Gillibrand Slaps Hold on Navy Nominee Over Sex Assault Comments

[n2doc]

BY DAN FRIEDMAN
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand will object to a Senate vote to confirm President Obama’s nominee for undersecretary of the Navy, Jo Ann Rooney, due to Rooney's stated concern about military prosecutions based “on evidence” rather than “order and discipline.”

Over Gillibrand’s opposition, the Senate Armed Services Committee voted Thursday to report out Rooney’s nomination, sending the nomination to the full Senate for possible confirmation.


But Gillibrand said she will place a hold on Rooney. That means the nomination can’t receive a confirmation vote without first mustering 60 votes to overcome the objection – or unless Gillibrand is persuaded to lift the hold.


The move is part of a push by Gillibrand to force the Armed Services to remove sexual assault cases and other crimes from the military chain of command.


more

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dc/2013/10/gillibrand-slaps-hold-on-navy-nominee-over-sex-assault-comments

[Mass]

1. Good for her. I am so tired of Democrats being just a little better than Republicans on these types

of issues.

[maddezmom]

2. Good n/t

[MADem]

3. I need to know more, here.

This would be the first female SECNAV, to my knowledge.

Often times, because people are reluctant to make an accusation contemporaneous with the event, there is no "evidence."

I don't know what this woman means when she says

“The impact would be decisions based on evidence rather than the interest in preserving good order and discipline,” Rooney wrote. “I believe this will result in fewer prosecutions and therefore defeat the very problem that I understand it seeks to address.”

If she's talking about physical evidence, she's right. If she's talking about testimony, that's a different issue.

I would like to see these things stay within the chain of command, but with an oversight mechanism--someone who flies in and looms over the process, and reports back to the CNO as to how it's going. That'll keep everyone honest and train the culture of leadership so that this kind of shit isn't kicked over. It's not appropriate to undermine leadership's authority without evidence, but at the same token, there is a problem in the military and this methodology is the best of both worlds because it leaves the CO in charge of the process while also keeping him or her honest.

[gopiscrap]

4. good for her