View Full Version : DADT vote happening now
http://live.cnn.com/
it is also being viewed on cspn2
Bill Summary & Status
111th Congress (2009 - 2010)
S.3454 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:S3454:
OK, so the Senate blocked the bill and a motion to reconsider has been made.
I am not exactly sure why the DREAM act was added as an amendment to a "defense authorization bill". Sen Dubin who proposed the bill has made a beautiful argument for his vision, however, I am still not sure it is a military issue. I would see it better served in an immigration reform bill where the focus would be on his points and not buried in a military bill. I think it has unfortunately killed the debates on other amendments, including DADT.
Guessing the bill will now be tabled until after elections. Go figure.
PearlsNLace
09-21-2010, 01:56 PM
Thanks Jess, for letting us know. This seems dissapointing. THis is not good for us, true?
At this point, no, it is not good for us. What happened today ( and i missed some of it while picking up the boy from school but will go back and watch it later), is that the Senate voted no to hearing debates for amendments.
Senators from both parties are now giving statements regarding the more controversial amendments ( repeal of DADT and the DREAM ACT) and expressing their opinions as to why they feel that debate was not even up for debate ( LOL). Gotta love politics.
I'll be very interested in seeing where this case leads. I am quite sure the feds are fearing the day that it ( DADT) IS deemed unconstitutional and all of the discharged vets sue the US Gov.
http://www.keennewsservice.com/2010/09/14/another-dadt-trial-but-a-different-doj-tack/
So.. maybe someone with more knowledge of how the process works can help me out with this... Sen Reid who has been the fore front champion of repealing DADT voted NO today to opening the amendments up to debate. He went right along with the entire Republican Senators and voted "NAY".
What gives?
Here is how they voted:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=2&vote=00238#name
Corkey
09-21-2010, 03:16 PM
So.. maybe someone with more knowledge of how the process works can help me out with this... Sen Reid who has been the fore front champion of repealing DADT voted NO today to opening the amendments up to debate. He went right along with the entire Republican Senators and voted "NAY".
What gives?
Here is how they voted:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=2&vote=00238#name
He did it as a procedural vote so he could bring up the bill at a later date. However I'm thinking that after the midterms it will be too late for it to matter to anyone but his constituents.
Thanks Corkey, I appreciate that. I'm still kind of confused though, because to what little I do understand, I thought as Majority Leader he could bring up the cloture motion at "any given point." At least according to an article from KEEN, which makes note that the D from AR voted NO ( the only other Dem to do so) and yet seemed to just pass over Reid's NAY vote.
http://www.keennewsservice.com/2010/09/21/vote-against-filibuster-fails-no-dadt-repeal-today/
Guess I'll just have to keep reading.. or reiding.. as it were.. LOL
Corkey
09-21-2010, 03:41 PM
Thanks Corkey, I appreciate that. I'm still kind of confused though, because to what little I do understand, I thought as Majority Leader he could bring up the cloture motion at "any given point." At least according to an article from KEEN, which makes note that the D from AR voted NO ( the only other Dem to do so) and yet seemed to just pass over Reid's NAY vote.
http://www.keennewsservice.com/2010/09/21/vote-against-filibuster-fails-no-dadt-repeal-today/
Guess I'll just have to keep reading.. or reiding.. as it were.. LOL
As he is the Majority leader he had to do this as he saw that it was going down. He can now bring it up again. DADT was voted upon, it did not reach 60 or super majority votes in favor. Round 1. If the House brings it up for vote, Reid can bring it up again. Round 2. ETA: The vote today was to debate the bill, not an up or down vote on the bill itself.
Right, I knew it was about the ability to even debate the amendments. What I wasn't fully aware of though, is that the language regarding DADT is not even a repeal. It is worded to allow the process for repeal, but is not the actual repeal itself.
From the KEEN article I linked above:
'Reid noted during Senate morning business Tuesday that the DADT amendment had been generating “all the attention” for the defense bill vote. He emphasized that the DADT law “is not repealed” by the language in the bill. Instead, he noted, the language provides for a process by which the law can be repealed. That process requires that the president, the secretary of defense, and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff all “certify” in writing that they have read the Pentagon report on how best to implement repeal and have considered whatever recommendations are made in the report. They must further certify that the necessary regulations to accompany repeal have been developed and that repeal is “consistent with the standards of military readiness, military effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces.”
