[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 15] [Senate] [Page 22574] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in support of repealing the so-called don't ask, don't tell policy. It has been 17 years since this misguided policy was enacted. I believed then, as I believe now, that it was wrong for Congress to legislate in this area. Prohibiting gays and lesbians from openly serving in our Armed Forces is contrary to our Nation's values and weakens our military's ability to recruit and retain competent individuals with critical skills. By codifying a policy that reinforces discrimination, intolerance, and inequality, we established a system that is inconsistent with the rights embodied in our Constitution and the fundamental notion that a person should be judged squarely on the basis of his or her qualifications--not the color of their skin, religious beliefs, or sexual orientation. I recently had the opportunity to visit President Franklin Roosevelt's home in New York--there was a quote that I saw that was particularly moving. In a campaign address delivered in 1940, FDR stated: I see an America devoted to our freedom--unified by tolerance and by religious faith--a people consecrated to peace, a people confidant in strength because their body and their spirit are secure and unafraid. I think this quote does a good job of capturing the true strength of America--a tolerant people committed to the preservation of freedom. The ability of a person to serve in our Nation's military should be based on his or her experience, qualifications and conduct. Since the inception of the don't ask, don't tell policy in 1993, over 14,000 gay and lesbian servicemembers have been discharged solely because of their sexuality. We have lost decorated soldiers and those with mission critical skills, such as Arabic linguists and intelligence specialists. Aside from the loss of necessary expertise, we've also wasted hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer money in discharging and replacing individuals who were completely willing and able to serve our country. The policy is also contrary to the values held by our military professionals. In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Admiral Mullen, Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, eloquently expressed this point: No matter how I look at the issue, I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place 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. When a person enlists in our Armed Forces and puts his or her life in harm's way in defense of our country, they should be able to serve with honor and dignity without being asked to live a life of deception. Secretary Gates ordered that a comprehensive review be conducted to assess the impact the repeal of the law could have on military effectiveness and to make recommendations about how a change could be implemented. The report, which was released a couple of weeks ago, surveyed thousands of active and reserve servicemembers as well as their families, veterans groups, health officials, and service academies. It is my understanding that this unprecedented report was the most comprehensive review of a personnel matter ever conducted. The key finding from this review is that the risk of repealing the don't ask, don't tell policy to overall military effectiveness is low and that the limited disruptions that may occur in the short-term can be addressed adequately through leadership, education, and training. In short, the Armed Forces are capable of accommodating this change without hampering unit cohesion, readiness, recruiting, and combat operations. There will never be complete unanimity when it comes to these types of controversial issues. However, the study found that 70 percent of military personnel believed that repealing the law would have positive, mixed, or no effect on them doing their jobs--only 30 percent anticipated that there would be negative consequences. And it is particularly telling that 92 percent of troops who served with a gay or lesbian servicemember believed their ability to work together was very good, good, or neither good or bad. We've had almost two decades to evaluate the success or failure of this policy and the legislation we are debating takes a very judicious approach. The bill stipulates that the repeal of the policy will not take effect until 60 days after the President, Secretary of Defense, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff make certain certifications. In particular, that sufficient implementation procedures are in place to ensure the repeal could be carried out in a manner consistent with standards of military readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention. In my view this is a very reasonable approach. The reality is that it is no longer a question of whether this policy should be repealed, it is a matter of how it should be and in what matter. If Congress fails to act, it is very likely that the courts will. If this occurs, implementation may be more difficult and the changes may occur in a more haphazard manner as cases move slowly through the courts. Keeping this law in place doesn't make us any safer and it is inconsistent with our Nation's commitment to equality. I urge my colleagues to support the repeal of this ill-advised policy. ____________________