Connect with us

Opinions

Tune out the partisans, it’s the middle that matters

Political parties plummet in popularity as independent voters increase

Published

on

Independent voter, elections, primary, candidates, D.C., gay news, Washington Blade
Independent voter, elections, primary, candidates, D.C., gay news, Washington Blade

Although the political parties kowtow to now-emblematic extremist wings, the one that moves to the middle is the one that will win.

It’s no wonder that a record number of Americans now self-identify as independents, estranged from both major political parties at a 43 percent plurality. Nor is it a surprise that a majority of those 35 and younger feel the same way.

Identification with the Democratic and Republican parties has dropped to less than a third each of voting-age adults and is barely above one-quarter for either. For Democrats this represents the party’s lowest affiliation share since the 1950s.

This week Gallup announced that neither party musters even a 40 percent favorability rating. This is the first time that both have simultaneously fallen below that mark since the question was asked beginning in 1992.

With 37 percent approval for Republicans and 39 percent approval for Democrats, a majority express disfavor toward both – 53 and 51 percent, respectively. For Democrats, their numbers are among the worst ever recorded for the party.

Americans view both Democrats and Republicans with equal disdain.

If the two political parties were products on store shelves it wouldn’t be long until their brands ended up in the deep-discount bin.

As a result, Democrats and Republicans desperately cling to a weakened affinity among the remaining population like a lifeboat.

Due the country’s binary political scheme, roughly three-quarters of independents consistently lean to one party or the other, split equally between Republicans and Democrats. This results in national political parity between parties, with each commanding a baseline of support in the mid-forties. The U.S. remains divided down the middle.

Less than three weeks ago came news from the Pew Research Center that Americans are split on which party is preferred for solving the nation’s problems. The Pew survey found that on major issues like the economy and immigration, as well as abortion and reproductive issues, both parties run even on best handling them.

Democrats score double-digit advantages on “caring about the middle class” and “being tolerant and open to all groups of people” while Republicans enjoy double-digit leads on matters of taxes, foreign policy and terrorism. While a majority continues to disapprove of the new health care law, Democrats maintain a slight preference on dealing with the issue overall.

Last week came the news from Gallup that the government was viewed as the nation’s leading problem. No surprise, given that less than one-third say they are satisfied with the direction of the country.

Of particular interest to business leaders – including the disproportionate number of gay and lesbian entrepreneurs, enterprise operators and corporate personnel – are consistent survey results indicating that Americans believe, by a more than two-to-one margin, there is too much government regulation of business and industry. This is especially true concerning small businesses – a burden that inhibits employment growth among the leading source of job creation.

In fact, the vast majority believes that “big government” is a greater threat to the future of the country than “big business.” This dominant view now at a record high 72 percent includes majorities of Democrats, Republicans and independents.

When a Democratic-aligned polling firm recently asked whether a larger government with more services or a smaller one and fewer government services was preferred, Americans overwhelmingly chose the latter.

That’s the political landscape as the 2016 presidential campaign gets underway. You wouldn’t know it by listening to potential candidates.

What we get instead is “Big Daddy Government” advocacy from Democrats and “Big Momma Morals” arguments by Republicans.

Republican failure to adapt to majority attitudes on civil and marriage equality for gays and lesbians is disheartening for modern era voters – and is decidedly self-defeating.

While a plurality of Americans describe themselves as conservative, outnumbering the one-in-five liberals by a two-to-one ratio, fully 37 percent consider themselves moderates. It is this group that is most alienated from the left-leaning Democrats and rightward-tilting Republicans.

Although the political parties kowtow to now-emblematic extremist wings, the one that moves to the middle is the one that will win.

 

Mark Lee is a long-time entrepreneur and community business advocate. Follow on Twitter: @MarkLeeDC. Reach him at [email protected].

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Opinions

Rosenstein: Vote for Angela Alsobrooks and April McClain-Delaney

Two strong, accomplished women for Maryland

Published

on

I am endorsing two strong accomplished women for Maryland. The first is Angela Alsobrooks, for United States Senate. Second is April McClain-Delaney for Congress in Maryland’s 6th District. Both women are superbly qualified, and will fight hard for, and be a credit to, the people of Maryland.

