Military Readiness Enhancement Act

ZigZig ...I am Captain Planet! Join Date: 2002-10-23 Member: 1576Members
<div class="IPBDescription">plz!!!! plzplzplz!!</div> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><a href='http://www.gaylinkcontent.com/prdetail.cfm?id=5444' target='_blank'>Congress Announces Legislation to Repeal 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'://Congress Announces Legislation to R...#39;t Tell'</a>
02/24/2005 (11:32 AM)

US Newswire 202-347-2770

Congress Announces Legislation to Repeal 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'; Bill Follows GAO Report That **** Ban Costs at Least $191M

Contact: Steve Ralls of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, 202-328-3244, ext. 116 or sralls@sldn.org

WASHINGTON, Feb. 24 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Congressional lawmakers today announced legislation to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," the military's ban on lesbian, **** and bisexual personnel. The Military Readiness Enhancement Act is scheduled to be introduced in the House of Representatives by Rep. Marty Meehan (D-Mass.) on March 2nd. The proposal is already supported by a bi-partisan coalition of Congressional representatives, including Reps. John Conyers (D-Mich.) and Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) among others.

Announcement of the bill follows release of a new Government Accounting Office (GAO) report analyzing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." The GAO report conservatively estimates the **** ban has cost at least $191 million since its inception in 1993. The report's financial estimate, however, includes only costs associated with recruiting and training enlistees to replace those discharged under the ban. The GAO analysis does not include costs associated with discharging officers or the nearly 800 specialists with critical skills who have been fired because of their sexual orientation. Administrative costs associated with discharges are also not included in the GAO analysis.

"Our homeland is more secure when every qualified, capable American who wants to serve is allowed to do so," said C. Dixon Osburn, executive director of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN). "The choice we now face is clear: Spend $191 million on firing patriotic Americans or spend the same amount on a dozen Blackhawk helicopters or 800 sidewinder missiles. Our priority should always be defense and security. The Military Readiness Enhancement Act is the best proposal to do just that."

According to GAO, the Pentagon has fired 322 language specialists who "had...skills in a foreign language that DoD had considered to be especially important.'" SLDN reported in 2004 that at least three dozen of those linguists spoke Arabic, Farsi or Korean, language the Pentagon acknowledges are understaffed. Nearly 800 specialists, including intelligence analysts, divers and combat controllers, were fired despite having "some training in an occupation identified...as 'critical.'" Since 1993, more than 10,000 service members have been fired under the **** ban. During that same time period, many of the United States' closest military allies, including Great Britain and Canada, repealed their prohibitions on **** service personnel.

"Congress and the American people now have the benefit of more than a decade of evidence indicting 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,'" said Osburn. "Every American in every community benefits from the talents and skills of the more than 65,000 lesbian, **** and bisexual service members on duty in our armed forces. Today's legislation will ensure their service is honored and give our military the opportunity to grow its pool of the best and brightest our nation has to offer, regardless of sexual orientation. 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' is costly, unnecessary and hurts our national defense. Congress should approve this important legislation before one more service member is fired because of a law that flies in the face of our nation's best interests."

"Don't Ask, Don't Tell," adopted by Congress in 1993, is a prohibition on lesbian, **** and bisexual service personnel. Under the law, military personnel cannot reveal their sexual orientation to anyone, including family members, without risking expulsion from the armed forces.

The GAO analysis was requested in 2004 by a bi-partisan group of 22 Members of Congress. Copies of the report, and today's announced legislation, are available for download at <a href='http://www.sldn.org' target='_blank'>http://www.sldn.org</a>.

------

Servicemembers Legal Defense Network is a national, non-profit legal services, watchdog and policy organization dedicated to ending discrimination against and harassment of military personnel affected by 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' and related forms of intolerance. For more information, visit <a href='http://www.sldn.org' target='_blank'>http://www.sldn.org</a>. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

i have that "bush is gonna win" kinda feeling about this.. but oh well... most promising thing in a while, at any rate ;|

Comments

  • UZiUZi Eight inches of C4 between the legs. Join Date: 2003-02-20 Member: 13767Members
    great news! <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->

