Commandant’s Testimony on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell

Friday, December 3, 2010

Posted by: CDR Glynn Smith

Adm. Bob Papp, Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard, sits with the chiefs of the Armed Forces before the Senate Armed Services Committee during a hearing to consider the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. (U.S. Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Patrick Kelley)

Adm. Bob Papp, Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard, sits with the chiefs of the Armed Forces before the Senate Armed Services Committee during a hearing to consider the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. (U.S. Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Patrick Kelley)

Posted by CDR Glynn Smith on behalf of Coast Guard Commandant Admiral Bob Papp following today’s Congressional testimony before the Senate Committee on Armed Services on possible repeal of the law concerning homosexuals serving in the military.

Earlier today, I testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee, along with my fellow Service Chiefs.  The purpose of the hearing was to allow the Committee to collect the Services’ views on the findings of the Report examining the impacts of repealing the law known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” – which bans gay and lesbian Americans from openly serving in the armed forces.

First and foremost, I want to let all of you know how proud I am of Coast Guard men and women, whose strong survey response rate helped inform the Report.  Our active duty response rate was 54%; our Reserve response rate was 39%; and our spouse response rate was also 39% – which demonstrates your understanding of the importance of this issue.

Adm. Bob Papp, Commandant of the Coast Guard, testifies before the Senate Armed Services Committee during a hearing to consider the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. (U.S. Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Patrick Kelley)

Adm. Bob Papp, Commandant of the Coast Guard, testifies before the Senate Armed Services Committee during a hearing to consider the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. (U.S. Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Patrick Kelley)

During my opening statement, I said to the committee, “I concur with the Report’s recommendations on how to implement repeal of the current law.  Allowing gay and lesbian Americans to serve in the Coast Guard openly will remove a significant barrier to those Coast Guardsmen who are capably serving, but who have been forced to hide or even lie about their sexual orientation.  Forcing these Coast Guardsmen to compromise our core values of Honor, Respect and Devotion to Duty to continue to serve is a choice they should not have to make.”

I realize, however, as with any controversial issue, that there are a wide range of viewpoints.  I also know that should Congress repeal the law, implementation will pose challenges – including challenges specific to units and localities.  Therefore, I told the Congress that if they repeal the law, we will need to proceed with caution, and ensure we fashion an implementation strategy that takes into account the attitudes that may relate to how our personnel at varying commands, and within varying communities, live and serve.

The bottom line is that if Congress repeals Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, I have absolute confidence that our officers, chiefs, and senior petty officers will provide the leadership to successfully implement this change.  Similarly, as I told the Congress, I do not harbor the slightest hesitation that Coast Guard men and women will be up to the task.  You prove every day that you are among America’s very best.  I have unshakable confidence in you, and your ability to professionally and effectively implement any change ordered by Congress.

I recommend everyone review the available information on this important issue.  My written testimony is available here, video of today’s hearing is available here, and the report is available here.

Semper Paratus,
Admiral Bob Papp
Commandant

  • Faz

    just curious, but since Gays are in the minority, will they fall into a protected class status? perhaps to even the playing field and correct past injustices the USCG could give Preferential treatment to gays for ASVAB points, service wide exams, OCS & academy appointments. then we will truly have a diverse team coast guard…b/c as we all know, we derive our maritime Strength from diversity

  • Jim Koshar, LT, USCG(Ret.)

    Thank you Admiral Papp for your leadership on this subject. You are a true leader in that you know your people, and have faith in them.

  • Jeremy Kelley

    How will the armed forces, any branch, approach gays in bootcamp? Will individuals with the sexual orientation of the same sex still bunk and go through bootcamp with their sex? i.e. Will gay males still go through bootcamp with the males? I was a marine and while i support the banning of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law, i wondering how other straight marines and service men will feel about going through bootcamp with gay and lesbians? I know in the Marine Corps, men and woman do not go through bootcamp together and do not live in the same rooms together in barracks. Just curious on how that would workout? Nevertheless i support Admiral Papp.

