Col. Jennifer Pritzker—trans Republican, but no Trumper
Gov. JB Pritzker's cousin talks gun rights, GOP history and border policies
BY ANDREW DAVIS
Given how polarized the United States is regarding politics, being an LGBTQ+ Republican might strike one as being ironic, mistaken or brave, depending on one’s point of view.
Republicans have been behind the hundreds of anti-LGBTQ+ measures that have been proposed and passed in the U.S. Congress and state governments over the past few years, galvanizing many. These actions have led to protests on both sides and will undoubtedly lead to tensions leading to the national and state elections taking place in November.
Col. Jennifer Pritzker (Ret.)—a philanthropist who is a cousin of Democratic Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and former U.S. Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker—is one of the few open LGBTQ+ Republicans out there. In an interview that took place earlier this year, the outspoken trailblazer talked about being a member of the party in such politically turbulent times as well as issues such as gun control.
NOTE: This conversation was edited for clarity and length.
Andrew Davis: First, you’ve always been a Republican, correct?
Col. Jennifer Pritzker: Pretty much. I started voting in presidential elections in 1972; I voted for Richard Nixon. The first time I did not vote Republican was in 2004, when I voted libertarian because [with] Bush the younger [George W. Bush], I was against the ground-force invasion of Iraq. Gen. [Eric] Shinseki—then chief of staff of the U.S. Army—said to Bush, “Mr. President, if you do this [invade Iraq], you’re going to pay more in casualties and dollars than with [just] the invasion, and If you break it, you buy it.” [Note: Then-U.S. Secretary of State is frequently cited as telling Bush “if you break it, you fix it,” about the same situation.] I was in total agreement with Gen. Shinseki.
I was also in disagreement with President Bush, who I voted for in 2000, because I thought his attempt to [outlaw] same-sex marriage through a constitutional amendment was totally out of line. The Constitutional makes it very clear that it’s up to the individual states. So those are two big reasons why I didn’t vote for Bush in 2004.
I have a feeling that Bush hadn’t thought that much about same-sex marriage but felt that, for political reasons, that he had to pander to the extreme right wing of the Republican Party. I voted for Trump in 2016 because I didn’t want Hillary Clinton as president—but in 2020, at age 70, I voted for a Democratic candidate for president for the first time in my life. President Biden is not a perfect human being and I think he’d be the first one to tell you that. But if the choice is between him and Donald Trump, I feel compelled to choose President Biden for a lot of reasons.
One thing is that I think the Republican Party has left me instead of the other way around. They’ve taken such extreme views on so many things—and not just the LGBTQ stuff. They so want to separate themselves from anyone who doesn’t think like the extreme right wing. But it can go both ways; if one party says, “Water is wet,” the other will say, “Water isn’t wet.” And we’ve lost the ability to make bipartisan decisions based on the interests of the whole country.
And there are extreme positions about border control. One party seems to want to let everybody in at once while the other group doesn’t want to let anybody in. So how to do advocate for everybody’s interest—including illegal immigrants’—to say that we need a process of orderly regulated admission into the country? No matter how much we want to help them out, we can’t take everyone at once. I wish we could work out a system, regardless of party affiliation, that looks out for the interests of the country.
It’s just too much with the extreme issues. We’ve had a president and there are senators and Congress [members] worried about which bathrooms people are using, who is what sports team and the issue of pornography. When [Florida Gov. Ron] DeSantis wants to ban all drag performances, does that mean we can’t have Little Red Riding Hood because the wolf dresses up as grandma?
Davis: So you’re wondering how far things might go—and that there’s a slippery slope.
Pritzker: Yeah, really. And in the overall scheme of things, people in the LGBTQ+ community, these policies are a matter of personal survival. That’s one reason I can no longer go with most of the Republicans because they want to put people like myself out of existence. Too many people take too many extreme positions on too many issues.
And there are other problems with Mr. Trump. He’s been indicted and might be convicted; he’s toting around an $83-million fine [the verdict E. Jean Carroll recently won against him in a defamation case]. He’s been told by a court of law that he doesn’t have presidential immunity. Two states want him off the ballot and others are working on it. He’s got all kinds of personal baggage and he makes way too many extreme statements. Yes, we need border control but I don’t think building a wall is the way to do it; the Great Wall of China didn’t stop the Mongols from taking over China, and the Maginot Line didn’t stop the Germans from conquering France. Walls are only good if they’re constantly patrolled and have a system of immediate reaction. So we need a system of observation and humane reaction to people [who are not authorized] to come across; we could have camps, but we need to treat people humanely, like making sure families stay together.
