Living

Service chiefs: ‘Don’t Ask’ repeal proceeding smoothly

Military leaders testify before House committee Thursday

Published

13 years ago

April 8, 2011

Chris Johnson

Gen. Norton Schwartz, chief of staff of the U.S. Air Force, at Thursday's hearing. (Blade photo by Joey DiGuglielmo)

The military service chiefs testified on Thursday that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal implementation was proceeding smoothly and that they don’t anticipate major problems with moving toward open service in the long term.

In a hearing before the Republican-controlled House Armed Services Committee, uniform leaders of the military services said “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal implementation was proceeding in a way that they felt was favorable.

The chiefs of the Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force — Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead, Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos and Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz — spoke on behalf of their services while Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Chiarelli represented his service.

Many of the service chiefs — especially Amos, who said he feared open service could be a distraction that could cost Marines’ lives on the battlefield — voiced opposition to legislative action to end the anti-gay before law last year before Congress took action to pass allowing for repeal.

However, following the passage of repeal legislation, each of the chiefs committed to working toward repeal and issued guidance on implementing open service to their subordinates — a sentiment they voiced in testimony before the committee.

Roughead, who was among the chiefs to favor “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal last year, said he doesn’t think repeal would have a measurable impact on the Navy.

“The United States Navy can successfully implement a repeal of the law,” Roughead said. “Combat effectiveness is what we provide the nation and repeal will not change who we are or what we do.”

Roughead said he’s established July 1 as time for when the Navy will be complete training for open service and said the service is on track to achieve that goal.

Amos noted that despite his earlier opposition to repeal, he issued guidance to the Marine Corps on the path toward open service and created a video to prepare Marines for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal.

“I’m looking for issues that might arise specifically coming out of the … training, and to be honest with you, chairman, we’ve not seen it,” Amos said. “There’s questions about billeting for Marines — I mean, the kinds of questions you would expect — but there hasn’t been the recalcitrant pushback, there’s not been the anxiety over it from the forces in the field.”

Amos said the Marine Corps has completed 100 percent of Tier 1 and Tier 2 training — which includes training of service leadership — and said Tier 3 training, training of the total force, is 41 percent finished and would be complete June 1.

Gen. Peter Chiarelli, vice chief of staff of the U.S. Army. (Blade photo by Joey DiGuglielmo)

Echoing the notion that repeal implementation is proceeding smoothly, Chiarelli, who’s superior Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey opposed repeal in testimony last year, said the training to prepare soldiers for open service is effective.

Chiarelli maintaining training “is not disruptive” to the Army, but said the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal implementation process for the service “will take time.”

“The chain teaching program facilitates thoughtful, constructive dialogue between leaders and subordinates,” Chiarelli said. “This dialogue is hugely important, especially at the lowest levels, where ownership and consensus are most critical.”

Chiarelli said he participated in the first session along with Casey and other four-star generals” and “can attest the process works.”

Schwartz, who testified last year that he didn’t want “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” implementation until 2012, said the Air Force is also moving toward open service in a deliberate but expeditious manner.

“We will rely on steady leadership at all levels to implement this change in a manner that is consistent with standards of military readiness and effectiveness, with minimal adverse effect on unit cohesion, recruiting and retention in the Air Force,” Schwartz said.

Schwartz added his service has trained about 15 percent of all airmen — some 117,000 of the force — is on track “to train the remainder within the project training window.”

Despite their generally favorable view of moving toward open service, both Chiarelli and Schwartz identified “moderate risk” with implementing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal, although they said they were mitigating the risk through educating service members.

LGBT advocates following the hearing that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal said the testimony demonstrates training is on track and further congressional hearings are unnecessary.

Alex Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, said the testimony demonstrates the service chiefs are “comfortable with this policy change.”

“This should be the last waste of their time and taxpayers’ resources to try to undo the inevitable,” Nicholson said. “‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is going away, and we will have a stronger military and a stronger nation as a result.”

