Opposing Ban on Transgender Members of Armed Forces

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Res. 124.

Mr. Speaker, this resolution is very straightforward. The Department of Defense, in cooperation with the White House, recently issued a policy, which will be implemented in a couple weeks, that would, effectively, bar transgender people from being able to serve in the military. We have this resolution to reject that policy. It is that simple and that straightforward.

We believe the policy that the Pentagon is putting forward is unfair, based on ignorance and bigotry, and will actually harm national security. We ask the House, in this resolution, to express the sense of Congress that we oppose this policy from the Pentagon.

Again, what this policy is primarily based on is ignorance and bias against the transgender community. The policies being implemented will make it virtually impossible for them to serve in the military. This is unfair discrimination, and it is also harmful to national security.

The Army last year failed to meet its recruitment quotas. It is a constant challenge in the military to find the people who have the character, the capability, and the ability to serve in our military.

We have the best military in the history of the world. We need high- qualified people to serve. To single out a particular group of people, to discriminate against them and say that they cannot serve, not because they can't meet the qualifications--it is not because they can't run fast enough or shoot straight enough or work hard enough--to be a member of the military, but because of something that literally has nothing to do with their ability to do their job, is bad for national security and is unfair discrimination.

We have heard a lot from people about how difficult it is for unit cohesion to have transgender people in the military, a whole bunch of arguments. The only problem with that is the military leaders who have actually been responsible for this--and I am just going to read one quote. There are many, and some of my colleagues will say it as well.

Army Chief of Staff Milley, who is about to become the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, last year said there are precisely zero reports of issues of cohesion, discipline, or morale as a result of transgender people serving.

There is no issue in terms of readiness, despite what the proponents of this policy will say. It is discrimination, pure and simple, and it is unnecessary.

We also hear opponents say that the policy doesn't ban transgender people from serving and, under certain circumstances, they can. But those circumstances, as described, are so limiting and restricting. Worst of all, as I will explain in a minute, in certain parts, it allows them to serve only if they are willing to deny who they are. That amounts to a ban. If you cannot be who you are and serve in the military, then that is a choice nobody should have to make.

Let's start with the fact that, right now, under this policy, anyone who wants to join the military, if they have transitioned to a different gender, either gone through the surgery or began hormone therapy, this ban says they cannot join. Again, this doesn't say anything about their fitness to serve, in terms of their physical ability or anything. If they have simply had transition surgery or gone through hormone therapy, they are barred from serving.

Worse than that, the people who are already in the military who are transgender are, to a certain extent, grandfathered in. In many different places throughout this policy, it says over and over again that they have to serve in their biological sex. A lot of people go: Well, what the heck does that mean? That gets at the essence, at the very heart, of what it means to be transgender.

This is not something that is just in people's minds. It is a physiological condition that people are born into in which they decide they are more comfortable being in the opposite gender. That is one of the cornerstone difficulties that all these people have to go through: Who am I? What gender do I want to be?

Working with therapists and working with other people, they make that determination. They decide: I know who I am, and this is who I am going to be.

This policy now says: Sorry, we don't care what your doctor says. You cannot be the gender that you know that you are. You have to deny who you are in order to stay in the military.

In many places throughout this policy, that is a consistent theme and points out what is so totally and completely wrong about this policy.

You have also heard, undoubtedly, that there are higher healthcare costs for people who are transgender. There are a number of studies out that show that actually isn't true. Yes, healthcare expense is part of people who serve in the military, and, regrettably, people who join the military have all manner of different healthcare expenses that we do have to pick up, but there is no evidence that this has an increased cost over an average servicemember.

Furthermore, we know that the purpose of this policy is not about cost because one of the first points that I made was about how they are not now going to be allowed to join the military even if they have already gone through transition surgery or hormone therapy. So even if they are all done with that, and there is no additional medical cost to come, this policy says that they are barred and banned from joining the military.

It makes it perfectly clear that this policy is unfair discrimination based on bigotry and ignorance, and I urge this House to reject it.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, just briefly, I will agree, this is a messaging bill, and the message is this is a bad policy. That is what the House is doing.

I will also agree that, when it comes to crafting the right policy in this area, it should be done in committee, and it will be done in committee. That is why we didn't bring that out here on the floor.

But I think it is important for the House of Representatives to make it clear how wrong we think this policy is.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Let's remember one important point. There was no problem. This was not an issue. It was not talked about until the President decided that, in his words, he wanted to ban transgender people from serving in the military.

I hope that is not engaging in personalities. It is simply saying what he said and did. He sent out a tweet saying we should ban people who are transgender. Then the military has had to backfill that tweet with a policy. I feel bad for the members of the military who have had to do that, who have had to waste their time for the last year trying to accommodate the ignorance and bigotry of this presidential policy.

There was no problem. Every single service chief testified there is no impact on unit cohesion. We weren't talking about that until the President decided that he wanted to discriminate against transgender people.

I think the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee is 100 percent correct. Every eligible person who can perform the duties should be allowed to serve.

This policy violates that principle in a whole bunch of different ways, but I will simply mention two.

Even if you have already transitioned, even if you have already gone through all of the healthcare needs and have fully transitioned to a new gender, this policy says you will not be allowed to serve if you are transgender.

That means that fully qualified people--not ones who have potential future surgery or anything--are being banned from serving.

It also says, if you are serving now, you cannot be who you are. And this is where the ignorance comes in.

Wow. What do you mean?

You have got to be the gender you were born in.

That is not the way it works. That is ignorance talking. This policy saying that, No, sorry, you have to be in your ``biological sex'' means you have to deny who you are. And that will also ban people from serving who are otherwise 100 percent qualified.

Without question, trans men and women who are fully qualified to serve in the military will be banned by this policy.

We have already seen the other two arguments: Well, the healthcare costs will go up.

No, they won't. The stats, the evidence, the facts show that transgender people have no greater healthcare costs than the average person serving in the military.

And the unit cohesion argument is an absolute joke. This debate, this policy, prompted by the President, inserting discrimination where it did not belong, is the only thing that has caused any of this issue.

As General Milley said: zero evidence of any unit cohesion issue.

So, let's be 100 percent clear here. This policy is based on ignorance and bigotry.

And why are we doing it on the House floor instead of down in some press conference somewhere? Because the vote of this House matters more than just the individual words of a few Members.

I, as a Member of the United States House and as a citizen of the United States of America, want my Congress to go on record that we will not stand for ignorance and bigotry in our military or anywhere else.

A vote of this House makes it clear just how wrongheaded this policy is. And make no mistake about it, this is not the military that wanted this. The President drove it, and he is causing problems that do not need to be caused. We should reject this policy.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source