|| Politics ||
1 2 3 4 NEXT  Page 1 of 4

Gays vs. Democratic Party

They’re fond of your checkbooks — and deaf to your demands for equal rights. What will it take for the Democratic Party to step up?


1035 COVER X300 | ADVOCATE.COM

In 2004, Andy Szekeres, then a 21-year-old budding Democratic strategist with several political campaigns already under his belt, was working as the Wisconsin LGBT field coordinator for John Kerry’s presidential campaign. Szekeres estimates that he and his team registered 26,000 new gay voters across the crucial swing state that year, and on Election Night, Kerry won the state by about 11,000 votes—less than 0.5% of the overall vote. Though the win can be attributed to the support of various constituencies, there’s no question that Wisconsin would have wound up red—not blue—if it hadn’t been for gay voters’ strong backing of the Democratic ticket.

Fast-forward five years to Maine, where social conservatives proposed and funded Question 1, a November ballot initiative that, like Proposition 8 in California, successfully repealed marriage equality in the state. Szekeres worked as finance director for No on 1/Protect Maine Equality, which opposed the initiative. But he says his experience with the Democratic Party was significantly different this time. While the national party had been more than happy to enlist the support of gay donors and campaign workers in its effort to get Kerry elected in 2004, it couldn’t be bothered to involve itself in the fight to maintain those voters’ and workers’ right to marry.

In a November e-mail to Politico’s Ben Smith, a Democratic National Committee official seemed to indicate that the party’s inaction on Question 1 stemmed from its desire not to be seen as prioritizing one cause over another. “In Maine there were over a half dozen ballot initiatives and referendums, and local municipal elections at stake, and OFA [Organizing for America, the Obama presidential campaign operation’s successor, which works within the DNC] sent an e-mail to thousands of activists encouraging them to vote in support of progressive causes and candidates,” the official wrote. In fact, it was only after prompted by The Advocate’s Washington correspondent, Kerry Eleveld, that the White House issued an oblique statement about Question 1—a reiteration of the president’s general opposition to measures aimed at rescinding marriage rights. Maine wasn’t explicitly addressed.

“I don’t think Maine was a sexy enough state for [the DNC] to invest in,” Szekeres says today, suggesting that had the battle taken place in a bigger state, the party might have taken a more active role. In 2008 the DNC wrote a $25,000 check to fight Prop. 8 (a pittance in an $83 million campaign). That involvement left many to wonder why the party didn’t do the same in Maine, where $25,000 could have paid for two days of TV ads or two weeks’ pay for 10 field organizers. The DNC did send an e-mail blast to its members in Maine reminding them to vote, but there was no mention of Question 1. That oversight was compounded when John Aravosis of AmericaBlog revealed that the party sent out a second e-mail, asking its members in Maine to make phone calls in support of the embattled Democratic governor—in New Jersey.

Szekeres’s experience is illustrative of the problem that many gay people, one of the most loyal Democratic constituencies alongside African-Americans and Jews, have vis-à-vis their relationship with the Democratic Party. “We give money to get something,” he says. “We don’t give money to get warm fuzzies. If I wanted that, I’d give money to the cat shelter.”

In the wake of the Maine defeat, a coterie of liberal bloggers and activists called for a temporary moratorium on DNC donations. The fledgling movement, which has adopted the motto “Don’t Ask, Don’t Give” and has attracted the likes of legendary gay rights activist David Mixner, hopes to discourage donations to the party until the passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and the repeal of both “don’t ask, don’t tell” and the Defense of Marriage Act. In so doing, these activists are hoping to reshape—if not completely upset—the relationship between gays and the Democratic Party. 

Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Twitter. Follow us on Facebook Follow us on Facebook. 1 2 3 4 NEXT  Page 1 of 4
Reader Comments
  • Name: Dr. Keith D. Jones
    Date posted: 3/31/2010 8:28:58 PM
    Hometown: Penndel PA

    Comment:

    I officially left the Democrat Party after I realized they do not support us as a whole and really never had any intention to do so. Therefore I have moved my vote and my support to the SOCIALIST PARTY of AMERICA. I suggest anyone who wants to see real change in this country needs to realize that two party system has ran its course! Stop wasting your time voting for folks who don't care about our desire for rights and basic fundamental civil liberties! Its time vote not just for a winner but a REAL voice for social change in this country. Check out the platform at http://sp-usa.org you won't be disappointed.