  • Jeremy Kelley

    it will be a race among all of the branches for the first transgender flag officer

  • Joe Coastie

    In response to Faz, I do not believe that any group should recieve preferential treatment with ASVAB points, SWE, OCS and Academy appointments. When it comes to tests and appointments you have to earn your score and the best person should get the appointments. They should not have any help from preferential treatment. We in the CG all work hard to be a team and to give special treatment to one group or another tears down the very fabric of the teamwork that the CG is.

  • Slim

    No one group should be given preferential treatment when it comes ASVAB scores, SWE, OCS and Academy appointments simply due to the fact that it tears down the CG’s teamwork. By giving one group something that another has to work harder for puts more of a barrier between the groups then any law would. I’m for the repealing of the law, but disagree that any group should have special treatment.

  • smokin

    FAZ, Gays are asking to serve without fear of discharge. They arent asking for a “minority” status or “special treatment”.

  • Linda – Coastie Disabled Vet

    I support the repeal of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”. Telling anyone in our country that though they are an American citizen they are not allowed to defend or protect our way of life. Quality of the person should be more important then race, religion or sexual preference. Thank you Admiral Papp.

    Thank you to all that serve.

  • FAZ

    SLIM and smokin
    if you guys are truly in the CG, you might want to educate yourself on the role of diversity for officer programs, flight school admissions etc.
    its only fair that gays should get protected status (and hence preferential treatment); they are 1% of the population and a true minority. they have been discrimated for years, and preferential treament will make up for past wrongs
    it will also make us a more diverse force, and i am told that diversity makes us stronger

  • STA PHILLY MK1

    if your need to come out of the closet is more important then the mission , perhaps the military lifestyle is not for you.
    End the witchhunts but keep DADT.
    its not perfect, but it works.
    Pandora’s box is about to be opened

  • CDR Glynn Smith

    The Report of the Comprehensive Review of the Issues Associated with a Repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” released by the Department of Defense on Tuesday addresses the issue of special or preferential treatment in the last paragraph on page 137. It says, “In the event of repeal, we do not recommend that the Department of Defense place sexual orientation alongside race, color, religion, sex, and national origin as a class eligible for various diversity programs, tracking initiatives, and the Military Equal Opportunity program complaint resolution process.” A link to the Report is located at the bottom of Admiral Papp’s post.

    v/r

    CDR Glynn Smith
    Commandant’s Communications Director

  • Danny B Warner

    Thank you for comments Commandant. Equal treatment not special treatment should be the rule. Semper Paratus.

  • RS in Humboldt

    MK1 in Philly:

    It is not possible to keep DADT and end the witchhunts. There will always be people in power that seek to end the careers of gays and lesbians if there is a policy that prevents them from serving openly in the service.

    I was very proud to have Admiral Papp as our Commandant today.

  • Robert

    Did Senator McCain see that there were FIVE service Chiefs in the room?

  • CDR Glynn Smith

    If you would like to view Admiral Papp’s statement and comments at today’s hearing on C-Span3, I have provided the times and subjects below for you to scroll through the video. You can access via the video link at the bottom of Admiral Papp’s post. Please note this will take you away from the Coast Guard page to the C-Span page.

    1) 35:00 – Admiral Papp’s opening remarks
    2) 49:15 – Coast Guard exchange officers and law enforcement detachments experiences with other organizations
    3) 1:12:00 – Admiral Papp’s relationship with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Secretary Gates and Secretary Napolitano
    4) 1:42:40 – Need for clear and unambiguous guidance, policy and direction
    5) 2:16:05 – Feedback from the Chaplain Corps
    6) 2:33:00 – Reiterating “clear and unambiguous” policy needed
    7) 2:36:15 – Comparison to Coast Guard’s assimilation of Women into the service

    v/r

    CDR Glynn Smith
    Commandant’s Communications Director

  • Former Shipmate

    At the very least, if DADT is not repealed, the service could attempt to do something about the potential environment of fear. DADT was intended to be a safe haven for those who kept their business to themselves, but it has become a lever of power for the zealous among us. I believe removal of the lever that causes fear for career is all many (not all) gays in the service are looking for. And it would be an improvement over current state.

