Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 5:34 PM ET, 12/14/2010

House to vote Wednesday on new 'don't ask, don't tell' bill

By Ed O'Keefe

Updated 5:34 p.m. ET
The House of Representatives will vote Wednesday a new bill to repeal the military's "don't ask, don't tell" law.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said the vote will occur tomorrow after House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) and Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-Pa.) on Tuesday introduced the House version of a bill proposed last week by Sens. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine). The bill authorizes the Pentagon to end its enforcement of the 17-year ban on gays serving openly in the military.

"This discriminatory and harmful policy has weakened America's security by depriving us of the work of tens of thousands of gay and lesbian troops who have served their country honorably. And it has severely compromised our Armed Forces' core value of integrity," Hoyer said in a statement.

Lieberman and Collins introduced the bill last week after the Senate failed to proceed to debate on the National Defense Authorization Act for the second time this year. The massive policy bill included language ending "don't ask, don't tell." it was passed by the House in May.

The new bill uses the exact language that was in the defense measure.

Murphy, an Iraq war veteran who lost reelection in November, helped broker the deal between the White House and Congressional Democrats to include language ending the ban in the defense bill.

Rep. Howard P. "Buck" McKeon (R-Calif.), the incoming chairman of the House Armed Service Committee, criticized Congressional Democrats for pushing to pass a repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" but failing to pass the annual defense bill, which has been approved every year for more than four decades. He urged lawmakers to consider the concerns of military service chiefs before rushing to end the ban.

"The defense authorization bill could -- and should -- have been passed months ago, but Democratic leaders have held it up because of controversial social provisions. The American people and our troops demand better," McKeon said in a statement.

McKeon wanted the House Armed Services Committee to hold hearings with Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen and other top military leaders, as the Senate did two weeks ago. But scheduling conflicts got in the way, according to Democratic aides.

Gay rights advocates and Democratic Congressional aides not authorized to speak publicly on the issue believe that having the House vote first on the new bill will force the Senate to consider it as a privileged resolution before the lame-duck session concludes.

Though Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) supports the new proposal, he has not said when senators might vote on it, if at all. The Senate is expected to vote on a new tax-cut package and perhaps consider a government spending bill and the New START Treaty before revisiting the issue of gays in the military.

Lieberman said Tuesday that he is "very encouraged" by the new House bill, saying it "creates some real momentum" for repeal in the Senate.

"To me, particularly if and when, I believe, the House passes a repeal of 'don't ask, don't tell,' it would be wrong of us to go home before taking it up and passing it," Lieberman said. "And I think we can do it pretty quickly."

Lieberman stopped short of saying whether he believes there's enough time to tackle the bill in the Senate. But he said he is optimistic that the repeal effort stands a chance.

"I am increasingly confident that we have more than 60 senators ready to vote to repeal 'don't ask, don't tell,' so we can do it this year, and time is of the essence," Lieberman said.

Staff writer Felicia Sonmez contributed to this report.

Leave your thoughts in the comments section below

RELATED: Marine general: Repeal of 'don't ask' would endanger lives

By Ed O'Keefe  | December 14, 2010; 5:34 PM ET
Categories:  Congress, Military  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama taps Jon Bon Jovi for new advisory board
Next: Most back repealing 'don't ask, don't tell,' poll says

Comments

Whether you agree or disagree with Don't Ask, Don't Tell, this should be left to the new Congress instead by people who lost in the last election.

Posted by: sales7 | December 14, 2010 1:38 PM | Report abuse

RELIGIOUS DEATH LAWS DOSE NOT PASS THE 14AMEND. EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS, LAW DOCTRINES OF [RATIONAL BASIS TEST 431US471,489 427US307,314, STRICT SCRUTINY 403US365, 405US330, 411US1,16-17 , COMPELLING INTEREST 394US618,634 AND SUSPECT CLASSIFICATION 411US1,28, INTERSEX/ XXY MALES IS GENETICS THEREFORE A RACE 379US184,191 AS ALCHEMY TEXT SAY THERE ARE THREE SEXES MALE-FEMALE-& HERMAPHRODITE CALLED THE REBIS SPICES WHICH IS BOTH THE OLDEST FROM WHICH "ADAM" WAS CREATED AS, AND WHAT MAN WILL BECOME AGAIN, SEE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT ON GENETICS PROTECTIONS, AGAIN FORIEGN/ RELIGIOUS LAWS ARE NO EXCUSE TO BE INHUMAN NOR A TERRORIST PERIOD

THE US CONSTITUTION 1ST AND 11TH US CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS

