We must have compassion for those who are homeless and there are many reasons for someone being homeless. Each homeless person or family must be dealt with as a person, not just a number.
When Mayor Bowser came into office she committed to closing D.C. General, a huge shelter for homeless families. She proposed smaller housing in each wards of the District. Some wards fought back but the mayor stood her ground and today those smaller shelters are up and by all indications functioning well.
But that is only one problem solved and there are many more. We will have to deal with the results of the pandemic, which in the near future could see many families losing their homes and prepare for that. Then there is the more perplexing issue of homeless people living on the streets in tents. This is where the city is really stumbling.
I recently followed the case of the tent that suddenly appeared on the northeast corner of 17th and Q streets, N.W. A huge REI tent. It was tethered to parking meters and to a tree box. Overnight a couple moved in. My initial reaction was it is outrageous for someone to be able to just pitch a tent on a city street anywhere they wanted. So I contacted the mayor’s chief of staff to report the tent and sent along a picture on Feb. 21. He responded agreeing it seemed ridiculous when there were resources in the city to put a roof over their heads. He suggested I reach out to the Community Relations Specialist for Ward 2, which I did and he responded quickly on a Sunday. But then the buck got passed from person to person and not until March 17 was someone out to take the tent down and pack up the remaining items in it after it had clearly been abandoned for over two weeks. The falling down tent and items in it were left on the street and still there on March 20.
No one in the city would seem to take full responsibility in a comprehensive way and I got different answers from the encampment group about whether these people were offered housing, whether they took it, and who was responsible for cleaning up the garbage in and around the tent, which was attracting rats. Who was responsible once the tent started collapsing and leaning into the parking lane? I had spoken to the gentleman who first occupied the tent who was clearly in need of some mental health counseling. He claimed he was from some other planet, I forgot its name, and told me his name was Zypher. I was not there the morning he was screaming at people passing by. I since found out there is a lawsuit against the city from an organization helping the homeless and supposedly it revolves around the city’s responsibility for protecting the possessions of the people in the tents once they finally take them down. Clearly that should not be a problem as the city could take a picture of the property in the tent and then store it.
I have gotten two stories from the city. One is the tent was simply abandoned; another was the couple found housing. Then I was told the encampment group can only get to each tent site about once a week to clear away the garbage as they only have three people assigned to the group. Now in Dupont there are tents all over the area. The city has upgraded one encampment in front of the Safeway on 17th and Corcoran by placing a toilet and hand washing stand.
My question to the D.C. Council and the mayor is will you use some of the over $2 billion the city will receive from the most recent Biden/Harris stimulus bill to deal with the issue of the homeless? Will more housing vouchers become available and will the city look at producing housing for single people with all the additional services they will need for support? Services to include mental health services, employment services, life classes, which could include cooking and cleaning for those who need them. Because of the pandemic any person moved into housing should be vaccinated to protect them and others who live there. As we move toward a more normal life for all this issue must be dealt with. We cannot be the city that invites anyone with a tent to place it on any city street and then say there is nothing the city can do about it. We must do more for homeless people and in the long run that helps the community as a whole.
Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist. He writes regularly for the Blade.
Opinion | U.S. senators: It’s time to act against anti-LGBTQ discrimination
Draw your inspiration from past bipartisan consensus
Georgia has had the eyes of the nation on it for some time now. It’s just over five years since people across Georgia braced themselves as lawmakers sent sweeping anti-LGBTQ legislation to the desk of then-Gov. Nathan Deal. The LGBTQ community feared for the potential harms that the broad “license to discriminate” bill could bring. Business leaders feared billions of dollars being drained from the state’s economy as major players from Hollywood, the business sector, and even the NFL threatened to pull investments.
But after thousands of calls, meetings, and letters, Gov. Deal, a Republican and devout Evangelical Christian, ultimately did the right thing. He vetoed the bill, saying, “We do not have a belief in my way of looking at religion that says we have to discriminate against anybody.”
At the time Gov. Deal’s veto was heralded as a radical move for a Republican leader. But the truth is that Republican lawmakers faced with bills targeting LGBTQ people frequently take action against these measures. We saw it last month in Arkansas as Gov. Asa Hutchinson vetoed a draconian anti-transgender healthcare bill. Earlier this year, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox teared up while condemning an anti-trans bill, saying, “These kids are just trying to stay alive.” Prominent Republican leaders in South Dakota, Texas, South Carolina, and Arizona have vetoed or moved to block anti-LGBTQ bills. Stalwart Republican senators from Alabama and Iowa have passionately supported open military service for transgender people.
