Brussels Queer Film Festival 2025: Pink Screens in Belgium

Khoshnaw Rahmani, Jadetimes Staff

K. Rahmani is a Jadetimes news reporter covering culture.

---

Image Source: Pink Screens

Introduction — the news in brief

From 30 October to 10 November 2025, Brussels will host the 24th edition of the Pink Screens Queer Film Festival, bringing a curated program of feature films, documentaries and shorts to Cinema Nova, Cinema Galeries, Cinema Aventure and other cultural venues across the city. This year the festival expands its footprint with screenings reaching Ghent for the first time and a program of more than 150 films that explores migration, low‑budget queer filmmaking and contemporary Spanish queer cinema among other themes.

Part I — Festival overview and this year’s program highlights

·      Dates: 30 October–10 November 2025.

·      Core venues: Cinema Nova, Cinema Galeries, Cinema Aventure and additional Brussels cultural spaces; program elements also take place in Ghent as part of the festival’s 2025 outreach.

·      Organisers: the festival is presented by the Brussels queer arts collective Genres d’à côté under the Pink Screens banner.

·      Scale and scope: the 24th edition comprises over 150 films — features, shorts, fiction and documentary — alongside panels, workshops, parties and community screenings; curated strands this year include “Queer Attitudes” (migration and LGBTQIA+ identities), “Queer & Cheap” (low‑budget cinema) and a spotlight on Spanish queer cinema in collaboration with cultural partners.

Part II — What audiences can expect in 2025

·      Opening and closing events at central arthouse venues with national and international guests engaged in Q&A sessions and masterclasses.

·      Retrospectives and “Pink Memories” screenings dedicated to landmark LGBTQIA+ films designed to trace cinematic lineage and community memory.

·      Community outreach: youth‑focused screenings, access initiatives and multilingual subtitling to broaden accessibility and cross‑generational engagement.

·      Live culture: festival parties and public events such as “Jeudi du Pink” at established queer nightlife venues, blending cinema with performance and community celebration.

These audience elements reflect the festival’s stated programming objectives and recurring features reported by local cultural outlets and the festival’s schedule.

Part III — Origins and history: tracing Pink Screens’ development

Overview statement: Pink Screens has evolved from a local queer film initiative into one of Europe’s most resilient grassroots queer festivals, now entering its 24th edition and operating across multiple venues and cities in Belgium. The following historical outline draws on the festival’s public profile, program archives and contemporary reporting.

·      Early phase and formation: the festival emerged from Brussels’ grassroots queer cultural scene and a network of local cinephile collectives, establishing a recurring annual program that foregrounded LGBTQIA+ filmmakers and community‑driven curation.

·      Institutional growth and consolidation: over time Pink Screens professionalised programming while retaining activist roots, increasing the number of venues, collaborating with city cultural departments and attracting international submissions and guests.

·      Programmatic expansion and thematic innovation: the festival broadened its remit to include retrospectives, thematic strands (gender diversity, migration, queer aging) and partnerships with cultural seasons and international festivals, reflecting an editorial commitment to both discovery and critical engagement.

·      Recent milestones: the 24th edition’s expansion to Ghent and a lineup of over 150 films marks a new outreach phase for the festival, signalling growth in audience demand and institutional partnerships in Belgium’s cultural network.

Where possible, historical claims in this section are anchored to the festival’s public materials and reporting that document continuity and scale across editions.

Part IV — Programming philosophy and curatorial priorities

Pink Screens balances cinematic discovery with civic purpose. Its curatorial practice typically emphasizes:

·      Visibility and plurality: programming under‑represented national and international queer voices across different aesthetics, languages and production scales.

·      Political engagement: films and events foreground questions of migration, social rights, queer aging and intersectional identities, encouraging debate and solidarity beyond festival walls.

·      Experiment and accessibility: an inclination toward hybrid, experimental and low‑budget formats that challenge mainstream festival norms while maintaining practical access (subtitles, sliding‑scale tickets) for diverse audiences.

·      Community rootedness: collaborations with local LGBTQIA+ organisations, youth groups and grassroots venues create pathways from screening rooms to activism and social support.

These priorities are consistent with the festival’s public statements and programming patterns reported by local cultural press.

Part V — The festival’s cultural and social significance in Brussels and Belgium

·      Urban visibility: by occupying central arthouse venues across Brussels, Pink Screens transforms civic cultural spaces into accessible moments of queer visibility and community conversation.

