Obama Administration Defers "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Repeal to 2013

[mitchtv]

When Secretary of Defense Robert Gates sent a letter to Congressman Ike Skelton today urging Congress not to repeal "don't ask, don't tell" in 2010, he wasn't just kicking the can down the road a little. He was announcing a de facto White House decision to delay action on the gays-in-the-military issue for a very long time.

According to Gates, Congress must await the results of a Pentagon study group which is looking into "don't ask, don't tell," and which is slated to finish its work in December, 2010. On its face, the request sounds fair enough. Why, after all, should civilian politicians meddle in military personnel policy before the Pentagon determines which policy makes most sense?

To answer this question, two factors must be considered. First, the letter must be understood as a signal from the White House, not just the military. As my colleague Christopher Neff has said, "the Department of Defense is not its own branch of government. The Secretary of Defense serves the President." The letter, in other words, reflects a decision by the Obama Administration to abandon repeal efforts in 2010.

Second, the Administration knows full well that if "don't ask, don't tell" is not eliminated now, repeal likely will have to wait until the next presidential term if not later. The political environment in Congress soon will become much more challenging than it is now, and the opportunity to repeal the law probably will diminish if not disappear as a result


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aaron-belkin/obama-administration-defe_b_559487.html

Oh well, he almost tried

[bluestateguy]

1. This does not have to be rocket science

One of the saddest aspects of the current situation is that, surprisingly, gay rights groups may block the one, remaining politically viable solution that would improve national security, deliver a victory to the White House, and honor the letter and spirit of Secretary Gates's request. According to this scenario, Congress would repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" law in 2010 while providing discretion to the Secretary of Defense regarding implementation.

Some groups believe that when Congress repeals the law, it must simultaneously mandate an affirmative requirement for the Pentagon to implement a non-discrimination standard. This is not, however, necessary. By eliminating the "don't ask, don't tell" law but refraining from insisting on a non-discrimination standard, Congress would allow Secretary Gates to formulate new regulations over time, after the Pentagon completes its study. There are now enough votes in the Senate to pass this option.

Some gay rights groups oppose it, however, because they fear that a legislative option that does not include a specific, statutory implementation plan would allow a future administrations to reinstate the gay ban.

Pass the repeal inside the defense authorization bill with the proviso that the ban ends in 2011 no matter what; play along and let the Pentagon do their silly little "study", which would have to be directed toward how the policy is repealed, not if.

I am not giving up and will not give up until the last gavel sounds the adjournment of this Congress. So Doomers and Gloomers, shoo! You go away!

[IndianaJoe]

2. Is DADT something Obama could repeal simply with an

Executive Order, as Commander-in-Chief?

[mitchtv]

3. not really, it was codified in the Clinton years

when he tried to include Gays, now, you need a law. No more shit that can be wiped out when the next Puke gets in, like Gay rights in Virginia, Arizona

[bluestateguy]

4. No

and you can thank William Jefferson Clinton for that, as he signed the DADT comprom--, er, sellout, which was enacted by Congress.

[ShadowLiberal]

5. Only temporarily, he or another president could reinstate it at any time, unless congress repeals it

[frebrd]

6. So much for "hope'n'change" n/t

:grr:

[Bluenorthwest]

7. Of course.

Cowards of the first order.

[Touchdown]

8. Well, that's good. It looks like I'll save $500 a year in donations

for 4 years! Counting interest, I might buy an upgrade to my Nikon DSLR in 2013.

Sorry Dems! But as you taught me, we have to have priorities!

[WillParkinson]

9. I rec'd the post...

But wish I could rec this one a lot of times.

[FreeState]

10. If DADT is not ended and EDNA is not law in 2012 I'm not voting

Except in state and local races - enough is enough.

[WillParkinson]

11. But...but...you want Palin to win!

Because she's so much worse. Or something like that.

[Touchdown]

18. As much as it pains the Democrats here, I have to say this.

DADT and DOMA were passed under a Democrat, not a Republican. As evil, stupid, and disastrous for the world as George Bush was, he didn't do anything to gay people by adding to them.

I'm tired of this "We should be happy we're being raped by a nicer political party" line. My life is not any more freer now, than I was under Chimpy.

