Opinions
D.C.’s Metro funding plan tarnished by tax trickery
Council Chair Mendelson criticizes first-year non-transit use of tax hikes


(Photo public domain)
The historic news that all three D.C.-area jurisdictions have agreed to provide the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority an additional, permanent and dedicated half-billion dollars in annual funding for Metro was tarnished last week by budget trickery in the District.
Those living in the D.C. metro area agree on one simple fact: The national capital area’s rail transit system is failing as a transportation mode. It is dysfunctional and in need of a sizable ongoing infusion of monies to recover from years of infrastructure repair and maintenance neglect.
Metro is the only system in the country without a dedicated revenue source, relying on insufficient annual federal and area government contributions to subsidize fares.
The ailing system has seen recent sustained ridership declines, along with dramatic reductions in operating hours that have further lowered use. Track fires, train derailments and service delays have lessened in frequency, but much improvement to restore adequate service remains.
WMATA General Manager and CEO Paul Wiedefeld made his plea clear nearly two years ago: Metro faces a whopping $25 billion in unfunded capital requirements to achieve system repair, increased capacity and improved reliability.
Regional jurisdictions would be required to provide new funding to finance these needs, allowing WMATA to borrow $1.5 billion a year to pay for necessary work. D.C., Maryland and Virginia would need to collectively pony up $500 million a year. D.C.’s annual portion under the existing allocation formula is $178 million.
Only in recent days did Maryland and Virginia agree to join the District in committing to contribute the requested funds.
Maryland Republican Gov. Larry Hogan recently announced, along with Democratic legislative leaders, that the state would contribute its portion, from general funds and beginning in 2019, contingent on both D.C. and Virginia kicking-in their shares. Virginia also pledged its contribution, including a restriction on annual system operating cost increases capped at three percent and demanding improved financial management likely to force long-needed labor union concessions and transit board governance reforms.
When D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser released her proposed annual city budget plan last week for D.C. Council review, included were consumer and business tax hikes to pay for the District’s increased annual allotment.
Not readily apparent was that D.C. would levy these dedicated-use taxes a full year in advance of spending them for the described intended purpose. In the first fiscal year, beginning Oct. 1, the tax hikes would instead go to the general budget.
D.C. tax increases totaling nearly $80 million per year announced as intended for increased Metro funding would actually be conveyed as intended only for revenue collections beginning in October 2019, a full year later.
These higher tax rates will affect the following:
• General sales tax, from 5.75% to 6%;
• Alcohol and meal sales tax, including for restaurants and bars already among the highest in the nation, from 10% to 10.25%;
• Hotel room tax, from 10.05% to 10.3%, plus existing 4.75% tax to finance the Convention Center and fund the city’s official marketing entity Destination DC;
• Commercial property tax, from $1.85 to $1.87 per $100 assessed value;
• Car rental tax, from 10% to 10.25%; and,
• Gross receipts tax for “ride-sharing” companies such as Uber and Lyft, resulting in an estimated consumer cost increase of 37-cents per $10 charge.
D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson issued a public statement last Friday, correctly stating, “[T]axpayers will begin paying the new taxes this fall. But the money won’t go to Metro for another year. Instead … the first year’s monies … [will] be used for other, unrelated, and unspecified purposes in the $14.4 billion District budget. I think it is wrong to take the tax increase of $77 million intended to help Metro and instead use all of it for projects unrelated to Metro.”
If these dedicated tax increases are not going to be conveyed to Metro until collections generated the following fiscal year, imposition of the taxes should also be delayed.
Mark Lee is a long-time entrepreneur and community business advocate. Follow on Twitter: @MarkLeeDC. Reach him at [email protected].
Opinions
Speaker Kevin McUseless calls for Biden impeachment inquiry
Stunt will backfire on Republicans in 2024

Congress has joined the world of the insane with Republicans calling to impeach any Democrat they disagree with. It is happening in Wisconsin to the new Supreme Court justice, and now lily-livered Kevin McUseless, facing threats from his MAGA members, announced an impeachment inquiry of President Biden.
He could name no reason, and in fact during the nine months of Republicans investigating Biden, they have found none. Two weeks ago, he said he wouldn’t do this without a vote of the House, but moderate Republicans rightly figure this will all backfire on them, so wouldn’t agree to vote for it. Meanwhile the country is waiting for House Republicans to do their job and pass a budget, which they are unable to do. The result could close the government again. That will also backfire on them, as it will hurt so many people.
So, what better time for Democrats, thinking independents, and any sane Republican left, those willing to put the country above their own party, and in the case of Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) and Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), even their own reelections, to just vote all these Republican clowns out of office?
