This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/26/us/politics/trump-transgender-military.html

The article has changed 10 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 6 Version 7
Trump Says Transgender People Will Not Be Allowed in the Military Trump Says Transgender People Will Not Be Allowed in the Military
(about 3 hours later)
WASHINGTON — President Trump announced on Wednesday that the United States will no longer “accept or allow” transgender people in the United States military, saying American forces “must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory” and could not afford to accommodate them. WASHINGTON — President Trump abruptly announced a ban on transgender people serving in the military on Wednesday, blindsiding his defense secretary and Republican congressional leaders with a snap decision that reversed a year-old policy reviled by social conservatives.
Mr. Trump made the surprise declaration in a series of posts on Twitter, saying he had come to the decision after talking to generals and military experts, whom he did not name. Mr. Trump made the surprise declaration on Twitter, saying that American forces could not afford the “tremendous medical costs and disruption” of transgender service members. He said he had consulted generals and military experts, but Jim Mattis, the defense secretary, was given only a day’s notice about the decision.
The sweeping policy decision was met with surprise at the Pentagon, outrage from advocacy groups and praise from social conservatives. It reverses the gradual transformation of the military under President Barack Obama, whose administration announced last year that transgender people could serve openly in the military. Mr. Obama’s defense secretary, Ashton B. Carter, also opened all combat roles to women and appointed the first openly gay Army secretary. Mr. Trump elected to announce the ban in order to resolve a quietly brewing fight on Capitol Hill over whether taxpayer money should pay for gender transition and hormone therapy for transgender service members, which had threatened to kill a $790 billion defense and security spending package scheduled for a vote this week.
The shift was announced with such haste that the White House could not answer basic inquiries about how it would be implemented. Chief among those questions was what would happen to the thousands of openly transgender people currently serving on active duty. But rather than addressing that narrow issue, Mr. Trump opted to upend the entire policy on transgender service members, a move that few on Capitol Hill or at the Pentagon expected.
Mr. Trump announced the decision with such haste that the White House could not answer basic inquiries about how it would be carried out, including what would happen to openly transgender people now serving on active duty; of eight defense officials interviewed, none could say.
“That’s something that the Department of Defense and the White House will have to work together as implementation takes place and is done so lawfully,” Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary, said.“That’s something that the Department of Defense and the White House will have to work together as implementation takes place and is done so lawfully,” Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary, said.
The announcement came amid a debate on Capitol Hill over the Obama-era practice of requiring the Pentagon to pay for medical treatment related to gender transition. The dispute has unfolded as Congress considers a nearly $700 billion spending bill to fund the Pentagon. Representative Vicky Hartzler, Republican of Missouri, has proposed an amendment that would bar the Pentagon from spending money on transition surgery or related hormone therapy, and other Republicans have pressed for similar provisions. Still, the announcement thrilled elements of Mr. Trump’s base, who have been dismayed to see the president break so bitterly in recent days with Attorney General Jeff Sessions, a hard-line conservative.
Mr. Trump made the decision within a matter of days, according to a person familiar with his decision-making, based on concerns among House Republicans who were preparing to vote Wednesday on the military spending legislation and pressure from the Family Research Council, a leading Christian conservative group that had opposed the bill over spending on transgender medical costs. Civil rights and transgender advocacy groups denounced the policy, with some vowing to challenge it in court. Pentagon officials expressed dismay that the president’s tweets, blasted out before they could consider how to make the change, could open them to lawsuits.
It was not clear whether the president informed Defense Secretary Jim Mattis directly of his plans in advance. The ban would reverse the gradual transformation of the military under President Barack Obama, whose administration announced last year that transgender people could serve openly in the military. Mr. Obama’s defense secretary, Ashton B. Carter, also opened all combat roles to women and appointed the first openly gay Army secretary.
Ms. Hartzler said she welcomed the president’s decision. And it represented a stark turnabout from Mr. Trump’s rhetoric during his campaign, when he billed himself as an ally of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.
The policy would affect only a small portion of the approximately 1.3 million active-duty members of the military. About 2,450 are transgender, according to a study last year by the RAND Corporation, though the estimated number of transgender service members has varied. The president, Ms. Sanders said, had concluded that allowing transgender people to serve openly “erodes military readiness and unit cohesion, and made the decision based on that.”
The study found that allowing transgender people to serve openly in the military would “have minimal impact on readiness and health care costs” for the Pentagon. It estimated that health care costs would rise $2.4 million to $8.4 million a year, representing an infinitesimal 0.04- to 0.13 percent increase in spending for active-duty service members. Citing research into other countries that allow transgender people to serve, the study projected “little or no impact on unit cohesion, operational effectiveness or readiness” in the United States. Mr. Mattis, who was on vacation, was silent on the new policy. People close to the defense secretary said he was appalled that Mr. Trump chose to unveil his decision in tweets, in part because of the message they sent to transgender active-duty service members, including those deployed overseas, that they were suddenly no longer welcome.