NO FOREIGN LAWS OVER US CITIZENS PERIOD,( RES IPSA LOQUITUR, RES JUDICATA) IT BARS THE INCORPORATION OF ANY FOREIGN LAWS INCLUDING RELIGIOUS LAWS (SHARIA-LEVITICAL- VATICAN etc) FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE they must be of HUMANE CIVILITY (SECULAR in purpose and effect see Law Doctrines ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE/ IN TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, BY ANY OF THE 4 SEPARATE POWERS (EXECUTIVE/ CONGRESSIONAL/ JUDICIAL AND BY VOTE OF THE US CITIZENS ) FOREIGN INHUMANE DEATH LAWS, IT'S PROHIBITED AND US CONSTITUTIONALLY INAPPROPRIATE

STATES CAN NOT CONSIDER FOREIGN LAWS (ART.1sec.9Cl 3& sec10 Cl 1&3) ( RES JUDICATA )

AS THE US CONSTITUTION PROHIBITS INAPPROPRIATE LAWS WHICH ARE NON-SECULAR HUMANE CIVILITY IN THEIR PURPOSE AND EFFECTS ON US CITIZENS, SHARIA-LEVITICUS ARE NOT SECULAR
SEE BILL OF ATTAINDER, EX POST FACTO, ART.1sec.9Cl 3& sec10 Cl 1&3 " NO STATE SHALL...ENTER INTO ANY TREATY, ALLIANCE OR CONFEDERATION.....NO STATE SHALL...ENTER INTO ANY AGREEMENT OR COMPACT WITH ANOTHER STATE, OR WITH A FOREIGN POWER,....., 381US437,448, AS A RELIGIOUS LAW WOULD BE A SUBTLE JUDICIAL TREATY OF WHICH BOTH NO STATE NOR JUDGE CAN DO , BOTH FOREIGN /RELIGIOUS INEQUALITY/ DEATH LAWS-CUSTOMS ARE CRUEL,UNCONSTITUTIONAL


Posted by: shaiarra | December 14, 2010 2:44 PM | Report abuse

(US CONST.AMEND.14sec1) "RELIGIOUS LAWS [SHARIA/ LEVITICAL etc] GIVES NO EQUAL PROTECTIONS OF THE LAWS, NO FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION, by privilege and law I AM immune from Religious Sharia/ Leviticus Laws the US/a State can not abridge this right, for such Legislation would be INAPPROPRIATE AS CHILL CHILLING EFFECTS LAW DOCTRINE 380US479:472US491,503, (20th AMEND.sec4) "ONLY CONGRESS CAN AUTHORIZE DEATH PENALTIES, NOT RELIGIOUS LAWS AND NOT FOREIGN LAWS ON US CITIZENS", I DO NOT CONSENT TO RELIGIOUS LAWS (LEVITICAL/ SHARIA) AND WAIVE THE BENEFITS (.)


ART.6 CL.2, AND IN CL.3, ( STAR E' DESISIS, RES IPSA LOQUITUR)

THE US CONSTITUTION IS ABOVE RELIGIOUS INHUMANE LAWS, DON'T LIKE IT, THEN LEAVE PERIOD, THE CONDUCT OF THIS NATION IS THE CONSTITUTION AND FEDERAL STATUTES, NOT THE JUNGLE LAWS OF INHUMANE NON-CIVIL SUPERSTITIOUS RELIGIOUS DELUSIONAL HALLUCINATION NON-REASONABLE LAWS, THE LAWS OF THIS LAND IS THE CONSTITUTION AND STATUES, NOT RELIGION, THEY SHOULD LEAVE PERIOD, SHARIA FORBIDS THE US CONSTITUTION TO BE ABOVE ISLAM, THAT'S TREASON !


RELIGIOUS LAWS ARE NOT HUMANE EQUALITY LAWS (SHARIA/ LEVITICAL etc), THERE JIM CROW LIKE
RELIGIOUS INHUMAN DEATH LAWS ARE VERY MUCH OUT DATED AND SHOULD FADE AWAY ASAP
RES IPSA LOQUITUR, THE INHUMANESS DEATH/JIHAD etc. SPEAKS VOLUMES FOR IT'S SELF

MY CONCERNS ARE AS FOLLOWS: (RELIGIOUS LAWS OUT LAWS THE US CONSTITUTION AND U.C.C.)
RELIGIOUS INHUMAN NON-CIVILITY LAWS GREATLY INFRINGES ON THE US CIVIL/BILL OF RIGHTS


* SHARIA Outlaws The US CONSTITUTIONAL PRECEPTS AND EQUALITY FOR ALL US CITIZENS/&FATWAS ,FOR SHARIA DOES HAVE SEGREGATIONIST LAWS THAT CONFLICTS WITH US CONSTITUTION & CIVIL/BILL OF RIGHTS, THAT IN IT'S SELF IS BOTH UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND INAPPROPRIATE PERIOD

