movements originate from these kinds of work places.
Yet other queer people settle for middle class jobs. Trans men who pass extraordinarily well as men become Realtors or insurance agents. Some even more become entertainers and singers and DJs; there are ample jobs available for trans people. Some drag queens or trans women like Laverne Cox shine bright on the national stage and become actresses that represent gender diverse women. And that is good for them.
What I’ve found though is much antipathy toward our job struggle. Not necessarily antipathy from the queer population itself, but antipathy from employers who are hesitant to hire a trans man or a trans man who doesn’t pass well. Trans men who don’t pass are an enormous issue to employers. Employers just don’t like non-passing trans people. They pose a liability to them. They make companies feel uncomfortable. It’s going to take years–if not decades–for companies to just “chill” about gender nonconformance. Trans people harbor many excellent minds, be it in mathematics, physics, English, computer science, or the arts.
It’s time that corporate America take a serious look at their queer workforce. Firing or denying someone employment because they don’t fit a certain gender mold is a cruel act. And this cruel act has gone on for far too long. There are some tales of getting it better. Most notably tech companies like Google or Amazon hiring gender nonconforming computer engineers to get the job done. They enforce an environment of respect and mutual aid. This trend needs to continue and grow.
If it doesn’t then the trans workforce is left feeling bereft, lost in translation. This can’t continue forever. It’s time for change.
Isaac Amend is a writer based in the D.C. area. He is a transgender man and was featured in National Geographic’s ‘Gender Revolution’ documentary. He serves on the board of the LGBT Democrats of Virginia. Contact him at [email protected] or on Instagram at @literatipapi
Opinions
Virginia 2025 GOP ticket gives DEI a bad name
John Reid’s views on trans issues are repugnant

The GOP ticket up for election in Virginia in 2025, is trying to prove DEI is bad. The ticket is Black, gay, and Latino and supports the racist, homophobic, misogynist, found liable for sexual assault, felon, in the White House.
There is all of this hullabaloo created by MAGA Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin about John Reid, the gay member of the DEI team, running for lieutenant governor, being on a porn site, or sending out pornographic material. There is no indication this is true, or if it is, that it was in any way illegal. There is most likely no young person today, straight or gay, who hasn’t visited a porn site — and not only young people. It is Reid’s own business. The issue for me is Youngkin and his aides, making this about Reid’s sexual orientation. That is despicable, but I would expect nothing less from this governor.
Clearly, I have no problem with Reid being gay. But it’s sad to see all the homophobic Republicans getting themselves in a twit over this. The reality is there are so many other things for decent people to be bothered about when it comes to John Reid’s candidacy. His stated views on so many areas are disturbing. His clear disdain for the trans community is offensive. His use of the term ‘wokism,’ which he, like so many other Republicans who use it, never explain what the hell it means to them.
Then I am always amazed when a member of a minority, thinks it’s OK to attack another minority. In Reid’s case it is surely a sign of a lack of self-worth. In any event, it is really disgusting. That is only the beginning of the issues I have with Reid. On his website Reid states “He believes we should prioritize first-class learning in education, free from leftist indoctrination.” What does that mean? Does it include banning gay-themed, and African American history books, among others, from school libraries? He says he is “dedicated to safeguarding and gaining knowledge from our heritage, rather than obliterating it. He appreciates the significance of our history and will always advocate for conserving our cultural landmarks and enlightening future generations about the foundation of our nation.”
Does that mean keeping up Confederate statues or using Confederate names for public institutions? Reid says “he is focused on stopping the divisive wokeness and bringing Virginians together on common values for a stronger future.” He claims to be “uniquely positioned to take the fight to the radical progressives head-on as he continues his fight against boys in girls’ sports, and the extreme trans-agenda being forced upon our children.” He calls that “common sense values.” I don’t think most of that would seem like common sense to any decent person.