I think sanctuary cities are a bad idea. It’s essentially legalizing trespassing.
Davis: I mentioned to a few colleagues that I would be talking with you—and there were some LGBTQ+ people who said they couldn’t understand how someone who’s a part of their demographic could be Republican, in any sense. What’s your response to that?
Pritzker: Well, the Republican Party of today isn’t the party I grew up with. I was born when Harry Truman was president, and I liked Ike [President Dwight D. Eisenhower]. My mom and dad liked Ike, and Eisenhower was a man to be respected because he thought of the welfare of the entire country. He was willing to use the 101st Airborne Division to enforce school integration in Little Rock, Arkansas in 1957. That’s the Republican Party that I identified with—the one that wanted interstate highways, the one that appreciated when to go to war and when not to. Eisenhower kept us out of Vietnam because he understood that defending a French colony was not in the interest of the American people. That’s the Republican Party that I have a frame of reference [of].
Too often, the Democratic Party solution seems to be to raise more taxes, spend more money and try to please too many people. I didn’t agree with some of the things that Franklin D. Roosevelt did but I also think he did some very good things. For example, I think we could use a revival of the Civilian Conservation Corps. [Note: Established by Roosevelt in 1933 and running through 1942, the corps allowed single men between the ages of 18 and 25 to enlist in work programs to improve public lands, forests and parks throughout the United States, according to the National Park Service website.] That could be one way of handling illegal aliens or homeless people—putting them to work and teaching them something useful while paying them a living wage.
And what I think Franklin Roosevelt would’ve been in favor of—and forgive my presumption—is dealing with student loans by limiting debt and [providing] a way to work out of it. Ideally, the work people would receive would match their college majors.
Now let’s take gun control. I’m a lifelong member of the NRA [National Rifle Association] and I think we have the right to defend ourselves. Now the original purpose of the [NRA] was to teach firearm proficiency and safety, and it’s still doing it today. Of course, we have to have laws regarding firearm use, but I think both sides are going to extremes. I do think civilians should be allowed to own military-grade firearms but they should have some training and licenses—but the regulations should be easy to comply with. There’s such a hodgepodge of regulations right now [depending on the state]. Above all, we need to educate people on firearms. There’s more compliance when things are easy to comply with.
I’ve been to a couple NRA conventions where there are enough firearms to arm a small-to-medium-sized country and a couple hundred thousand people attend—and I’ve never heard of a major violent incident taking place there. The last one I went to, everyone was civil and safety policies were enforced.
Davis: And what about background checks?
Pritzker: If they can be done in a timely manner that’s easy to comply with, [that’s fine]. For example, ideally, firearm-range operators should be able to do something like police officers do: Within a couple minutes after pulling you over, an officer can tell if you’re a fugitive from justice. If we could have a system like that—where it’s easy to do background checks and it’s no more intrusive than it needs to be—it’d make it a lot easier to comply.
Davis: So what Republican would be your ideal candidate to run for president?
Pritzker: I think [former New Jersey Gov. Chris] Christie is much better than Trump. I think Biden is a politician who’s trying to serve in the best interest of the country, but both he and Trump are a little long in the tooth; Trump’s only four years younger than Biden but he keeps making an issue of Biden’s age. To me, Biden looks to be in better shape than Trump, who looks like he’s been to a lot of rubber-chicken dinners.
It comes down to qualifications. For JB’s second election, I voted for him instead of the Republican, Darren Bailey. Bailey wasn’t qualified to be governor. He was a big man in Clay County [Illinois], and he’s a good guy for [that] county. But if you stack him up against JB, Bailey has an associate’s degree in agriculture while JB has a law degree, which means he understands the legalese of governance. Bailey’s degree is fine if he wants to be the state secretary of agriculture. Also, JB and his brother Tony are established businessmen; they did more than just live off the family trust fund. I didn’t vote for JB because he’s my cousin, and there are issues we disagree on—but I couldn’t vote for Darrin Bailey.
Davis: So would you ever entertain the thought of running for office?
Pritzker: No. I’ve done as much public service as I think I want to do. However, I may want to be appointed to something. For example, I was once a candidate for civilian aide for the secretary of the U.S. Army; my grandfather, AN Pritzker, did so for the Navy. You don’t get any pay but you’re treated as a three-star general. A position like that, with the proper training and experience, is something I would consider.