So, I'm not getting the sense of "urgency" if the language clearly states that it is only AFTER reviewing the Pentagon findings that the Pres, et al have to "certify" their considerations of those findings.
It all just feels way too dog/ pony show to me.
Corkey
09-21-2010, 04:09 PM
It is, I have lost faith that it will be repealed in my lifetime. I also won't be voting for President Obama in the future. Another Dem perhaps, but not him.
Apocalipstic
09-21-2010, 04:11 PM
It is, I have lost faith that it will be repealed in my lifetime. I also won't be voting for President Obama in the future. Another Dem perhaps, but not him.
I am pretty upset about this too. He could have just given an executive order.
I tend to have very little faith in our political process for bringing about social justice. I have very little faith in most folks once they reach Washington. Kaine from VA has even discouraged me with his showboating and as Richmond resident ( then/ not now) I found him to be a great city council member then mayor then Gov , but now.. he just seems to be another mouthpiece yammering on.
I pray to see equal rights for the LGBT community in my lifetime, although likewise, I seriously have doubts. I tend to gravitate toward 2012 prophecies before believing politicians will resolve anything.
Melissa
09-21-2010, 04:54 PM
Does anyone know how the recent court ruling effects any of this? Also, for some reason I thought Obama had to go through Congress for a repeal and that an executive order couldn't be used. I thought I read this recently but now can't find where.
Melissa
I'm not sure which court ruling you are referring to Melissa. There have been quite a few gay rights related trials going on, so I'm not sure..
I think ( and as always could be wrong), that THIS was the attempt to take it to Congress to set up the process for repeal. I also think that it is within the Presidents powers to make an executive order to place a "stay" on further DADT charges against soldiers while the policy is being investigated/reviewed. I'm pretty sure that is what Rachel Maddow was all fired up about when she made her "challenge to do the right thing" to our President.
But, as ever.. I could be wrong LOL!
Thanks for taking part in the conversation. It is very important to me, as I just couldn't imagine being the spouse of a soldier who gets killed in action and not being honorably notified. That among the many ways of LGBT soldiers are dishonored by our government simply saddens me to my core.
http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/20/gay-service-members-discuss-dont-ask-dont-tell/#essay3
Corkey
09-21-2010, 05:05 PM
You are correct Jess.
AtLast
09-21-2010, 06:27 PM
Does anyone know how the recent court ruling effects any of this? Also, for some reason I thought Obama had to go through Congress for a repeal and that an executive order couldn't be used. I thought I read this recently but now can't find where.
Melissa
I think that the reason was that an EO wouldn't secure the repeal of DADT on an absolute basis to stand forever- another president could come in and just undue his EO. But, within the first part of his taking office, he had enough political capital to do an EO and light the fire for Congress to pass legislation to get rid of it forever. This is my understanding only.
Rachel Maddow on yesterdays Senate activity.
http://gayrightsmedia.org/2010/on-the-last-gasp-of-the-far-right/
I'm not sure if Melissa was referring to the Log Cabin Republicans VS US GOV case. What I have been able to find out about it, is that it was first filed in 2004 and recently determined by Judge Virginia Phillips that DADT is unconstitutional. I believe she promised to put an injunction on DADT in two weeks if US GOV had not filed a formal appeal.
I have not been able to find whether or not the US GOV has filed such an appeal or if Robert Gates ( named specifically) has filed one.
If anyone has any current info it would be great if you could share it!
Melissa
09-22-2010, 06:39 AM
Jess- Yes, that's the ruling I was referring to in my earlier post. The Obama admin has 60 days to file an appeal. I don't think that decision has been made or appeal has been filed yet.
Obama could suspend DODT with an exec order. It won't get rid of DODT but it could stop the military from firing or investigating anyone. For some reason, he has not done that. From the way I understand it, DODT would still be on the books but the EO would prevent it from being enforced. Which means that a new President could restart it again. So I'm not sure it would do much good. Especially if a service member came out while DODT was suspended and then was pushed out of the military in 2 years under a new President who scraps the EO.
Here's a article from the Huffington Post regarding an EO
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aaron-belkin/obama-to-fire-his-first-g_b_199070.html.
Melissa
Thanks, Melissa. I was pretty sure you were talking about that case. I am praying it is allowed to stand as it would indeed set a legal standard for the constitutionality of discrimination of gays. I think it would be a mere step ( rather than leap) for the general population to see the very deep wrongs across the board from there, not just in military service.