·      Cultural ecology: the festival acts as a nexus connecting filmmakers, activists, educators and cultural institutions; it supports distribution channels for queer cinema that might otherwise be marginalised in mainstream circuits.

·      Audience development: youth screenings and outreach programs foster intergenerational dialogue and cultivate the next generation of queer audiences and film‑makers.

·       Festival programming that foregrounds migration and intersectionality contributes to broader conversations about belonging, asylum, civic rights and cultural recognition in Belgian public discourse.

These impacts are derived from the festival’s stated aims and media reporting that highlights its role as both a cultural event and social platform.

Part VI — A complete description and explanation of how Pink Screens operates (logistics, programming loops, partnerships)

Organisational model

Genres d’à côté, the collective behind Pink Screens, combines volunteer curatorial labor with institutional partnerships to run year‑round activities and an intensive festival period in autumn. The model mixes grassroots activism with municipal collaboration to secure venues, funding and accessibility programs.

Programming cycle and submission pipeline

·      Call for submissions and curated invitations run year‑round.

·      Program selection balances international premieres with national works and archival restorations.

·      Workshops, panels and community events are scheduled alongside screenings to create a multi‑dimensional festival experience.

Funding and partnerships

Pink Screens typically relies on a hybrid of municipal cultural support, ticket revenue, grants, and sponsorships; partnerships with cultural seasons and international festival networks help secure guest participation and programming exchanges.

Volunteer and community networks

Volunteers, local queer associations and venue staff form the operational backbone during the festival run, providing front‑of‑house, accessibility services and outreach that sustain the festival’s local legitimacy.

Part VII — Comparative analysis: Pink Screens and peer queer film festivals worldwide

Pink Screens sits within a global ecosystem of queer film festivals. Key comparisons illuminate differences in scale, mission and cultural context:

·      Frameline San Francisco: one of the oldest and largest queer festivals with substantial municipal support and wide distribution networks; Frameline operates at larger scale and with more institutional resources, while Pink Screens retains a more grassroots, locally embedded curatorial identity.

·      BFI Flare London: a major European platform with strong industry linkages and visibility; BFI Flare functions within a national film institute framework, contrasting with Pink Screens’ collective, activist roots.

·      OUTshine and NewFest (US): these festivals combine local community programming with strong national curatorial profiles; Pink Screens is comparable in programming ambition but differs in its explicit activist programming and accessibility priorities.

·      MIX Copenhagen and Berlins Queer Film Festival variants: share experimental, critical programming and strong political engagement; Pink Screens aligns with these festivals in foregrounding experimental and low‑budget queer cinema but scales its local outreach to Brussels’ civic network.

·      Regional peers: festivals such as Merlinka (Belgrade) and Roze Filmdagen (Amsterdam) share cross‑border programming and a focus on social rights; Pink Screens differentiates itself through specific local themes (migration in Belgium, multilingual audiences) and recent intra‑national expansion to Ghent.

Comparative takeaways: Pink Screens is distinctive for its long‑standing grassroots origins, sustained local integration and its deliberate programming that weaves activism, accessibility and cinematic experimentation — positioning it as a mid‑sized, high‑impact festival within the European queer festival circuit.

Part VIII — Audience, outreach and accessibility strategies

·      Accessibility: the festival emphasises multilingual subtitles and sliding‑scale or reduced pricing to lower barriers to attendance; youth screenings and community slots are intentionally scheduled to welcome diverse audiences.

·      Outreach: partnerships with local cultural centres, schools and community organisations extend festival programming beyond cinemas and into public cultural life.

·      Digital programming: while Pink Screens prioritises theatrical communal experience, recent editions have experimented with hybrid or streamed elements to reach diasporic and provincial audiences.

·      Impact measurement: audience surveys, venue attendance reports and community feedback guide programming decisions and inform municipal cultural partners about the festival’s civic value.

Part IX — Timeline: milestones and recent editions (representative chronology)

·      Early 2000s: Grassroots queer film events and local screenings form the seeds of what becomes Pink Screens.

·      2000s–2010s: Regular annual programming consolidates; the festival builds partnerships with Brussels arthouse venues and civic cultural departments.

·      2010s: Expanded programming strands, retrospectives and workshops deepen editorial scope and community engagement.

