Mediaboss Marketing

Sign up for the Guardian's Fight to Vote newsletter

Texas Republicans are at the vanguard of a national push to curtail voting rights, with lawmakers targeting the voters and policies that helped Democrats make inroads in the 2020 election.

Texas legislators have introduced 49 bills restricting voting access, far more than any other state, even as major Texas-based corporations such as American Airlines express fervent opposition.

The sweeping provisions could deal an outsized blow to low-income residents, people with disabilities, city dwellers and Texans of color, many of whom belong to diverse, youthful cohorts whose political views spell trouble for the GOP.

And, in a twist that differentiates Texas from other states such as Georgia and Arizona that have instituted or are planning voting restrictions, some of the proposals impose extreme penalties on people who make even innocuous missteps.

When you make making a mistake on a voter registration application a second-degree felony, thats the equivalent of arson and aggravated kidnapping, said Sarah Labowitz, policy and advocacy director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas.

Conservative politicians have tried to justify the rollback by hiding behind Donald Trumps claim that last years presidential contest was stolen despite a complete lack of evidence, and even though their party won handily in Texas.

Allegations of widespread voter fraud have almost become a litmus test among Texas Republicans, said Juan Carlos Huerta, a professor of political science at Texas A&M University, Corpus Christi.

Conservatives political futures could hinge on whether their base believes they are cracking down on the non-issue. And, as a new generation of voters comes of age, the specious talking point provides cover for politicians who can see that their partys prospects may be dimming.

Although Republicans maintained their ironclad grip on Texas last year, Trumps margin of victory in the presidential race winnowed to less than six points, from a nine-point lead four years earlier. Democrats also gained significant ground during the 2018 midterm elections, when former representative Beto ORourke lost his Senate bid to incumbent Ted Cruz by fewer than 215,000 votes.

The states current officeholders know they will not be able to get re-elected on the issues alone, so they are moving the goalpost, said Claudia Yoli Ferla, executive director of civic engagement non-profit Move Texas.

These legislators are seeing the writing on the wall, and theyre scared of the power of young people. Theyre scared to have the true voices of our communities reflected, Yoli Ferla said.

Already Texas subjects its residents to a byzantine electoral system, giving it a reputation as the hardest place to vote in the US. Voters do not have access to same-day registration, and they can only register online if they are simultaneously updating their drivers license.

Then, at the ballot box, hardline documentation requirements honor handgun licenses as a form of accepted identification, but not student IDs. Mail-in voting is so limited that last fall, voters were forced to gather in long lines, in-person, regardless of the coronavirus pandemic.

But despite Texass legacy of voter suppression, large, Democratic counties most notably Houstons Harris county came up with innovative approaches to expand access to the polls last year. For instance, Harris county implemented 24-hour and drive-thru polling sites, while the local election administrator tried to send mail-in ballot applications to every registered voter.

Instead of lauding those solutions, Republicans fought them hard. Now, the states leaders are working to ensure they are not an option for future elections.

Whether its the unauthorized expansion of mail-in ballots, or the unauthorized expansion of drive-thru voting, we must pass laws to prevent election officials from jeopardizing the election process, said the Texas governor, Greg Abbott.

In February, while Trumps national defeat was still fresh, Abbott designated so-called election integrity as one of five emergency items for the legislature. As of late last month, Texas was leading the charge among 47 total states that had introduced 361 bills restricting the vote, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.

One Texas bill would do away with drive-through polling places, allow partisan poll watchers to electronically record voters, and set limits on early voting hours.

Another could consolidate voter registration responsibilities under the secretary of state, sidelining local governments.

Yet another would dangle felony charges over basic activities, such as public servants proactively distributing applications to vote by mail.

Texas is already known for criminalizing the ballot box, especially among communities of color. Under the states current attorney general, Ken Paxton, at least 72% of prosecutions by the so-called election integrity unit have targeted Black and Latino residents, according to the ACLU of Texas.

