iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Military Looking To Quickly Move Forward On DADT Rollback, But Discharges Still Possible In Meantime


First Posted: 01/28/11 04:41 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:30 PM ET

WASHINGTON -- Pentagon officials said Friday that the Department of Defense is moving to speed the rollback of "don't ask, don't tell," and that Defense Secretary Robert Gates has asked a top official to deliver a plan to "facilitate the timely and orderly realization" of that process by Feb. 4.

That plan will launch a lengthy waiting period before the military's ban on openly gay service members is fully erased, however, and in the meantime, gay service members may still be discharged.

Under the DADT repeal legislation that President Barack Obama signed in late December, openly gay individuals will not be able to serve in the military until 60 days after the president, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the defense secretary have certified that the Pentagon is prepared to implement the repeal in a manner that won't hurt readiness, effectiveness, cohesion or recruiting. Pentagon officials said at a press briefing Friday that they believe repeal implementation can be completed within the year.

"This is not, however, a change that should be done incrementally," Gates wrote in a memo to Clifford Stanley, the defense undersecretary for personnel and readiness. "The steps leading to certification and the actual repeal must be accomplished across the entire Department at the same time, and consistent with the standards of military readiness, military effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces."

According to a second memo from Stanley, once repeal is certified, all open DADT investigations will be dismissed, recruits will not be required to reveal their sexual orientation, discharged members will be allowed to reenlist and the standards of conduct will apply to all service members regardless of sexual orientation.

Stanley and Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters on Friday that repeal training is expected to begin in February. They did not provide a specific timeframe, though, saying the heads of each service will have control over their respective finish dates.

Repeal won't require any major policy overhaul, and the officials said the new training will emphasize professionalism and respect for all -- including training about using gay slurs and jokes.

But as was made clear in the briefing, there are still a significant number of issues to be worked out before the repeal is certified, and gay service members will have to be careful until the process is complete.

Last fall, Gates issued a higher standard for discharging service members under DADT, requiring higher-level approval. Since November, no one has been kicked out because of sexual orientation, although there are still cases pending. But in today's briefing, Stanley said that the military did not have any plans to issue a moratorium on discharges while they work toward certification:

Q: If there's no de fact moratorium in place, can you explain what the reason is for why there have been no discharges in the last three months, since the Secretary changed the policy on having the two of you, plus a service chief, overseeing a discharge? What is the reason for the lack of discharges?

STANLEY: I don't want to characterize it as a lack of discharges, but it's been a very deliberate process. The process is deliberate now. There's more scrutiny with the general counsel, my office, the service secretary. As you go through the process in whatever you are going to do. ... You automatically add a level of review that elongates the process. I'm not saying there won't be discharges. [...]

Q: Would you actually discharge somebody right now, in this climate, as you're moving toward repeal and certification? Would you actually do that?

STANLEY: Each individual case is judged on its own merits or demerits. So, quite frankly, the answer is yes, if the case merits it. There are a number of circumstances that could lead to that -- each case. I can't talk about any individual case.

Gay rights groups are also concerned about the lack of clarify on benefits for same-sex partners and legal recourse for service members who face discrimination based on sexual orientation. Stanley said that he did not believe there would be a change in who can receive spousal benefits at this point, since the Defense of Marriage Act -- which defines marriage as between one man and one woman -- is still federal law.

"[T]oday's memo does not go far enough in calling for parity in benefits that could be accomplished through revised regulations that add same-sex committed partners to the definitions of 'dependent,' 'family member,' or other similar terms," according to a statement from the Human Rights Campaign. "Such a step would be consistent with President Obama's June 2009 memorandum that all federal agencies take steps to extend benefits equally to lesbian and gay employees, where permitted by law."

The Stanley memo also says the Military Equal Opportunity program will not be amended to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, although both Stanley and Cartwright stressed that such harassment and discrimination will not be tolerated based on existing military codes of conduct.

In Friday's briefing, reporters pressed on how people who face such discrimination would be able to seek recourse if sexual orientation is not a protected class. Cartwright said that he would have military lawyers look into the issue.