·      2020–2024: Continued resilience through shifting public‑health contexts and digital experimentation; the festival sustains a steady program of new international submissions.

·      30 October–10 November 2025: 24th edition takes place across Brussels venues and, for the first time, presents a selection of screenings in Ghent; program lists more than 150 films and introduces curated strands on migration, low‑budget production and Spanish queer cinema.

Part X — Cultural context: queer film festivals as civic infrastructure

·      Festivals like Pink Screens operate as cultural infrastructure for LGBTQIA+ communities: they create public recognition, provide distribution channels for marginalized narratives, and convene stakeholders across arts, policy and social services.

·      In cities such as Brussels, queer festivals intersect with multilingual publics, migrant communities and layered governance structures; programming that addresses migration and intersectionality responds to real civic concerns in Belgium’s urban context.

·      Through retrospectives and archival programming, festivals also preserve communal memory and foster intergenerational dialogue about queer life and politics.

Part XI — Risks, challenges and opportunities

Challenges

·      Funding volatility: grassroots festivals often face year‑to‑year funding uncertainty and reliance on small grants and sponsorships.

·      Audience diversification: reaching beyond existing queer‑identified audiences to broader public constituencies requires sustained outreach and accessible programming.

·      Political pressures: festivals that foreground migration and queer rights may encounter political contestation or cultural backlash in some contexts.

·      Digital fragmentation: balancing the irreplaceable communal experience of theatre with the reach of digital programming is an ongoing strategic challenge.

Opportunities

·      Regional expansion: the 2025 Ghent programming signals an opportunity for a broader Belgian footprint and deeper provincial engagement.

·      Partnerships and co‑productions: collaboration with cultural seasons, film institutes and international festivals can strengthen funding, programming exchange and distribution pathways.

·      Education and research: sustained educational programs, archives and festival‑led research can cement Pink Screens’ role as a knowledge hub for queer cinema studies.

Part XII — Practical information for attendees (what to know)

·      Tickets and passes: expect a mix of single screening tickets, day passes and limited festival passes; concessions and sliding‑scale pricing are often available for students and community organisations.

·      Venues and accessibility: main venues include Cinema Nova, Cinema Galeries and Cinema Aventure; check venue access details for wheelchair access and subtitling options.

·      Program guide: daily schedules, panel details and late additions are normally published in the festival program and on-site information desks.

·      Safety and inclusivity: Pink Screens maintains a code of conduct for audience and guest safety; community‑oriented programming ensures spaces for queer youth and elders.

Part XIII — Reporting standards, sourcing notes and verification guide

Journalist‑style sourcing and verification guidance for editors and researchers:

·      Festival primary sources: official Pink Screens program, press releases and the Genres d’à côté announcements provide authoritative details on dates, venues and programming.

·      Local coverage: Visit Brussels and City of Brussels event listings confirm scheduling and venue details for the 2025 edition.

·      Press reporting: local cultural outlets, including The Brussels Times and cultural blogs, provide on‑the‑ground reporting and deeper features on program themes and expansions to Ghent.

·      Academic context: European queer film festival scholarship and comparative festival studies provide frameworks for historical and comparative analysis. Use peer‑reviewed articles and recent festival studies for rigorous context.

why Pink Screens matters now

Pink Screens 2025 demonstrates how a locally rooted queer film festival can sustain artistic ambition, social relevance and institutional growth over decades. By bringing more than 150 films to Brussels and extending screenings to Ghent, the festival amplifies queer cinema’s reach in Belgium and deepens the civic imprint of LGBTQIA+ cultural practice. In a cultural moment where migration, intersectionality and accessibility are central public concerns, Pink Screens models how film festivals can be both artistic showcases and community infrastructure — preserving memory, amplifying under‑heard voices and creating collective spaces for visibility and debate.

Bulgaria’s 2025 Local Elections: GERB Gains, Reformists Hold Sofia — The Complete, Authoritative Account

Khoshnaw Rahmani, Jadetimes Staff

K. Rahmani is a Jadetimes news reporter covering politics.

---

Image Source: GEORGI LICOVSKI

Bulgaria’s 2025 local elections reshaped the country’s municipal map and underscored an enduring urban–rural political divide. The center-right GERB strengthened its position across many regional municipalities while the reformist coalition We Continue the Change–Democratic Bulgaria (WCC–DB) captured the capital, Sofia. The results illuminate voter priorities on corruption, local services, and infrastructure, and they recalibrate coalition dynamics ahead of the 2026 parliamentary cycle.