He says, “You know best how to live your life and will fight to allow adults to make their own decisions without government intervention.” That is except for trans people, a woman who wants to control her own body, and healthcare, and anyone else he disagrees with.
He also says “we all must pay our own bills and personally own and be responsible for the consequences — good and bad, of our decisions.” Does that mean he opposes Medicaid, any government assistance for the poor, government sponsored pre-school, aid for childcare, or even assistance from a church or community group?
Then there is his full-throated support for Jason Miyares running on the ticket for attorney general, and Winsome Earle-Sears, the candidate for governor, both MAGA Republicans like himself, all giving their mutual strong, blind support, to the felon, racist, homophobic, misogynist, found liable for sexual assault, liar, in the White House. They continue to support him as he, and his Nazi sympathizing co-president, fire thousands of Virginians, including veterans, who fought, and were willing to risk their lives, for our country. They all support the felon as he slashes medical research programs for children. The felon who is cutting hot lines for the LGBTQ community to reach out if they have mental health issues. The felon who is cutting HIV/AIDS research, and hundreds of other grants, at NIH, dedicated to improving the health of the LGBTQ community, along with other programs the felon has cut, which will lead to more deaths around the world from polio and malaria. This is the GOP ticket in Virginia in 2025.
For the good of Virginians, and the nation, vote for Abigail Spanberger for governor, and the entire Democratic ticket, up and down the ballot.
Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist.
Opinions
The power of queer community: When aid is cut, we don’t disappear. We organize
US funding withdrawal has had global impact

The global LGBTIQ+ movement is being systematically undermined, not just by eroding legal protections and escalating political harassment, but by the sudden withdrawal of vital funding. What began in the U.S. as a flurry of policy changes under Donald Trump has become a global flood of cuts, bans, and deliberate dehumanization. This week in Nairobi, prominent ultra-conservative campaigners from around the world, who are against abortion, transgender and LGBTIQ+ rights, and sexuality education, are speaking at the Pan-African Conference on Family Values.
Grassroots organizations, which are the backbone of queer survival and resistance around the world, are struggling to stay afloat. The global funding squeeze will and has already started to directly impact frontline organizations, forcing them to scale back, shut down programs, or close entirely.
In South Africa, support groups have slashed services due to the sudden disappearance of U.S. aid. In Mali, new laws criminalize LGBTIQ+ identities altogether. These regressions are not organic, they are engineered as American evangelicals continue to export anti-LGBTIQ+ ideologies across Africa.
In Europe, trans rights are being rolled back under the guise of biological essentialism, most recently validated by the U.K. Supreme Court’s ruling to exclude trans women from the legal definition of “woman.” In Hungary, LGBTIQ+ events have been constitutionally banned.
In the U.S., Trump is once again weaponizing his platform to push bans on gender-affirming care for minors and cut LGBTIQ+ research funding, all under the banner of “protecting children.” Elon Musk, once a corporate ally for LGBTIQ+ rights, now echoes far-right voices and launches transphobic tirades in tandem with personal attacks against his own daughter.
This is a coordinated, well-funded, and transnational anti-rights campaign to strip queer people of rights, dignity, and resources. At Hivos, we see this backlash as a call to deepen our commitment to centering queer voices, challenging harmful narratives with data and lived experiences, and working to strengthen the LGBTIQ+ movement globally.
We cannot fight this movement with performative IDAHOBIT posts on social media alone. We need action, international solidarity, and a recommitment to protecting queer lives.
What’s at stake?
This isn’t about identity politics. It’s about survival.
When the USAID funding freeze came into effect in early 2025, the Hivos-led EU SEE network conducted a survey on the impact of the freeze on civil society organizations around the world. Most surveyed organizations are reducing staff, scaling down programs, or reallocating budgets.
Outright International had to cut more than 120 grants to LGBTIQ+ organizations in 42 countries following U.S. aid freezes with devastating consequences: Lost access to trauma care for survivors of gender-based violence, the dismantling of HIV prevention networks, and increased discrimination, arrests, and violence. Outright International is only one of many organizations that have had to cut grants and funding.