  • Name: Bruce Majors
    Date posted: 3/8/2010 12:57:03 PM
    Hometown: Washington DC

    Comment:

    For years the Democrats have needed gay issues to be unsolved so they could use gay issues as wedge issues and milk the gay community out of campaign contributions. Gay Democratic leaders like Clinton appointee Richard Socarides, Gore campaign chair Donna Brazile, or Business Forward lobbyist Hillary Rosen are formally out in their communities, but never identified as gay when they appear every week on ABC or MSNBC, lest it turn off the viewer. Yet they are happy to see Republican closeted gays outed and accept the notion that being less than out implies that homosexuality is shameful and leads to teen suicide. When Brazile is on ABC's "This Week" and says she thinks Governor Perry is hot, as she did this week (reminiscent of Rosie O'Donnell's leaden running joke about her crush on Tom Cruise on her variety show), is she responsible for the next teen lesbian suicide in Texas? Ms. Brazile also ran the 2000 Democratic nominating convention, which I attended as a gay donor. We were feted with special all gay sky boxes, credentials to go on the floor with the delegates, nightly cocktail parties with people like Ellen and Betty Degeneres and Anne Heche. But when the cameras were on, Democratic Party apparatchiks made sure any rainbow flag or pink triangle was put away, lest a voter in fly over country see it. And now we have the spectacle of the outing of a gay or bisexual Congressman before any ethics charges against him have been heard, because he was not a solid vote in favor of Obamacare. It's rather obvious that the Obama-Pelosi regime leaked the fact that Massa is not straight and sexually harassed someone (and/or manufactured either part of that story) to get rid of him. Given that they bribed some Congresspeople with hundreds of millions of pork and promised others judicial appointments for family members, and that their every word is a lie, there is no reason not to believe that. The Democrats have long taken black votes and gay dollars while being ready to throw gay and black politicians under the bus, and pursue policies harmful to gays and blacks, as they are doing this month with Massa, Patterson etc.

  • Name: John
    Date posted: 2/26/2010 11:48:17 AM
    Hometown: Merced

    Comment:

    The design of Gays vs. Democratic Party by James Kirchick is polarization (a we vs. them hostility). The only merit in this article is that it shows the failure of How to solicit support. The old way doesn't get results. We all agree about that fact of life. I disagree with James implication that the Democratic Party is useless, because gay rights have been advanced the most during a Democratic Administration. Now that is not a brag, but rather a fact of life. So the solution is: keep voting for the Democrats, but stop giving money to the party and instead give to Gay Political Action Organizations who know and promote the gay adenda, and who interface with the Democratic Leadership. Think about this solution.

  • Name: Core
    Date posted: 2/3/2010 9:55:31 PM
    Hometown: Los Angeles

    Comment:

    The democratic party is at serious risk of crashing during the next election. It seems like nothing was learned from Massachusetts.

  • Name: Teresa
    Date posted: 2/2/2010 2:20:38 PM
    Hometown: Meshoppen, Pa

    Comment:

    I read here that there are all these loyal groups that vote democratic and that is true. If you measure loyalty by percentage pf group that votes for the party candidates. I always find it interesting that no one ever mentions women. No, we may not vote in as large percentages for democrats, however, since we are more than half the population and we vote in the majority for democrats, I think we have to be considered the most loyal and powerful group in the democratic party. However, we are totally taken for granted. The primaries of 2008 proved that. To underscore that fact, we have only to look at the anti woman language in the recent HCR mess of a bill, both houses to see how much respect women are given. Do you all think that they will care more about your issues? I wouldn't hold my breath. If Obama hasn't thrown you under the bus yet it is only because he hasn't gotten to you yet.

  • Name: Terry Hummel
    Date posted: 1/28/2010 8:45:23 PM
    Hometown: Orlando

    Comment:

    We supported Democratic candidates all over the U.S., especially those up against Right Wing haters. After Florida voters approved a CONSTITUTIONAL amendment forbidding Gay marriage, my husband and I decided not to support any non-gay charities. Would Jews support Aryan Youth, Blacks the Klan, , etc. Yes, it seems a bit harsh, but our fellow citizens told us that we were unworthy of equal rights AND made it a part of our state constitution. Enough is enough. Can you think of a single charity in this country whose charity events, advertising, or donated art/dance/music are not done by or contributed to by Gay Americans? I think it would make a huge impact if gays stopped contributing their time and money to non-Gay charities. Our fellow citizens don't want us to enjoy the same rights & privileges as they have, so let's stop supporting Them. It is definitely a case of Us and Them. Now it seems we may have to stop contributing to at least some Democratic candidates also.

