WILL AMERICANS RESCUE OUR MILITARY FROM WOKEISM?

Electing the Next Commander in Chief

It’s decision time, and the future of our military is at stake. Voters in several states already are speaking out in the 2024 Presidential Election, and Congress soon will be voting on one of the most consequential defense bills in years.

It’s decision time, and the future of our military is at stake.  Voters in several states already are speaking out in the 2024 Presidential Election, and Congress soon will be voting on one of the most consequential defense bills in years.

The Center for Military Readiness has posted our quadrennial CMR Report on the Republican and Democratic Parties’ National Platforms. CMR’s report also compares actions taken by the presidential candidates that support what they are saying now and what they have actually done in the past.

This edition of CMR E-Notes also puts the spotlight on major issues in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2025.  Shortly after the election and through the lame-duck session, Congress will be making decisions on major issues of concern to CMR. We are also pleased to report that some U.S. Naval Academy alumni working with the Calvert Task Group have just released a new book that analyzes pervasive woke influences at the Academy and why they must come to an end.

The tide is starting to turn, but we have a long way to go. CMR is working hard to influence events and outcomes, but we need financial support from people like you. 

Congressional staff members and other organizations tell me that they have appreciated CMR’s Interim Reports on the annual defense bill and Challenges to Congress on military/social issues of concern. CMR has been honored to provide leadership in this unique field of public policy since our founding in 1993, but there are expenses involved and our funds are very low.   

--Elaine Donnelly    

A. Republican and Democratic Platforms Reveal Stark Contrasts

Americans are looking for a new Commander-in-Chief who will act with common sense and leadership to restore morale and meritocracy in the only military we have.

The Center for Military Readiness is non-partisan and does not endorse candidates. On a quadrennial basis, however, CMR reports on and analyzes the positions of presidential candidates vying to become the next President of the United States.

CMR has prepared this article to assist in the process of electing a new President:

• CMR Report: Electing the Next Commander-in-Chief – Republican and Democratic Platforms Reveal Stark Contrast

America is not defended by weapons, ships, aircraft, and missiles alone. Our national Security depends on military/social policies that preserve and promote high morale and readiness to defend America. Military/social issues are matters of national security. They require careful consideration at all times, but especially in presidential election years. 

This information and developments in the news every day underscore the importance of making a plan to VOTE and make sure that friends and family VOTE as well.

B. Memo to Congress: Enact Sound Policies, but First, Do No Harm

After the election, House and Senate Conferees will negotiate and consolidate differences in the House and Senate versions of the NDAA for 2025. Indications are that there will be no floor votes on amendments in the Senate and major decisions will be made behind closed doors.

This year’s NDAA could be one of the best defense bills in years – or one of the worst.

In meetings and communications with congressional staff, CMR has expressed concerns about three problematic provisions in the House and Senate versions of the NDAA, which should not be approved. (See H.R. 8070 and S. 4638).

1.      Remove “Draft Our Daughters”

In May, the House approved NDAA language making Selective Service registration for men (18-26) automatic.  As CMR predicted, members of the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) approved the same proposal and extended it to impose Selective Service registration on eligible “persons,” to include young women. 

This latest version of controversial “Draft Our Daughters” legislation, sponsored by SASC Democrats, came up behind closed doors, without notice, rationale, or evidence of popular demand.

For still-unexplained reasons, three Republicans voted for the anti-women “Draft Our Daughters” legislation – perhaps because of a well-meaning but inadequate attempt to mitigate the negative impact of the still-unacceptable legislation. (See Senate Report, p. 713, Motions 14-15)

This year’s legislation purports to exoclude any women required to be registered for the Selective Service System from being cmpelled to join combat roles that were closed to women prior to December 3, 2015.” (Motion #15, Senate Report Sec. 529B) The highlighted date refers to the unfortunate day when the Obama Administration disregarded the Marine Corps’ request that some military occupational specialties (MOSs) remain all-male. 

Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter’s decision to impose “gender equity” on combat arms units such as the infantry disregarded three years of scientific research backing up Gen. Joseph Dunford’s request. Carter summarily opened up all MOSs, as if men and women would be equally capable of serving in physically demanding combat units that attack the enemy.

CMR’s Policy Analysis sets forth several reasons why the well-meaning Republican-sponsored “combat carveout” changes nothing. A Defense Department that cannot define what a women is cannot be trusted to define what “combat” is or what combat training should be: 

• CMR: “Combat Carve-out” Does Not Justify “Draft Our Daughters”

If women are automatically registered and called up to fight in a future war, they would have to go where the Army sends them – just like the men.

Furthermore, the administrative burden of finding the theoretical one-in-four woman who might be qualified would make it more difficult to find and quickly mobilize American forces. This would jam and slow mobilization at the worst possible time.

This 2-pager summarizes reasons why “Draft Our Daughters” always has been a bad idea.

• CMR: Congress Should Reject Defense Bill “Draft Our Daughters” Mandate

Because it has some Republican support, “Draft Our Daughters,” legislation to automatically register young men and women for service to the government could be enacted as law during the lame-duck session. Voters should let their elected representatives know that any legislation that would automatically register women with Selective Service is simply unacceptable!  

Both Congressmen and Senators in Washington, D.C. can be reached at this number: 202/224-3121 or by sending messages through their searchable Senate or House websites. 

2.      To Restore Meritocracy, Congress Must Get It Right

Sec. 523 of HR 8070 was billed as a “principles of meritocracy” amendment, but its lack of clear language and precise definitions for words like “merit” and “sex” invite harmful unintended consequences. Sec. 523 reads, in part,

“—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that each personnel decision regarding a covered member, including military accession, promotion, and command selection, is— (1) based on the individual merit and demonstrated performance of the covered member; [and] (2) without regard to the political affiliation, race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or marital status, of the covered member . . .” (emphasis added)

Sounds positive, but as this CMR Policy Analysis explains, predictable misinterpretations reflecting current DoD practices would allow Pentagon bureaucrats to continue discriminating without interference from Congress or the Courts.

• CMR: Undefined “Merit” Provision Mars Positive Initiatives in House Defense Bill

Sec. 523 requires a word like “exclusively” or “solely” just before “(1) based on individual merit . . .” Without such a word, the DoD will consider individual merit and performance, but continue assigning higher priority to other factors, such as superficial race-conscious designators to meet DEI demographic quotas. 

This is because the DoD keeps insisting without evidence that “Diversity is a strategic imperative.” Sec. 523 requires a definition for the word “merit” that explicitly excludes consideration of irrelevant factors such as race, ethnicity, or skin color as proxies for merit.  Absence of a clear definition for “merit” creates a loophole that the Defense Department will continue to exploit in justifying race-conscious DEI mandates.

In addition, Sec. 523 would prohibit discrimination on the basis of “sex,” without defining the word “sex” in terms of biological science. This would invite the DoD to consider “gender identity” as synonymous with “sex” in much the same way that the Supreme Court’s Bostock decision did in the Title VII case involving employment discrimination. Stretching that ruling beyond its intent, the Department of Education has redefined “sex” to mean “gender identity.” The result has been enormous nationwide controversies about biological men competing on women’s athletic teams.

Sec. 523 would allow current or future Democratic administrations to claim congressional authorization for doctrinaire transgender policies that Congress never voted for, taking the current gender identity agenda as far as radical transgender activists want it to go. 

Furthermore, prohibiting all sex discrimination without a definition tied to biological realities would preclude DoD from making any accommodations based on male/female biological differences, especially in close combat units where physical sex differences matter.

Theoretically, a new President could revoke such mandates by issuing different orders. However, for reasons explained by Law Prof. Emeritus William A. Woodruff, it would be extremely difficult to revoke anti-women transgender policies without another act of Congress to define what a woman is:

• The Federalist: NDAA 'Merit Provision' Enables More Military Identity Politics

No wonder the Biden Administration is not opposed to Sec. 523. Given what is at stake, it would be better to drop this legislation and start over again next year.

