The ambassador's story.

In an exclusive interview, James Hormel provides a behind-the-scenes account of his fight to become ambassador to Luxembourg

Even in an era known for the politics of personal destruction, the battle over James C. Hormel's nomination as U.S. ambassador to Luxembourg established a new low. For nearly two years, the gay philanthropist and scion of the food products family was tarred by opponents as an anti-Catholic bigot who supported child abuse and abandoned his family, all for the privilege of serving a country smaller than Rhode Island.

For Hormel and his backers, at least, the public ordeal came to a just conclusion in June 1999. President Clinton, fed up with the hold placed on the nomination by three right-wing senators, ordered a "recess" appointment, effectively making an end run around the Senate's confirmation process. By all accounts, Hormel went on to have an uneventful tenure representing U.S. interests in the grand duchy.

Following state department protocol, Hormel refrained from making on-the-record remarks during the nomination process and the two years he served as ambassador. With his term about to expire in late December, Hormel sat down with me over lunch for an exclusive gay press interview. We are joined by Hormel's partner of six years, Timothy Wu, a 38-year-old Harvard Law School graduate and a management consultant for nonprofit organizations who recently completed a one-year stint as a White House fellow.

It's an auspicious weekend to visit Washington, D.C. The night before, Hormel and Wu attended a private White House dinner hosted by the president and first lady. Earlier in the day, the Florida supreme court ordered a statewide hand recount, raising the hopes of Hormel, a stalwart Democratic activist and fund-raiser, that Al Gore would become the next president. The following morning the U.S. Supreme Court blocked the recount, setting the stage for a Republican administration that Hormel fears will be far less sympathetic to gay rights.

As he dines on roast duck at the Hay-Adams, a posh hotel just across Lafayette Park from the White House, Hormel, 68, hardly comes across as the threat to the nation's moral fiber that his detractors depicted. With his gracious manners and thick shock of white hair, he is the incarnation of a diplomat and an odd candidate for demonization. "From a personal sense, it was painful to hear statements made about me which had no basis in truth but to which I had no capacity to respond," Hormel says between bites. Clearly the usually reserved Hormel is eager to finally to have his say, and Wu is eager to join him.

You were at the White House last night.

Hormel: During my seven years of experience with this administration, I've noticed a progressive ease with gay people and same-sex couples in those circles. The president signals his ease by assuming equal treatment for everyone. He doesn't make an issue of it--it just is. Wu: Last night we were walking around the White House, and there were several gay couples. That no longer surprised me. Here we are in town for dinner with the president and first lady, and this feels natural. Ten years ago that would not have been possible.

Are you worried that the climate might change in a Republican administration?

Hormel: I think Bush will be cordial and polite. After all, Dick Cheney has a lesbian daughter. My concern really is the courts, where gay rights will ultimately be decided. Court appointments are often a way to appease certain interest groups. This may be Bush's way of paying homage to the right wing.

Wu: Clinton's accomplishment was really in setting the tone. He established a baseline it will be hard to fall under. He made the White House a bully pulpit for understanding and knowledge. It's easy to forget how important that can be. As a White House fellow, I had a photo of Jim on my desk. A lot of people were really surprised. It reinforced how disparate the country's understanding is.

Hormel: In my office in Luxembourg, there is a picture of Tim and me with the president standing between us.

Critics of your nomination contended that your sexual orientation was an obstacle to your service in Luxembourg, which is 97% Catholic.

Hormel: It was the opposite. It was obvious from the day I arrived that members of the government were going out of their way to make me feel welcome. The country was very aware of the circumstances of my appointment--there had been two years of assailing. Some said they were grateful for the controversy because the country was finally getting some attention in the U.S. [Laughter] The mayor of Luxembourg, who was about to become foreign minister, greeted me at her office. She took great pains to make clear she was welcoming and supporting my arrival.

Did the conservative attacks on your nomination backfire?

Hormel: There is a certain pleasure in pointing out that one of the senators who leveled charges against me [Oklahoma Republican James Inhofe] went on to suffer an office scandal in which computers crashed because of a porn overload [downloaded by staffers]. Another of the senators went through a divorce. One of the San Francisco papers managed to publish the announcement of my appointment on the same page with the announcement of [Arkansas Republican] senator [Tim] Hutchinson's separation.

I'm not sure I want to say what I just said for public consumption. On the other hand, I think it's important that people recognize that the charges may have come from a direction that may not have been pure.

How did you and Tim deal with [North Carolina Republican] senator Jesse Helms's restrictions about Tim's role as your partner in Luxembourg?