Oversight and Accountability Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.), who will lead the inquiry on Biden, has for the nine previous months come up with zilch — nothing meriting impeachment or even further investigation. The IRS whistleblowers’ testimony he touted was contradicted by the FBI in sworn testimony. But then it isn’t Comer asking for this impeachment inquiry, it is Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gaetz, and the MAGAs holding McUseless hostage. Those two should be arrested for criminal behavior, charged with being an embarrassment to the country. They are joined by the likes of Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), recently thrown out of a Denver theater for groping her boyfriend, vaping, taking pictures, and recording a show, Beetlejuice. This is today’s Republican Party.
Clearly, most elected Republicans are not willing to stand up to these jokers; all afraid of the Trump cult, aka the Republican Party. They are being threatened with a primary by Trump if they do. They would lose the primary, part of the reason Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) just announced he would not run again. The Trump cult controls roughly 35% of the party and you can’t win without them. But Trump-supported primary winners have shown they lose general elections.
I am more confident than some in a Trump/Biden replay, Biden will win by 10 million votes this time, but not get one more electoral vote. It will again be about seven or eight states. If Republicans go ahead with this impeachment Democrats will win in 2024.
As to Hunter Biden, he should be punished for anything he did wrong, like any private citizen; whether it is not paying his taxes or lying on a gun permit application. President Biden should stop inviting Hunter to the White House, and curtail his public embrace of his son. It hasn’t helped his son, and is clearly not helping his own campaign, or for that matter any other Democrat. What he does in private is his business. The president has two homes, one in Wilmington, and one in Rehoboth Beach, where he can meet with, and entertain his son. I think the president owes that to the people he is asking to support him. He owes it to the party to not put himself in positions his opponents can take advantage of.
Joe Biden has been a public servant since he was 28 years old, starting on the New Castle County Council, in Delaware, in 1970. He ran and won his Senate seat in 1972. He has never been accused of any impropriety until the Republicans decided they could make unfounded accusations for political gain. He has shown himself a decent and honest man. A man with empathy for those less fortunate; and a president with one of the most successful administrations in modern times.
So McUseless, do your worst. Bend over for the MAGAs and get screwed. Hope it hurts. You have no balls as depicted in a recent funny meme where Barbie is shown on her knees in front of Ken, saying she finally understood; McUseless was the model for Ken.
The country will survive McUseless and the congressional Trump cult and be stronger for it. The decent people of the country will end up winning and McUseless, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Matt Gaetz, and their cronies, will be relegated to the dustbin of history with nary an asterisk to their names. If there is an asterisk it will read that they were useless, venal, and screwed up.
Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist. He writes regularly for the Blade.
Opinions
Impact lingers 22 years after that bright September morning
Religious zealotry that led to 9/11 can be seen in far right politics

Tuesday, September 11, 2001, a point in time that forever altered the world in a series of events, terrorist attacks, that would linger on politically, spiritually, culturally, and leave an indelible mark on those alive at the time who experienced that day.
A human being born that day celebrates their twenty-second birthday this week, having grown up in a world where security measures — some draconian — dominate and where a certain sense of collective innocence has been lost.
Perhaps the ultimate irony is that lessons of peaceful diplomacy that could have possibly been gained from that day were instead lost to the sense of paranoia and nationalistic ideology and messaging as governments reacted, and in the case of the United States, commencement of a war that became the longest in American history.
The number of American service members who died fighting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan had passed 7,000 at the end of 2021. The ‘War on Terror’ as it was known spanned 20 years, saw the expenditure of $6 trillion, 900,000 lives lost around the globe and at least 38 million people who have been displaced.
9:37:46 AM, The Pentagon in Arlington, Va., just across the Potomac River from Washington, D.C.: American Airlines Flight 77, which had taken off from Dulles International Airport, struck the southwest side of the building killing 184 people.
This reporter was in the Pentagon that fateful morning, having agreed to substitute for a sick colleague. I witnessed the utter disbelief on the faces of every one of my colleagues as we were clustered around a television set watching the events unfolding in New York City at the World Trade Center and then suddenly it was our turn as the entire building shook as Flight 77 crashed into the southwestern face of the Pentagon.
The next 16 hours are still a vignette of sounds, smells, and sights from that day that have never left me. The events of that day would later define my career and set me on a path of being far more cynical than I was previously as I viewed a changed world.
Here, two decades later, I reflect still on what could have been and yet still remain optimistic even in the face of greater turmoil, widespread authoritarianism, a global climate crisis exacerbated by war, and then too of war itself as evidenced by the illegal incursion into the sovereignty of Ukraine.
The rise of nationalism, especially of the white supremacist variety tied to religious fundamentalism, is the primary danger and the direct linear descendent of the terrorism that was seen on that Tuesday morning 22 years ago. It is not just an American issue, it is a global issue, one that needs to be exposed and then dealt with.
