SAN FRANCISCO - Supporters and opponents of a ballot initiative that would outlaw same-sex marriage in California have poured $41.2 million into the race, more than the combined total spent in the 24 states where similar measures have gone before voters since 2004.
-
(Photo: AP Images / Steve Yeater)Proposition 8 supporter Jeff Zaine, right, asks voter Dionisio Tonel, left, about his thoughts on gay marriage during a poll of voters in Elk Grove, Calif., on Saturday, Aug. 23, 2008. If passed Proposition 8 would amend the State Constitution to make same-sex marriage illegal in California.
Campaign finance figures show supporters of the gay marriage ban have taken a significant lead in fundraising even as Proposition 8 has lagged in public opinion polls. A backer, ProtectMarriage.com, reported taking in $25.4 million through Sept. 30 of this year compared to the $15.8 million in donations raised by the main committee opposing the measure.
"It shows there is tremendous grassroots support for what we are trying to do," said Frank Schubert, co-manager of the gay marriage ban campaign.
Schubert said more than 60,000 people and businesses have given money to help pass the initiative, which would amend the state constitution to limit marriage to a man and a woman. He provided the figures Monday before the group filed its official fundraising report with the secretary of state's office to meet the reporting deadline.
Steve Smith, manager of Equality for All, a coalition of groups working to defeat the gay marriage ban, predicted the bank accounts for the two sides would even up by Election Day on Nov. 4. He noted that when the last campaign finance reports were filed at the end of July, the proposition's opponents were ahead.
"What's happening is a little seesaw battle," Smith said.
Both sides have set aside more than $10 million for television advertisements and plan to start airing their second round of ads this week. The fundraising advantage Proposition 8's supporters have at this point is reflected in the remaining cash on hand they reported having on Monday — $12.8 million for supporters of the ban, $1.8 million for its opponents.
According to figures compiled by the National Organization on Money in State Politics, a little less than $33 million was spent on campaigns to pass or defeat gay marriage bans in the 24 states where they appeared on ballots in 2004, 2005 and 2006. Supporters of same-sex marriage had the fundraising edge in all of them, but voters approved all but one, in Arizona.
With a month to go until the election, fundraising by the two sides in the California campaign already has well exceeded that amount. By comparison, the most expensive gay marriage fight before now was in Colorado, where opponents and supporters spent $6.8 million in 2006.
"For an issue like this, it's a lot of money," said Rachel Weiss, a spokeswoman for the national Organization on Money in State Politics. "California is in its own universe."
Associated Press writer Steve Lawrence in Sacramento contributed to this story.
RSS
Mike, I'm sorry you do not believe me. I grew up in the Methodists Children's Home which is based in Little Rock, Arkansas. I was there in through out all of the 70s. I was there in the mid 70s when they began to accept federal funding and had to follow federal guidelines. The percentage of children who ended up in the pen rose dramatically in the years that followed. I admit it was always unacceptably high but much of that was due to factors that often existed after children left. You leave with very little money (generally whatever you saved from summer jobs), little expereince, no drivers license, no place to live, no transportation, and zero support from families. You have to find all of the above to live in todays society. Any lack of one of these can leave you homeless and broke with criminal activity being the only way to feed yourself. You get caught, go to court with your overworked public defender and often get "made an example of". Whereas every kid with a mom and/or dad goes in a gives whatever excuse they can and gets their kid off or with a much lighter sentence. I have known kids who grew up in foster homes, homes with a gay parent, and adopted parents. All four of brothers were adopted, one by a single male. The single male later was very inappropriate with my baby brother and it has taken years for me to purge my heart of the hatrrd and anger I had for this man. From my personal experience I stand by my statements that a stable, heterosexual, married couple can provide the best environment for any child. I find it interesting that society is willing to subject its most vulnerable citizens to an experiment that has no proven success or reults.
As is yours. If I present data showing gays are good parents or that gays have happy relationships, you turn up your nose at them. Don't act as if that is a character flaw of mine.
Mike,
"I do not believe you"
This is always your response when presented with data you do not agree with.
Obama/Biden aren't against marriage. In fact, they're against gay marriage, but believe in extending civil unions. Please get your facts correct before posting unchristian lies.
Well, so be it then. I don't believe what he said. I think he is spouting typical rhetoric.
mike2685, not believing what a person is saying is the same as negating what a person is saying.
Your response was not focused on what I said at all, and I didn't negate it, I said I don't believe it. Children in the foster care system want a loving home, and don't care whether its a single mother, a mother and father, or gay parents. A loving, stable home, is a loving stable home.
mike2685, I was simply responding to your response to ender as you totally negated what he had to say.
OK, but those white parents still make great parents to black children, just like gay parents make great parents to the children. What was your point?
mike2685, I don't know if it's true of black children, but I do know their are many in the black community who are adamantly opposed to white couples adopting black children over concerns about black heritage issues.
ender, I do not believe you. Knowing quite a few children in foster care, all they want is to have a stable, loving home in which they can grow and be nurtured. Compared to our foster system, it is much better for a child to be in a loving, supportive, same sex household than in a straight foster care system, where they will experiment with drugs and sexual promiscuity (check the facts for yourself!)
ender, a very truthful and courageous post, be blessed as you serve Him, believer
Ironic that any ol' household is good enough for orphaned children or those that are in the foster care system. I grew up in an orphanage. What they want, generally, is to be back with their parents and have them acting responsibly. Failing that, they want to be in a normal household. The media says that one parent can do as good a job as a married couple or that a gay couple can do as well. But these children have often seen horrible things and experienced psychological, emotional, physical and sexual abuse that would require the efforts of a loving stable, normal couple. As someone from this background and many of my childhood friends as well, I am sickened by society's desire to use these children in a sociological experiment that is presented under the concept of being a progressive policy of equality. I remember arguing this very policy in college courses, and a student asked if I would've been willing to adopted by a balck couple eitgher. I said no, as was accused of being a racist, until I pointed out that none of the black children I grew up with wanted to be adopted by a white couple either. This policy does not think of the welfare of the children, it is only considering the policy of government to homosexuals. I firmly believe that stable, married, Christian couples offer the best hope for these children. I can only pray that other people and our government will see the wisdom in such a policy.
Squeaky: Keep in mind that gay parents are adopting the foster children that heterosexual parents produced and cannot or will not raise. How is this anti-children?
You're right squeaky, we should let them rot in the foster care system waiting for straight parents who will never come. That's the Christian thing to do.
Supporters of same-sex marriage are turning their backs on the real interests of the children.
Shame on them for advocating anti-children policies when such funds could be used to feed children!
Forcing a fatherless or motherless household on the children is selfishness for the sake of self-addicting lusts is pure self-centeredness.
Supporters of same-sex marriage are turning their backs on the real interests of the children.
Shame on them for advocating anti-children policies when such funds could be used to feed children!
Forcing a fatherless or motherless household on the children is selfishness for the sake of self-addicting lusts is pure self-centeredness.
I can't speak for the gay community, but I personally donate to the ACS and to the Diabetes association, not to mention the money I blow on my classroom :)
mike2685, would the homosexual community be willing to donate all the monies they raised and give those funds to be used to help all those in need?
41.2 million could buy so many people food, could build so many homes, could hire so many highly qualified teachers for rough inner cities. My heart is aching that "christians" are willing to put this much effort into fighting gay marriage, yet turn their backs financially on children who are starving in our countries and rotting in disgusting classrooms.
This should not even be an issue!!! Dear Lord in Heaven, has the entire world gone MAD? Is it any wonder that God is punishing this country? Things will only get worse until we turn back to God, not turn our backs on Him like we've been doing for some time now.