Gay Rights Donations Fell To Lowest Levels Since 1990: Report

Political donations from gay rights groups and activists, perhaps disheartened by the Democrats' lack of progress on key issues and uninspired by the scarcity of gay-related initiatives on the ballot in November, reached their lowest numbers in the last 20 years during the 2010 election cycle.

According to a report from the Center for Responsive Politics, the approximately $850,000 contributed from January 2009 through September is the smallest amount since since 1990.

The swing was significant, the Center for Responsive Politics reports, as total contributions from PACs and individual donors fell 58 percent from the $2 million put forth in 2006. Personal donations were hit the hardest this cycle, as the more than $1.1 million provided during the 2006 election cycle dropped to a mere $151,000.

Andy Szekeres, a political consultant and fundraiser on LGBT issues, tells the Center for Responsive Politics's OpenSecrets Blog that gay rights activists are prone to "emotional" factors that were not present in these elections.

And they weren't the only ones who felt that something was lacking.

A New York Times piece from September reported that wealthy Democratic bulwarks, such as billionaires George Soros and Peter B. Lewis, were taking huge steps back from their blanket financial support of the party. Instead, they were choosing to channel funds directly to specific issue-related causes, in part because they no longer had faith that propping up Democratic candidates would necessarily lead to progress on their primary concerns.

Read the entire Center for Responsive Politics report here.

Comments

[SteveHansen]

03:33 PM on 12/03/2010

I give money to challengers who promise to support my issues, when the incumbent in that office has a record of opposing my issues. And, I give money to incumbents who have actually supported my issues.

In 2008, there were some candidates who promised to support equal rights for gay people. After that election, though, they did not do so. In a few cases, they actually opposed equality after being elected on a pro-equality promise. So, those same politicians did NOT get my money for 2010. That shouldn't be a surprise.

In 2010, my money went to support lawsuits, not liars.

[BobSF94117]

01:19 PM on 12/02/2010

Gay-related sites across the web, from political sites to social ones, have been inundated with disinformation and constant whining from "liberals" who are "fed up with the Dems".

With handles and nicknames indicating leftish tendencies, they rant and rave about Obama and the "worthless Dems". Thing is, on many of the sites with long-term users who get to know each other over the years, no one can remember these guys before this last election cycle.

It's called propaganda.

[kforce]

01:17 PM on 12/02/2010

I don't, and have never, understood why people get so shocked and offended when SOME members of a particular demographic (and, yes, for the last year or so this conversation has mainly been about the LGBT community) choose not to donate to organizations, officials or candidates who do nothing to advance the causes and concerns closest to that demographic. (I won't say "withhold," because that would imply that the potential recipients have some sort of right or expectation to the donation, which they emphatically do not.)

Put simply: It is OUR money and we can use it, not use it, donate it, or employ it in place of TP in our powder rooms if we so choose. If you don't like it, then make up the difference with your own funds or, better yet, encourage the recipients of YOUR donations to do the right thing and advocated full equality for all Americans. We are under no obligation to lay down over a mud puddle every two to four years for the privilege of allowing the Dems to walk over us on their way to office.

It is abundantly clear that the LGBT community doesn't have the political muscle everyone seems to think we do, what with accusing us of helping to acheive the woeful election results of 2010. If only we actually did have that kind of power, we'd be having a very different conversation.

In any case, most LGBT donors still gave, just with greater particularity.

[Ioan Lightoller]

05:51 PM on 12/02/2010

F&F. I am not donating what little I can spare for donations to organisations which do not really have my interests at heart. So yes, I am becoming very picky as to where my donations go.

[Alien Nation]

10:30 AM on 12/02/2010

The way that the gay rights people act I think we should just let them move on with their money.

From day 1 they've been screaming DO WHAT WE WANT or WE'LL TAKE OUR BALL AND GO HOME.

Well go home, see how well that works out for you. It's good that they aren't donating money because no amount of dollars will change the hearts of the corrupt.

[vanhattan]

12:48 PM on 12/02/2010

Done. For the record, when Obama loses in 2012 it will be folks like you who will scream the loudest. Blaming his failed presidency on everyone but where the failure resides, namely, with Obama and the DNC.

[Alien Nation]

10:10 AM on 12/03/2010

No it won't because I'm not voting for Obama. If I had my way he would be gone this afternoon.

So I guess - THANKS!

[Independent4America]

06:30 PM on 12/02/2010

Thanks for the "support"! Its exactly why Gays don't need the Democrats when everyone can see its all just a grab for donations without any intention of delivering on your false promises.

[gregstevens]

10:28 AM on 12/02/2010

To put the main point of this article more personally, and more succinctly:

Almost nobody I know donated to the DNC in the last year;

Everyone I know donated to the Trevor Project and/or the No H8 Campaign last in the last year.

This has nothing to do with declining interest in "gay rights"; it has to do with where to best allocate the money.

[CelticDragon]

05:02 PM on 12/02/2010

Exactly.

[HighSierra1981]

08:50 PM on 12/02/2010

Exactly.....example Get Equal or HRC? I choose the former

[Alien Nation]

10:27 AM on 12/02/2010

I'm sure Lady GaGa can make up for any lost funds.

[Jdaddy1951]

10:15 AM on 12/02/2010

Hey, it's a way of calling attention to the fact that for all our donations, politicians keep putting our rights on the back burner. Donations are down because we're saying, "Don't come knockin' on our door if you're not committed to delivering what you promised."
 