"While there are positive aspects to the Pentagon's announcement today, the Administration's failure to mandate a clear non-discrimination policy either by way of Executive Order or regulation continues to be very troubling," said Richard Socarides, president of Equality Matters. "For implementation to succeed, the President must set a clear non-discrimination rule as President Truman did in 1948 when he desegregated the armed forces. That is the kind of leadership we need today."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- Pentagon officials said Friday that the Department of Defense is moving to speed the rollback of "don't ask, don't tell," and that Defense Secretary Robert Gates has asked a top official...
WASHINGTON -- Pentagon officials said Friday that the Department of Defense is moving to speed the rollback of "don't ask, don't tell," and that Defense Secretary Robert Gates has asked a top official...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 518
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (11 total)
07:41 AM on 01/31/2011
I'm gay. I'm in the military. I have been for 16 years. I've deployed all over the world. I've shared quarters, showers and ammo with my fellow Soldiers.

I understand many of you are frustrated with the wait periord for repeal implementation, but please take my word when I say this: There is a reason for it. There are numerous issues that need to be addressed before implementation can happen in a seamless fashion.

The last thing any of us wants is for this to be hurried. Doing that would only open us to possible harrassment in the long term and show the repealment to be a weak decisions.

Please bear with our leaders as they make the responsible decisions for the future of us in the military instead of just rushing the implementation and not doing it the right way.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
06:53 AM on 02/05/2011
Your perspective on this is so interesting.
What are good facets of what you would consider a right implementation?
What are the issues that should be addressed?
What kind of harassment would you feel opened up to?
03:36 AM on 02/07/2011
My main concern, personally, boils down to logistics. How do our senior leaders provide us with the same rights as married couples? Can my partner and I now share a home in base housing? Can my partner now receive my medical benefits? It's those types of things that I want our leadership to think about before hapharzardly throwing something together just to make a few people happy. Please, take the time to do this right.

The harrassment of which I spoke is the same type of harrassment you might expect anywhere. The military is a true example of the American population. It has its fair share of bigots, and I'm concerned they'll feel more empowered to treat me differently than they have in the past if they feel this is something that was forced down their throats.

This is something important that not only affects the military; this could have long lasting effects on our population as well. Our leaders need to ensure they're sensitive to our ENTIRE population; not just a small segment of it.

All in all, this will work. It just needs to be well thought out and implemented correctly.

Those are just my thoughts.
RTIII
Poster of over 0.0135% of all HufPost comments
02:31 PM on 01/30/2011
I trust I was not alone in noticing that during the State of The Union Address, when the subject of DADT repeal was mentioned, the camera panned to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, all of whom had angry faces and none of whom applauded along with all the cheers in the gallery.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:29 AM on 01/30/2011
You know, as long as a lesbian or gay, transgender, etc. person doesn't try to push themselves on someone that doesn't have interest in it... what's the big deal? That's affected two of my friendships, one because the girl was considerably self-centered, not instructed in restraint of her urges for sex (and food, and just about anything come to think of it), just dumped, and maybe I shouldn't have let my boyfriend at the time perform falacio on me in the top bunk when I thought she was asleep (he really wanted to). And another time because I didn't know what to say when my (dating guys but apparently experimenting) friend invited me on an all-lesbians-take-Seattle bicycle run (without telling me it was all lesbians) and I felt a bit like fresh meat among a sizable group of girls, which was just very immediate and strange. It turns out I miss the latter friendship to this day; she was a thoughtful and fun person. When I said - but you know I have a boyfriend, why wouldn't you tell me before - she maybe felt marginalized. In retrospect, she was likely trying to find a way to approach the topic. If there were eggshells before me, I'd sometimes grind them to dust.

Gender and sexuality has come a good distance as measured by community comfort level, though. For some communities.
photo
the crustybastard
I could be worse, and have been.
05:42 PM on 02/04/2011
Craziest thing I've read all day. Awesome.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
06:58 AM on 02/05/2011
I'm glad you found it awesome. I'm sure it's not the craziest collection of interpersonal recollections on same sex awkwardness. But sometimes I try.

I also have a gay uncle I love a bunch, and I profoundly believe in marriage equality.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
JShankel
I want my country forward
03:37 PM on 01/29/2011
@suirrelygirl: "By the way, it may only be "a couple of $hundred" to you, but to a single mother struggling to put food on the table and keep a roof over her head with a minimum wage job, "a couple of $hundred" might as well be a few thousand or a million.

How's that view from privilege mountain?"

