By Nitya

Aug 28, 2009 5:49pm

No Timeline for “Don’t ask, Don’t Tell” Changes

ABC News' Sunlen Miller and Kirit Radia report: Despite President Obama recently saying that he wants to repeal “Don’t ask, Don’t tell” policy “sooner rather than later,” Pentagon officials tell ABC News that there is no timeline yet to repeal or ease the enforcement of the controversial policy of banning gays from opening serving in the military.

“The Secretary has asked the DoD General Counsel to review the law to determine if there is any flexibility in how this law is applied and there isn't a timetable,” Pentagon spokeswoman Cynthia Smith tells ABC News, “We're looking at the law to see if there's at least a more humane way to apply the law until it gets changed.”

First reported in the Advocate, Smith’s comments indicate a review that seems to be moving at a pace without specific time goals.

Despite this, Smith insists that the President has been “clear in his direction” to Defense Secretary Gates and Chairman Mullen that he is committed to overturning the policy in a way that is “least disruptive to troops.”

Repealing the policy requires an act of Congress, something the White House has indicated they’d like to do “in this Congress,” yet have stated that they must not simply ignore the existing law.

“I also want to make sure that we are not simply ignoring a congressional law,” President Obama told CNN’s Anderson Cooper in July, “If Congress passed a law that is constitutionally valid, then it’s not appropriate for the executive branch simply to say we will not enforce a law. It is our duty to enforce laws.”

As first suggested by Secretary Gates, as the administration is persuading a shift in that congressional policy, they have also indicated that there are also looking at ways to change how the law is being enforced and applied currently.

One of these options, Gates suggested last month, could be looking at where the information comes from, and possibility including those who had been “outed” due to vengeance.

“Do we need to be driven when the information, to take action on somebody, if we get that information from somebody who may have vengeance in mind or blackmail or somebody who has been jilted?,” Gates told reporters in July.

The President has said that the appropriate congressional allies have been contacted already to start processing these changes. The question is how fast and aggressive will change come without a timeline?  Even the President himself has said before that change is hard to come in Washington without a deadline.

- Sunlen Miller and Kirit Radia

User Comments

Time for Obama to toss the gay community another bone until he decides to get to DADT.
He’ll probably get to it after 2012
IF ge gets reelected.
Obama is good at tossing bones and tossing people under the bus.

Posted by: bailey | August 28, 2009, 8:47 pm 8:47 pm

_there were those who fought the end of slavery
_there were those who fought against a womens right to vote
_there were those who fought against voting rights for ‘black’ citizens
_there were those who fought against 18 year olds having the right to vote
_there were those who fought against social security
_there were those who fought against medi care
_there were those who fought against a women’s right to choose her own medical treatment
_there are those who fight against universal health care
and
there are those who fight against equal rights regardless of sexual identity
it never seems to end

Posted by: been around a long time | August 29, 2009, 1:17 am 1:17 am

The Military is a place of discipline with specific functions. To open it up to behaviorist sects is not only counterproductive, it is far less than wise.

Posted by: Reflect09 | August 29, 2009, 6:42 pm 6:42 pm

To open it up to behaviorist sects is not only counterproductive, it is far less than wise.
Posted by: Reflect09
‘behaviorist sects’, that’s why all the evangelical christians should not be recruiting during their military service…. nor sure they can be trusted to safe guard the US if their primary allegiance is somewhere’s else

Posted by: TJ | August 30, 2009, 1:11 am 1:11 am

A belief in something beyond self gratification, is not counterproductive and it is wise.

Posted by: Reflect09 | August 30, 2009, 1:25 am 1:25 am

Oh by the way,
DADT was passed by a Democratic House,
passed by a Democratic Senate,
signed by a Democratic President
in 1993.

Posted by: Inconvenient Truth | August 31, 2009, 10:27 am 10:27 am

“_there were those who fought against a women’s right to choose her own medical treatment”
Is the term “women’s right to choose her own medical treatment” the new PC term for right to an abortion?
Getting back on topic: Males and females who serve in the military have separate living quarters on land and at sea. Will the same treatment be applied to gays if DADT is repealed? I don’t ask this question to be offensive – There are reasons why the sexes are separated within the military. Will the same standard apply if DADT is repealed? If the answer is yes, wouldn’t this be a form of segregation (which in the end would be even more counter-productive than DADT itself)?
DADT is imperfect, but it could be the best option of several difficult options. As Obama is finding out, following through on campaign promises is much more difficult sitting in the WH than making the promises while stumping in Iowa (see closure of Guantanamo, rendition, state secrets, WH visitor logs, placement of proposed legistlation online 5 days prior to vote, etc., etc.).

Posted by: tjp612 | August 31, 2009, 12:36 pm 12:36 pm

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.