No committee hearings specifically devoted to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal are planned in the Senate. Tara Andringa, a spokesperson for Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Carl Levin (D-Mich.), said his committee has asked the chiefs to inform panel members about the progress of repeal as part of the hearing on the fiscal year 2012 budget.

Despite the confidence that chiefs expressed in moving toward open service, Republicans on the committee voiced concerns about “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” or griped about the process that led to passage of legislation allowing for repeal of the anti-gay law.

House Armed Services Committee Chair Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) said he disapproved of the way the Democratic-controlled House last year proceeded with repeal legislation after the Pentagon published its study in November on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

“As a result of the rush to judgment that bypassed this committee, Congress was denied the opportunity to ask questions and identify weaknesses in the repeal implementation plan,” McKeon said. “Now, we’re confronted by an implementation process that is moving quickly to completion of the education and training phase.”

McKeon maintained that the “one outcome that must be avoided” is a path for the U.S. armed forces that would “put the combat readiness of our military forces at risk.”

Following the hearing, McKeon told the Washington Blade that the chiefs’ testimony didn’t allay his concerns — but insisted they were based on the congressional repeal process as opposed to open service itself.

“My views of established from the way it was handled in the first place to get to this point,” McKeon said. “They’re just doing their job.”

Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, chided for McKeon for holding the hearings and for asserting that insufficient discussion led to repeal.

“It’s particularly unfortunate that the full committee chairman, Mr. McKeon, has decided to become a party to this ugly cabal to play politics with our men and women in uniform,” Sarvis said. “This has traditionally been a bi-partisan committee, but under the current leadership of McKeon and [House Armed Services Subcommitee Chair Joe] Wilson, that sane and sensible approach is at risk.”

While Republicans voiced concern about the passage of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal legislation or implementing open service in the U.S. military, Democrats on the panel indicated support for the repeal legislation Congress passed last year.

Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), ranking Democrat on the committee, said the issue of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” has been “hotly debated” since its inception in 1993 and disputed the argument that Congress didn’t undertake sufficient discussion before acting — adding lawmakers “made the only logical choice” last year by enacting repeal.

“I believe we have analyzed this at enormous length over an enormous period of time, and at some point you have to make a decision about what the best way to go forward is,” Smith said.

Smith added the longtime service of gays in the military is well known — although they’ve been serving in secret because of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” — and said he’s “yet to meet a service member who wasn’t abundantly aware of somebody that they were serving with [who] was gay or lesbian, and yet we have the finest military in the world.”

Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) said when Congress was going through the process of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal she had no doubts the U.S. military could handle open service.

“I did not believe that our military units were so fragile that finding out having somebody next to you that was openly gay would be disruptive to the mission of our units,” she said. “I am very proud so far, as you’ve discussed today, of all men and women in uniform, who not only go out and fight for us everyday but who are also working through this new policy that you’re trying to implement.”

Sanchez asked whether service members discharged would be able to re-enter the military if there was no other reason for their separation.

Schwartz replied that discharged service members would be able to re-enlist based on the needs of the services to which they apply and there is no guarantee for returning at the same grade.

Pressed by Sanchez on what options are available to gay service members if they feel they’re harassed upon seeking re-entry, Schwartz replied an appeal process is available both through an inspector general and the Board of Corrections.

Could legislation disrupt certification?

In December, President Obama signed legislation allowing for repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” but the anti-gay law will only be off the books after 60 days pass following certification from the president, the defense secretary, and the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Defense officials have said certification is anticipated mid-summer.

But Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) has introduced legislation in the House that could complicate or delay certification by expanding the certification requirement to include direct input from each the chiefs.

Following the hearing, Hunter told the Blade he still thinks legislation to expand the certification requirement is necessary despite the chiefs’ testimony because of “the same reason [he] put it up in the first place.”

Hunter said he’s been talking with McKeon’s staff about having a vote on his legislation in committee and is expecting a vote during the panel markup for the FY2012 budget.

