Connect with us

National

Report finds limited difficulty in lifting ‘Don’t Ask’

Gates urges Congress to repeal ban by year’s end

Published

on

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has renewed his call for Congress to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" by the year's end. (Blade photo by Michael Key)

The Pentagon on Tuesday released its long-awaited “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” report — which found open service can be implemented in the armed forces with limited disruption to the military — as Defense Secretary Robert Gates renewed his call for Congress to repeal the gay ban by the year’s end.

“Now that we have completed this review, I strongly urge the Senate to pass this legislation and send it to the president for his signature before the end of this year,” Gates said during a news conference.

Gates continued that legislative repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is a “matter of some urgency” because of pending litigation that could strike down the statute.

“It is only a matter of time before the federal courts are drawn once more into the fray with the very real possibility that this change would be imposed immediately by judicial fiat — by far the most disruptive and damaging scenario I can imagine,” Gates said.

Still, the defense secretary also said the military would need some time to prepare for open service even after Congress repeals the statute. Gates noted that pending legislation before Congress would end “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” only after he, the president and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certify that the U.S. military is ready for repeal.

“I believe it would be unwise to push ahead with full implementation of repeal before more can be done to prepare the force — in particular, those ground combat specialties and units for what could be a disruptive and disorientating change,” Gates said.

Gates said he doesn’t know how long it would take for the U.S. military to make the changes necessary before he can certify that open service can happen in the military. Still, Gates said if Congress enacts repeal, President Obama would be “watching very closely that we don’t dawdle or try to slow-ball this.”

“I think his expectation would be that we prepare as quickly as we properly and comprehensively could, and then we’d be in a position to move toward certification,” Gates said. “But how long it would take, I don’t know.”

For the first time, Gates also expressed his personal opposition to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” because the law comprises the integrity of gay service members.

“One of the things that is most important to me is personal integrity,” Gates said. “A policy or a law that in effect requires people to lie gives me a problem.”

Majority of troops don’t care about gays in military

The defense secretary made his remarks as part of his endorsement of the Pentagon report, which found little potential disruption in lifting the military’s gay ban should Congress repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Gates said the findings of the report “reflect nearly ten months of research and analysis along several lines of study” and “represent the most thorough and objective review ever of this difficult policy issue and its impact on the American military.”

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Adm. Mike Mullen, who also took part in the news conference, said he also fully backs the report. Mullen has already testified before the Senate that supports open service in the U.S. military.

“For the first time, the chiefs and I have more than just anecdotal evidence and hearsay to inform the advice we give our civilian leaders,” Mullen said.

In the executive summary for the 256-page report, the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” working group co-chairs Jeh Johnson, the Pentagon’s general counsel, and Army Gen. Carter Ham, commander of U.S. Army Europe, write that based on their findings, the risk of repeal “to overall military effectiveness is low.”

“We conclude that, while a repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell will likely, in the short term, bring about some limited and isolated disruption to unit cohesion and retention, we do not believe this disruption will be widespread or long-lasting, and can be adequately addressed by the recommendations we offer below,” Johnson and Ham write.

The report includes the results of a survey sent to 400,000 service members over the summer to solicit their views of gays serving openly in the military. According to the report, more than 115,000 of the surveys, or about 28 percent, were returned.

As earlier reported in November by the Washington Post, 70 percent of service members said alongside an openly gay person would have positive, mixed or no effect on their unit’s ability to get the job done.

The survey also found that 69 percent of respondents believe they have served alongside someone they believed to be gay. Of these respondents, 92 percent said their unit’s ability to work together was either very good, good or neither good nor poor.

Still, the survey found a significant minority who predicted negative consequences as a result of repeal — most notably in the Marine Corps.

While 30 percent of survey respondents overall had negative views on open service, around 40 to 60 percent of respondents in the Marine Corps and others in various combat arms specialties expressed concerns about serving alongside openly gay people.

During the briefing, Gates said this discontent with repeal among these groups has made the service chiefs of the Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps “less sanguine” about the prospects on open service. Each of these service chiefs were set to testify on Friday before the Senate on the views on the report.

Still, Gates said the views on the combat troops on implementing open service “do not present an insurmountable barrier” to repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

“However, these findings do lead me to conclude that an abundance of care and preparation is required if we are to avoid a disruptive and potentially dangerous impact on the performance of those serving at the tip of the spear in America’s wars,” Gates said.

Implementing open service

Accompanying the larger report is an 87-page support plan to guide implementation of open service in the U.S. military. The guide emphasizes that the key implementation message for successful repeal is “leadership-professionalism-respect.”

For leadership, the guide states that leaders in the chain of command must set the example for open service. For professionalism, the guide advises leaders to remind service members of their obligations and oath to defend the U.S. Constitution. For respect, the guide states that unit strength derives from treating other service members with respect.

