Given the blanket condemnation of "gay politics" by Robbie that led to the exchange in this post, I though this letter from Donald Hitchcock was interesting.
Washington Blade
DNC Not Ready to Make Nice
Dear Editor,
After attending the recent Democratic National Committee LGBT Caucus meeting, it reaffirmed for me my reasons for standing up to Gov. Dean’s reluctance to treating our community with dignity and respect, an action for which I was fired. I claim that firing as a badge of honor.
Gov. Dean barely addressed the LGBT caucus with only 5 minutes worth of comments, and no questions from the floor. And unfortunately, his talking points had shifted from the comprehensive plan to address the anti-LGBT state ballot measures offered last year to throwing only “a little bit of money” into the states at the end of the fight. So much for the strategy to combat them that he touted in the LGBT press prior to the elections. A recent survey shows that the DNC gave states less than $20,000 in-total, despite having raised almost $2 million from the LGBT community in 2006. But we will never know the exact amount given to state groups since the DNC is embarrassed to officially release the numbers.
The most shocking revelation during the meeting was that Gov. Dean misspoke by claiming that there were no 2006 LGBT exit-polling numbers, stating that “people won’t admit that they are gay” to pollsters while walking out of the voting booth. However, as many of us know, there are indeed exit polls reporting that approximately 80% of LGBT voters voted Democratic. Obviously, either his staff still does not have access to brief him on our issues, or he is not listening. I wonder if he would address any other constituency group, not knowing this basic information.
At the meeting, LGBT finance staff and key fundraisers did sit at the Caucus table, as before, but what is different is that lately we seem to be treated solely as an ATM for the party, with our civil rights seeming an afterthought or burden. After Gov. Dean became Chair of the DNC, two LGBT political positions were abolished, and two finance positions were added, for a total now of four positions in Finance and zero in Political. Given the meeting, it’s obvious that we continue to be invited to the table, pay for the meal, but we are not allowed to eat.
I have great faith in the community to continue to ask questions, and hold our party accountable. That is the only way real progress can be made.
Sincerely,
Donald Hitchcock
Washington, DC
Editors Note: Donald Hitchcock is the former Director of the Gay and Lesbian Leadership Council of the Democratic National Committee
OK -- open letter from a gay former DNC staffer to a gay publication. Tell me again how we're giving the Democrats a pass.
(Reposted from AmericaBlog.)
4 comments:
I don't think one letter is proof against my general belief that Democrats largely get a pass in gay politics. Harold Ford, after all, sidled into a shiny new job in the party without much sturm and drang from gay activists. There might have been mutterings, but there was certainly none of the over-wrought reaction to his nomination that is reserved for Republicans who take his positions. No HRC press releases, no campaigns, no boycotts and calls to stop donating.
The issue of Howard Dean and the DNC came up in the Washington Blade when Chris Crain still edited the newspaper. He pushed the story with articles and opinion. He took Dean to task. We wrote about it extensively at the time, interviewed Crain on our podcast, and Crain's complaint was largely my own. Where was the gay community on the original firing? Why was there not more outrage when Dean back-handed the gay community?
The answer, as usual, was that there was an election to win and that our issues would be addressed at the proper time. Gay people needed to sit down, shut up, and trust in Dean. And a lot of gay organizations did exactly that.
I'm happy this letter is appearing in the Blade. This kind of article is much rarer there now without Crain at the helm. But at this point I'll take anything.
That rareness strengthens my point instead of diminishing it.
And the continued silence and support of Dean and other Democratic figures by the major organizations speaks volumes. One guy (with a personal stake) writes a letter, one newspaper publishes it, and "Democrats don't get a free ride after all!"
That's a bit much.
(Sorry I haven't responded to your post yet. Been a little distracted lately. Since you took the time to write it, it deserves careful reading and a response, so I apologize that I haven't. Seems rude of me).
I think we really are arguing at cross-purposes here. You seem to be taking HRC as the "gay activists," when, as I have pointed out, many in the community do not really give them as much credit as they give themselves.
I remember the original firing, and the blogosphere, at least, was all over it. Crain wasn't blogging yet, that I know of, but as I recall, Sullivan had something to say about it (only to be expected), and so were John Aravosis and Pam Spaulding. (Those are the four chief gay bloggers I follow, along with Jim Burroway of Box Turtle Bulletin.) I don't recall what the Chicago print media (i.e., Windy City Times and Chicago Free Press) said, but I barely read them any more anyway -- CFP, in particular, is so PC I want to scream.
My point was, and remains, that HRC is not the community, although it may be the most visible part on the national scene. Ironically, while it has been preaching "grass roots," the grass roots have been divorcing themselves from it and organizing on their own, mostly because it's fallen on its face on the marriage issue.
I also seem to see a certain lack of proportion here, which I would expect from GayPatriot, but not necessarily from you, from what I know of your writings. What, after all, have the Democrats actively done against us? Their failings are more on the order of negligence, and I agree they need to be brought up short. But it's not like any Democrats were introducing marriage amendments in Congress or running on a platform of "no special rights."
(That's actually another reason I think HRC is making a bad mistake jumping into bed with the Democrats. I think we're much more effective when we focus on particular candidates. You may recall that in the last statewide election in Illinois, gay rights were a non-issue, because both candidates support them, although neither was ready to commit to same-sex marriage, which is not such a surprise -- "personal beliefs" aside, it's political suicide in most places. Nationally, the only politician I know of who came right out and supported that one is Russ Feingold, although you will note that more and more statehouses are coming to favor the idea, with Eliot Spitzer leading the pack.)
At any rate, I don't have any problem with raking Republicans over the coals on our issues, because they deserve it. It certainly makes more sense to me than losing it over candy bar ads. And I think you're right -- Democrats should get it, too, when they screw up, but don't expect much from the national organizations. No one else does.
That's why we have blogs.
Oops -- PS
Take your time answering the other post. I have too much on my plate right now anyway.
Mostly a/k/a Hunter.
As an update to my last comment, this letter has appeared at AmericaBlog and Pam's House Blend (that I've seen so far), as well as in the Washinton Blade, so I think characterizing it as "one letter" is missing the point -- it's one letter that has been widely disseminated, much more so than if it had only appeared in print. The same holds true of any criticism of the Democrats by the left -- it may not be a press release from HRC, but it's out there.
Post a Comment