|| News ||
Page 1 of 1

White House Sends Mixed Messages on DADT


WHITE HOUSE X390 (PHOTOS.COM) | ADVOCATE.COM

As LGBT activists grow more desperate to repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell” before the midterm elections, a picture is emerging of a divided White House where President Barack Obama’s own words are sometimes odds with the message his administration is sending about repeal.

Early in the year, multiple sources say some administration officials counseled the president against acting on the military’s gay ban in 2010. Still, Obama included his intention to end the policy in his State of the Union address, saying, “This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law…”

Yet just days after the January 27 speech, White House officials convened a meeting on February 1 with LGBT advocates in which they said the policy would not be included in the president’s recommendations for this year's Department of Defense authorization bill, according to multiple sources with direct knowledge of the meeting.

“It was a definitive shut-down from [Jim] Messina,” said a source, who was present at the meeting and agreed to speak on the condition of anonymity, referring to the White House deputy chief of staff. “He said it would not be going into the president’s Defense authorization budget proposal.” The news was a blow to activists since the Defense funding bill is the best legislative vehicle for including a measure to overturn the policy. “It almost seemed like the bar on the hurdle got raised two or three times higher,” said the source.

The White House declined to comment on the meeting.

But the Human Rights Campaign’s David Smith, who also attended the meeting, recalls it differently.

“They were noncommittal about legislation in that meeting, but not definitively one way or the other,” said Smith, vice president of programs for HRC.

According to Smith, the meeting included discussion of the Pentagon’s working group, who was going to lead that group, and their intent to review the current regulations and consider how they could reduce discharges.

Since the president’s State of the Union pledge, the White House has failed to set a timeline for repeal. Press secretary Robert Gibbs has declined several times to indicate whether the president would like to see legislative action taken this year.

During Wednesday’s press briefing, Gibbs signaled that President Obama was committed to first letting the Pentagon complete its study, which is due in early December.

“The President has set forward a process with the Joint -- the Chair of the Joint Chiefs and with the Secretary of Defense to work through this issue,” he said, adding that the president believes the Pentagon’s process is “the best way forward” to changing the law.

Gibbs also laid the responsibility for whether a repeal vote is taken at the doorstep of Congress.

“The House and the Senate are obviously a different branch of government,” he added.

Smith took exception to the remarks from Gibbs.

“Those comments were not helpful and the White House needs to clarify that,” he said. “The president said he wants to work with Congress this year to repeal 'don't ask, don't tell' and we take the president at his word. But as we continue to put pressure on Congress, the White House needs to speak with one voice and not send us mixed messages.”

Repeal advocates feel a simultaneous sense of urgency and possibility, since they are only two to three votes away from having the 15 votes necessary to enfold a repeal measure into the DOD authorization bill in the Senate Armed Services Committee. Successfully attaching the measure in committee would put the onus on opponents of repeal to find the 60 votes in order to strip it out on the Senate floor.

“We have 12 to 13 firm votes for repeal,” said Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network.

Lobbyists say they are concentrating their efforts in the committee on Democrats Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Evan Bayh of Indiana, Bill Nelson of Florida, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, and Jim Webb of Virginia along with Republican Scott Brown of Massachusetts.

Sarvis said he believes some senators are looking for a game-changer, which could come in the form of repeal language that honors the Pentagon’s working group process while still legislatively locking down an end to the policy in 2010.

The concept was first floated by the group Servicemembers United earlier this year, and repeal advocates are working to help craft such an amendment. Under this scenario, discharges and investigations would continue for a period even after the president signs the defense authorization into law until the Pentagon completes its implementation period.

Sarvis added that President Obama could boost repeal efforts by stating his desire to see the measure passed this year but, more importantly, by getting personally involved with lobbying senators.

“We need the president to become actively engaged in this vote, not unlike the way he is engaged with financial services reform right now,” he said.

The problem for the White House is that they have committed to letting the Pentagon study on how to implement repeal run its course.

“Their dilemma is that they’re committed to Gates and Mullen on the working group process,” Sarvis said. “They have to thread that needle of being faithful to the working group but still getting a vote in committee this year.”

HRC’s Smith said those two goals are not at odds with each other.

“We believe that Congress can and should perform legislative repeal of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ at the same time that the Pentagon continues its working group study,” he said.

Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Twitter. Follow us on Facebook Follow us on Facebook. Page 1 of 1
Reader Comments
  • Name: Rikki
    Date posted: 4/24/2010 7:53:28 PM
    Hometown: San Antonio

    Comment:

    ..Instead of repealing DADT, why not just apply the same guidelines to heterosexuals as well? This means, forcing heterosexuals to remain celibate during their terms of military service and prohibit them from getting married. It’s genius when you think about it. Having a bunch of pissed off soldiers on the front lines would make a pretty formidable force, wouldn’t you say? Plus think of all the tax dollars we can save by not having to support dependents. The only drawback to this would be the dramatic increase of discharges for those that engage in what comes natural to them- gay or straight., but hey, at least then, we can say it’s a fair law that applies to everyone...

  • Name: Joe
    Date posted: 4/22/2010 12:43:47 PM
    Hometown: Fort Worth

    Comment:

    Once again, HRC sells us out. And once again, Obama shows himself to be a liar.

