Multiple sources have confirmed that following meetings at the White House today, the Administration is now onboard with a set end date/delayed implementation approach. Outlets are calling it a "compromise", which in part it is in the sense that it repeals the statute but leaves implementation up to the Pentagon, although I would say most organizations and advocates in the pro-repeal community (myself included) have been comfortable with it for some time (I've written about it here, here, here and here), and the offer has literally been on the table for over a year. Here's Servicemembers United's press release dated when Gates and Mullen originally testified on Capitol Hill:
In response to the opportunity presented by this historic testimony, Servicemembers United recently resurfaced its "Set End-date / Delayed Implementation" model for repeal legislation and made the case for the introduction and adoption of such legislation in 2010. The proposal would see to it that full repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law gets locked in this year while also allowing the Pentagon time to complete it's analysis.
To strengthen the prospects for the repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law and to reduce political risk, the President can still order the Pentagon to include "Set End-date / Delayed Implementation" repeal language in one of the legislative policy transmittals that will soon be sent to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees by the Department of Defense. These policy proposal packages serve as indications of White House and Pentagon support for policy changes to be included in the next National Defense Authorization Act.
From their report, dated February 8th:
In early 2009, Servicemembers United began proposing Set End-date / Delayed Implementation (SEDI) models for "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) repeal based on the understanding that public Pentagon support for repeal would be an absolute requirement for a DADT repeal plan's political viability, and the prediction that a robust repeal implementation management planning process with a generous time allotment would be an absolute requirement for obtaining that support. In light of recent announcements and developments, the DADT repeal community and the progressive political community appear to be coming to terms with this reality and coalescing around an understanding that a Set End-date / Delayed Implementation (SEDI) repeal plan is the best way to lock in full legislative repeal in 2010, and thereby avoid the high risks associated with a legislative delay. In this memorandum, a viable plan for locking in full legislative repeal in 2010 is laid out according to Servicemembers United's Set End-date / Delayed Implementation (SEDI) model.
So this is little more than the Administration finally coming around to see the light on supporting a sensible plan for repeal. We still need a date certain for repeal, otherwise it could be years before anyone could serve openly. Still, it is a breakthrough, and good on them, and it's about time, too.
Administration position or not, we still have to get the votes, so let's keep up those calls tomorrow.
Update: There is some confusion over what "set end date" means, which is partly my fault because of the headline. The proposed model that has been out there for over a year and that much of the pro-full repeal community, online and offline, is behind is to hold a Congressional vote to repeal the statute and allow the Pentagon time to finish the report and implement the repeal. "Set end date" would set a date certain for the policy to be lifted- in the proposed case, 60 days after the review to prepare directives, and then another 60 days to implement the regulations. This "deal" does not set such a date but rather requires the President, SecDef, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs to certify they have received the report and it does not adversely impact cohesion etc., then implement the new regulations scrapping the policy.
So it is a variation on the set end date/delayed implementation model with the problem, as I noted in the 2nd to last paragraph at the end of the post above, in that there is no date certain, and the additional problem that we still need the votes in Congress to implement this, which is still legwork. On the brighter side, advocates including myself have been pushing the White House to support legislative repeal prior to the Pentagon review for months, so it is a positive, but small, step in that regard.
|
STATE BLOGS
