Gillibrand calls for repeal of ban on gays in service

WASHINGTON — Sen. Kirsten E. Gillibrand and other critics of the ban on military service by gays and lesbians called for a Senate vote this spring on repealing the policy, as debate continued to brew on Capitol Hill.

Mrs. Gillibrand signed on to a bill by Sens. Carl M. Levin, D-Mich., and Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., to repeal the policy. If it passes, Mr. Levin said, he might not pursue a moratorium on discharges of gays and lesbians, which he had promised to seek through an annual defense bill at the Senate Armed Services Committee, of which he is chairman.

"This is an outrageous policy," Mrs. Gillibrand said at a press conference with the bill's authors. She called it "one of the most corrosive, destructive" policies to military morale and readiness.

"Why wouldn't we want all of our best and brightest to serve?" Mrs. Gillibrand said.

In pressing forward with their legislation, lawmakers sought to lay the groundwork for votes as a Pentagon task force has barely begun a nine-month study of the possible impacts of the policy's repeal. Established in 1993, the "don't ask, don't tell" policy forbids the military from asking about a service member's sexual orientation and forbids service members from revealing it.

Some 16,000 service members have been discharged under the policy. Lawmakers said an additional 4,000 annually do not re-enlist because of the policy.

Mr. Levin said the Armed Services Committee will hold a hearing on the policy March 18. A committee vote could follow in mid-May, he said.

Lawmakers are divided, as they were when the policy was enacted. But polls suggest public opinion has turned sharply against keeping gays and lesbians out of the military, and Mr. Lieberman said he believes he could garner more than 50 votes to pass the bill by simple majority.

Senate procedures require 60 votes, however, to overcome a filibuster, and Mr. Lieberman acknowledged that would be a challenge.

"We don't have 60 votes today, but that's our battle," Mr. Lieberman said.

Mr. Lieberman credited Mrs. Gillibrand with being persistent, saying that in recent weeks, hardly three days have gone by without her prodding him to introduce a bill.

Their press conference amounted to a pep rally, with supporters from advocacy groups cheering on the lawmakers. But the Capitol is sharply divided; some Democrats on the House Armed Services Committee have joined Republicans in opposing the policy's repeal, particularly while the Army is engaged in Afghanistan.

And while the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Michael G. Mullen, has openly supported repeal, Army Chief of Staff Gen. George W. Casey Jr. has been openly skeptical and firmly opposes stopping discharges during the study. Army Secretary John M. McHugh opposes a moratorium as well but has not shared his personal view on the Obama administration's goal of a permanent repeal.

While Mrs. Gillibrand and other senators were pushing a quick repeal, lawmakers on the other side of the Capitol traded opinions in front of the leaders of the Pentagon study. Defense Under Secretary Clifford L. Stanley and the two co-chairmen of the Pentagon working group, Jeh C. Johnson and Army Gen. Carter F. Ham gave a House Armed Services subcommittee an outline of how they will conduct their work but resisted sharing their personal opinions.

Rep. John Fleming, R-La., asked whether the military's main purpose is to protect the country or to engage in "social experimentation," suggested the number of discharges through the policy is tiny compared to the size of the force and implored the working group to consider the unintended effects a repeal might have on other laws.

Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., said the ban has not affected recruitment and retention or stopped the Army from expanding rapidly since the beginning of the war in Iraq, although Mrs. Gillibrand has said the military had to spend about $300 million in recruitment to replace the soldiers discharged since 1993.

Separately, the ranking Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Howard P. "Buck" McKeon, who opposes repeal, wrote to Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates with a series of questions about the possible impacts.

"I see nothing that leads me to believe that a change in law is necessary and I am concerned that the debate and potential implementation of a repeal of section 564, while our country is fighting two major wars, would be detrimental to those wartime efforts," Mr. McKeon wrote.

But the House hearing suggested that the discussion will eventually turn from whether to change the law to how to implement a new policy — if not this year, then in the future. Most of the United States' military allies let gays and lesbians serve openly, and Rep. Vic Snyder, D-Ark., suggested the debate is drawn largely along generational lines, as service by blacks and women was in decades past.

"America is changing. The world is changing," said Mr. Snyder.

The emphasis "really is on how," said Gen. Ham, who told lawmakers the working group will conduct surveys of service members and their families but that the results will shape how — not whether — the ban is lifted.