There is a better alternative. The Senate should join the House in passing an NDAA measure that would affirm meritocracy and ban racial discrimination at the military service academies with at least 30% weighted consideration of standardized test scores. This would be consistent with the recent Supreme Court decision ending racial discrimination at Harvard and the University of N. Carolina. That ruling included ROTC programs but not the service academies, which were not parties in the case. (SFFA v. Harvard, 600 U.S. 183 (2023))

3.     Lowering Standards re Cannabis

A provision in the House defense bill would waive restrictions on new recruits testing positive for cannabis. In some cases waivers are justified, but a legislative provision such as this could be extended to weaken disciplinary standards on and off military bases.

C. Approve Consensus Measures to End Wokeism in the Military

Several positive NDAA measures were approved in both the House and Senate, improving chances of their enactment in law, even though the Pentagon strongly objects:

1.      No More DoD “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” (DEI) Positions

The Senate Committee approved a measure that would prohibit establishment of new DEI positions in the DoD and the filling of DEI personnel vacancies. The House approved a similar measure, and both deserve enactment in law. 

2.     No Sex-Change Surgeries on Adults or Children

A Senate provision would prohibit the performance of sex change surgeries by the DoD, and a House measure would prohibit TRICARE coverage of certain medical procedures for children that could result in sterilization. The Senate measure should be consolidated with the House amendment prohibiting gender transition services or referrals through the Exceptional Family Member Program (EFMP). 

According to Military.com, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has put these sections on his “heartburn list” of NDAA measures that the Defense Department opposes. Congress, however, has the constitutional power and responsibility to establish policies that strengthen the military instead of weakening it.

3.      Additional Measures for Consideration

Several more House measures should be approved by the Senate this year or taken up again when the political situation changes.

These include, for example: Prohibitions and limits on “diversity, equity, & inclusion” (DEI) programs and offices, including the Defense Advisory Committee on Diversity & Inclusion (DACODAI); DEI programs in DoD Education Activity (DoDEA) schools for military dependent children; Toxic critical race theory (CRT) instructions; Drag queen performances and story hours on military bases; “Climate change” Executive orders mandating fleets of electrical vehicles, and: Use of DoD funds for time off and transportation to obtain “non-covered” abortions and other controversial medical procedures across state lines.

A review of all these issues underscores the need for Americans who care about our military to participate in this process. If you would like to encourage your Representatives and Senators in Washington, DC, to take these issues seriously, you can reach them at: 202/224-3121. Voters also can send short messages through individual Senate or House websites. Let the lawmakers know (respectfully) that you expect action to end wokeism in the military now.

D. USNA Calvert Group Publishes Don’t Give Up the Ship

The Calvert Task Group, a group of U.S. Naval Academy alumni organized in 2021, has just released an important new book titled Don’t Give Up the Ship: Woke Politics Are Endangering Our Nation. 

The hardcover book, available on Amazon.com, presents a compendium of articles on current controversies, including “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) mandates that weaken meritocracy and “critical race theory” (CRT) instructions that contradict Plebe Year lessons about cohesion. The book also discusses the U.S. Constitution and the importance of returning to constitutional values. 

Don’t Give Up the Ship is not a posting place for disgruntled commentators. Authors include knowledgeable alumni and veterans, most of whom have years of combat and leadership experience in the Navy, other branches of the service, and in their professional lives. 

All are deeply concerned about social policies that are undermining the special culture and sound policies at the Naval Academy, and all have personally witnessed the Naval Academy’s transformation from a “color- and gender-blind” culture to a woke institution focused on “Diversity as a strategic imperative.”

