On a conference call with supporters of Ralph Reed’s Faith and Freedom coalition on Tuesday evening, presidential candidate Michele Bachmann said she would reinstate Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, while agreeing with a caller who said allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military would “destroy the armed forces.”

“I am a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ,” Bachmann said in her introductory remarks. “I gave my life to the Lord when I was 16 years of age. We are committed to the pro-life cause, we believe that life deserves protection from conception to natural death.”

Bachmann also talking about her work on the anti-gay marriage amendment that will be on the ballot in Minnesota in 2012.

“We also believe that God has a design for marriage between one man and one woman. I was the chief author of the marriage amendment in Minnesota and we persisted, and after seven years, in a very hostile liberal state, we finally passed that marriage amendment and it will be on the ballot and I believe it will pass in 2012.”

She said conservatives don’t win “pro-family victories’ unless they fight hard and have trust in the Lord: “It’s incredibly important that we trust him in what he can do because god is so big and so great and so powerful.”

Bachmann took questions from callers, including a man named Jack who said “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is going to destroy the armed forces” before his call was dropped.

“I think of all of the candidates that are running in this race, I have been very vocal about this,” Bachmann said. “I would reinstate the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy. It worked before and what it says is the issue of sexuality is one that doesn’t come up and people aren’t allowed to be open about it because the United States military is unique, its not a social experiment.”

She said repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is gong to hurt the military’s preparedness: “I take very seriously the job of Commander in Chief. I see that as my very first job and I would listen to the generals [on DADT].”

Bachman told the activists not to settle for a moderate candidate when choosing their candidate for 2012, and that she is the most socially conservative.

“I believe that this is a powerful election, and I firmly believe that this is the election of all elections and that’s why my message has been don’t settle,” she said. “Every four years the pro-life conservative Christians, we are told about this time time the race and just get patted on the head and told that we have got to elect the moderate in the race.”

Bachmann’s campaign has recently focused on the theme that conservatives don’t have to compromise on their ideal candidate.

“Don’t settle. Don’t settle for anyone less than a candidate that will stand up for our profile, pro-family, pro-marriage issues,” she told people on the call. “What makes me stand out is that I have stood up on every battle tat we care about and I have taken the heat and have shown in the heat of the battle I push on.”

She added, “I have a titanium spine. I will put my spine up against any man who is running in this race.”

DENVER– Veterans, state lawmakers and Democratic Party officials gathered on the capitol steps here Monday to celebrate the end of the policy known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” which for the last 18 years barred gay Americans from serving openly in the military. The Pentagon on Tuesday is officially lifting Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell across all branches of the armed services in accordance with legislation passed last December. At a time when nearly any issue can generate incendiary political rhetoric and gridlock Congress, the end of the controversial military policy is being lauded as a rare bipartisan victory for equality and common sense and a sign of progress in service of the nation.

“Today is the eve of a major day… It’s almost like Christams Eve or Passover for many of us in this community,” said state Senator Lucia Guzman. “Tomorrow brings a new era. Nowhere in America should anyone be asked to lie about who they are or about what they stand for.”

Guzman said that active gay service members would now openly be representing core U.S. values they were fighting for overseas.

“As the sun goes down… the gentle cool breeze here in Colorado will connect with a breeze all over the world and say to our men and women in uniform ‘You are now free not only to fight and die for our country but also to be our country.”

“Many people fought to make this day possible,” said Colorado Democtaic Party Chairman Rick Palacio who, as a staffer for Maryland Representative Steny Hoyer, helped draft and push the legislation that will end the policy. “Colorado’s senior Senator Mark Udall, [independent] Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and [Republican] Senator Susan Collins of Maine were pivotal in ensuring this legisaltion passed. They are proof that bipartisanship still exists.”

Palacio referenced the fact that 14,000 service men and women had been discharged under the policy.

Government accountants estimated last year that the process of identifying gay service members and discharging them under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” cost the country more than $200 million since its implementation.

In arguing for repeal, Senator Udall said repeatedly that seeking to expel men and women the country had paid to train was extremely detrimental at a time when the nation was fighting two wars.

“These are jet pilots, translators of Arabic, Farsi, Pashtun– languages so important in the War on Terror. All the skill sets needed in the military are met by gay Americans.”

Most of the countries of the European Union, as well as Israel, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, Taiwan and Uruguay all embrace open gay military service and have in most cases for years.