    Perhaps a higher threshold of proof and disincentives for those that might take it upon themselves to “be righteous and expose another shipmate” would go a long way (including prosecution of those that carry out personal investigations with malicious intent). The logical extension of sexual orientation is the assumption of a violation of the UCMJ, but without real proof of action and a culture that didn’t pursue this proof, would DADT work as originally intended?

    Surely, many heterosexuals violate these same articles and we know that they do. But we don’t pursue it and those individuals don’t feel persecuted by the overzealous.

    Just a thought on how THIS service might adjust culture and policy while still adhering to UCMJ and DOD policies (which is a steep climb to change).

    I think DADT will likely be continued as political battles rage on. It is truly up to Congress and the watch is about to change. The incoming watch will not allow DADT to be repealled. Just sayin.

  • Former Shipmate

    I too noticed Sen McCain’s slip-up. I hope it wasn’t intentional.

  • Retired Coastie

    Read the Executive Summary to the published report. It will answer your quesions in a few pages regarding implementation, special treatment, sleeping quarters, showering, etc.

    It’s about time we got beyond this issue and repealed DADT. In my career I served with several excellent officers and enlisted men and women who were gay. Their performance and personal conduct was first rate. Too bad they either left or got processed out for their private sexual orientation, NOT for misconduct. Waste of valuable resources and good shipmantes.

    If you know your history, and it’s also in the Executive Summary, the military was far more opposed to having blacks in the military after WWII and none of the dire predictions came true. The military has shown that prejudice can’t get in the way of mission performance.

    As far as conduct goes, we already have UCMJ laws about that. No need to change it just because someone is gay/lesbian. For the minority who still can’t handle the issue, I challenge you to educate yourself and let go of fears and prejudice. 10 years from now this will seem like such a non-issue.

  • USCG IT

    As a member I support whatever decision is made. I was just curious how that would affect gay marriage and things of that sort. Say you are stationed in a state that allows it and your legally married, does that mean when you transfer somewhere that doesn’t allow it that the military treats you as a single member again? What about all the other perks of being a spouse would that be recognized as well? Not sure I explained fully but I figure you get the just.

  • STA PHILLY MK1

    can we institue a “dont ask; dont flaunt” policy?

  • Chris USCG

    I agree with the MK1′s “Don’t flaunt” policy. I can’t tell you how annoying it was going to college seeing how many people want to tell the world their sexual orientation. If you want the government to stay out of your bedroom, don’t announce what you do there to everyone you see in public.

    I consider myself a Conservative/Libertarian mix, where I don’t have a problem with gays serving in the military or marrying. Freedom means many things, and doesn’t mean that we should determine what is “right and wrong” on a moral compass. I was against Pres. Clinton when he instituted the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy because I forsaw this happening. But I understood his point. Keep it private, plain and simple. But making it a military law is where it got kinda messed up…

    The only concerns I have ever had with gays in the military was berthing situations, bathing situations, etc. The reason males and females aren’t allowed to live together or share the same showers are for “sexual” reasons…so will they put gays in seperate areas?

  • Chris USCG

    **Correction to what I said above. I meant to say “religious compass” instead of “moral compass.” We SHOULD base many laws on morality, haha.

  • John Dawson

    If you repeal the “don’t ask don’t tell law” I agree that it will allow service-men and women to respect the core values, but I belive if you repeal it people may not want to serve with people who they know are homosexual, it may also make people not be unified so much as a team and that can potentially cause problems.

  • John Dawson

    And I very much agree with Chris above. I believe they should make bathrooms/showers for people of “different” sexual orientation.

  • New Coastie

    This is my stand on the situation, me being new to the coast guard I do stand behind my leadership and the decisions they make, but from a personal more human stand point I have to say DADT was a policy that allowed gays to go through things such as boot camp unharmed, being underway with someone who is gay lead to problems and even creating groups of people being out casted, the same group that has the opportunity to be accepted without exposing their sexual preference.