The report also notably states the building separate rooming quarters for gay and straight service members won’t be appropriate for implementing open service.

“Building separate facilities would create divisions within units and inappropriately isolate a portion of the force,” the support plan states.

In March, former Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway has raised the idea of separate quarters when he said they might be necessary in his service as a result of open service. The Marine Corps is unique among other services because Marines bunk together on base in the same room.

Despite the recommendation against building separate quarters, Johnson said during the Tuesday news conference that commanding officers may be able to make different housing arrangements from service members as result of open service in some circumstances.

“We’re noting that commanders should retain the discretion on an individualized case-by-case basis to address concerns, particular concerns about privacy,” Johnson said. “And this is discretion they have right now. If a service member has a particular concern about an issue with privacy or can’t get along with someone with whom he’s been assigned a room, a commander has discretion to deal with that.”

The guide also makes recommendations for partner benefits for gays serving in the military. Ham said if “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is repealed, the U.S. military would only to continue to observe federally recognized marriages, which would be in accordance with the Defense of Marriage Act.

Still, Ham said a repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” would mean the same-sex partners of service members would be entitled to hospital visitation rights and death benefits.

“With regard to the hospital visits and death gratuities and the like, if the law is repealed, then we believe that are a number of benefits to which servicemembers are entitled that are servicemember-designated,” Ham said. “And we believe that the examples that you offer would likely fall into that category.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

National

White House orders warning signs at Smithsonian over gender identity exhibits

Administration criticizes National Museum of American History

Published

on

Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum is expected to install warning signs outside the National Museum of American History warning visitors of supposedly anti-American content. (Photo courtesy of the Office of the Governor of North Dakota)

The Trump administration will install temporary warning signs outside the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History after releasing a report accusing the museum of promoting what it calls “radical” gender ideology and other politically biased content.

According to the Executive Order, “For purposes of policy formulation under EO 14253, this review of the National Museum of American History concludes that NMAH, by the intention and at the direction of current Museum and Smithsonian leadership, has become subject to institutional capture by a radical, activist ideology that is fundamentally opposed to telling the noble, honest story of the great country we know and love.”

Executive Order 14253 refers to what the White House has deemed the “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History” order. Therefore, the Trump administration has said it will take all available steps to ensure that the issues in the report are addressed and rectified.

Without specifying, the White House has stated that warnings will be posted along NMAH to alert visitors to sections of the museum it has deemed are in violation according to the report.

“The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National Park Service (NPS) and in coordination with the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, shall install temporary signage along the NPS-maintained sidewalks and walkways used by the public to access the Museum, informing visitors of the findings of the Report and of the policy set forth in section 1 of this order,” the Executive Order states.

The warnings were raised in a 162-page report issued by the Domestic Policy Council. The report detailed ways in which the National Museum of American History (NMAH) has “poorly” portrayed American history and insufficiently highlighted the founding story during America 250th celebrations.

The report outlined key findings of the NMAH. One of these findings was the Center for Restorative History within the museum, which has stated its purpose is to “encourage systemic change” by highlighting diverse groups. However, the report states that it highlights every group of Americans except for straight and white Americans.

The Domestic Policy Council accused the museum of engaging in “transgender activism.” According to the report, examples include referring to “biological men” as women or girls, displaying what it describes as sexually suggestive content, and incorporating discussions of gender fluidity, gender identity, and gender nonconformity into the museum’s educational curriculum, “Becoming US.”

The report also criticizes the curriculum for using the term “transgender” when discussing gender-nonconforming people and encouraging individuals to ask a person’s pronouns when meeting them. It further objects to exhibits stating that “transgender, nonbinary, and cisgender female athletes” continue to struggle for and demand equality.

It also condemns what it refers to as explicit content in an exhibition, “Girlhood (It’s Complicated)”, such as chest binders, questioning gender testing in women’s sports, and referring to biological females as “people inhabiting female bodies.”

Additionally, the report accuses the museum of no longer participating in flag-celebrating ceremonies because it was “too busy” preparing for June Pride and WorldPride events. It states, “As Director Hartig explained in a June 2024 presentation, all her attention was focused on flying the Smithsonian Pride Alliance’s ‘intersexual pride flag during June’ in 2023 and 2024.”

On July 9, the American Historical Association issued a statement rejecting the report’s findings.

In regard to the report, it states, “Its anonymous authors overlook a central lesson of the nation’s founding: the United States was forged by finding common purpose amid intense divisions, conflicts, and disagreements.” They argue that only “honest history” can tell the true history of the nation.