There are plenty of examples of Republicans supporting LGBTQ people, but they’ve often been lost in the headlines stoking the so-called left-versus-right “culture wars.”
In my home state of Georgia, Gov. Deal’s action inspired further evolution on LGBTQ issues. In the five legislative sessions since Gov. Deal’s veto, Georgia’s legislature has not passed a single anti-LGBTQ bill. Republicans and Democrats alike have defended LGBTQ Georgians from discriminatory measures. And so many Georgians across the political spectrum – within families, friend groups, and workforces – have had conversations about what dignity for LGBTQ people looks like.
Now it’s time for the members of the United States Senate to build on that consensus by taking the most important and critical step yet for LGBTQ Americans. It’s time for senators on both sides of the aisle to come together and enact equality legislation that would establish concrete, enduring nondiscrimination protections for all LGBTQ people in areas like housing and public spaces, including restaurants, stores, and hospitals. LGBTQ people in too many states – 29 nationwide – remain vulnerable because of a lack of explicit nondiscrimination laws at the state and federal levels.
Polling consistently shows that a wide majority of Americans of both political parties strongly supports protecting LGBTQ people from discrimination. More than eight in 10 Americans support LGBTQ-inclusive nondiscrimination laws, including 62% of Republicans. We cannot let the loudest voices of a fringe minority hold our country back from delivering the promise of liberty, security, and equality for all people, no matter where they live.
Because really, we are so close to passing federal LGBTQ protections – closer than ever before. Nearly 50 years after its first introduction in Congress, the Equality Act passed with bipartisan support in the House, and received its first-ever Senate hearing. Republican senators in the Senate Judiciary Committee voiced empathy for the harms that discrimination has caused LGBTQ people. They also expressed a willingness to finding a path to protect us. And there is more than one bill proposed to address the inequity that LGBTQ people are subjected to. The Senate judiciary committee opened a door to the long overdue conversation.
Now it’s on us to hold that door open and guide all of our senators through. Democratic senators must reach out to their Republican colleagues and address concerns. Republicans must draw on the many recent examples of conservative leaders working to protect LGBTQ people.
We can’t afford another 50 years of federal inaction on our protections. We can’t afford for the two parties to keep butting heads in a bitter stalemate. For the first time in history, we have a real opportunity to secure protections for LGBTQ Americans.
We must seize this opportunity, seek common ground and find a solution that works for everyone. It’s essential that right, left, and center come together, reach consensus, and do the right thing. At last.
Jeff Graham is executive director of Georgia Equality. Reach him at [email protected].
Opinion | Why LGBTQ people should fear new Texas abortion law
Slippery slope measure turns private citizens into enforcers
I worry about everything from climate change to violence against transgender people to racism to reproductive freedom for women. But, until recently, I didn’t have to worry that a “$10,000 bounty” could be collected from me if I helped a woman to have an abortion.
Yet, this is now a terrifying concern for abortion providers, advocates of women’s reproductive rights and those who value civil liberties. Especially, for people in Texas.
If you value the right to privacy and are LGBTQ or a queer ally, you should be terrified.
Here’s why everyone with a sense of decency should feel the hair standing up on the back of their necks: It’s no secret, that the Supreme Court, more conservative since the court of the 1930s, is likely eyeing the chance to overthrow or gut Roe V. Wade.
In May, the Supreme Court said that, in its next term (beginning in October 2021), it would consider an abortion case involving a Mississippi law that would prohibit most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy (about two months earlier than permitted by Roe v. Wade).
The Court’s decision to consider this case gives hope to anti-abortion activists seeking the overthrow of Roe v. Wade.
States with Republican-controlled legislatures, aware of the make-up of the Supreme Court (with its conservative 6 to 3 majority), have acted quickly to severely weaken abortion rights. This has been especially true this year.
“More abortion restrictions — 90 — have already been enacted in 2021 than in any year since the Roe v. Wade decision was handed down in 1973,” according to a Guttmacher Institute report.
On May 19, Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas signed a draconian abortion bill into law. This measure, known as a “heartbeat law,” bans abortion after six weeks of pregnancy.
Many women, at the six-week point, have no idea that they’re pregnant.