I think Pres Obama could extend an EO with a pretty good bet that DADT will be revisited during his term. I just don't see it going away until the civil rights of all of us are sanctified.
Thanks again!
AtLast
09-22-2010, 12:11 PM
I am mad as hell about what happened in the senate yesterday!
Ferfucksakes, they held up resources for our troops serving based on the politics around DADT!! But it is just fine for gays and lesbians serving to be killed and injured!
I am so tired of thr right wing GOP! And the fact of the matter is that I bet I personally fall on a pretty moderate scale on many issues overall. I'm not all that radical to the left most of the time. I also deeply support those in the military. No, I don't like war, but, these people are putting their lives on the line for us.
This just makes me sick on a human level.
I am mad as hell about what happened in the senate yesterday!
Ferfucksakes, they held up resources for our troops serving based on the politics around DADT!! But it is just fine for gays and lesbians serving to be killed and injured!
I am so tired of thr right wing GOP! And the fact of the matter is that I bet I personally fall on a pretty moderate scale on many issues overall. I'm not all that radical to the left most of the time. I also deeply support those in the military. No, I don't like war, but, these people are putting their lives on the line for us.
This just makes me sick on a human level.
I totally agree with "not liking war", hell, my old motto was " if they don't want gays to serve, then don't draft them" or denied for not being flat foot but "light in the loafer".
When I hear stories of folks actually willing and desirous to risk all for my rights ( whether I have them all or not) I have to place my support with these men and women.
I am pretty moderate also and do actually try to research my candidates and issues as I get older and try to become more informed.
I don't think anyone thought this would really pass on to the debate stage because why? Mid term elections.... Everything has to wait until then. Unfortunately, any decent politicians will only have about nine months to get anything done before what? 2012 elections....
I am only 46, but I swear, our system could not have always been this party driven, could it? Wasn't there a time when our representatives actually placed THAT responsibility first?
Perhaps we need a radical movement such as the Tea Party for those of us simply fighting for human rights. Maybe the Disco Party. I think it is time our electorate realizes that they can be voted out as easily as they were voted in. I would love to see the fat cats replaced with truly grass roots candidates who don't spend millions on ads or channels running 24/7 with their "message".
It becomes more difficult to retain hope for our future when our present is so crappy and doesn't seem to be heading into a brighter direction. Sorry for sounding so glum.
Thanks, At Last!
christie
09-22-2010, 01:47 PM
I totally agree with "not liking war", hell, my old motto was " if they don't want gays to serve, then don't draft them" or denied for not being flat foot but "light in the loafer".
When I hear stories of folks actually willing and desirous to risk all for my rights ( whether I have them all or not) I have to place my support with these men and women.
I am pretty moderate also and do actually try to research my candidates and issues as I get older and try to become more informed.
I don't think anyone thought this would really pass on to the debate stage because why? Mid term elections.... Everything has to wait until then. Unfortunately, any decent politicians will only have about nine months to get anything done before what? 2012 elections....
I am only 46, but I swear, our system could not have always been this party driven, could it? Wasn't there a time when our representatives actually placed THAT responsibility first?
Perhaps we need a radical movement such as the Tea Party for those of us simply fighting for human rights. Maybe the Disco Party. I think it is time our electorate realizes that they can be voted out as easily as they were voted in. I would love to see the fat cats replaced with truly grass roots candidates who don't spend millions on ads or channels running 24/7 with their "message".
It becomes more difficult to retain hope for our future when our present is so crappy and doesn't seem to be heading into a brighter direction. Sorry for sounding so glum.
Thanks, At Last!
Disco Party? Please tell me that polyester suits (ala Travolta in SNF) and those hideous hairstyles aren't required? I'm also opposed to sequins.
I think something like the "Has some Goddamn&d Sense" Party might be nice.
All I got to say.. is NO FAG, NO FLAIR!
http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x314/thumper1969/animated-gifs-disco-08.gif
An on line petition from GET EQUAL. It only takes a second to send!
http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/6535/t/11098/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=666
Judge Orders Lesbian Reinstated To Air Force
by THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
September 24, 2010
A federal judge ruled Friday that a decorated flight nurse discharged from the Air Force for being gay should be given her job back as soon as possible in the latest legal setback to the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy.
The decision by U.S. District Judge Ronald Leighton came in a closely watched case as a tense debate has been playing out over the policy. Senate Republicans blocked an effort to lift the ban this week, but two federal judges have ruled against the policy in recent weeks.