Hormel: I think there has been something of a misperception about that. When I was nominated, Senator Helms sent a letter to secretary [of state Madeleine] Albright indicating he would not stand in the way of my nomination, but he wanted several assurances. They were in fact pro forma. The first was that I be accepted officially by Luxembourg's government; the grand duchy had already given approval, which is standard practice. He asked that no federal funds be expended in the transport of my companion back and forth. There, again, the answer was obvious: The government doesn't pay for expenses of anyone but official spouses, which, of course, as a gay couple we are denied. Thirdly, he asked that there be no official assignments for my companion during course of my service as ambassador, whatever that may mean--spouses don't perform official functions anyway. There are already state department regulations to cover those instances. He also asked for an assurance that I not am involved politically in espousing equal rights in the county. Ambassadors generally don't get involved in that kind of politics anyway.

In effect, the secretary told Helms she could give him those sorts of assurances, because they were routine anyway. But that became interpreted as a concession on our part that Tim and I would live separate lives as I served as ambassador. Tim ended up spending a lot of time with me there. The foreign minister, for instance, is holding a luncheon in my honor before I leave office. She insisted that Tim be included in the invitations.

Wu: As far as we have progressed, we are still subject to second-class treatment.

Hormel: In spite of the efforts of Clinton to assure that there will be no discrimination on basis of sexual orientation in the federal government, there is still a lot of de facto discrimination. People who are not married spouses do not get benefits of health care, travel, being evacuated in case of an emergency.

Wu: I remember sitting in strategy discussions about nominations and hearing all this discussion: "Would you take me? Would you leave me behind?" and I thought to myself, "Am I a sofa?" I'm not anyone's to take or to leave behind. We wouldn't have been talking like this about an opposite-sex couple, married or unmarried.

Hormel: The process was very painful for us--I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, On the other hand, the rewards were enormous. In retrospect, I'm grateful things happened as they did. I thought it was courageous for the president to make the recess appointment.

Senator Hutchinson and other critics charged that you were anti-Catholic because of your support for the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, a group whose members satirize conservative elements of the church.

Hormel: About three years ago, I was invited to be interviewed in the course of San Francisco's Gay Freedom Day parade. The television station invited at least 50 others, including the mayor. The owner of the station was there with a journalist I knew. We started what seemed to be a normal interview, and then she said, "Oh, here comes the Sisters." In my mind, the interview is being put on hold while the sisters go by. She said that legend has it that the Sisters got their habits from a convent after telling the "nuns" that they needed them for a performance of The Sound of Music. I thought this was amusing, and I laughed out loud. The laughter was recorded and eventually found its way into the hands of Hutchinson. Somehow he distorted it into the charge of anti-Catholicism, which was an enormous stretch for someone who was an alumnus of Bob Jones University and who has no record of supporting the Roman Catholic Church. I found all this out in an interview he granted me after my nomination. He asked me about my affinity for the Sisters. I was blindsided; I didn't know anything about this. It was only after the meeting that I asked the station to see a copy [of the tape].

How did you respond?

Hormel: I told the senator I was not a particular supporter of the Sisters but that I thought they had a right to be doing what they were doing. People found them amusing, and they were actually a 501(c)(3) charitable organization that was raising a lot of money for AIDS.

You were actually raised in a Catholic family.

Hormel: My mother was Catholic. I was not raised in the church, however. I'm a member of the Episcopal Church. My opponents were looking for a cover for the real grounds of their opposition--that I am gay. They manufactured whatever they could.

Another charge was about the James C. Hormel wing of the San Francisco Public Library, which you endowed. It contains materials relating to a group called the North American Man/Boy Love Association.

Hormel: That charge was also specious. I nor anybody else would not have the audacity to tell a public library what books they should have in their public collection. What bothered me was that the charge detracted from the great significance of the library collection.

Did you have any positive experiences with the Senate?

Hormel: I met with [Oregon Republican] Gordon Smith. He conducted my committee hearings because he was chair of the European subcommittee. He became, far and away, my most enthusiastic supporter among Republicans. He did his best to be useful, allowing the nomination to come to a vote. The California Democrats--Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein--were excellent too.

That's a great story, because Smith is a religious conservative himself.

Hormel: Because of his religious faith, Smith has had a direct experience with discrimination. That's allowed him to take a closer look at what other people suffer. Mostly we discussed the strategy of the nomination with him. After I had gone to Luxembourg a year ago, he paid an official visit on his way to Eastern Europe. I was able to organize a dinner for him at the prime minister's residence, after which he led a private discussion with members of the foreign ministry. I felt honored he had called on me, and I was pleased to help provide an opportunity for the government of Luxembourg to see that there was more than one side to the Republican majority in the Senate.

What's next?

Hormel: My goal was to represent the president. I think I did my best for the president and for the nation.

Find more on the battle over Hormell's ambassadorship at www.advocate.com