releases: https://www.mccaskill.senate.gov/media-center/latest-headlines/editorial-women-in-the-military-break-the-penultimate-barrier
Data license: MIT · Data source: dwillis/congress-press
This data as json
| url | title | date | year | month | party | chamber | state | member_name | bioguide_id | domain | scraper | source | date_source | text | has_text | collected_at | updated_at |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| https://www.mccaskill.senate.gov/media-center/latest-headlines/editorial-women-in-the-military-break-the-penultimate-barrier | Editorial: Women in the military break the penultimate barrier | 2015-12-13 | 2015 | 2015-12 | Democrat | House | MO | Claire McCaskill | M001170 | www.mccaskill.senate.gov | legacy | Editorial: Women in the military break the penultimate barrier Sunday, December 13, 2015 By: Editorial Board The U.S. militaryis now an equal opportunity employer. Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced thatall military jobswill be open to women, even dangerous combat roles from which they were previously blocked. Theyll be allowed to drive tanks, fire mortars and lead infantry soldiers into combat, Mr. Carter said at a Pentagon news conference announcing the decision Dec. 2. Theyll be able to serve as Army Rangers and Green Berets, Navy SEALs, Marine Corps infantry, Air Force parajumpers and everything else that was previously open only to men. This change which comes nearly 70 years after the U.S. military racially integrated is long overdue. For too long, women have been kept from many combat roles and other duties simply because they were women, not because they couldnt do the job. The limitations never kept women out of harms way, of course. More than 160 women have died and more than 1,000 have been injured serving in the U.S. military in Iraq and Afghanistan. But the policy did hold women back when it came to climbing the ranks. Combat experience is an important factor in career advancement in the military. The policyheld the military back, as well, as Mr. Carter made clear. To succeed in our mission of national defense, we cannot afford to cut ourselves off from half the countrys talents and skills, he said. We have to take full advantage of every individual who can meet our standards. The emphasis on meeting standards by Mr. Carter was intentional. President Barack Obama also stressed military standards. As commander-in-chief, I know that this change, like others before it, will make our military even stronger, he said. Our armed forces will draw on an even wider pool of talent. Women who can meet the high standards required will have new opportunities to serve. Make no mistake: Women can meet those standards. The three women who graduated from the Armys grueling Ranger School at Fort Benning, Ga., are proof of that. U.S. Rep. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., an Army helicopter pilot injured in Iraq in 2004, was pleased with Mr. Carters announcement. I didnt lose my legs in a bar fight, she said. Of course women can serve in combat. The decision followed a lengthy assessment by the military ordered by then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta in 2013 when he overturned a 1994 Pentagon rule barring women from combat units. After that assessment, only the Marine Corps sought exemptions to keep women from serving in some roles. Mr. Carter denied that request. Chairman of the JointChiefs Gen. Joseph Dunford, a Marine who argued for keeping women out of some combat roles, was noticeably absent during Mr. Carters announcement. There have always been those who object when barriers fall, yet those barriers do, and must, continue to fall. The military will adapt. And, as Mr. Obama said, it will be stronger for it. But this decision opens up another issue that Americans need to consider: selective service. Though no American has been drafted into military service since the end of the Vietnam War, young men in the United States continue to be required by law to register for selective service when they turn 18 while young women are not. When that requirement was challenged as discriminatory decades ago, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a male-only draft, based substantially on the fact that women were excluded from combat roles by statute and military policy. APentagon analysispublished recently without comment noted that Mr. Carters decision further alters the factual backdrop of that ruling. Sen. Claire McCaskill,D-Mo., agrees. Theres all kinds of ways women can serve, and theres all kinds of ways men can serve, she said. And if, in fact, we were at a point where we were having a draft again, I would think both would and should serve. The Selective Service Act is being challenged again. On Dec. 8, the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals heard a case brought by the National Coalition for Men. The policy may change before any lawsuit is settled, though. Shortly after Mr. Carters announcement, aWhite House spokesmansaid a policy shift was under discussion, though Mr. Obama has not made his own views known. Its long past time for the United States to rethink forcing its citizens to register for a potential draft. Considerable evidence suggests that the nation is better served by an all-volunteer military though had there been an active draft, it might have focused more national attention on the long-running wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. If selective service registration is going to remain a requirement, then it should not be a discriminatory one. The existing rationale for excluding women from this requirement no longer holds up. It would require an act of Congress to add women to the draft. Congress should act. This editorial was commissioned from freelance editorialists and edited by the Post-Dispatch editorial board Print Email Tweet | 1 | 2026-03-30T12:14:52Z | 2026-03-30T12:14:52Z |