This continues the partnership between OpenLeft, SLDN and other progressive blogs to respond to the 150,000 surveys the Pentagon is sending out to military spouses with a series of letters from military families.
Today’s letter is from the sister of Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach, who is 13 months away from his 20-year retirement, and is in the news as he is currently filing an injunction in federal court to prevent his discharge under DADT.
August 27, 2010
Hon. Jeh C. Johnson
General Counsel, U.S. Department of Defense
Co-Chair, Comprehensive Review Working Group
General Carter F. Ham
Commanding General, U.S. Army Europe
Co-Chair, Comprehensive Review Working Group
Dear Mr. Johnson and General Ham:
My name is Angela Trumbauer. I am an Air Force enlisted veteran. I was born and raised in a family of 8 children by my father, a retired Air Force officer (deceased 1979), and my widowed mother, a former Air Force officer, who just turned 78 years young this month. I am married to a retired Air Force Senior Master Sergeant. My stepson is an active-duty Air Force Technical Sergeant. My brother is Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach, a highly decorated 19-year Air Force officer. I hail from the “military family” in every sense.
Over Victor’s military career, our family had limited opportunities to see and spend time with him. He came home to Ohio for visits once or twice a year, usually over the Thanksgiving or Christmas holidays. I took my kids to visit him at his assigned Air Force Bases a few times over the years. We prepared and sent him care packages when he was deployed to Iraq. Vic sent me care packages when I was stationed in Greece years ago, while he was still a high school student. Reflecting back, I never gave much thought to his short 2-3 day trips home or the seemingly strained nature of the visits. All that changed in May, 2009, however, when my brother was forced to reach out and seek our family’s support in the most difficult battle of his life – fighting against his discharge under “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.”
The revelations that have come to light and emotions evoked throughout the past year have brought a great sense of loss and heartache to our family, not unlike that experienced in grief and death. It saddened me deeply to realize that my single, younger brother could never enjoy a close personal relationship, free from fear of persecution or harassment, throughout his near 20 years serving. His family back home was free to enjoy wonderful family relationships with their spouses and children, but Vic was never to experience that same freedom and privilege while in uniform. I often wonder how alone or lonely he must have felt all those years, especially when he couldn’t even share his personal struggles with his very own family.
I recently took the opportunity to ask my brother who he would like us to notify in the event of an emergency or upon his death, after I realized he had no one else to confide in. Most soldiers and airmen have a support system in place, where their spouses or immediate family members are aware of their dying wishes and will share urgent news or handle the appropriate notifications with those closest to their loved one. In my brother’s case, I just figured the military would let us know if something happened to him and that no one else aside from his family members needed to be notified, since he was single and has no children.
Under “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,” the Fehrenbach family has been robbed of truly knowing and loving our brother for who he is for nearly two decades. He chose to serve in silence to protect his own family – the only family he can legally call his own – from potential exposure to investigation under DADT. We can never get those years back. Nor can we accept the damage to and destruction of our family’s long-standing military history that will result from Lt. Col. Fehrenbach’s discharge under this discriminatory and unjust law. Our family legacy goes back generations, in which our father, mother, grandfathers, spouses, children, uncles and cousins have all answered the call to serve.
Despite all the suffering that Don’t Ask Don’t Tell has caused my brother and our family, we have reaped a benefit far greater than words can measure. Since I’ve come to know and understand my brother’s true identity, and because he no longer has to hide any part of himself from me, our relationship has become much closer and deeper, where we laugh and share more than ever before. Vic can now be completely open and honest with me – an element that was clearly missing in our lives and relationship in the past. I can’t express the immense pleasure I’ve experienced in getting to know my baby brother — “Uncle Baldy” as some of our 17 nieces and nephews call him.