Officials at the Pentagon were caught off guard. They had been studying, per the orders of Mr. Mattis, how transgender troops in the military affect other service members, but not with a view toward removing transgender people from the military, several defense officials said. The policy would affect only a small portion of the approximately 1.3 million active-duty members of the military. Some 2,000 to 11,000 active-duty troops are transgender, according to a 2016 RAND Corporation study commissioned by the Pentagon, though estimates of the number of transgender service members have varied widely, and are sometimes as high as 15,000.
In June, the administration delayed a decision on whether to allow transgender recruits to join the military. At the time, Mr. Mattis said an extra six months would give military leaders a chance to review its potential impact. Mr. Mattis’s decision to delay accepting transgender recruits for six months had been seen as a pause to “finesse” the issue, one official said, not a prelude to an outright ban. The study found that allowing transgender people to serve openly in the military would “have minimal impact on readiness and health care costs” for the Pentagon. It estimated that health care costs would rise $2.4 million to $8.4 million a year, representing an infinitesimal 0.04 to 0.13 percent increase in spending. Citing research into other countries that allow transgender people to serve, the study projected “little or no impact on unit cohesion, operational effectiveness or readiness” in the United States.
What’s more, Mr. Mattis loathes wading into politically divisive social policy, the official said, noting that the defense secretary, who is on vacation this week, has taken pains to steer clear of Mr. Trump’s more partisan moves, and views the American military as a unifier of a divided country. The announcement came amid the debate on Capitol Hill over the Obama-era practice of requiring the Pentagon to pay for medical treatment related to gender transition. Representative Vicky Hartzler, Republican of Missouri, has proposed an amendment to the spending bill that would ban the Pentagon from spending money on transition surgery or related hormone therapy, and other Republicans have pressed for similar provisions.
Gay and transgender rights groups and research organizations that have worked to craft policies around the military service of transgender individuals expressed outrage at the move. Mr. Mattis had worked behind the scenes to keep such language out of legislation, quietly lobbying Republican lawmakers not to attach the prohibitions, according to congressional and defense officials.
“The president is creating a worse version of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,’” said Aaron Belkin, the director of the Palm Center, referring to the Clinton-era policy in which gay and lesbian people could not openly serve in the military. But Mr. Trump was concerned that the transgender medical care issue could imperil the security spending measure, which also contains $1.6 billion for the border wall that he has championed, and wanted to resolve the dispute cleanly and straightforwardly, according to a person familiar with his thinking, who insisted on anonymity to describe it. That prompted his ban.
Mr. Belkin said that “discredited” policy had harmed readiness, and Mr. Trump’s new one would have similar effects. The president’s decision shocked even Republican congressional leaders, who were aware Mr. Trump was looking into whether taxpayer money should be spent on medical procedures for transgender service members, but had not expected he would go so far as to bar transgender people from serving altogether.
“This is a shocking and ignorant attack on our military and on transgender troops who have been serving honorably and effectively for the past year,” he added. Mr. Trump and Republican lawmakers had come under pressure from Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council, a leading Christian conservative group, and an ally of Mr. Trump. Mr. Perkins opposed the bill over spending on transgender medical costs and lobbied lawmakers to do the same.
Joshua Block, a senior staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union’s LGBT & HIV Project, called the move “an outrageous and desperate action,” and asked transgender military service members to get in touch with the organization, saying it was “examining all our options on how to fight this.” “Grant repentance to President Trump and Secretary Mattis for even considering to keep this wicked policy in place,” the Family Research Council said in one of its daily prayers last week. “Grant them understanding, courage and willpower to stand up to the forces of darkness that gave birth to it and wholly to repeal it.”
“The thousands of transgender service members serving on the front lines for this country deserve better than a commander in chief who rejects their basic humanity,” Mr. Block said. Opponents of allowing openly transgender service members had raised a number of concerns, including what they said was the questionable psychological fitness of those troops and the cost the military would bear for their medical treatment, potentially including gender reassignment procedures. They said the military was being used for social experimentation at the expense of national security.
Mr. Trump’s abrupt decision will likely end up in court; a nonprofit group that represents gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people in the military immediately vowed to sue. “This was Ash Carter on his way out the door pulling the pin on a cultural grenade,” Mr. Perkins said on Wednesday. “Our military leaders are saying this doesn’t help make us a better fighting force; it’s a distraction; it’s taking up limited resources.”
“We are committed to transgender service members,” the group, OutServe-SLDN, said in a statement. “We are going to fight for them as hard as they are fighting for the country. And we’re going to start by taking the fight to Donald Trump in the federal court.” Mr. Carter objected to the decision, for its effect on the military and on those considering joining.
