The Right Time to Repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell Is Now

Since 1994, almost 13,000 gay servicemen and women have been discharged from the military based not on their performance but on their sexual orientation. In 2009 alone, we've had more than 400 of our brave men and women leave the military under Don't Ask Don't Tell. This is simply unacceptable. It is time to repeal this outdated and immoral policy once and for all and end the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly and honestly in our armed forces.

To that end, I've secured the commitment from Senator Carl Levin, Chair of the Armed Services Committee, to hold the first hearing on the policy since it began 16 years ago. Chairman Levin expects to hold the hearing soon and it's my hope that it will be instrumental in demonstrating the level of support that exists for repeal not only throughout the country -- where polls consistently indicate that solid majorities oppose the policy -- but within the military itself.

I'm happy to see that, as the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing approaches, there are signs of momentum building toward repeal.

On September 24, Majority Leader Harry Reid sent letters to the president and Secretary Gates reiterating his support for repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell and requesting their recommendations to Congress on the policy. I agree with Senator Reid. I know the president opposes DADT, and I am confident he and his administration will work to engage Congressional and military leaders in this debate.

Then, just last week, an article was published in the Joint Force Quarterly -- a publication considered to be the scholarly journal of the Pentagon and released by the Joint Chiefs -- that goes beyond addressing just Don't Ask Don't Tell, but overtly calls for a repeal of the ban on gays and lesbians serving in the U.S. military. In the article, Air Force Colonel Om Prakash writes:

After a careful examination, there is no scientific evidence to support the claim that unit cohesion will be negatively affected if homosexuals serve openly. Based on this research, it is not time for the administration to reexamine the issue; rather it is time for the administration to examine how to implement the repeal of the ban.

It's heartening to see such a strong statement coming from the top levels of the military. Not only did this article appear in a publication published by the Pentagon, but it was written by a man currently working under Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and was reviewed by the office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral Mike Mullen. Supporters of Don't Ask Don't Tell often cite the lack of support for repeal among the top levels of the military. With this article, those leaders are sending a clear signal that that's simply not the case.

Then, yesterday, the New York Times published an editorial in which they cited the Joint Force Quarterly article and called for a reversal of Don't Ask Don't Tell.

Colonel Prakash argues that the law has undermined unit cohesion, in part by compromising the integrity of homosexuals who have to dissemble and by posing a moral quandary for commanders -- look the other way or risk discharging a valuable service member. He judged the policy a "costly failure" because of the lost manpower and the administrative costs of recruiting and separating homosexuals. He urged the Obama administration to examine how to repeal the ban.

We agree strongly with Colonel Prakash, and urge the Pentagon to press ahead with changes in its regulations to make implementing the "don't ask" law more humane. Ultimately, Congress must repeal the 1993 statute.

They went on:

We are not confident that the Senate has enough enlightened members to overcome a filibuster. But if the military can show an open mind, surely lawmakers can summon the courage to end this sad chapter in history.

As many of you know, earlier this year I considered offering an amendment to impose a moratorium on DADT discharges for 18 months, but decided against it because I couldn't secure the 60 votes we would need for passage. That said, I believe that we are seeing momentum building nearly every day. Every day I feel we are getting closer to the votes we need to pass.

I look forward to continuing that momentum at the upcoming hearing. I'll also be launching a new DADT story project, which I'll introduce to you all in the coming weeks. My hope is that as people meet some of the brave servicemen and women that have been affected by this unfair and misguided policy, we can build support for repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell and move toward allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly and honestly in our military.

In the meantime, you can help by joining the effort. In advance of the hearing, I've launched a petition calling for the repeal of DADT. We already have almost 10,000 signatures from people nationwide who are standing with me to show my colleagues that our country is ready to repeal this policy. I hope you'll join us.

I know that many were discouraged by the statement yesterday from National Security Advisor James Jones that President Obama would pursue repeal "at the right time." I believe the right time is now.