McKeon seemed unaware of any plans to hold a vote on Hunter’s legislation or didn’t want to disclose his plans. Asked by the Blade whether he was expecting a vote, McKeon replied, “I don’t know. We’ll have to look at it and see.”

Nicholson said Hunter was probably referring to the FY-2012 defense authorization bill — legislation over which the House Armed Services Committee has jurisdiction.

Additionally, Nicholson said Hunter may have enough votes to attach the measure as part of the House version of the defense legislation, but won’t have a shot of passing it through the Senate or having Obama sign the legislation.

“Of course, the reason we’re not worried about it is because it’ll never pass the Senate,” Nicholson said. “So I wouldn’t necessarily be surprised and I wouldn’t necessarily be alarmed even if it passed as part of the House defense budget.”

Up Next

Senators: Stop separating married bi-national couples

Don't Miss

Anti-gay Bush official sentenced to jail

FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM

Real Estate

The rise of virtual home tours

Adapting to changing consumer preferences in spring real estate

Published

21 hours ago

April 26, 2024

Jeff Hammerberg

Looking for a home? Virtual tours hold special benefits for queer buyers.

In today’s dynamic real estate market, the spring season brings not only blooming flowers but also a surge of activity as buyers and sellers alike prepare to make their moves. However, in recent years, there’s been a notable shift in how consumers prefer to explore potential homes: the rise of virtual tours.

For the LGBTQ community, these virtual experiences offer more than just convenience; they provide accessibility, safety, and inclusivity in the home buying process.

Gone are the days of spending weekends driving from one open house to another – unless that’s your thing of course, only to find that the property doesn’t quite match expectations. With virtual tours, you can explore every corner of a home from the comfort of your own space – find something interesting? Schedule a showing with any LGBTQ Realtor at GayRealEstate.com.

This is particularly significant for LGBTQ individuals, who may face unique challenges or concerns when attending in-person showings. Whether it’s the ability to discreetly view properties without fear of discrimination or the convenience of touring homes located in LGBTQ-friendly neighborhoods across the country, virtual tours offer a sense of empowerment and control in the home buying process.

Moreover, virtual tours cater to the diverse needs of the LGBTQ community. For couples or families with busy schedules or those living in different cities or states, these digital walkthroughs provide a convenient way to view properties together without the need for extensive travel. Additionally, for individuals who may be exploring their gender identity or transitioning, virtual tours offer a low-pressure environment to explore potential living spaces without the added stress of in-person interactions.

At GayRealEstate.com, we understand the importance of adapting to changing consumer preferences and leveraging technology to better serve our community. That’s why our agents offer an extensive selection of virtual tours for LGBTQ individuals and allies alike – visit our website, choose an agent and within minutes you’ll have access to the Multiple Listing Service (MLS) via their website.

From cozy condominiums in bustling urban centers to sprawling estates in picturesque suburbs, virtual tours showcase a wide range of properties tailored to diverse tastes and lifestyles.

In addition to virtual tours, GayRealEstate.com provides comprehensive resources and support to guide LGBTQ buyers and sellers through every step of the real estate journey. Our network of LGBTQ-friendly agents is committed to providing personalized service, advocacy, and representation to ensure that all individuals feel respected, valued, and empowered throughout the process. Plus, we are happy to provide a free relocation kit to any city in the USA or Canada if you are a home buyer.

As we embrace the spring season and all the opportunities it brings in the real estate market, let’s also celebrate the power of virtual tours to revolutionize the way we find and experience our future homes. Whether you’re searching for your first apartment, forever home, or investment property, GayRealEstate.com is here to help you navigate the exciting world of real estate with confidence, pride, and inclusivity.

Jeff Hammerberg is founding CEO of Hammerberg & Associates, Inc. Reach him at [email protected].

Advice

Should I divorce my husband for the hot new guy in our building?

