[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 7]
[House]
[Page 9960]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




         DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL: ``IT COMES DOWN TO INTEGRITY''

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, we heard all of the arguments before we had 
our votes yesterday on Don't Ask, Don't Tell, but in the past we heard 
very similar arguments. The Secretary of the Army said he was concerned 
about how the proposed change would affect the efficiency of the Army. 
A 5-star general warned of social experiments and worried that with 
reform in military personnel policy, we may have difficulty attaining 
high morale.
  Those are not quotations from 2010, Mr. Speaker. Those are not 
quotations about the right of gay and lesbian Americans to serve openly 
in the military. They are from more than 60 years ago during the debate 
over racial integration of the Armed Forces. Does anyone believe they 
were right? If so, please speak up.
  Is anyone prepared to argue that our military has suffered from the 
full participation of African Americans in its ranks? Thankfully, a 
majority in this body remembered this history lesson last night when we 
made history by voting to repeal the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy, an 
embarrassment unworthy of a great country and a great military.
  It has been responsible for the discharge of 13,000 honorable 
Americans, men and women who were told their services were dispensable 
not because of how they behaved, but because of who they are. It has 
done violence to cherished American values like equality, inclusion, 
and tolerance. And it has damaged our national security, too.
  Given the military's recruitment challenges at a moment that we're 
still, unfortunately, fighting two wars, it is incomprehensible to me 
that we would reject any capable person who wishes to serve. It was 
particularly galling to watch as hundreds of language specialists who 
could speak Farsi and Arabic were dismissed just when they were needed 
the most, when our occupation of Iraq began.
  The assertion that openly gay servicemembers would undermine unit 
cohesion is just bunk, Mr. Speaker. It is an argument based on fear, 
not fact. The research suggests that Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are 
comfortable serving side by side with fellow soldiers who happen to be 
gay or lesbian. To suggest otherwise is to insult our troops, as the 
author of the amendment, Mr. Murphy, has pointed out, because it 
assumes our soldiers are so unprofessional, and even unpatriotic, that 
they would let another soldier's sexual orientation distract them from 
the mission.
  Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, may have 
said it best when he said, ``I cannot escape being troubled by . . . 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.''
  And last night, Mr. Speaker, it came down to our integrity, the 
integrity of those of us who have the privilege to serve in the 
people's House. I can't remember too many prouder moments during my 
time here, because at least we have the integrity to do what's right--
to support our troops and strengthen our military by repealing the 
cruel and un-American Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy.

                          ____________________