Comments

[MarkInEugene]

DADT should be repealed now because it is simply an asinine policy. Not only does it enable gay bashing, but it fosters sexually insecure men to express hatred and violence toward other soldiers regardless of their sexual preference. There is nothing healthy about this policy; on the contrary it is beneath our military to advocate it, because it forces everyone to hide their sexuality if it is not purely heterosexual.

Now who among us can claim to be pure heterosexuals? Do you see how ridiculous the question is? Some men are very heterosexual, some are very homosexual, but nobody is 100% of anything.

We are a sick society that refuses to come to terms with the diversity in our sexuality. Hiding it is not what people do in a civil society. DADT is an embarrassing ignorant policy without wisdom, without logic and it is retarding our awareness and understanding of our own sexuality.

[Jkairi]

Why is this issue so important right now? There are serious problems in this country. How can anyone justify making an issue related to sexual conduct of primary concern. Those folks demanding that DADT be repealed must not feeling be the pressure of this depression. You have the collaspe of America right before you and you can only think about sex. People are loosing jobs, homes etc. and the only thing on some of your minds is getting the military to accept your sex style.

Obama isn't doing anything, zero, nada, zilch for so-called African Americans. The unemployment rate among so-called African Americans is over 15% and the man is afraid to even address it.

[CaveatMagnusFrater]

It is important now because of military manpower.

From the article: Colonel Prakash judged the policy a "costly failure" because of the lost manpower and the administrative costs of recruiting and separating homosexuals.

[cure077]

So your answer to the fact that there is blatant discrimination in the military is how dare us gays have the nerve to ask it to end? Why don't we know our place, you seem to be asking. This DADT nonsense doesn't affect me at all, so why should any of us care about it, your post seems to suggest. Well, home foreclosures don't affect me since I don't have one, but I support legislation and my tax payer money for helping those who need it. Job loss doesn't really affect me either since I'm in the military (if you don't count the fact that I can be fired for being gay) but I would surely support legislation that would help people get jobs. I don't want to military to accept my sex style, I just want to be able to serve my country without constantly living in fear of losing my career because I am in love with a woman. Obama has done nothing but address the unemployment problem in the country and I support him all the way. You are a selfish, moronic, fool and I wish people like you did not have the right to vote/be involved in issues that don't affect you.

[Gnrshrtd]

"...you can only think about sex"
__________­__________­_____

Respectfully, I differ.

Here is the problem: You think this is about a behavior (that you object to, and seem to want to insist everyone agree with you). It is not. It is about sexual orientation - not about sexual behavior. If you don't think there's a difference, ask a psychiatrist or a physician or a psychologist - OR THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF. Did you read the article?

[Liberal Angel]

Why do you homophobes only think of gay sex every time you hear talk of anything relating to gay people? You would think all we do is have sex, and don't have jobs or other interrests, like our civil rights. You are the ones thinking about sex. Maybe if people like you stopped thinking with your members, and used your heads, you'd realize that not everything has to do with sex.

[kendraro]

This should be the shortest hearings ever - JUST DO IT!!!

[Jude Nagurney Camwell]

I'm passing this request along to others. Thanks, Senator Gillibrand. - Jude (from Upstate New York)

[Tankdawg971]

I have served in theArmy for 20 years now and I have loved every minute of it. I support dont ask dont tell. Its funny how those that never served in the military like to dictate policy to those of us who fight daily. I know many homosexuals that gotten out on DADT because they did not want to deploy to Iraq. Hmmmmmmmmmm. I know many Soldiers that will not serve with gay or lesbuan Soldiers and have stated so. It could be because of moral, religious or just dont want to but I know it was a distraction. You can not compare the black and white issue to homosexuality when it comes to serving in the military. This is a lifestyle choice not a color choice. Thats a whole different debate, all I know is this, do they thing about the FRG (Family Readiness Group) meetings that families attend, or what the family first idea at Hood, do parents have to explain this to their children. I am just saying that it is easier to say get rid of DADT if you are already gay, not in the military and is a politician trying to get votes

[Sari]

I was in the military. I still work for the DoD. I served and was honorably discharged after the completion of my tour. I and most of my military and civilian colleagues support the banning of DADT because they realize that it's NOT a lifestyle choice. It's wrong to ask people to lie just to do their jobs, ones that they love and volunteered for. It is NOT that easy to just "say you're gay so you don't have to go to Iraq." You don't just get to get out of it. They still send you and do the paperwork while you're away and can't argue.