Angela Alsobrooks is county executive of Prince George’s County. She was born and raised in Maryland. She is a graduate of Duke University, and the University of Maryland, School of Law. She was the first full-time Assistant State’s Attorney to handle domestic violence cases in Prince George’s County. She made history as the youngest, and first woman, to be elected Prince George’s County State’s Attorney where she stood up for families, taking on some of Maryland’s worst criminals, while treating victims and the accused with dignity and respect. Under her tenure, violent crime dropped by 50 percent.  

Alsobrooks has said, “This year we know the rights of women to control their own bodies and healthcare, is at the top of the list of concerns for so many Marylanders, and decent people across the country, both men and women.” Because of this Maryland must elect a strong woman to ensure we win the fight on this issue. There are many reasons to support Alsobrooks. One is if we look at the United States Senate, what is clearly missing, is an African-American woman. That is a disgrace. Marylanders have the ability to make that right by voting for Angela Alsobrooks. 

But there are other reasons to vote for Angela. She understands how federal policy impacts states and counties, directly impacting her constituents, because she has dealt with the issues that arise from the bills Congress passes. Angela is a pragmatic progressive, and will work across the aisle to get things done. Nothing prepares you more for negotiating with Republicans in Congress, than negotiating with a county council and community activists, and she has done both successfully for many years. She will continue to fight for LGBTQ equality having named the first LGBTQ liaison in PG County. She supports legislation to fight climate change, and supports student loan forgiveness. Maryland leaders know Alsobrooks is the right candidate. She has been endorsed by Gov. Wes Moore, Lt. Gov. Aruna Miller, Sen. Chris Van Hollen and former Sen. Barbara Mikulski, Congressmen Jaimie Raskin, Steny Hoyer and Glenn Ivey; and an overwhelming number of local legislators and leaders in PG County. They all know how good she is, and how much she will do for Maryland, and the nation. I urge a vote for Angela Alsobrooks in the Democratic Senate primary.

I also join a hero of mine, former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Congressmen Steny Hoyer and Dutch Ruppersberger, along with a host of Maryland legislators and office holders, who have endorsed April McClain-Delaney. She has more than 30 years’ experience in communications law, regulatory affairs, and advocacy, across a broad spectrum of government, private sector, and non-profit engagements. She has served as the Washington director and a board member of Common-Sense Media, a leading non-profit dedicated to how media impacts kids health and wellbeing. Her policy and advocacy efforts have spanned digital citizenship, bridging the digital divide, and tech equity issues, privacy matters, spectrum, and internet governance. She has served as assistant general counsel and regulatory affairs director at Orion Satellite where she oversaw domestic and international regulatory efforts in approximately 20 countries, and served as one the founding board members of the International Satellite Association.

In addition to her professional endeavors, she has served on numerous boards and councils. These include the Meridian Women’s Leadership Council; Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security; Georgetown Law Center (past chair); Northwestern University Board of Trustees; the International Center for Research on Women; Innocents at Risk; and the Sun Valley Community School. She is a graduate of Northwestern University and has her JD from Georgetown Law Center.  Delaney is the best candidate to win the 6th District for Democrats. Delaney understands rural Maryland having grown up on a farm in Iowa. She understands government today, serving as the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information, U.S. Department of Commerce, in the Biden administration. 

When it comes to the issue of protecting a woman’s right to control her own body and healthcare, no one will match April in her vigilance. She is a mother fighting for the rights for her four daughters. She is a strong supporter of LGBTQ rights, and will support policies to fight climate change, support debt relief for students, and will work to protect our national security. She understands what it means to work across the aisle without giving up any of her principles. She is the kind of person we need in Congress. I urge a vote for April McClain-Delaney in Maryland’s 6th Congressional District, Democratic primary. 

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

Continue Reading

Opinions

Unique financial planning challenges for trans community

Overcoming roadblocks in journey to living an authentic life

Published

on

Approximately 2.6 million Americans identify as transgender, according to the U.S. Census Bureau Household Pulse Survey in 2023. This community faces many financial, legal, and estate planning challenges, resulting in higher rates of financial instability compared to the general population. However, these challenges are not generally understood or even discussed. 

