Top GOPers McCain and McKeon Bucking DADT’s Repeal

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis, the election, and more, subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.


All that talk of a brewing GOP civil war? Premature, as far as ending Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is concerned—just ask Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Representative Buck McKeon (R-Calif.). McCain is the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services committee; McKeon is his counterpart in the House, and the expected pick to lead the committee in the 112th congress. As the top Republican lawmakers on defense issues, they’re united their opposition against ending DADT, the policy that prevents homosexuals from serving openly in the military.

After asking hundreds of thousands of servicemen and women for their views on the DADT, the Pentagon released a study on Tuesday concluding that ending the policy wouldn’t have negative consequences. But McCain and McKeon don’t buy it. At a Senate hearing on Thursday, McCain claimed the survey asked the wrong questions and didn’t include enough respondents. Over in the House, it’s McKeon said he’s “been [in Washington] long enough to know that when you rush things through or jam something through without . . . giving people a chance to really flesh things out and really look at issues in depth, you make some big mistakes.” Unlike McCain, McKeon never served in military. But as the future House Armed Services Committee chairman, he’ll soon be in a position with considerable influence over issues like DADT.

McCain hopes that “everyone will recognize that this debate is focused on our military and its effectiveness, not on broader social issues being debated in our society at large.” McCain and McKeon’s outdated responses show how out of step they are with the rest of the country. There’s more than readiness and bureaucratic proceduralism at stake here. A military that is tasked with enforcing freedom and equality around the world but doesn’t require the same discipline of itself is a walking, talking, gun-toting hypocrisy. There’s no gray area here.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest