Sen. Robert Byrd’s (D-WV) office has just sent me an email saying that the senator, who is a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, will support the compromise to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell after successfully inserting language into the amendment that would “give Congress an additional 60 days to thoroughly review the implementation policy once certified”:

“I did not want to blindly assent to repealing this law without giving the Congress an opportunity to re-examine the concerns of our Armed Forces and the manner in which they are being addressed.”

“Therefore, I worked with the Senate and House Leadership, Senators Lieberman and Levin, Congressman Murphy, the Administration and the Department of Defense to include a provision in the proposed compromise amendment that would delay the repeal of the ‘Don’t Ask – Don’t Tell’ policy for 60 days after receipt of the findings of the Pentagon Review and the determination of the proposed policy and regulation changes.”

“This period of time will allow the Congress, along with the American people, to thoroughly review the proposed policy recommendations to ensure that these changes are consistent with the standards of military readiness, military effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention for our Armed Forces.” “With these changes, I will support the amendment expected to be offered by Senator Lieberman to the Department of Defense Authorization bill.”

The new language will presumably send the issue back to Congress even after the results of the Defense Department review are certified by President Obama, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Mike Mullen. The full compromise now looks something like this: 1) Congress passes repeal as an attachment to the defense authorization bill, 2) once the study is completed on December 1, officials will certify that it does not undermine military effectiveness 3) once it’s certified, Congress has 60 days to “review” it before DADT is repealed. Byrd provides the 16th vote for repeal on the Senate Armed Services Committee, but under this scenario the ban won’t be eliminated until sometime in early 2011.

Read Byrd’s full statement HERE.

As advocates of repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) scramble to secure enough votes to pass a compromise that would delay implementation of a repeal until President Obama, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mike Mullen certify the results of the Defense Department’s study, religious groups and members of foreign militaries are throwing their support behind eliminating the policy.

Yesterday, a coalition of 10 major Jewish organizations, joined a growing number of religious organizations urging Congress to repeal DADT. “We believe this policy is unjust and become an anomaly among western nations,” the letter said. “Advanced militaries throughout the world, including many of our NATO allies and Israel, allow gay, lesbian and bisexual personnel to serve openly. It is time for the United States to repeal the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ and we encourage you and colleagues to act swiftly.”

Indeed, writing in today’s Politico, members of the Dutch, Swedish and British militaries explain how their nations successfully transitioned to an open policy and how DADT undermines military coalitions:

For example, units of our own or other armed forces have refused to deploy in some joint operations with U.S. forces because gay service members would not work with the Americans — for fear of hostile reactions….We are aware of colleagues in our own militaries who don’t like it that gays and lesbians serve openly. However, despite considerable fears before we enacted these policies, such attitudes are rare. In no cases, in fact, have negative private opinions about gay people undermined our ability to work with one another. Our service members are professionals who care, first and foremost, about the ability to do the job. Moral opposition to homosexuality, while real, is just not allowed to undercut our militaries’ missions. Nor do we think it will have any impact on yours after you repeal “Don’t ask, don’t tell.” [...]

In fact, our polls, rhetoric and even threats of mass resignations were quite similar to the continuing resistance in America. Yet none of the doomsday scenarios came true….We are also puzzled about repeated claims we heard in Washington about the need for more research on “Don’t ask, don’t tell.” There is more than enough on-the-ground experience, as well as serious social science research, showing what will happen when the U.S. military allow gays and lesbians to utter the words, “I am gay” without getting fired.

We are confident that, despite the unique nature of each culture and military, you will have a similar experience to ours — which is that ending discrimination against gay troops was a giant nothing.

Larry Korb has noted that the experiences of these nations suggest that repeal can and should occur swiftly. Three of the United States’ closest allies—Israel, Canada, and the United Kingdom—”have successfully removed all restrictions on gays and lesbians in their armed forces since the early 1990s.” All three countries made quick, successful transitions to policies of open service without undermining military readiness or effectiveness. In fact, 30 months “after the policy change, the United Kingdom conducted a tri-service review of its transition to open service. The response was unquestionably positive. The Royal Air Force reported that “the overwhelming view of RAF [Commanding Officers] is that the change in policy was overdue…All COs agreed that there had been no tangible impact on operational effectiveness, team cohesion, or Service life generally.”

Responding to criticism that the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repeal compromise doesn’t end the policy fast enough or provide enough safeguards to ensure eventual repeal, Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-PA) — the lead sponsor of repeal in the House — said, in an exclusive interview with the Wonk Room, that he expected “Secretary of Defense Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mullen” to certify the Defense Authority “shortly after” it is completed.

Murphy admitted that the compromise did not replace DADT with a new nondiscrimination policy — as his original repeal legislation would have done — but expressed confidence that Gates would institute one anyway. “The Secretary of Defense and the Chairman could put clearly a policy in place that would not discriminate against men and women because of their sexual orientation. And I have full confidence that they will,” he said:

ON SWIFT REPEAL:

I take both Secretary of Defense Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mullen at their word and that they both have articulated the need to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and that I believe our agreement is a smart agreement and that it truly dismantles Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. But it pays respect and honors the Pentagon Study Group that they’re formulating.

Q: Can you give any kind of estimate of how long you think it would take after the study is out for it to be certified?

I would think it would be shortly after.

ON INSTITUTING A NONDISCRIMINATION POLICY:

I’m fully confident in the public testimony of both Secretary of Defense Gates of Chairman Mike Mullen and our current Commander in Chief, Barack Obama, that they have been very clear that they want to have a nondiscriminatory policy in place. Having a nondiscriminatory policy in place was impossible because U.S. law for 17 years was that we’ll continue discrimination that we currently do as under Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. The Secretary of Defense and the Chairman could put clearly a policy in place that would not discriminate against men and women because of their sexual orientation. And I have full confidence that they will.”

