After doing an analysis of the voting and spending trends of the 2022 congressional races in New York, another factor seemed worth commenting regarding which party won certain districts: the percentage of White voters.
In the districts which were 76.0% White people over 18 years old (there were five of them), Republicans won every race. In districts which had fewer than 52.0% White voters (ten of them), Democrats won each race. The remaining eleven districts which had between 52.0% and 76.0% White voters, were split, with five for Democrats and six for Republicans.
The sharp break in blue, red and purple districts does NOT correlate in a similar fashion for median income levels. Many of the districts with the highest percentage of White voters (like NY-21, NY-22 and NY-23) have median incomes below solidly Democratic districts.
Democrats and Republicans will likely battle very intensively for the House in 2024, and spend even more than the $92 million they spent in New York in 2022. The most contested battles will likely be in those districts with between 52.0% and 76.0% White voters.
The New York Congressional races were impacted by the reduction of a seat in congress (to 26 from 27) and redistricting this year. Many pundits were surprised by this year’s election results which saw Republicans win 11 seats and Democrats secure 15, in a heavily Democratic state. People considered whether the new district contours hurt Democrats or whether “outside money” influenced races.
Democrats won 56% of the total vote count and won 58% of the House seats, which closely align. Arguably, that shows that new contours served the goal of not seeing a disconnect of one party using gerrymandering to push out the other. Additionally, the Democrats outspent the Republicans by 2-to-1 (over $62 million compared to $30 million for Republicans).
The New York City-oriented media suggested that the more rural parts of the state had low voter-turnout and therefore did not really reflect the will of most people. In fact, it was the opposite. NYC voters barely turned out in the general election, with an average of 155,241 in the city’s eleven districts. That compares to an average voter turnout of 266,329 in non-New York City districts, and and average of 219,330 overall.
The New York City low voter turnout was rational. Indeed, going to the ballot box had virtually no meaning as the districts were blowouts. Six races had a winning spread of over 60% and another three were over 40%. The two races that more closely resembled the rest of the state with over 200,000 votes and closer races were NY-11, which was won by a Republican, and NY-16 (with just shy of 200,000 votes) which actually only has a small nub of the Bronx and is mostly Westchester County,
The money spent on the races was extremely uneven and yielded varied results.
While Democrats spent twice as much as Republicans, much of the money was spent in just a few districts. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY-14) blew away all fund-raisers ($9.9 million) and easily beat her Republican challenger. Elise Stefanik (NY-21) was the biggest Republican spender ($8.3 million) and also won her seat.
Consider that AOC alone spent about one-third of the total amount that all 26 Republicans spent in the race.
Some Democrats seemed to spend without reason. Dan Goldman (NY-10) spent $6.9 million even though his opponent barely had a dime and won virtually no votes. Similarly for Hakeem Jeffries (NY-8) spending of $5.1 million.
Three Democrats vastly outspent their Republican rivals and still lost. Sean Patrick Maloney (NY-17) outspent Republican Mike Lawler by 5.6 times ($5.3 million to $900,000) and still lost. Francis Console (NY-22) outspent Republican Brandon Williams by 4.2 times and lost, while Democrat Bridget Fleming (NY-1) outspent Republican Nick LaLota by two times and lost.
Meanwhile Democrat Pat Ryan’s (NY-18) huge 2.1 times spending of Republican rival paid off, eking out a slim victory of 2 points. Republican Nicole Malliotakis (NY-11) UNDERSPENT her rival on a dollar-per-vote basis, and won comfortably.
Overall, Democrats spent $19.54 per vote while Republicans spent $12.05, a 38% difference. Democrats spent over $10 per vote in 19 races compared to just eight for Republicans. They spent over $20 per vote in six districts, compared to three for Republicans.
In total, Democrats lost seven races in which they spent more per vote than the Republicans. The Republicans did not lose a single district where they spent more per vote than the Democrats.
Of the 26 congressional races, seven had a spread of less than 10 points. NY-17, NY-18, NY-19 and NY-22 all had spreads of one or two points, while NY-3, NY-4 and NY-25 had a bit more. Republicans won five of these seven tight races. Two of them, NY-17 and NY-22, saw Democrats pour millions of dollars into the races which ended up keeping them tight but still were won by Republicans.
Looking at it geographically, Democrats won 10 of 11 New York City Districts, while Republicans won 10 of 15 non-NYC districts.
