Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 18:07:10 -0500 From: Jason Riggs Subject: Policy Institute Report Summary of "Income Inflation" ************************************************************************ INCOME INFLATION: The Myth of Affluence Among Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Americans Released Winter '98 ************************************************************************ A Joint Publication of the Policy Institute of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and the Institute for Gay and Lesbian Strategic Studies By: M.V. Lee Badgett, Ph. D. Dept. of Economics, University of Massachusetts at Amherst With An Introduction By Suzanne Goldberg, Attorney Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund ************************************************************************ Policy Institute reports can be downloaded from the publications section of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force website at http://www.ngltf.org REPORT SUMMARY: Do gay, lesbian, and bisexual (GLB) Americans earn more money than their heterosexual counterparts? Is there an economic dividing line in this country based on sexual orientation? Not at all. In an important new report released today, Dr. M.V. Lee Badgett establishes that GLB persons are not, as a class, richer than heterosexuals. In detailed studies, in fact, gay men earn less. (The transgender population is among the least examined by social scientists; because of this lack of data, the inclusive term GLBT is used only when it is accurate to represent the community as a whole.) Income Inflation: The Myth of Affluence Among Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Americans, a joint publication of the Policy Institute of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) and the Institute for Gay and Lesbian Strategic Studies (IGLSS), is a startling study of the economic status of a frequently stereotyped population of Americans. Badgett explores the pervasive and inaccurate notion that GLB people form an economic elite, insulated from discrimination by their wealth and disconnected from society at large by a special, privileged status. Her conclusions are not only surprising, but they are certain to ignite a new era of debate about and understanding of the true economic status of the GLB populace. Badgett, a professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts, outlines how the distorted image of high income and wealth among GLB people has remained in force through the reliance on a limited number of marketing studies, conducted on behalf of gay publishing concerns about their readers. The debate has, till now, ignored the few random sample studies that allow us to more thoroughly identify a real outline of GLB life. By examining data sets from seven national studies such as the U.S. Census to the Voter News Service's exit polls, Badgett begins to fill in the gaps and establish an empirical rather than a mythological frame of reference. HIGHLIGHTS Badgett's report sweeps aside a host of long-standing distortions and inaccuracies. Income Inflation shows that comparisons of the economic status of lesbian, gay, and bisexual people with that of heterosexual people in the United States offer the following very consistent findings: … Gay, lesbian, and bisexual people do not earn more than heterosexual people. … Gay, lesbian, and bisexual people do not live in more affluent households than heterosexual people. … Two studies suggest that gay men earn less than similarly qualified heterosexual men. … Gay, lesbian, and bisexual people are found throughout the spectrum of income distribution: some are poor, a few are rich, and most are somewhere in the middle, along with most heterosexual people. ANALYSIS Badgett mounts a critique of the handful of marketing surveys frequently used to characterize GLB economic status, surveys conducted by organizations such as the Simmons Market Research Bureau and Overlooked Opinions. She concludes that, while useful for some purposes, these surveys continue to be used inaccurately to represent the economic status of wide range of very diverse GLBT populations. Through her provocative report, Badgett proves that any picture of the GLBT community must rely on the results from more accurate general studies. Badgett shows how the misuse of these statistics is not only pervasive, but that it has, ironically, allowed organized political forces of the extreme Right, who have frequently cited these marketing figures when arguing that GLBT people do not experience discrimination, to increase their power base. The recent Supreme Court battle over Colorado's anti-gay Amendment 2 was a particularly noteworthy example of the distortion caused by such marketing numbers. In a dissent which argued that the amendment should be upheld, Justice Scalia opined that "high disposable income" gave gay and lesbian people "disproportionate political power." By uncovering and explaining a number of existing data sets that survey a broader cross-section of the GLB population, both individual and household income numbers are put under the microscope. Using this information, Badgett arrives at a number of compelling statistical snapshots, all of which strongly undermine the myth of GLB affluence. Surprisingly, Badgett reveals that two surveys suggest that gay men may, in fact, earn less than their heterosexual peers. CONCLUSIONS Through her excellent report, Badgett puts marketing surveys back in their proper place -- as important information for advertisers seeking to reach a certain subgroup of gay people -- and opens the door to a broader, more accurate economic view of GLBT Americans as a whole. Using seven national studies, she concludes that GLB Americans do not earn more than their heterosexual peers; they frequently even earn less. Income Inflation also explains how social scientists are beginning to develop these new methods for collecting data about gay, lesbian, and bisexual Americans. These statistics are gathered from random samples and are therefore less susceptible to economic bias than data gathered from readership studies. These more scientific data sources have received little public attention, but provide a wealth of information. Badgett's review of these data suggests that the true picture of GLB individual and household income has yet to be understood in the debate raging today. ****************************************************************************** The Policy Institute of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force is a think tank dedicated to research, policy analysis, and strategic projects to advance the greater understanding and equality of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. The Institute for Gay and Lesbian Strategic Studies is a non-profit think tank. Its mission is to inform public debates through research, analysis, and education in order to create an equal and integrated society for people of all sexual orientations and gender identifications. ****************************************************************************** Media calls should be directed to NGLTF Media Director, Tracey Conaty at 202-332-6483. This message was issued by Jason Riggs at the Policy Institute of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. If you would like to be taken off the Policy Institute email distribution list please respond to jriggs@ngltf.org. If you wish to SUBSCRIBE to NGLTF's activist email listserve, please send an email with "SUBSCRIBE ACTIVIST" in the subject and body of your email message to . You may also subscribe by visiting http://www.ngltf.org.