On The Accessibility of US Political Systems & A Crisis of Legitimacy

California prides itself on 'expanding the voting franchise' by delivering a ballot to each doorstep, but a single vote does not even guarantee lobby entry into a private club where the membership access and dues stay unchanged. Moreover, mail-in ballots are fake paper thin luxuries when you lack the stable home, living wage, and benefits (medical, dental, and retirement) needed for a future. While California postures as a sanctuary for voting rights under the Voter’s Choice Act (VCA), an incumbent, self reinforcing status quo undermines free and fair elections in a lot of places - which I suspect has been the case for many generations but observe it with increasing clarity. Most folks do not understand this status quo for their relative class at birth - so they vote along party lines according to what is popular which means exposed most.

Maybe voting rights have always been an issue at stake. However, before voting rights as enabling ‘free and fair’ began to contract for the “Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act” (S.128), introduced by S. Mike Lee (R-UT), questions of genuine social consent undermine an established status quo. Our federal regime, the Trump administration, only exacerbates a crisis of legitimacy in this country for big business and law owning politics. Although mail-in ballots streamline voting mechanics, a rigid bipartisan, and often technocratic, duopoly narrows our options so severely that we the people are often unwittingly forced to support an establishment - or make a bad situation worse - that ultimately does little to nothing for us. For those among us who understand politics, business, and law, the "status quo" often proves the lesser of two evils, particularly when the defense of democratic and ECONOMIC norms, our rights feel increasingly disingenuous.

If I cannot afford to feed a family, why even get married? Nevertheless, my partner and I struggle to support a stabilizing family. I was a “contingent”, “contract”, and corporate paralegal for ten years - which more often than not barely afforded me the income that I needed to survive. Any long term illness would kill me without state sponsored healthcare because I do not measure up to big law standards for demographic reasons. In 2022, an EEOC report for obvious discriminatory misconduct resulted in the killing of my career - resulting in a permanent ‘do not use’ and ‘do not resuscitate’.

Real representation is next to impossible when economic disempowerment and ultimately genocide was quietly reified by the very people, the AM Law 100 elite, who claim to be our advocates. These same people strategically position themselves in groups to benefit the power and money interests of big business and big law. Our crisis is my single disingenuous vote cast for Ro Khanna, who worked in big law, draws in billions for big law/tech, and did not even hear us. Not so ironically, they suppressed and blamed victims for years. I was not an Epstein victim - thank gods - but I have been victimized by powerful people in business and big law, repeatedly - which has largely gone unacknowledged.

While our liberal status quo faces the onslaught of candidate claims of voter fraud, federal data-mining lawsuits, potentially new local ID mandates, and the aggressive economic genocide of marginalized communities and the working class, the crisis of the legitimacy of our voting institutions has exacerbated into a crack in the facade of our ruling elites forcing us to critically examine them.

Attacking the vote - whether through questioning the integrity of election results without evidence, restricting access, and/or interfering with the administration of the vote - is considered a crisis of legitimacy because it strikes at the social contract enabling a functioning democracy. When the process of choosing leaders is compromised (or perceived to be), the foundational "right to rule" is called into question. If a great portion of the population believes that the voting process is unfair, it ultimately reduces the moral or civic duty to participate or, ultimately, respect the rule of government - which we have seen with both the January 6th capitol riots and, most recently, a steady resistance to ICE, the federal Gestapo. More recent and belligerent moves on the part of a Trump regime have resulted in a growing institutional distrust.

In the upcoming 2026 mid term race for CA District 17, the 'incumbency advantage' is NOT a rhetorical, political term - it is a substantive financial, political, and professional wall. When facing Nicolas Finan, Khanna’s only rival, Khanna’s competitive advantage is astounding. Khanna’s ‘pedigree’ is formidable. He graduated Yale Law School to then practice intellectual property at elite big AM law 100 firms like Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati (WSGR) and O'Melveny & Myers (OMM) - preparing him to reinforce the big tech clients of Silicon Valley big law. As an aside, WSGR, notably the “God Father” of Silicon Valley tech, has represented the 3 big tech companies - Apple, Google, and Linkedin. They also represent other household names, like Intel, HP, Seagate, Netflix, Salesforce, ServiceNow, Tesla, DoorDash, and Roblox. And so it goes, OMM also represents Apple, Google, and Meta. Khanna receives his political contributions from big tech billionaires most often. As an aside, with the Elon Musk $44bn merger in 2022, WSRG and Tweeps effectively assassinated free speech for shareholder value.

Khanna’s only opposition is Nicolas Finan. The disparity is jarring. With a $45.7mn net worth, Khanna has $15M in ‘non PAC’ contributions from wealthy donors like Thomas Kurian, Google Cloud CEO, Dipanjan Deb, Francisco Partners CEO, and Sunny Bhatia, Prime Healthcare CEO). He reframes these donations as non PAC for voters - but these people have him in their pocket. Whereas Finan, a NYL financial representative with an opaque educational background, has yet to record a single dollar in campaign receipts - so no campaign activity (as of December 2025). NYL representatives only need a high school education - and to pass a set of series (securities) exams. I had these jobs put in front of me too. I do not even know what the nuances of his platform are, but, for his presumed economic class, he is already more representative of my real concerns - which does not guarantee that he is not biased.