Maj. Margaret Witt was discharged under the "don't ask, don't tell" policy and sued to get her job back. A judge in 2006 rejected Witt's claims that the Air Force
violated her rights when it fired her. An appeals court panel overruled him two years later, leaving it to Leighton to determine whether her firing met that standard.
Witt, of Spokane, joined the Air Force in 1987 and was suspended in 2004 just short of retirement after her commanders learned she was in a relationship with a civilian woman. She was a flight nurse with an aeromedical evacuation squadron responsible for transporting and caring for injured soldiers.
Her attorneys, led by the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, insisted that Witt was well respected and liked by her colleagues, that her sexuality never caused problems in the unit, and that her firing actually hurt military goals such as morale, unit cohesion and troop readiness. Several members of the squadron testified to that effect and said they would welcome Witt back to the unit.
Lawyers for the Air Force said such evidence was irrelevant.
Military personnel decisions can't be run by unit referendum, they said.
`````````````````````````````````````````````````` ``````````````
Former Marine Sees 'Long Way To Go' For Equality
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4516989
http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2010/09/23/bailey_bush.jpg?t=1285267663&s=2
iamkeri1
09-24-2010, 07:52 PM
I am totally jazzed by this decision. There is little likelihood that it will ne over turned in appeal since it was referred b the appellate court back to the lower courts for reconsideration. The talk on the news could be that this will bring an end to DADT since the court ruled that each person could only be fired following proof that they caused harm to the goal of the military or to the morale of the unit.
A little bit of progress made today
We shall overcome,
Smooches,
Keri
theoddz
09-25-2010, 07:24 AM
Here's the decision of Maj. Witt's case as covered by Rachel Maddow. :cheer:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/39352146#39352146
I'm totally thrilled with this. I look at each one of my own Drill Instructors from Parris Island, SC, (1979) who were discharged for simply being gay (all but one of 4) and I wonder where they are now. I know they're watching this and I can't help but feel that they are smiling. After 31 years, change is coming and justice is finally on the way.
I also wonder if they, like so many others who were discharged for no more cause than who they love, were among those who received administrative discharges that were "under conditions other than honorable". That was common back then, and it stripped these good people of all VA benefits and marred their records for life.
When DADT is finally overturned and things are put to right, I hope these past heroes will be able to submit application to correct their military discharges that will allow them full benefits as United States Veterans. I will keep these honorable men and women in my thoughts and prayers for justice and final resolution of this terrible wrong. :vigil:
~Theo~ :bouquet:
Thanks for the link Theo! What amazes me is that even after her discharge, this woman chose to work with vets. It says a great deal to her integrity and her loyalty to our armed forces.
Thanks again. I am also excited beyond words at the progress being made!
theoddz
09-25-2010, 09:45 AM
Thanks for the link Theo! What amazes me is that even after her discharge, this woman chose to work with vets. It says a great deal to her integrity and her loyalty to our armed forces.
Thanks again. I am also excited beyond words at the progress being made!
I agree, Jess. :winky:
Speaking to the point you bring up about working with Vets.....there are many, many of us Vets out here who have chosen to work with other Vets. I, like Maj. Witt, was discharged against my will, though I was discharged for a reason related to my medical condition and not specifically because of my sexual orientation.
I think there is something "healing" about working with Vets, at least for me. I think Maj. Witt would understand this, if not feel similarly, herself. I wasn't able to complete my service contract for reasons I had no control over, either, but working as I do now with Vets, has helped to fill that void. In a strange sense, I feel like my employment with the VA has allowed me to serve in a capacity which I am able, even if it is not in uniform. The Veteran community is *my* community, a part of me. I've met and talked to a few other Vets, over the years, who have found themselves in similar circumstances, for whatever reason. I totally understand why Maj. Witt would and has *chosen* to put her skills, professionalism, heart and soul into working with Veterans. American Veterans are simply second to none. :clap::thumbsup:
I can't find the words to express how very happy and proud I am for Major Witt and the many, many proud service members and Veterans whom this case will affect in a lot of very meaningful and healing ways.
~Theo~ :bouquet:
Petition to Eric Holder to allow fed court ruling that DADT is unconstitutional to stand!
http://gayrights.change.org/petitions/view/the_fight_isnt_over_tell_holder_dont_defend_dont_a sk_dont_tell
Tommi
12-22-2010, 08:42 AM
Petition to Eric Holder to allow fed court ruling that DADT is unconstitutional to stand!
http://gayrights.change.org/petitions/view/the_fight_isnt_over_tell_holder_dont_defend_dont_a sk_dont_tell
I sit here watching it live on CNN.
