Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McKEON. I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, here we go again. The Speaker has decided once more to subvert regular order in the waning moments of this Congress and bring to the floor, without consideration by the House Armed Services Committee, a repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Now, anyone who was listening earlier to the Clerk read the bill that we're discussing, it is titled: To amend the Small Business Act with respect to the Small Business Innovation Research Program and the Small Business Technology Transfer Program. Now, if you're confused, what they have done is taken this bill that has passed, stripped out what is in it, and put in Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

So today, we will debate this standalone measure as a priority when we don't even have a National Defense Authorization Act for 2011. The other body cannot get its work done on that bill because the leadership there placed a higher priority on repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell to satisfy a Democratic liberal agenda than on passing a bill designed to meet the broad needs and requirements of our national defense, as well as those men and women serving in harm's way. Where are the Democrat priorities? Certainly not with overall national security.

So now we are here to consider the bill by Representative Murphy. It comes to the floor without the committee of jurisdiction being able to formally examine the issues raised by the recent DOD report and without the ability to question witnesses who would have to implement the repeal. Essentially, the high-handed actions of the Speaker forcing this bill to the floor deny the House an ability to assess the conflicting testimony and conclusions that have been rendered by the report.

So I rise in strong opposition to Mr. Murphy's bill. He and the House leadership behind him bring it to the floor in complete disregard for the testimony of three of the four service chiefs and their warning that implementing repeal now will have a negative impact on combat readiness.

Let me repeat that: three of the four service chiefs warn that implementing repeal now will have a negative impact on combat readiness. This is something we all ought to pay serious attention to when we are fighting two wars.

Beyond that, Mr. Murphy brings this bill to the floor in complete disregard for the concerns of those actually in the combat arms. As we now know: ``The percentage of the overall U.S. military that predicts negative or very negative effects on their units' ability to `work together to get the job done' is 30 percent; the percentage for the Marine Corps is 43 percent, 48 percent within Army combat units, and 58 percent within Marine combat units.''

If there is any doubt about where the service chiefs stand, here is what they told the other body.

General Casey, the Army Chief of Staff said, ``I think it's important that we're clear about the military risks. Implementation of the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell would be a major cultural and policy change in the middle of a war. It would be implemented by a force and leaders that are already stretched by the cumulative effects of almost a decade of war and by a force in which substantial numbers of soldiers perceive that repeal will have a negative impact on unit effectiveness and morale, and that implementation will be difficult.

``I believe that the implementation of repeal in the near term will: one, add another level of stress to an already stretched force; two, be more difficult in our combat arms units; and, three, be more difficult for the Army than the report suggests.

``My recommendation would be that implementation begins when our singular focus is no longer on combat operations or preparing units for combat. I would not recommend going forward at this time given everything that the Army has on its plate.''

The commandant of the Marine Corps, General James Amos, said, ``If the law is changed, it has strong potential for disruption at the small unit level as it will no doubt divert leadership attention away from an almost singular focus on preparing units for combat.

``Based on what I know about the very tough fight in Afghanistan, the almost singular focus of our combat forces as they train up and deploy to the theater, the necessary tightly woven culture of those combat forces that we are asking so much of at this time and, finally, the direct feedback from the survey, my recommendation is that we should not implement repeal at this time.

``What I would want to have with regards to implementation would be a period of time where our marines are no longer focused primarily on combat. All I am asking is for the opportunity to implement repeal at a time and choosing when my marines are not singularly, tightly focused on what they're doing in a very deadly environment.''

Just yesterday, General Amos made clear just how strongly he feels about the threat that repeal poses to marines in combat, warning ``that a change in current policy could pose a deadly distraction on the Afghanistan battlefield. I don't want to lose any marines to a distraction,'' Amos said in a roundtable discussion with journalists at the Pentagon.

Air Force Chief of Staff, General Norman Schwartz, said, ``I do not agree with the study assessment that the short-term risk to military effectiveness is low. Our officer and NCO leaders in Afghanistan in particular are carrying a heavy load. I remain concerned with the study assessment that the risk of repeal of military effectiveness in Afghanistan is low. That assessment is too optimistic. I suggested that perhaps full implementation could occur in 2012, but I do not think it prudent to seek full implementation in the near term. I think that is too risky.''

These are three of our four Chiefs of Staff.

I strongly believe that we ought to listen closely to the concerns of the service chiefs if for no other reason than they are closer to the sense and pulse of their services than are the Secretary of Defense or the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. Moreover, I also believe that we should do nothing at this time to threaten the readiness of the soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines who are at the tip of the spear, fighting America's two wars. So I urge all Members to vote ``no'' on the Murphy bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, today we have heard a few times from the other side to do the right thing. I think the right thing will be in the eye of the beholder.

I choose to feel that the right thing for me is to protect those in uniform. I prefer to listen to what those who are leading those men into combat have to say. Just one of the quotes out of the survey said:

In warfighting units, the ones which will be the most effective, 67 percent of marines in combat units predict working alongside a gay man or lesbian will have a negative effect on their unit's effectiveness in completing its mission in a field environment or out at sea.

Now, we may all have different opinions--obviously, from this debate, we do--but these are the ones who are going to be affected. These are the guys who are on the line right now, and they are saying it will have a negative impact--67 percent. I don't think it is worth the risk to put them in any further jeopardy than they are in right now.

So, Mr. Speaker, I would ask, I would implore our Members to reject this Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal. Let's go back and look at it a little more thoroughly before we move forward.

I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source