(ARTICLES 4 sec 1-4 "EQUALITIES", 6 sec3)
"RELIGIOUS TEST", AMENDMENTS (1st AMEND) "RESPECT TO ESTABLISH A RELIGION, AND PEACEABLE ASSEMBLY TO ADDRESS THE GOVERNMENT OF GRIEVANCES" RELIGIOUS LAWS SAY BECOME VIOLENT TO ALL THOSE THAT REJECT GOD'S LAWS ie" INHUMANE NON-EQUALITY DEATH LAWS" ,

(2nd AMEND) IT OUTLAWS THE US MILITARY,(4th AMEND) "NO MIRANDA WARNINGS" NO OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTIES, (5th AMEND) IT DOES DOUBLE JEOPARDY OF LIFE AND LIMBS, NO OWNERSHIP RIGHTS OF PROPERTY NOR LIBERTY, (6th AMEND) HUMANE RIGHTS FOR THE ACCUSED , (8th AMEND) "CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS INFLICTED, (9th AMEND)" IT DENY AND DISPARAGE RIGHTS RETAINED BY THE US CITIZENS",

(11th AMEND) " IT IMPOSES FOREIGN LAWS AND CUSTOMS ON US CITIZENS BY CITIZENS/SUBJECTS OF A FOREIGN STATE (RELIGIOUS LAWS , ie Remember The US OATH OF ALLIGENCE , allegiance to the United States Constitution,* renunciation of allegiance and laws to any foreign country to which the immigrant has had previous allegiances to * defense of the Constitution against enemies "foreign and domestic") , SHARIA IS A FOREIGN LAW FROM A FOREIGN COUNTRY, IT CAN NOT GOVERN THE USA

Posted by: shaiarra | December 14, 2010 2:48 PM | Report abuse

ie XTIANS USE OF LEVITICUS ,BIBLE AND SHARIA TO BLOCK DADT REPEAL AND SAME SEX MARRIAGE CONTRACTS THAT THE US CONSTITUTION LAW DOCTRINE CALLED "FREEDOM OF CONTRACTS", ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND TREASONOUS DO TO THE FACT THAT THOSE RELIGIOUS LAWS ARE FOREIGN LAWS NOT NOT NATIVE AMERICAN LAWS THAT ARE THE ONLY RELIGIOUS LAW FROM THE USA, THE US CONSTITUTION FORBIDS BOTH FOREIGN/ RELIGIOUS LAWS BEING ENFORCED ON US CITIZENS

Posted by: shaiarra | December 14, 2010 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Makes sense to me. At least the house only requires a majority. I think it is obscene to have a house of the national lelgislature where you have to have a 60% vote to do anything.

Posted by: tinyjab40 | December 14, 2010 3:38 PM | Report abuse

I *absolutely love* this: Rep. McKean (R-Cal), the incoming chair of the House Armed Services Committee criticized Congressional Democrats for failing to pass the NDAA, after it has been passed every year for 4 decades. Dear Rep. McKean -- REPUBLICANS were the ones who voted against it, you moron. The Democrats busted arse to get it passed!

Posted by: bwe43201 | December 14, 2010 4:11 PM | Report abuse


FINALLY A RAY OF LIGHT

Finally a ray of light breaks through the clouds of homosexual deception and delusion that have hung so heavy and ponderous over the American mind. General Amos speaks the truth. Homosexuals in the military will cause a level of distraction that will cost the lives of more of our soldiers. The vote to repeal DADT is a vote that will cause the death of more of our soldiers. That is the bottomline. This is from the leader of the Marine Corps, the top national expert on soldiers in combat. Go ahead Democrats, don’t the facts hold you back. Don’t let the lives of our soldiers hold you back. Vote for repeal, and prove for the umpteenth time, that you don’t have a bit of sense when it comes to the subject of national security.

Posted by: GoldenEagles | December 14, 2010 6:51 PM | Report abuse

hello everyone,Welcome to our website

===== http://www.buyshopping.us/ =======

accept paypal or credit card and free shipping

We need your support and trust!!!

Dear friends, please temporarily stop your footsteps

To our website Walk around A look at

Maybe you'll find happiness in your sight shopping heaven and earth

You'll find our price is more suitable for you.