Tears stream down my face for those who know, and those who do not. For those who ended their careers and their lives for coming out in the military.
For those who fought for this for years, and for those that have risen above and know our truth. Now we can serve openly and proud.
Honorably Discharged, but by the grace of God.
http://www.c21learners.com/multimedia/images/usaf_logo.gif
mERCrjXvfi8&feature=player_embedded
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_t6rV3U9ZEHM/TRIg7iZXGSI/AAAAAAAA-00/IHUEKkab7EA/s1600/parker.jpg
Sparkle
12-22-2010, 04:18 PM
Lt. Dan Choi gets his West Point ring back from Sen. Harry Reid
In a vivid moment of political theater at a conference last summer, Lt. Dan Choi -- a combat vet discharged from the Army after acknowledging he's gay -- handed his West Point ring to Sen. Harry Reid. The majority leader promised to return it when "don't ask, don't tell" was repealed. After dropping a Twitter hint this week, Choi scored an invitation to President Obama's bill-signing Wednesday... then closed the loop that afternoon in a meeting at Reid's office, where the senator gladly handed him his ring. Story over? Not for Choi: "The next time I get a ring from a man," he tweeted later, "I expect it to be for full, equal, American marriage."
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/reliable-source/2010/12/update_dan_choi_gets_to_dadt_s.html
iamkeri1
12-22-2010, 11:53 PM
21 gun salute for Lt. Dan Choi!!!
Smooches,
Keri
:cheerleader::cheer::cheerleader::cheer:
:cheerleader::cheer::cheerleader::cheer:
iamkeri1
12-23-2010, 12:09 AM
I am 63 years old and I can't even begin to tell you how glad I am that I have lived to see this legislation passed. I cried when it came to cloture, I cried when it passed the Senate and the House of Representatives, and I cried when President Obama signed the bill earlier today. I never believed I would live to see any of the freedoms we have achieved so far. Each step has been hard fought and joyfully won.
Still what tempers my joy is the knowledge that while "we" are now being given permission to die for our country, the legislation to ensure that we will be able to live freely in that same country is yet to be achieved.
Smooches,
Keri
Toughy
12-23-2010, 10:53 AM
The real question is: WHEN will it be implemented? It will be no sooner than 60 days and more than likely will be several months before folks can actually serve openly.
Anybody on active duty had best NOT come out yet.....you can still be discharged under less than honorable conditions. And if you are going to enlist now, don't tell!
atomiczombie
12-23-2010, 12:43 PM
That the actually repealed DADT is a huge step forward. I am hoping that goes for trans people too, but no mention was made about transfolks in the military. Anyone know what that policy is?
Greyson
12-23-2010, 12:49 PM
That the actually repealed DADT is a huge step forward. I am hoping that goes for trans people too, but no mention was made about transfolks in the military. Anyone know what that policy is?
My answer is purely my opinion. I have not done research to confirm it. I suspect the policy does not allow for Transexuals. I doubt if the military uses the nomenclature, Transgender.
In previous LGBTQ proposed legislation coming before Congress the "T" was a point of conteniton and debate. (Even among our LGBTQ Community. Not just with the mainstream.)
I am willing to bet there is no allowance, protection or legal recognition of "Transfolk" of any kind in the Armed Forces of the USA.
If anyone`s interested, Andersoon Cooper is focusing on the Navy tapes that contained anti-gay attitudes, slurs, lewd behaviour etc.
iamkeri1
09-20-2011, 08:57 PM
It ended today at last!
Smooches,
Keri
5MefM5Eor38&feature=player_embedded
bigbutchmistie
09-20-2011, 10:29 PM
5MefM5Eor38&feature=player_embedded
Damn you beat me to it! LOL I was coming in here to post this very video! LOL
iamkeri1
09-20-2011, 10:32 PM
A beautiful and amazing video. Thank you Jess. These people have put their lives on the line for their country every day, yet they have been rejected.
Let the end of DADT be the end of any rejection/ill treatment as well.
Thank you one and all for your service.
Smooches,
Keri
Damn you beat me to it! LOL I was coming in here to post this very video! LOL
I love that they made this video. It is important we be seen, that those who would deny us are forced to put a face to the people they choose to oppress. We are not a word or ideology. We are people.
DOMA.. next!
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.