In May 2006,
Donald Hitchcock was fired by the Democratic National
Committee as director of its Gay and Lesbian Leadership
Council--less than a week after his partner,
fellow Washington politico Paul Yandura, e-mailed
high-level Democratic donors and suggested they withhold
financial support from the DNC in protest of the group's
apparent neglect of antigay ballot initiatives.
Hitchcock, whose role was to raise funds from gay
donors, claimed his sudden dismissal was retaliatory, but
the DNC denied the charge. Indeed, in an
Advocate interview at the time, Dean said the
accusation was "absolutely false," adding that he
would not discuss Hitchcock's "personnel records." (To
read that interview, click here.)
This May, after
settlement negotiations failed, Hitchcock filed a lawsuit
in District of Columbia superior court against the DNC,
Dean, treasurer Andy Tobias (who is gay), and deputy
finance director Julie Tagen, alleging retaliation,
defamation, and discrimination on the basis of sexual
orientation. Again, the DNC denied the allegations.
Hitchcock hasn't
spoken to the media about his firing or the
lawsuit, but in this exclusive interview he finally breaks
his silence, maintaining the DNC ousted him unfairly
and charging that other perceived wave-makers at the
group faced similar strong-arm tactics. And in a
bittersweet twist, he reveals that his replacement at the
leadership council, Brian Bond, sought strategy advice
from him after he was dismissed.
The Advocate:Let's start at the beginning: Did you have any
knowledge of Paul's letter before he sent it?Hitchcock: No, I did not.
If you had, would you have tried to stop him from
sending it? Well, first of all, when it happened I was in
New Orleans at the Democratic National Committee
meeting, so he was doing it on his own. And Paul has
his own credentials to criticize the party. Paul worked in
the White House [as an aide to the Clinton
administration], he was the executive director of the
Stonewall Democrats, and he was actually hired by Andy
Tobias as the first GLLC director for the DNC. And anyone
who knows Paul knows that me wanting to stop him
wouldn't stop him. He's his own political entity, and
he's been in politics in D.C. for 13 years.
And within days of Paul's letter you were asked to
leave the DNC. That's right. I was asked to leave by Julie
Tagen. She pulled me aside as a friend and asked me to
resign. What I found out [later] was that there was a
strategy to ask me to resign. It wasn't just a friend
talking to a friend; it was an effort and a discussion
that had occurred with some other DNC employees. She
had already asked me to keep Paul silent. And because
I couldn't keep Paul silent, I feel I was asked to resign.
The DNC has said that it was your poor job
performance, not retaliation, that lead to your dismissal. The derogatory comments were to cover up what
the DNC had done to me and to try to shame me for
something that Paul said. They continually attacked
me, thinking I wouldn't defend myself. They had to cover
their tracks to make it look like they weren't
punishing me for somebody criticizing the party.
Was there any indications up to that point that
your superiors were unhappy with your job performance? No, there was no problem with that. I didn't
have any negative performance reviews. I've never been
written up, and I was never reprimanded. So that all
came out of the blue.
What did you think when you read Howard Dean's
comments inThe Advocatelast year referring to your "personnel records"? It didn't surprise me, because there was already
that kind of talking point coming out of the DNC. The
fund-raisers had been doing that for some time.
Ultimately they're just trying to raise money from our
community. It was actually a sad, shameful thing for
Governor Dean to say, because there was no poor job
performance review or any sort of criticism of my
performance while I was at the DNC.
What was the most shocking aspect of how things
went down? That the fund-raisers in the Democratic Party
feel that they can't be held accountable for defaming
somebody, and they're exempt from consequences when
they go out and slander people that used to work for
the Democratic Party. This lawsuit's about holding them
accountable and holding the Democratic Party to our
values.
Have things changed at all for the better at the
DNC since you've left? I don't think so. What a lot of people don't
know is that Brian [Bond] asked to meet with me a few
months ago to discuss the strategy of what's happening
within the DNC. Brian even called Paul and asked if he'd
keep up the outside pressure during the delegate
selections rule fight, because the senior staff was
working against the gay community's desires. Brian
specifically asked that Paul keep up the pressure so that we
didn't get screwed in the process. He will obviously
deny this, because if he doesn't, he'll be fired. But
during the court proceedings everyone will be under
oath--including myself--and I look forward to shining some
sun on this.
Joseph Sandler, who's representing the defendants
in your suit, has said that the DNC won't respond
publicly to your charges, and has asked people to
keep in mind that "everything you'll see
may well be one-sided." How do you respond to that? One thing we should point out is that it's been
one-sided from them for a long time. Now the community
is actually seeing two sides to this issue. I've been
silent over the past year around my firing. I've been
talking about policy issues of substance.
Unfortunately, the DNC believed I wouldn't protect
myself and they could act with reckless abandon in order
to keep money flowing. I've always held the Democratic party
to a higher ideal. I walked into the DNC building
expecting more out of the Democratic Party. The easy
thing for me now would be to walk away and be quiet,
because we've been meeting people who have done just that.
As we're telling our story, they're saying,
"That happened to me [too]"--not with
regard to LGBT discrimination, but personal attacks and
defamation against anyone who stands up to the party.
All under the Dean regime? That is under the Dean regime. Several people
have approached us where this has happened to them,
and we're referring them to our lawyers.
Do you worry that this could affect fund-raising
for the DNC going into 2008, especially given that the
presidential campaign has already begun? Well, I'm a loyal Democrat, and I want to help
the Democratic Party. I think this lawsuit can help
the Democratic Party get better on our issues. Honest
conversation can only move us forward. The DNC could have
settled this privately. I approached them at least five
times before going public, but the DNC lawyers or
senior staff refused to settle out of court.
Can you talk at all about the settlement you tried
to reach? I don't want to go into details, but the
settlement was really not about money. The settlement
was clearing my name and setting the record straight
about my job performance at the DNC and also asking DNC
agents to stop defaming me. There were no hard lines
in the sand. It was just about coming to the table and
having a responsible conversation and being honest
about what's happened so we could all move forward. But it's
obviously the stubbornness and arrogance of their senior
staff that prevents them from coming to the table. For
them it's all about money, and that means fighting
this with a P.R. spin campaign and trying to keep this
from hurting their fund-raising. For me, it's about doing
the right thing, having the right values, and
expecting our party to have the values that we all
espouse.
How has this experience affected your career? When this happened to me I kind of reevaluated
where I was at. It's hard to say, because the DNC
fund-raisers have spoken to a lot of influential
people about my job performance. I actually am very
interested in the Democratic movement and staying in
the LGBT movement, and I do not want to be criticized
when I speak on policy issues moving forward--and this
is what has been happening. I'm back in school getting a
master's in public policy, but I'm not going anywhere.