Vietnam veteran Dennis Daughtery spoke to the small crowd outside the capitol today about the kind of closure the repeal would bring for him.

“I have two friends whose names are chiseled into a wall in Washington DC. I just want to go back and say to them Welcome home.”

State Senator Pat Steadman, who sponsored a same-sex civil unions bill in Colorado that gained bipartisan support before being killed in a House committee last year, said he saw the repeal as the end of a chapter in the larger story of gay equality.

“This is one step in a much larger movement,” he said. “It is a movement that has seen continual progress, from what is happening in different states around the country to, finally, the legislative changes coming out of our nation’s capital. This particular policy was a policy of exclusion and discrmination that way outlasted any usefulness and it was really time for it to go.

“We are now at a point where most of these policies of exclusion are history and we can start talking more about what we can do legislatively to focus on inclusion and equality. I hope that momentum continues to sweep our nation’s capital and where we are right now,” he said, referring to the state capitol building behind him.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

While it might seem logical, given the nation’s latest job numbers, that when Congress returns after an August recess its members will be focused on the economy, unemployment and the national deficit, at least one federal lawmaker from California is hoping to switch the conversation to gays and lesbians in the military.

Duncan Hunter

U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), a long-time opponent of open service in the military for gays and lesbians, is drafting legislation, according to Army Times, that wouldn’t seek to reinstate the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy set to end this month, but would allow military personnel to voice their opposition to serving with such individuals.

Speaking with National Public Radio in February 2010, Hunter gave his reasons for opposing repeal of DADT:

… I think that its bad for the cohesiveness and the unity of the military units, especially those that are in close combat, that are in close quarters in country right now. Its not the time to do it … [T]he folks who have been in the military that have been in these very close situations with each other, there has to be a special bond there. And I think that bond is broken if you open up the military to transgenders, to hermaphrodites, to gays and lesbians. …

It’s not just gays and lesbians. Its a whole gay, lesbian, transgender, bisexual community. If you’re going to let anybody no matter what preference – what sexual preference they have that means the military is going to probably let everybody in. Its going to be like civilian life and the I think that that would be detrimental for the military. …

The Hunter proposal is expected to specifically address sensitivity training that is being conducted by the military branches in preparation for the Sept. 20 repeal date of DADT.

“We’ve heard the training is really pushing the line for people who believe homosexuality is wrong on religious and personal grounds,” an aide, who asked not to be identified, told Army Times. “It is a legitimate concern, under the circumstances, with the services working on disciplinary policies for people who don’t agree with this decision.

“The military always falls in line, but that doesn’t mean that the men and women who serve in its ranks should suddenly be forced to personally accept something that is contrary to their own principles,” the aide said.

The proposal has not yet been submitted for consideration, but it is believed that if such a measure is going to be considered, it would need to be one of the first proposals viewed by Congress when it reconvenes on Sept. 7.

Hunter, who was first elected to Congress in 2008 as the successor to his 14-term father of the same name, served tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan as a member of the Marine Corps. He is the first Marine combat veteran of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan elected to Congress.

Since DADT was first introduced in 1993, the military has discharged more than 13,500 soldiers for being gay.

More than two centuries after America’s first military skirmish, gay and lesbian Americans can now serve openly in the military. President Obama today announced that the military was finally ready to implement a policy of openly welcoming people of all sexual oreintations.

From The Washington Post:

The Obama administration announced Friday that the military had made all necessary preparations to allow gays to serve openly in the armed forces, setting the stage for the repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in 60 days.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, presented President Obama with a formal certification Friday afternoon at the White House that the military’s ability to fight and recruit would not be harmed by the overt presence of gays in the ranks.

‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ repeal: Closing a chapter in history: President Obama signed the landmark repeal in December, ending a 17-year ban on gays serving openly in the military.

The certification marked the final hurdle in a nearly two-decade-long campaign by gay-rights groups and civil-rights advocates to integrate the armed forces. Under a law passed by Congress and signed by Obama in December, the 18-year-old “don’t-ask, don’t-tell” policy will now automatically vanish in 60 days.

Congressman Jared Polis released the following statement in reaction to President Obama’s certification of the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.

“I applaud President Obama for certifying the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Our military will be stronger and our nation more secure because brave men and women who are gay will be able to serve without living in secret and talented service members won’t find themselves discharged from the military just because of their sexual orientation.