Those severe penalties cause confusion and can have chilling effects on would-be voters. In the border community of Brownsville, people fear they cant legally vote for reasons that should not be disqualifying, such as their familys immigration status, said Ofelia Alonso, a regional field manager for youth organizers at Texas Rising Action.

Its already such a hostile environment for folks that want to participate in the process, but these restrictions would make it even harder, Alonso said.

In an ironic turn, the proposed reforms may inadvertently affect senior citizens, who are among the few demographics eligible to vote by mail, and whose bloc trends right.

As the Texas legislative session ramps up, voting rights advocates and experts are especially concerned by two omnibus bills filled with restrictions, SB7 and HB6. Both are already advancing through the legislature.

Its kind of difficult to be able to have a strategy on, like, how to target this, said Alonso, when we know that the majority of the Republicans in the Texas legislature are very shameless.

Unlike in Georgia, where backlash from corporations such as Coca-Cola and Delta Air Lines came retroactively, the Texas bills have already become a lightning rod.

Free, fair, equitable access to voting is the foundation of American democracy, Michael Dell, chief executive of Dell Technologies, tweeted in early April. Those rights especially for women, communities of color have been hard-earned.

Governments should ensure citizens have their voices heard. HB6 does the opposite, and we are opposed to it.

American Airlines similarly came out against SB7, saying the company is strongly opposed to this bill and others like it.

But, emboldened by victory in 2020, the states conservatives dont seem to care. When corporate giants decried the bills for being anti-democratic, Abbott simply warned them to stay out of politics.

Their prioritys to stay in power, with whatever means necessary, Alonso said. And election fraud is a good fearmongering way to rile up their base and not have to come out and say what theyre doing are Jim Crow tactics.

They wont say it, but we know what it is.

Go here to see the original:
Shameless: Texas Republicans lead the charge on voting clampdown - The Guardian

In this image from video, former Minneapolis police Officer Derek Chauvin arrives for the verdict in his trial for the 2020 death of George Floyd, Tuesday, April 20, 2021, at the Hennepin County Courthouse in Minneapolis, Minn. (Court TV via AP, Pool)(Photo: AP)

The verdict in the Derek Chauvin murder trial seemed to reopen the partisan split over race and justice in America for Arizonas congressional delegation.

The states Democrats embraced the guilty verdicts against the former Minnesota police officer who killed George Floyd last year either as appropriate or as a way to address larger social inequities. Two of the states four House Republicans used the occasion to attack Democrats as hypocritical in overlooking the words of one of their members over the weekend.

Accountability. Finally. Now we keep working towards justice and major reform, said Rep. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., in a tweet shortly after the verdict.

Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., echoed the need for further change.

I hope this trials conclusion brings some level of healing and solace to George Floyds loved ones, as we continue working toward a future in which all Americans have equal protection under the law, she said.

After George Floyds death in May 2020, Sinema said he should still be alive and that the video of his death was grounds for Chauvins arrest. She said she supported the investigations into Floyd's deathbecause bad police officers make it harder for good police officers to do their jobs safely. Sinemas brother is a Tucson police officer.

Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., the son of police officers, said in a statement the verdict brought accountability for Floyds murder.

We must continue building a more just system that does not discriminate against any American because of their race, he said.

Last year, he spoke of inequities within the nations criminal justice system and beyond, saying it required independent oversight to stop misconduct and discrimination.

Moments before the verdict was announced, Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., a former prosecutor, attacked Democrats for voting down a GOP effort to censure Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., for her comments in Minnesota over the weekend urging people to get more confrontational if there was no guilty verdict in the case.

The Democrats willingly protect violence against our police officers, Biggs tweeted just ahead of the verdict. Afterward, he tweeted against the Democratic-led Green New Deal.

Rep. Debbie Lesko, R-Ariz., had a similar complaint.

She cited Waters words, then added: But today, not a single House Democrat voted to hold Waters accountable for her dangerous words. Shameful.

The partisan attacks seemed to sidestep the issue of Chauvins actions and rekindled the law-and-order message Republicans used against Democrats last year after Floyds death triggered mass protests and scattered looting and violence.

Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., addressed the verdict more directly by calling for restraint in judging the matter at all, and wanted peace.

One must sit through the trial and hear all of the evidence in order to understand what the jury saw, he said in a statement.I did not, and most people did not.I do pray for peace for the families involved.

Rep. Tom OHalleran, D-Ariz., and a former Chicago detective, acknowledged the legal process and a need to address racism in America.

As a former police officer, I know how important it is that those who have sworn to protect and serve are held to the highest standards, he said in a pair of tweets. Today, Derek Chauvin was held accountable by a jury of his peers. Going forward, we must commit to the important, ongoing work needed to address systemic racism and rebuild broken trust between police and the communities they serve.

Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, D-Ariz., also a former prosecutor, said the decision provided a measure of accountability.

Today, the jury stood with the people and reaffirmed the fact: Black Lives Matter. George Floyds life mattered, she said in a statement. We have to hold our systems accountable, over and over again, and thankfully, that is what the jury did today.

The work to establish long-overdue, permanent, morally-right solutions to police brutality continues. Our justice system is only as strong as those who demand accountability, and change is urgent. Im committed to working with the Biden-Harris Administration and the millions of Americans calling for action. The George Floyd Justice in Policing Act must become law and we must commit ourselves to the pursuit of justice for all.

Rep. Greg Stanton, D-Ariz., welcomed the verdict but insisted Congress must take concrete steps to address police practices across the country.

I am grateful that justice was served for George Floyd and his family. But this verdict does not erase the systemic problems that put Black lives at risk every day in America and we, as a people, have more work to do, Stanton said in a pair of tweets. That starts in Congress, where the Senate must do what the House did more than a month ago: pass the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act.Failing to move forward on this bill or allowing it to die by filibuster would be a grave injustice.

Stanton, a former Phoenix mayor, noted the police body-camera videos proved critical in this trial. Today's outcome reinforces how imperative it is that every police officer in America utilize body-worn cameras while on duty."

Stanton introduced a bill to outfit U.S. Capitol Police with such cameras after the deadly Jan. 6 riot and last year sought to require them for police departments to qualify for federal funding.

Rep. Ral Grijalva, D-Ariz., called the verdict an overdue reckoning for police.

After so many miscarriages of justice in the aftermath of senseless police killings, todays guilty verdict was a long-awaited step in the right direction to holding police officers accountable, he said in a statement. Although nothing can bring George Floyd back, I hope this guilty verdict provides some form of comfort to his grieving family.

We must continue to ensure the movement his death inspired lives on in real, long-lasting transformations to policing and reforms to our criminal justice system. I will keep fighting in Congress to make it easier to punish bad police officers and begin the process of dismantling the racist policies that have flourished in police departments across the country. We cannot allow George Floyds death to be in vain.

Rep. David Schweikert, R-Ariz., did not immediately release public statements about the verdict or respond to a request for one.

Reach the reporter Ronald J. Hansen at ronald.hansen@arizonarepublic.com or 602-444-4493. Follow himon Twitter @ronaldjhansen.

Support local journalism. Subscribe to azcentral.com today.

Subscribe to our free political podcast, The Gaggle.

Read or Share this story: https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2021/04/20/arizona-democrats-republicans-have-different-take-chauvin-verdict/7311293002/

Read the original:
1 verdict, 2 views: Democrats, Republicans have different take on what Derek Chauvin trial means - The Arizona Republic

"Throughout my career in public service I've worked to promote policies that drive our economy forward, get folks to work, and put our country's fiscal house in order," Stivers said in his statement. "That is why I am looking forward to this new opportunity with the Ohio Chamber of Commerce, where I can continue my efforts to support free enterprise and economic growth here in Ohio."

Stivers' exit is notable given how small Democrats' margin is for control of the chamber following losses in the 2020 elections that saw Republicans make significant gains by flipping seats. His acceptance of a new position also likely takes Stivers out of another highly contested campaign -- this one for US Senate seat in his home state.

