"Is David Dreier Gay?" Crosses Into the Mainstream

By DHinMI

From today’s Wall Street Journal (subscription required):

California's Rep. David Dreier is a gentleman in the not-so-gentle world of the House Republican leadership.

Witty, articulate, friend to the Annenbergs and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Mr. Dreier is a Ronald Reagan-style optimist who favors inclusive politics. But after 25 years in Congress, he finds himself isolated by the increasingly raw social warfare within his own party.

Amid the turmoil in the House, the 53-year-old lawmaker is an obvious candidate to help fill the leadership void. But Mr. Dreier, whose upscale Los Angeles-area constituents are less conservative on social issues than on fiscal matters, shuns any elected party post, preferring to protect his privacy as a loyal lieutenant to Speaker Dennis Hastert…

Mr. Hastert waived party rules to extend Mr. Dreier's tenure as House Rules Committee chairman and considered elevating him to fill in when Mr. DeLay first stepped aside in October after being indicted in Texas on campaign-finance charges. The idea was quickly scotched when Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R., Mo.) went to Mr. Hastert to claim the title for himself. But talk of Dreier leadership set off an uproar among social conservatives, who mounted calls to Mr. Hastert's office and attacked Mr. Dreier, citing his votes in support of stem-cell research and against a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.  [emphasis added]

Um, yeah. Preferring to protect his privacy. And sure, “social conservatives” objected to Dreier’s votes on stem cell research and against the Federal Marriage Amendment.

Let’s be honest here. The reason why Dreier isn’t acceptable to many Republicans is because he’s gay.

It’s hardly a secret that David Dreier is gay. Doug Ireland wrote about Dreier for the L.A. Weekly in 2004. And Pam covered things as Dreier’s candidacy to replace DeLay was floated and quickly pulled back when DeLay stepped down last September. But throughout all this, there’s been barely a peep in the mainstream media about Dreier apparently being rejected for the top ranks of GOP congressional leadership because of his (still not publicly acknowledged) sexual orientation.

But this morning, I finally heard an honest mention of Republicans rejecting Dreier for leadership because he’s gay on a non-alternative media source. During her weekly News Roundup with a panel of journalists, NPR’s Diane Rehm asked her panel—including the WSJ’s Doug Harwood—about the Dreier article. Specifically, she asked about why he faced a “leadership test.”  She almost certainly knew what she was doing, and The Nation’s David Corn took her bait, and made it clear that Dreier is gay and that’s why many of his colleagues oppose the idea of him being in leadership.

It was really quite simple, and didn’t include any parsing, or hemming and hawing. Corn just said there’s plenty of information out there for people to read for themselves, even mentioning the LA Weekly article (linked above). For the WSJ—which separate from their editorial page is an outstanding newspaper—to avoid candid discussion about Dreier’s sexual orientation and the opposition it generates among his Republican colleagues is irresponsible.

Homophobia is a fact of Republican politics. To paper it over with euphemisms about protecting one’s privacy helps the GOP continue pursuing a radical agenda while concealing their true radicalism and intolerance to the broader public outside their reactionary base. Kudos to Diane Rehm and David Corn for just coming out and saying what David Dreier and his fellow Republicans won’t say: he’s gay, and for that reason his fellow Republicans don’t trust him.

  

Comments

[Pachacutec]

I like Rehm. How she stomachs hosting people like Jay Sekelow as panelists for her discussions is beyond me. She knows so much better, and yet, she has to play it straight.

[Crab Nebula]

off topic, but Next Hurrah'ers all need to read Garance Franke-Ruta's new piece in the Prospect for Feb, "Remapping The Culture Debate"

This is one of the most important things i've read about the political culture in the US in recent memory. It's extremely informative, sobering, troubling, while presenting opportunities as well...

[michael72]

DHinMI, thanks for the good post and the heads up on this issue. I never knew about Dreier being gay I mean homosexual until last year and it always makes me wonder how any self respecting gay I mean homosexual like millions of us in america can support and stomach the homophobic policies of the right wing Reptiles. and he's in a leadership position! shame on him!
it is beyond me.

being gay means being out, or coming out. people still in the closer are homosexual. that's how I define it. Dreier is homosexual.

also now that Dreier is/should be so concerned about protecting his privacy and other such personal issues, I can only assume that he will come out, so as to speak, against all this illegal wiretapping and email-tapping and spying on americans by the Bush adminstration.

fyi - the Washington Blade in december took on the Reptiles and their hypocrisy, including duke cunningham, who had already been outed another other occasion.

the interesting thing that Chris Crain points out is that the voting records of these men re gay rights issues improved dramatically once they were outed and forced to be more honest in their political lives. and I am all for that.