Only in the military is it still legal to fire someone because of their sexual orientation. Every other employer in the country has to abide by state and federal non-discrimination statutes, allowing people from the GLBT community to accept and maintain a job regardless of their sexual status.

BTW, there's no reason to believe that even if DADT stayed in place that you would have a gay-free military. I know several people right this very minute who are important assets to the DoD who happen to gay men or lesbians. They are honorable service members who do their jobs very well and reflect credit upon our nation's uniformed services. Don't tell me they're not worthy of equal right and respect under the law.

They're more worthy than some...

[Tankdawg971]

First it is a lifestyle choice. Second the paperwork and the investigation only takes three weeks. Third I am assuming you were not in a combat arms unit because the majority of those that say keep DADT are not in those types of units. And I did not say we have a gay free military. I am saying is that many Soldiers do not want to serve with a openly gay or lesbian Soldier. There is a difference of guessing and knowing.

[Manx]

I agree. As far as those who say Obama shouldn't take on too many issues at the same time, Obama himself has bragged that he can walk and chew gum and the same time. But apparently Don't Ask Don Tell is an issue that's too hard for him to chew.

[dans5843]

It's at least twenty years past due. Let's get er done!

[sws3030]

Senator, even if you can pass this bill, do you have enough votes to recover it when the current anti-gay commander in chief vetos it-because he will. His ties to the evengelical movement are too tight for anything else to happen.

[JShankel]

He just said he'd sign it. He will sign it. He's called for the repeal of DADT and DOMA. Why would he do that if he planned to veto it?

[Leakman]

All it would take would be a directive from our commander-in-chief stating that from now on,a persons sexuality, has no bearing on whether you are competent to serve in the military. Back in 1948, I believe, President Truman issued just such a directive for the military to de-segragate. It was a slow process to accomplish, but sometimes someone has to step up and declare what is right. Maybe President Obama could step up for all the people in the military, serving their country, whom have alternate lifestyles,Just like Truman did for African americans.

[RedXIV]

Unfortunately, that's not accurate. The racial segregation policy of the military which Truman repealed was not required by federal law. Don't Ask Don't Tell unfortunately is. 10 U.S.C. § 654 makes Don't Ask Don't Tell something that can only be eliminated by an act of Congress.

The President DOES have the authority to simply order that the law not be enforced, but would accomplish very little since the moment a Republican is elected President, the executive order would be repealed.

[Anym]

Senator you should stop writing about it and start proposing some bills to repeal it.

[DCBarrister]

Sen. Gillibrand isn't the President of the United States.

Obama has the power right now to end DADT with a pen and a post-it note. There is no stronger mandate to end DADT than the Commander in Chief ordering the armed forces NEVER to use it again. Obama won't do it because he is afraid of how it would look to Joe Wilson (R-NC), Eric Cantor (R-VA) and Bachmann (R-Outer Space)

That's not change, it's cowardice.

Keep the change.

Hillary 2012

[Awake-and-Sing]

No real progressive would be supporting Hillary for 2012 as she's just as DLC as Obama.

If you really want a progressive challenger in 2012, support Howard Dean or Dennis Kucinich.

[kendraro]

Please don't give NC Joe Wilson! He doesn't belong to us!He belongs to SC - not the same as NC! - R. Burr is bad enough.

[cal5000]

Changing it by Execiutive Order doesnt protect the gays serving from the next president who may not agree--and it gives the right more ammo to use against him.

Johnson could have used an Executive Order for Civil Rights but thats not a good idea--it has to be law, pushed through and spoken about in a National Debate and passed by the Congress to make it as strong as possible.

