I was looking back over the report by Professor Ken Sherrill of Hunter College, "Same-Sex Marriage Initiatives and Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Voters in the 2006 Elections," and wondered just what LGB voters represented, potentially, as a demographic potentially providing a margin of victory in an election.
Ken's study doesn't focus specifically on that question, so I asked him. He replied that he and his team have completed a newer study, conducted in November 2007. The report will be presented in Chicago on April 4. One of the team, Patrick J. Egan of New York University, said that the study indicates that "The top priorities for LGBs bear little resemblance to the debates that have dominated the headlines." And Ken replied to me relative to the study--emphases mine:
finds that LGB Americans are.... unusually interested in politics and unusually involved -- about 50% more likely to be interested in politics than non-LGB Americans -- including being more likely to vote. Exit polls estimate LGB voters as being 3-4% of the electorate. Unlike other minorities, LGB Americans are found in roughly equal proportions in every state in the country, although there is some gravitation toward the more urban and cosmopolitan. These data can be used to construct the argument that LGB votes will account for the margin of victory in any state that the Democrats carry by between two and four percent and will contribute heavily to the margin of victory in any state the Democrats carry by five or six percent.
I'm looking forward to reading more about the study itself, though its findings relative to the current Democratic presidential contest will be somewhat dated. (Edwards was still in the race in November 2007, and the Obama surge grew significantly afterward. At the time of the study, results showed Clinton had the support of 63% of LGB likely voters in the Democratic primaries, Obama 22%, Edwards 7%.)
Looking back at the 2006 report, I noted a few things:
1. In 2004, 25% of self-identified LGB voters voted for Bush. Frankly, I thought that that number would be lower.
2. From the study:
Evidence continues to indicate that the presence of same-sex marriage ballot
measures does not appreciably help Republican candidates. As previous analysis by political scientists has shown, President Bush did no better than expected in states that held marriage referenda in 2004 than in states that did not.
3. Tennessee results:
In Arizona and Virginia, those with post-graduate education were about twice as likely as those who did not complete high school to oppose the referendum [to ban same-sex marriage]. In Tennessee, they were almost three times as likely to oppose it (but in Tennessee, where 80% of all voters supported the referendum, only one-third of the best-educated opposed it).
4. An interesting conclusion:
LGB voters are about aslikely to say that they are moderates as is the rest of the electorate. LGB voters also are slightly more likely than all other voters to say they are Independents. This combination means that the electoral capture of the LGB vote by the Democratic Party is not complete. At the moment, the data indicate revulsion by LGB voters to the hostility toward gay people that has been manifested by some of the most visible members of the Republican Party’s leadership. The data also indicate that, in terms of family heritage and other demographic variables, we should expect LGB Americans to be just about as Republican as anyone else. The Democratic Party, when in power, will have to take actions to reinforce the loyalty of LGB voters by providing them with tangible benefits.