Under Obama, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” will Pass Away
By Aubrey Sarvis
The Huffington Post
Published December 3, 2008
It's all about change, and although many of the faces on the next president's national security team look familiar, it's not going to be the same old, same old when Mr. Obama assumes office on January 20th. There is one preeminent reason for that: the change, as Mr. Obama said the other day, "comes from me. The vision for change comes first and foremost from me. That's my job."
That's called leadership, and that's why we elected him. I take Mr. Obama at his word, and I am confident that as president he will begin, as promised, an orderly, responsible withdrawal from Iraq. I am also confident that Mr. Obama will work to end the ban on lesbians and gays serving openly in the military and that the last discriminatory law on the federal books, the law we call "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," will be repealed in the next Congress and replaced by a bill that permits open service without regard to sexual orientation. Why am I so confident? Because Barack Obama said so.
But it will not happen unless the White House, the Department of Defense, the Joint Chiefs, and the Congress forge a new working relationship to make it a reality. The president-elect has made a good start. A few days ago he met privately with the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullen. Admiral Mullen was not accompanied by the usual aides. He brought no briefing books, no PowerPoint presentations, just a pad and a pen - and, The Washington Post reported on Sunday, "a desire to take the measure of his incoming boss."
The two men met for a conversation, not a briefing, which speaks well for the confidence of both the president-elect and the chairman. Admiral Mullen emerged from this first meeting with "a view of the next president as a non-ideological pragmatist who was willing to both listen and lead," Karen DeYoung reported in Sunday's Washington Post. Admiral Mullen's spokesman, Captain John Kirby, told her that the chairman "felt very good, very positive" about the meeting.
We can all breathe a sigh of relief for that. For any number of reasons Mr. Obama needs the chairman of the Joint Chiefs on his side (and vice versa, of course), but for my particular cause it is absolutely essential. Sixteen years ago, when Bill Clinton was campaigning for the presidency, he said that he would sign an executive order to permit gays and lesbians to serve openly in the armed forces. But he hadn't discussed the matter with the Joint Chiefs or its chairman, Colin Powell, and that was a fatal error. The Pentagon generally took a dim view of President Clinton. Some regarded him as a draft dodger who stayed out of Vietnam by staying in college - much like Vice President Cheney, but that's another story (and Mr. Cheney won't be around much longer, anyway). The military brass were not disposed to like Bill Clinton, and his announcement - without consulting those who would have to carry out his order - that he would end the ban unilaterally ensured their continued opposition. The resulting brouhaha consumed much of President Clinton's first year in office and, instead of lifting the ban, Congress with the approval of the Pentagon handed the president the compromise known as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," which satisfied no one and has never worked. The military does ask, and the discriminatory and basically un-American law encourages too many to become snitches, a role that doesn't fit anybody's honor code. The result was a very costly mess, which the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network has been trying for fifteen years to clean up.
We are not deluding ourselves at SLDN. We know that matters of extreme urgency are crying for the next president's attention. There is the economic meltdown, for example, and the prospect of a serious recession looming ahead. There is the winding down of the war in Iraq and, apparently, the stepping up of the war in Afghanistan. In the meantime, the polar ice is melting and the seas are rising as the globe gets warmer.
But these critical issues do not supplant the fact that the last discriminatory law on the books of the United States needs to be junked. Make no mistake: this law can be repealed and it can happen in the next Congress. We know that the president-elect wants to do it. As poll after poll has shown, the people are already on his side but that is not enough. He must have the Pentagon and a majority of the House and the Senate as well. The groundwork has to be laid and the votes lined up one by one by one. That's the way things get done in Washington.
And that's how the tortoise beat the hare - step by step by step. "No drama Obama" knows that very well. It has worked very well for him. That's how he won the nomination and then the election -- step by step by step.
