A reader writes:
I’ve been watching with much interest as a HRC Federal Club member as you have taken on the financial transparency of the organization. Thank you for leading the way because I’ve had a wary eye as this organization has wrapped itself in a cloak of info-tainment as the work of gay civil rights has marched on, particularly with marriage.
I write, however, to give you pause. I live in a moderate Pennsylvania suburb of Philadelphia where we elected our first Democrat in a long time named Rep Patrick Murphy. It was an upset over a solid Republican Mike Fitzpatrick – a good guy with a good record. Murphy the Iraq war veteran, however, won here with nearly two years of wearing down his shoe leather – a remarkable campaign in a county filled with discontent about the war. Nonetheless, Murphy embraced the gay community here. He came regularly to The Raven, the only gay gathering place in Pennsylvania’s Bucks County area. And he also sought me out at Pride Events in Philadelphia. Consistently, he has verbally supported civil unions and gay marriage.
HRC has supported him and he has attended HRC events along the way. What I’m saying, Andrew, is that HRC has given a political forum and source of fundraising to a very gay-friendly congressman. The man won in November, and that’s a very good thing thanks to his hard fought campaign, and support from people like me and my spouse, as well as HRC’s financial and grass-roots supoort.
Really, the support of candidates can work. And yes, HRC needs more transparency. But let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water.
Agreed. The question is simply how effective the support is, how focused it is, and whether the group is as ethical, transparent and accountable as it should be. In the last election cycle, Tim Gill’s group did exactly the same thing – to greater effect and with far less overhead.
The Dish 