“The repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is a landmark civil rights victory. With this victory, as with every civil rights advance, America becomes more true to its values and to the ideal that, not only are we all created equal, we are all equal in the eyes of the law. I express my gratitude to President Obama for his leadership and to my colleagues in Congress who voted to end Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell last December.”

Senator Michael Bennet had this to say:

“It’s long past time for ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ to be relegated to the dustbin of history,” said Bennet. “‘This backwards looking policy is not only wrong; it undermines our national security and flies in the face of our national values.

“Now that the President, Secretary Panetta and our military chiefs have certified the military is ready for this transition, we are well on our way towards affirming our nation’s basic rights and affording every American, regardless of their sexual orientation, the opportunity to serve their country.”

Bennet was an original co-sponsor of the bill to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” He is also a cosponsor of the Respect for Marriage Act, a bill that would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

Senator Mark Udall, a member of the Senate Armed Services and Intelligence committees, issued the following statement:

“For almost two decades, we’ve had a policy that dishonored our troops and compromised our national security because it encouraged qualified service members to lie about their identity. Our men and women in uniform have been ahead of us for some time on this issue. They know that what counts in battle isn’t your sexual orientation but your courage, strength, intelligence, training and loyalty.

“I opposed ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ from the beginning because it makes no sense, especially while we’re fighting two wars and engaged in conflicts around the world, to tell dedicated, qualified service members that they can’t serve. And I was proud to help lead the fight to end it. With today’s certification, the clock officially begins to tick on the end of the policy. I have faith that our military leaders will implement the repeal with respect, strengthening our military and ensuring the safety of our troops.”

President Obama’s reelection campaign sent out a fundraising letter to mark the occasion. From that letter:

This is huge and welcome news for every one of us who opposes discrimination of any kind. But now, the fight for equal rights moves on.

Here’s the next front: This week the President endorsed a bill to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, a discriminatory law that forces the federal government to ignore the rights of those in same-sex marriages, even those performed in states where gay marriage is legal. The New York Times has said it “ranks with the most overtly discriminatory laws in the nation’s history.”

With the “Obamacare-repeal” legislation passed yesterday in the U.S. House, California GOP Rep. Duncan Hunter has introduced the next Republican Congress repeal effort. Hunter’s “Restore Military Readiness Act” is reopening debate on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the 17-year-old policy lifted by lawmakers in December that banned gay soldiers from serving openly in the U.S. Armed Forces. Hunter’s bill, which Colorado’s Doug Lamborn signed onto as a co-sponsor, is already being criticized not as a true policy initiative but as a way to revisit the issue of gay rights and military readiness that generated sparks during the last days of the previous Democratic-controlled session of Congress.

Hunter’s bill would require the heads of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines to independently sign off on whether or not to allow gays to serve openly. The Pentagon has already suggested that such a measure has no place in the world of the military, where strict adherence to chain of command is everything. The law repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell in December already requires the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and President Obama as Commander in Chief to sign off on the process through which the ban on openly gay soldiers will be ended.

Hunter’s bill is sure to come under fire from Democratic lawmakers and progressive voters who see the debate over Don’t Ask Don’t Tell as well-worn ground and as a legislative battle already won. More significant perhaps, the bill may also come under fire from voters and analysts on the right whose top priorities in the midterm elections were to bolster the economic recovery and rein in government spending.

The Government Accountability Office reported recently that the military spent more than $193 million between 2004 and 2009 to replace roughly 3,660 troops discharged under Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. A University of California committee looking into the costs of the policy maintained that the GAO estimates were conservative. The UC Palm Center released a report in 2006 that estimated military spending on recruiting, discharging and replacing gay soldiers in the first decade of the policy was roughly $363.8 million. (ThinkProgress has posted a short blog on the topic that includes two of the charts from the recent GAO report.)

Hunter, a Marine veteran of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, said in a release that his bill “isn’t necessarily” about lifting the repeal of DADT.

“The idea… is rather to ensure that military readiness and combat effectiveness are not adversely impacted. Given that the service chiefs carry most of the day-to-day responsibilities for each service branch, their independent certification is just as important and equally necessary.”

Hunter is a long way from the Marine Corps. “Independent certification” is the kind of phrase you may search long and hard for and fail to find in a Marine training manual.