It doesn't mean we'll be supporting Republicans by any means --- huh-uh, no sir, no ma'am, we KNOW the Party of No hates us. But it does mean that we'll be more selective about which Democrats get gay and lesbian money. We'll donate to individuals who are willing to put themselves on the line, but not necessarily to any party where gay rights is not at least in the top 10 priorities.

[neighborhoodmole]

04:26 PM on 12/02/2010

It's not just gay issues. I stopped donating to the DCCC when I realized there were some so-called Democrats that did not support a public option for health care. Donate to individuals who you know support your views, not to general party funds!

[Jdaddy1951]

04:56 PM on 12/02/2010

Actually, I've been thinking for some time that everyone should stop donating to ANY political candidates and voting for them as well. It only encourages them. Most candidates and politicians make me feel like calling for the Orkin Man ... nasty varmints.

[HighSierra1981]

08:19 PM on 12/02/2010

I agree that this is a great way to make a point but unfortunately I have heard an awful lot of talk about either voting Libertarian, Republican or not at all in the next election and it really angers me. It is totally counterproductive and will set up back decades.

[Jdaddy1951]

08:38 PM on 12/02/2010

Sorry about your anger. As a gay person, I'm angry, too --- at Republicans for their hatred of us and at Democrats for taking us and our money for granted.

[sean62965]

09:41 AM on 12/02/2010

Having access to all the information available on the internet. I am able to look at where my money goes for everything. From the supermarket to charities.
If I don't like how they direct the money I spend with them or who they help or support, I stop spending or donating to them.
I don't vacation in hostile cities or states.
I gave pretty generously in 06 & 08. But, 2010, I stayed clear of all political donations. After the Dems, collectively, ignoring prop 8, and Maine and NY, then to have the DOJ make those insane statements fighting for DOMA and the DADT non-sense.
When Harry Reid attached an abortion bill to the DADT vote prior to the elections, that was it. They knew that would kill the deal.
I'll still vote in every election, but, it doesn't matter which party gets the keys, we're always going to be considered the Gay-T-M to the Dems because they think we have no other options.

[FalstaffsMind]

09:27 AM on 12/02/2010

Everything fell sharply in 2010.

[Bob Holton]

09:08 AM on 12/02/2010

This is because log cabin repugs are rising so they hate themselves to much to donate for their rights.

[sean62965]

09:51 AM on 12/02/2010

They're the ones who brought the lawsuit for DADT. They have done more for gay causes than Obama and the Dems collectively.
I used to think they're self loathing. But, they're working from the inside with the GOP. More gay votes went to GOP candidates this year than ever before. So, they may be getting much more support than before. It could be from the DADT lawsuit. People could see that they're actually trying instead of BSing us like Obama, Reid and Pelosi.
All we got were empty promises and the DOJ fighting against us

[Alien Nation]

10:28 AM on 12/02/2010

Support from who? Republicans hate gays. Their god tells them to smite them or something.

[BobSF94117]

01:15 PM on 12/02/2010

"But, they're working from the inside with the GOP."

You'll see how successful that "inside" work has been when ZERO Republicans vote to repeal DADT.

[chevy706]

09:05 AM on 12/02/2010

No offense to the LGBT community, but in these economic times, it seems most people with disposable income earmarked for charity are a little more concerned donating to causes that provide food, clothing, and shelter. Social contributions take a back seat to life sustaining entities.

[FlamingLibrul]

09:41 AM on 12/02/2010

What's offensive is your pretending not to mean any offense when you clearly wanted to say gay rights are of little importance during hard times. The article actually is saying donations to DEMOCRATS/DEM PACS have dropped FROM gay civil rights supporters and the gay community. It helps to actually read the articles if you're going to comment.

People with money aren't donating either:

New York Times piece from September reported that wealthy Democratic bulwarks, such as billionaires George Soros and Peter B. Lewis, were taking huge steps back from their blanket financial support of the party.

Doh.

[AxelDC]

08:51 AM on 12/02/2010

Andy Szekeres, a political consultant and fundraiser on LGBT issues, tells the Center for Responsive Politics's OpenSecrets Blog that gay rights activists are prone to "emotional" factors that were not present in these elections.

Emotional??? Isn't this the same word that men used in the 1960s to dismiss feminism?

[AxelDC]

08:45 AM on 12/02/2010

Why throw good money after bad?

[jcwtts1]

08:03 AM on 12/02/2010

I certainly wouldn't pay to have someone ignore my goals. That being said, good luck with the GOP congress. I will say this also, LGBT had muscle in the house and senate races of 2010, they will have much less in 2012, when you have muscle there are two schools of thought one of them is use it or lose it. So I get why the community withheld money. The law of unintended consequences, however, is that Pat Murphy and other supporters of DADT repeal and DOMA repeal lost. And of course their losses have a chilling effect on support for your issues. If people back your issues and lose, and people against your issues win, then doing the right thing becomes harder. With the number of LGBT votes the GOP got doubling at the congressional level, making it about 30% in both the presidential and the congressional cycles now, I believe the community just made their own political message more complicated. But again, I wouldn't pay money, organize, and support people who refused to deliver on my issues either so I get it. Good luck.

[AxelDC]

08:46 AM on 12/02/2010

"Republicans are worse" only goes so far.  I'll vote Democratic only because I have no choice, but why throw money at useless politicians?

My vote is wasted if I don't use it, but my money earns interest if I don't give it away.

[lackofoversight]

07:14 AM on 12/02/2010

Yes, as someone on here suggested, the way the Democratic Party and this administration have dealt with gay issues, they both can kiss my ....................................................................................... donations goodbye.