At JPMorgan Chase, we’re dedicated to providing awareness and education to help all communities — including members of the LGBTQ+ community — reach their financial goals. Our team at J.P. Morgan Wealth Management recently published a new white paper to offer actionable tips for transgender adults to help them overcome some of the specific obstacles they face with planning.

Here are some key takeaways:

Inaccurate identity documents create a foundational problem

Hundreds of thousands of transgender people in the U.S. do not have a single piece of identification that correctly identifies their gender or chosen name. Many people, including those in the broader LGBTQ+ population, have never thought about what their lives would be like if they lacked accurate identity documents. 

Having accurate identity documents is essential for so many aspects of everyday life – applying for school or a job, finding a place to live, exercising the right to vote and boarding a plane. Presenting inaccurate identification in these situations can subject transgender individuals to unfair discrimination and harassment. But correcting name and gender markers on identity documents can be complicated, expensive, time-consuming, and in some cases, impossible.

The U.S. State Department has adopted one of the most simple and progressive policies for correcting gender markers in the world. Since June 2021, medical certification is not required to change the gender marker in one’s passport. Transgender people should consider updating their U.S. Passport book or card immediately and use that document as primary identification. Passport books and cards are valid for 10 years, even if policies change during that time.

Credit issues are common for trans community 

Transgender individuals who are able to successfully obtain new identity documents still frequently face credit issues. Unlike changes to one’s last name after a marriage or divorce, informing banks or other creditors of a change to one’s first name on accounts does not automatically cause credit reporting agencies to update that person’s credit file. The credit reporting system can often be problematic for transgender people after a name change, with many reporting that credit files are never updated or that their credit scores decline.

This can create a cascading effect in numerous areas of one’s financial life, and it goes beyond borrowing. Credit files are frequently checked in employment decisions, pricing insurance, establishing utility and phone service and applying to rent a home. 

Until policies change, transgender individuals should directly contact each creditor and credit reporting agency and follow each organization’s specific procedures and documentation requests. And they should carefully monitor that the changes are actually made and do not result in a credit score change.

Emergency and end-of-life documents should be carefully reviewed

Transgender people often have special health care needs and face unique forms of disparate treatment in accessing care, and cannot speak for themselves in these circumstances. End-of-life planning is often difficult to think about, but it’s especially critical that this community works with their attorneys and trusted advisors to create customized emergency and end-of-life legal documents. 

The people named in these documents who could become decision-makers – typically trusted friends or supportive family members – should be empowered to direct health care providers to meet the patient’s wishes and preserve their chosen name and gender identity, as well as service providers, such as funeral home employees, to honor the deceased’s wishes about their appearance during memorial services.

The laws for these documents are complicated, and they vary depending on the state or territory. If possible, these documents should be prepared by experienced attorneys who routinely work with members of the LGBTQ+ community. 

The bottom line

Transgender individuals in the United States face unique financial, legal and estate planning challenges that create roadblocks in their journey to living an authentic life. Careful planning can help mitigate some, but not all, of these obstacles.

JPMorgan Chase & Co., its affiliates, and employees do not provide tax, legal or accounting advice. You should consult your own tax, legal and accounting advisors before engaging in any financial transaction. J.P. Morgan Wealth Management is a business of JPMorgan Chase & Co., which offers investment products and services through J.P. Morgan Securities LLC (JPMS), a registered broker-dealer and investment adviser, member FINRA and SIPC.

Joseph Hahn is executive director of Wealth Planning & Advice at J.P. Morgan Wealth Management.

Continue Reading

Opinions

University students have a right to protest

But they must not threaten Jewish students on campus

Published

on

Students at Columbia University have set up a tent city to protest the war in Israel. (Screen capture via CBS News New York YouTube)

I support the right of students at Columbia University, and other colleges, to protest. They must understand they are protesting on private space. What I also find interesting is how many of them see their right to protest, and right to free speech. 

