Recruiting and keeping soldiers in the military is a problem that is clearly getting worse. The military routinely falls short of monthly recruiting goals, to the point that the Pentagon has decided to start pushing off the bad news to avoid further embarrassment. In addition, in many communities, parents who used to encourage serving in the military no longer want recruiters talking to young people.
It’s reached the point in which the Army is now making it harder for military officials to remove individuals who would otherwise be thrown out.
Faced with a long, tough war in Iraq, the U.S. Army has struggled mightily with recruiting. Now the service is battling to keep the new soldiers it has brought into the force.
More of the new Army recruits are washing out of the service before completing their first enlistment, which typically runs three or four years. One recent memorandum from a senior Army personnel official branded the problem “a matter of great concern.”
The Army’s answer: Figure out a way to keep more of the soldiers who are now being forced out. “We need your concerted effort to reverse the negative trend,” reads the internal Army memo, which was directed to senior commanders. “By reducing attrition 1% we can save up to 3,000 initial term soldiers. That’s 3,000 more soldiers in our formations.”
As a practical matter, this means the Army has told battalion commanders, who typically command 800-soldier units, that they can no longer bounce soldiers from the service for poor fitness, pregnancy, alcohol and drug abuse, or generally unsatisfactory performance.
And yet, the military still believes it’s wise to discharge gays.
A non-partisan GAO report earlier this year detailed the fact that the military’s 12-year-old “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy costs taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars and has a negative effect on military readiness.
This problem becomes even more serious in light of the attrition crisis the military is facing. To hear the Pentagon tell it, an out-of-shape drug addict should remain on active duty, but well-trained gay linguists who want to serve and who can translate intercepted Arabic and Farsi messages have to go home.
It’s worth noting that there is legislation pending that would correct this insanity. Rep. Martin Meehan (D-Mass.), who helped design “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in the 1990s, has unveiled the Military Readiness Enhancement Act.
A group of more than 50 House members filed a bill yesterday that would reverse the 12-year-old ”Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy and allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in uniform, arguing that the ban against them undermines national security at a time when the military is struggling to recruit soldiers. […]
”The policy is a proven failure,” said Representative Martin T. Meehan, a Lowell Democrat who is the bill’s lead sponsor. ”In a time of war, it’s outrageous that the military continues to discharge thousands of experienced, courageous, dedicated service members, with many of the critical skills that are needed in the war on terror, for reasons that have nothing to do with their conduct in uniform.”
I know Tom DeLay and Dennis Hastert will never let this bill reach the floor, no doubt because they’re convinced military readiness isn’t as important as keeping well-trained, able-bodied troops out of the military if they’re gay. Nevertheless, I’m vaguely encouraged by the fact that Meehan’s legislation (H.R.1059) is now up to 83 co-sponsors, including — get this — four Republican House members. I know; I couldn’t believe it either.
The bill doesn’t have a chance, but I have to give its proponents a lot of credit; they’ve framed the fight perfectly. In introducing the legislation, Meehan surrounded himself with top military brass who agreed that the armed services need to make a change. The emphasis has nothing to do with gay rights or discrimination; only improving military readiness and building a stronger military.
If we want more troops in the military during a time of war, we can have them — but ”Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” will have to go.