    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1993, Book I)]
    [January 29, 1993]
    [Pages 20-22]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    [[Page 20]]

    The President's News Conference
    January 29, 1993

    Homosexuals in the Military

        The President. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I'm sorry, we
    had a last-minute delay occasioned by another issue, not this one.
        The debate over whether to lift the ban on homosexuals in the
    military has, to put it mildly, sparked a great deal of interest over
    the last few days. Today, as you know, I have reached an agreement, at
    least with Senator Nunn and Senator Mitchell, about how we will proceed
    in the next few days. But first I would like to explain what I believe
    about this issue and why, and what I have decided to do after a long
    conversation, and a very good one, with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and
    discussions with several Members of Congress.
        The issue is not whether there should be homosexuals in the
    military. Everyone concedes that there are. The issue is whether men and
    women who can and have served with real distinction should be excluded
    from military service solely on the basis of their status. And I believe
    they should not.
        The principle on which I base this position is this: I believe that
    American citizens who want to serve their country should be able to do
    so unless their conduct disqualifies them from doing so. Military life
    is fundamentally different from civilian society; it necessarily has a
    different and stricter code of conduct, even a different code of
    justice. Nonetheless, individuals who are prepared to accept all
    necessary restrictions on their behavior, many of which would be
    intolerable in civilian society, should be able to serve their country
    honorably and well.
        I have asked the Secretary of Defense to submit by July the 15th a
    draft Executive order, after full consultation with military and
    congressional leaders and concerned individuals outside of the
    Government, which would end the present policy of the exclusion from
    military service solely on the basis of sexual orientation and at the
    same time establish rigorous standards regarding sexual conduct to be
    applied to all military personnel.
        This draft order will be accompanied by a study conducted during the
    next 6 months on the real, practical problems that would be involved in
    this revision of policy, so that we will have a practical, realistic
    approach consistent with the high standards of combat effectiveness and
    unit cohesion that our armed services must maintain. I agree with the
    Joint Chiefs that the highest standards of conduct must be required.
        The change cannot and should not be accomplished overnight. It does
    require extensive consultation with the Joint Chiefs, experts in the
    Congress and in the legal community, joined by my administration and
    others. We've consulted closely to date and will do so in the future.
    During that process, interim measures will be placed into effect which,
    I hope, again, sharpen the focus of this debate. The Joint Chiefs of
    Staff have agreed to remove the question regarding one's sexual
    orientation from future versions of the enlistment application, and it
    will not be asked in the interim.
        We also all agree that a very high standard of conduct can and must
    be applied. So the single area of disagreement is this: Should someone
    be able to serve their country in uniform if they say they are
    homosexuals, but they do nothing which violates the code of conduct or
    undermines unit cohesion or morale, apart from that statement? That is
    what all the furor of the last few days has been about. And the
    practical and not insignificant issues raised by that issue are what
    will be studied in the next 6 months.
        Through this period ending July 15th, the Department of Justice will
    seek continuances in pending court cases involving reinstatement. And
    administrative separation under current Department of Defense policies
    based on status alone will be stayed pending completion of this review.
    The final discharge in cases based only on status will be suspended
    until the President has an opportunity to review and act upon the final
    recommendations of the Secretary of Defense with respect to the current
    policy. In the meantime, a member whose discharge has been suspended by
    the Attorney General will be separated from active duty and placed in
    standby reserve until the final report of the Secretary of Defense and
    the final action of the President. This is the agreement that I have
    reached with Senator Nunn and Senator Mitchell.

    [[Page 21]]

        During this review process, I will work with the Congress. And I
    believe the compromise announced today by the Senators and by me shows
    that we can work together to end the gridlock that has plagued our city
    for too long.
        This compromise is not everything I would have hoped for or
    everything that I have stood for, but it is plainly a substantial step
    in the right direction. And it will allow us to move forward on other
    terribly important issues affecting far more Americans.
        My administration came to this city with a mission to bring critical
    issues of reform and renewal and economic revitalization to the public
    debate, issues that are central to the lives of all Americans. We are
    working on an economic reform agenda that will begin with an address to
    the joint session of Congress on February 17th. In the coming months the
    White House Task Force on Health Care, chaired by the First Lady, will
    complete work on a comprehensive health care reform proposal to be
    submitted to Congress within 100 days of the commencement of this
    administration. We will be designing a system of national service to
    begin a season of service in which our Nation's unmet needs are
    addressed and we provide more young people the opportunity to go to
    college. We will be proposing comprehensive welfare reform legislation
    and other important initiatives.
        I applaud the work that has been done in the last 2 or 3 days by
    Senator Nunn, Senator Mitchell, and others to enable us to move forward
    on a principle that is important to me without shutting the Government
    down and running the risk of not even addressing the family and medical
    leave issue, which is so important to America's families, before
    Congress goes into its recess. I am looking forward to getting on with
    this issue over the next 6 months and with these other issues which were
    so central to the campaign and, far more importantly, are so important
    to the lives of all the American people.
        Q. Mr. President, yesterday a Federal court in California said that
    the military ban on homosexuals was unconstitutional. Will you direct
    the Navy and the Justice Department not to appeal that decision? And how
    does that ruling strengthen your hand in this case?
        The President. Well, it makes one point. I think it strengthens my
    hand, if you will, in two ways. One, I agree with the principle embodied
    in the case. I have not read the opinion, but as I understand it, the
    opinion draws the distinction that I seek to draw between conduct and
    status. And secondly, it makes the practical point I have been making
    all along, which is that there is not insignificant chance that this
    matter would ultimately be resolved in the courts in a way that would
    open admission into the military without the opportunity to deal with
    this whole range of practical issues, which everyone who has ever
    thought about it or talked it through concedes are there. So I think it
    can--it strengthens my hand on the principle as well as on the process.
        Q. Mr. President, there's a glass of water there, by the way, while
    I ask the question. Do you think, since you promised during the
    campaign--your literature put out a very clear statement: lift the ban
    on homosexuals in the military immediately--do you think you didn't
    think through these practical problems? What have you learned from this
    experience in dealing with powerful members of the Senate and the Joint
    Chiefs? And how much of a problem is this for you to accept a compromise
    which doesn't meet your real goals?
        The President. Well, I haven't given up on my real goals. I think
    this is a dramatic step forward. Normally, in the history of civil
    rights advancements, Presidents have not necessarily been in the
    forefront in the beginning. So I think the fact that we actually have
    the Joint Chiefs of Staff agreeing that it's time to take this question
    off the enlistment form, that there ought to be a serious examination of
    how this would be done, even though they haven't agreed that it should
    be done; that the Senate, if they vote for the motion advocated by
    Senators Nunn and Mitchell, will agree; Senators who don't agree that
    the policy should be changed are agreeing that we ought to have a chance
    to work through this for 6 months and persuade them of that, I think, is
    very, very significant.
        Now, I would remind you that any President's Executive order can be
    overturned by an act of Congress. The President can then veto the act of
    Congress and try to have his veto sustained if the act stands on its own
    as a simple issue that could always be vetoed. But I always knew that
    there was a chance that Congress would disagree with my position. I can
    only tell you that I still think I'm right; I feel comfortable about the
    way we have done this; and I'm going to maintain the commitment that I
    have.

