[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Pages 16043-16044]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION

  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I come to the floor to discuss the 
Defense authorization bill and the don't ask, don't tell provisions 
included in it. Let me begin by making my position crystal clear: I 
agree with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, ADM Mike Mullen, 
that the don't ask, don't tell law should be repealed. It should be 
repealed contingent upon the certifications of the President, the 
Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff 
that its repeal would not have an adverse impact on military readiness, 
recruitment, and retention. Those are exactly the provisions included 
in the Defense authorization bill.
  My view is that our Armed Forces should welcome the service of any 
qualified individual who is willing and capable of serving our country. 
The bottom line for me is this: If an individual is willing to put on 
the uniform of our country, to be deployed in war zones such as Iraq 
and Afghanistan, to risk his or her life for our country, then we 
should be expressing our gratitude to those individuals, not trying to 
exclude them from serving or expel them from the force.
  That is why during consideration of this bill in May, I supported the 
compromise provisions that were put forth by Senator Lieberman and 
Senator Levin. At a previous Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, I 
asked Admiral Mullen if there was any evidence at all that allowing gay 
and lesbian troops to serve had harmed military readiness in those 
countries that allow their service now. At least 28 countries, 
including Great Britain, Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, and Israel 
allow open service by lesbian and gay troops. We have no greater allies 
than Great Britain, Australia, Canada, and Israel. None of these 
countries--not one--reports morale or recruitment problems. At least 
nine of these countries have deployed their forces alongside American 
troops in Operation Iraqi Freedom, and at least 12 of these nations are 
allowing open service and are currently fighting alongside U.S. troops 
in Afghanistan.
  There is a cost involved to end our current policy. According to a 
2005 GAO report, American taxpayers spend more than $30 million each 
year to train replacements for gay troops discharged under the don't 
ask, don't tell policy. The total cost reported since the statute was 
implemented, according to GAO, has been nearly $200 million. That 
doesn't count the administrative and legal costs associated with 
investigations and hearings, and the military schooling of gay troops 
such as pilot training and linguist training.
  We are losing highly skilled troops to this policy. According to the 
GAO, 8 percent of the servicemembers let go under don't ask, don't tell 
held critical occupations defined as services such as interpreters. 
Three percent had skills in an important foreign language such as 
Arabic, Farsi or Korean.
  More than 13,000 troops have been dismissed from the military simply 
because of their sexual orientation since President Clinton signed this 
law in 1993. Society has changed so much since 1993, and we need to 
change this policy as well.
  But let me say that I respect the views of those who disagree with me 
on this issue, such as the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services 
Committee, Senator McCain; and I will defend the right of my colleagues 
to offer amendments on this issue and other issues that are being 
brought up in connection with the Defense authorization bill.
  There are many controversial issues in this bill. They deserve to 
have a civil, fair, and open debate on the Senate floor. That is why I 
am so disappointed that rather than allowing full and open debate and 
the opportunity for amendments from both sides of the aisle, the 
majority leader apparently intends to shut down the debate and exclude 
Republicans from offering a number of amendments.
  This would be the 116th time in this Congress that the majority 
leader or another member of the majority has filed cloture rather than 
proceeding to the bill under an agreement that would allow amendments 
to be debated.
  What concerns me even more is the practice of filling the amendment 
tree to prevent Republican amendments. If that is done on this bill, it 
will be the 40th time.
  I find myself on the horns of a dilemma. I support the provisions in 
this bill. I debated for them. I was the sole Republican in the 
committee who voted for the Lieberman-Levin language on don't ask, 
don't tell. I think it is the right thing to do. I think it is only 
fair. I think we should welcome the service of these individuals who 
are willing and capable of serving their country. But I cannot vote to 
proceed to this bill under a situation that is going to shut down the 
debate and preclude Republican amendments. That, too, is not fair.
  So I am going to make one final plea to my colleagues to enter into a 
fair time agreement that will allow full and open debate, full and open 
amendments to all the provisions of this bill, including don't ask, 
don't tell, even though I will vote against the amendment to strike 
don't ask, don't tell provisions from this bill.
  Now is not the time to play politics simply because an election is 
looming in a few weeks. Again, I call upon the majority leader to work 
with the Republican leaders to negotiate an agreement on the terms of 
debate for this

[[Page 16044]]

bill so that we can debate this important defense policy bill this 
week, including the vital issue of don't ask, don't tell.
  I thank the Chair.

                          ____________________