In light of the infinite family gains that the repeal of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” will yield, I sincerely believe that allowing open service is necessary, right, and just in every sense. Each and every service member deserves the FULL love and support of their family and friends, without fear of persecution, discrimination and harassment. A strong sense of support and love is essential for our troops at all times. It only stands to reason that overall military performance is enhanced and the resolve to accomplish the mission is strengthened by complete and unhindered family bonds.
Sincerely,
Angela Trumbauer
CC: U.S. Sen. Carl M. Levin
Chairman, Senate Armed Services Committee
U.S. Sen. John S. McCain
Ranking Member, Senate Armed Services Committee
U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman
Member, Senate Armed Services Committee
This continues the partnership between OpenLeft, SLDN and other progressive blogs to respond to the 150,000 surveys the Pentagon is sending out to military spouses with a series of letters from military families. Today’s is from Jose Rocha, who had personal troubles raising a gay son and came to accept both his orientation and his bravery in the military. May his journey be the journey for our members of Congress.
August 26, 2010
Hon. Jeh C. Johnson
General Counsel, U.S. Department of Defense
Co-Chair, Comprehensive Review Working Group
General Carter F. Ham
Commanding General, U.S. Army Europe
Co-Chair, Comprehensive Review Working Group
Dear Mr. Johnson and General Ham:
I am a heavy machinery truck driver; I have been all of my life. A blue collar American who raised my son, Joseph Rocha, in a Roman Catholic home with strong Spanish values, after his mother lost custody for drug abuse. Throughout school Joseph turned out to be an awarded scholar, athlete and leader. I did my best to provide a good home for him. But, I wasn’t prepared for my only boy to turn out gay.
Early on in his senior year, at 17, he left the house on one condition: that he never return.
I learned through my wife that he was excelling quickly in the military. He was promoted twice in his first year and was hand-picked for explosive detection school. We had no idea that during his 28 months in the Middle East, he was being abused by his superiors because he wouldn’t tell them if he was gay or not. He only ever called home to tell my wife he loved working with the dogs and about his aspirations of becoming an officer.
He sent gifts to his kid siblings for every single holiday and called them religiously. He was a hero to my girls. I struggled through our silence knowing that I was missing out on my son. As it sank in that Joseph might be injured or killed in the service, it became clear how irrelevant who he wants to love is. On a phone call home to congratulate me for my birthday, I told my son for the first time that I was truly proud of him and asked him to live his life for himself, not for me or anyone else.
After receiving a Naval Marine Corp Achievement Medal for his service overseas and being accepted to Naval Academy Preparatory School to go on to the United States Naval Academy and earn a commission, Joseph was discharged under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
Recently, just after his mother’s death, I asked him what he would be doing this year when he becomes the first in our family to graduate from college. I was surprised when he said that he wants to serve again. I asked him why he would go back after all they did to him. I asked him if he was prepared to go back to the Middle East. He replied that he was never meant to be done serving.
Joseph contributed to my family and to the families of each of his co-workers: loyalty, respect and service. My son had always lead by example and in coming out he has taught his siblings pride and his favorite value, integrity.
I am proud of my son and it makes me sick now to read the Navy documents detailing the abuse he stomached in order to try and save his career. He is a brave young man and a patriot. I know now first hand that the old ways are not always right and I ask that you encourage your superiors to end “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Please allow my son, Joseph C. Rocha, and countless like him, to resume their military careers.
This continues the partnership between OpenLeft, SLDN and other progressive blogs to respond to the 150,000 surveys the Pentagon is sending out to military spouses with a series of letters from military families. Today’s is from Lee Quilian, a retired sailor, living with another servicemember discharged under DADT.
It is especially interesting because in the bullet points below, Lee describes all the extra things he has to do to avoid detection while she and her companion are living under Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and all the small, but important, items that disadvantage servicemembers and their families under this policy. It’s very personal and I learned many things I did not know.
August 25, 2010
Hon. Jeh C. Johnson
General Counsel, U.S. Department of Defense
Co-Chair, Comprehensive Review Working Group
General Carter F. Ham
Commanding General, U.S. Army Europe
Co-Chair, Comprehensive Review Working Group
Dear General Ham and Mr. Johnson:
I am a retired military sailor, living with a wonderful person who was fired because of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT).
