Speaking to reporters this afternoon, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) practically guaranteed that he would bring Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell to a vote before Congress adjourns, suggesting that the Senate would take up the measure once it passes in the House. Reid warned Republicans that he was prepared to stay in session until the new Congress is sworn in on January 4th “to complete the work we have to do here”:

REID: We have other things to do that are extremely important. We have to make sure we complete work on the DREAM Act….If the House completes work on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, we’ll have to work on that….We are going to complete the work we have to do here. I want to get out of here just as soon as we can, but we’re not going to walk away from any of the work we have to do. Christmas is a week from Saturday, I understand that, but I hope the Republicans understand that also. Because we are going to complete our work no matter how long it takes in this Congress. We have to do the work of the American people…You know, there is still Congress after Christmas. So if the Republicans think that because they can stall and stall and stall that we take a break we’re through, we’re not through. Congress ends on January 4th. So we’re going to continue working on this stuff until we get it done.

Watch it:

The majority leader did not say precisely when he’ll bring the DADT measure to the floor — which, according to Lieberman has more than 60 votes — but said that it would be after the Senate ratifies the New START treaty, which could move as early as this evening.

His comments about the House voting first are also significant. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has promised to hold a vote on the House version of the stand-alone DADT tomorrow, which under one optimistic scenario, could send the bill to the Senate sometime this evening. Senate aides have indicated that the plan is to then send the bill to the upper chamber as a message that holds privileged status. Reid will be able to call up the measure without voting on a motion to proceed, saving some 30 hours of debate in the Senate, and will have to hold firm against Republican efforts to filibuster or attach amendments to the legislation. Under this scenario, the Senate bill would have to be identical to the House version or else it would have to return to the House for another vote.

The tactic is not without its problems. While Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Scott Brown (R-MA) are expected to vote for the bill, as Sam Stein points out, “Reid may have to fill the tree with amendments — thereby setting in stone how the debate process plays out. But if he does this without accommodating Republican requests, it could give senators the cover they need to oppose the measure on procedural grounds.”

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs refused to directly condemn the Marine Commandant’s suggestion that repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell would have the effect of killing Marines in the line of duty, saying simply that the Commandant’s views are “well known.” Earlier today, Gen. James Amos — who has publicly opposed lifting the ban — said in the context of repealing the policy, “I don’t want to lose any Marines to distraction. I don’t want to have any Marines that I’m visiting at Bethesda (hospital) with no legs.”

Pressed by the Advocate’s Kerry Eleveld on whether Obama was worried about having his own appointee “constantly raising opposition to his own stated belief the the policy needed to be changed,” Gibbs simply reiterated the administration’s talking point on the issue:

GIBBS: I think the President’s views and the Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff’s views and the Secretary of Defense’s views are fairly well known. I think the President as Commander in Chief has a strong viewpoint. I think backed up by the survey conducted by the Pentagon as to the attitude of the men and women in our military that this can be done in a way that strengthens our national security, preserves the best fighting force in the world, and most importantly, does away with a policy that he doesn’t think is just.

ELEVELD: I mean, the Commandant is continually challenging the assumptions of the Commander in Chief…

GIBBS: No, I mean, look, I think their views are very well known, just as the Commander in Chief’s views are very well known. I think if you look at the Commander in Chief, the head of the Pentagon, and the head of the Joint Chiefs, you’ll find unanimity in the belief that it’s time to do away with this policy and that’s exactly what the President is working to do.

Watch it:

Conversely, repeal advocates have strongly condemned Amos’ statement. “General Amos needs to fall in line and salute or resign now,” Aubrey Sarvis, Army veteran and executive director for Servicemembers Legal Defense Network said in a statement. “He implied that repeal will lead to Marines losing their legs in combat. Those fear tactics are not in the interest of any service member.” Alexander Nicholson of Servicemebers United also noted that Amos’ comment “reflects very poorly on DOD and on the administration.”

Speaking to reporters this afternoon, Marine Commandant Gen. James Amos — who has opposed repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell — suggested that if Congress lifts the ban against open service and allows gays to serve without hiding their sexual orientation, the Marines could be so distracted that they would die in the line of duty:

The chief of the US Marine Corps said Tuesday that ending a ban on openly gay troops in the military could jeopardize the lives of Marines in combat by undermining closely knit units.

