The Bridge
How sheriffs define law and order for their counties depends a lot on their views − and most are white Republican men
Mirya Holman, University of Houston and Emily Farris, Texas Christian University
Many Americans will find on their November 2024 ballot a space to vote for an important office: local sheriff. While there are exceptions, sheriffs have a long history of using their power to maintain a particular, unequal balance of power in society, often along racial and class lines.
A recent example of this arose on Sept. 13, 2024, when Bruce Zuchowski, sheriff of Portage County, Ohio, posted a message on a Facebook page headed by a graphic that included his official portrait and which was labeled with his official title. Zuchowski called for the public to write down the addresses of people who have campaign signs supporting Democratic nominee Vice President Kamala Harris in their yards.
That way, he said, when immigrants arrive and need housing, “We’ll already have the addresses of the … families … who supported their arrival.”
The post, which Zuchowski later claimed appeared on his “personal Facebook page,” used derogatory terms for immigrants and for Harris. It also included screenshots of two Fox News stories about migrants in Aurora, Colorado, and Springfield, Ohio, which are both places that former President Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, and his running mate JD Vance have falsely claimed to be sites of dangerous activity by immigrants.
Sheriffs in the U.S. don’t often get national news attention, but Zuchowski’s request was covered in The Washington Post, NBC News and The Guardian, among others.
There are more than 3,000 sheriffs elected at the county level in the United States, each of whom has authority and autonomy to both set and enforce law enforcement policy. For example, sheriffs in many states can decide whether their deputies will wear body cameras and what happens to the footage recorded during routine stops.
In our book, “The Power of the Badge: Sheriffs and Inequality in the United States,” we provide a comprehensive look at this office and detail the history of sheriffs enforcing inequality both by using formal powers of their office, such as cooperating with federal immigration officers, and with informal powers, such as communicating about who belongs in their community.
Zuchowski’s post, which vilifies immigrants and targets people who support immigrant rights, is just part of that long history of sheriffs using their power as a tool of social control, as we document in our book.
Various sheriffs have participated in social control throughout American history. For instance, in the 18th century, an Alabama sheriff ran slave auctions and Georgia sheriffs played a central role in enforcing slave codes. In the 19th century, a Pennsylvania sheriff quashed union efforts to protect workers’ rights against exploitative businesses. In the 20th century, Southern sheriffs’ roles in voter suppression during the Civil Rights Movement are well documented. In the 21st century, racial profiling has been a problem in the enforcement of traffic laws by sheriffs in Arizona and California, among other states. Zuchowski is just one 21st-century sheriff entering the debate over immigration policy and immigrants’ rights.
Personal views affect public service
In the wake of Zuchowski’s post, The Portager, a news website in his community, reported residents saying the sheriff’s post constituted voter intimidation. Some residents have called for investigations of the sheriff’s office by local, state and national agencies, including the Department of Justice’s civil rights division.
So far, the Ohio Secretary of State’s Office says the sheriff has broken no laws.
In both our book and previous work, we document through two national surveys how variations in sheriffs’ views on race and ethnicity may shape their office’s policies and practices.
Zuchowski’s comments about immigrants, including calling them “Illegal human ‘Locust,’” denies their humanity by comparing immigrants to animals.
In our research, we have found that sheriffs’ negative attitudes toward immigrants are statistically correlated to their offices’ anti-immigrant policies. For instance, sheriffs with more negative attitudes are more likely to have an official policy to check the immigration status of crime victims and witnesses. That relationship held even after we controlled potential influence of other factors such as political partisanship and the share of the native-born population in a sheriff’s county.
Similarly, as we show in our book, sheriffs with racist views were less likely to report to us their deputies have been trained to reduce racial and ethnic bias in traffic enforcement. That issue is a problem in Portage County, according to the local NAACP, which in 2023 released a report claiming the sheriff’s office unfairly targets Black drivers.