But I feel for him. In Silicon Valley, you are running against the combined institutional powers of big law and tech - which have always, discreetly and economically disempowered any perceived threat and/or demographic deviation, or defect, from established norms - suppressing people and silencing victims. If enough of them get together, they leave you LITERALLY fighting for your life. I know because I lived it. Although I have never exchanged two words with Khanna, his politics give him away as a political/economic candidate even if he is a Democrat.

I have voted for candidates like Khanna who discard me for cash, repeatedly, because I know that they are the lesser of two evils. I pay for systems that do not serve us. I have interviewed at firms like WSGR with the qualifications for longer term jobs to be ignored. I have CONTRACTED at companies like OMM and Twitter with substandard pay and benefits. I have even contributed time and effort to causes like Twitter’s merger without ever seeing a cut of the bottom line. Over the past ten years, I have also been a target for how unsuccessfully vocal I have proven contending with getting knocked of my feet - literally. I hide in plain sight.

In formidable titans' shadows, I have always eked out life - which began before I had a voice to speak. Before Musk took X, I supported corporate securities counsel, and the Taxation Controversy, as a contractor from May to October 2020. Although I was invited to join global legal team meetings, old tribal rules occluded my influence - I was told NEVER to contact the General Counsel, directly, without prior authorization. In an entity rationalization project at Twitter - which is a compliance cost cutting initiative for enhanced appeal - you streamline the org structure to dissolve unused domestic and foreign legal entities for changing tax laws and dead/dead end projects to lower compliance and tax costs. These kinds of projects, among others over years of conversations with experts and auditors, lay the foundations for later sales, mergers, because they increase revenue and shareholder value. Although this was one of a few historically noteworthy projects, I did not even receive a footnote for the work that I had done, in the absence of their lead, when the headlines blew up with the Musk controversy in October 2022. I did good work, but the counselor ghosted me. The sale ultimately effected without lining my pocket while Tweeps walked away with boatloads of cash. I earned $35k last year - which I now know is commensurate with gay men in Silicon Valley.

As a contract corporate paralegal (earning $25 an hour) in 2013, I supported counsel, without benefits, at OMM (c/o Beacon Staffing Group) for 2 weeks. I resigned for a better paying position, with benefits, as an Associate at ICON Investments - which was not life changing. Over the years, I have submitted 3 applications to WSGR in 2021, 2024, and 2025. Only one of which, the 2021 application, resulted in an interview with an HR Manager. It was a non-starter. As far as I know, the subsequent applications never even received a rejection. I was unacknowledged, which makes no sense for my 7 years at Cravath Swaine & Moore LLP - the premier US corporate law firm. I have seen firsthand the high bar of 'pedigree' that these institutions demand. Even a hint of instability for justifiable moves and/or a combination of the 'wrong' education, demographics, and/or upbringing, you are snubbed. They are all like this. And the predicaments that you find yourself in for having the experience but lacking their approval seal are harrowing. These people also do not believe in comebacks. But the democratic process needs not only competition but also representatives who reflect our diverse demographic and economic interests - which, ironically, only comes from Nicholas Finan.

Representative Ro Khanna spearheaded the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 - unlocking $52.7 billion to repatriate semiconductor manufacturing from China and Taiwan - the legislative victory highlights a stark internal disconnect - a conflict. The fox is guarding the hen house. Big tech business profits from tax incentives while those of us who have offered decades of support slowly die. The 17th Congressional District serves as the technological engine of the world, hosting the "Big Three" - Apple, NVIDIA, and Intel - alongside global powerhouses like AMD, Applied Materials, ServiceNow, Palo Alto Networks, Marvell Technology, and LinkedIn. These businesses realized a greater advantage in Khana’s election than his constituents LGBTQIA+ have. Basically, because we are largely ignored at the federal level (we are not counted in the census and listing exchanges like the Nasdaq do not count us in diversity head count requirements). At a federal level, we are erased while fighting for rights that only push us further into debt - like marriage. “Local support” echoes “federal support” by having us fighting for the recognition of basic rights while supporting systems within which we are economically disempowered. We do not have robust professional networks on certain levels for how those above us see us as a class.

While our money pot shrinks, their money pot grows. They leave us slowly dying - quite literally. While Representative Ro Khanna spearheaded the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 - unlocking $52.7 billion to repatriate semiconductor manufacturing from China and Taiwan - the legislative victory highlights a stark internal disconnect - especially for the plight of the LGBTQIA+ community. Yet, despite this concentrated wealth and our seemingly more ‘progressive’ economy, significant federal, state, and local economic gaps remain. At the level of the federal government and national economy, we are simply not counted in Santa Clara County.