House Republicans led a subcommittee hearing that questioned Smithsonian Director Hartig extensively. A main focus of the questions was on the exhibits related to gender identity and whether they were appropriate. In the hearing, Rep. Nancy Mace asked: “When was your gender revealed to you, Dr. Hartig?”

In response to questioning, Hartig stated that the institution is nonpartisan and does not push a specific agenda.

Hartig published a two-page statement ahead of her hearing outlining her thoughts on the situation. In the report, she states that the institution is always open to criticism and will continue to look for ways to improve, but she sees the report as misleading.

“I can attest that the report does not fairly characterize the full body of work at this museum. I am familiar with the depth and breadth of our collections, exhibits, and programming. And while I recognize there is always room for improvement, I also know the beauty, inspiration, and expertise that exists in our museum,” Hartig wrote.

Democrats created their own 16-page report as a rebuttal to the Domestic Policy Council’s report. It argued that the attacks by the current Trump administration are another example of its attempt to rewrite history. Additionally, the report states that no policy changes were included in the Executive Order, as that is beyond the President’s role. “The Report recommends nothing. That is no accident. To recommend an action, the Report would need to identify who is legally empowered to take it, and its own opening chapter concedes the President’s only power is to ‘urge’,” House Democrats wrote.

It is still unclear when the temporary warnings will be installed or what form they will take beyond the requirements outlined in the executive order.

An exhibit at the Smithsonian. (Washington Blade photo by Landon Shackelford)

Continue Reading

National

Trump ends direct HIV prevention funding to community groups

Advocates say transfer of funds to states may disrupt local programs

Published

on

The Trump administration will discontinue direct federal funding of community-based organizations that provide HIV prevention services. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

A decision by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) at the request of the Trump administration to discontinue direct federal funding of community-based organizations and clinics that provide HIV prevention services has raised concern among community health advocates, including LGBTQ advocates.

 News surfaced earlier this month that the OMB informed the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that it would not renew $46 million in funding for 96 community-based organizations that provide HIV testing, referrals to medical care, and arrangements for obtaining pre-exposure HIV prevention medication known as PrEP that has been shown to be 99 percent effective in preventing HIV infection.

Under the new policy arranged by OMB, the funds will be redirected to the states to be allocated to state and local health departments. The policy calls for states to encourage but not require their respective state and local health departments to allocate some of those funds for community-based organizations. Under the new policy, the funding is scheduled to last until May of 2027, before a renewal decision is made.

Some political observers have speculated that the decision to end direct federal funding to community-based organizations could be motivated by the Trump administration’s hostility to diversity, equity, and inclusion or DEI programs and organizations that promote those programs, with the belief that some of the groups receiving the federal HIV prevention funds are promoting DEI.

Carl Schmid, executive director of the D.C.-based HIV+ Hepatitis Policy Institute, is among the leaders of many AIDS advocacy organizations expressing strong opposition to the OMB action. Schmid said that in places like D.C. and some states, local officials will be willing to redirect the federal funds to local community-based organizations.

A list of the 96 community-based organizations across the country that are currently receiving the federal AIDS funds includes the D.C.-based Whitman-Walker Health, which has a long history of healthcare support for the LGBTQ community, and La Clinica del Pueblo, which reaches out to the Latino community.

 Schmid said Whitman-Walker and La Clinica del Pueblo have longstanding good relationships with the local D.C. government.

“But other states and jurisdictions don’t have that relationship with the community-based organizations,” Schmid said. “It depends on the state,” he said, adding, “Not all states send their money to the communities that really need it most. And not all states are fast in getting money to the community-based organizations.” 

Spokespersons for Whitman-Walker and La Clinica del Pueblo couldn’t immediately be reached for comment on whether they think the Trump administration’s latest action related to funding will adversely impact their respective organizations.  

 Schmid said under the current federal grant program slated to be discontinued, which has been in effect for at least five years, HIV-related health organizations receiving the federal grant funds were eligible for an existing federal policy enabling them to purchase HIV-related medication, including the PrEP prevention medication, at a significant discount from pharmaceutical companies. With the ending of the direct federal HIV funds to community-based organizations, Schmid said it was unclear whether problems may surface in obtaining drug discounts.

“They could still qualify as a sub-grantee from a state,”  Schmid said. “But what if they don’t get that grant again? They would not be able to qualify to obtain the drugs” at the discounted price, he said.

Among the organizations expressing strong concern over the decision to discontinue the direct HIV prevention funding to community-based organizations has been the Federal AIDS Policy Institute and its subgroup called the HIV Prevention Action Coalition.

In a July 22 letter bearing the names of 71 community-based organizations from throughout the country sent to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Acting Director Jay Bhattacharya, the group called for the Trump administration to “reconsider” ending the current funding policy.  