Politics plays a role
Since his initial post, Zuchowski has defended himself on social media, writing:
“If the citizens of Portage County want to elect an individual who has supported open borders (which I’ve personally visited Twice!) and neglected to enforce the laws of our Country … then that is their prerogative. With elections, there are consequences. That being said … I believe that those who vote for individuals with liberal policies have to accept responsibility for their actions! I am a Law Man … Not a Politician!”
Despite Zuchowski’s claims, he is indeed a politician. Like other sheriffs in the United States, he was elected by voters. He was the Republican nominee in 2020 and is running for reelection in 2024.
Like sheriffs across the country, Zuchowski had extensive law enforcement experience, including working in the Portage County Sheriff’s Office prior to running to head the office. We found that more than 85% of sheriffs worked for the previous sheriff before seeking election. And like most other sheriffs, Zuchowski is a white Republican man. We and others find that more than 90% of sheriffs are white and over 98% are men.
Across the United States, sheriffs will ask voters for their support this fall to remain in office. In most counties, these elections are uncompetitive: Sheriffs usually run either unopposed or against weak candidates.
In this way, Portage County is an exception. Zuchowski’s first election was a competitive race for an open seat, and he faces a challenger to his reelection bid in the 2024 election. His Democratic opponent, Jon Barber, is similarly a white man with a law enforcement background.
But Barber’s campaign website highlights another common challenge for voters: how to pick a good sheriff. His site focuses on transparency, accountability and community policing, with no discussion of immigration. Voters don’t get a clear message about any substantive differences that might exist between the two candidates.
Will Zuchowski’s comments matter for voters? Elsewhere around the country, voters have reelected sheriffs who have made anti-immigrant and racist comments.
Mirya Holman, Associate Professor of Public Policy, University of Houston and Emily Farris, Associate Professor of Political Science, Texas Christian University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
The Bridge is a section of the STM Daily News Blog meant for diversity, offering real news stories about bona fide community efforts to perpetuate a greater good. The purpose of The Bridge is to connect the divides that separate us, fostering understanding and empathy among different groups. By highlighting positive initiatives and inspirational actions, The Bridge aims to create a sense of unity and shared purpose. This section brings to light stories of individuals and organizations working tirelessly to promote inclusivity, equality, and mutual respect. Through these narratives, readers are encouraged to appreciate the richness of diverse perspectives and to participate actively in building stronger, more cohesive communities.
https://stmdailynews.com/the-bridge
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The Bridge
Scrappy, campy and unabashedly queer, public access TV series of the 1980s and 1990s offered a rare glimpse into LGBTQ+ life
Last Updated on March 10, 2026 by Daily News Staff
“Hello to all you lovely lesbians out there! My name is Debbie, and I’m here to show you a few things about taking care of your vaginal health.”
So opens the first “Lesbian Health” segment on “Dyke TV,” a lesbian feminist television series that aired on New York’s public access stations from 1993 to 2006.
The half-hour program focused on lesbian activism, community issues, art and film, news, health, sports and culture. Created by three artist-activists – Cuban playwright Ana Simo, theater director and producer Linda Chapman and independent filmmaker Mary Patierno – “Dyke TV” was one of the first TV shows made by and for LGBTQ women.
While many people might think LGBTQ+ representation on TV began in the 1990s on shows like “Ellen” and “Will & Grace,” LGBTQ+ people had already been producing their own television programming on local stations in the U.S. and Canada for decades.
In fact my research has identified hundreds of LGBTQ+ public access series produced across the country.
In a media environment historically hostile to LGBTQ+ people and issues, LGBTQ+ people created their own local programming to shine a spotlight on their lives, communities and concerns.
Experimentation and advocacy
On this particular health segment on “Dyke TV,” a woman proceeds to give herself a cervical exam in front of the camera using a mirror, a flashlight and a speculum.
Close-up shots of this woman’s genitalia show her vulva, vagina and cervix as she narrates the exam in a matter-of-fact tone, explaining how viewers can use these tools on their own to check for vaginal abnormalities. Recalling the ethos of the women’s health movement of the 1970s, “Dyke TV” instructs audiences to empower themselves in a world where women’s health care is marginalized.
Because public access TV in New York was relatively unregulated, the show’s hosts could openly discuss sexual health and air segments that would otherwise be censored on broadcast networks.
