Alex Blaze

HRC donates $150K to offset Target... what about everyone else?

Filed By Alex Blaze | September 13, 2010 12:00 PM | comments

Filed in: The Movement
Tags: MN Forward, Target, tom emmer

HRC off-set the donation Target made to MN Forward, targetno.jpgthe rightwing PAC set up to elect officials who want to decrease social services in Minnesota and hurt the economy in order to benefit corporations and wealthy people in that state, at least one of whom is anti LGBT.

The Human Rights Campaign, based in Washington, D.C., will donate $100,000 to Win Minnesota, a PAC that helps fund anti-Emmer TV advertisements. They will toss another $20,000 to OutFront Minnesota, a GLBT group, and $30,000 to individual candidates -- including DFLer Mark Dayton.

I'm just going to assume that the candidates who will receive HRC's money would be less bad for the people living in Minnesota than the ones Target ended up giving to, so that's good.

MN Forward reported around $1.2 million in donations up to the first week of August, according to the state's campaign finance board (the donations did not stop after the outcry against Target started). As much as all of us out in Real America like to make fun of HRC for being all rich and elitist and inside-the-beltway, they really don't have anywhere near the resources that Target has. And the non-profit industry as a whole could, at most, spit into the tide of cash for-profit corporations are going to be using to sway elections their way.

Recent Entries Filed under The Movement:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.

I'll be among the first to applaud HRC for this. We've been complaining for a long time that HRC seems to spend far more time raising money than doing advocacy, so it's nice to see them using the power of those deep pockets to make a good and useful point.

Of course, as with all things HRC, the really interesting thing to see will be if this is a one-shot aberration or a new way of HRC utilizing its money in the public sector to help effect positive change.

Maybe you could expand on what you mean by "aberration"? HRC's been giving its money to state and local advocacy groups for some time now.

They haven't given squat to Georgia Equality over the last 15 years, yet they have siphoned hundreds of thousands from our state that GAEQ could have used.

This stunt (yes, I call it a stunt,) is to try to counter their recent superficial ad for "I (heart) HRC" tee-shirts and other useless crap. They play to the worst gay stereotype of gay men are nothing more than "forward-thinking fashioneestas." That ad is an insult to all in the LGBT community.

I mean how they're being public about it and using the money to make a political point. I think that's a great idea. I'd like to see HRC and other orgs going out of their ways to support those candidates who really deserve it. In other words, not simply no more Al D'matos and Mary Bonos, but also no more donating to those who are simply non-antagonistic toward LGBT rights.

I want to see our community's political impact, financial and otherwise, being used to further the cause of LGBT equality by supporting those who support us, not used to help provide political cover for those who still lack the courage to do so.

HRC PAC has a long history of giving to candidates although my understanding from working with them around the Ellsworth campaign was that they weren't giving any state candidate dollars this year - instead they wanted to focus on national elections.

I'd fall with Monica that it's a stunt. Will it really make a difference or is it, as Alex calls it, "spitting into the waves"?

thanks for pointing out that quote. That was not the best way to say what I wanted to say.