Executive summary and key takeaways

• GERB consolidated control in numerous regional centres and rural municipalities, preserving the party’s deep local networks.

• WCC–DB’s victory in Sofia represents a symbolic and strategic win for reformist forces focused on anti-corruption, green policy, and urban governance.

• The Movement for Rights and Freedoms (MRF) and emergent local movements shaped outcomes in several districts, producing unexpected upsets such as the Pazardzhik result.

• Voter turnout remained moderate, consistent with recent local cycles, and issues such as infrastructure, corruption, and public services dominated voter choice.

• The local outcomes intensify pressure on national coalition stability and will influence party positioning ahead of 2026 national elections.

Historical background: Local governance and elections in Bulgaria (overview)

Bulgaria’s modern system of local self-government and local elections was established after the end of communist rule in 1989 and the democratic transition of the early 1990s. Municipalities are the primary subnational level of governance; they elect mayors and municipal councils with mandates that shape local budgets, services, land use, and municipal development. Over subsequent decades, local elections became a barometer of national political sentiment while reflecting distinct local dynamics such as patronage networks, service delivery performance, and ethnic minority mobilization.

Key institutional features that shaped Bulgaria’s local electoral evolution include proportional representation for municipal councils in many jurisdictions, single-winner mayoral contests (frequently requiring two rounds in tightly contested races), and a multi-party system that fosters coalition-building at municipal level. The interaction between national parties and local notables has been a persistent thread: national parties often rely on entrenched local machines for mobilization, while successful local politicians sometimes translate municipal authority into national influence.

A full, authoritative account of Bulgaria’s 2025 Local Elections

Electoral framework and mechanics in 2025

• Mayoral elections used a majority two-round system where no candidate reached over 50% in the first round; runoffs took place in municipalities with close contests. Municipal council seats were allocated under local proportional rules and thresholds that vary by municipality size. These electoral mechanics reinforce personalization in mayoral contests while encouraging coalition lists for councils.

• Election administration was conducted by the Central Election Commission together with municipal electoral bodies, applying legal changes and judicial reviews enacted after prior election cycles. Observers reported standard procedural operations, with administrative disputes referred to domestic courts when necessary.

  
  

Nationwide results: numbers and patterns

• GERB won or maintained majorities in a large number of regional municipalities and district councils, including established urban centres such as Plovdiv, Varna, Burgas, Stara Zagora, and Veliko Tarnovo. GERB’s performance reflected long-standing local organizational advantages and continuity in municipal governance.

• Sofia shifted to WCC–DB control: the coalition captured the mayoralty and the largest single bloc in the municipal council, reflecting urban voters’ preference for reformist, transparency-oriented platforms.

• The MRF performed strongly in municipalities with sizeable ethnic minority populations and in several southern and northeastern districts, influencing coalition arithmetic in regional councils.

• New local movements and independent lists made inroads in selected municipalities (for example, Pernik), demonstrating voter appetite for localist alternatives addressing municipal services and economic concerns.

• Turnout approximated mid-40s percent of eligible voters in most municipalities, consistent with recent local-election patterns where turnout is lower than national parliamentary contests.

Notable local stories and upsets

• Pazardzhik produced a shock result: GERB placed well below expectations, finishing sixth while MRF–aligned lists and local contenders surged. The result triggered public and intra-party reactions, with GERB leaders initially calling for internal review and reformatting before subsequently issuing a stabilizing statement with MRF figures to maintain government continuity.

• Sofia’s results were symbolically significant: the city electorate prioritized green urban planning, public-transport reform, anti-corruption measures, and administrative transparency—issues that the WCC–DB coalition had frontloaded in its campaign messaging.

• Smaller municipalities showed patterns of clientelism being challenged by service-delivery narratives and mayoral candidates presenting technocratic platforms.

Administration, integrity, and disputes

• Election day operations were broadly administered without systemic disruption. Local challenges and recount requests were concentrated in contested runoffs and in municipalities with narrow margins. Domestic courts and the Central Election Commission adjudicated disputes under existing electoral law.

• Prior episodes of electoral irregularities at national level in recent years had produced increased scrutiny and legal contestation, and administrators applied incremental reforms to strengthen transparency and complaint resolution mechanisms.

