Antoine by Peter Frycki
(Published on Out In Jersey, Aug 30, 2010, updated Sept 9, 2010)
It has never happened before and it’s a first for New Jersey. A LGBT candidate has decided to run for a very high office: the U.S. Congress. His name is Ed Potosnak. He’s a science teacher and helped run a small business. But after watching first-term Republican Congressman Leonard Lance of the 7th District prance around with the conservative fringe during the past two years, Potosnak decided he could do a better job in Washington.
Potosnak says that since being elected just two years ago, his opponent is “completely out of touch with his constituents.”
So, Ed Potosnak is running as a Democrat for Congress in New Jersey’s 7th Congressional District, which spans the state from the Delaware River just below Phillipsburg to Woodbridge Township. It is a topsy-turvy, thin and squiggly lined district that looks like too many other electoral districts.
But what makes this year’s district election different is really exciting to the LGBT community in New Jersey. Ed Potosnak is running as an out and proud gay man on the Democratic ticket.
So…Out in Jersey sat down with the charming and intelligent Ed Potosnak and got right to the point!
How is the campaign going?
The campaign is going really well. People across the district have really come a long way in understanding our campaign. We need to strengthen our economy with good jobs for them and their children. I would say the campaign has been very inspiring. I have had the opportunity to speak with families and business owners throughout the district about their frustrations with Washington not being able to help provide the kind of policies they need to put job creation in the forefront. There certainly is a disappointment with the political structure and partisanship of career politicians in Washington. There is a sense, that I share, a frustration, that those folks just are not getting the job done.
On a personal level, what is the catalyst that made you decide to run for Congress? What was that “aha” moment for you?
I’m a scientist, you know. Things sort of built logically. I left the halls of the high school classroom I taught in, and entered the halls of Congress and looked around at the process. And when Leonard Lance came into office I watched him very acutely. My representative…what is he doing? How is he representing us? And in the beginning I think he had some real votes. But then he fell in with the Republican leadership and time and time again he voted against our interests. So the moment was…over time seeing how someone I had hoped would deliver on his campaign promise to provide a moderate, bipartisan representation, working across the aisle, just shattered. I did not want to sit on the sidelines and have my district represented in that manner. For me, I wanted to step up and take a huge risk to represent the needs of all the people living in the 7th District.
You explain what happened to Lance. What will keep you from doing that?
I think knowing that I am going to Washington to get a job done….not for a job. That is the best way that I could summarize it.
Is Leonard Lance’s Republican voting record your major criticism of him, or are there other issues?
I could go into many different things. But the question you are asking is… Is it just about the votes? Actually, it is a lot about the pattern. When you represent your major contributors–Wall Street, big banks and the insurance industry over the need of struggling middle-class families–I have a major criticism. When you are more worried about being re-elected than you are in representing us, our families and our businesses, I have a criticism. When you spend more of your time and energy into making sure you have a job instead of getting a job done, I have a criticism. And these are all symptoms of someone who has spent nearly a quarter century in elected office. I think people deserve a representative who is interested in representing them, not just keeping their job.
Sounds as if you are in favor of term-limits?
Yes. Absolutely. I have spoken about this before. I do not intend on serving in more than eight years. Because the pattern can be avoided if you put a time frame on your time. I have certain things I want to accomplish and by setting a timetable I know that I am working within that time frame to accomplish those goals. I want to work to bring research and development to the nation. I want to reach our goals to lead our nation in the global economy by improving education so that our students are prepared with the skills they need to be part of that innovative work force. And to help clean up our environment: our water, our land, our air, so that for future generations they can enjoy what we have come to enjoy.
If you don’t plan on being around forever what would be the fire under your butt to get it done? [laughs]
My experience taught me some of the best and worst things that Washington has to offer. I was able to work on issues that I care about and get things done. I was only there for a very brief amount of time. I very strongly reject the idea that you can’t get real work done in eight years. If you can’t, then why are you there?
You are running a more-or-less anti-incumbent campaign. But you do have some political experience?
After many years of classroom teaching, I was an Albert Einstein Distinguished Educator Fellow, working as a science teacher taking my classroom experience in the form of looking at education and public policy in Washington D.C. I also looked at appropriations work to see how we can strengthen our education policy so that we have students that can accept the challenges of a 21-st century global economy. So this was a period of time where I was bringing my real-world experience to help form policy. And I was bringing my insight that only a classroom teacher could have. I worked on making heads or tails out of suggestions from policy-makers that are made without any understanding of the reality of the school environment. I see the campaign and running for Congress as a way of bringing my real-world experience into policy-making in Washington. There are far too many individuals that do not do that.
Here in the district, how do you explain your candidacy?
I have always been active in my community. When at Rutgers I sang with the Glee Club, I was a residence adviser and a residence counselor there for six years before becoming a teacher.
How do you work that in with older people in the district?