Because of my experience with the military, I understand the life, the duty days, the underway time, the training cycles. Even the simple events of life at sea – how wondrous or disastrous mail call can be, depending on whether or not you get a letter; the whirlwind caused by the simple announcement of liberty call; and the sounds of the Navy – the bells, the whistles, the constant hum and different noises of shipboard living. These are just some of the various events and sometimes intense evolutions that occur around the universe called the United States Ship. I’ve been stationed on five of the best ships in the Navy. I speak the language, I know all the acronyms, and it’s an organization I’ve spent most of my closeted life in.
If my highly decorated and accomplished spouse had been able to stay in the Navy, her professional life would have included all of those same events mentioned previously, and more. She would have undoubtedly been stationed on board a ship of awesome capabilities. That ship would deploy, do training missions, visit foreign and domestic ports, and represent the world’s finest Navy. She would stand watch, hopefully in something better than a port and starboard rotation. If you don’t know what a port and starboard rotation is, just imagine working at your current job, six hours on, then take six hours off, then go back to work for six hours. Repeat 24/7 for the next 180 days.
She might even be sent on an Individual Augmentation (IA) to Iraq or Afghanistan while in her current assignment. During an Individual Augmentation, she would literally be loaned out to cover a critical needs job, however long that may be, in addition to her regularly scheduled deployment cycle.
I, however, would have to adhere to a strict set of rules when dealing with a deployment, whether it be an IA or ship deployment. Here are just some to think about – they reflect what life is like for military families under DADT:
· Set up an alternative e-mail account that wouldn’t show the gender of my name;
· Establish a very generic, genderless form of communications over e-mail;
· Never write “I love you” – or nothing that could indicate anything at all about the nature of our relationship;
· No access to the Ship’s Ombudsman – a point person for military families for all things very, very important relating to the ship and her crew;
· Create a plan for dropping her off at ship – making sure our goodbye or welcome is in secret;
· Never spending the remaining few hours on the ship like with the rest of families before a deployment;
· Worrying about how close to the pier I could be without raising suspicion;
· Before leaving home, be sure to say final goodbyes – no hugs and certainly no kisses allowed on or near the base;
· Not being able to participate in any family video postcards to the ship;
· Still trying to figure out how to deal with those pesky customs forms required when mailing anything to a “Fleet Post Office” – they require a name, so maybe use her parent’s name or the dog’s name;
· Don’t put anything too personal in care packages – those might arrive via barge, waterlogged and falling apart – therefore, they might be opened;
· As a result of the rough handling from a helicopter mail drop, any other boxes I send could be opened if damaged;
· Don’t get sick, seriously sick, and don’t get hurt while spouse is gone;
· Hope she doesn’t get hurt as no one would tell me – I can’t be listed as her next of kin in her service record without raising eyebrows;
· Remember to have her pack her personal cell phone and the charger for use six to nine months later – can’t use any of the ship’s communications, so the cell is the only way to coordinate a pickup upon return home;
· Knowing that when the other families are waiting at the pier, I wouldn’t be able to stand among them anxiously awaiting my sailor’s return.
Over at LGBTPOV, my friend and Los Angeles journalist Karen Ocamb posted a video of her question to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral Mullen, at his appearance at USC late last week.
There has been a lot of unsettled anger at Mullen reassuring servicemembers that he wants to hear the views of sericemembers, that nothing will be done until the review is completed, etc., and he re-emphasizes that in this video.