  • Name: Daniel S
    Date posted: 4/22/2010 10:20:32 AM
    Hometown: New Hope, PA

    Comment:

    Politically the upper echelons of the military lean strongly towards the GOP and are devoutly hoping that they will take control of Congress away from the Democrats in November. Hence the stalling that is going on with this study. Ironically, a foreign-born Muslim can join the armed forces with no problem but an American-born gay is a "threat to unit cohesion". In plain English it's the same argument as to why they couldn't integrate blacks back in the day. Obama is waffling because he doesn't want to spend any political capital on us. The whole "fierce advocate" thing is a bald-faced lie. He just doesn't want to deal with gay issues now while his approval ratings are low and Congressional elections are coming.

  • Name: Rann
    Date posted: 4/22/2010 9:17:27 AM
    Hometown: Indianapolis

    Comment:

    Derrick, why don't you look at Obama's comments before being elected? He said he would start working on repeal and the study right away and be a fierce advocate. Has he done either? No. In fact he is working against repeal this year. So, the Liar in Chief is beginning to fit. It is so awful to get people's hopes up and to make us think he would be different. He has not been. The comment about Rahm Emanuel is spot on! Read David Mixner's book about the Clinton start when he went to see Rahm. Rahm is a very sneaky and twited person. He is not helping but in fact hurting this cause. I think the only chance we have of getting DADT repealed in the next year or two is to do it through the Defense bill. I will be calling my Senator, Evan Bayh. He needs to do this before he and leaves DC. But, thank you to Get Equal and folks like Dan Choi for getting out there and leading the way and showing that sometimes you have to be willing to ruffle feathers or get arrested to bring attention to this!

  • Name: MAWM
    Date posted: 4/22/2010 8:27:13 AM
    Hometown: Durham

    Comment:

    Derrick is the typical Obama shill. He thinks it is our fault that we heard "repeal this year" when Obama said "this year". We didn't parse his words well enough to hear how he would weasel out of his promises again. Guess what, Derrick, if it doesn't happen this year it ain't happnin for years, because Democrats are about to get booted out. I didn't believe him during the State of the Union because I know Obama is a liar. Derrick is proud of his liar in Chief.

  • Name: Ben
    Date posted: 4/22/2010 8:15:25 AM
    Hometown: NY

    Comment:

    In other words, the HRC is simply lying to us.

  • Name: Shawn
    Date posted: 4/22/2010 6:52:02 AM
    Hometown: Lewistown, PA

    Comment:

    You know, I hate hearing anything the HRC has to say. They are just too afraid to say anything against BO. They are so out of touch, which is why I stopped my donations to the HRC. I give it to other organizations that actually do something constructive. The similarities between now and when Stonewall happened are amazing. I don't have room to explain here...but when stonewall happened Gay Inc. would picket places...men had to wear suits and women skirts and NO HAND HOLDING. Gay Inc has always stood in the way of our progress.Gay Inc is still trying to contain us, notice how HRC won't let their stooges hold hands or show any sort of emotion? We've been fighting for our rights for over 40 years and it's obvious suits and skirts are still not working. Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi did not get their freedom by going to gala events, they weren't afraid to stand up to the powers that be. There is a reason why we study history...it often repeats itself. So maybe we should take a hint

  • Name: Thomas J. Coleman
    Date posted: 4/22/2010 2:56:51 AM
    Hometown: Venice, California

    Comment:

    With 70% of Americans supporting repeal of DADT, along with majorities of all political persuasions (including teabaggers), with large Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress, the only thing preventing it are the weak-kneed prevaricators in the Democratic Party hierarchy, transparent schemers in Oval Office like Rahm E (who shows nothing but contempt for us) and their dissembling apologists like Derrick. This issue has been studied to death. Another "study" is nothing but a delaying tactic and EVERYONE KNOWS IT. So cut the crap and get on with it. If they don't they (Barbara Boxer et al.) will pay the price, LIKE IT OR NOT.

  • Name: Derrick
    Date posted: 4/22/2010 2:19:42 AM
    Hometown: Los Angeles

    Comment:

    "This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are." That's what he said, Kerry. Do you see anything in that statement that indicates that the repeal will happen in 2010? No. Because he never said when it was going to happen. He said that "this year" he would work with Congress and our military." Matter of fact, it would have been absolutely foolish on the president's behalf to have stated a date or even timeline---if only to leave wiggle room for spontaneous critical events to be addressed in the immediate as they occur. How does a supposed journalist working for a national publication get that twisted into something else like an exact date? I can understand lack of journalistic integrity by the likes of Pam Spaulding and John Aravotis but now I see the Advocate doesn't dig deep to get quality professionals reporting on LGBT issues. What a shame



Don't Miss
  • Best of Broadway Smash: Why You Will Love It

    Craig Zadan and Neil Meron, two of the producers of NBC’s new critically acclaimed musical series, explain why the backstage drama of creating a musical about Marilyn Monroe has mass appeal and why big stars like Anjelica Huston, Uma Thurman, Bernadette Peters, and Nick Jonas were eager to appear in it.

  • Best of Broadway How Broadway Does a Flea Market

    Find out why actress Kathleen Chalfant calls the annual Flea Market and Grand Auction in Times Square "the most glamorous flea market you've ever seen." It raised half a million dollars to fight HIV/AIDS.

  • Travel Slideshow Flag Gayest Cities in America, 2012

    It's no secret that megalopolises New York City, Chicago, and Los Angeles have robust LGBT life — and we've even heard tell of little queer hoods like the Castro and P-Town. This isn't that list.

 
 
Advocate Subscribe Promo Banner 300x50
 
Follow Us Follow Us on FacebookFollow Us on TwitterSubscribe to our RSS feedsDownload our app
Facebook Activity
 
1056 COVER X135 | ADVOCATE.COM
Today's Headlines