Like today’s LGBTQ content creators, many of the producers of LGBTQ+ public access series experimented with genre, form and content in entertaining and imaginative ways.
LGBTQ+ actors, entertainers, activists and artists – who often experienced discrimination and tokenism on mainstream media – appeared on these series to publicize and discuss their work. Iconic drag queen RuPaul got his start performing on public access in Atlanta, where “The American Music Show” gave him a platform to promote his burgeoning drag persona in the mid-1980s. https://www.youtube.com/embed/hab5HrnfEZk?wmode=transparent&start=0 RuPaul appears on a 1985 episode of ‘The American Music Show.’
The producers often saw their series as a blend of entertainment, art and media activism.
Shows like “The Gay Dating Game” and “Be My Guest” were tongue-in-cheek satires of 1950s game shows. News programs such as “Gay USA,” which broadcast its first episode in 1985, reported on local and national LGBTQ news and health issues.
Variety shows like “The Emerald City” in the 1970s, “Gay Morning America” in the 1980s, and “Candied Camera” in the 1990s combined interviews, musical performances, comedy skits and news programming. Scripted soap operas, like “Secret Passions,” starred amateur gay actors. And on-the-street interview programs like “The Glennda and Brenda Show” used drag and street theater to spark discussions about LGBTQ issues.
Other programs featured racier content.
In the 1980s and ‘90s, “Men & Films,” “The Closet Case Show” and “Robin Byrd’s Men for Men” incorporated interviews with porn stars, clips from porn videos and footage of sex at nightclubs and parties.
Skirting the censors
The regulation of sex on cable television has long been a political and cultural flashpoint.
But regulatory loopholes inadvertently allowed sexual content on public access. This allowed hosts and guests to talk openly about gay sex and safer sex practices on these shows – and even demonstrate them on camera.
The impetus for public access television was similar to the ethos of public broadcasting, which sought to create noncommercial and educational television programming in the service of the public interest.
In 1972, the Federal Communications Commission issued an order requiring cable television systems in the country’s top 100 markets to offer access channels for public use. The FCC mandated that cable companies make airtime, equipment and studio space to individuals and community groups to use for their own programming on a first-come, first-serve basis.
The FCC’s regulatory authority does not extend to editorial control over public access content. For this reason, repeated attempts to block, regulate and censor programming throughout the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s were challenged by cable access producers and civil liberties organizations.
The Supreme Court has continually struck down laws that attempt to censor cable access programming on First Amendment grounds. A cable operator can refuse to air a program that contains “obscenity,” but what counts as obscenity is up for interpretation.
Over the years, producers of LGBTQ-themed shows have fiercely defended their programming from calls for censorship, and the law has consistently been on their side.
Airing the AIDS crisis
As the AIDS crisis began to devastate LGBTQ+ communities in the 1980s, public access television grew increasingly important.
Many of the aforementioned series devoted multiple segments and episodes to discussing the devastating impact of HIV/AIDS on their personal lives, relationships and communities. Series like “Living with AIDS”, “HoMoVISIONES” and “ACT UP Live!” were specifically designed to educate and galvanize viewers around HIV/AIDS activism. With HIV/AIDS receiving minimal coverage on mainstream media outlets – and a lack of political action by local, state and national officials – these programs were some of the few places where LGBTQ+ people could learn the latest information about the epidemic and efforts to combat it.
The long-running program “Gay USA” is one of the few remaining LGBTQ+ public access series; new episodes air locally in New York and nationally via Free Speech TV each week. While public access stations still exist in most cities around the country, production has waned since the advent of cheaper digital media technologies and streaming video services in the mid-2000s.
And yet during this media era – let’s call it “peak public access TV” – these scrappy, experimental, sexual, campy and powerful series offered remarkable glimpses into LGBTQ+ culture, history and activism.