[FreeState]

23. That line of reasoning always pisses me off as well

I really don't care who put injustice and inequality in the current law - I care about who will make us all equal. Making excuses or tossing blame around wont salve the problem or make the current leadership any more palatable IMO.

[GodlessBiker]

12. This is disgusting. Who, exactly, is the Commander-in-Chief?

[Smarmie Doofus]

13. If it's true that Congress can do a simple repeal......

>>>>Some groups believe that when Congress repeals the law, it must simultaneously mandate an affirmative requirement for the Pentagon to implement a non-discrimination standard. This is not, however, necessary. By eliminating the "don't ask, don't tell" law but refraining from insisting on a non-discrimination standard, Congress would allow Secretary Gates to formulate new regulations over time, after the Pentagon completes its study. There are now enough votes in the Senate to pass this option>>>>>>>>>>.

........without ADDING an explicit non-discrimination statute ( which is apparently where Obama won't ) go, I'd favor going ahead with it.

Half a loaf, etc etc etc. Plus I think it is true that it will be very HARD for future RW admin/congress to resurrect DADT once it's in storage. Not impossible, but unlikely.


Not defending President Transformational here, ( Who could have predicted his remarkable predictability?} just making a grudging concession to politics as the art of the possible.


It would be nice to get rid of that fucking law.... even if we can't as yet dance on it's grave.

[mitchtv]

14. what I don't want is a Presidential directive or such

that will disappear the second this one gets the boot. I'll wait til the end of this congress before I turn on Fierce advocate.

[dickthegrouch]

15. Over my dead body!!!!

I'm so sick of this.
Our civil rights are trampled every day. Where's the huge demonstrations? (IMHO All our money to fund them was stolen by Goldman Sachs et al).

It will cost them NOTHING to repeal this. Mr President: Tear down this wall.

[GeorgeGist]

16. Why are GLBTs in the military waiting for permission?

Are they all cowards?

Afterall, they are FREE to TELL anyone, whenever they choose.

[mitchtv]

17. because many would prefer to keep

their jobs/careers. It's easy to call names

[sui generis]

21. If you come out in medical service and you've had formal training

say, MD, PA, SA, etc., you will get the bill for your education along with your discharge papers.

Now THAT'S a fine "thank you for your service". In the military more than almost anywhere else the people who aren't telling are NOT at all of a group mind and risk exposing themselves merely by participating in even discussing or planning such a thing.

Just the same, a part of me thinks that if over 10% of the military suddenly came out, it would short circuit our bonehead president's inability to be a real leader on this topic. There is just no way to organize that, that wouldn't place people who decide not to participate in danger of being outed against their personal wishes.

[sui generis]

19. I'm not disappointed.

I didn't expect any less from this lip service administration.

Just as soon as a real leader runs for office I'm voting for him or her, regardless of their party affiliation. I hope it's a democrat but the incumbent is definitely not in that category when it comes to our issues.

[mitchtv]

22. agreed

I am neither disappointed, nor suprised
I plan to write in Howard Dean at this point

[Teka]

20. Disgusting Cowards - OBAMA, PELOSI, REID

Makes me sick.

[bigwillq]

26. Hello.

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[Teka]

27. Thanks :)

Glad to be here

[RetiredTrotskyite]

24. Let's Face It....

We were used to get Obama into office. He never intended to do anything for us. He and the rest of the lot in Congress are nothing but cowards. Sure, we have a decent chance of getting DADT overturned NOW, but Obama is hoping that once it's made clear there will be no action by Congress at this time, the fundies will flock to his banner in 2012.

Maybe the Obama lovers on here are finally getting their eyes opened.

[Smashcut]

25. If true, they can expect no vote from me in 2012

[mitchtv]

28. this lame duck session is our only chance

after the next congress comes in, forget it. I will bolt and write in Dr Dean in '12

[Divine Discontent]

29. that is the downfall of his admin I believe - if DADT is thrown off down the road, hoping for a 2nd

term. He will certainly experience a few points drop in votes because a large percentage of GLBTers watch this closely...

If a man or woman can die for this country and be shipped back in a box, they should be able to kiss their partner on base without fear of being kicked out...

disgusting politics....