February 19, 1993 GAY PEOPLE'S CHRONICLE

Page 7

Ohio senators support President Clinton's plan

Metzenbaum is passionate as he introduces bill, Glenn decries gay bashing

by Kevin Beaney

Both of Ohio's Democratic U.S. senators have expressed support for President Clinton's efforts to end gay discrimination in the military. Sen. Howard Metzenbaum, long a firm supporter of gay issues, made a passionate, persuasive speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate on January 21 as the issue reached a critical stage.

Saying "The time has come to overturn one of the last bastions of governmentsponsored discrimination in this country,” Metzenbaum went on to introduce a bill to prohibit discrimination by the armed services on the basis of sexual orientation. The bill is co-sponsored by Senators Murray, Kerry (Mass.), Campbell and Wellstone, and is identical to the bill introduced in the House of Representatives by Rep. Pat Schroeder of Colorado.

Calling the Pentagon's policy "senseless and cruel," Metzenbaum said it "is discrimination against a distinct group of individuals who repeatedly and throughout history have shown that they are every bit as capable, hardworking, brave, and patriotic as their heterosexual counterparts.

"It is a fact that the job performance of homosexuals in the military has been superb," he continued. "I know that to be true because every time a gay man or lesbian is discharged from the service for

Scramble

Continued from Page 1

doing our jobs," said HRCF executive director Tim McFeeley. "A lot of this is just Monday-morning quarterbacking."

McFeeley said HRCF staffers have organized phone banks to contact their members and constituents throughout the country and have mobilized them to call, write, and visit their representatives to seek support for ending the ban. He said that HRCF's legislative staff has been on Capitol Hill since January 22, lobbying key senators.

McFeeley said HRCF sent out more than 26,000 mailgrams through its existing "Speak Out" program, in which gays prepay for mailgrams to be sent in their behalf when needed.. But gay staffers in two Senate offices said mailgrams, such as HRCF's, are discounted by most senate offices.

One senate staffer said his office got 600 calls opposed to Clinton's plan and only 15 in support. Asked whether his office received any of HRCF's mailgrams, the staffer exclaimed, "Mailgrams don't mean shit!"

"If they're all the same mailgram, we just say, 'Oh, it's amass mailing.' It doesn't get counted."

"Why hasn't HRCF been calling people and telling them to call us? It's insane. Forget HRCF; why haven't all the gays we know been calling?!"

A senate staffer for another member said he feels like the national gay groups are "asleep at the switch."

"We need more people to call," he said. "They talk about pushing on the gay civil rights bill--if we can't win this one, we're not going to win a gay civil rights bill!" Peri Jude Radecic, NGLTF's acting executive director, said NGLTF in late January began its own phone banking to mobilize its members and others to begin calling their senators.

"We're also about to put a 26,000-piece mailing to our members," said Radecic. "Every time someone calls our office, we give them a phone number to call on Capitol Hill." She also said that NGLTF lobbyists were also meeting with staffers in key Senate offices.

Both McFeeley and Radecic pointed to an increase in pro-gay phone calls in late January as evidence at least some of their work is succeeding.

reason of being a homosexual, his or her service record becomes part of the official investigative process. In nearly every instance, the job performance of these individuals is above average," he said.

Sen. John Glenn, who is not so liberal and generally does not distinguish himself on gay issues, has also proven to be a supporter of the president's plan to end the ban. While not actively calling for acceptance of gays in the armed forces, Glenn considers the change inevitable and has allied himself with Clinton's compromise six-month plan. Glenn said, "I support the process which has been worked out for careful analysis and consultation on this important issue. I think everyone would agree that simply decreeing a change in policy does not address all the practical questions raised. It's not as simple as just making a pronouncement. There are issues which need to be clarified or else every base commander will be interpreting the policy in a different way.”

Glenn, who serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee where much of the debate will continue to occur, stated, "I don't have any doubt the policy will be

plinary action against three Marines who are accused of attacking and bashing a gay civilian, Crae Pridgen, outside a North Carolina gay bar on January 30. The senator, who chairs the Armed Services Subcommittee on Manpower and Personnel, had strong condemnation for the hate crime, calling for "zero tolerance" for this type of violence by the military.

On February 2, Glenn told the Commandant of the Marine Corps that top military officials will need to re-double their efforts to prevent future acts of violence against homosexuals. He said that the penalty for hate crimes in the military should be prosecution by military or civilian courts, and dismissal from the military.

"Good order and discipline is a phrase we have heard a lot of lately. I believe that good order and discipline also means zero tolerance for acts of hatred and prejudice. Regardless of the Service Chiefs' positions on lifting the ban, it is incumbent upon them to send a strong signal that no acts of violence or hate against homosexuals will

be tolerated," said Glenn. The senator stated that if the three Marines were found guilty of the bashing, "they should receive the maximum penalty possible and be discharged from the military. These types of people should not be allowed to wear the uniform of the United States."