=== http://www.buyshopping.us/ =====

Posted by: quisai11 | December 14, 2010 6:53 PM | Report abuse


FINALLY A RAY OF LIGHT

Finally a ray of light breaks through the clouds of homosexual deception and delusion that have hung so heavy and ponderous over the American mind. General Amos speaks the truth. Homosexuals in the military will cause a level of distraction that will cost the lives of more of our soldiers. The vote to repeal DADT is a vote that will cause the death of more of our soldiers. That is the bottomline. This is from the leader of the Marine Corps, the top national expert on soldiers in combat. Go ahead Democrats, don’t let the facts hold you back. Don’t let the lives of our soldiers hold you back. Vote for repeal, and prove for the umpteenth time, that you don’t have a bit of sense when it comes to the subject of national security

Posted by: GoldenEagles | December 14, 2010 7:05 PM | Report abuse

FINALLY A RAY OF LIGHT

Finally a ray of light breaks through the clouds of homosexual deception and delusion that have hung so heavy and ponderous over the American mind. General Amos speaks the truth. Homosexuals in the military will cause a level of distraction that will cost the lives of more of our soldiers. The vote to repeal DADT is a vote that will cause the death of more of our soldiers. That is the bottomline. This is from the leader of the Marine Corps, the top national expert on soldiers in combat. Go ahead Democrats, don’t let the facts hold you back. Don’t let the lives of our soldiers hold you back. Vote for repeal, and prove for the umpteenth time, that you don’t have a bit of sense when it comes to the subject of national security

Posted by: GoldenEagles
------------------------------------------
Sorry, but about 37 other countries have allowed LGBT to serve in their military without any problems whatsoever. Unless you have incontrovertible evidence that allowing gays and lesbians to serve will have an adverse effect on our military, you should keep your bigoted beliefs to yourself.

Posted by: binaryboy | December 14, 2010 8:32 PM | Report abuse


They will not vote on the tax bill, but Pelosi and the Dims will vote to let open screamers into the military. That is the priority of these loser Dims. Great.

As for the Senate, any attempted repeal of DADT dies there Friday when the lame duck session ends.

Dims can try again in the next House on January the 3rd, minus the 63 losing Dims of course.

Posted by: screwjob23 | December 14, 2010 9:02 PM | Report abuse


That must mean there are close to another 170 countries that do not allow screamers in their military.

Posted by: screwjob23 | December 14, 2010 9:21 PM | Report abuse

It is unfortunate that we still allow those senators and representatives who have lost their elections efforts to then come back and at the last minute try to cram all these bills into law before they leave office and the joke is on the american citizens and taxpayers.

Posted by: ren51 | December 15, 2010 6:21 AM | Report abuse


CONTRASTING THE SPIRIT OF THE LOSER
AGAINST THE BRIGHT BACKDROP OF
THE SPIRIT OF THE WINNER.

binaryboy says, “Sorry, but about 37 other countries have allowed LGBT to serve in their military without any problems whatsoever.”

There is a very substantial difference between allowing open homosexuality in militaries who must win wars, and open homosexuality in militaries that have no responsibility to win wars.

For those who have no fighting responsibilities, allowing homosexuals to serve, is not much different than deciding whether homosexuals can work in your local department store.

For America, our military is on the frontline in fierce combat situations day in and day out. If we lose, a war is lost. And our national security interests are severely damaged. This means that our people are STRONGLY attuned to the spirit of winning. And they LIVE the spirit of winning day in day out.

When you place a homosexual, who exemplifies the spirit of losing, the spirit of defeat, the spirit of surrender to the enemy, against the bright light of this Will to Win, our soldiers will see the homosexual as a black hole, a shadow, where the light of victory should be shining. Intuitively, they will not trust that soldier. Intuitively, they will never allow the soldier to be in a position to cover their backs, as they know, that solider has no spiritual capacity to express courage. The homosexual will take only those actions which will save his own life, and thus maintain his lifestyle, where his passion to place his primary sexual organ in the excrement portal of another male will have a reasonable chance of fulfillment. If he is dead, this passion can no longer be fulfilled.

Homosexuals are the most pathologically selfish people on the planet. They will sacrifice everything, including the very survival of their own nation (see the City of Sodom) just so they can continue to have the opportunity to place their primary sexual organ in the excrement portal of another male.

This striking difference between the spirit of winning in most of our soldiers, and the spirit of losing in a homosexual, will make of that individual an outcast in the eyes of at least 50% of the soldiers. Why only 50%? Because some soldiers cannot anchor a spirit of winning, so they will be ok with the homosexual, they will not sense the spiritual contrast.

And you will have a situation where alliances in units will polarize around the issue of homosexuality, where a large percentage of the soldiers won’t trust the individual, and others will come to the defense of the homosexual. And this polarization will rip the quality of unit cohesion right down the middle. The soldiers will not be able to work and move as one, as they do now. We will have a totally different dynamic, and we will find that engagements that were once won by American soldiers, will be lost, and of course, as General Amos says, that means more dead on our side.

Posted by: GoldenEagles | December 15, 2010 8:33 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company