The Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal Act of 2010

Below is the text of the bill that the Senate passed last Saturday, December 18. It has been previously passed by the House, and now only needs the signature of the alien-in-chief to become law. Note its remarkable title: “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal Act.” The very name is a lie, since what is being repealed is not something called “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” but rather federal statute 10 U.S.C. 654 which barred the enlistment and membership of homosexuals in the U.S. armed forces. The Democrats didn’t want to bring out that fact, because their rhetorical line all along has been that the previous law oppressed homosexuals by letting them enlist in the military but then, contradictorily and unfairly, requiring them to keep their homosexuality secret once they were in the military. In reality, once again, 10 U.S.C. 654 prohibited the enlistment of homosexuals in the military, and it was only Clinton’s directive which said that the military must not ask potential inductees if they were homosexual (“Don’t ask”), and that homosexuals could only be kicked out of the military if they themselves advertised their homosexuality (“Don’t tell”). The “oppressive contradiction” of which homosexuals and liberals have endlessly complained, and which they falsely claim is being repealed by this new law, was in fact brought into existence, not by 10 U.S.C.654, which if it had been followed would have simply kept all homosexuals out of the military, thus avoiding the “oppressive contradiction,” but by Clinton’s directive, which both made it possible for homosexuals to enlist (since they couldn’t be asked if they were homosexual) and required them to remain silent about their homosexuality once they had enlisted.

Also note (as Lydia McGrew points out here) that President George W. Bush, still loved and worshipped by many conservatives, could have rescinded the Clinton “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” directive with a stroke of the pen, but declined to do so. Indeed, I’m sure the thought of doing so never remotely occurred to him.

S.4023—Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal Act of 2010 (Placed on Calendar Senate—PCS)

Calendar No. 688

111th CONGRESS 2d Session

To provide for the repeal of the Department of Defense policy concerning homosexuality in the Armed Forces known as ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

December 10, 2010

Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself, Mr. UDALL of Colorado, Mrs. GILLIBRAND, Ms. COLLINS, Mrs. LINCOLN, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. REID, Mr. FRANKEN, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mrs. MURRAY, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. COONS, Mr. KERRY, Mr. DODD, Mr. AKAKA, Mr. CARDIN, Mr. WHITEHOUSE, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. UDALL of New Mexico, Mr. BENNET, Mr. HARKIN, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. MERKLEY, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. WYDEN, Mr. BROWN of Ohio, Mrs. HAGAN, Mr. SCHUMER, Ms. MIKULSKI, Ms. CANTWELL, Mr. CASEY, Mr. SANDERS, Mr. FEINGOLD, Ms. LANDRIEU, Ms. STABENOW, Ms. KLOBUCHAR, Mrs. SHAHEEN, Mr. SPECTER, Mr. KOHL, and Mr. DORGAN) introduced the following bill; which was read the first time

December 13, 2010

Read the second time and placed on the calendar

———

A BILL

To provide for the repeal of the Department of Defense policy concerning homosexuality in the Armed Forces known as ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal Act of 2010’.

SEC. 2. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE POLICY CONCERNING HOMOSEXUALITY IN THE ARMED FORCES.

(a) Comprehensive Review on the Implementation of a Repeal of 10 U.S.C. 654-

(1) IN GENERAL- On March 2, 2010, the Secretary of Defense issued a memorandum directing the Comprehensive Review on the Implementation of a Repeal of 10 U.S.C. 654 (section 654 of title 10, United States Code).

(2) OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF REVIEW- The Terms of Reference accompanying the Secretary’s memorandum established the following objectives and scope of the ordered review:

(A) Determine any impacts to military readiness, military effectiveness and unit cohesion, recruiting/retention, and family readiness that may result from repeal of the law and recommend any actions that should be taken in light of such impacts.

(B) Determine leadership, guidance, and training on standards of conduct and new policies.

(C) Determine appropriate changes to existing policies and regulations, including but not limited to issues regarding personnel management, leadership and training, facilities, investigations, and benefits.

(D) Recommend appropriate changes (if any) to the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

(E) Monitor and evaluate existing legislative proposals to repeal 10 U.S.C. 654 and proposals that may be introduced in the Congress during the period of the review.

(F) Assure appropriate ways to monitor the workforce climate and military effectiveness that support successful follow-through on implementation.

(G) Evaluate the issues raised in ongoing litigation involving 10 U.S.C. 654.

(b) Effective Date- The amendments made by subsection (f) shall take effect 60 days after the date on which the last of the following occurs:

(1) The Secretary of Defense has received the report required by the memorandum of the Secretary referred to in subsection (a).

(2) The President transmits to the congressional defense committees a written certification, signed by the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stating each of the following:

(A) That the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have considered the recommendations contained in the report and the report’s proposed plan of action.

(B) That the Department of Defense has prepared the necessary policies and regulations to exercise the discretion provided by the amendments made by subsection (f).

(C) That the implementation of necessary policies and regulations pursuant to the discretion provided by the amendments made by subsection (f) is consistent with the standards of military readiness, military effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces.

(c) No Immediate Effect on Current Policy- Section 654 of title 10, United States Code, shall remain in effect until such time that all of the requirements and certifications required by subsection (b) are met. If these requirements and certifications are not met, section 654 of title 10, United States Code, shall remain in effect.

(d) Benefits- Nothing in this section, or the amendments made by this section, shall be construed to require the furnishing of benefits in violation of section 7 of title 1, United States Code (relating to the definitions of ‘marriage’ and ‘spouse’ and referred to as the ‘Defense of Marriage Act’).

(e) No Private Cause of Action- Nothing in this section, or the amendments made by this section, shall be construed to create a private cause of action.

(f) Treatment of 1993 Policy-

(1) TITLE 10- Upon the effective date established by subsection (b), chapter 37 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—

(A) by striking section 654; and

(B) in the table of sections at the beginning of such chapter, by striking the item relating to section 654.

(2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Upon the effective date established by subsection (b), section 571 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (10 U.S.C. 654 note) is amended by striking subsections (b), (c), and (d).

Calendar No. 688

111th CONGRESS

2d Session

S. 4023

A BILL

To provide for the repeal of the Department of Defense policy concerning homosexuality in the Armed Forces known as ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’.

———

December 13, 2010

Read the second time and placed on the calendar

—end of initial entry—

Kathlene M., who sent the document, writes:

This law grants authority to the DoD to make changes to the Uniform Military Code of Justice. [LA replies: I assume, though I’m not sure, that Kathlene means that the bill allows the DoD to throw out the Clinton “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” directive.] It also states that benefits cannot be applied in violation of current U.S. code and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). So guess what the next target of the homosexual activists will be? DOMA

Kathlene writes:

I’d written: “This law grants authority to the DoD to make changes to the Uniform Military Code of Justice.” You replied: “I assume, though I’m not sure, that Kathlene means that the bill allows the DoD to throw out the Clinton “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” directive.”

“Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” was Defense Directive 1304.26 which I assume will be abolished. However, I was thinking of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 125 about sodomy as just one example. A group of legal scholars urged in 2009 that congress remove this article from the UCMJ. (Lawrence v. Texas was cited as a basis to do this.) See this.

Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) ART. 125. SODOMY

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense.

(b) Any person found guilty of sodomy shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

See this.


Posted by Lawrence Auster at December 20, 2010 05:19 PM | Send
    

Email entry

Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):