  • Name: Nicki Davis
    Date posted: 1/23/2010 2:29:01 PM
    Hometown: Olympia

    Comment:

    As a member of the the transgender community, I have to say that I'm nolonger going to give my support to a party that has no intention of standing up for the rights of its gay constituents. If they want our money, then they have to earn it, just like we do. Why should I support an organization that does not support any of us. We should start a letter writing campaign. If a voter actually takes the time to set down and write a physical letter and address it to their representatives, it has to be delivered to the desk of that representative. Emails are easier and certainly faster, but there is no guarantee at the email will actually get where it is intended to go. A real letter on the other hand, has the weight of federal law insuring that it will get there. Just how many of us are there? Do you really want to get noticed, or do you just want to make noise?

  • Name: Bob
    Date posted: 1/23/2010 12:44:22 PM
    Hometown: Las Vegas

    Comment:

    You've got to be kidding, Religion has had everything to do with injustice and little to do with justice throughout history. Religion isolates those who don't believe like the religious, it separates society in that if you're not a person of faith, you must be the devil's advocate and it has caused every war in history.We have a 14th amendment right to our civil liberties and Religion be damned! The GLBT community does not have to wait for people of faith to agree to give us our constitutional rights, we must take it and squash organized religion if it gets in our way.

  • Name: Stonewaller
    Date posted: 1/21/2010 6:59:43 PM
    Hometown: Washington DC

    Comment:

    DANIEL S Postscript: 1st female S Ct J, Sandra Day O'Connor, 1981 (60 years after women's suffrage). Disabled S Ct J, ? (65 years after FDR). 1st female Cabinet Member, Frances Perkins, 1932. Subsequently, female Cabinet Members appear to be appt 1 every 20 years.

  • Name: Stonewall
    Date posted: 1/21/2010 6:47:05 PM
    Hometown: Washington DC

    Comment:

    JILLIAN T WEISS Thank you for putting some sense back into this discussion DANIEL S History of ethnic politcial power in US. Despite disproportionate contribution of Jews in law profession, 1st S Ct J, Lous Brandeis, appt 1916. NAACP in existence for 50 years before Legal Defense Fund Director, Thurgood Marshall, 1st S Ct J appt 1967. 40 years after United Farmworkers, Sonja Satomayor, 1st S Ct J appt 2009. 60 years after Japanese internment 1st S Ct appt, ?. Blacks approx 10% of pop, 1st Cabinet appt, 1965 (100 years after Emancipation); Hispanics approx 15% pop, 1st Cabinet Member, 1988 (150 years after Alamo); Asians approx 5% pop, 1st Asian Cabinet Member, appt, 2000 (150 years after gold rush); Gays maybe 6% of pop, 1st Cabinet appt 1993 (24 years after Stonewall). Jews may be considered greedy, Blacks stupid & Asians sneaky but significantly different than LGBT being considered perverts. Unlike interracial marriage, SSM subject to "public morals" exception.

 PREVIOUS 1 2 3 4 5  ... NEXT  


Don't Miss
  • Best of Broadway Smash: Why You Will Love It

    Craig Zadan and Neil Meron, two of the producers of NBC’s new critically acclaimed musical series, explain why the backstage drama of creating a musical about Marilyn Monroe has mass appeal and why big stars like Anjelica Huston, Uma Thurman, Bernadette Peters, and Nick Jonas were eager to appear in it.

  • Best of Broadway How Broadway Does a Flea Market

    Find out why actress Kathleen Chalfant calls the annual Flea Market and Grand Auction in Times Square "the most glamorous flea market you've ever seen." It raised half a million dollars to fight HIV/AIDS.

  • Travel Slideshow Flag Gayest Cities in America, 2012

    It's no secret that megalopolises New York City, Chicago, and Los Angeles have robust LGBT life — and we've even heard tell of little queer hoods like the Castro and P-Town. This isn't that list.

 
 
Advocate Subscribe Promo Banner 300x50
 
Follow Us Follow Us on FacebookFollow Us on TwitterSubscribe to our RSS feedsDownload our app
Facebook Activity
 
COVER 1055 X135 | ADVOCATE.COM
Today's Headlines