This is bad enough. Other states, including Ohio, Georgia, Louisiana, Missouri, Alabama, Kentucky and South Carolina have passed “heartbeat” laws banning abortion (when a fetal heartbeat can be detected).
But the legislation signed into law this spring by Gov. Abbott is even more insidious.
The legislation, scheduled to take effect in September 2021, gives private citizens the right to sue doctors and abortion clinic employees.
It doesn’t stop there. The new law permits a private citizen (from a pastor to an Uber driver to a friend, family member or perfect stranger) to sue anyone who performs or helps anyone to get an abortion. Even private citizens not living in Texas could sue people performing or helping someone to get an abortion.
Each private citizen could potentially be awarded $10,000 for every illegal abortion.
The law doesn’t allow for abortion in the case of rape or incest. Though it would permit abortions in rare medical instances. Thankfully, on July 13, a coalition of abortion rights and civil liberties advocates, including abortion clinics, doctors, clergy, filed a federal lawsuit to challenge this new law.
Six-week abortion bans passed by other states have been successfully challenged because abortion rights advocates sued government officials.
But Texas’s new law prohibits state officials from enforcing it. It’s set up to be enforced by private citizens.
“We had to devise a unique strategy to fight this subversive law,” Nancy Northup, president and chief executive of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in a statement. “We will pursue every legal avenue we can to block this pernicious law.”
This new law sets up a dangerous slippery slope for LGBTQ folk.
If a private citizen is allowed to sue anyone assisting a woman having an abortion, what, for example, would prevent anyone (from a minister to a friend to a cab driver) who helps a queer couple to adopt a child? Or suing anyone helping a transgender person to get health care.
Let’s do all we can to support the effort to block this dangerous law.
Kathi Wolfe, a writer and a poet, is a regular contributor to the Blade.
Opinion | LGBTQ victories are largely legal, not legislative
Leading lobbying groups ineffective as we face hostile Supreme Court
The recent conclusion of last month’s Pride month celebrations marked an annual milestone in both the history and advancements of rights for the LGBTQ community. The progress for LGBTQ rights over the last two decades has been groundbreaking – oftentimes described as an exemplary movement obtaining rights for a marginalized community. It was less than 20 years ago the United States Supreme Court struck down the country’s first real gay rights test in Lawrence v. Texas, decriminalizing “homosexual conduct” among consenting adults.
Even in the most recent years, we all recognize how major achievements like marriage equality to the protection of gay adoption – to the recent action ensuring a fully inclusive military with transgender service – have benefited the community. But with new attacks arising daily in state capitals around the nation, like transgender sports becoming the new “bathroom bill,” LGBTQ future generations are counting on the leading LGBTQ rights and legal organizations to secure more equality.
Almost unanimously, these groundbreaking rights – while being achieved at almost lightning speed (although not fast enough for the millions of LGBTQ Americans whose lives have been, and still being impacted) – have been won in American courtrooms, not the halls of Congress.
While the first federal LGBTQ rights bill was introduced in Congress in 1975 by former Rep. Bella Abzug (D-N.Y.) making it illegal to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, it was simply referred to the Judiciary Committee and died. Forty-six years later barring discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, part of today’s Equality Act, has still not been passed into law by the LGBTQ lobbying organizations – and faces a similar fate this year in the U.S. Senate.
The Equality Act, the chief legislative target for Washington, D.C.’s LGBTQ lobbying organizations is dead in Congress despite the ripest political environment with a Democratic House, Senate and White House. The Senate’s filibuster and Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) are major structural problems for the legislation, but there is not even serious discussion or demands from the LGBTQ lobbying community to insist on passage through filibuster reform.
Must we automatically presume the LGBTQ community is so low a priority we are essentially beholden to prejudice of the minority in the Senate? When, therefore, can we ever expect any action? If not now, then when will gay lobbying succeed?
As an LGBTQ researcher at the University of Sydney in preparation for a new academic piece, I wanted to find out how groundbreaking LGBTQ rights could be won in courtrooms while lingering in Congress for half a century. The central question this research tried to answer was, “what factors contribute to LGBTQ lobbyist and advocate perceptions of movement success by LGBTQ organizations?” The answer became pretty clear when surveying the top LGBTQ lobbying and government affairs professionals, the ones with the most intimate, front-line view of congressional outreach.
