[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 168 (Friday, December 17, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10504-S10505]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL

  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in support of 
repealing the so-called don't ask, don't tell policy.
  It has been 17 years since this misguided policy was enacted. I 
believed then, as I believe now, that it was wrong for Congress to 
legislate in this area. Prohibiting gays and lesbians from openly 
serving in our Armed Forces is contrary to our Nation's values and 
weakens our military's ability to recruit and retain competent 
individuals with critical skills.
  By codifying a policy that reinforces discrimination, intolerance, 
and inequality, we established a system that is inconsistent with the 
rights embodied in our Constitution and the fundamental notion that a 
person should be judged squarely on the basis of his or her 
qualifications--not the color of their skin, religious beliefs, or 
sexual orientation.
  I recently had the opportunity to visit President Franklin 
Roosevelt's home in New York--there was a quote that I saw that was 
particularly moving. In a campaign address delivered in 1940, FDR 
stated:

       I see an America devoted to our freedom--unified by 
     tolerance and by religious faith--a people consecrated to 
     peace, a people confidant in strength because their body and 
     their spirit are secure and unafraid.

  I think this quote does a good job of capturing the true strength of 
America--a tolerant people committed to the preservation of freedom.
  The ability of a person to serve in our Nation's military should be 
based on his or her experience, qualifications and conduct. Since the 
inception of the don't ask, don't tell policy in 1993, over 14,000 gay 
and lesbian servicemembers have been discharged solely because of their 
sexuality.
  We have lost decorated soldiers and those with mission critical 
skills, such as Arabic linguists and intelligence specialists. Aside 
from the loss of necessary expertise, we've also wasted hundreds of 
millions of dollars in taxpayer money in discharging and replacing 
individuals who were completely willing and able to serve our country.
  The policy is also contrary to the values held by our military 
professionals. In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, 
Admiral Mullen, Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, eloquently 
expressed this point:

       No matter how I look at the issue, I cannot escape being 
     troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which 
     forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order 
     to defend their fellow citizens. For me personally, it comes 
     down to integrity--theirs as individuals and ours as an 
     institution.

  When a person enlists in our Armed Forces and puts his or her life in 
harm's way in defense of our country, they should be able to serve with 
honor and dignity without being asked to live a life of deception.
  Secretary Gates ordered that a comprehensive review be conducted to 
assess the impact the repeal of the law could have on military 
effectiveness and to make recommendations about how a change could be 
implemented. The report, which was released a couple of weeks ago, 
surveyed thousands of active and reserve servicemembers as well as 
their families, veterans groups, health officials, and service 
academies. It is my understanding that this unprecedented report was 
the most comprehensive review of a personnel matter ever conducted.
  The key finding from this review is that the risk of repealing the 
don't ask, don't tell policy to overall military effectiveness is low 
and that the limited disruptions that may occur in

[[Page S10505]]

the short-term can be addressed adequately through leadership, 
education, and training. In short, the Armed Forces are capable of 
accommodating this change without hampering unit cohesion, readiness, 
recruiting, and combat operations.
  There will never be complete unanimity when it comes to these types 
of controversial issues. However, the study found that 70 percent of 
military personnel believed that repealing the law would have positive, 
mixed, or no effect on them doing their jobs--only 30 percent 
anticipated that there would be negative consequences. And it is 
particularly telling that 92 percent of troops who served with a gay or 
lesbian servicemember believed their ability to work together was very 
good, good, or neither good or bad.
  We've had almost two decades to evaluate the success or failure of 
this policy and the legislation we are debating takes a very judicious 
approach. The bill stipulates that the repeal of the policy will not 
take effect until 60 days after the President, Secretary of Defense, 
and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff make certain certifications. 
In particular, that sufficient implementation procedures are in place 
to ensure the repeal could be carried out in a manner consistent with 
standards of military readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, and 
recruiting and retention. In my view this is a very reasonable 
approach.
  The reality is that it is no longer a question of whether this policy 
should be repealed, it is a matter of how it should be and in what 
matter. If Congress fails to act, it is very likely that the courts 
will. If this occurs, implementation may be more difficult and the 
changes may occur in a more haphazard manner as cases move slowly 
through the courts.
  Keeping this law in place doesn't make us any safer and it is 
inconsistent with our Nation's commitment to equality. I urge my 
colleagues to support the repeal of this ill-advised policy.

                          ____________________