• Unemployment Gap: Within that same TGNB group, 12% were unemployed - nearly triple the general tech unemployment rate in Silicon Valley, which sat at approximately 2.8% to 4% in mid-2025 - while we are among the richest districts.
• Gig Economy Dependency: Roughly 17% of LGBTQIA+ residents in the county work for themselves or in short-term gig work. Many report choosing this path for recurring discrimination in hiring. Ro Khanna delineated a Gig Workers bill of rights, which big companies have already learned to circumvent.
• The 16% Gap: National data reflected in Silicon Valley trends indicates that LGBTQIA+ employees earn about 16% less than non-LGBTQIA+ workers. For transgender workers, this gap widens to 23%.
• Santa Clara County Disparity: Despite 46% of local LGBTQIA+ survey participants holding a bachelor’s degree or higher, 42% reported an individual income under $25,000, highlighting a severe "underemployment" issue whereby skilled workers are stuck in low-wage roles.
• Wage Theft: 35% of LGBTQIA+ young workers in the region reported working off the clock, compared to 21% of their heterosexual peers. I just had this occur to me.
• Safety and Discrimination: Roughly 70% of participants in local LGBTQIA+ health and economic assessments reported "struggling or barely making enough to get by" due to the high cost of living in Santa Clara and Sunnyvale.

Ro Khanna and his politics are at the root of our crisis of legitimacy. He calls himself a ‘progressive capitalist’ but rarely has capitalism ever sustained my community as you can see from the local numbers. He is a centrist, a moderate, who refuses to take a single meaningful position on any economic policy benefiting the LGBTQIA+ community and/or impose consequences on those who fail at the rules. While he cosponsored the Equality Act (H.R. 15) prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in housing and employment, it lacks teeth. The regulators are political appointees, who favor the politics of their appointing regimes and what is accepted as triable based on years of institutional animus.

The Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) would enforce the Equality Act (H.R. 15) your demographics align with the internal policies of the EEOC on who has access to and/or can benefit from the federal tax money allocated to maintain these institutions (which are no less subject to the arbitrary whims of changing federal regimes with new appointees and political sampling bias), they evaluate the merit of your claims, investigate, and then facilitate conciliation between the employer and the employee. From 2015 to 2025, the EEOC has focused roughly ¾ of the public resources on retaliation, gender based discrimination, and disability. Across the Obama (2015), Biden (2024), and Trump (2025) administrations, these numbers have stayed relatively constant - although the Trump regime has used it to reverse racism lawsuits against companies by straight men for DEI initiatives and drop gender biased trans claims. In 2025, the Trump regime has awarded $700mn - likely none of which was seen by the LGBTQIA+ community. The DOJ handles cases against state and local governments.

I have a first hand account. I filed complaints with the EEOC in both 2022 (Charge Number 550-2022-01529) against Sidley Austin LLP and 2024 (Charge Number 520-2024-02084) against the NYC Department of Finance under Biden with Obama appointees. For the 2022 charge, I was issued a Right to Sue Notice, which read derisive for their knowing how cost prohibitive litigation can read for someone of my status. For the 2024 charge, I do not think it was closed. They informed me that they would investigate depending on agency resources. Ro Khanna memorializes rights that we cannot enforce for unfavorable regulatory agencies and resource gaps.

Notwithstanding the onslaught of rollbacks and laws designed to effectively dismantle US democracy, LGBTQIA+ economic development policies would not likely see the house floor for our numbers alone. We represent 13, roughly 2.4%, of the 533 voting lawmakers but roughly 9% of the US. If you are born of a perceived lower class, you are more often destroyed before we reach an age mature enough to think. We are the proverbial blind spots economically for sampling bias - infer it from our non-existent census counts alone. Economic policies for the LGBTQIA+ community policies would not see the house floor right now for how much more often historically we have been shut out of their economic narratives. Politicians, like Khanna, overwhelmingly “vote the party line” - which boils down to what his peers think looks good. He only funds us and/or works in our economic favor at the hospital or in a crisis, by securing gender affirming care and/or funding SAFE+ which pays for trauma informed care.

I have fought on every single ‘frontier’, including basic human rights like housing, jobs, medical/dental insurance, retirement/investment savings, banking, privacy even in California over the past ten years. I had to move to NYC for local harassment. Calling these human rights ‘frontiers’ is a disgusting irony. I have even had to fight with CA EDD to obtain benefits from a system that I paid into, because an employer retaliated by lying - which cost me months of my life fighting and exacerbated housing. I relied on public food sources. Calling these human rights ‘frontiers’ is a disgusting but all too true irony for many of us. Our crisis, as the LGBTQIA+ community, is a crisis of legitimacy, because we are neither less intelligent nor educated but are forced to accept candidates who actively bet against us for our sexuality and their implicit bias and then enact bills without teeth reinforcing a lie.

Empowered by Google Gemini