Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
March 26, 2017 Disclaimer: Please read.

Statements and opinions expressed in articles are those of the authors, not Truthdig. Truthdig takes no responsibility for such statements or opinions.

What Is Sex For?
I Am Brian Wilson

Truthdig Bazaar more items

Ear to the Ground
Email this item Print this item

‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Compromise Could Pass This Week

Posted on May 24, 2010
US Army / Mike Strasser

The White House, congressional leaders, the Pentagon and gay rights activists have hammered out a deal that could finally end the military’s ban on gays serving openly. A vote could come as soon as this week, but the ban would remain until the president and military leaders agreed to lift it.

Such a decision would almost certainly wait until the Pentagon completed a review of the policy by Dec. 1, and possibly much longer.

Servicemembers United Executive Director Alexander Nicholson said in a release, “This announcement from the White House today is long awaited, much needed, and immensely helpful as we enter a critical phase of the battle to repeal the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ law.”

Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese said, “Today’s announcement paves the path to fulfill the President’s call to end ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ this year and puts us one step closer to removing this stain from the laws of our nation. ... A solution has emerged: Congress needs to vote to repeal ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ now.”

Though he is commander in chief, the president does not have the power to end “don’t ask, don’t tell.” If lawmakers pass this compromise, as amendments to the national defense authorization bill, they will essentially transfer the authority to the president and military leaders.  —PZS

Washington Post:

Even if the compromise language passes, a legislative repeal would go into effect only after Obama certifies that the change does not harm the nation’s military readiness.

[...] Some Democrats, particularly in the House, wanted to wait for the completion of the Pentagon’s study, while other, more liberal Democrats had been pushing for an immediate repeal. The compromise is designed to satisfy both concerns.

“We can live with this, and we’re asking enthusiastically members to support and vote for it,” said Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network.

Read more

More Below the Ad


Square, Site wide
Taboola Below Article

Get truth delivered to
your inbox every day.

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Join the conversation

Load Comments

By dihey, May 25, 2010 at 2:21 pm Link to this comment

Just in: AP reports that there may not be enough yea votes in the Senate to pass this monstrous amendment. Good! I hold that DADT must be repealed by the Congress today by legislation dedicated to DADT only. However, this particular crazy attempt is clearly unconstitutional. It gives the president two shots at signing or not signing a piece of legislation whereas Article 1, Section 7 gives the President only one shot. No wonder: Harebrained Senator Lieberman is associated with it.

Report this

By dihey, May 25, 2010 at 11:25 am Link to this comment

The Congress will send what appears to be a DADT law to the President who can do one of three things. He can return the law signed or refuse to return the law within ten days to a Congress in session. In both cases the proposed legislation shall “be a law” according to Article 1 Section 7 of the Constitution. If Obama returns the legislation unsigned (a.k.a. “Veto”) within ten days it “will not be a law” and Congress can try to override which, I believe is politically impossible in this case.
Now assume that the President returns the legislation signed. Wait a minute: it is not (yet) a law? Where in our Constitution is that allowed?
Now, it is possible that what passes the Congress is a resolution and not really a law. If it is a binding resolution then it makes the President and the Pentagon into lawmakers which is patently unconstitutional. If it is a non-binding resolution what is the sense of that?
Can you begin to fathom the mischief which this so-called compromise is likely to engender? This will, nay must get to the Supreme Court.

Report this

By dihey, May 25, 2010 at 10:47 am Link to this comment

I sure hope that Mr. Obama knows what the word “chutzpah” means because this so-called repeal of DADT is the Congress’ “chutzpah of the month”.
I am audacious enough to state that this law is unconstitutional because it does not demand a timely veto from the President. In essence the Congress has empowered the President and the Pentagon to make law. Is that not unconstitutional. And where is the provision that the Congress can override a Presidential Nyet?
At the end of this Kabuki theater the DADT issue will have to return to Congress for a vote. The President and the Pentagon are not members of the legislature.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, May 25, 2010 at 8:36 am Link to this comment

“A vote could come as soon as this week, but the ban would remain until the president and military leaders agreed to lift it.”

IOW, it’s a FUCKING LIE!!!!!!!!

Barry wants our money but he has no intention of overturning DADT because the Big Sissies in the Military are afraid of taking showers with men who enjoy getting fucked.

The KAPOS of the HRC are delighted but the actual men and women this affects know different.

I have know doubt a similar scam is being confected to deep six ENDA.

Report this
Right Top, Site wide - Care2
Right 3, Site wide - Exposure Dynamics
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right Internal Skyscraper, Site wide

Like Truthdig on Facebook