Sort of.
The US Senate voted today to repeal the military policy of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) that was first passed in 1993 as an upgrade to the former military policy on gay and lesbian personnel. Before that, it was possible to just whisper that Joe X. was a "homo" and the military could start on the procedures to drum him out.
Or not.
Back in the late 70's, I had a roommate who was gay. He was in the military and a flaming queen. He was also the chief steno to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, with the concomitant security clearances, and for which he had just been re-certified. He died a few years later, and the military had to know he was gay, yet, because he was such a good steno, nothing was ever done about it.
Even during the Vietnam War, many men who were trying to avoid the conflict told their draft boards that they "had homosexual thoughts" or were "actively homosexual" and yet the military said, "So what? We still need you -- you're on your way to 'Nam. Have a nice trip."
When I was draft-eligible, in 1973, the war had wound down, and there was not much likelihood that I would face conscription, even though my draft lottery number was 70, and the first 95 were re-classified as 1-A (ready to go). College deferments were no longer available, and, if the military had needed us, we would have been drafted if our number was called.
Amazingly, when Vietnam was over and the US wasn't involved in active military operations, "we don't care" turned into "now, you got our attention." And, this was one of the factors that led to the 1992 Clinton-Gore campaign pledge of allowing open gays and lesbians to serve honorably.
In actual fact, all throughout history, gay men have fought and died along with their heterosexual comrades. Many countries have allowed open gays to serve in their military forces for years.
Needless to say, when Bill Clinton tried to change the policy in 1993, the "fit hit the shan," and the Congress got involved. The compromise that came about was DADT. Someone gay or lesbian could serve, but not be open about it. Essentially, the brass was told "Don't Ask," and the gay personnel were advised, "Don't Tell." The military would no longer go on a witch hunt and try to find out one's sexual orientation, but, if it became an issue, then, the military would, in its discretion, begin the separation proceedings.
Seems that nobody was happy with the results. Most Republicans, by and large, didn't want any change, liberal Democrats wanted a complete reversal of policy, and the affected gays and lesbians still had to be in the closet to stay in the service. Thus, the long battle to repeal DADT.
Things got so stupid that, back during the second Gulf War, there was a shortage of Arabic speakers, so the military offered training to people in Arabic, so that they could help translate television and radio broadcasts, newspapers, and documents seized. That should have greatly helped the war effort.
But, nooooooo....
Some thirty-seven of them were gay or lesbian! So, rather than use the talents of these translators, the military refused to use them. So, we had a shortage of translators, we trained people to be translators, and then we kicked three dozen or more to the curb because of their sexual orientation. Alllllrighty, then.
And just how did that work out for us? Intelligence, shmintelligence.
President Obama won election promising the repeal of DADT, yet, when challenged in the courts, his Administration pleaded for a stay of the court's ruling. Yes, the logic went, the Congress was the one that passed the original legislation, the Congress should be the one to repeal it.
What a concept! It went to the courts because the Congress had not acted.
I have spoken to, and know of, a number of former service personnel, most of whom were not even involved in the field of battle, but were separated because of DADT. They tell me they'd jump at the chance to get back in because they loved the military. Some even had more than a dozen years in and wanted to stay until retirement.
So, what happens now...?
Now that the repeal of DADT has passed, there are some questions that still need to be resolved. The legislation gives the Secretary of Defense the power to "certify" that the military is ready for repeal, but it's not effective until 60 days after that.
In the meantime:
- The DOD will have to come up with procedures, training, and regulations regarding how the new law will be implemented. It's assumed this will take months, and will be phased in.
- The Secretary of Defense will certify that the military is ready for the changes to be effective.
- Sixty days thereafter, buh-byee DADT.
- What happens with investigations currently in the separation pipeline? If the policy is going to be repealed eventually, is there any reason to continue those investigations, especially in light of our budgetary crisis?
- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), with whom I rarely agree, did ask President Obama today to order the military to cease and desist any further investigations from here on out, since the repeal is coming.
- What will be done with re-admitting service members who wish to continue their military service after the repeal? Seniority, benefits, whatever else come into play. I'm assuming that will be handled in the DOD review of regulations, training, and so forth.
Until we get more details on implementation, the answer remains: sort of.
