Not the Time to Retreat from Equality, Says NOW Leader and Military Veteran

NOW Executive Vice President, Lt. Col. Karen L. Johnson, Applauds Victory

May 26, 2005

On May 25, women's rights advocates and military leaders beat back an effort by some conservative Republican members to deny servicewomen assignments in combat support companies. House Armed Services Committee Chair Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., dropped language in his committee-adopted amendment to incorporate into federal law a 1994 military rule against women serving in direct ground combat units below the brigade level.

"Yesterday we succeeded in defeating a discriminatory, dangerous and regressive ban," said NOW Executive Vice President Karen Johnson, a retired Air Force Lt. Colonel. "Through NOW's web site alone, activists sent more than 2,000 messages to Congress in less than 24 hours. Women in the military will not be forced to take a giant step backward thanks to the many voices that called out for fairness and equality."

Since 1994, the Army has expanded the number and range of positions that women are allowed to fill. More than 20,000 positions currently held by women in the Army would have to be closed to them had an earlier version of the amendment been adopted; jobs for women in the Navy and Air Force would have been affected as well. The revised amendment was contained in the $491 billion 2006 Defense Authorization bill which passed the House by 390-39.

But with strong pressure from women's rights organizations, like NOW, the Women's Research and Education Institute-Women in the Military Office and the National Council of Women's Organizations (and their supporters), House members adopted a revamped provision that would only require a study of women's role in the military and a 60 day notification to Congress from the Pentagon when they open or close positions to women.

Both the Pentagon and the Army opposed legislative language that would have frozen the positions that women are currently allowed to hold related to military ground operations in armed conflicts and would have expanded Congressional control over any future changes. The military argued that this would reduce military readiness and their ability to recruit and retain personnel. Army Secretary Francis J. Harvey described the committee amendment as "unnecessary" and could cause "confusion on the part of commanders and soldiers."

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told Republican Rules Committee members that the House Armed Service Chair Hunter was wrong and that the proposal "should be taken out of the bill." Rep. Heather Wilson, R-N.M., the only female veteran in the House, took the lead in opposing the legislation's restrictions on women's combat-related assignments.

According to a Washington Post article, Rep. Wilson told her House colleagues, "In the history of this country there has never been a law limiting the assignment of women in the Army, and we will not do so now."

Military leaders were quick to praise the service of women in the military, describing their performance as "magnificent." The Army is currently undergoing a re-organization of its personnel structure; while backing away from the restriction on women, GOP leaders asked the Army to assure minimal exposure for women to hostile fire. At the base of the debate, though, was the realization that military policy about the assignment of women in or near combat areas is in need of thorough review as we are seeing in Iraq there are no longer clear-cut lines of battle.

"NOW and other women's rights groups have worked diligently for years to advance equal treatment for women in the military and we have made important gains," Johnson noted. "This is not the time to retreat."

###

Sign up to receive press releases by email.