A) the view is fine

B) you miss my point.  It's not that a couple of hundred is nothing to impoverished rape victims.  It's that it's nothing to the government and it's nothing compared to all the other drastic cuts we've made to family aid.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Honeybabe1
old eskimo lady who knits musk ox smokerings
01:24 PM on 01/29/2011
i don't understand why "discharges are still possible". they are repealing dadt for heaven's sake!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wakeupyouall
12:41 PM on 01/29/2011
One of the greatest Armies of all time had gays soldiers and was lead by a gay guy. Alexandra the Great. Common men of the military lets get this done.
RTIII
Poster of over 0.0135% of all HufPost comments
02:34 PM on 01/30/2011
By all accounts, he was bi.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cool Bam
12:31 PM on 01/29/2011
I find it kinda funny that some or these organizations that claimed DADT could be immediately banned with no other thought or consequences all now seeing the shoe box of other considerations.
photo
compajuan049
Meat & potatoes lefty, freethinker/internationalis
11:39 AM on 01/29/2011
Well, I actually understand that the Churches HAVE been part of the problem when it comes to accepting others.

Religions tend to be exclusive and sectarian by nature.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:00 AM on 01/29/2011
OMG! How did we ever win a war?Or did we? they repealed the damn thing-Now lets get on with it!!!!
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
CarolinaYankee
10:39 AM on 01/29/2011
WHAT? They have to be trained to accept other people as they are? Where were the parents and churches of these soldiers when they were younger?? Ridiculous..........
12:13 PM on 01/29/2011
Obviously "training" their kids to not accept other people as they are!
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
CarolinaYankee
05:54 PM on 01/29/2011
fanned. You are sooo right. I forget, not having grown up down here.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
marco01
12:19 PM on 01/29/2011
Where do you think they learned to_hate?
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
CarolinaYankee
05:53 PM on 01/29/2011
undefined
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Eric Leslie
hi
10:14 AM on 01/29/2011
great hours of training and GMT to look forward too. why is it taking so long? rules have to be changed and there a lot of rules for us military folk. and the repeal and not taken effect yet. you still can get kicked out.
photo
compajuan049
Meat & potatoes lefty, freethinker/internationalis
10:11 AM on 01/29/2011
The Pentagon will get this done ASAP so that the repeal process doesn't have the risk of going through the "death by 1000 cuts" tactic by a republican congress or administration, because once DADT evaporates, it will cease to exist as something in need to be funded.

Very smart move!
AgingLady
laughter is best medicine
09:52 AM on 01/29/2011
speed the rollback of "don't ask, don't tell,"
"facilitate the timely and orderly realization"
a lengthy waiting period
may still be discharged.

Truly I believe the Army is more efficient than this -- but it makes one wonder!!!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:33 PM on 01/29/2011
I encourage you to research the changes that have to be made to the UCMJ and personnel systems, it may open your eyes to why it is going to take longer than common sense would dictate.
09:49 AM on 01/29/2011
Our President has said many times that he "struggles" with same-sex marriage and that he favors civil unions with equal rights to marriage. IMO, that's a real cop out, especially from a man who is the product of a marriage that many at the time would have "struggled" with.

It is time to match deeds with the cop out rhetoric, at a minimum. Let service members get "civil unioned" and give partners the same rights as other spouses. It's 2011! There is no excuse to deny civil rights to our citizens.
12:14 PM on 01/29/2011
Faved!
HoosierInMaryland
HuffPo says my 'micro-bio is empty'
06:27 PM on 01/29/2011
Allowing civil unions and giving partners the same rights as other spouses is a violation of DOMA. That's why DOMA needs to be repealed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rimser
09:38 AM on 01/29/2011
They are following the letter of the law. By doing so, they are attempting to keep the process above reproach. Of course that doesn't deter people from moaning and groaning that the process is too slow, or that the President should do it by caveat. Rome wasn't built in a day and trying to turn the military is like trying to turn a very large ship -- it takes time. There should, however, be a stay on all discharges unless based on reasons other than simply being gay.
12:23 PM on 01/29/2011
I think you mean by "fiat" or "decree". Lot of cliches in that post, but instead of Rome and ships and caveats, I would say, let the President use "force majeure". He has the ability to make a "decree" and at least declare a moratorium on any more discharges.