On the one hand, I understand Mullen’s inclination to do so. He’s the senior military officer in the country and charged with ensuring that servicemembers understand the process and that their commanders respect how major changes will affect them. One colleague close to this issue and formerly of the military put it to me that the best way to think of it is that Mullen’s in a Republican primary. He has to stretch what actually happen and make it sound much more conservative than it is with comments like these. Which gets at how political all of this is, even in the military. On the other, throughout this whole process of working to repeal DADT, it has been plainly appalling to me how much the military acts as a 4th branch of government, from the Gates/Mullen letter and Gates’ separate comments flagrantly taking a different tack from what the Administration said it wanted, to service chiefs’ issuing their own statements and letters on this issue whenever they wanted, no matter how much it conflicted with their Commander in Chief. Civilian control over the military is never what it sounds like.
With all of that said, I believe that Mullen is on our side in wanting this law changed, and is doing his due diligence in making sure servicemembers are reassured. So while his comments are certainly influential, at this stage of the game, I don’t think they’re being made out to be.
I took a stroll down to the rally to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell in front of the White House yesterday. Although smaller than expected (likely due to a 90 degree steam room that was the weather yesterday), I came away from it with one memory: the palpable anger you can see in online communities has bubbled offline. It’s real, and it’s there. I think if there was a call to March on Washington, more than a couple hundred thousand (the turnout at last fall’s March) would come out.
Speaker after speaker took the bullhorn and shouted- literally, shouted- at this White House. Sometimes at political rallies you hear “Mr. President, let’s work with you to do X” or “The President has made this a priority and we need to get his back!” Not at this rally. It was “Mr. President, lead or get the hell out of the way!” “When I was in basic training, the last time I checked on that organizational chart, the Commander in Chief ranks above the Secretary of Defense. So where is our Commander in Chief?” and chants of “No money, no votes”. Even former Gov. Dean showed up after being asked to earlier in the morning to speak.
The rally ended with six activists chaining themselves to the fence while supporters shouted “shame!” at the White House. I am not kidding or exaggerating when I say the tone of the rhetoric is something you might have heard at a teabagger rally.
The speech I remember the most was from Alex Nicholson, a former servicemember involuntarily outed, who is executive director of Servicemembers United:
h/t to Aravosis for the video
The anger on Alex’s face is what everyone was feeling that day, and what millions more are feeling online. It’s a feeling that this President is under the influence of what Joe Sudbay calls “political homophobia”- politicians who say they’ll vote for you and support you but are scared- thus, phobia- when it comes time to get it done. And I’m telling you, from the exasperation and feeling of being pissed-off beyond belief yesterday, there will be a lot of LGBT activists who will stay home in November to punish the President- and telling their straight friends and family to do so, too, if this Administration and Democrats in Congress do not do right by them. I’m not saying this to make idle threats- I’m just the messenger here. Anyone can go read it online or see it in person. It’s real and it’s growing.
This administration dealt Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repeal a serious blow on Friday. Now the President has, like Alex says, until May 24th- the week of markup in the Senate Armed Services Committee- to insert repeal language in the defense authorization bill. This is something advocates have been calling for for months. It’s not in conflict with the Secretary of Defense’s recommendations- like I wrote on Friday, the Administration’s position that repeal should be done after the review avoids the issue. You can set an end date and delay the implementation. The Administration needs to take a position on that, too.
The patience out there is wearing thin. When you go to an LGBT rally and the tone of the rhetoric sounds like a teabagger protest, that’s a serious problem. It’s one this Administration shouldn’t take lightly.
Speaker Pelosi’s office announced it is the Speaker’s “intention” to hold a vote on DADT repeal this year. Great news.
It will be interesting to see how the White House reacts, and how members vote, in advance of the Pentagon review being completed. Remember Sec. Gates said in answer to a direct question on that issue, “I do not recommend a change in the law before we have completed our study.”
This afternoon, President Gates and Vice President Mullen weighed in:
WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Robert Gates is warning Congress not to tamper with the military’s ban on openly gay service members until he can come up with his own plan for repeal. In a strongly worded letter, obtained by The Associated Press, Gates told a House committee on Friday that forcing policy changes on the military before it’s ready “would send a very damaging message to our men and women in uniform that in essence their views, concerns and perspectives do not matter.”