General James Amos, commandant of the Marine Corps and an opponent of lifting the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” prohibition, cited a Pentagon study saying Marines fighting in Afghanistan were worried that permitting gays to serve openly could disrupt “unit cohesion.”

“When your life hangs on a line, on the intuitive behavior of the young man… who sits to your right and your left, you don’t want anything distracting you,” Amos told reporters at the Pentagon.

“I don’t want to lose any Marines to distraction. I don’t want to have any Marines that I’m visiting at Bethesda (hospital) with no legs,” he said.

He added that “mistakes and inattention or distractions cost Marines’ lives. That’s the currency of this fight.”

His comments were the toughest yet on the issue, after he testified at a congressional hearing that he opposed lifting the ban at a time of war.

Amos said Marines fighting in Afghanistan sent a “very strong message” in the Pentagon’s recent study, expressing opposition to the repealing the ban in an survey.

“I have to listen to that,” he said.

The study did reveal that Marines are most opposed to repealing the measure, but nowhere did it suggest that the distraction of gay servicemembers would have the effect of killing their straight counterparts. What it found was that 47.2% of Marines said a repeal of DADT would have a negative impact and were more likely to say their morale would be negatively affected by repeal than other Service members. Ninety-two percent of servicemembers also said they were fine with working with their gay colleagues, including 84% in Marine combat arms units.

As the study’s co-chairs explained during testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee earlier this month, the negative findings were not insurmountable, and that with the proper leadership and communication, the policy could be repealed without undermining unit cohesion. In fact, both Gates and Mullen argued that if Congress doesn’t move forward with repeal, the courts will likely rule the policy unconstitutional and force the military to end the ban without providing any time for a smooth implementation process.

The study’s co-chairs also explained that the Marines’ more negative reaction was partly the result of their relative inexperience with gay servicemembers. Here is how Army Gen. Carter F. Ham put it to me shortly after the report was released:

One of the factors that causes a difference in the Army and the Marine Corps combat arms responses when compared to the overall responses is that we find in those two communities, Army and Marine Corps combat arms, — and this is probably unsurprising — that those communities have lower rates of actual experience of having served alongside a gay or lesbian servicemember. They’re all male organizations. They are the youngest communities, if you will, within the military. So you know, it’s not really surprising that they have less actual experience serving with gay and lesbian servicemembers. We did find in the survey that there is a difference between servicemembers who have and those who have not served with gay and lesbian servicemembers. And I think this may be one of the significant contributors to the differences between combat arms responses and the force overall.

Amos should not be worried about the “distraction” of gay servicemembers. The real distraction is a policy which denies gay Marines the right to confide in their straight comrades as they’re dealing with the difficulties of deployment.

[updat

Editor’s note: A version of this post was prematurely published yesterday afternoon. We apologize for the confusion.

At a pen-pad briefing this morning, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) announced that Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-PA) will introduce a stand-alone DADT repeal bill that he will co-sponsor and bring to the House floor in short order. The legislation will be identical to the measure offered by Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Susan Collins (R-ME) after the Senate failed to proceed to the National Defense Authorization Act last week and will include the same repeal language contained in the NDAA, which passed the House in May.

While the exact process is still unclear, Politico’s Josh Gerstein reported yesterday that Democrats may be exploring different avenues for expediting the repeal process by moving the measure from one chamber to another. Other Democrats are suggesting that the House and Senate will still pass separate repeal bills. Last week, Washington Post’s Greg Sargent speculated on the following tactic:

Here’s yet another way DADT repeal could still happen: A Senate aide says one scenario being mulled would be to ask the House to pass repeal again and send the Senate a so-called “message” asking for a vote. That would circumvent various procedural hurdles. No idea if it will happen, but it’s a possibility.

However the Democrats decide to proceed, bringing up the measure in the House presents a real possibility for having a clear up or down vote on lifting the ban in the lame duck session. Last week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) sounded very optimistic about the bills’ chances in the lower chamber, saying “[a]n army of allies stands ready in the House to pass a standalone repeal of the discriminatory policy once the Senate acts.” In the Senate, Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Scott Brown (R-MA) also hinted they could support a stand-alone measure.

[/update