The religious zealotry that fed the extremist ideology that led to the acts of terrorism that bright September morning can be seen again manifesting in the extremist actions of the far right beyond politics. Book bans, the war on trans and queer people, stifling of free speech and ideas, promotion of anti-immigrant, anti-LGBTQ and racist ideas all contribute to a society that is rapidly becoming very unsafe and a petri dish for the next 9/11.
This is the lingering impact of that long ago day and must be mitigated, before history repeats itself.
Brody Levesque is editor of the Los Angeles Blade.
Opinions
There’s a good chance you’re overpaying for medication
New policy lets worst offenders behind high drug prices off the hook

In its push to lower the cost of medicine, Congress has focused on giving Medicare the authority to negotiate drug prices with manufacturers. Officials just announced the first 10 medicines up for negotiation under the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).
Unfortunately, all of the attention given to that policy lets some of the worst offenders behind high drug prices off the hook: pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs — companies that function as powerful drug-industry middlemen.
Acting on behalf of insurers, PBMs use their buying clout to obtain discounts and rebates from drug makers. In theory, these savings should be passed on to patients at the pharmacy counter. But in fact, while PBMs extract billions of dollars in profit for themselves each year, patients see little to no benefit.
It’s time to change this system. Thankfully, lawmakers now have PBMs in their sights in a proposed bipartisan reform bill.
The fundamental problem is that PBMs wield enormous influence over drug prices, with virtually no transparency or accountability. They’re able to wield such power because they control insurance company formularies — those lists that determine which drugs your insurer will cover, and on what terms.
PBMs have drug manufacturers over a barrel because (in a helpless position), in order to make sufficient sales, the manufacturers need their products on formularies on favorable terms. But even though PBMs are charged with obtaining discounts, their interests are not aligned with those of patients. In fact, just the opposite is true.
The PBM revenue model is linked to the list prices of drugs. The higher the list price, the bigger the discount they can obtain. That means that PBMs make more money off more expensive medicines, giving them a perverse incentive to offer better formulary placement to pricier treatments. But that, in turn, pressures drug makers to increase list prices, on the expectation of offering larger discounts.
Meanwhile, the coinsurance obligations that patients pay continue to be calculated based on list prices — not the discounted prices insurers actually pay. By exploiting this difference, PBMs manage to charge two-thirds of patients for the full list price of a drug, even though they’ve negotiated deep discounts from the manufacturer.
Mergers and acquisitions among PBMs and insurers have given them even more power. Currently, just three PBMs make up 80% of the prescription drug market, and the top six control nearly the entirety, 96%. At the same time, the three biggest PBMs either own or are owned by the three biggest insurance companies. They also use their sway to steer patients to fill prescriptions at the pharmacies they likewise own.
Consider how this whole setup affects patients with HIV. While there are more than 30 FDA-approved medicines to treat the virus, a PBM can steer patients toward the most expensive options via their insurance coverage. Then, a patient can be required to pay a percentage of the list price out of pocket, rather than a percentage of the lower price the insurer actually paid.
There’s still more in the PBM-insurer bag of tricks. Drug makers often issue discount coupons to help patients with coinsurance requirements. But PBMs and insurers essentially steal the value of those coupons right back, by refusing to count them toward deductibles and annual caps on out-of-pocket spending.
Insurers and their PBMs are also behind the “utilization management” rules that patients increasingly face when seeking care. So-called “prior authorization” policies, for instance, require doctors to ask insurers’ permission before ordering certain drugs or tests. Such policies have been an obstacle to patients obtaining PrEP drugs, the pre-exposure prophylaxis that prevents HIV transmission.
As so many activists and lawmakers have observed, we need to bring down out-of-pocket medication costs. One-third of Americans report not filling a prescription because of price, and we know that when prescription costs increase, patients are less likely to adhere to their medication regimen. Their health suffers as a result, often requiring additional interventions and hospital stays.
But the new IRA plan for drug-price negotiations can’t solve all these problems. Lawmakers also need to rein in PBMs. Specifically, any new legislation should decouple PBM compensation from the list prices of drugs, so that the companies aren’t motivated to steer patients toward the most expensive treatments.
For the sake of patients, myself included, there’s no time to lose.
Guy Anthony is president and CEO of Black, Gifted & Whole.
-
Federal Government4 days ago
Pentagon to restore honor to veterans kicked out over their sexual orientation
-
U.S. Federal Courts2 days ago
Federal judge: drag is ‘vulgar and lewd,’ ‘sexualized conduct’
-
Opinions4 days ago
Speaker Kevin McUseless calls for Biden impeachment inquiry
-
National5 days ago
Activists mark Bisexual Awareness Week