What's Next for Log Cabin After DADT?

Army Captain R. Clarke Cooper is genuinely excited about the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" -- to the point that he almost convinced me to join the ranks, now that DADT has been struck from the books (sadly, my tape recorder was off by that point). As the candid executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, his organization had been fighting to repeal the discriminatory law against openly gay service members in federal court since 2004. Though he is already out to his unit, he's even happier for the countless number of service members who can be out at work for the first time. But Cooper knows that the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" is only the tip of the iceberg--he predicts that the Department of Defense will now play a major role in breaking down other barriers in gay rights policy, especially the Defense of Marriage Act.

The Advocate: Is there any sense of how much further the trial will be pushed forward, now that "don't ask, don't tell" is being officially repealed?
R. Clarke Cooper: We had the last hearing earlier this month, and according to our attorneys, a ruling could come any time -- it could be this week, this month, or even next year. There's no prescribed time window for the court to rule, and unfortunately, as we've experienced with previous rulings, we won't know until immanently prior to the ruling coming down, so this could drag out.

There's been some talk from the Republican candidates, threatening to repeal "don't ask, don't tell" if they are elected. Is that one of the motivations for keeping the lawsuit moving forward?
Technically, the only two candidates who are still running, who said they would repeal repeal, are Rick Santorum and Michele Bachmann, and she's even stepped back from that and said, "I'd do it if I was advised." So, someone on her campaign was probably like, "Lady, you can't do this." And Rick Santorum makes Michele Bachmann look liberal. She's still pandering to the far right, but someone has given her a reality check. Realistically, is [repealing repeal] a truly viable situation? No. The Department of Defense would say no. But, could a future Congress change it? Technically yes. Do I think it's viable to see DADT or a ban on gays and lesbians serving in the military coming back? I don't think that's likely. It's an overused metaphor, but you can't un-ring a bell. There's no desire among the ranks to have a closed service. Having "don't ask, don't tell" in place had an adverse effect on unit cohesion.

And [in debates], this hasn't been an issue, really. Even your far end of the spectrum has been wanting to avoid this issue. As a Republican, I think the 2012 cycle is going to be a mandate on economic growth, job creation, fiscal discipline, and debt reduction. As a gay Republican, I say good--let it be a referendum on the economy; not at the expense of gays and lesbians. We don't need to be held up as a divisive reason for people to go to the polls. We've been saying that for years -- true conservatives don't use the government as a tool to impose upon personal liberties.

As an Army captain, you had to undergo "don't ask, don't tell" training, too. Were there any experiences that particularly stood out to you?
Actually, another amazing thing was that every time there was a questions briefing, heterosexual service members come up with the most amazing hypothetical scenarios. I was stunned, not only of the positive or agnostic reaction to open service, but the questioning about DOMA was so detailed, and so concerned. They're like, "Let's say I have a female tech sergeant, and she's gay married to her gay spouse..." Can you insert the word "gay" one more time [Laughs]. But they're really asking good questions like, "If they have a kid, does the kid have access to medical and school?" There's questions about travel orders. The DOD is the largest federal employer to educate their populous about gay rights in one fell swoop. This is what NOM is afraid of. They know that the domino effect that leadership in the Department of Defense are going to see DOMA as a problem.

What kind of lobbying did Log Cabin have to do to get Republicans to back "don't ask, don't tell" repeal?
We have several tiers of Republicans within Congress -- tier ones are the obvious members like Sen. Scott Brown, and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. You know, one time, Speaker Boehner said to me, "Not everyone can be like Ileana." Then you have another class of Republican members of Congress who say they get it, they see the metrics, we know we have to move on, but the question is, how? I do see a number of Republicans who feel stuck. I encourage them to have the courage to step in. Fortunately, the "don't ask, don't tell" vote is a solid example of where we can tell them, "your colleagues can take credit for being a part of a positive, significant vote in the House." Sure there are people on the far who aren't approachable on the issue, but some are teetering, and others who were elected in 2010 who are approachable. When a big piece of legislation comes up, we can then go to that next tier of Republicans, and try to get them to side with things like ENDA, or a domestic partner parity act. The jobs agenda is a legit, credible part of the federal Republican agenda. Everybody needs a job, and access to employment and removing the barriers resonate.

When Congress came to the session in January, Log Cabin immediately started identifying freshman that we could invest in, as far as building relationships for future votes and co-sponsorship on future legislation. Standouts among the freshman class, who happened to come in on that Tea Party wave, were representatives Richard Hannah from upstate New York and Nan Hayworth from Westchester County. They're very strong fiscal conservatives, but they both believe that DOMA doesn't have a place in government, and they both believe in the fundamental right to marry for all. They both said that if they were in Congress, they would have voted for repeal. I know it's easy for them to say that now, but they did say it on the campaign trail before the final vote. Their positions on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act is good, and they both believe that the tax code needs to be reformed to address domestic partnerships and tax equity. These are all issues that we're lobbying on, and a number of them may not get a vote this year, but they could get a vote in other legislative packages during this year or the next congressional term. It's lobbying 101 -- it doesn't matter if you're lobbying for the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell," or the repeal of DOMA, the work has to be done, the time has to be invested with staff, with numbers, and believe it or not, there are members of Congress who had not heard of DOMA until we walked into the doors.

Wow, why is that?
Well, you and I say "Wow," but I had a wake up call for me in June or July, at Fort Meade. Army, Navy, and Air Force elements all together, and there was an explanation about DOMA. Now with open service, DOMA is the giant personnel train wreck that is about to occur. So yes, people can serve openly, but because of DOMA, the Department of Defense can't provide full scope and range of benefits and services to same-sex couples, and dependents, unless they're biological dependents of the service members. And that's when the light bulb went on for me, when I thought, "Wow, DoD will probably become the largest change agent for the repeal of DOMA." The Department of Defense does very well as an institution on standard operation procedure and the uniform code of military justice, and the uniform code of conduct. It abhors having to deal with exceptions, which is why, even institutionally, "don't ask, don't tell" was dying internally because it was becoming a management issue. Commanders were just ignoring it. We always talk about the thousands who were discharged, but we never wonder, how many thousands of gay soldiers were not discharged because the chain of command ignored their orientation. There became a real ignoring of that statute, especially after September 11, 2001. Many discharges still occurred, but what I'm getting at is that we're going to see the Department of Defense coming before Congress saying, "Please fix this for us, because we're having all these exceptions to the rule."