A modification of language governing security clearances and sexual orientation by National Security Advisor Steven Hadley has gays wondering whether policy has changed. Some say yes; others are not so sure.
The revised guidelines are contained in a memo dated Dec. 29 as part of the Bush administration's efforts to plug leaks to the media, and were first reported on the liberal blog Raw Story on March 13.
Guidelines issued as an executive order by the Clinton administration in 1995 said that sexual orientation 'may not be used as a basis for or a disqualifying factor in determining a person's eligibility for a security clearance.' That section was replaced by language stating that a security clearance cannot be denied 'solely on the basis of the sexual orientation of the individual.'
The Human Rights Campaign called it 'a subtle, yet potentially substantial change for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans.' President Joe Solmonese charged, 'This administration continues to roll back the clock on the most basic of protections that were granted by the last administration.'
Congressman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., said, 'The Bush administration is waging a covert war on loyal federal employees who happen to be gay.'
National Security Council spokesman Frederick Jones denied that. He said, 'The minor language change did not and was not intended to alter the way sexual orientation is treated. The U.S. government policy has not changed in any way.'
'If the National Security Council did not intend to make a consequential change by altering existing language, why did it change the guidelines at all?' wondered Sharra E. Greer, director of law and policy at the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. It vowed to continue to monitor the situation.
'My hope is that this language change is mere bureaucratic tinkering or has some benign explanation,' opined gay blogger Andrew Sullivan. 'But my fear is that some within the administration made this change and did it for a reason.' He encapsulated the distrust that increasing numbers of people have of the Bush administration.
Frank Kameny is not so sure the language constitutes a change. The man who many consider to be the father of modern gay activism began fighting the security clearance issue in the 1960s. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, although not a lawyer, he was an invited participant in the American Bar Association committee that recommended changes in this area, which were incorporated into Clinton's 1995 executive order.
Drawing upon his experience over countless security clearance investigations, Kameny says, 'Once homosexuality is on the table, then every 'intimate' question asked must be countered with a procedural one to the interviewer as to whether that same question is routinely asked of all applicants. The answer is invariably 'no,' and then you are on sound grounds in refusing to answer. I had to force that on them for years before equality was achieved.'
'With the erosion of sodomy laws and finally Lawrence [ the Supreme Court decision that threw out all remaining sodomy laws ] the issue of criminality, once a major anti-gay weapon in these cases, has faded.'
Kameny says, 'It seems to me that the basic favorable situation of recent years on security clearances has not changed, but we are going to have to monitor the situation to make sure there is no backsliding.'
All of the parties agree that situations that leave a person open to potential blackmail, and that may include certain aspects of conduct associated with sexuality, may be grounds for denial of a security clearance.