    It shouldn't matter what other people's preferances are, if he is willing to drop the hammer on someone thats good enough for me.
  • TestamentTestament Join Date: 2002-11-02 Member: 4037Members
    Props to Congress for proposing this.
  • ZigZig ...I am Captain Planet&#33; Join Date: 2002-10-23 Member: 1576Members
    odds are **** that it'll go through, but it's progress.
  • SkulkBaitSkulkBait Join Date: 2003-02-11 Member: 13423Members
    I'm with UZi on this one (didn't think I'd say that any time soon), if they're willing to be a soldier, then who cares who they sleep with?
  • ChronoChrono Local flyboy Join Date: 2003-08-05 Member: 18989Members
    <!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+Mar 2 2005, 11:45 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait @ Mar 2 2005, 11:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I'm with UZi on this one (didn't think I'd say that any time soon), if they're willing to be a soldier, then who cares who they sleep with? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    same here the only problem id have is if they started hitting on me or something <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
  • RenegadeRenegade Old school Join Date: 2002-03-29 Member: 361Members
    <!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+Mar 2 2005, 10:45 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait @ Mar 2 2005, 10:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I'm with UZi on this one (didn't think I'd say that any time soon), if they're willing to be a soldier, then who cares who they sleep with? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Quoted for emphasis.

    On a sidenote, if you think this is progressive, you should see what the UK's Navy is doing XD
  • MantridMantrid Lockpick Join Date: 2003-12-07 Member: 24109Members
    You know, I was wondering something semi-related. If "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" remains in effect, and for some reason the draft comes back, what happens if you aren't straight and get drafted? Would they throw you out if you were drafted?

    I'd like to know, just in case hell freezes over and the draft comes back, if I've got a free ticket out of the army or not.
  • TalesinTalesin Our own little well of hate Join Date: 2002-11-08 Member: 7710NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators
    Chrono, that's the original idea behind the ban. That a homosexual service(wo)man will hit on one of their squad, the other won't like it, and a sack beating will be arranged. A good chunk of those who decide to enter the military following graduation (or in lieu thereof) from high school are stereotypically... well, redneck. I can't think of a better way to put it. Maybe 'chav'.
  • kidakida Join Date: 2003-02-20 Member: 13778Members
    edited March 2005
  • SoulSkorpionSoulSkorpion Join Date: 2002-04-12 Member: 423Members
    Sorry to inject cynnicism into this thread, but I doubt the primary motivation for scrapping this law is equality. The article made it pretty damn clear that the existing policy is hampering the US armed forces and wasting money. To quote the article:

    <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->"The choice we now face is clear: Spend $191 million on firing patriotic Americans or spend the same amount on a dozen Blackhawk helicopters or 800 sidewinder missiles. Our priority should always be defense and security. The Military Readiness Enhancement Act is the best proposal to do just that."<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    I have no doubts that it'll go through. It'd have the same effect as a sudden surge of $382 million extra funding; they'd be insane not to.
  • MantridMantrid Lockpick Join Date: 2003-12-07 Member: 24109Members
    Wouldn't it be an even better idea to put a large number of homosexuals into the armed forces? Didn't Alexander do that so his troops would fight harder to protect/impress their lovers?
  • CForresterCForrester P0rk(h0p Join Date: 2002-10-05 Member: 1439Members, Constellation
    To be honest, I see no reason why the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy should be in place. In most cases, sexual orientation wouldn't even come up. All sex should be banned on military bases, especially when you're on duty.

    If you're caught having sex with someone else, male or female, you should be punished. But not kicked out of the military. Make them run for a few hours or something.
  • ZigZig ...I am Captain Planet&#33; Join Date: 2002-10-23 Member: 1576Members
    <!--QuoteBegin-CForrester+Mar 2 2005, 11:35 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CForrester @ Mar 2 2005, 11:35 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> To be honest, I see no reason why the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy should be in place. In most cases, sexual orientation wouldn't even come up. All sex should be banned on military bases, especially when you're on duty.

    If you're caught having sex with someone else, male or female, you should be punished. But not kicked out of the military. Make them run for a few hours or something. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    .... lol n.n

    you have a bit to learn about the military <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->

    i'll spell it out: a PT is not a form of punishment <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->