One essay by Phillip Keuhlen, a retired nuclear submarine commander and nuclear industry senior manager, exposes many flaws in the 2020 Task Force One Navy (TF1N) Final Report, which presented “the twin assumptions that the Navy suffers from systemic racism and that diversity benefits the Navy’s military mission. Those assumptions are not supported by evidence.” (p. 145)

Another one by retired Navy Capt. Brent Ramsey, who frequently writes on Navy matters, challenges the wisdom of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s observation of the International Transgender Day of Visibility and other divisive LGBT Pride events. Ramsey also criticizes the former Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Michael Gilday for recommending to Navy personnel “woke” books published by the likes of Ibram X. Kendi. (pp. 60 and 80-81)

Cdr. Randy Arrington, a retired 20-year naval aviator and a Professor of Political Science, wrote, “The military’s strength is not its ‘diversity’ but its ability to break through adversity with strong assimilation and unwavering unity of purpose. We need to train our young troops to trust, respect, fight alongside of, and, if necessary, die for their squadron mates, shipmates, and comrades on the battlefield – not to obsess about each other’s skin pigment.”

Calvert Task Group President Tom Burbage, a former Navy Test pilot and current aircraft development industry leader, initiated the book with Editor Fred Stuvek, Jr. Among other things, Burbage expresses the hope that voices of the book’s various authors will be heard. 

“The mandated infusion of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion assumes the Service Academies are equivalent to the Ivy League universities they compete with academically. In the view of most alumni, that is not the case. The Service Academies are chartered to produce combat leaders . . . While the Service Academies for years were lighthouses developing the leaders of tomorrow, they have become weathervanes in the shifting winds of political social experiments. . . The quality of our leadership core and the ability to protect our nation from its adversaries have never been more threatened.” (p. 287)   

 The title of Don’t Give Up the Ship echoes resolve and determination to influence policy makers who can and should act to turn the ship of social change around. CMR hopes that the book is made available to current and future midshipmen and cadets in the military service academies’ libraries, bookstores, and classes assessing social change in the military.

Articles of Interest: 

• Elaine Donnelly, The Federalist: 'Draft Our Daughters' Legislation Is A Trojan Horse For Big Government

• Daily Signal: EXCLUSIVE: Poll Reveals Gender Divide on Drafting Women

• Brent Ramsey, RealClearDefense: Politics or People: What Does the Navy Value?

• The Daily Caller: EXCLUSIVE: Pentagon Schools Encouraged Students To Be Left-Wing Activists, Pushed DEI On Kids And Teachers, Docs Show

• Washington Examiner: DOD K-12 schools pushed DEI and activism on children: Report

• Will Thibeau, Part I:The Crisis in the Armed Forces (tomklingenstein.com)

• Will Thibeau, Part II:The Logic of the Woke Military (tomklingenstein.com)

• Will Thibeau, Part III: How the Department of Defense Went Woke

• Will Thibeau, Part IV: An Anti-Woke Agenda for the US Military

• Spencer Lindquist, Daily Wire: EXCLUSIVE: Biden-Harris Admin Paid Consultants Millions To Help Military Implement Race-Based Hiring, Combat Resistance to DEI

• J. A. Cauthen, James Martin Center: The Corrupting Influence of DEI on Military Education — The James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal

• Judicial Watch: Pentagon DEI Budget Surges for Military-Wide Woke Training to Root out “White Privilege”

• Jim Fein and Mary Mobley, The Heritage Foundation: DEI Is Distracting Our Military From Its Primary Task

• Victor Morton, Washington Times: Secret Service seeks attendees for LGBTQ summit at Disney World as campaign season heats up

• Military.com: DoD's Policy on Telling Parents About Teens' Health Rankles Some Congressional Republicans

• James Golden (Bo Snerdley), the Daily BS: Trump Promises to Ban Trans Surgeries on Minors without Parental Consent 

• Shawn Fleetwood, The Federalist: Trump Pledges New Task Force To Gut DEI From The Military

• Mike Glenn, Washington Times: Army Faces Fresh Heat Over Security Briefing That Labeled Pro-life Groups as 'Terrorists'

* * * * * *

The Center for Military Readiness (CMR) is an independent public policy organization, founded in 1993, which reports on and analyzes military/social issues. More information is on the CMR website, www.cmrlink.org. To make a tax-deductible contribution to CMR, click here.