I’m having embed issues, but full text of the letter is here. The letter, written in response to a request for comment from House Armed Services Chairman Ike Skelton- a known opponent of repealing DADT- makes clear that this review is to conduct an “assessment of the impact of such a policy change”.
There you go. This is not a “how and when” review; this is an “if” review, and that is unacceptable. Did the White House even vet this? This can all be amenable to all parties by including a date certain for repeal in the legislation, while allowing the Pentagon to finish examining how best to implement such a change.
I go back to my interview with retired Vice Admiral and Rep. Joe Sestak, who oversaw substantial change inside the E-ring:
Adam: You talked about a “Z-Gram”- what is the fastest process that could and perhaps should be taken versus a long, drawn-out process?
Rep. Sestak: A “Z-Gram” was where the Chief of Naval Operations would say, here’s the new policy. The best way to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is to call the flag leadership together and then they meet with their commanders, then those officers meet with their subordinate commanders, and through the chain of command there’s an explanation of why and how this policy is going to be changed. You have the chain of command, the leadership including the chief petty officers, who are the backbone of the Navy, understanding why. Then you set out, on this date certain, this will be the change. But the problem is they’re going to study it for a year first, then there will be the implementation. And I just think that’s an awful long time to study an implementation.
[…]
Adam: If the Pentagon implemented the timeline that you outline, how long do you think that should take?
Rep. Sestak: I would say two to three months. Because you can do this in a nice deliberate way and still finish it in that period of time. Someone used the phrase to me, the military is always “ready”. We can do these things. I always remember former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Admiral Crowe once said, supposedly to President Clinton, just tell the military to do it and they’ll do it.
Apparently that’s not how the chain of command works in President Obama’s President Gates’ administration.
Update: Over e-mail, I received Sen. Gillibrand’s statement. Sen. Gillibrand has led part of the push on the Hill for hearings and for repeal in general.
Washington, DC – Following a letter from Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, telling Congress today to wait to repeal “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,” U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand issued the following statement:
“I respectfully disagree with Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen. Congress should not sit on their hands.
“Now is the time for Congress to show strong leadership and repeal this disastrous policy. ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is wrong for our national security and inconsistent with the moral foundation upon which our country was founded.
“When we repeal this policy – and we will repeal this policy – we will strengthen America – both militarily and morally.”
Update 2: Also received over e-mail, Servicemembers United, a DADT repeal group affiliated with HRC, rips the letter, and describes the date certain process I talk about above (bolding mine):
“This letter from Secretary Gates is a significant cause for concern for those who truly respect and support the gay military community,” said Alexander Nicholson, a former U.S. Army interrogator who was discharged under ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ and who is the current Executive Director of Servicemembers United. “Several of the points in this letter are patently offensive and false, such as the claim that repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ would have a ‘direct impact for [troops] and their families’ or the suggestion that legislative action to repeal the law this year would ‘send a very damaging message to our men and women in uniform that in essence their views, concerns, and perspectives do not matter.'”
For more than a year, Servicemembers United has been actively lobbying for a repeal plan that would respect the need of the Department of Defense to proceed in a thoughtful and measured way and to plan for repeal implementation in advance. The plan, which Servicemembers United released publicly in early February but which the White House has had since last spring, would allow for legislative repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” statute now but delay the effective date of full repeal until a pre-determined future point at which the Department of Defense is comfortable and ready for the change. This type of plan, referred to as a Set End-Date / Delayed Implementation plan, would accomplish both the goals of the President and the goals of the Pentagon without risking the lives and livelihoods of gay and lesbian troops by delaying legislative action.