Debating whether to leave or stay after the sex goes cold

Published

1 day ago

April 26, 2024

Michael Radkowsky

Dear Michael,

I’ve been with my husband for 10 years and the sex is pretty much gone. It stopped being exciting a long time ago and pretty much the only time we ever do it is with the occasional third.

A really hot guy moved into our building about a year ago. We would see each other sometimes in the elevator or at our building’s gym and we started talking and really hit it off. Mark is 15 years younger than I but we seem to have a lot in common. We started hooking up and the sex is amazing.

I haven’t told my husband because it’s breaking our rule about no repeats. I have to say that the secrecy is hot. It’s kind of a thrill to take the elevator upstairs when I say I’m going on an errand. But it’s more than that. I have a connection with Mark that is far more amazing than what I have ever felt with my husband. Not just the sex. We just enjoy being together, talking about anything and everything.

My husband went to visit his family last weekend and I spent the whole time with Mark. Since then I can’t stop thinking that I want to leave my husband and be with Mark.

Part of me thinks this is a crazy mid-life crisis. I mean, this kid’s in a totally different place in life. But we have mind-blowing sex and a fantastic connection. I’d like your thoughts on how to proceed.

Michael replies:

You’ve got a lot to consider.

First: Sex with a long-term partner changes over time. It tends to be less about erotic heat and more about the connection with a person whom you love. In other words, it’s being with the person you’re with that makes the sex meaningful and even great. Having a good sexual relationship with a long-term partner comes far more from a heart connection than from a crotch attachment.

Second: You seem ready to throw your relationship under the bus pretty quickly, without addressing other problems in the relationship besides sex. When you are sneaking around, lying, and rule-breaking , I don’t see how you can look your husband in the eye; and if you can’t look him in the eye, you certainly can’t have even a half-way decent relationship.

Yet another point to consider: Affairs pretty much always seem more exciting than marriage. The partner is new, which almost automatically makes the sex hotter; the secrecy is a thrill; and you don’t have to deal with paying the rent, house chores, and all the petty annoyances of living up-close with someone day-in, day-out.

You are bringing lots of energy to your affair, and everything about it is exciting. You are bringing no energy — at least no positive energy — to your marriage. You get what you put into a relationship.

Divorce is not something that should be entered into lightly. Be aware that if you leave your husband for Mark, you will no doubt find over time that the sex becomes less exciting and that the connection is not always fantastic. No surprise, 75 percent of marriages that begin with affair partners end in divorce. While I don’t think statistics predict what will happen to any particular couple, believing that you will have a significantly better relationship with your affair partner than you did with your husband sets you up for likely disappointment.

Many gay men focus on “hot sex” as the big draw, pursuing a lot of sex with a lot of men, and/or pursuing an ongoing series of relationships that last until the sex cools. If that’s what you want, that’s fine. But it’s a different path from pursuing a close and loving long-term relationship, which involves knowing someone well and having him know you well; collaborating on getting through the hard stuff life throws at us; finding ways to make peace with disappointment; and consistently striving to be someone worth being married to.

How to proceed? While you are the only person who should make that decision, I would suggest that whatever your choice, keep in mind that marriage can be more than what you’ve made of it, so far.

Michael Radkowsky, Psy.D. is a licensed psychologist who works with couples and individuals in D.C. He can be found online at michaelradkowsky.com. All identifying information has been changed for reasons of confidentiality. Have a question? Send it to [email protected].

Autos

Sport haulers: Jeep Grand Cherokee, Mercedes GLE-Class

Updated cabins, adept handling, and more

Published

1 week ago

April 20, 2024

Joe Phillips

Jeep Grand Cherokee

Now that March Madness and the Masters are over, it’s time for, well, everything else. For my husband and me, this means water sports, as in kayaks and rowing sculls, which is why we trekked to the Potomac for the George Washington Invitational regatta last weekend.

Alas, high winds splashed cold water on the event, canceling much of it. But there was still plenty of spirited camaraderie to rival “The Boys in the Boat.”