Lauren Herold, Visiting Assistant Professor of Gender & Sexuality Studies, Kenyon College
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
The Bridge is a section of the STM Daily News Blog meant for diversity, offering real news stories about bona fide community efforts to perpetuate a greater good. The purpose of The Bridge is to connect the divides that separate us, fostering understanding and empathy among different groups. By highlighting positive initiatives and inspirational actions, The Bridge aims to create a sense of unity and shared purpose. This section brings to light stories of individuals and organizations working tirelessly to promote inclusivity, equality, and mutual respect. Through these narratives, readers are encouraged to appreciate the richness of diverse perspectives and to participate actively in building stronger, more cohesive communities.
https://stmdailynews.com/category/the-bridge
Author
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Last Updated on March 8, 2026 by Daily News Staff
Jay L. Zagorsky, Boston University
With the Olympic torch extinguished in Paris, all eyes are turning to Los Angeles for the 2028 Olympics.
The host city has promised that the next Summer Games will be “car-free.”
For people who know Los Angeles, this seems overly optimistic. The car remains king in LA, despite growing public transit options.
When LA hosted the Games in 1932, it had an extensive public transportation system, with buses and an extensive network of electric streetcars. Today, the trolleys are long gone; riders say city buses don’t come on schedule, and bus stops are dirty. What happened?
This question fascinates me because I am a business professor who studies why society abandons and then sometimes returns to certain technologies, such as vinyl records, landline phones and metal coins. The demise of electric streetcars in Los Angeles and attempts to bring them back today vividly demonstrate the costs and challenges of such revivals. https://www.youtube.com/embed/9X78ZqGyc5o?wmode=transparent&start=0 The 2028 Olympic Games will be held in existing sports venues around Los Angeles and are expected to host 15,000 athletes and over 1 million spectators.
Riding the Red and Yellow Cars
Transportation is a critical priority in any city, but especially so in Los Angeles, which has been a sprawling metropolis from the start.
In the early 1900s, railroad magnate Henry Huntington, who owned vast tracts of land around LA, started subdividing his holdings into small plots and building homes. In order to attract buyers, he also built a trolley system that whisked residents from outlying areas to jobs and shopping downtown.
By the 1930s, Los Angeles had a vibrant public transportation network, with over 1,000 miles of electric streetcar routes, operated by two companies: Pacific Electric Railway, with its “Red Cars,” and Los Angeles Railway, with its “Yellow Cars.”
The system wasn’t perfect by any means. Many people felt that streetcars were inconvenient and also unhealthy when they were jammed with riders. Moreover, streetcars were slow because they had to share the road with automobiles. As auto usage climbed and roads became congested, travel times increased.
Nonetheless, many Angelenos rode the streetcars – especially during World War II, when gasoline was rationed and automobile plants shifted to producing military vehicles. https://www.youtube.com/embed/AwKv3_WwD4o?wmode=transparent&start=0 In 1910, Los Angeles had a widely used local rail network, with over 1,200 miles (1,930 kilometers) of track. What happened?
Demise of public transit
The end of the war marked the end of the line for streetcars. The war effort had transformed oil, tire and car companies into behemoths, and these industries needed new buyers for goods from the massive factories they had built for military production. Civilians and returning soldiers were tired of rationing and war privations, and they wanted to spend money on goods such as cars.
After years of heavy usage during the war, Los Angeles’ streetcar system needed an expensive capital upgrade. But in the mid-1940s, most of the system was sold to a company called National City Lines, which was partly owned by the carmaker General Motors, the oil companies Standard Oil of California and Phillips Petroleum, and the Firestone tire company.
These powerful forces had no incentive to maintain or improve the old electric streetcar system. National City ripped up tracks and replaced the streetcars with buses that were built by General Motors, used Firestone tires and ran on gasoline.
There is a long-running academic debate over whether self-serving corporate interests purposely killed LA’s streetcar system. Some researchers argue that the system would have died on its own, like many other streetcar networks around the world.
The controversy even spilled over into pop culture in the 1988 movie “Who Framed Roger Rabbit,” which came down firmly on the conspiracy side.
What’s undisputed is that, starting in the mid-1940s, powerful social forces transformed Los Angeles so that commuters had only two choices: drive or take a public bus. As a result, LA became so choked with traffic that it often took hours to cross the city.