 “Ending this program without a clear plan for what comes next would dismantle prevention infrastructure that has taken more than three decades of federal investment to build and do so just as that long record of measurable returns is accelerating,” the letter states.

It says the initiative by President Trump in his first term as president to end the HIV epidemic and reduce new HIV infections by 90 percent by 2030 was moving ahead by the funding program for community-based organizations that the administration now wants to end. 

“Discontinuing this program would also cost far more than it saves,” the letter says. “Every HIV transmission prevented avoids an estimated lifetime treatment cost of roughly half a million dollars per person to the healthcare system – costs that fall heavily on taxpayer-funded programs, including Medicaid, Medicare, and the Ryan White HIV/AIDS program,” the letter continues.

“The choice before the administration is straightforward: a modest, targeted investment in prevention now, or far greater public expense for treatment later,” the letter concludes. 

Spokespersons for the OMB and the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the CDC, have not immediately responded to news media requests for comment on the opposition to the funding change policy.

Continue Reading

National

At Alliance Defending Freedom’s summit, church and state are one

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) among speakers

Published

on

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Uncloseted Media published this article on July 23.

By SPENCER MACNAUGHTON | Earlier this month, hundreds of people filled a conference room in San Diego. These included Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, Assistant Secretary of Health Admiral Brian Christine, OpenAI executive Dean Ball, and the attorneys general of West Virginia and Idaho.

They all came together for Alliance Defending Freedom’s 2026 Summit. The Christian legal group, also a Southern Poverty Law Center-designated anti-LGBTQ hate group, described the event as a “gathering of leaders from many different spheres, including law, public policy, media, business, education, and Christian leadership.”

Johnson — who has said that “homosexual relationships are inherently unnatural and … society cannot give its stamp of approval to such a dangerous lifestyle” — was a featured speaker.

In his speech, he seemed unconcerned with the separation of church and state: “It is so encouraging to Kelly and I to be among friends and fellow warriors for this cause and people who understand that God is not done with America yet. … ADF’s on the very tip of the spear, front line, defending those very truths and keeping the door open for the spread of the Gospel. This is our moment. I’m telling you, I believe the next season … is going to be the greatest season of this ministry since its inception.”

That ministry is one that has espoused aggressively anti-LGBTQ views since its inception in the early 1990s. It was co-founded by a group of evangelical men, including Alan Sears, who co-authored a book called “The Homosexual Agenda: Exposing the Principal Threat to Religious Freedom Today.” Since then, ADF has opposed gay marriage and supported bans on gay sex and on gender-affirming care for minors.

After helping overturn Roe v. Wade, ADF lawyers have led key victories at the Supreme Court. In 303 Creative v. Elenis, SCOTUS ruled that a website designer could refuse service to gay weddings. And this year they convinced the Court to overturn Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy and to uphold state laws in West Virginia and Idaho that ban trans girls from playing on girls’ sports teams.

At the summit, ADF President Kristen Waggoner, who has promoted conversion therapists and consistently misgenders trans people, interviewed these states’ attorneys general.

“The lawyers who were defending women’s sports were among the best I’ve ever seen in my entire life,” West Virginia Attorney General JB McCuskey told Waggoner.

Similar to Johnson, Trump’s Assistant Secretary of Health Christine showed his commitment to governing based on conservative Christianity. He gave a Bible-thumping speech against gender transition and trans healthcare, saying that it “contradicts … the deeper moral order that is woven into creation itself. For Genesis 1:27 informs us that God created man in his own image. … Male and female” He also said the “complementary relationship between man and woman is divine” and advocated for youth with gender dysphoria to receive care from a pastor.

All of these remarks from politicians made me think of the interview I published earlier this week with Pete Hegseth’s pastor, Doug Wilson. He wants a Christian theocracy in America and told me that: both the perpetrator and the victim should be disciplined in some cases of marital rape; that transgender people are “sad;” that execution is justifiable for certain homosexual acts; and that gay sex should be illegal.

The ADF Summit is glossy and polished. And while its messaging may be less explicit than Pastor Wilson’s, the track record of the organizations shows they have the exact same desires. They’re just deeply strategic in what they say and when and how they say it.

I believe the political power players who attended this year’s summit know this. They know they are endorsing an organization whose members have essentially called for the illegalization of most — if not all ‚ forms of queer behavior and presentation.

In the last few years, these perspectives have become increasingly embedded in the highest rooms of the federal government and they have been effective in stripping away LGBTQ rights. Wilson, who just installed a full-time pastor in Washington to lead services, says there are 10 to 20 government officials who align with his church’s ideology.

It is vital for Americans to keep their eyes wide open to the ultimate goal of groups like ADF: to create a United States that leaves LGBTQ people without rights and that pushes us back in the closet.

Continue Reading

Popular