Gen. James Amos, a Marine Corps commandant who publicly opposed the repeal in December, said he wouldn’t hesitate to implement it if Congress passed it as law.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

Openly gay Colorado Congressman Jared Polis took to the floor of the House Wednesday to commend U.S. leaders for putting an end to the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Clinton-era policy banning gay members of the military from serving openly. Gay citizens will “hold their heads a little higher as Americans,” Polis said soon after President Obama signed the repeal. “We are closer to equal treatment under the law, which is all we have ever asked for. Our government will no longer be an instrument of discrimination against us.”

Polis said Obama spoke “wisely and strongly” on the repeal at the White House ceremony and that he welcomed any gay service-members discharged under the law to reenlist.

President Obama said, there will never be a full accounting of the heroism demonstrated by gay Americans in service to this country. He continued, as the first generation to serve openly in our armed services you will stand for all of those who came before you and your will serve as role models for all of those who came after you.

Madame Speaker, today is an important day, not just for gay and lesbian members of the military, but to all of us who are gay or lesbian. To our family, to our friends. For they all know that today we hold our heads a little higher as Americans. We are closer to equal treatment under the law, which is all we have ever asked for. Our government will no longer be an instrument of discrimination against us. And all America will see and be told of the patriotism of the gay and lesbian Americans who proudly defend a country that today is one step closer to considering us equal.

Weeks ago, as Republican lawmakers led by Arizona Senator John McCain sought to put the breaks on the repeal, Polis told MSNBC that the power had drained from McCain’s shifting arguments in the debate.

You don’t have to be straight to be able to fight for our country. It doesn’t make sense. No other western country has this policy. You can study after study. They’re all going to show you the same thing, that of course gay and lesbian Americans can serve in the military and of course the military is a professional institution that is up the challenge of allowing them to serve, like every other institution in society, like the U.S. Congress, like our police forces. This is just a bizarre conversation we’re having… [It's] an absurd issue whose time has long since past…

I’ve talked to friends of mine in the military, constituents, they said the military has never asked their opinion about what’s on the menu in any of the other conditions. This has been the broadest reaching model for gaining input of members of the military on any major decision… Of course the men and women in the military overwhelmingly support allowing gays to serve openly. They have gay and lesbians friends, sometimes brothers, sisters, cousins. I mean this is just a stigma that maybe a few old white male senators have but the men and women of the military are well past this.

Gay Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank, meanwhile, was asked by right-wing news site CNS to consider complaints that gay and straight soldiers would now have to shower together.

Frank nearly dismissed the question out of hand. “Oh no, not shower together,” he said, all mock aghast, but then added that gay and straight people have showered together in public spaces since the beginning of time. He pointed out that they were required to do so in the U.S. military for hundreds of years before Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and for seventeen years under Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and that for all that time the U.S. military has done just fine.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

Members of the government in Washington, reviled by the majority of the American public as a pack of petty partisan do-nothings, took action this weekend. Democrats and Republicans joined together in an inspired last-ditch effort that succeeded in repealing the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” military policy banning gay soldiers from serving openly. The 17-year-old policy reflected a confused transitional moment in U.S. history. It was written by military brass referencing no serious empirical data. It asked soldiers to lie to each other and to their commanding officers. It resulted in tens of thousands of discharges and hundreds of millions of wasted dollars on education, combat training and legal fees. Even though the policy’s end came too late to prevent the career disasters that befell gay service members such as CU Boulder Air Force ROTC Cadet Mara Boyd, maybe it came in time to see many of those careers resurrected.

Boyd joined the collegiate officer training program as a sophomore at CU. She completed basic training at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas, and finished in the top 10 percent of the class. She hated being in the closet. She told the Colorado Independent’s Wendy Norris last year that it seemed to go against everything she was putting into her training.

“I was in a state of anguish about not being able to lead by example and have integrity.”

Boyd said she felt tangled up by “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” She wanted to ask about the policy but felt that to some degree even asking about the policy was a version of telling that she was gay.

“I was starting my third year in the program, [but] we had never discussed [the policy] in depth. One of the Catch 22s is if [you] need to know about the law, [you] can’t go to [your] commander and say, ‘You know, I’d like to discuss Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’”

Boyd began to see her career dreams unravel.

“I knew I wouldn’t be able to lie and I wouldn’t be able to cover,” Boyd said. “As the generations pass and as gay and lesbian youth come out and are coming out at younger ages and have better resources, then the lying piece is a lot tougher. Some of the older generation are much more accustomed to having to lie and be closeted and hide that piece in their everyday life.

“I think it’s a burden for everyone no matter what age. It just really ate away at me.”

Norris relates the story of how Boyd’s career ended and how the military asked her to repay $30,000 to the government for the cost of tuition and books.