    [[Page 22]]

        Q. But do you think that you hadn't examined the practical
    problems----
        Q. Sir, I just wonder, do you think in retrospect that--obviously,
    you didn't intend the first week--I'm sorry, you want to----
        The President. No, I had always planned to allow some period of time
    during which policies would be developed to deal with what I think are
    the significant practical problems. This, in effect, may reverse the
    process over what I intended to do, but there has to be a time in which
    these issues, these practical issues are developed and policies are
    developed to deal with them.
        Q. Obviously, you didn't intend the first week of your
    administration, given your promise to have the laser focus on the
    economy, to be seen around the country as military gay rights week. I
    wonder if in retrospect you think you could have done things differently
    to have avoided that happening?
        The President. I don't know how I could have done that. The Joint
    Chiefs asked for a meeting about a number of issues, in which this was
    only one. We spent a lot of time talking about other things. This issue
    was not put forward in this context by me; it was put forward by those
    in the United States Senate who sought to make it an issue early on. And
    I don't know how I could have stopped them from doing that.
        Q. You don't think that in making the promise and then in promising
    to follow through on it early that you might have given rise to this, do
    you, sir?
        The President. Well, I think it was pretty clear to me that we were
    talking about some sort of 6-month process days and days ago. And the
    people who wanted it debated now were not deterred by that, and probably
    a lot of them won't be deterred by the agreement announced today. I
    think that we must--they have the perfect right to do this. But the
    timing of this whole issue was clearly forced by the people in the
    Senate who were opposed to any change of the policy no matter what the
    facts are. And I think that was their right to do, but they control the
    timing of this, not me.
        Q. Two questions. First of all, just to make sure that we're clear
    on this: July 15th this happens, period, regardless of what comes out at
    these hearings, is that correct? The ban will be issued, or will be
    lifted, rather?
        The President. That is my position. My position is that I still
    embrace the principle, and I think it should be done. The position of
    those who are opposed to me is that they think that the problems will be
    so overwhelming everybody with good sense will change their position. I
    don't expect to do that.
        Q. So you definitely expect to do it. And secondly----
        The President. I don't expect to change my position, no.
        Q. What do you think is going to happen in the military? There have
    been all sorts of dire predictions of violence, of mass comings-out,
    whatever. What do you think the impact of this is going to be,
    practically?
        The President. For one thing, I think if you look at the last 10
    years of experience here, according to the reports we have, this country
    spent $500 million in tax dollars to separate something under 16,500
    homosexuals from the service and has dealt with complaints, at least, of
    sexual abuse, heterosexual abuse, largely against women, far greater
    volumes. But during this period, we have plainly had the best educated,
    best trained, most cohesive military force in the history of the United
    States. And everybody, ask anybody, and the Joint Chiefs will tell you
    that.
        They agreed that we should stop asking the question. This single
    thing that is dividing people on this debate, I want to make it very
    clear that this is a very narrow issue. It is whether a person, in the
    absence of any other disqualifying conduct, can simply say that he or
    she is homosexual and stay in the service. I do not expect that to spark
    this kind of problem. And I certainly think in the next 6 months, as
    people start to work it through and talk it through, a lot of
    legitimate, practical issues will be raised and dealt with in a more
    rational environment that is less charged. That is certainly what I hope
    will happen.
        Thank you.
        Q. Want to tell us what the other problem was you were working on,
    Mr. President, on the Middle East, sir?
        The President. No, tomorrow or the next day.

    Note: The President's first news conference began at 1:44 p.m. in the
    Briefing Room at the White House.