Republicans will need to significantly boost their fundraising over the next election cycle and win the trust of their constituents if they want to continue to hold the five seats in the close races. It is likely that Democrat Mondaire Jones, a popular progressive who used to live in Rockland County (NY-17), will return to run against Mike Lawler in two years, after Jones’ failed run in the NY-10 primaries.
In summary, the new district contours seemed to work in New York State. The Democratic money machine poured tens of millions into races, with far left progressive AOC leading her party. If Republicans spend more intelligently in the state in the next cycle, they could keep and maybe expand upon their 2022 showing.
In New York’s 17th congressional district, Democratic incumbent Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney lost his seat to a Republican challenger, Mike Lawler. The pundits – and Maloney himself – offered their opinions as to why the five-term incumbent who spent 5.6 times more than his opponent, lost.
Their conclusion is disheartening, as it further underscores how liberals simply refuse to acknowledge the rampant anti-Semitism and attacks against Jews in society.
The New York Times asked the question directly in its headline “A Powerful N.Y. Democrat Was a Shoo-In for Re-election. What happened?” It offered some ideas including that Maloney opted for running in the wrong district after his historic contours were redrawn. The article wrote that it may have appeared like a safe choice in “diverse, left-leaning places like Peekskill and Ossining,” it neglected to consider the “significant population of right-leaning ultra-Orthodox Jews.“
Jews were the only ethnic group mentioned in the article. Not Hispanics, Blacks, Asians nor any others. Jews were the thorn in the side which helped lead to this congressman’s demise, and possibly Democratic control of the House of Representatives.
In another Times’ article, Maloney was asked why some of his constituents voted against him. He blamed media fear-mongering.
Maloney said that people in the suburbs of New York City are fed lies by conservative media about crime. “New York is home to the fiercest outlet in the News Corporation fear machine. In fairness to the governor, she and the rest of us have to contend with the hysteria of The New York Post and of Fox News… you have these suburban voters who are experiencingthose messages coming out of New York City outlets, which were heavily focused on crime.”
The outgoing congressman said that the media cooked up “messages” about crime to manufacture “fear” and “hysteria.” The issue for this New York politician who’s been serving in congress for ten years was media spin, not actual crime.
Hate crimes against Jews – particularly in New York – is not a fiction concocted to make Democrats look weak on crime. It is an alarming reality, and the scourge is reported by all media outlets, whether CBSNews, CNN or Reuters.
Jews are being harassed, assaulted and murdered with increasing frequency and rather than acknowledge the serious problem, liberals are treating it like false news.
And if that’s not bad enough, they are now blaming Orthodox Jews for flipping congress and thereby hurting the Democratic agenda in the entire country. A little more fuel for liberal Jew hatred for the coming years.
The past election cycles have witnessed an explosion of radicals entering congress. They have almost all been coming from the left-wing.
According to the non-partisan group GovTrack, the number of extremists (scoring in the most extreme 0.10 ideology scoring) among Republicans was cut in half – from 22 to 11 – from 2018 to 2020. Many of the most extreme conservatives left the House of Representatives including Jeff Sessions who became U.S. Attorney General, Mark Meadows who became the president’s Chief of Staff, and Kevin Cramer who moved to the Senate.
Meanwhile, the number of liberal extremists jumped from 4 to 14. Seven of those radicals were newly elected to Congress.
While Republicans typically elect one to three radicals into its freshman class each election cycle, Democrats historically had only voted for new moderates. That changed dramatically in the 2018 elections.
The Democratic leadership warmly embraced the freshmen extremists and rewarded them with plum committee assignments, including in financial services and foreign affairs. Every left-wing extremists got two or three committees. In total, the freshmen radicals accounted for 18 committee seats, while the Republican radical freshmen had five.
Several of these freshmen radicals voted against providing Israel with funding to replenish the Iron Dome system it had used to defend itself against the barrage of missiles that the US-designated terrorist group Hamas launched into Israeli cities. The no votes included Representatives Garcia, Pressley, Tlaib and Omar. Ocasio-Cortez voted ‘present’.
The alt-left wing Democratic Socialists of America is continuing to back several of these extremists, include Rep. Tlaib and Ocasio-Cortez. They are also backing many candidates in statewide races. Many of the DSA’s endorsed candidates fortunately lost to more moderate voices in the primaries. Hopefully, that is a harbinger for the general vote on November 8.