At the start of her senior year, with just 12 cadets remaining in the original class of 100, Boyd told her commanding officer, then-Lt. Col. George Ballinger, that she was a lesbian. According to Air Force ROTC protocol she was required to write a memo outing herself, an exercise Boyd recalls as “a bit absurd.”

She signed the declaration as the “character development officer,” a position to which her fellow cadets had just nominated her…

Ballinger followed military protocol and launched an investigation that resulted in Boyd’s suspension from the program… According to both Boyd and local news accounts at the time, Ballinger reluctantly pursued the probe, which would take nearly a year to complete.

In June 2003, the highly regarded cadet was drummed out of the officer training program and deemed “unfit for service” because of homosexual conduct. To add insult to injury, the government also demanded she repay her college scholarships and book stipends, now totaling $30,000… for her sophomore and junior years. Despite the efforts of Colorado University administrators and then-Rep. Mark Udall in asking the Air Force ROTC to forgive Boyd’s debt, Brig. Gen. Michael Hankins, who supervised the nationwide programs denied the move. Hankins declined to comment on the matter.

Boyd returned to CU and completed her degree. She’s still paying off the tuition. She told Norris that if DADT were ever repealed she might re-enlist.

“I’ll consider joining up. If the ban is lifted, I will really want to be a part of that transition in the military, to finish a commitment that I didn’t get to finish. I still have that emptiness of not having been able to see it through.

“I’d like to be a part of it as a part of the gay community and also to return to my military family.”

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

Colorado Democratic Sens. Michael Bennet and Mark Udall today were joined by the state’s gay and lesbian activist groups in cheering the 65 to 31 Senate vote to repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy that bars gay men and women from serving openly in the military.

“It it past time to repeal ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ and confer dignity and a basic civic right to Americans who have signed up to defend our country,” Bennet said in a release. “No longer will well-performing service members be discharged or denied the ability to serve in the military based on sexual orientation.

“It is not only wrong; it undermines our national security and flies in the face of our national values. We don’t tolerate this kind of discrimination in the private sector, and should not do so in our Armed Forces either. Our military leaders say we should move forward with repeal, and the American people agree.”

Eight Republicans crossed party lines to vote for the bill, co-sponsored by Udall, who serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee. The bill survived a filibuster attempt by Republicans earlier in the day, but now will be sent to President Barack Obama for his signature.

The bill compels the U.S. Department of Defense to implement the new policy in a way that protects national security. U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen had recently urged the Senate to lift DADT.

“The U.S. Senate took a giant step forward today toward enhancing our national security by allowing all Americans to fight for their nation regardless of whether they are gay or straight,” Udall said in a release.

“Once the Department of Defense certifies that it is ready to allow fully open service, it will be a proud day for our nation. Never again will a soldier, a translator, a jet mechanic, or others in our Armed Services lose their job merely because of who they love. Instead, their love of country – and a willingness to sacrifice their lives – will be the paramount factor in their service.”

The Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Community Center of Colorado (The Center) lauded the Senate vote after the bill passed out of the House last week. Center officials said “this vote means the military’s 17-year prohibition on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military is a step closer to ending.”

After the president, Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff certify the lifting of the ban, it’s expected to go into effect within 60 days.

“We are pleased that the Senate listened to the American people, who overwhelmingly approve of gays and lesbians being able to serve openly. Repealing it is the right thing to do,” said Center spokeswoman Heather Draper. “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell has long infringed on the fundamental rights of gay and lesbian military men and women, which has been painfully obvious since the policy was implemented in 1993.”

Organizing for America-Colorado (OFA-CO) State Director Jennifer Cheyne released this statement after today’s vote:

“OFA supporters in Colorado are celebrating the Senate vote to repeal the archaic ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy. Repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is something OFA supporters care very deeply about and they have been working hard urging Senators to support ending this discriminatory policy.

“Thanks to the leadership of President Obama and members of Congress, brave men and women will soon be able to serve openly and proudly in our Armed Forces regardless of their sexual orientation. Repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ will strengthen our national security and is a major step towards equal rights in our country.”

“If we don’t get this done now… I fear it will be a number of years before we actually have a statutory repeal, and the Chairman of the Joint Chief and the Secretary of Defense are saying they want to do this now because they want clarity. They also know this is about national security [as well as civil rights]… We’re in two wars and we’ve discharged over 14,000 patriotic Americans.”