In 1990, the Los Angeles Times reported that people were putting refrigerators, desks and televisions in their cars to cope with getting stuck in horrendous traffic. A swath of movies, from “Falling Down” to “Clueless” to “La La Land,” have featured the next-level challenge of driving in LA.
Traffic was also a concern when LA hosted the 1984 Summer Games, but the Games went off smoothly. Organizers convinced over 1 million people to ride buses, and they got many trucks to drive during off-peak hours. The 2028 games, however, will have roughly 50% more athletes competing, which means thousands more coaches, family, friends and spectators. So simply dusting off plans from 40 years ago won’t work.
Olympic transportation plans
Today, Los Angeles is slowly rebuilding a more robust public transportation system. In addition to buses, it now has four light-rail lines – the new name for electric streetcars – and two subways. Many follow the same routes that electric trolleys once traveled. Rebuilding this network is costing the public billions, since the old system was completely dismantled.
Three key improvements are planned for the Olympics. First, LA’s airport terminals will be connected to the rail system. Second, the Los Angeles organizing committee is planning heavily on using buses to move people. It will do this by reassigning some lanes away from cars and making them available for 3,000 more buses, which will be borrowed from other locales.
Finally, there are plans to permanently increase bicycle lanes around the city. However, one major initiative, a bike path along the Los Angeles River, is still under an environmental review that may not be completed by 2028.
Car-free for 17 days
I expect that organizers will pull off a car-free Olympics, simply by making driving and parking conditions so awful during the Games that people are forced to take public transportation to sports venues around the city. After the Games end, however, most of LA is likely to quickly revert to its car-centric ways.
As Casey Wasserman, chair of the LA 2028 organizing committee, recently put it: “The unique thing about Olympic Games is for 17 days you can fix a lot of problems when you can set the rules – for traffic, for fans, for commerce – than you do on a normal day in Los Angeles.”
This article has been updated to indicate that Los Angeles has four light-rail lines.
Jay L. Zagorsky, Associate Professor of Markets, Public Policy and Law, Boston University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Dive into “The Knowledge,” where curiosity meets clarity. This playlist, in collaboration with STMDailyNews.com, is designed for viewers who value historical accuracy and insightful learning. Our short videos, ranging from 30 seconds to a minute and a half, make complex subjects easy to grasp in no time. Covering everything from historical events to contemporary processes and entertainment, “The Knowledge” bridges the past with the present. In a world where information is abundant yet often misused, our series aims to guide you through the noise, preserving vital knowledge and truths that shape our lives today. Perfect for curious minds eager to discover the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of everything around us. Subscribe and join in as we explore the facts that matter. https://stmdailynews.com/the-knowledge/
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The Bridge
Celebrating International Women’s Day!
International Women’s Day is celebrated globally on March 8th to honor women’s achievements and promote gender equality, originating from a 1908 march in New York for better rights.
Last Updated on March 7, 2026 by Daily News Staff
International Women’s Day is a global celebration that honors the achievements of women and highlights the progress still to be made in the fight for gender equality. On this day, people around the world come together to recognize the amazing contributions of women everywhere and to rally for greater gender equity in all areas of life.
The origins of International Women’s Day can be traced back to 1908, when 15,000 women marched through the streets of New York City to demand better working conditions and the right to vote. Since then, the celebration has grown to be an international event, with more than 100 countries recognizing the day. The United Nations even declared March 8th as International Women’s Day in 1975, to honor the struggles of women around the world.
This year’s International Women’s Day theme is #ChooseToChallenge, meaning that everyone is encouraged to call out gender bias and inequality when they see it. We’re also encouraged to celebrate women’s achievements, support each other, and take action for equality.
It’s important to recognize the progress we’ve made in terms of gender equality, but we still have a long way to go. International Women’s Day serves as a reminder that we must continue to fight for gender equality in all areas of life. Let’s use this day to honor the contributions of women around the world, and to continue the fight for a more equitable world.
https://www.internationalwomensday.com/
https://stmdailynews.com/category/science/
Author
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