The senator promised to keep close watch on hate-induced violence in the military as the president's proposal to lift the ban on gays moves forward.

During his January speech, Metzenbaum also addressed the issue of violence, saying "military leaders are now talking publicly about the likelihood of increased acts of violence against homosexuals that choose to come out if the ban is lifted--as if the military were powerless to discipline and educate its own troops. Instead of wringing their hands about this, the Joint Chiefs should be stating publicly and clearly for everyone to hear that the military will not tolerate violence in the ranks directed against any distinct group, including homosexuals."

changed. My concern is making sure that it Area representatives follow

99

smoothly with the possible impact on combat effectiveness." Reflecting an increased sensitivity to gay issues, Glenn has also called for disci-

But according to one gay activist, several large contributors to gay movement groups, including HRCF, have become so concerned about the handling of the military issue by gay leaders that they are considering forming a new, ad hoc committee to assume the "lead" role on the matter. The contributors reportedly are considering raising funds to hire a professional public relations firm to coordinate both the lobbying and a national public relations campaign.

Frank Mankiewicz, vice chair of the nationally recognized public relations firm of Hill and Knowlton, said an issue as volatile as gays in the military poses special problems for anyone seeking to secure its implementation through the political pro-

cess.

"If the gay rights political apparatus had been turned loose a little earlier, it may have helped," said Mankiewicz, in a telephone interview.

"But it's difficult for anyone to do anything to prevent what's happening now from playing out," he said. "It's an issue that has raised many fears." Psychiatrists would tell you that opposition to gays in the military is based mostly on irrational fears, not on political ideology.”

Because of this, Mankiewicz said, a successful effort to bring about Clinton's plan should be done with great care and planning. After what has happened this week, he said, he agrees with Clinton's apparent strategy of seeking a "cooling off'"' period of several months before final action is taken.

Another recognized public relations official, who spoke on condition that he not be identified, said the gays in the military issue is so volatile and has become so pervasive in the nation's consciousness that gay groups may now find themselves "out of their league."

"From a public relations perspective, I'm not sure they thought out the kind of reaction this has created," he said.

The public relations official recommends that gays and their allies hire a professional public relations firm to help them "navigate through the land mines that are certain to come their way" between now and the time Congress votes on the issue.

Lisa Keen contributed to this report. Reprinted with permission from the Washington Blade.

party lines on ending ban

by Kevin Beaney

Cleveland area Democratic representatives have come out in support of President Clinton's attempt to end gay discrimination in the military.

Rep. Louis Stokes, D-11, continues to support gay rights as he has in the past. He is totally in support of lifting the ban, despite phone calls from opponents. His congressional office re reported that they received about 30 calls a day from people opposed to ending gay discrimination, and no calls in favor, after the president made his intentions known. Since the initial furor, calls have dropped off.

Freshman representative Sherrod Brown, D-13, is firmly in favor of lifting the ban, calling it a "civil rights issue" that deserves no further argument.

Newly elected Rep. Eric Fingerhut, D19, is also firmly in support of lifting the ban, despite an avalanche of calls in opposition that "far outweighed" supporters, according to his office. The bulk of the calls came from a small region in Ashtabula County that clearly has an organized conservative base ready to express its opinion. Fingerhut has issued a statement that says "the correct and fair policy, one that is consistent with the American tradition of equality before the law, is to draw a clear line between status and conduct. We should not ask about an individual's sexual status, but we should unequivocally prohibit ho-

mosexual conduct while soldiers are on duty. Like other military rules, this rule should be strictly enforced." The representative noted the similarity between this debate and earlier ones when the military incorporated blacks and women, saying "the armed services have not only tolerated but thrived on diversity..." He urged the opponents to listen carefully and "leave their minds open to the other side.”

Only Rep. Martin Hoke, R-10,, the Republican who defeated Mary Rose Oakar, felt differently. He said "I am convinced that the president's proposal must be viewed first and foremost from the perspective of national security. I suspect even gay rights activists would concede that their efforts on this issue have less to do with advancing America's national security interests than with pressuring President Clinton to follow through on a commitment he made to them during his recent campaign.”

Hoke urged the president to the Joint Chiefs and others "best qualified to advise him" on recruitment, morale and combat readiness issues. He pointed out that his constituents have opposed lifting the ban by a margin of eight to one. Hoke concluded, "Unless we receive clear and compelling evidence [in the next six months] that our national security will not be weakened through the admission of gays to the military I am inclined to oppose any change in current policy."

Take The Plunge!!!

Be Yourself on a Gay Adventure RSVP Cruise

FLITE II TRAVEL, INC.

Call Cindy for Information on our Special Group Departures • Carribean March 7. 1993

• Mexican Riviera March 27 & Nov. 20, 1993

• Greek Isles September 6, 1993

23611 Chagrin Blvd. Beachwood, Ohic

Give the Gift of Travel for the Holidays! Ask About Travel Gift Certificates!

(216) 464-1762

(800) 544-3881