Matthew F. Thorn, executive director of OutServe, said Mr. Trump’s decision was a slap in the face of transgender service members. “To choose service members on other grounds than military qualifications is social policy and has no place in our military,” he said in a statement. “There are already transgender individuals who are serving capably and honorably. This action would also send the wrong signal to a younger generation thinking about military service.”
“We have transgender individuals who serve in elite SEAL teams, who are working in a time of war to defend our country, and now you’re going to kick them out?” Mr. Thorn said in an interview. While some conservative lawmakers, including Ms. Hartzler, praised Mr. Trump, the president drew bipartisan condemnation on Capitol Hill and outrage from civil rights and transgender advocacy groups.
The move drew praise from Tony Perkins, the president of the conservative Family Research Council, which had opposed the Pentagon spending bill over the dispute about paying for gender reassignment surgery. On Wednesday, Mr. Perkins said he would now support the legislation, effectively sending a message to conservative Republican lawmakers that they would not pay a price with their core supporters for voting for it. “There is no reason to force service members who are able to fight, train and deploy to leave the military — regardless of their gender identity,” said Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona and the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
“I applaud President Trump for keeping his promise to return to military priorities — and not continue the social experimentation of the Obama era that has crippled our nation’s military,” Mr. Perkins said in a statement. “The military can now focus its efforts on preparing to fight and win wars rather than being used to advance the Obama social agenda.” He called Mr. Trump’s move “yet another example of why major policy announcements should not be made via Twitter.”
Mr. Carter issued a statement objecting to the decision, both for its effect on the military and on those considering joining. Senator Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island and the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee, noted the irony of Mr. Trump’s announcing the ban on the anniversary of President Harry Truman’s order to desegregate the military. “President Trump is choosing to retreat in the march toward equality,” he said.
“To choose service members on other grounds than military qualifications is social policy and has no place in our military,” Mr. Carter said. “There are already transgender individuals who are serving capably and honorably. This action would also send the wrong signal to a younger generation thinking about military service.” In June, the administration delayed by six months a decision on whether to allow transgender recruits to join the military. At the time, Mr. Mattis said the delay would give military leaders a chance to review the shift’s potential impact. Mr. Mattis’s decision was seen as a pause to “finesse” the issue, one official said, not a prelude to an outright ban.
And Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, condemned Mr. Trump’s sudden announcement, saying it muddied policy and that anyone who is fit to serve should be allowed to do so. The delay on recruits “was largely based on a disagreement on the science of how mental health care and hormone therapy for transgender individuals would help solve the medical issues that are associated with gender dysphoria,” Gen. Paul Selva, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said during his reconfirmation hearing last week.
“The president’s tweet this morning regarding transgender Americans in the military is yet another example of why major policy announcements should not be made via Twitter,” said Mr. McCain, the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. “I am an advocate of every qualified person who can meet the physical standards to serve in our uniformed services to be able to do so,” he said.
Senator Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island and the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee, noted that Mr. Trump made his decision public on the anniversary of Harry Truman’s order desegregating the United States military. “President Trump is choosing to retreat in the march toward equality,” Mr. Reed said in a statement. Mr. Mattis, a retired Marine, has not been a major proponent of allowing transgender individuals to serve in the military, in part because medical accommodations, including hormone injections, could open the Defense Department to claims from other people not allowed to serve, like Type 1 diabetics, who also need regular injections.
“This was a divisive political move that exposes the president’s lack of faith in the professionalism of our armed forces,” Mr. Reed said, calling on Mr. Trump to review the facts and reverse his decision. “In the land of the free and the home of the brave, every American who is brave enough to serve their country should be free to do so.” But Mr. Mattis and the Pentagon’s military leadership all seemed to have accepted that transgender people already serving in the military would be allowed to remain. A senior adviser to Mr. Mattis, Sally Donnelly, represented the Palm Center, an organization that advocated on behalf of the L.G.B.T. community in the military during the debate that led up to the Obama administration’s decision to allow transgender individuals to serve, defense officials said.
Mr. Trump’s abrupt decision is likely to end up in court; OutServe-SLDN, a nonprofit group that represents gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people in the military, immediately vowed to sue.
“We have transgender individuals who serve in elite SEAL teams, who are working in a time of war to defend our country, and now you’re going to kick them out?” Matthew F. Thorn, executive director of OutServe, said in an interview.
Lt. Commander Blake Dremann, a Navy supply corps officer who is transgender, said he found out his job was in danger when he turned on CNN on Wednesday morning. Commander Dremann came out as transgender to his commanders in 2015, and said they had been supportive of him.
He refused to criticize Mr. Trump — “we don’t criticize our commander in chief,” he said — but said the policy shift “is singling out a specific population in the military, who had been assured we were doing everything appropriate to continue our honorable service.”
He added: “And I will continue to do so, until the military tells me to hang up my boots.”