Grassroots mutual aid groups in East Africa, working with minimal resources, have pioneered radical community models by providing housing, legal aid, and emergency support in the absence of government protection. These groups don’t just serve communities; they are the communities. Their defunding is not only cruel; it is a death sentence for countless individuals.
Economic justice and LGBTIQ+ liberation
Justice isn’t just legal, it’s economic. In most contemporary societies, justice is also closely tied to economic power. Around the world, LGBTIQ+ people face disproportionate levels of poverty, unemployment, housing insecurity, and workplace discrimination. Economic inclusion shouldn’t be an afterthought to queer rights around the world – it is foundational to their survival and dignity.
And yet, reports from Outright International, the Williams Institute, and the World Bank affirm that LGBTIQ+ economic inclusion benefits society as a whole. When the queer community is excluded, the human and financial costs are steep. The economic marginalization of LGBTIQ+ people lowers GDP, deepens inequality, and entrenches cycles of sexual and gender-based violence. So we also need systemic change that includes LGBTIQ+ people in broader economic opportunities — from education to employment and entrepreneurship opportunities.
There are strategies to bring LGBTIQ+ inclusion to the forefront. At Hivos, through the Free to be Me program, we have seen successes in LGBTIQ+ economic inclusion from the establishment of the Queer and Allied Chamber of Commerce of Africa to our partners in the Philippines successfully supporting the Lapu-Lapu city council’s Anti-Discrimination Ordinance. Positive developments like these are just one part of creating safer social, political, and legal environments allowing LGBTIQ+ people to have equal access to resources, opportunities, and decision-making.
What do we do now?
If governments won’t lead, then LGBTIQ+ communities and our allies must.
- Philanthropic foundations must step up. Some foundations have pledged to increase support, but the momentum pales in comparison to the urgency. Funding must be flexible, long-term, and led by community input.
- Media and influential individuals must confront hate speech head-on. Political leaders like Donald Trump aren’t “debating” gender identity — they’re inciting division and violence. Do not let bigotry define the narrative. Bigotry is not a “debate” its incitement
- Corporations must put money where their rainbows are. Pride-themed products without meaningful reinvestment into queer causes are nothing more than branding and pinkwashing. Corporations must ensure LGBTIQ+ employees are supported and protected.
- Solidarity demands more than words, donating directly to grassroots organizations and mutual aid funds. Speak up. Pressure local leaders. Boycott non-inclusive organizations and corporations. Demand change.
- Bring LGBTIQ+ voices into policymaking spaces. When the LGBTIQ+ community participates in the legislative process — and when advocates and organizations receive the funding they need to support long-term, transformative impact — the potential for positive change and inclusivity is endless.
Continuing the fight from previous generations
Queer communities have always faced adversity with grit, love, and radical imagination. But resilience is not infinite. Without funding, protection, and political will, resilience can end up in burnout.
Let’s do more than celebrate the queer community — let’s mobilize. We can take inspiration from the 2024 protests in Peru against a law classifying transgender people and other LGBTIQ+ people as mentally ill, which succeeded in getting the law scrapped within a month. The future of LGBTIQ+ rights will not be decided in courtrooms or campaign rallies alone. It will also depend on whether we show up right now, with our money, our voices, and our actions. Because when aid is cut, we don’t disappear. We organize.
Susan Githaiga is a Pan-African, feminist and human rights defender grounded in the belief that none of us are free until all of us are free as inspired by Lilla Watson and collective Black feminist thought. As the Global Program Manager of Free to Be Me Hivos, she leads a transformative initiative across 12 countries in Africa, MENA, and Southeast Asia, partnering with over 160 LGBTIQ+ CSOs and movements to advance human and economic rights and resilience. A strategist, bridge-builder and movement weaver, Susan thrives at the intersection of advocacy and grassroots power.