Currently the House balance is 218 Democrats and 212 Republicans with five vacancies. With Stivers leaving, Republicans would have 211. A date for a special election to fill the seat has yet to be determined, a decision left to Ohio's GOP Gov. Mike DeWine.

While Stivers is the first Republican House member to announce he's resigning from office in the near future, five others have said they'll be leaving the House at the end of the term, including two who are seeking higher offices. Three Democrats have already resigned from the House to join the Biden administration, and three others have said they won't run again in 2022.

The state's 15th congressional district, which includes parts of Columbus and its suburbs, as well as more rural areas, has a distinctive Republican bent. Former President Donald Trump won 56.3% in the district in 2020, improving a bit from 2016. Stivers outperformed Trump with 63% last November in the district.

First elected in 2010, Stivers serves on the Financial Services Committee. He also chaired the National Republican Congressional Committee, the campaign arm of House Republicans, during the 2018 election cycle, when his party lost 40 seats.

Before joining Congress, Stivers served in the Ohio state senate. He's also a member of the Ohio Army National Guard and earned a Bronze Star for his service during Operation Iraqi Freedom in Kuwait, Iraq, Qatar and Djibouti.

This story has been updated with additional developments Monday.

CNN's Alex Rogers, Ethan Cohen and Adam Levy contributed to this report.

Read more here:
Ohio GOP lawmaker to resign giving Republicans one fewer vote in the House - CNN

American democracy faces many challenges: New limits on voting rights. The corrosive effect of misinformation. The rise of domestic terrorism. Foreign interference in elections. Efforts to subvert the peaceful transition of power. And making matters worse on all of these issues is a fundamental truth: The two political parties see the other as an enemy.

Its an outlook that makes compromise impossible and encourages elected officials to violate norms in pursuit of an agenda or an electoral victory. It turns debates over changing voting laws into existential showdowns. And it undermines the willingness of the loser to accept defeat an essential requirement of a democracy.

This threat to democracy has a name: sectarianism. Its not a term usually used in discussions about American politics. Its better known in the context of religious sectarianism like the hostility between Sunnis and Shia in Iraq. Yet a growing number of eminent political scientists contend that political sectarianism is on the rise in America.

That contention helps make sense of a lot of whats been going on in American politics in recent years, including Donald J. Trumps successful presidential bid, President Bidens tortured effort to reconcile his inaugural call for unity with his partisan legislative agenda, and the plan by far-right House members to create a congressional group that would push some views associated with white supremacy. Most of all, it re-centers the threat to American democracy on the dangers of a hostile and divided citizenry.

In recent years, many analysts and commentators have told a now-familiar story of how democracies die at the hands of authoritarianism: A demagogic populist exploits dissatisfaction with the prevailing liberal order, wins power through legitimate means, and usurps constitutional power to cement his or her own rule. Its the story of Putins Russia, Chavezs Venezuela and even Hitlers Germany.

Sectarianism, in turn, instantly evokes an additional set of very different cautionary tales: Ireland, the Middle East and South Asia, regions where religious sectarianism led to dysfunctional government, violence, insurgency, civil war and even disunion or partition.

These arent always stories of authoritarian takeover, though sectarianism can yield that outcome as well. As often, its the story of a minority that cant accept being ruled by its enemy.

In many ways, thats the story playing out in America today.

Whether religious or political, sectarianism is about two hostile identity groups who not only clash over policy and ideology, but see the other side as alien and immoral. Its the antagonistic feelings between the groups, more than differences over ideas, that drive sectarian conflict.

Any casual observer of American politics would agree that theres plenty of hostility between Democrats and Republicans. Many dont just disagree, they dislike each other. They hold discriminatory attitudes in job hiring as they do on the Implicit Association Test. They tell pollsters they wouldnt want their child to marry an opposing partisan. In a paper published in Science in October by 16 prominent political scientists, the authors argue that by some measures the hatred between the two parties exceeds longstanding antipathies around race and religion.

More than half of Republicans and more than 40 percent of Democrats tend to think of the other party as enemies, rather than political opponents, according to a CBS News poll conducted in January. A majority of Americans said that other Americans were the greatest threat to America.

On one level, partisan animosity just reflects the persistent differences between the two parties over policy issues. Over the past two decades, they have fought bruising battles over the Iraq war, gun rights, health care, taxes and more. Perhaps hard feelings wouldnt necessarily be sectarian in nature.

But the two parties have not only become more ideologically polarized they have simultaneously sorted along racial, religious, educational, generational and geographic lines. Partisanship has become a mega-identity, in the words of the political scientist Lilliana Mason, representing both a division over policy and a broader clash between white, Christian conservatives and a liberal, multiracial, secular elite.

And as mass sectarianism has grown in America, some of the loudest partisan voices in Congress or on Fox News, Twitter, MSNBC and other platforms have determined that its in their interest to lean into cultural warfare and inflammatory rhetoric to energize their side against the other.

The conservative outrage over the purported canceling of Dr. Seuss is a telling marker of how intergroup conflict has supplanted old-fashioned policy debate. Culture war politics used to be synonymous with a fight over social issues, like abortion or gun policy, where government played a central role. The Dr. Seuss controversy had no policy implications. What was at stake was the security of one sect, which saw itself as under attack by the other. Its the kind of issue that would arouse passions in an era of sectarianism.

A Morning Consult/Politico poll conducted in March found that Republicans had heard more about the Dr. Seuss issue than they had heard about the $1.9 trillion stimulus package. A decade earlier, a far smaller stimulus package helped launch the Tea Party movement.

The Dr. Seuss episode is hardly the only example of Republicans de-emphasizing policy goals in favor of stoking sectarianism. Last month, Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, penned an op-ed in support of unionization at Amazon as retribution for the Seattle companys cultural liberalism. At its 2020 national convention, the Republican Party didnt even update its policy platform.

And perhaps most significant, Republicans made the choice in 2016 to abandon laissez-faire economics and neoconservative foreign policy and embrace sectarianism all at once and in one package: Donald J. Trump. The G.O.P. primaries that year were a referendum on whether it was easier to appeal to conservatives with conservative policy or by stoking sectarian animosity. Sectarianism won.

Sectarianism has been so powerful among Republicans in part because they believe theyre at risk of being consigned to minority status. The party has lost the popular vote in seven of the last eight presidential elections, and conservatives fear that demographic changes promise to further erode their support. And while defeat is part of the game in democracy, it is a lot harder to accept in a sectarian society.

It is not easy to accept being ruled by a hostile, alien rival. It can make political losses feel like existential threats, as the authors of the study published in Science put it.

As a result, the minority often poses a challenge to democracy in a sectarian society. Its the minority who bears the costs, whether material or psychological, of accepting majority rule in a democracy. In the extreme, rule by a hostile, alien group might not feel much different than being subjugated by another nation.

Democracies in sectarian societies often create institutional arrangements to protect the minority, like minority or group rights, power-sharing agreements, devolution or home rule. Otherwise, the most alienated segments of the minority might resort to violence and insurgency in hopes of achieving independence.

Republicans are not consigned to permanent minority status like the typical sectarian minority, of course. The Irish had no chance to become the majority in the United Kingdom. Neither did the Muslims of the British Raj or the Sunnis in Iraq today. Democrats just went from the minority to the majority in all three branches of elected government in four years; Republicans could do the same.

But changes in the racial and cultural makeup of the country leave conservatives feeling far more vulnerable than Republican electoral competitiveness alone would suggest. Demographic projections suggest that non-Hispanic whites will become a minority sometime in the middle of the century. People with a four-year college degree could become a majority of voters even sooner. Religiosity is declining.

The sense that the country is changing heightens Republican concerns. In recent days, the Fox News host Tucker Carlson embraced the conspiracy theory that the Democratic Party was trying to replace the current electorate with new voters from the third world. Far-right extremists in the House are looking to create an America First Caucus that calls for common respect for uniquely Anglo-Saxon political traditions and an infrastructure that befits the progeny of European architecture.

It is not easy to pin down where political sectarianism in America fits on a scale from zero to The Troubles. But nearly every protection that sectarian minorities pursue is either supported or under consideration by some element of the American right.

That includes the more ominous steps. In December, Rush Limbaugh said he thought conservatives were trending toward secession, as there cannot be a peaceful coexistence between liberals and conservatives. One-third of Republicans say they would support secession in a recent poll, along with one-fifth of Democrats.

One-third of Americans believe that violence could be justified to achieve political objectives. In a survey conducted in January, a majority of Republican voters agreed with the statement that the traditional American way of life is disappearing so fast that we may have to use force to save it. The violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6 suggests that the risks of sustained political violence or even insurgency cant be discounted.

Whatever risk of imminent and widespread violence might have existed in January appears to have passed for now.

Instead, Joe Biden was sworn in as president a person who did not attempt to arouse the passions of one sect against the other during his campaign. His nomination and election demonstrates that sectarianism, while on the rise, may still have limits in America: The median voter prefers bipartisanship and a de-escalation of political conflict, creating an incentive to run nonsectarian campaigns.

Yet whether Mr. Bidens presidency will de-escalate sectarian tensions is an open question.

Mr. Biden is pursuing an ambitious policy agenda, which may eventually refocus partisan debate on the issues or just further alienate one side on matters like immigration or the filibuster. Still, the authors of the Science paper write that emphasis on political ideas rather than political adversaries would quite likely be a major step in the right direction.

And Mr. Biden himself does not seem to elicit much outrage from the conservative news media or rank-and-file perhaps because of his welcoming message or his identity as a 78-year-old white man from Scranton, Pa.

But sectarianism is not just about the conduct of the leader of a party its about the conflict between two groups. Nearly anyones conduct can worsen hostility between the two sides, even if it is not endorsed by the leadership of a national political party. Mr. Carlson and the congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene are only the latest examples.

It leaves America at an uncertain juncture. Mr. Biden may dampen sectarian tensions compared with Mr. Trump, but it is not clear whether festering grievances and resentments will fade into the background with so many others acting to stoke division.

Sectarianism, after all, can last for decades or even centuries after the initial cause for hostility has passed.

The rest is here:
How Democracy Faces a Rising Threat Splitting Republicans and Democrats - The New York Times

They argue that Republicans are targeting transgender youth now as a way to score political points with a segment of their base at a time when the party is out of power at the federal level and squabbling over some of the fundamental policies that used to unite them from fiscal conservatism to cozying up to big business.

When you have nothing to say, when you have no case, what you do is you throw everything at the wall, said US Representative Marie Newman, a Democrat from Illinois who is also an advocate for LGBTQ issues. You throw all the spaghetti at the wall and you see what sticks.

More than 30 states are considering legislation that limits transgender rights, with many of those bills focusing on barring transgender children from participating in school sports or on restricting the medical care they can receive.

The onslaught of legislation is new in its focus on children, and in its volume.

We have seen more bills introduced just since January in state legislatures across the states attacking transgender youth than weve seen in the previous five years before, said Carol Rose, executive director of the ACLU in Massachusetts.

The proponents often frame the bills as civil rights legislation protecting women, arguing that transgender girls will have an unfair advantage in girls sports.

Over 30 states have considered or passed civil rights legislation to protect female athletes and thats just one among other important goals states have pursued, Meridian Baldacci, a spokeswoman at the Family Policy Alliance, a conservative Christian organization that is pushing for the legislation, said in a statement.

But activists cite several reasons they suspect that these bills are more about firing up the GOP base with culture war issues than addressing an actual policy problem in their states.

Most of the sponsors of the legislation targeting transgender children in sports could not name any examples where a transgender student athlete was competing in their state or region when asked to do so by the Associated Press. The bills, which their proponents are framing as about womens rights, are also not accompanied by broader support for womens sports or other womens issues.

Theyre not introducing bills that support funding for womens sports in their states, pointed out Alphonso David, president of the Human Rights Campaign, a pro-LGBTQ organization. Theyre not introducing bills that champion pay equity for women.

The bills also come during a time of transition for the Republican Party nationally, as it struggles to define itself after Donald Trumps election loss. The former president shattered the partys consensus on economic issues by embracing more government spending and taking populist positions on trade, while uniting Republicans through fierce fights with liberals and by targeting immigrants. Those culture war issues papered over the cracks in the coalition.

They didnt even have a platform, Rose pointed out, referencing the Republicans decision to not try to write a party platform in 2020. The party instead released a document saying their platform was Trumps America First agenda.

In recent months, as President Biden passed a COVID relief bill and now turns to infrastructure legislation, both measures that poll well among conservatives, Republicans have sought to divert attention by raising concerns about cancel culture and censorship as they attempt to claw back power in the midterms. (Cancel culture generally refers to efforts, often online, to ostracize someone for expressing views that are deemed offensive.)

Representative Jim Banks, the chair of the House Republican Study Committee, argued in a recent memo that Republicans should make fighting wokeness a core campaign message. (Wokeness can refer to anything from supporting the Black Lives Matter movement to Dr. Seuss own estate pulling some of his books that contained racist imagery.) Banks also included under the wokeness umbrella legislation protecting LGBT people from discrimination, arguing that efforts to redefine sex are unpopular among Latino and Black voters.

Thats a message that Republicans like Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia appeared to hear loud and clear. After her House office building neighbor, Representative Newman, hung a pink and blue transgender pride flag outside her door, Greene posted a sign outside her own office in retaliation. There are TWO genders: MALE & FEMALE . . . Trust The Science! it read. (Newmans daughter is transgender.)

Newman said she hopes to invalidate the state bills by passing federal legislation that ensures transgender rights. We need to put together legislation that makes these state bills completely moot, she said.

Congress, which is narrowly under Democratic control, is not considering any bills similar to those targeting transgender people that are being debated on the state level, and LGBTQ rights advocates have scored some key victories at the federal level recently.

Last year, the Supreme Court ruled that federal civil rights laws that protect individuals from being discriminated against on the basis of their sex in the workplace also protect transgender people. (A Trump nominee, Justice Neil Gorsuch, wrote the opinion.) And Biden reversed Trumps executive order banning transgender people from serving in the military and appointed the first transgender American to be confirmed to an administration position by the Senate.

Jennifer Pizer, law and policy director of the LGBTQ legal organization Lambda Legal, said the coalition of groups that are pushing for these laws were also often the drivers of past attempts to ban same-sex marriage.

As it became more obvious in opinion research that the general public was no longer worried about married same-sex couples we just werent scary anymore showing up at the PTA, shopping for groceries the attention shifted to transgender people, Pizer said. It was chosen as a political tool to be used in the same way same-sex couples had been used.

While some polls show more Americans are skeptical of transgender rights than of gay rights, it still doesnt appear that targeting transgender people is a winning political issue. A new PBS NewsHour/NPR/Marist poll found that roughly two-thirds of Americans say they oppose bills limiting transgender rights, including a majority of people who identify as conservative. More than half of Americans say they personally know a transgender person up from less than one-third of people who said the same five years ago.

Bills targeting transgender people are not new. In 2015 there was a wave of bathroom bills that were mainly aimed at excluding transgender women from using womens restrooms. Bills that make it difficult to obtain a new ID with the correct gender on it after transitioning also proliferated. But the focus on children gives this push a different feel with different consequences.

Being one of the most high profile social issues of the day is not one any high schooler wants, said Casey Pick, a senior fellow at the Trevor Project, a nonprofit focused on suicide prevention. It is showing up in what were hearing from our LGBTQ youth on our crisis hotlines.

Liz Goodwin can be reached at elizabeth.goodwin@globe.com. Follow her on Twitter @lizcgoodwin.

Read more from the original source:
Republicans, out of power and squabbling, are targeting transgender kids to score political points, activists say - The Boston Globe