Some in GOP Undiplomatic Over Openly Gay Ambassador Nominee

WASHINGTON —  To court their conservative base, key Senate Republican leaders are digging in their heels on an issue that does not seem ideological at all: Who should be the next U.S. ambassador to a tiny European country most Americans could not find on a map?

With a land mass smaller than the city of Los Angeles and at the center of no burning diplomatic dilemmas, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg would not appear to provide the kinds of issues--such as abortion or flag-burning--that would tweak conservative politicians.

But San Francisco gay activist James C. Hormel--President Clinton’s choice as ambassador to the predominantly Roman Catholic country--has so enraged some conservative groups that they have made his defeat a legislative priority.

As a result, the nomination is now stalled in the Senate, even though Republicans increasingly are divided as to how to proceed--conservative Sen. Alfonse M. D’Amato (R-N.Y.), facing a tough reelection campaign in a state with a large gay population, recently endorsed Hormel. Democrats, meanwhile, have vowed to push aggressively for an up-or-down vote in the weeks ahead, hoping at least to spotlight the dispute.

It is not Hormel’s diplomatic experience that is at issue. Luxembourg is traditionally an outpost for big campaign contributors and Hormel qualifies on that count because of his $209,950 in Democratic donations in 1995 and 1996. And his resume shows that he served as an alternate U.S. representative to the 51st United Nations General Assembly in 1997--a post that required Senate confirmation--and that he was a member of the 51st U.N. Human Rights Commission in 1995.

Rather, the furor stems from the fact that Hormel--a lawyer who comes from the well-heeled family that makes Spam--is openly gay and has actively used his wealth to fund gay causes. His appointment would make him the first openly gay U.S. ambassador in history, which his conservative detractors denounce as “precedent-setting.”

Hormel’s critics have circulated videotapes in Washington that feature ominous music, bold graphics and men dressed as nuns participating in a raucous gay pride parade on the streets of San Francisco. There on the sidelines, laughing at it all, is Hormel.

Critics call the nomination anti-Catholic, saying that Hormel is unfit to be an ambassador.

“I don’t think he represents the majority views of our country,” said Sen. Robert C. Smith (R-N.H.), one of three senators who has put a “hold” on the nomination.

Also on the videotape is footage from a documentary that Hormel, 65, partly funded in which gay activists are seen discussing gays and lesbians with schoolchildren.

“It’s a pro-active thing with him,” said Smith, who joined Sens. Tim Hutchinson (R-Ark.) and James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.) in publicly blocking Hormel’s nomination.

Numerous people have come to Hormel’s aid--from former Secretary of State George P. Shultz, who served in GOP administrations, to Hormel’s ex-wife, retired psychologist Alice Hormel Tucker, who publicly defended him as a man who tried to “live what was a lie” during their decade-long marriage. To lend support, she attended Hormel’s confirmation hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last fall, as did their five children and several of their 13 grandchildren.

*

In his bid to quell critics, Hormel has seemed at times to distance himself from the activism that has seemed to be such an essential part of his life. If he becomes ambassador, he has vowed, he will discontinue most of his public service and philanthropic activities. And he has assured uncomfortable senators that his partner, Timothy Wu, would not live with him in Luxembourg.

Despite these efforts, Hormel’s nomination has languished since the Foreign Relations Committee approved it, 16 to 2, last fall. And now, according to Sen. Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.), there is not enough time on the Senate schedule to consider the controversial nomination before Congress adjourns this year.

Lott’s stance has buoyed conservatives, who have been angered in recent months by what they consider a lack of responsiveness by GOP leaders.

This spring, representatives of the Christian Coalition, Family Research Council and more than a dozen other groups met with House Republicans to push an agenda that included a ban on late-term abortions, abolishing the National Endowment for the Arts and phasing out the so-called “marriage penalty” that compels many couples to pay more income taxes than those who file single returns.

On the Senate agenda, the groups added Hormel’s nomination.

“We consider it an important issue,” said Steven A. Schwalm, a policy analyst for the Family Research Council who has prepared reports critical of Hormel. “This is about the basic issue of civilization. We think his agenda represents a clear and present danger to our country.”

But Republicans are by no means united.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) has indicated that he believes Hormel is qualified for the post. And D’Amato sent Lott a stern letter saying that Hormel’s sexual orientation should not be an issue.

Lott has insisted that scheduling will prevent a vote. With only about 35 working days before they are scheduled to adjourn in October, the Senate simply has more important matters to address, he has said. But he and other GOP leaders seemed to have undercut this position with a spate of recent anti-gay comments. Lott termed homosexuality an affliction similar to kleptomania or alcoholism that must be overcome.

“Discrimination is the only reason why the nomination is stalled,” asserted Winnie Stachelberg, political director for the Human Rights Campaign, a national gay-rights group in which Hormel has been active.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the former San Francisco mayor who has known Hormel for decades, said she has rounded up the 60 votes needed to defeat any filibuster attempt--if Lott would just bring the matter to the floor.

*

To encourage Lott to act, Democrats are vowing to attach amendments to unrelated legislation that would urge him to call up the matter, although the amendments would have no binding effect.

The White House also has options, although administration officials said that they still hope the Senate will approve the nominee. If the Senate ultimately fails to act, Clinton could pull off an end run by naming Hormel to the job in an acting status--a course he took last fall for Los Angeles lawyer Bill Lann Lee, whose nomination as assistant attorney general for civil rights foundered in the Senate.

Hormel has avoided media interviews. But he has fired off letters to senators when, in his opinion, his views have been misrepresented. When Hutchinson said in a television interview that Hormel has refused to disavow groups that ridicule organized religion, Hormel responded that he finds such conduct “not only offensive but out of step with the important values we hold dear as Americans.”

People close to Hormel have said that he is furious about the way he has been treated, although it is not the first time he has had such an experience.

Early in Clinton’s first term, Hormel had sought nomination as ambassador to Norway, a country he considered receptive to gays. Instead, Clinton floated his name as ambassador to Fiji, where anti-sodomy laws were in effect and government officials openly objected to him.

Luxembourg officials, for their part, have steered clear of the furor. The country has had major Clinton donor Clay Constantinou in the ambassador’s residence in recent years and many there still remember when Washington socialite Perle Mesta--who had played the roll of the so-called “hostess with the mostess” in Irving Berlin’s Broadway musical “Call Me Madam”--filled the job.

“We have been asked, as is customary in diplomatic relations, if we agree to Mr. Hormel and we gave that agreement,” said Alphonse Berns, Luxembourg’s ambassador to the United States. “Other than that, we don’t want to interfere in the internal debate in this country.”