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

U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court to consider bans on trans athletes in school sports

27 states have passed laws limiting participation in athletics programs

Published

on

U.S. Supreme Court (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear two cases involving transgender youth challenging bans prohibiting them from participating in school sports.

In Little v. Hecox, plaintiffs represented by the ACLU, Legal Voice, and the law firm Cooley are challenging Idaho’s 2020 ban, which requires sex testing to adjudicate questions of an athlete’s eligibility.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals described the process in a 2023 decision halting the policy’s enforcement pending an outcome in the litigation. The “sex dispute verification process, whereby any individual can ‘dispute’ the sex of any female student athlete in the state of Idaho,” the court wrote, would “require her to undergo intrusive medical procedures to verify her sex, including gynecological exams.”

In West Virginia v. B.P.J., Lambda Legal, the ACLU, the ACLU of West Virginia, and Cooley are representing a trans middle school student challenging the Mountain State’s 2021 ban on trans athletes.

The plaintiff was participating in cross country when the law was passed, taking puberty blockers that would have significantly reduced the chances that she could have a physiological advantage over cisgender peers.

“Like any other educational program, school athletic programs should be accessible for everyone regardless of their sex or transgender status,” said Joshua Block, senior counsel for the ACLU’s LGBTQ and HIV Project. “Trans kids play sports for the same reasons their peers do — to learn perseverance, dedication, teamwork, and to simply have fun with their friends,” Block said.

He added, “Categorically excluding kids from school sports just because they are transgender will only make our schools less safe and more hurtful places for all youth. We believe the lower courts were right to block these discriminatory laws, and we will continue to defend the freedom of all kids to play.”

“Our client just wants to play sports with her friends and peers,” said Lambda Legal Senior Counsel Tara Borelli. “Everyone understands the value of participating in team athletics, for fitness, leadership, socialization, and myriad other benefits.”

Borelli continued, “The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit last April issued a thoughtful and thorough ruling allowing B.P.J. to continue participating in track events. That well-reasoned decision should stand the test of time, and we stand ready to defend it.”

Shortly after taking control of both legislative chambers, Republican members of Congress tried — unsuccessfully — to pass a national ban like those now enforced in 27 states since 2020.

Continue Reading

Federal Government

UPenn erases Lia Thomas’s records as part of settlement with White House

University agreed to ban trans women from women’s sports teams

Published

on

U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon (Screen capture: C-SPAN)

In a settlement with the Trump-Vance administration announced on Tuesday, the University of Pennsylvania will ban transgender athletes from competing and erase swimming records set by transgender former student Lia Thomas.

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights found the university in violation of Title IX, the federal rights law barring sex based discrimination in educational institutions, by “permitting males to compete in women’s intercollegiate athletics and to occupy women-only intimate facilities.”

The statement issued by University of Pennsylvania President J. Larry Jameson highlighted how the law’s interpretation was changed substantially under President Donald Trump’s second term.

“The Department of Education OCR investigated the participation of one transgender athlete on the women’s swimming team three years ago, during the 2021-2022 swim season,” he wrote. “At that time, Penn was in compliance with NCAA eligibility rules and Title IX as then interpreted.”

Jameson continued, “Penn has always followed — and continues to follow — Title IX and the applicable policy of the NCAA regarding transgender athletes. NCAA eligibility rules changed in February 2025 with Executive Orders 14168 and 14201 and Penn will continue to adhere to these new rules.”

Writing that “we acknowledge that some student-athletes were disadvantaged by these rules” in place while Thomas was allowed to compete, the university president added, “We recognize this and will apologize to those who experienced a competitive disadvantage or experienced anxiety because of the policies in effect at the time.”

“Today’s resolution agreement with UPenn is yet another example of the Trump effect in action,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. “Thanks to the leadership of President Trump, UPenn has agreed both to apologize for its past Title IX violations and to ensure that women’s sports are protected at the university for future generations of female athletes.”

Under former President Joe Biden, the department’s Office of Civil Rights sought to protect against anti-LGBTQ discrimination in education, bringing investigations and enforcement actions in cases where school officials might, for example, require trans students to use restrooms and facilities consistent with their birth sex or fail to respond to peer harassment over their gender identity.

Much of the legal reasoning behind the Biden-Harris administration’s positions extended from the 2020 U.S. Supreme Court case Bostock v. Clayton County, which found that sex-based discrimination includes that which is based on sexual orientation or gender identity under Title VII rules covering employment practices.

The Trump-Vance administration last week put the state of California on notice that its trans athlete policies were, or once were, in violation of Title IX, which comes amid the ongoing battle with Maine over the same issue.

Continue Reading

New York

Two teens shot steps from Stonewall Inn after NYC Pride parade

One of the victims remains in critical condition

Published

on

The Stonewall National Memorial in New York on June 19, 2024. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

On Sunday night, following the annual NYC Pride March, two girls were shot in Sheridan Square, feet away from the historic Stonewall Inn.

According to an NYPD report, the two girls, aged 16 and 17, were shot around 10:15 p.m. as Pride festivities began to wind down. The 16-year-old was struck in the head and, according to police sources, is said to be in critical condition, while the 17-year-old was said to be in stable condition.

The Washington Blade confirmed with the NYPD the details from the police reports and learned no arrests had been made as of noon Monday.

The shooting took place in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of Manhattan, mere feet away from the most famous gay bar in the city — if not the world — the Stonewall Inn. Earlier that day, hundreds of thousands of people marched down Christopher Street to celebrate 55 years of LGBTQ people standing up for their rights.

In June 1969, after police raided the Stonewall Inn, members of the LGBTQ community pushed back, sparking what became known as the Stonewall riots. Over the course of two days, LGBTQ New Yorkers protested the discriminatory policing of queer spaces across the city and mobilized to speak out — and throw bottles if need be — at officers attempting to suppress their existence.

The following year, LGBTQ people returned to the Stonewall Inn and marched through the same streets where queer New Yorkers had been arrested, marking the first “Gay Pride March” in history and declaring that LGBTQ people were not going anywhere.

New York State Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, whose district includes Greenwich Village, took to social media to comment on the shooting.

“After decades of peaceful Pride celebrations — this year gun fire and two people shot near the Stonewall Inn is a reminder that gun violence is everywhere,” the lesbian lawmaker said on X. “Guns are a problem despite the NRA BS.”

Continue Reading

Popular