Tweet
We welcome Ron Hill back to the Blend, now at its new digs. His site Republicans 4 Freedom is billed as “Advocates For The Rational Wing of the Republican Party.” And that he is. Hill wrote for conservative CNN commentator David Frum’s web site, and has advocated for repeal of “DADT” and for marijuana legalization. With the news broken by the Blend about HRC President Joe Solmonese’s resignation, we plan to do a series of articles about the organization and the opportunities that lie ahead. This first piece focuses on the tight relationship HRC has with the Democratic Party.
Will Joe Solmonese’s Replacement at Human Rights Campaign Reach Out to Conservatives?
Leading GLBT blogger Pam Spaulding broke the news a few days ago that Joe Solmonese, the current leader of the Human Rights Campaign, will not renew his contract in March 2012.
This is good news. Mr. Solmonese had an extremely cozy relationship with the Obama White House, often being criticized as too reluctant to “make waves” with the administration and often seen as giving Obama a free pass on GLBT issues. DADT repeal is an example of this. The truth is that HRC and the Obama White House was fully prepared to let DADT repeal go down in flames – it was only the hard work of grassroots equality activist and a handful of committed Senators and Congressmen that got repeal passed. Obama did not press for DADT repeal until the last-minute when it became obvious that his GLBT base would never forgive him – and was raising a ruckus.
If advocates for equality had depended on the HRC to get the repeal passed the law would never had made it last December.
One must wonder, will the new HRC leader be more vocal when democrats fail to actively work for equality? Too often democrats ask for money and votes from the gay community while making great promises to support our equality – only to fail to work for equality once elected. What good is nice words when they are followed with no action? What good is a GLBT organization that refuses to press our political leadership on our behalf because it doesn’t want to make waves?
Will the new HRC leader make a concerted effort to support republicans who are pro-gay equality? Will the HRC now help the GOP Senators in New York who supported marriage equality? The GOP Senators who supported DADT repeal? Will HRC make an effort to work with those of us who are conservative to expand support for equality within the GOP?
Or will the new HRC leader buddy up to the democratic party and develop a too-cozy relationship again? It’s not helpful to the HRC or to the cause of equality for the HRC to be perceived as a partisan organization. Will the new HRC leader make an effort to be seen as non-partisan? Will the new HRC leader appoint ANY conservatives in leadership positions? Diversity is not just good for the country, diversity is also good for the HRC and the cause of equality. We cannot win equality by depending on the votes of one party alone.
It doesn’t help the image of the HRC when they’ve already endorsed Obama for re-election – a year from now and prior to even knowing who the GOP nominee will be. Why should Obama move forward on fighting for us when the largest GLBT organization in the country has already endorsed him? Why should GOP moderates listen to the HRC when they’ve already endorsed the democratic nominee for President and appear to be owned lock, stock and barrel by the Democratic National Committee?
18 Comments
Is this the trial balloon to see how Ken Mehlman as Solmonese’s replacement would fly?
If it is, it likely spells F-A-I-L.
With respect, Obama did not finally move for DADT repeal because of any LGBT “ruckus” but because it became perfectly clear that the courts were going to end the policy. The much ballyhooed (by Obama) legislative repeal short-circuited the possibility that the policy would be declared unconstitutional and ended once and for all, a prospect Obama simply didn’t want to face. The legislative repeal (which as of this date is no repeal) leaves the White House, congress and the Pentagon firmly in charge of the policy which, since the courts have not ended it, means it can be reinstated at their whim–as most of the Republican candidates keep reminding us.
As for HRC, Joe Solmonese, despicable as he has been, is hardly the only problem there. The board that chose him and endorsed his every action remains in place, leaving any hope for serious change there in the realm of epic fantasy, on the order of Gormenghast.
When the Republican Party completely ceases and desists in persecuting the GLBT Community, stops talking States Rights when convenient for their discrimination and hatred while attempting to legislate National policies (DMA, DOMA, DADT)which are in direct contradiction to States Rights, then perhaps a small sect of the LGBT Community could rightfully support the Party. But until that time, groups like LCR, GOProud, and Republicans4Freedom are actively attempting to murder, torture, and bury equality, justice, and fairness for LGBT Americans. As for HRC, they need a change in leadership that will be in the forefront of fighting for and supporting LGB and Transgender equality, not standing in the way of it ;D
The Republican Party has positioned itself as an implacable enemy of any kind of civil rights for minorities in general and LGBTI people in particular. It is completely dominated by hardline social conservatives, and those who claim to be “fiscally conservative but socially moderate” have a consistent record of bowing to party solidarity rather than standing up for what they supposedly believe. As long as that remains the case, there’s no room for LGBTI rights in the Republican Party, and conversely no room for avowed Republicans in the LGBTI rights movement.
More generally speaking, fiscal conservatism as actually practiced in America is generally incompatible with equality because it consistently opposes any measures to help the underprivileged as “interference with the Almighty Invisible Hand”. It is in principle possible to construct moderate implementations of conservatism which are compatible with equality, and that’s what the “fiscally but not socially conservative” types need to be doing.
As to social conservatism, it is totally incompatible with equality.
Actually, I wouldn’t be opposed to HRC reaching out to conservatives.
Whether they could do that effectively (and I think that I need a working definition for “effectively” given the current state of the GOP) is an entirely separate issue.
But reaching out to “conservatives” was successful in New York.
Welcome to all the commenters from Pam’s House. We’re so happy to have you here.
It’s quite simple, you either put equality first or your personal political party affiliation.
It’s a little jarring to see suggestions that they reach out to conservatives given that the HRC has historically been the mainstream, conformist, conservative voice of the GLBT movement. Birch was pretty much of a disaster in that regard.
Well said!
I don’t understand the “reach out” part — it’s not as if the doors are shut at HRC to non-Democrats. And we’ve already seen that the GAyTM opened for NY Republican Senators that voted for marriage equality… So what do you mean by “reaching out”?
Does it mean, not criticizing GOP bigotry? Adding a few RINOs to the board? Throwing a special cocktail party?
I’m fine with that, so long as they don’t make the fatal mistake of Obama and his entourage and confuse utter capitulation with outreach. (Remember how much flak he deservedly got over Donnie McClurkin?)
I so agree with Alexandra. In general, Conservatives (that is with a big “C” and an big “R” for Republican) want LGBT folks to go away, deny that we exist. How about new HRC leader trying to at least deal with Democrat Blue Dogs….them dawgs cause plenty of trouble for our liberties already.
agreed.
Ummm. duh! Does a dog have fleas… especially RICH fleas?
Just want to second Twain’s welcome to all Blend commenters, as well as Pam and the bloggers. It’s good to have you here!
I can confidently endorse Obama over whoever the Repubs nominate and be certain that it is by far the best choice for gay rights.
I can do this because I know without a doubt that the Repub party is violently hostile to equality for gays and will remain so for years – something the author seems to be unaware of.
Ron Hill is either living in a dream world, or is purposely deceptive for his own political purposes – but in either case he doesn’t deserve a hearing on Pams HOuse Blend.
keep in mind that actions by conservative gays helped move our LGBT agenda forward these past two years, even when the HRC was hesitating…