Across the political divide.

Republican RICH TAFEL and Democrat CINDY JORDAN discuss gay party politics during the Bush presidency

One of the themes George W. Bush has consistently struck is the need for Democrats and Republicans to work together. But does that sense of bipartisanship cross over to gay and lesbian Democrats and Republicans? The two groups have often been at odds, exchanging bitter accusations about each other's contributions to the movement. In an attempt to see what common ground gay Democrats and Republicans share, we invited a leader from each party to sit down and discuss their roles in the new administration. On a gray and cold February afternoon in Washington, D.C., Rich Tafel, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, and Cindy Jordan, deputy director of the National Stonewall Democrats, met at a Dupont Circle eatery to talk about the political climate in the capital after President Bush's first month in office.

With all the talk of of bipartisanship in town these days, where does this leave gay and lesbian Democrats and Republicans? Could either of you see coalition building between Log Cabin Republicans and Stonewall Democrats?

Tafel: Before Stonewall [Democrats], we worked with the Human Rights Campaign, which has a largely Democratic agenda, on issues. We worked with National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, which is largely liberal Democrat or progressive. There's a lot of common ground on issues of discrimination. The problem is, the common ground is overrated. People just assume that because it's a gay group, we're all going to agree on things.

Jordan: I agree with Rich. I'm sure both organizations want to see the Employment Non-Discrimination Act passed. We want to see hate-crimes laws and those kinds of things, but we just have different methods. The Log Cabin Republicans are doing it through the Republican Party; we're doing it through the Democratic Party. It's good we have nonpartisan organizations in our movement, but it's also very good we have partisan organizations in our movement, without which party politics would ignore the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community.

You just threw out ENDA and hate-crimes legislation. But is it fair to say you have the same position on these issues?

Tafel: We supported both those pieces of legislation. But if you said, "Is this the most crucial issue for the organization?" I would say for the Democratic groups, it is. For the Log Cabins, it's not as driving an issue, and there's certainly debate within our organization. Underlying a lot of gay Republican thinking is more libertarian thinking. That's where you see the real difference, with real big-government Democrats who look to the government to solve everything.

Jordan: I completely agree that there are more important issues. To use as an example, adoption: Our president, as governor of Texas, tried to push through one of the most homophobic adoption bills our country knows. I know as a lesbian parent--my partner and I raise two children-that Bush, when he talks about the American family, is not talking about our family. I don't believe that through the Republican Party as it stands, we're ever going to get there.

How will the tone change in Washington with Bush in office?

Jordan: Stonewall Democrats are going to watch what Bush does and not what he says. In his first few days in office we've seen some very large things to be concerned about. The Ashcroft nomination was of course one of them. We believe that Bush at best is going to be silent on our issues and at worst is going to be hostile. And that's not progress. Stonewall is very committed to watching Bush and judging him on his record and not by his rhetoric.

Tafel: I think the key words we just heard are they're going to "watch," they're going to criticize, they're going to react. It's the politics of press release and criticism. The question is, How do we achieve our goals given this set of circumstances? I hear people say, "We'll wait for two years" or "We'll wait for four years." Log Cabin is not waiting. We're working with the Administration on each of the issues that comes up. By working within the party, we'll effect things. John Ashcroft, for example--we have him more on the record on gay rights than we had Janet Reno on the record on gay rights. That's the difference between doing a press release criticizing and working with the candidate and the Administration itself.

Clinton's "don't ask, don't tell" policy was flawed at best. What will you advocate for now?

Tafel: The "don't ask, don't tell" policy wasn't flawed. It was disastrous. The first thing I'd like to see happen is, let's live up to the policy as it's written back seven years ago. At least we can stop people from being witch-hunted and being thrown out of the military. To me, it's going to be a Republican strategy, it's going to be working with the secretary of Defense, but it's also going to be working with Republicans in the Senate and the House with leadership roles in various ways. It's something we're working on. I don't want to go into exact details of the strategy because I don't want to undermine it.

Jordan: The "don't ask, don't tell" policy was in fact a bad policy, there's no question of that. And Clinton himself has admitted that. We would like to see nothing less than LGBT people serving in the military openly and out. You know Clinton appointed hundreds of out gay and lesbian political appointees. And Bush has said he will appoint political appointees regardless of sexual orientation. Here's where the two strategies differ. It's important to have gay and lesbian people in the Administration who are sitting at the table out and open, representing our community and our needs. And that comes to the military as well.

