Jun 23, 2006  |  By: LOU CHIBBARO J  | COMMENTS     

When Wisconsin Democrat Tammy Baldwin became the nation’s first openly gay non-incumbent to win election to the U.S. House in 1998, gay activists were hopeful that more out gay politicians soon would follow her to the halls of Congress.

At least nine have tried in the eight years since, but none has won. Most have lost in primaries. This year, one openly gay House candidate lost in a primary and two dropped out for lack of support or sufficient funds to wage a competitive political campaign.

Another three — all from California — won their primaries and will be on the ballot in November. But none has been endorsed or received financial support from the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund, the primary organization in the gay rights movement focused on electing openly gay candidates to public office.

Since Baldwin’s 1998 landmark victory, openly gay congressmen Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.) have continued to win re-election to the House. But they have done so as incumbents who did not disclose their sexual orientation when they first ran for public office and won their seats. Kolbe has announced his retirement this year.

Congressman Gerry Studds, another Massachusetts Democrat, was the nation’s first openly gay member of Congress, but came out almost a decade after winning office. He has since retired.

“If you study federal elections, you see that 98 percent of House members and 96 percent of senators won re-election last time,” said Chuck Wolfe, the Victory Fund president.

Wolfe and Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest gay political group, explain the dearth in gays elected to Congress by lamenting the “safe seats” most House incumbents enjoy.

Republican and Democratic Party leaders in state legislatures across the country often strike deals to create safe seats by carving up the nation’s 435 congressional districts in a way that assures each party would retain control of certain districts.

“That’s the most telling answer,” said Wolfe, for why so few open gays win election to Congress. “Those of us who are trying to change election outcomes are looking for open seats,” he said.

Wolfe noted that most successful House candidates spend between $1 and $1.6 million to fund their campaigns. Raising that kind of money is difficult unless a candidate is well known, Wolfe said. The best way to raise name recognition is have been elected to an important local office, such as state legislator, mayor or city councilmember, he said.

Perhaps due to the challenge of electing non-incumbents, press releases from the Victory Fund after each Election Day tout the success of the group’s endorsees, the vast majority of which are incumbents.

But Wolfe argued that the percentage of endorsements does not square with where the Victory Fund spends most of its resources: the campaigns of non-incumbents.

“People get misled because we endorse incumbents,” Wolfe said. “But 75 percent to 90 percent of our money goes to non-incumbents.”

Robin Brand, Victory Fund’s political director who monitors the day-to-day campaigns of openly gay candidates, said a growing number of openly gay political hopefuls have won election to state and local offices. Many are being groomed for higher office, with Congress a likely place for them to land, she said.

Patrick Guerriero, executive director of Log Cabin Republicans, a national gay group, echoed that hope.

“There are a record number of openly gay and lesbian Americans running for and serving in office,” he said. “And they are doing it exactly the right way by getting elected to local offices, mayoral seats, state legislatures. They are the farm team for future federal and statewide candidates.”

Three out gay hopefuls lack Victory Fund backing

Supporters for the three out gays running for Congress in California say they are hopeful that the Victory Fund and other local and national gay groups would consider endorsing them as their campaigns progress this summer toward the fall election.

One of the candidates, Democrat Cynthia Matthews, surprised political observers when she received 42.8 percent of the vote in 2004 in her race against Republican incumbent David Dreier in a district located northeast of Los Angeles. Dreier, who had been in office nearly 25 years, received 53.6 percent, and a Libertarian Party candidate received 3.6 percent.

In prior races, Dreier had breezed to re-election with close to 70 percent of the vote, according to media reports in California. Leaders of both parties said Matthews, a political newcomer, benefited from a backlash against Dreier from conservative voters who blamed him for not taking a harder line on immigration.

This year, Matthews defeated two challengers in the ...