Listen to highlights:

Murphy also responded to Chief of Naval Operations’ G. Roughead’s recent claim that adopting legislative changes ahead of the study “may cause confusion on the status of the law in the Fleet and disrupt the review process itself by leading Sailors to question whether their input matters.” “I think that to say that the American troop isn’t as professional as a 26 other countries that allow their troops to serve openly, is, frankly, not appropriate.”

Asked if he thought the administration did all it could to bring about repeal, Murphy joked, ” I think Patrick Murphy could have done more in retrospect. Everyone can work harder and work smarter.”

Several Service chiefs who have opposed repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell in the past have written letters to Congress expressing their opposition to the new compromise. In these testimonials, obtained by the Wonk Room, the officials stressed their strong support for completing the Defense Department review and suggested that any change in policy would confuse soldiers:

– G. ROUGHEAD, CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS: “My concern is that legislative changes at this point, regardless of the precise language used, may cause confusion on the status of the law in the Fleet and disrupt the review process itself by leading Sailors to question whether their input matters.”

– JAMES T. CONWAY, COMMANDANT OF MARINE CORPS: “I encourage Congress to let the process the Secretary of Defense created to run its course. Collectively, we must use logical and pragmatic decisions about the long-term policies of our Armed Forces.”

– NORTON SCHWARTZ, CHIEF OF STAFF (USAF): “I believe it is important, a matter of keeping faith with those currently serving in the Armed Forces, and the Secretary of Defense commissioned review be completed before there is any legislation to repeal the DA/DT law…To do otherwise, in my view, would be presumptive and would reflect an intent to act before all relevant factors are assessed digested and understood.”

– GEORGE CASEY, CHIEF OF STAFF (ARMY): “I also believe that repealing the law before the completion of the review will be seen by the men and women of the Army as a reversal of our commitment to hear their views before moving forward.”

Of course, the delayed-implementation compromise addresses all of these concerns by ensuring that nothing actually happens until the Defense Department’s study is completed. The amendment specifically states that “Section 654 of title 10, United States Code, shall remain in effect [the DADT seciont] until such time that all of the requirements and certifications required by subsection (b) are met” — until the review is complete (i.e. the voices of the military are considered) and the President and military officials certify that repeal is “consistent with the military’s standards of readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion and recruitment and retention.” In 1993, Congress passed DADT before the military had issued final rules on how to implement the policy, and there is no reason it shouldn’t do the same now — particularly when it’s bending over backwards to accommodate the Defense Department.

The more offensive notion — besides Roughead’s belief that our soldiers are so easily confused — is the assumption that openly gay members will undermine the military or that, once the views of American soldiers are considered, policymakers will discover that they’re homophobic.

Moments ago, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) — who had previously told reporters that he would not support repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) before the military completed its year-long review of the policy — announced that he would vote for a compromise to delay implementation until after officials certified the findings of the review. Nelson’s support brings the total number of votes in the Senate Armed Services Committee to 15, enough to attach the delayed-implementation amendment (offered by Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT)) to the defense authorization measure on Thursday. When the amendment passes in committee, it would require 60 votes to strip repeal from the bill during the floor debate. The Defense Authorization bill is expected to pass both Houses and be signed by the President by late summer or early fall.

From Nelson’s statement:

I will support the Lieberman compromise because it removes politics from the process. It bases implementation of the repeal on the Pentagon’s review and a determination by our military leaders that repeal is consistent with military readiness and effectiveness, and that the Pentagon has prepared the necessary regulations to make the changes.

“I spoke to Secretary Gates and he advised that while he preferred waiting until the study is completed, he can live with this compromise.

“The Lieberman compromise shows that Congress values the Pentagon’s review that will include the advice and viewpoints from our men in women in uniform, from outside experts and from the American people about how to implement the repeal. It rests ultimate authority to make this change with our military leaders. I believe this is the right thing to do.”

Until today, it was unclear if the new compromise would win over enough votes, but Nelson’s statement suggests that the compromise and Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ support, was critical to Nelson’s decision. As he told Metro Weekly last week, “I want to follow with the advice and the suggestions of Secretary of Defense Gates to have the study that is underway right now before we make that final decision — because it’s not a question of ‘whether,’ it’s a question of ‘how,” Nelson said. At that time, Nelson was also unsure if he could support the delayed-implementation approach. ““I don’t know,” Nelson said. “I haven’t seen that legislation. I know there’s probably some support for that, but I think it’s been made pretty clear by Secretary Gates that we shouldn’t take any action until the study is completed, and that’s my position. That’s where I’m going to stay.’”

As a Republican, governor and senatorial candidate Charlie Crist supported the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) policy, and in February his campaign spokesperson said the governor believed DADT should be kept in place. “We are a nation at war. The governor believes the current policy has worked, and there is no need to make changes,” Crist campaign spokeswoman Amanda Henneberg told the Buzz. But now that Crist is an independent, his staff is not so sure:

When contacted Tuesday, Crist staffers said they did not know where he stood on the issue.  The staffers did not say that the governor had changed his position.

Crist has has maintained a traditionally conservative record on so-called gay issues. He has supported efforts to ban gay marriage in Florida, but has said that civil unions between gays are “fine.” In 2007, however, he asked the Republican party to stop spending money promoting “a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage in Florida.”

Crist has also endorsed Florida’s ban on adoption by gay parents, telling reporters, “My position is the traditional family is the best to adopt.” Of course, now that he’s an independent, those positions may too become uncertain.