You have not imagined it: far-left extremists have been winning a frightening number of seats in congress. Everyone must go out to vote and support their opponents, and urge party leaders to strip the radicals of committee positions.
The American calendar has a holiday that is sadly often overlooked. Every September, there is Constitution Day, which marks the signing of the U.S. Constitution on September 17, 1787 by the founding fathers. It established three branches of government to protect the rights of every citizen.
The three branches are the executive, legislative and judicial which are run by the president, congress and the Supreme Court, respectively. The legislative branch writes laws, while the executive and judicial branches enforce and interpret the laws. The system of checks and balances were meant to prevent tyranny, from which the early Americans were fleeing in an English monarchy thousands of miles away.
Alas, the threat of tyranny has grown in the 21st century, and it is local.
The Supreme Court, which should be above politics, has become a weapon of politicians. Republicans wrongfully blocked the approval of Merrick Garland towards the end of Democratic President Obama’s final term. It allowed Republican President Trump to appoint another judge, and the highest court now sits at 6-to-3, in favor of Republican-appointments.
While the number of appointees by a Republican or Democratic president should not be the litmus test, we are seeing extreme biases to the right (Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito) and left (Sonia Sotomayor), each scoring above 2 on the Martin-Quinn score, with Stephen Breyer nosing up to the extremist liberal line. The court has become a war room of ideologies rather than a debate of the law.
The presidency, deeply political by design, has become infested by the power of the office. From Republican President Ronald Reagan until Democratic President Barack Obama, no executive issued more than an annual average of 48 Executive Orders. Republican Donald Trump issued 55 on average in his term, and Democrat Joe Biden has issued a horribly high 59. Modern presidents are seeking to end run congress.
Congress, in the Senate and most notably in the House of Representatives, has become a polarized pit of extremists. The govtracks report card for 2020 had eleven Republicans with an ideology score of 0.90 and above, and 14 Democrats scoring 0.10 and below. That compares to 2016 ideology scores when 17 Republicans scored 0.90 and above (change of -6) and Democrats had six people of 0.10 and below (change of +8). Republicans have become more ideologically moderate and Democrats more ideologically extreme. While Republican extremists exceeded Democrats by 183% in 2016, Democratic extremists now exceed Republicans by 27%.
Democratic extremists exceed the number of Republican extremists in 2020, a sharp reversal from 2016, when Republicans had more extremists.
The 2022 Vote
If one has a goal – as I do – of a more moderate and peaceful society, then the extremism and political partisanship should be alarming.
Fortunately, one can try to have an impact at the voting booth.
One cannot vote for Supreme Court judges; that is the responsibility of the president. As the court is currently right-leaning, one should vote for a Democratic president, if the party doesn’t put forward a proven incompetent (like VP Kamala Harris) or extremist (like Elizabeth Warren) in 2024. Hopefully that will balance the judicial and executive branches, which should have been separated anyway.
The legislative and executive branches are where Americans get to protect themselves from a new form of tyranny. It is critical now, when the president is a Democrat, to put Congress in Republican hands. This is especially true, as moderates from both parties are resigning and the Democrat Socialists are gaining significant strength in the Democratic Party.
Should the House and Senate stay in Democratic hands, the economy and crime will surely suffer.
A fully Democratic executive-legislative combination would advance a much larger government with more spending. Complete student loan forgiveness, free community college, free child care, billions of dollars for first time home owners and more giveaways would pass without a modifying voice. Inflation would rise as the money spigot would go on overdrive.
Putting more of a strain on the economy would be the open border policy and ‘abolishing ICE’, the agency managing immigration, as called for by Democratic extremists.
Adding to the crime wave would be the extremist push to ‘Defund the police’ and the catch-and-release program for violent criminals.
The United States would resemble New York City in the 1970’s: crime ridden and bankrupt.
But such is tyranny. An extremist belief coupled with unchecked power to enforce wild agendas upon a public that the elitists believe are too stupid to know what is good for them. In the end, the socialist extremists know they win either way in flattening of society, with everyone either rich or destitute.
Save America, stop tyrannical government and embrace a moderate agenda. Keep the separation of powers by voting Republican.
Brazil and Israel held elections this week to decide on the future leaders of the countries.
In Brazil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, a left-wing politician and former president of Brazil, defeated the incumbent by two million votes on October 30. US President Joe Biden called the president-elect of Brazil the following day. As featured on the US embassy in Brazil’s website, “President Biden commended the strength of Brazilian democratic institutions following free, fair, and credible elections. The two leaders discussed the strong relationship between the United States and Brazil, and committed to continue working as partners to address common challenges, including combatting climate change, safeguarding food security, promoting inclusion and democracy, and managing regional migration.“
On November 2, Israel held elections, its fifth in four years. Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party won the most votes and his right-wing block easily had a majority to lead the next Knesset. As in Brazil, a former leader came to defeat an incumbent, but the reaction of Biden was markedly different.
On the day following the vote, the US embassy in Israel did not say that Biden called Netanyahu. It did not say that the two countries would work together “to address common challenges.”
Instead, the press release posted a release from Ned Price, a spokesperson from the State Department. It read: “Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken spoke today with Prime Minister Yair Lapid to commend Israel for its free and fair elections, and to thank the Prime Minister for his partnership. The Secretary reaffirmed the strength of the U.S.-Israel bilateral relationship. He also emphasized his deep concern over the situation in the West Bank, including heightened tensions, violence, and loss of both Israeli and Palestinian lives, and underscored the need for all parties to urgently de-escalate the situation.“
Rather than follow protocol with the president of the United States calling the incoming Prime Minister of Israel, the Secretary of State called the outgoing Prime Minister. Instead of discussing ways of working together, the US voiced “deep concern” and urged Israel to take action to “de-escalate the situation.”
This is highly inappropriate and a deeply insulting slap in the face of every Israeli.
When Britain elected Liz Truss, a member of the Conservative Party to be the next Prime Minister of the United Kingdom on September 5, Biden called her the next day. He offered the incoming leader congratulations and “reaffirmed the special relationship between our countries and expressed their readiness to further deepen those ties…. and discussed the importance of continued close cooperation on global challenges.”
But Biden uniquely snubbed the new leader of the Jewish State. He treated the country as a vassal to take orders, not as a partner to work with in “close cooperation on global challenges.”
Meanwhile, leaders from the around the world had no issue congratulating Netanyahu and discussing collaborating with the Jewish State.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi tweeted “Mazel Tov my friend Netanyahu for your electoral success. I look forward to continuing our joint efforts to deepen the India-Israel strategic partnership.“
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky tweeted “Congratulations to @netanyahu on winning the elections. It’s always important to see real democracy in action. Ukraine & Israel share common values & challenges that now require effective cooperation. We hope to open a new page in cooperation with the new Government for Ukraine & Israel benefit!“
Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis called Netanyahu. He tweeted “Just spoke with @netanyahu to congratulate him on his election victory. Looking forward to continuing the very strong relations between our two countries.“
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau issued a statement which led “On behalf of the Government of Canada, I congratulate Benjamin Netanyahu on his electoral success and wish him well as he moves ahead with the process of forming a coalition government. Canada’s friendship with Israel is based on a long history of close cooperation, enduring ties between our peoples, and our shared commitment to upholding democratic values.“
President of the European Parliament, Roberta Metsola said “Congratulations @netanyahu, on your success in #Israel’s elections. The bond between the EU & Israel is one forged in shared history and based on common values of democracy, liberty & rule of law. We will keep working together for peace, security & prosperity in the region.“
Italy’s Prime Minister, Giorgia Meloni sent her congratulations to Netanyahu on Twitter as well, saying “Congratulations-Mazel Tov to @netanyahu for the electoral success. Ready to strengthen our friendship and our bilateral relations, to better face our common challenges.“
Just days before mid-term elections in the US, President Biden completely disrespected Israel. How does he think tens of millions of American Zionists will react? How much worse will the increasingly anti-Israel Democratic Party treat the Jewish State when votes are not on the line?
There is a lot of commentary floating in mainstream and social media about Kanye West’s repeated anti-Semitic comments, and whether he represents much of Black America, right-wing America or the Black entertainment industry. Authors pull an example here and there to make generalizations but no one has done a deeper dive into the matter.
Many of the statements being made are true but are far too narrow. Yes, there are many Black entertainers, athletes and politicians who espouse Jew hatred. Blacks are not immune from the scourge, any more than any racial or ethnic group.
The Kanye comments are vile and should be condemned, as are many others like Washington, D.C. Council member Trayon White Sr. (D-Ward 8) who said that the Jews control the weather so they can get rich. However, a more detailed analysis is important to consider if there is an overall trend of Blacks attacking Jews, and to evaluate the underlying reason.
