Speaking Truth to Power - Anita Hill [55]
On September 6, without knowing about the conversation between Laster and Taylor, I was pondering whether to call Gail Laster back. But before I had a chance, Ricki Seidman of Senator Ted Kennedy’s staff telephoned me. Seidman was the chief investigator for the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee, which was chaired by Kennedy. In late August, Bonnie Goldstein, Senator Metzenbaum’s investigator, who also got my name from Nan Aron’s organization, had passed the information to Seidman to follow up. Seidman contacted the Alliance for Justice office and spoke to Goldstein’s contact, George Kassouf, who informed her that he had not spoken to me directly but was relying on other sources.
When she telephoned me, Seidman at first spoke in general terms about the Thomas nomination. When she turned the conversation to sexual harassment, I told her about my conversation with Gail Laster of the Metzenbaum staff. Seidman continued the conversation and then asked directly, “Do you have any comment on rumors that Thomas sexually harassed you while you were at the EEOC?” It occurred to me that the whole inquiry was based on rumors. In a city like Washington, that could mean anything. Seidman had not told me the source of the rumors or given me any indication what the committee might do in response. “I will neither confirm nor deny the information at this time,” I told her. We then talked more generally about victims of sexual harassment, and the conversation ended with Seidman’s promise to contact me again on Sunday, September 8.
This was the second call I had received in two days about Clarence Thomas and sexual harassment, and I could no longer deny that the committee knew something about Thomas’ behavior and knew that I was its target. I had been thinking about coming forward all summer, but had decided to wait until the investigators came to me. When that had not happened by the end of August, I had assumed it would never happen. So when the first call came, I was not prepared. And when the second call came, I was taken aback that two separate inquiries were being made. At that point, I needed to talk things over with someone I trusted. I went to Shirley Wiegand and another woman on the law school faculty, whom I had not confided in before, Leisha Self.
Our conversation was intense and gloomy. I was agitated and my two colleagues equally apprehensive. I did not detail the behavior, but they immediately understood its nature. Together we began to formulate a plan for moving forward. Their advice was to make the disclosure but only after receiving assurances about the procedure the committee would follow in investigating the charges. Of the three of us, only Wiegand had experience litigating Title VII claims. Self had some experience in labor law generally. None of us were experts on sexual harassment. We decided that any statement and investigation must be kept confidential. Despite our legal experience and sense of obligation to the legal process, our skepticism about the politics involved counseled caution. And that is how I attempted to proceed, with caution.
Ricki Seidman contacted me again on Monday, September 9. By then I was ready to go forward, but I insisted that the information not be made available to the press. Seidman assured me that the committee could accommodate my desire for confidentiality. During that conversation I told Seidman about Thomas’ pressuring me for dates and about his discussions of pornography. I indicated that the conduct was not isolated, but