  • United We Stand

    The way I see it, fraternization is the biggest obstacle. If the military institutes separate living/bathroom facilities for Gays/Lesbians, there will be no way to police such personnel to ensure they aren’t breaking the rules. Living, and working along Non-gays & Lesbians allows them, and the entire force, the means for better team integrity. Everyone’s heard the saying “a woman scorned.” People can be extremely vindictive against ex’s, and is one of the major reasons fraternization is frowned upon. If given the chance, will Gays/Lesbians use serarate living quarters as a “safe haven,” knowing that their chances of being caught fratenizing with fellow personnel becomes diminished? I believe the majority of our people don’t break the rules because of ther own personal integrity. I also think a percentage of those that are left don’t break the rules because they don’t want to risk ruining their careers by getting caught doing something illegal, as set forth by the UCMJ. Lets treat all our personnel as equals from the start, and not “separate, but equal.”

  • Slim

    Faz,
    Diversity may make us stronger in some ways, however, if you take appointments away from someone who is more qualified to give it to someone simply on the basis of it will “diversify and repay them for past injustices” that will break down the quality of work for the mission. If it becomes more important to repay “past injustices” as opposed to making sure we do the mission well then the CG will not succeed in it’s job.

  • east coastie

    There are certain clear problems with repealing this that aren’t being addressed. Seperate heads seem to be one of them. If a straight male were to bathe along side an attractive female day in and day out. Would it be reasonable to assume that the male could be aroused by seeing her in the shower at some point during a 3-4 year tour? (even if he had no intention or desire to do anything about it)

    Now, take a gay male and put him in the shower with a straight male that is physically attractive to him. All things being equal (which is supposed to be the goal) you could expect the same chance of arousal. This would severely damage morale. It would make the straight sailor VERY uncomfortable I would imagine.

    Most units have seperated shower stalls with curtains and there would likely never be an issue. However, not all do. I know this is a worst case scenario, but you can’t say that you see the “big picture” til you have looked at an issue from every angle.

    The other side of the seperate shower issue, is that if you force them to use seperate facilities, then you risk damaging morale that way and making people feel “singled out”. We obviously have gay/lesbian Coasties right now who enjoy their privacy and even after they have the opportunity to come out, I imagine many would prefer to keep their business to themselves. Making them shower and/or live in different quarters would be a negative for those people.

  • here’s a thought

    If a current member of the Coast Guard has the ablility to come out after a possible repel of DADT, should that member be held to a fradulant enlistment??? After all, it is a known fact that you can’t enter the military as a homosexual…

  • flynnbw

    @here’s a thought: Actually, you are thinking of the law as it stood before 1993. The whole purpose of the original 1993 DADT law was to allow gay and lesbian Americans to serve in the military (just not openly). I don’t believe any enlistments of gays or lesbians from that time forward would be considered fraudulent (though I am not a lawyer).

    ADM Papp was on-point when he ID’d the DADT policy as incompatible with the service’s core values of Honor, Respect, and Devotion to Duty. I thank him for his principled stand and leadership on this issue. I also appreciate the respectful tone of the conversation on this blog.

  • stu slesh

    east coastie, nothing has happened in these showers in the past. Having same sex member with different sexual orientations showering together is far safer than than having people with the same sexual preferences share those showers. If someone find someone else attractive, it doesn’t really matter where that setting is and we still have policies to protect people from unwanted, unwarranted advancing in the service.

  • Seatroll

    Change is inevitable, and everyone should serve, or at the very least have the open right to. Your rights tend to mean more when you have the responsibility to defend them.

    On the “opinion” side though I will never understand why, what is normally one of the most private human functions needs to be such a publicly debated issue.

    We once had standards for “PDA” (Public Displays of Affection) I wonder if this is where some of all the angnst comes from.

  • MK1 Robert B. Panish

    I would like to make it known to all the readers of this blog, that I am the only active duty MK1 at Station Philadelphia. I would appreciate if the individual under the screen name “STA PHILLY MK1″ clarifies who he or she is. I have been receiving phone calls about your comments, and while you have every right to voice your own opinion you do not have the right to speak for me. Thank you.

  • JC

    They were probably saying the same thing before women were allowed on-board ships underway. Now woman serve on all ships. In this country we have way to many labels. I would hate to work with a hundred people exactly like me, there wouldn’t be an original thought. Equal rights should apply to everyone. A person’s sexual orientation should not preclude them from the opportunity to serve their country. Some of the best disciplined warriors in history were the Spartans, and they weren’t known for their heterosexuality (and it didn’t impact their effectiveness).