12-03-08 By Aubrey Sarvis, SLDN Executive Director |
4 Comments
Comments for this entry are closed.Jeremy Johnson in Washington, D.C. on December 11, 2008 at 05.41 pm
SLDN has fought a long battle and with Obama’s election, it’s easy to be fanatically enthusiastic and hugely skeptical all at the same time. At this moment, I believe that the President-elect has every INTENTION of supporting a repeal. What makes me wary, as it does many folks, is the language accompanying that promise. “Not now, but soon.” Legislation can be written for just about every imaginable circumstance. It can be passed to recognize a single moment in history or to amend the foundational document that governs us. There is no legitimate reason to delay signing a legislative repeal… especially when Obama says his focus is on preparation and smooth transition. By passing a bill with an implementation date attached, Congress can give the DoD however long they need to prepare, but failing to pass anything only allows time to bury the issue again… and again. The military answers to Congress and the Commander in Chief. If legislation is passed and they know what the end result has to be, and they know they have “this much time” to make it happen, they will. If you wait, they will use military tactics to talk circles around the issue and you’ll never get anywhere. So now, we, as current and former veterans, will just have to wait and see who is going to make the next move.
Benjamin in Oregon on December 07, 2008 at 06.51 pm
My question is, if and when this happens, what will come of men and women like myself who were discharged under DADT?
Will we get even the slightest of an apology? Or will everyone act like ,” Alright, next page.”?
No one has even directly addressed that issue. I haven’t heard much from anyone even president Obama about possibly how the correction of records awarding of campaign ribbon and citations and benefits denied for those who came out or were coerced into saying they were gay, lesbian or bi sexual. What will happen to us?
Joe in California on December 04, 2008 at 07.45 pm
I have served quietly as a gay man in the military since 2000. I understand that the political engine needs time to effect change on national policy. I am proud to serve my nation as a linguist. The military desperately needs individuals with the skills that I posses. However, every day that passes is another that tears away at my soul.
I cannot attend annual events like the the Air Force Ball, or holiday parties because I refuse to present a false image by bringing a female date. I dare not speak out against other service members in my work area for saying derrogatory things about homosexuals for fear of raising suspicion. There is no way I can atend any sort of gay pride event, or go to any gay clubs without feeling a great deal of paranoia. Even so, I cannot bring myself to seek another path for my life because I feel a deep comitment to serve in the military for as long as I am able to do so.
The path to equality for gay folks in the U.S. military may need to be done step by step as you say. But please keep in mind, every day that passes is another slap in the face from the very same nation that I have pledged my life to defend.
James E. Pietrangelo, II in Vermont on December 03, 2008 at 03.22 pm
Mr. Sarvis’ post is misguided and demonstrates why Gays in America have not yet achieved equality across all spectrums in life: rather than unrelentingly and stridently demanding equal rights, many if not most Gays have settled for simply asking for them and hoping that their requests eventually fall upon sympathetic ears.
In one breath, Mr. Sarvis says that “under Obama, ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ will pass away…because Obama said so,” and then in another breath, Mr. Sarvis says “but it will not happen unless the White House, the Department of Defense, the Joint Chiefs, and the Congress forge a new working relationship to make it a reality.” In other words, Mr. Sarvis—obviously having bought Obama’s ‘Messiah’ message hook, line, and sinker: if Obama says it, it must be true —is parroting the Obama camp’s “consensus” argument—that DADT will not be dealt with until future-President Obama reaches a political “consensus.” But “consensus” is coward-speak for “I don’t have the guts to do it myself.” Obama does not need any “consensus” to do the right thing; he could immediately use his executive powers and legislative majority to effect equality for Gays. In particular, he could, on his very first day in office, sign an executive order effectively neutralizing DADT. He would be the commander-in-chief, and any generals or other military personnel who would not like his order would simply either obey it—just as they do and must any other order—or resign. Indeed, previous presidents, from Lincoln to Eisenhower to Johnson, used their presidential authority and influence to effect equality for Blacks despite strong political opposition. If they had waited for “consensus” like Obama and Mr. Sarvis urge, Blacks would still be slaves or second-class citizens. Obama is simply either too cowardly or too bigoted himself to effect equality for Gays.
If it were Black Americans instead of Gay Americans denied the opportunity to serve in the Military and systematically abused in the Military—and otherwise relegated to second-class citizenship in this country—Obama would break his neck to effect complete equality on the very first day of his administration—regardless of consensus. But, as we know from his association with his racist church pastor, Obama is no real civil-rights proponent or supporter. He talks equality, but acts politically.
We’ve heard and seen it all before. Bill Clinton too promised equality in the Military for Gays. His political consensus was DADT. Nothing more need be said.
The only way DADT is going to fall is if Gays push it over ourselves.