Tafel: Democrats want sexual orientation to be an issue. The religious right wants sexual orientation to be an issue--all for different reasons. But I don't want it to be an issue. I want people in the Administration who are gay, because they are qualified. And I want them hired based on merit. They should be qualified for the jobs they are hired to do, and they should do them well. That's the best way the community will shine.

Jordan: Obviously we want qualified people there who feel comfortable to sit around the table and be open about who they are. It's a fact of life, whenever we come together at a table, we're representing where we come from, and that matters. You just can't say, "Oh, I don't think it should be an issue." It is an issue. It always will be an issue.

There does seem to be an opportunity for both groups to really push forward on their agendas and maybe come together on some issues.

Tafel: I hate to pour cold water on the unity part. I'm convinced that groups like the Stonewall Democrats are waiting for Bush to fail. I think they want him to fall. We look at most of the gay community not as an asset to what we're trying to accomplish. They're generally a negative. We're more likely to pass something with members of Congress who are straight, moderate Republicans who care about what we're trying to do than we will be because gay groups are protesting. They don't help.

Jordan: If Log Cabin Republicans and Stonewall Democrats came together and unified, then we would be weakening our fight for equality. I think it's important that they both have a place in the movement right now, and it's through partisan politics. But I also feel like Bush has already failed. You know he still refers to LGBT equality as "special rights," and we know how divisive that is.

I meant that there's a place for both groups at this time in history. You couldn't look at the GOP convention and say the party doesn't need work.

Tafel: We look at most gay Democrat strategies: Their long-term goal is to win back the House or change the presidency. As she already said, Bush is already a failure, and he's been in here less then 100 days. This is going to be four years of shrill criticism. Any mistake will be magnified. Any positive thing will be rationalized away. You'll never find us going after the Stonewall Democrats. But you'll rarely find a press release from the Stonewall Democrats that's not obsessed with the Log Cabin Republicans and what we're doing and being critical.

Jordan: Bush didn't just all of a sudden become president. He was the governor of Texas before that, and his record on LGBT issues stands for itself. It's not good. It's not like he gets a fresh, clean slate because he started as the president. The gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender community is wary of Bush, and they have a right to be. As far as us attacking the Log Cabin Republicans, I don't believe that we attack the Log Cabin Republicans. It's very important for us to present another message to the community. That isn't a message of "Hey, support Ashcroft because during his interview he said a few nice things about gay people." It's important to show the other side of the argument.

Tafel: There's a way to criticize. But calling us "storm troopers," as you did during the campaign, that is not a constructive criticism. As someone who lost relatives in the Holocaust myself, being called a storm trooper by a gay group--I had much more hate mail from the gay community than we had from the religious right. We're at a moment in our movement where we could see real change. And the person who could usher it in could be Bush. But he's going to get zero credit from the community.

Jordan: The reason the gay community was so angry at the Log Cabin Republicans during the election is that they tried to deceive the LGBT community into voting for the Republican Party [by running ads linking Al Gore to antigay minister Fred Phelps]. If what Rich is saying is that he's going to try to have Bush come around on LGBT rights, that's great. But to try to deceive the community is a whole other issue altogether.

Final statements?

Jordan: I do hope that the Log Cabin Republicans can lobby Bush to come around and not just be tolerant of LGBT people but become an advocate for LGBT people. And until that happens? The Stonewall Democrats are going to continue to educate the community as to why we should be voting Democrat. In the meantime we're going to see our community doing a lot more grassroots activism and working on the local level in their states.

Tafel: We are really at a historic turning point for the gay movement. It can really change from a group whose sole effort was to be a player in the Democratic Party to really changing American politics completely. That's only going to happen with a bipartisan strategy. We're at a unique opportunity to do that, because the leader of the Republican Party has signaled that he's interested in reaching out. Does education have to take place? Yes. It will take place among people he trusts, those he feels are working in his interests. I think it's a unique opportunity if the community can get out of its mindset that this man must fail for us to be right and instead say, "Gosh, if this man can change things in the Republican Party, everything will change dramatically."

For more of this conversation between Tafel and Jordan, go to www.advocate.com

Wildman has contributed to The New Republic and The Washington Post.