  • BMCS

    Rely, maintain, and live our Core Values. It’s about being a professional. We all raised our hands and swore to defend our country; to die if necessary for our beliefs. Does it really matter whose hand it is that pulls you out of the water or whose breath it is that restores your life? As true professionals do we need segregated heads or berthing areas? We just need to have Respect for the privacy of others, uphold our core values, enforce our own policies, and live up to the true professionals we are. I might not always agree with you but if you’re willing to do what we do best then climb aboard.

  • RS in Humboldt

    Thank you BMCS for your comment. We tend to forget the class of people that come into the Coast Guard in the first place.

    I have news for all of you. Gays and lesbians are already here in the Coast Guard. They shower with you and share locker rooms. Nobody that is gay is going to stare at someone of the same sex in the shower or present an uncomfortable environment. Bad stereotypes have created a mentality that gay people are so far different than everyone else. It is actually quite the opposite because gay people in the military do not want to be singled out or differentiated. All they want to do is serve without fear of losing their retirement at 19 years or be with their partner without fear of blackmail and once again losing their job. Why would someone stare at you and intentionally make you uncomfortable when as a result they would be singled out and look like a fool? Maybe it is you who are making the situation for yourself uncomfortable.

    Those of you making negative comments about gays need to find one in the Coast Guard and make friends. I guarantee you that your opinion will change.

  • RS in Humboldt

    Also, I wanted to add one other comment and then I will shut up. Remember when we were asked to do those surveys asking us what we thought of DADT repeal? One of my many bosses thought it was ridiculous and stupid to even answer it because he did not care if gays/lesbians served openly. I told him that if he did not answer then the survey results would tip to the negative side and would not be accurate. With hesitation he agreed and filled out the survey. I have found this reaction to be very common among people I work with. People found it a waste of their time because they did not care. It was not an issue to them that gay/lesbians served openly.

    However, negative opinions about DADT are overwhelmingly heard on blogs and in the survey. I ask that people who support repeal be heard and not brush it to the wayside because they think voicing their opinion is ridiculous because it is not an issue for them.

  • Carlos

    @ Faz, You are right gays have suffered discrimination for many years, but to ask our country to sacrifice standards of accession in order to let a minority in to our branch, will compromise our ability to have the best and most motivated individuals serving with us. it is as, if you were asking, all Americans to pay for the inequities committed by a few. It is my understanding we in the Coast Guard, have policies in place, which encourage recruitment of minorities. The purpose of them is to have our Coast Guard mirror our population, it is not to provide an unfair advantage to a group of our population and punish all others. I am sure, there are plenty of qualified gay men and women, who are competitive and motivated enough to enter our service. There’s no need to lower our standards for a select group of individuals, that could actually backfire as all other members, who do not benefit from this special treatment which you suggest, could become resentful. Moreover if you were drowning in the middle of the ocean, who would you rather have as a rescue swimmer, someone who did not meet the standards, but was let in because of his minority status or a highly qualified rescue swimmer, who met all the standards?

  • ex_coastie

    I am happy to see the DADT was done away with! I served with many gay and lesbians but was never allowed to ask, laughing. Even when I was stationed PCS on the four cutters, they were all OUTSTANDING shipmates!! What happens if these highly qualified officers and enlisted personel who were discharged Honorably want to re-enlist or go reserves? Has this been addressed? Will the CG bring them back in if it was within so many years? Also, will the CG rewrite their DD-214′s to reflect congresses laws?? Everyone wants to be treated equally! These are just my thoughts!

  • Carlos

    @ Ex-Coastie, Thank you for your service.
    As I understand, provided the prior Coastie meets all other elegibility criteria for reenlistment, his/her application will be accepted, as all others. They will be processed, as soon as guidance is provided from DOD and above.

  • Patrick Denny

    Although I don’t agree with DADT’s repeal, I do agree with being professional, and following appropriate orders. We all know where the order came from, so, like it or not, now’s not the time to gripe, now’s the time to adapt. Coast Guard personnel are good at adapting to change, so this shouldn’t be difficult….