Don't Ask, Don't Tell | Kirsten Gillibrand | Military | New York | News

BigGayDeal.com

Gillibrand to Introduce Legislation That Would Withhold Funding for Military Procedures Related to 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'

Senator Kirsten Gillbrand (D-NY) plans to announce she's introducing legislation that would financially curtail the military's ability to process discharges under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," the Caucus reports:

Gillibrand Ms. Gillibrand, who is fighting to defend her appointed seat in New York, will announce her plans on Saturday night in Manhattan at a fund-raiser for a gay rights group, according to someone with direct knowledge of the senator’s plans.

Ms. Gillibrand’s proposal, which would be introduced as an amendment to the federal budget, would deny funding to the military for the costs of pursuing inquiries, dismissal proceedings and other procedures associated with enforcing the ban.

Gillibrand reportedly plans to make the announcement at a Human Rights Campaign gala dinner in New York over the weekend.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. While i admire Gillibrand's stance on our issues, I do not like the fact that Schumer not only hand picked her, but scared away anyone from running against her this year.

    Seems I'm not alone, as was just reported on Huffpost, Spitzer is floating the idea of taking her on.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/05/eliot-spitzer-mulling-run_n_451436.html

    The NY Times reported this morning for the first time Schumer's poll numbers were bellow 50, 47%. While no one will take him on, NY State is going to be in free fall, especially if there is any truth to a new sex scandal about to hit Paterson.

    Posted by: patrick nyc | Feb 5, 2010 6:21:20 PM


  2. just repeal the darn freakin ban. no need for cosmetics.

    Posted by: daftpunkydavid | Feb 5, 2010 6:43:14 PM


  3. This legislation, while symbolic, does nothing to end DADT or even to stop discharges.

    There is no magical pot of money at the Department of Defense to conduct DADT discharges. Discharges are conducted at the unit level along with every other administrative separation and there is no separate accounting that addresses how much is spent on one type of discharge over the other. The only cases that would ever incur an additional cost to the government are the ones that are highly contested -- most servicemembers lack the resources or will to contest a case over a period of years so 99% of the cases are never contested.

    Posted by: Rich | Feb 5, 2010 6:56:03 PM


  4. well, it is an argument for working within the system.

    Even if it goes no where, it draws into focus that money is being wasted persecuting willing members of the service at a time when both money & recruits are short.

    power to her- it's a creative, "fuck-you-too"

    Posted by: stephen | Feb 5, 2010 8:14:23 PM


  5. Balderdash, Rich!

    While I'd agree that there is probably no "sub account" marked DADT, just as I'm sure there's a sub account for recruiting, there must be ones about investigations of misconduct [of whatever kind] and discharges [of whatever kind] processing.

    In an institution ALL ABOUT following orders there is absolutely no reason to believe taat such a bill could forbid using any of those accounts for DADT investigations ... which MUST have occcured BEFORE any discharge can proceed; often even when the person has outed him/herself as in the six months investigation applied to prove Anthony Woods was not "faking gay,"...and using any of those accounts for DADT discharges.

    Think of it this way, their purchasing budgets are probably very broad, too, but if the order came down: you will not use any of this money to purchase, say, appliances for the base laundry that weren't "Energy Star" rated no fool is going to fucking buck it.

    The ACTUAL question is whether she could convince enough of her colleagues to "end run" DADT this way WITHOUT it being a part of a broader intention of implementing the kind of moratorium on discharges concurrent with the study/implementation plan that many, including Carl Levin, wants.

    If Gates can consider tinkering with stopping discharges that are "inhumane" which IS in his power but contradicts the [evil] spirit of DADT then just about anything is on the table

    I say throw EVERYTHING at the goddamn thing to finally kill it.

    Posted by: Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com | Feb 5, 2010 8:56:13 PM


  6. So under this legislation the military would be required to discharge decloseted gays, but would be banned from spending money on it?

    I don't think this is the most effective way to go about this

    Posted by: mcc | Feb 5, 2010 10:35:09 PM


  7. Let's forget about strategies and waiting for the right time, we need leaders like this. Apathy and timing considerations have bored me to death.

    Posted by: Neo | Feb 5, 2010 10:52:07 PM


  8. How refreshing to be reminded of what leadership looks like. Ford's toast, too - which is an added benefit.

    Posted by: elcamino | Feb 6, 2010 8:46:36 AM


  9. As a Congresswoman she represented a more conservative district and her stances on issues like marriage equality reflected that. Now that she's a Senator she must appeal to a more liberal electorate. I do not care what her personal beliefs are regarding gay issues. Rather, I care how she advocates for those issues by drafting bills and speaking on behalf of gay and lesbian civil rights. She seems to grasp this very well. While I can't say this will have a concrete benefit yet I am not willing to throw her out, either. Let's encourage her to keep pushing, and let's make it known to her and the rest of them that we demand nothing short of real change. Let's also demonstrate to the Democrats that we will not abandon them if and when the day comes that we see change.

    Posted by: Patrick | Feb 6, 2010 7:41:18 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Scientists Decode Coloring of a Bird-like Dinosaur« «