And I was reminded of my time years ago as a rower with D.C. Strokes, ferrying teammates to races up and down the East Coast. Back then my ride was a dated, rather cramped four-door sedan.

If only we could have paddled around in a sporty SUV like the two reviewed here. Now that would have been some smooth sailing (wink-wink).

JEEP GRAND CHEROKEE

$40,000

MPG: 19 city/26 highway

0 to 60 mph: 7.5 seconds

Maximum cargo room: 37.7 cu. ft.

PROS: Updated cabin, adept handling, strong towing

CONS: So-so gas mileage, no third row, pricey trim levels

IN A NUTSHELL: Rough, tough and buff. It’s doesn’t get much more butch than a Jeep. This year’s Grand Cherokee is no exception, with rugged looks, expert off-road capability and better-than-average towing capacity of 6,200 pounds.

There are a dizzying number of trim levels—more than a dozen—starting with the barebones base-model Laredo at an affordable $40,000. The lineup tops out with the Summit Reserve 4xe PHEV, which is almost twice the price at $76,000 and one of various plug-in hybrid versions available. Those plug-in hybrids can drive up to 25 miles on all-electric power before the four-cylinder gas engine kicks in. Otherwise, you can choose from a standard V6 or V8. Gas mileage on all trim levels is basically the same as the competition.

Where the Grand Cherokee really shines is in the handling. More refined than a Wrangler but less lavish than a Land Rover, this Jeep maneuvers just as well on city streets and highways as it does on bumpier terrain.

I tested the mid-range and mid-priced Overland, which comes standard with four-wheel drive and large 20-inch wheels. It also boasts a slew of niceties, such as quilted upholstery, panoramic sunroof and high-tech digital displays. These include a 10.25-inch infotainment touchscreen and rear-seat entertainment system.

The nine-speaker Alpine stereo, designed specifically for the Grand Cherokee, is pleasing. But I really wanted to hear the boffo 19-speaker McIntosh surround-sound system that Jeep also offers. Sigh, it’s only available on the premium Summit trim level.

MERCEDES GLE-CLASS

$64,000

MPG: 20 city/25 highway

0 to 60 mph: 6.6 seconds

Maximum cargo room: 33.3 cu. ft.

PROS: Lush interior, silky-smooth suspension, speedy

CONS: Some confusing electronics, tight third row, many competitors

IN A NUTSHELL: For a more high-class hauler, there’s the Mercedes GLE-Class. This midsize SUV is similar in size to the Jeep Grand Cherokee. But instead of seating five passengers, the GLE can carry up to seven. Sure, legroom in the optional third row may be tight for taller travelers, but it’s perfect for a cocky cockswain or two.

Six trim levels, ranging from the base-model GLE 350 to two high-performance AMG models. For eco-conscious buyers, the GLE 450e plug-in hybrid arrived earlier this year and can run on battery power alone for almost 60 miles.

My test car was the top-of-the-line AMG 63 S 4Matic, a head-turner in every way. Priced at a whopping $127,000, this GLE looks best in glossy black with the Night Package, which includes tasteful jet-black exterior accents and matte-black wheels. To complete the Darth Vader effect, there’s a deep, menacing exhaust rumble that’s downright threatening.

You expect such a ride to be wicked fast, and it is: 0 to 60 mph in a blistering 3.7 seconds. Yet the carbon ceramic brakes with their devil-red calipers are equally impressive in slowing things down quickly.

Inside, each GLE comes with two large digital displays on the elegantly sculpted dashboard. My favorite feature is the “Hey Mercedes” digital assistant, which responds to voice commands such as opening or closing the sunroof, operating the infotainment system or activating the climate controls.

It’s hard to find sport seats that are more comfortable, especially with the heavenly massage function (though those massage controls could be a bit more user-friendly.) For AMG models, the seats come with red-contrasting stitching and red seatbelts—a nod to the devilish demeanor under the hood.

Considering all the SUVs available in showrooms, few make quite the splash of a GLE.