It is well-known that voter turnout in the United States is abysmal, especially when compared with the rest of the industrialized world. But there is one group of Americans that meets and even exceeds the extraordinary level of participation experienced in other western industrialized countries: gay voters.

A recently released study found that a phenomenal 92.5 percent of gay men and 91 percent of lesbians voted in the 2004 presidential election, and 82.4 percent of gay men and 78 percent of lesbians voted in the 2006 midterm elections. As the Los Angeles Times noted, that compares with an overall turnout of about 61 percent in 2004 and a 40 percent turnout in 2006. The financial participation of gay Americans in politics is also remarkable. This same study found that 40 percent of gay men and 31 percent of lesbians gave money to a political party within the year—compared with 7 percent of Americans overall. (In the run up to the 2008 election, the lion’s share of donations to candidates is going to Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.)

One possible explanation for this disparity is that gay Americans have learned the hard way the direct impact that government and politics can have on one’s life. There is less of a disconnect between the act of voting and the repercussions of the outcome, because the impacts of public policies on family and livelihood are so evident.

Since it is reasonable to assume that gay turnout is just as disproportionate in primary elections, and that a substantial majority of the gay population votes Democratic, this new data means that the gay vote could play a significant role in the Democratic primaries next year. As I have noted, as bad as turnout levels are in general elections, they are much worse in primaries, and still worse in caucuses. Any group that is going to vote in numbers exceeding its proportion of the general population may prove to be the margin of difference. And with respect to this community, in contrast to some other Democratic constituencies, there is less of a threshold level of mobilization that must be undertaken by the candidates in order to get them to vote, making them even more prized by candidates.

The desire of Democratic candidates to appeal to the gay community was demonstrated by the debate last week hosted by the gay rights organization the Human Rights Campaign Fund and aired on the gay network Logo. Almost all of the Democratic candidates participated, taking on very tough and personal issues regarding gay marriage and discrimination. None of the Republican candidates participated, indicating the Republican Party is ceding this small but potentially powerful constituency in the general election.

The question now is how far are the candidates willing to go to court the gay vote. None of the top-tier candidates have gone beyond supporting civil unions to being in favor of gay marriage. As a pure political calculus for the general election, perhaps this stance is understandable. At the same time as this new information regarding the strength of gay voters came out, so did another poll, which found that voters in the three critical election states of Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania would be more likely to see the endorsement of a gay rights group as a reason to vote against, rather than for, a candidate—and by wide margins.

Gay Americans are using the ballot box as a tool in their campaign to make America more tolerant and equal. They seem to be capturing the attention of political candidates, but it seems it will take more than voting power to sway a majority of the rest of the American people.

Tova Andrea Wang is a Democracy Fellow at The Century Foundation.