Nicholson added, “If the White House and the Department of Defense had been more engaged with us and had communicated with us better about the alternatives available, Secretary Gates would surely not feel that legislative action this year would disrespect the opinions of the troops or negatively impact them and their families. This is partly a failure of the Administration to substantively engage the gay military community in a timely manner, and it remains unacceptable. The Commander-in-Chief should strongly and immediately speak out about the need to move swiftly and decisively on this issue for the sake of military readiness. It is, after all, as the President said, ‘the right thing to do.'”
Well said.
Update 3: I received a statement from the White House over e-mail:
“The President’s commitment to repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is unequivocal. This is not a question of if, but how. That’s why we’ve said that the implementation of any congressional repeal will be delayed until the DOD study of how best to implement that repeal is completed. The President is committed to getting this done both soon and right.”
This avoids the issue. The issue is whether or not to hold a repeal vote before the review is completed assuming a delayed implementation, not whether to implement repeal upon the President’s signature. They’ve never answered this question, and that’s the one on the table- is the White House in favor of a repeal vote NOW assuming implementation is delayed- something even more aggressive supporters of repeal like me, Servicemembers United and SLDN are in favor of- or not?
Update 4: Over e-mail, Servicemembers Legal Defense Network’s statement, also spot on (excerpted):
“The President of the United States appears to have reversed himself from what he told the American people in his State of the Union Address. We have the votes in the House and we’re close to having the votes in the Senate Armed Services Committee — the President, however, is not helping us to get the votes we need. Service members around the world took the President at his word; we still do.
“It’s time for the president and commander in chief to speak clearly and frankly on this issue. The commander in chief sounds like he is deferring to his Defense Secretary, to a House Chairman who opposes him on repeal, and to his political operatives.
“With all due respect to Secretary Gates, it is Congress that determines the legislative schedule, not the Secretary of Defense. Congressional leaders and repeal advocates may need to give the Pentagon leaders a gentle reminder.
Update 5: Now this is getting interesting. Speaker Pelosi issued a statement calling on the President to issue a moratorium on discharges (h/t Aravosis):
Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi released the following statement in response to a letter sent this afternoon by Admiral Michael Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Defense Secretary Robert Gates concerning the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy:
“We all look forward to the report on the review of the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy by the Defense Department. In the meantime, the Administration should immediately place a moratorium on dismissals under this policy until the review has been completed and Congress has acted.”
I agree with John, that’s on the unusual side. Of course, I wouldn’t be thrilled either if I announced my intention to hold a repeal vote this year and the Defense Secretary essentially told the world “that would be a mistake.”
By the way, if this pisses you off too, don’t forget the rally on Sunday in Lafayette Park, 12-3 PM. Details on Facebook.
This continues OpenLeft’s partnership with what has now grown from 10 to 30 blogs and Servicemembers Legal Defense Network
On Monday, I wrote about the President’s role in repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. All this week, we are partnering with online new media and SLDN to bring attention to personal letters to the President from discharged veterans. Today’s letter comes from LCpl. Danny Hernandez, a Marine, and I want to excerpt this one paragraph that really brings a jolt:
Upon earning the title of Marine, I took an oath and vowed to “defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” This enemy is a domestic one, and with your direction as Commander and Chief, this is a war in which we can be victorious.
“Semper Fidelis” is the Marine Corps motto meaning “Always Faithful.” Not only am I willing and anxious to go overseas, but I am prepared to pay the ultimate sacrifice in order to protect our freedoms.
I have remained faithful to my country; please be faithful to me.
Very Respectfully,
LCpl. Danny Hernandez, USMC (Separated)
The ugly face of homophobia is indeed an enemy in our country. In other major nations, from Israel to Britain, militaries are integrated. In ours, despite overwhelming public support- including a majority of Republicans- and studies repeatedly demonstrating that servicemembers serving openly would not impact unit cohesion, we have not. It’s time to end Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and it’s time for our President to lead.
The letter is posted in the extended entry. Please take a minute to read it. If you are a current servicemember or veteran, or close to someone who is who was affected by DADT, submit your story here. You can also contact your member of Congress via a simple tool here.