Overwhelmingly, the research concludes the leading mainstream legal organizations have been primarily responsible for the community’s progress – not the LGBTQ organization’s lobbying efforts. The Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the wealthiest LGBTQ organization with a $48 million a year budget based in Washington, D.C. and founded 41 years ago, was ranked 10th most effective out of 17 organizations ranked. Since 2018, HRC has fallen six additional positions since the original research was published. In contrast, Lambda Legal, the LGBTQ community’s foremost legal rights organization, followed by the legal powerhouse, the ACLU, have moved ahead of them ranking as the most effective LGBTQ organizations.
The research clearly demonstrates the ineffectiveness of the LGBTQ lobby, which has largely focused on gaining access to power structures instead of winning legislative victories. Fundraising models of these organizations, built largely around monetizing their access to power, has left little evidence of their effectiveness and in turn, has strengthened systems of oppression against an overwhelming number of LGBTQ people of color, transgender individuals and lower-income members of the community. The “access to power” model of LGBTQ lobbying has essentially commercialized gayness (white, cisgender, English-speaking, middle and upper class gayness) as a consumable product that most often benefits those in power. It’s a “scratch my back, and I’ll scratch yours” system of lobbying that shuts the door on the most marginalized LGBTQ people – those most in need of legislative victories to protect their lives.
Today, regardless of all of the progress in LGBTQ legal victories over the last two decades, the community is in the most dangerous place it has been in 25 years. LGBTQ lobbying does not work, and LGBTQ legal avenues have catastrophically changed. The 6-3 Supreme Court is poised to undermine Roe, which some say undermines Lawrence, which undermines Obergefell (the groundbreaking 2015 marriage equality decision). A house of very successful, but delicate legal cards, may begin to fall. The LGBTQ community is holding its collective breath against an anti-LGBTQ Supreme Court majority, and the spotlight is now shining brightly on the LGBTQ lobby and their ability to produce legislative success.
Unfortunately, the organizations responsible for shaping the community’s relationship with states and the federal government are largely seen as ineffective and oftentimes harmful to progress. This ineffectiveness leaves the LGBTQ community in a dangerous and perilous moment in the movement’s history.
To be successful, a radical transformation of the movement’s lobbying must happen immediately by shifting to a much more state-based movement, where anti-LGBTQ opponents are already attacking the identity and existence of transgender people with the introduction of more than 100 bills aimed to curb the rights of transgender people nationwide. Secondly, the danger to the lives of LGBTQ people from these legislative harms must be amplified and ready to be fought against. And lastly, a new model of investment is required that prioritizes the lives of transgender individuals and people of color and embraces an intersectional approach to lobbying.
The LGBTQ movement is about to face darker days ahead. Leaders in Washington’s premier gay rights groups, including their lobbyists, must figure out how to protect our children, protect the poor, and lift up the marginalized or face disastrous consequences in the next few years in legislative bodies from city halls to the U.S. Capitol. Otherwise our hopes to tackle issues like transgender sports and equality will rest solely on the LGBTQ legal apparatus.
Christopher Pepin-Neff, Ph.D., a senior lecturer in Public Policy in the Department of Government and International Relations at the University of Sydney, is the author of ‘LGBTQ Lobbying in the United States.’
Draft of draconian anti-LGBTQ bill in Ghana leaked
Vienna Ávila, la abogada transfeminista de Honduras que revoluciona Libre
More Americans personally know someone who’s transgender, non-binary: survey
Opinion | U.S. senators: It’s time to act against anti-LGBTQ discrimination
Four Olympics, 13 years, and now a Gold Medal for Tom Daley
Opinion | Why LGBTQ people should fear new Texas abortion law
Drew Pisarra’s ‘dangerously funny and queerly inventive brain’
Meet Theater J’s new managing director
Gay Nigerian priest makes religion serve LGBTQ people
Puerto Rico activists condemn police raid on LGBTQ-friendly bar
Sign Up for Blade eBlasts
Local7 days ago
Gay men arrested under Md. sodomy law in adult bookstore raid
National7 days ago
Gay Asian Atlanta man found beaten, unconscious on railroad tracks
Local6 days ago
Suspect charged in murder of trans woman in PG County apartment
News5 days ago
Senate confirms lesbian, trans nominees to high-profile defense roles
Sports6 days ago
Out athletes going for gold
Opinions7 days ago
Opinion | Macha, Byrne for Rehoboth Beach Commission
Opinions5 days ago
Opinion | Why LGBTQ people should fear new Texas abortion law
National7 days ago
Incarceration for HIV crimes in Florida cost taxpayers $12 million