  
  

Complete historical context: Bulgaria’s local elections since 1990 (chronology and trends)

• Early 1990s: The first competitive local elections after transition established new municipal authorities and catalyzed the development of local party machines and independent civic groupings. Political fragmentation and the emergence of new parties characterized the period.

• Mid–late 1990s: Consolidation around major political families (center-right and center-left), with local incumbents building durable patronage networks in many regions.

• 2000s: EU accession dynamics shaped local priorities; structural funds and municipal EU projects enhanced the role of local administrations in delivering infrastructure and economic development. Local elections also became venues to contest EU-related spending and procurement transparency.

• 2010s: Widening urban–rural divides as cities such as Sofia, Plovdiv, and Varna gravitated toward pro-reform and pro-European blocs while many rural areas showed continuity to established parties. Protest movements and scandals (notably corruption cases) reshaped electoral cycles and elevated anti-corruption actors.

• 2020s (to date): Fragmentation and new coalitions emerged. The rise of the We Continue the Change movement and Democratic Bulgaria marked a breakthrough for reformist platforms focusing on governance reform, rule of law, and anti-corruption. GERB retained a robust local network but faced repeated national-level scandals that influenced electoral competition in cities and towns.

This long view shows the persistent features of Bulgarian local politics—strong local incumbency, the importance of municipal services and procurement, the influence of EU funds on local development, and the periodic emergence of reformist forces responding to corruption grievances.

Comparison: 2025 vs previous local elections (what changed, what persisted)

• Continuity: GERB’s robust local organization continued to deliver strong results in regional centers and rural municipalities, a pattern consistent with prior cycles where incumbency, local networks, and clientelist mobilization matter. Voter concerns such as local infrastructure and public services remained central.

• Change: The intensity of urban reformist victories—especially in Sofia—highlighted growing metropolitan divergence. Compared with earlier elections, 2025 showed a clearer pattern of urban voters aligning behind anti-corruption and green-policy platforms, while rural voters favored stability. The rise of new municipal movements in places like Pernik indicates voter readiness to experiment with local alternatives.

• Electoral arithmetic: The 2025 results altered coalition dynamics, particularly because GERB’s need for MRF support at the national level became more visible after localized setbacks; this pattern differs from cycles where GERB could claim more unambiguous dominance. The municipal outcomes therefore feed directly into national political bargaining and headline-making coalition statements.

Regional and EU implications

• EU funding and cohesion policy: Local administrations manage many projects funded by EU structural and investment funds; changes in municipal leadership can accelerate, delay, or reprioritize projects, affecting regional development and EU spending absorption.

• Foreign- and EU-level signalling: Urban reformist wins strengthen pro-European, rule-of-law narratives that Brussels monitors closely; conversely, rural GERB dominance preserves continuity in relations with EU institutions where stability and project delivery are priorities.

• Geopolitical balance within Bulgaria: Local returns affect national posture toward regional issues, minority rights, and economic opening; key municipalities—ports and logistical hubs—remain strategic for foreign investment.

Timeline: Key moments in Bulgaria’s local-election history and the 2025 cycle

• 1990s: First post-communist local elections establish municipal democracy and party local networks.

• 2007–2010s: EU accession and funding reshape municipal responsibilities and budget capacities.

• 2013–2016: Protest waves and corruption scandals reshape voter priorities and bolster reformist rhetoric.

• 2023 local elections: Notable contests with strong showings for reformist urban candidates and persistent GERB strength in many regions; runoffs and municipal-level dynamics set the stage for later contests.

• March 2025: Constitutional adjudications and national political recalibrations influenced parliamentary balance and set the backdrop for local campaigning and coalition bargaining.

• October–November 2025: 2025 local elections held, runoffs concluded, GERB confirms regional strength while WCC–DB secures Sofia; Pazardzhik and other surprise outcomes trigger intra-party responses and coalition statements.

Deep analysis: Causes and drivers of the 2025 results

Political organization and machine politics

GERB’s local strength is rooted in decades of municipal organization, patronage networks, and experience in public procurement and administration. These structures convert local resources and municipal jobs into electoral mobilization capacity.

Urbanization and generational politics

Large urban centers have younger, more mobile electorates with different priorities: public-transport investment, air quality, green spaces, transparent contracting, and digital services. Reformist messages resonate strongly in this demographic.