"....But Dreier’s voting record looks very much like that of his pre-outed colleagues, ranging between 0 and 25 in the last decade.

In each case, the closer a closeted member of Congress comes to grips with being gay, with or without a nudge, the better their voting record on gay rights issues. The deeper the hole they dig with their lives, the more their voting records reflect their own self-loathing, and the sadder the end they come to.

DESPITE THE ETHICAL dangers in outing politicians or threatening to do so — and the Blade’s policy has been the subject of some commentary — there’s little question of its effectiveness, whether or not the ends justify the means...."

http://washingtonblade.com/2005/12-2/view/editorial/cunningham.cfm

[michael72]

oops! sorry. typo there, should read:

...people still in the closet are homosexual. that's how I define it. Dreier is homosexual.

[michael72]

Pam's House Blend blog has a futher take on this issue, talking about the Washington Blade article and these closet cases in power positions, saying,

"Remember, most of the people we're talking about are not closeted in their social circles; their friends, staffers and colleagues know of the person's orientation.

Most are just not politically out, choosing to lie by omission because it suits their day jobs sucking up to the likes of the Christian Coalition."

so that's the sucking sound I hear coming from the great halls of Congress! and the white house and state legislatures etc etc

and Pam lays into the overarching hypocrisy of this section of the power elite which is addicted to power and the revolving door of DC wealth and privilege:

"We're not only talking about elected officials. This closet is full of campaign managers, fundraisers and legislators in the corridors of power, ready to elect homophobic officials with homo-hating tactics, and pass anti-gay measure, even as they enjoy homosexual activities themselves under the cover of anonymity."

Pam, You Go Girl!!

http://www.pamspaulding.com/weblog/2005/12/washington-blade-editorial-outing-can.html

[Sara]

Kitty Kelly deals with Drier in her book on the Bush Family -- and the story is funny. Seems that Barbara Bush took a shine to Drier, thinking he would make a great second husband for her daughter, Doro, who was having difficult recovering from a failed marriage and divorce. While people told Barbara that Drier probably would not be interested -- she went to work trying to be a matchmaker with a vengence, and stayed with the project for a couple of years -- inviting Drier to virtually every family event going.

Eventually Doro met and married a Democrat -- one who had worked on the hill for Gephardt and then Tony Coelho. Married at Camp David in 1992.

[DHinMI]

Sara, that's pretty damn funny. I guess that means Bar is in favor of gay marriage...or at least marrying off gay men...if she doesn't realize they're gay...or...oooh, it's making my head hurt.

Michael: good point on the gay/homosexual terminology. I used to be more consistent with it, but in 2004 I worked with the people trying to defeat the same-sex marriage amendment in Michigan. As a straight guy, I became more immersed in gay issues than I ever had been before, and I was really struck by the vehemence with which the haters use the term homosexual. The word itself is a perfectly fine descripive word, but it almost makes me feel like I'm parroting their talking points when I use it.

But in regards to Dreier, Pam's correct that Dreier is presumably out to most who know him personally, which is sort of the point of my post. Dreier doesn't seem particularly closeted, and he lives a nice lifestyle (even paying his presumed partner more to be his chief of staff than any other chief of staff on the Hill. He's also hurt by it, in that any aspirations for higher leadership appear thwarted by the hatred for gays in his caucus. And I think it's a travesty that this isn't reported in the press, because Dreier is abetting a deeply anti-gay agenda by being a partisan Republican leader/MoC, regardless of how he may vote on a particular issue. Dreier's silence on his fellow Republicans' hatred is worse than that of the press.

[Joseph McCord]

More importantly than being gay, David Dreier is the one person who can make or break the Congressional impeachment process in this Congressional term. This is because the Impeachment Resolution is walled up in the House Rules Committee, and will remain there for as long as the Republicans can manage to keep it there - and off the floor. Dreier squeaked through to re-election last year by an astoundingly narrow margin - and his own Party doesn't even like him. Perhaps he should consider becoming a Libertarian. Then he could vote his mind, instead of his politics.

[Joseph McCord]

By the way. In Texas, where I grew up, *everyone* accused *everybody* of being homosexual, all the time. Mockingly, jokingly, angrily, whatever, depending on the social context. It's just a normal part of our social structure in that state. Does that tell you anything you didn't already know about George Bush?

[SID VICIOUS]

I MEAN REALLY, WHAT OTHER GROUP DRESSES AS WONDERFULLY AS DRIER.