GAYS IN MILITARY PLAN IS POLICY-MAKING AT WORST

You can't please all the people all the time. President Bill Clinton is finding out that it is possible to displease all the people. His policy regarding the service of homosexuals in the American military struck a chord of discord in all sides involved, and the president's catering to a targeted special-interest group failed to pacify even those supporters. This is policy-making at its worst.

The compromise arrived at is the so-called "don't ask, don't tell, don't pursue" policy. According to news accounts, the policy says sexual orientation is a private matter and not a prohibition to service unless the individual declares his or her sexuality or engages in a homosexual act. Recruits and service members would no longer be asked about their sexual orientation.

In trying to appeal for support from gay-rights groups, candidate Bill Clinton vowed to lift the ban on homosexuals serving openly in the military. President Bill Clinton discovered that campaign rhetoric is easier to dispense than effective management. Taking up the issue almost immediately after assuming office, and then facing a near revolt from his top military officers, President Clinton stalled, then stumbled, in putting together a guideline that confounds the service establishment, many members of Congress, the American public and (especially and ironically) gay-rights groups.

Advocates of homosexual rights say the president has reneged on his promise; legal challenges are sure to follow from this quarter. The military remains wary of how this policy will be implemented, and in turn how this uncertainty will affect morale in the services and the nation's state of readiness.

The result of this much-ballyhooed debate is a policy that doesn't even have the benefit of ideological honesty. The compromise speaks only to throttling the discussion, not speaking to the issue. In many cases of disagreement in our nation's capital, a shoddy process is redeemed by a determination that people can understand and can live with. In this case, there is no redemption ... just confused policy.

President Clinton is commander-in-chief of the nation, a position he was elected to. However, he is a man of no military experience. Wisdom would seem to dictate that a person in such a situation would turn to the advice of professionals, those who have spent their careers in the military and in leading service personnel. Ask the generals and the admirals, Mr. President.

Follow the trail of this issue and what you will find is a policy that had worked well for the strongest military force on the planet, a campaign promise to a tiny, vocal constituency and a national debate that ultimately frustrated everyone and satisfied no one. If there is a silver lining that might be found in this whole episode, it is in the hope that President Clinton will recognize the difference between what sells on the campaign trail and what works in making a nation safe.