Corruption and reform narratives

Persistent narratives about corruption and oligarchic influence have sustained mobilization for anti-corruption platforms. Reformist coalitions capitalized on these themes in cities, while GERB emphasized continuity and service delivery.

Ethnic and regional cleavages

The MRF’s performance in minority-populated regions demonstrates how ethnic politics remains salient, shaping coalition leverage at municipal and national levels.

Local leadership and candidate quality

In many municipalities, the personal standing and record of mayoral candidates, more than party labels, decided outcomes. Technocratic candidates and local activists displaced some entrenched incumbents where service delivery lagged.

What the results mean for national politics and the road to 2026

• Coalition management: GERB’s dependence on MRF support increases leverage for the latter and complicates GERB’s ability to claim reformist credentials, constraining policy agility at the national level.

• Electoral strategy: WCC–DB can leverage urban wins to broaden national appeal but must convert municipal governance successes into tangible outcomes to convince rural voters.

• Party messaging: All major parties must reconcile local governance promises with national platforms—absent clear delivery at municipal level, voters will continue to sanction incumbents.

• Timing of national elections: While local outcomes do not automatically trigger national polls, they recalibrate momentum and bargaining power ahead of the 2026 parliamentary elections, influencing candidate selection and coalition offers.

  
  

Practical policy implications for municipalities and citizens

• Service continuity and project handover: Municipal transitions require careful handovers, especially for EU-funded projects and procurement contracts, to avoid delays.

• Anti-corruption and transparency reforms: New councils should prioritize transparent procurement portals, open budgeting, and civic oversight mechanisms to build trust.

• Urban planning and green policy: Sofia’s reformist mandate puts urban sustainability, public-transport upgrades, and pedestrianisation higher on the municipal agenda.

• Civic engagement: The rise of local movements highlights the potential of civic activism to shape municipal priorities; authorities should institutionalize participatory budgeting and consultative forums.

  
  

Limitations, data gaps, and areas for further monitoring

• Detailed municipal vote breakdowns, demographic turnout by age and precinct-level data, and post-election audits remain essential for fine-grained analysis.

• Monitoring the implementation of mayoral pledges and the pace of EU project disbursement over 2026 will provide clearer evidence of whether local mandates translate into outcomes.

• Watch for judicial reviews or election-administration complaints that may alter narrow-margin results in selected municipalities.

Quick-reference timeline (condensed)

• 1990s: Post-communist local elections establish municipal democracy.

• 2007 onward: EU accession shapes municipal development roles.

• 2013–2016: Public protests and corruption scandals boost reformist narratives.

• 2023: Local contests underline urban reformist advances.

• March 2025: Constitutional rulings reshape parliamentary arithmetic ahead of local campaigns.

• Oct–Nov 2025: Local elections; GERB strong regionally, WCC–DB wins Sofia; Pazardzhik upset and other local movements rise.

Bulgaria’s 2025 local elections combined continuity and change: GERB’s enduring regional apparatus retained broad municipal power while reformist forces consolidated urban influence, culminating most notably in Sofia. The map that emerged is a mosaic of longstanding party machines, minority-party leverage, rising local movements, and metropolitan reformist momentum. For citizens, the immediate test will be whether newly-elected local authorities convert mandates into improved services, transparent governance, and tangible development projects. For political parties, the test is strategic: translate municipal results into national credibility without sacrificing local performance.

"I'm not sure that that's the best approach..." – State Representative Todd Smola Criticized Governor’s Web Dashboard of Federal Cuts

Wanjiru Waweru, Jadetimes Contributor

W. Waweru is a Jadetimes News Reporter Covering America and Political News

---

Image Source: Spectrum News

Governor Maura Healey had recently published an updated dashboard on the Commonwealth’s official website, underlining the impact of federal cuts by the Trump Administration on Massachusetts. Healey reported that currently, over $3.7 billion has been wind-downed from the state so far this year, all of which has been located in various programs and services such as health care and housing.

Smola on the website’s progress report, "Why not try and come together and figure out some of those things that we agree upon or can agree upon and work together? So I'm not sure that that's the best approach. I think there's probably a better way to do it. And remember that we're all in this boat together. So we sink, we swim, we rise, we fall as a collective commonwealth and as a collective country. So let's try and find the common ground. If we can find the common ground, we're all going to be better off."

A Link to the funding of the state representative could be located here.