I have analyzed two decades of FBI Hate Crime statistics. To summarize:
Black people account for 24% of annual hate crimes on average from 2015 to 2020, for situations where the offender’s race or ethnicity is known. That is up from a 20% annual average from 2004 to 2014. These percentages should be considered against the fact that Blacks account for roughly 13.4% of the population, meaning that they are committing a disproportionately high number of hate crimes.
Black anti-religion hate crimes did jump significantly in the 2010-2019 decade compared to the 2000-2009 decade. Black hate crimes against Jews jumped by 60% and against Muslims by 50%. That compared to White anti-Jewish and anti-Muslim crimes declining by 24% and growing by 39%, respectively.
Much of the shift away from White hate crimes began in 2015. From 2004 to 2014, Whites committed an annual average of 78% and 85% of total hate crimes and anti-Semitic crimes, respectively. Since 2015, that has dropped to about 67% and 77% on average, respectively. The difference comes from the growth in attacks being made by the Black community (first bullet above) and the Hispanic community, growing from about no hate crimes to roughly 6% and 5% of the total and anti-Jewish crimes, respectively. An undisclosed non-Hispanic ethnic group is accounting for an increasingly very large percentage of hate crimes as well – it is likely that many of these are Muslims, Arabs and people from southeast Asia (Pakistan and Asia) which are normally categorized as Asian in the United Kingdom but not in the U.S..
The year 2015 did not suddenly see a growth of Jewish businessmen, media ownership, landlords or any other perceived anti-Semitic tropes to drive the change in patterns. However, that year witnessed the launch of the Black Lives Matter movement after the killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson, MO in August 2014, just as Israel’s Gaza war was concluding.
Beyond the protests against White people generally, Blacks sought allies to their cause and turned to the Hispanic and Muslim communities. Black media personalities like CNN’s Marc Lamont Hill produced a “revolutionary” video in January 2015 in Nazareth, which he falsely said was in “Palestine”, and smeared the Jews in “a land stolen by greed and destroyed by hate… we stand by the people who courageously struggle and resist the occupation… From Ferguson to Palestine, the struggle for freedom continues.” A few years later, Rep. Rashida Tlaib would pick up this theme “From Gaza to Detroit“, that Jews in the U.S. and Israel are racist profiteers hiding “behind the curtain” and making a profit off of Black and Brown bodies.
In March of 2015, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke before a joint session of the U.S. Congress asking them to not proceed with the Iranian nuclear deal which created an existential threat for the Jewish State. Leaders of the Black community considered it a racist affront disrespecting the Black president, Barack Obama, as opposed to a desperate plea. The Black Democratic members of congress boycotted the speech.
With this backdrop, the Black Lives Matter movement drafted a manifesto with the assistance of Nadia Ben-Youssef of Adalah, a group dedicated to fighting Israel. The BLM platform singled out Israel and America’s relationship with the Jewish State as “complicit in the genocide taking place against the Palestinian people…. Israel is an apartheid state…. Palestinians are forced to walk through military checkpoints along the US-funded apartheid wall.”
Progressive politicians argued that the militarization of U.S. police forces occurred because of training exercises with Israel, although the nature of the training and whether it led to the deaths of any Black people had been discounted for any who bothered to read past the headlines. Regardless, the perception that the Jewish State may have been connected to the deaths of Black Americans was often repeated by Blacks, Muslims and anti-Zionist progressives.
The Southern Poverty Law Center assimilated the narrative. Even though Jews suffered more hate crimes per capita than any other group, SPLC highlighted attacks against Blacks and Muslims, and those committed by Whites. Jewish victims were a small footnote.
The BLM narrative continued to churn whereby it was determined that Black people could not even be considered racist as they lacked power, and any actions taken against White people was simply “punching up.” Hate speech and actions by minorities was thereby given a clean bill of health, a double-“O” license for racism. The power afforded by that twisted reasoning became so ingrained, that SPLC openly stated that it objected to FBI’s Hate Crime numbers for Black people, since “Black separatism was born out of valid anger against very real historical and systemic oppression…. Black separatism is a response to white supremacy and white nationalism,” and therefore could not be counted as a hate crime. SPLC contended that the FBI’s calling out Black racism was “used to justify the over-policing and surveillance of communities of color,” and they would therefore not highlight it.
