Don't ask -- he won't tell

GOP Senate hopeful Mark Foley announces he won't answer questions about his sexuality. Should voters care?

By Jake Tapper

May 23, 2003 | On Thursday afternoon, Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla. -- a possible candidate for the Senate in 2004 -- held a conference call with a handful of Florida reporters that perfectly captured a dilemma in which he finds himself. The subject of the call was the same matter that he refused to directly address within the call, and it is the one that has quietly dogged him for years: Is he, or is he not, a heterosexual?

Foley, according to a source familiar with the conference call, told reporters that he was hosting the call because he'd heard that one of the biggest newspapers in his district -- the Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel, whose reporters were not invited on the call -- planned on being the first newspaper in the "mainstream" press to write about his sexual orientation, following on the heels of some alternative newspapers that had raised the issue. Some things -- like a politician's religious affiliation -- are for public consumption even though there are people who don't think they should be, said Foley, a 48-year-old bachelor. But some things just aren't for public consumption, he said, and with that in mind, Foley declared that he was not going to answer the question as to whether he's gay. People have a right to privacy, he said, and that's his position on the matter and how it will remain throughout his campaign for the Senate.

Until Thursday, Foley had yet to acknowledge these stories publicly; if he had his druthers, they would all just go away. Maybe they will. But the matter raises a provocative question: How much do we really have a right to know about our elected politicians? And it also raises inevitable questions about Foley's own party. If Foley continues to ignore the question, there will be plenty of people who will assume he is simply hiding his homosexuality. And for a Republican Party stigmatized in recent months by comments widely perceived as anti-gay by its No. 3 man in the Senate, it raises the question of whether Foley believes his party faithful, among others, will reject him if he reveals his sexuality.

Foley's office noted that myriad Republican officials were issuing statements on his behalf. The one issued by Majority Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo., states: "Mark is one of my Deputy Whips. He is a key part of virtually every bit of work that we get done up here. He is an integral part of our team, and I value his help, advice, and understanding of what needs to be done and how to get it done."

Presumably Blunt is reading from the textbook of those, like Charles Francis, a friend of President George W. Bush and co-chair of the influential Republican Unity Coalition, who think that Foley's answer is totally acceptable and should be left right there. "I believe in the 'non-issue' approach," Francis tells Salon. "Homosexuality as a non-issue is something that Republicans aspire to, it's the president's worldview, and it's something I've tried to create at the Republican Unity Coalition." Foley's non-answer to the question would seem to fit in with the non-issue theory. "He has the right to say what he wants about his private life as he faces the voters," Francis says. "God bless him, and good luck."

Another prominent gay Republican organization agrees. "Our position is that our first priority is turning what is now a Democratic seat in the Senate to the Republican side," says Patrick Guerriero, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans. "We're less concerned with any of the candidates' sexual orientation than where they stand on issues of fairness." Guerriero noted that Foley's probable GOP primary opponent, conservative former Rep. Bill McCollum, sponsored a hate-crimes bill that offered protection to gays and lesbians, "so we have two candidates who have some track record on being right on our issues."

He issues a warning to Democrats looking to exploit Foley's discomfort. "I hope we're not coming to a time when every single candidate will be asked to tell every single thing about their personal life," he says. "The Democrats should know that this would be walking down a very dangerous path." After all, as another Republican activist points out, there are plenty of rumors about the sexuality of a current Democratic senator and two Clinton administration Cabinet officials. People in glass houses (however divinely decorated)...

Even some partisan Democrats agree. "I think he has a right to take" the position of not answering the question, says openly gay Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass. "I used to take that position 17 years ago." Careful to not address the issue of Foley's sexuality one way or another, Frank says he disagrees with gays who refuse to acknowledge their sexuality. "While I do think you have right to keep things private, when you do that, it leaves an implication that there's something wrong with it."

Next Page: Carville: "I doubt there's much he can do to stop this"

• View blog reactions