What gives anyone the right to decide what issues are the most important facing this nation--especially when gays can get marries on some states and serve in the military--who cares what they do with their sex life?

[DCBarrister]

Don't Ask Don't Tell is just another case of President Obama's political cowardice and proof that the man was never a liberal Democrat.

Obama had the power to get out in front of DADT and end the practice by executive order before Congress stepped in to make it official.

Obama hid from DADT to save political face with the GOP right.

Keep the change.

Hillary 2012

[logic123]

I couldn't agree more

[Anym]

Don't ask Don't tell is a law that must be repealed by the Congress.'

H.R.2401 look it up.

[DCBarrister]

I don't have to "look it up"...the President has the power to issue an executive order banning the armed forces from applying DADT in any way, shape or form.

Yes, Congress has to come along and pass legislation to "formally" repeal DADT, but the President could have kept his promise and ended DADT from day one.

Obama didn't because he didn't have the integrity or guts.

[RedXIV]

Hillary is clearly more conservative than Obama, and remember that it was the Clinton Administration that gave us DADT in the first place.

[randyjet]

I am a long time liberal and civil rights, anti-war activist, and Vietnam era veteran. I am NOT a libertarian, nor a libertine. All of those who argue for gays in the military are of the libertarian stripe, NOT liberal. The liberal position is NOT that the state exists to serve the needs of individuals, but that it has to serve the good of society as a whole. That it is the people through elections which decide what the policies should be. It is a two ways street, not one way. I have an obligation to my country, and it also has certain duties towards me. Those duties are decided by the elected representatives who DO have the power to TAKE MY LIFE IF THEY DECIDE it is the the interest of the government. It was called the draft, and I am sure that most of those who are for gays in the military are against that too. I am NOT. A libertarian IS against such a thing.

[Geoffreys]

I'm not a Libertarian. I'm a gay person. I think the military should only exclude from service those who are not qualified.

I read your previous comments on this topic and you earlier mentioned that keeping gays from serving openly will keep assaults and rapes to only the straight people. That is a specious argument designed to try and make an irrational position sound rational. in the 70's, there was an argument around gay teachers where is was posited that excluding gays will help keep molestation numbers down - this is the same kind of irrational argument.

If 90% of all rapes, assaults and molestations are committed by heterosexuals, then crack down on the problem itself. Don't pretend that you're fighting a bigger problem by excluding only the gay people.

[aftershock]

If there's an argument for or against DADT in there, you hid it real well...

[WaitingforJanuary]

I was thinking the same thing aftershock.

[Ahsanm]

our military should learn from Chinese. They believe that preserving oneself maintains their power. Once you fight, you lose that power, just like we currently don't have it, and are exposed to the world. Not to mention our dead and wounded soldiers.

[Aaror]

The funniest part of "don't ask, don't tell" is how obvious it sometimes is. I went to the middle east with a guy in my division who was obviously "different." It wasn't a problem for anyone, and mind you, we had open bay barracks where 50-100 folks shared a big warehouse looking building with bunk beds.
The military has a policy of not harrassing someone on the basis of percieved sexual orientation-if someone acts gay, you can't treat them differently because of it, and if they say they are gay you can't harrass them, you just discharge them.
A lot of hazing rituals are rather gay, but since they are tradition, it doesn't matter? (I am glad the military is trying their hardest to get rid of hazing).
While I am at it, I want to give one shout out for some of the contractors out there. While halliburton was indeed filled with slimeballs, there are some great, patriotic Americans, generally Arab-Americans, who have spent years in the middle east as contractors (translators mostly), only seeing their family on vacation. Amusingly enough, some of them are openly Gay, guess how much it matters?

[iskra]

Thanks for your story. Good to hear real people talking about real experiences rather than the 'I had a friend who had a friend in the military and she says..."

[Laws456]

He will repeal it, he's waiting for the health care battle to be over. It's something he can use to bolster his low approval numbers. Politics shouldn't matter with an issue of this magnitude but politics seem to control everything that happens in Washington. I think it should have been done as soon as he got into office, but again, he didn't for the above mentioned reason.