When Jews were killed in Jersey City, NJ, a Black member of the school board said that the Black killers had a point in killing Jews since they were “brutes” aggressively moving into the neighborhood. Black community leaders rushed to her defense when she was lambasted for her anti-Semitism about murdered Jews. SPLC also tried to come to the defense of the Black killers. And then, with the gas-lighting complete, the city’s un-murdered Jews appallingly handed out gifts to the Black residents of the city on Christmas, apologizing if their blood dirtied the local streets.
Amidst the attacks on Jews, the Democratic Socialists of America called for demonizing Israel and singling it out as a litmus test for endorsement. Not Iran, China, Saudi Arabia or North Korea – but the one liberal and Jewish state in the middle east and north Africa region. The DSA principally endorses non-White and non-Jewish candidates, with the exception of their champion Bernie Sanders, who is completely secular and an anti-Zionist.
So Blacks gather even more allies to the BLM movement. Muslims, progressives and anti-Zionists who all feel victimized by “pushy” White Jews. Validating their victimized status, they can no longer be accused of anti-Semitism or racism, and demand reparations.
This is the storm of Jew hatred that weighs on the Black-Jewish relationship today. The BLM movement and intersectional approach have taken aim at people they perceive as privileged and racist. For them, no group encapsulates having more than their fair share, stealing the fruits of others, than White Jews – both in the U.S. and Israel – in a warped worldview that has infected way too much of the Black community.
The Los Angeles City Council was rocked when a secret recording was released of various Hispanic members of the Council making highly offensive comments about various groups. They ranged from calling the Black child of one of the other council members a monkey, to lambasting ‘Jewish power.’ President Biden and various community members called for their resignations which were tendered in short order.
It is unclear whether the push to expel the bigots was due to the desire to not have racists represent the city, whether there were concerns that such bigots would actively harm groups because of their prejudice or a combination of both.
The motivation for terminating a racist was more clear in 2019, when an Ohio doctor, Lara Kollab, was fired from her position at the Cleveland Clinic after it was revealed that she posted many anti-Semitic tweets for the whole world to see. Beyond the various insults about Jews, she posted that she would “purposely give all the yahood the wrong meds” using the Arabic word for Jews. This was a woman who broadcast that she was in the Jew-killing business.
Anti-Semitic doctor, Lara Kollob and one of her tweets
A similar situation occurred at the University of Vermont where a TA publicly taunted Jewish students by asking on social media whether “Is it unethical for me, a TA, to not give zionists credit for participation??? I feel like its good and funny“. The students protested for her censure and removal, but to no avail. The president of the university, Suresh V. Garimella, sent a letter to the school community that there didn’t appear to be evidence of harm, so decided to take no action. The Brandeis Center For Human Rights Under Law and Jewish On Campus, two non-profits issued a strong rebuke to Garimella’s inaction and complacency in the face of blatant anti-Semitism. The Department of Education is now looking into the matter.
Society has clearly taken a range of actions in dealing with bigots in power. While there are laws in place to protect people from unfair bias, they are typically enforced after an incident happens.
Yet in the case of the Los Angeles City Council, the president of the United States got involved even though no action happened or was even threatened. For the Ohio doctor, no one wanted to wait for her to kill a Jew, and it was easier to fire her immediately as the threat of violence is a crime as well.
But what of the Jews on university campuses today? They are publicly threatened by teachers and student groups, and administrations are loathe to take any action under the guise of free speech – even though threatening to lower the grades of Jews is a threat of the powerful over the weak, with serious personal long term consequences, which has nothing to do with free speech.
President Biden has allowed this anti-Semitism on college campuses to flourish, waiting until after midterm elections to decide on applying the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism to Title VI. Such move could protect the Jewish students from both the bigots and complacent university leadership.
There will always be bigots and racists but society has moved to protect the persecuted with a variety of laws. It is time to finally check the anti-Semites as well.
On September 23, 2022, six liberal members of Congress wrote a letter to Yeshiva University denouncing its decision to not officially recognize a LGBTQ+ club. The letter is full of inaccuracies and fuels anti-religious hatred at a time that anti-Semitic crimes are already at record highs.
