Anti-Gay Forces Raising Huge Sums

Over at GayRightsWatch.com, Bryan Harding has an exclusive:

From December 2004 to present the 'Defense of Marriage' Coalition PAC has raised just under a half a million dollars. Unprecedented amount for an off cycle. If this isn't a sign of what's to come, I don't know what is.

The exact figure is $443,674.18. Does this seem like the mark of of organization that will be staying quiet during the 2006 cycle? ...

Prior to the Measure 36 campaign in 2004, the most that anti-gay groups has spent in any one cycle was just over--HEAR THIS--$100k.

Head on over and read the rest. Discuss over there.

Comments

  • Dan Meek (unverified)
    (Show?)

    A bit of context: While the group raised $444,000 during the period since the last election, they also spent $425,000. This left them with an ending cash balance of about $11,000 and, considering their outstanding loans and accounts payable, a balance sheet deficit of $382,000. Thus, they are just about $400,000 in the hole, despite having raised $444,000 since November 2004.

    These amounts are not surprising, since they raised about $2.2 million during the 2004 election cycle for Measure 36.

  • Bryan Harding (unverified)
    (Show?)

    They do/did have a good amount of debt. At the same time it was a large amount of money to have raised in an off season for a Measure PAC. It just goes to show their fundraising capacity.

    You say that they raised $2.2 million... that was because there was a specific call to action. Measure 36. They had money pouring in from the Alliance Defense Fund among other national groups during the campaign as well.

    Bryan GRW

  • dmruso (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I am tired of living in fear and anxiety over what DOMC or the former OCA for that matter. For years, the GLBT community has been defending itself against one measure after another. We REACT instead of ACT. Most of these measures have been defeated, with the big exception of M36. I believe that the votes were so close in most cases, not because their message appealled to voters, but because our side lacked the will and insight to speak to voters and frame a good message. We also did almost nothing to educate the public between these ballot measures.

    This is why I am in total agreement with BRO (Basic Rights Oregon). They have taken the initiative to educate the public, get officials elected to the legislature that support gay rights, and then pursue their own civil union agenda. It will be a long hard road, but I believe that it will work. They came to these conclusions by polling their members. What a concept!

    So, while it is important to keep an eye on DOMC and their next "un-Christian" ballot measure of pushing hate and biggotry, let's focus on ourselves and what we can do to open hearts and minds and do the grasswork efforts needed to root out such groups in the future.

  • (Show?)

    Yep. BRO is doing it right this time around, and we should all pitch in to help them get the word out.

    I suspect that the support for DOMC,while fiancially strong, probably doesn't have a large voter constituency.

    <hr/>

    One example is the way large employers talk about partner rights in employment. My sense is thaqt most of them understand the fairness issue and would be glad to "do the right thing" but no one wants to be out there alone.

    I think it'd be great fun to see what happened if the Religious Right decided to boycott Centrino chips, or quit buying power from PGE due to their support of legal rights for gay partners....

  • dmrusso (unverified)
    (Show?)

    The Religous Right did try to boycott Disney and failed. That was quite humorous. While Disney is not the poster-"boy" or "girl" of tolerance, they understand that they could not rely on being labelled as biggots in the "Happiest Place on Earth".

    The Religous Right believes that they have more pull than they really do. (See Heriet Meirs, as an example) This arongance has been their undoing. They tend to win when there is little organized effort working against them; little education or re-framing of messages so that they are more accepting and positive for all. In otherwords, they win when we are ignorant.

  • (Show?)

    Also, a large share of the contributions to DOMC came directly from churches, despite their tax-exempt status that limits what they can spend on "grassroots lobbying" (about 5% of annual expenditures) Collecting signatures or asking for votes on an initiative is "grassroots lobbying." But, since churches spend lots of money on other things, contributing to DOMA is legal for them.

elsewhere

connect with blueoregon