    <span style='font-size:16pt;line-height:100%'>if you didn't already know: the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy was not proposed because someone thought "it was a good idea". the policy used to be YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED IN IF YOU ARE HOMOSEXUAL. DA/DT was a <i>compromise</i>. it was never designed to be a fully functional and efficient system.</span>
  • CForresterCForrester P0rk(h0p Join Date: 2002-10-05 Member: 1439Members, Constellation
    <!--QuoteBegin-Zig+Mar 3 2005, 02:50 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Zig @ Mar 3 2005, 02:50 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <span style='font-size:16pt;line-height:100%'>if you didn't already know: the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy was not proposed because someone thought "it was a good idea". the policy used to be YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED IN IF YOU ARE HOMOSEXUAL. DA/DT was a <i>compromise</i>. it was never designed to be a fully functional and efficient system.</span> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Is it used to be? I was meaning that I see no reason why it should be in place <i>now</i>. I can see why it was in before.
  • UZiUZi Eight inches of C4 between the legs. Join Date: 2003-02-20 Member: 13767Members
    <!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+Mar 3 2005, 01:45 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait @ Mar 3 2005, 01:45 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I'm with UZi on this one (didn't think I'd say that any time soon), if they're willing to be a soldier, then who cares who they sleep with? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    See the big difference between you and me, I fight for freedom, you give it to the government.
  • ZigZig ...I am Captain Planet&#33; Join Date: 2002-10-23 Member: 1576Members
    <!--QuoteBegin-CForrester+Mar 3 2005, 12:05 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CForrester @ Mar 3 2005, 12:05 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Is it used to be? I was meaning that I see no reason why it should be in place <i>now</i>. I can see why it was in before. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I'm not sure if this is what you're asking.. but the reason it's still in place even though it's such an uncomfortable system is that it's just SO hard to implement reform in this kind of setting. too many old conservatives with too much power.
  • SkulkBaitSkulkBait Join Date: 2003-02-11 Member: 13423Members
    <!--QuoteBegin-UZi+Mar 3 2005, 03:36 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (UZi @ Mar 3 2005, 03:36 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+Mar 3 2005, 01:45 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait @ Mar 3 2005, 01:45 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I'm with UZi on this one (didn't think I'd say that any time soon), if they're willing to be a soldier, then who cares who they sleep with? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    See the big difference between you and me, I fight for freedom, you give it to the government. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Um.... what? Coherentness?
  • UZiUZi Eight inches of C4 between the legs. Join Date: 2003-02-20 Member: 13767Members
    <!--QuoteBegin-Zig+Mar 3 2005, 03:42 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Zig @ Mar 3 2005, 03:42 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-CForrester+Mar 3 2005, 12:05 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CForrester @ Mar 3 2005, 12:05 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Is it used to be? I was meaning that I see no reason why it should be in place <i>now</i>. I can see why it was in before. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I'm not sure if this is what you're asking.. but the reason it's still in place even though it's such an uncomfortable system is that it's just SO hard to implement reform in this kind of setting. too many old conservatives with too much power. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    We as libertarians call these folk "social conservatives" they are no better then the socialists or democrats.
  • CForresterCForrester P0rk(h0p Join Date: 2002-10-05 Member: 1439Members, Constellation
    <!--QuoteBegin-Zig+Mar 3 2005, 03:42 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Zig @ Mar 3 2005, 03:42 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-CForrester+Mar 3 2005, 12:05 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CForrester @ Mar 3 2005, 12:05 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Is it used to be? I was meaning that I see no reason why it should be in place <i>now</i>. I can see why it was in before. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I'm not sure if this is what you're asking.. but the reason it's still in place even though it's such an uncomfortable system is that it's just SO hard to implement reform in this kind of setting. too many old conservatives with too much power. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I'm asking if being ****/bi/lesbian is still not allowed in the military.
  • UZiUZi Eight inches of C4 between the legs. Join Date: 2003-02-20 Member: 13767Members
    <!--QuoteBegin-CForrester+Mar 3 2005, 04:22 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CForrester @ Mar 3 2005, 04:22 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Zig+Mar 3 2005, 03:42 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Zig @ Mar 3 2005, 03:42 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-CForrester+Mar 3 2005, 12:05 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CForrester @ Mar 3 2005, 12:05 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Is it used to be? I was meaning that I see no reason why it should be in place <i>now</i>. I can see why it was in before. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I'm not sure if this is what you're asking.. but the reason it's still in place even though it's such an uncomfortable system is that it's just SO hard to implement reform in this kind of setting. too many old conservatives with too much power. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I'm asking if being ****/bi/lesbian is still not allowed in the military. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Not if you get caught they will discharge you.
  • AllUrHiveRblong2usAllUrHiveRblong2us By Your Powers Combined... Join Date: 2002-12-20 Member: 11244Members
    Darn, there goes my excuse if they ever impliment a draft. Boo.
  • UZiUZi Eight inches of C4 between the legs. Join Date: 2003-02-20 Member: 13767Members
    You could go to Canada...oh wait, no you can't...they deport people.
Sign In or Register to comment.