Penned by outgoing Congressman Mondaire Jones, and cosigned by Representatives Adriano Espaillat (D-NY), Paul Tonko (D-NY), Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), it contends that Yeshiva University prohibited the formation of a Pride Alliance Club which is completely false. The club already exists. YU just did not give it official recognition as it runs counter to the school’s religious mission.
I could not disagree more with your letter to Yeshiva University, both in tone and summary of your impressions on the matter.
1. The school does not discriminate against any student, counter to your claims. There is no team, club, class, event or any activity that is available to some students and not others. It is a disgraceful slur to state that the school does not treat some of its students “as full human beings.”
2. There is already a Pride Alliance at the school. There is membership and events that have been going on for years. The school took no actions to ban the group.
3. The existing group asked for official recognition by the school, which the school declined to do – as it does for all groups that run counter to its beliefs as a religious institution. That is not selective discrimination against the LGBT community. It would have rejected a Cheeseburger Club as well. It is outrageous for a member of Congress to suggest, let alone dictate, how and what a religious institution can approve and sanction.
4. The courts sided with the Pride Alliance solely because it does not believe that YU is a religious institution and thinks it a secular one. The fact is that YU is non-binary, being both religious and secular, a situation that does not fall neatly into the legal charter boxes. It is a position that members of the LGBTQ+ community should understand.
5. This case has nothing to do with discrimination but the government’s refusal to recognize the religious character of a leading Jewish modern Orthodox institution. Your letter feeds a false narrative targeting religious Jews as discriminating against LGBT students and fuels anti-Semitic sentiment which is already at terrible levels. In fact, it is the government that has refused to recognize the university’s non-binary status, and now you are attempting to dictate how a religious institution should operate.
Over the past weeks, we have followed the Supreme Court’s rulings affecting LGBTQ+ students at Yeshiva University who wish to form a peer support club, the YU Pride Alliance. Many of these students are our constituents.
We write to express our support for these students and for the rights of all LGBTQ+ students to equal treatment in New York State’s educational institutions. We urge the University to do everything possible to care for its LGBTQ+ students as full human beings in the campus community, including to recognize their student group.
We understand the LGBTQ+ students at Yeshiva University seek to form a student group that provides a safe space for discussion and connection. Research confirms that LGBTQ+ students face discrimination, isolation, higher rates of mental health issues such as depression and anxiety, and other challenges as they navigate their college years. Gay-straight alliances and student-led clubs that provide safe spaces for LGBTQ+ students to support each other and discuss issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity are critical to student health and success. Other proudly religious universities in New York have navigated this terrain, recognizing LGBTQ+ student groups as a critical resource for their students; it is time for Yeshiva University to do the same.
We are disappointed with the University’s recent decision to suspend all student groups in order to avoid recognizing the YU Pride Alliance. This move pits students against each other and risks further isolating LGBTQ+ students at Yeshiva University. We also believe this action to be in tension with your recent statement that Yeshiva University’s “commitment and love for [its] LGBTQ students are unshakeable.”
As members of Congress representing New York, we believe that the equal treatment of LGBTQ+ students and the provision of safe spaces for their well-being are consistent with established federal public policy. We know our concerns for the well-being of LGBTQ+ students at Yeshiva University are shared by many who care deeply about the institution—Jewish clergy, University faculty, alumni, current students, and local elected officials.
We encourage the University to extend its hand to its LGBTQ+ students, and their allies, who have bravely come forward telling you what they need to flourish as students and community members at Yeshiva University.
… for visiting countries on vacation that fund anti-Israel NGOs and condemn Israel at the United Nations;
… for not listening to kids’ recommendation to invest alongside Pelosi, and for listening to them about investing in crypto;
… for calling my uncle a crazy racist and my niece a lazy woke-tard;
… for still not having a proper name for my in-laws, after many years of being married;
… for not calling my parents enough, even when they remind me of that fact constantly;
… for pretending I’m preoccupied when my spouse asks for something I’m not interested in;
… for telling my spouse to change attire; for not listening to spouse’s recommendation on attire; for listening to spouse’s recommendation on dress; for being late to events because of attire;
for these sins and thoughts related to family, please pardon us
… for the arrogance of believing that people read my postings including annoying Wordle scores;
… for believing Shabbos calories don’t count;
… for thinking I’m younger than my age, and not living each day fully;
… for internalizing that living my best life means selfish overindulgence;
… for trying to do too much; for trying to do too little;
… for not spending more time with family, friends, community and You;
First One Through 