The First Amendment gives us a right to free speech, but it doesn’t specify what exactly is meant by freedom of speech. Defining what types of speech should and shouldn’t be protected by law, has been left to the courts. Clearly free speech has its limits. Obscene material such as child pornography, plagiarism of copyrighted material, defamation, or threats, aren’t allowed. Also not protected under the First Amendment is speech inciting illegal actions, or soliciting others to commit crimes. Private employers, and universities, are allowed to set their own guidelines as to what speech is allowed for their employees, and on their campuses. 

The debate over student protests at Columbia University is not a new one. I remember when the Student Afro Society (SAS) and the basically all-white Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), demonstrated and took over buildings at Columbia in 1968. Some were protesting the Vietnam War, others what they deemed would be a segregated gym in Morningside Heights, and Columbia’s infringement on a minority community. Both legitimate causes. Those demonstrations took a nasty turn when students took over buildings and cut off water and electricity to them. They held a sit-in, in the president’s office, and took a dean hostage. Police were called and in some cases it got violent. We are not at the 1968 stage yet in the current demonstrations, and if outside agitators don’t get involved, it may not get to that. 

I agree with some of what the demonstrators are calling for, including having Israel rethink how it is conducting this war, protection for the Palestinian people, and immediately providing them with food and medicine. I don’t agree with their call to support BDS, which is the disinvestment in Israel. BDS is a Palestinian non-violent movement begun in 2005. I also see hypocrisy in what some of the protesters are saying. While they claim Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, which many disagree with, the same people are calling for genocide against Israel by supporting Hamas. It is Hamas’s stated goal to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, “from the river to the sea.”

Calling out Israel for its tactics, is not anti-Semitic. But attacking, and calling out Jewish students on campus, telling them to go back to Poland, which we have seen on video, and making them feel unsafe, is. Then there is the totally outrageous statement, “Zionists don’t deserve to live.” made by Khymani James, one of the student leaders of the Columbia, pro-Palestinian student protest encampment. He made the comments during and after a disciplinary hearing with Columbia administrators that he recorded and then posted on Instagram. I hope the president of Columbia University will be able to negotiate an agreement with the peaceful student demonstrators, including amnesty for some of those students who were arrested, if the students agree to certain parameters for continuing demonstrations. One being they cannot make other students feel unsafe on campus. 

I find it abhorrent that House Speaker Mike Johnson has inserted himself at Columbia University, calling for President Shafik to quit. It is a totally inappropriate political stunt. The same goes for Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) who called for the Biden administration to revoke the student visas of all foreign students who are demonstrating. Those students came to the United States for an education, because we are a free country. If they agree to the guidelines of the university, and what is recognized as acceptable free speech, we should continue to welcome them, and allow them to voice their feelings. Again, as long as they don’t threaten others while they do so. 

I am Jewish, and a strong supporter of the State of Israel. That support has not stopped me from calling on the Israeli people to rid themselves of Netanyahu, and his right-wing government. I oppose the settlements, and support a real two-state solution. But for that to happen not only will the Netanyahu government have to go, but the Palestinian people will have to reject Hamas. I have not heard the call for Hamas to release the hostages they took, whether those hostages are alive or dead at this time. 

I strongly believe in the right to protest, and for Americans, and those here legally, to speak out. In 1969, I came to D.C. to protest the Vietnam War in front of the Justice Department and was tear-gassed. I had a right to protest in a public space. Since that time, I have participated in many demonstrations. Some around the White House supporting rights for the disabled community, LGBTQ rights, women’s rights, and in the ‘80s, demanding the government recognize, and do something about HIV/AIDS. The difference was in these demonstrations, those who disagreed were not threatened. The demonstrations I participated in, took place in public space, not the quad at Columbia University, or other university campuses, which is private space. Students who protest there must understand that. 

My hope is none of the peaceful student demonstrators at Columbia, and other institutions, those who do not threaten fellow students, are thrown out, losing the chance to earn a degree. Those students chose to go to their schools because they thought they would get a good education, and believed graduating from those schools would be good for their futures. 

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

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign Up for Weekly E-Blast

Follow Us @washblade

Advertisement

Popular