I don’t see age as a component of how you interact differently with people. When working as a teacher or working as a community leader, I directed the musicals at the high school and in college I worked with all kinds of people of all different ages. I guess I just don’t see age as part of a barrier or a challenge or as anything different. I’m not teaching, I’m running for Congress. I am running for Congress not to teach anything to people but to be a representative looking out for their interests. It is really quite different.
Our seniors, I can understand their needs because I can see what’s happening and how much people are out to dismantle everything they need to get by on a daily basis. Making a choice between prescriptions or your rent, That shouldn’t be a choice anyone has to make and seniors sometimes have to do that. The new health-care reform law will help with that so that seniors can make ends meet on a very tight budget. And we need representatives who can put those needs first over [political] party talking points.
Your opponent Leonard Lance is a fairly popular politician in New Jersey and your campaign literature makes the point, very often, that he has sided with the Republicans in Washington almost all of the time. Can you give me a few other reasons not to re-elect him but to vote for you?
It is a good question. I think there is a consistent pattern of how he casts his votes against the needs of his congressional district. He voted against extending unemployment benefits and then a week later voted for billions more dollars for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. There will probably be more votes like that down the pike.
You would have not voted for the war appropriations?
The war for me is something that we have spent a lot on. There are struggles for me in that I don’t see a very clear objective. I don’t know how we will ever know when we are done. When we don’t have a goal that is clearly planned or articulated there… I would be extremely hesitant to fund a war and write a blank check for military activities overseas. We have people here at home that are struggling to find a job and can’t make ends meet. They are losing their homes to foreclosures.
But there is bipartisan support for the war effort and the Obama Administration is supporting it. But you would not?
I mean the Obama Administration can push different issues and things that they want to see. But that doesn’t mean that as a Democrat you have to agree with everything they put forward. You have to use a very critical eye and make sure that it is in the best interests of the constituents whom you represent and in the interest of our country and our long-term fiscal longevity.
Do you feel that the Obama Administration has done the best that they can do for the LGBT community in Washington or for this district?
I think progress on LGBT legislation in this Congress has been slow. I was happy to see that they took on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, which is a discriminatory law that makes our gay and lesbian soldiers choose between being open and honest or serving their country. I think someone should not have to choose. I think our nation would be stronger for it. I am extremely pleased that they took action to repeal that. My opponent voted against it! He can say whatever he wants as to why, and give reasons. But I think that that vote sends a clear message about his level of support for gay and lesbian soldiers that put their lives on the line everyday for our freedom.
You know, as far as other pieces of legislation that our community needs, I think ENDA, the employment non-discrimination act, should pass. I am shocked that even with bipartisan support it has the House vote but without a transgender-inclusive version. It has been a disappointment. I think the Defense of Marriage Act should be repealed so that states can have local control.
You believe in legislative repeal of DOMA? Explain.
Yes! There is a bill that would repeal it and offer federal benefits as married same-sex couples. I think it is only a matter of time.
Many feel DOMA will fall in the courts, not legislatively.
But that is a lot of lawsuits in a lot of states. DOMA says states don’t have the right to set their own policy. When our country was formed that was one area that was left to the states but now the federal level is taking an active role. I would not be surprised if we see that repealed. I won’t predict when. But it will be repealed.
On other issues, the Democrats in Congress are not focused enough on creating jobs in our communities. Small businesses are the economic engine and the innovators. They put people to work. I understand as a small business owner, who helped to run my family’s small business, that this is where we have the best potential to put people back to work. Government needs to be out of the way. We need to support that. The Administration has not done enough in two years.
What changes would you make to help the New Jersey manufacturing sector?
Biotechnology is a big growth area, and pharmaceuticals. More research and development help and funding. My opponent voted against that. For our district. I don’t get it. You can’t vote against the industries that call the 7th District their home. You could not cast a worse vote than that. That is our future. But the bill passed.
We need new factories that produce sustainable green energy sources like those in which China is now investing. We need to support education, research and development in future growth areas every way that we can. If we do that we will lead. But if we sit back and let partisan politics take over and special interests control the agenda we will not. We will be left behind, and say, Wow! How did we get left behind? I will not stand by and let that happen.
The National Stonewall Democrats endorsed you as one of just 12 candidates nationally whom they will support with special help. But why should New Jersey vote for Ed?
At the end of the day, when issues come up, [Lance] is more interested in looking out for his special contributors than meeting the needs of middle-class families living on Main Street. I have been very pleased with the support both locally and nationally. Being one of just twelve Stonewall Democrats ElectEquality selections is a huge honor and I think speaks volumes to my campaign and my commitment to equality and to my ability to win in November.
What can the LGBT community do to help your campaign?
If we are going to change things I need their help. There are many things they can do. Of course financially we are in need and volunteer time is needed. We also need their ideas and energy. I would welcome the opportunity for that at our offices here in Woodbridge.
Contact Ed’s campaign online at www.edpotosnak.com or call the campaign office at (732) 762-2465. You can also follow Ed Potosnak’s page on Facebook.
