Atwater Rebuffs Dannemeyer on Gay GOP Clubs

In a rebuff to Rep. William E. Dannemeyer, Republican National Committee Chairman Lee Atwater said Wednesday he has turned down the conservative Orange County Republican’s request to publicly repudiate party sponsorship of gay political clubs.

“I am for civil rights and civil liberties for everyone, period,” Atwater said during a breakfast with Times reporters and editors. “So I simply was not prepared to acknowledge in a letter to the congressman that question (about sponsorship of gay political groups) one way or the other.”

During a meeting early this month, Dannemeyer (R-Fullerton) had asked Atwater to make a public statement against chartering gay GOP organizations after a state party convention in September turned aside a Dannemeyer resolution on the issue.

In a statement drafted for Atwater’s signature, Dannemeyer had asked the GOP national chairman to state that “ . . . Congressman Dannemeyer’s resolution not to equate homosexuality on par with heterosexuality is wholly within the traditions of the Republican Party.”

Instead, Atwater wrote Dannemeyer a letter Oct. 5 stating that “the GOP welcomes all people into its ranks who subscribe to its platform. . . ,” while noting that “the party has chosen not to give special status to Republican organizations on the basis of sexual preference, one way or the other.”

In an interview Wednesday, Dannemeyer sought to downplay his differences with the party chairman. “I would have phrased it differently, but I think the language he has placed in the letter makes it clear that the national Republican Party does not choose to give special status to (homosexual) organizations,” he said.

Later, however, Dannemeyer said: “Lee Atwater is the chairman of the Republican Party. The (leaders) of the Republican Party in America (are) George Bush and the leaders in the House and Senate. We’re the ones who are elected to speak for the people of this country. And I think a . . . majority of the House spoke strongly on this two weeks ago.

“It is Mr. Atwater who I think should be looking at where the leadership of the party is.”

Dannemeyer referred to a 252-170 vote in which the House of Representatives endorsed legislation that would amend a District of Columbia ordinance to allow private religious schools to deny recognition and support to homosexual student groups.

At the California GOP convention in Anaheim in early September, Dannemeyer was unable to muster the two-thirds vote required to bring to the floor resolutions that would have condemned the homosexual life style and banned affiliation with the state Republican Party of any group formed on the basis of sexual preference. He did, however, persuade a 353-246 majority of the delegates to vote with him on the issue.

The measure was aimed at the Log Cabin Club, whose membership is largely gay. For the past four years, the club has been officially chartered by the Republican Central Committee of Los Angeles County, a committee spokesman said. Club operations in Orange County are not affiliated with the Orange County Republican Central Committee, a spokesman said.

At Wednesday’s breakfast, Atwater equivocated on other issues involving the rights of homosexuals. On the question of whether homosexuals ought to be able to legally adopt children, Atwater said: “I frankly hadn’t thought about that. Give me a week to think about it.”

Asked whether the Republican Party is diverse enough to accommodate both gay rights organizations and critics, such as Dannemeyer, who oppose the gay rights agenda, Atwater said, “I’m not going to answer that question, specifically, because I’m not going to give you the pure enjoyment of being able to file a story.”

Dannemeyer said he was disappointed that Atwater asked for a week to consider the question of homosexual adoptions. “I would hope that in rather sooner than the expiration of a week he will come to wisdom,” he said.

On other issues, Atwater said next year’s California gubernatorial campaign will be the “No. 1 race” in the country because of its potential impact on the nationwide struggle for reapportionment of congressional seats.

He also said California could play an important role in the 1992 presidential election if legislation to move its June presidential primary to March is revived in the Legislature next year.