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Udall repeated something he also told the Colorado Independent, that he prefers a legislative solution rather than a looming legal solution.

“It’s crucial… The law sometimes take a twisted and winding road to get where you need to arrive. We want to arrive at this point very quickly. That’s why the Secretary and Joint Chiefs are saying repeal the law clearly so we then can go to our enlisted and personnel, the leaders in the military to begin to implement this change… In hearings we’ve had the Secretary and Chairman said it’s not a matter of whether it’s a matter of how we’re going to do this. They want to get to work. They want to let patriotic Americans serve in our military whether gay or straight.”

The Democrats in Congress have set an ambitious agenda for the ongoing lameduck session but so far gridlock on high-profile bills has ruled. Republicans blocked an extension of unemployment benefits Tuesday and are threatening to filibuster the immigrant DREAM Act. Democrats are likewise balking at extending Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.

Got a tip? Freelance story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

The lame-duck session could be the last chance for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to pass a number of bills. (Pete Marovich/ZUMApress.com)

Bush tax cuts:

The biggest question before the Senate — and the one that will likely receive the most attention — is the expiration of the 2001 tax cuts signed into law by President Bush. Facing Democratic resistance in the Senate at the time, Republicans set up the cuts to sunset after ten years. Now that they’re set to expire, however, GOP lawmakers have lined up shoulder to shoulder to make them permanent.

President Obama, on the other hand, ran for office on a pledge to extend the existing tax rates for families making less than $250,000 a year, while letting the tax cuts for those making over that number expire. But as the economy continued to falter and Democratic re-election prospects began looking bleak, Democrats in Congress put off addressing issues related to the tax code until after the midterm elections. Now that Republicans have made big gains in both chambers of Congress, Democrats find their confidence further weakened.

Following the midterms, the White House has signalled that Democrats might be willing to compromise on the idea of a permanent extension of tax cuts for middle-class families and a temporary extension of cuts for the two percent of Americans families making more than $250,000, but it won’t stomach the approximately $700 billion in additional debt that would be required to extend those cuts permanently. Republicans, on the other hand, haven’t deviated from their position that the tax cuts for all Americans be kept together as a package deal.

If neither side blinks, taxes are set to rise for all Americans effective January 1. Neither party wants to be seen as responsible for a tax hike during difficult economic times, but Democrats have appeared far more worried at the prospect of getting blamed should negotiations break down. Polls favor the Democrats’ position that the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans should be allowed to expire, but without the votes of at least two Republicans in the Senate, the proposal is likely to fail. Barring momentum in Congress for the creation of a new tax bracket — for people making half a million dollars or a million dollars per year — in order to better rhetorically define the class of folks for whom Republicans are advocating tax relief, the easiest and most likely outcome will be a bill that temporarily extends all the tax cuts, simply kicking the decision of what to do to some point farther down the road.

Unemployment insurance benefits

As Congress frets over whether the marginal tax rate for incomes over $200,000 should be raised three percentage points, the Senate is also on the verge of allowing federal unemployment benefits to lapse — again. Extending the benefits before they expire on November 30 might seem like a no-brainer: It would prevent somewhere between 1.2 and 2 million unemployed Americans from having their subsistence checks cut off just in time for Christmas and would reduce the risk of a drop in consumer spending and economic growth as high as 0.4 percentage points from December to February.

Republicans might have trouble arguing that deficit reduction trumps other priorities, including unemployment benefits, when the only major initiative the GOP is pushing — extending the Bush tax cuts for the upper 2 percent of wage earners — would increase the deficit by $700 billion over ten years. That said, Republicans in the Senate, along with Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), are likely to vote against any extension of unemployment insurance benefits unless Democrats can come up with ways to offset their cost.

The last time unemployment benefits were set to lapse, back in early June, the Senate was unable to muster enough votes to renew an extension for 51 days. With Republican Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine joining Democrats to vote for cloture, and Nelson joining with Republicans to vote against debate, Democrats had no choice but to wait for Sen. Carte Goodwin (D-W.Va.) to be sworn in as a replacement for the late Sen. Robert Byrd (D- W.Va.) in order to garner a 60th vote.

This time, assuming all the senators maintain their positions in the debate, the hurdle will be that much higher for Democrats after Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) takes the seat of Sen. Roland Burris (D-Ill.) on Nov. 29. With one fewer assured vote, Democrats would either have to come up with a package of equivalent spending cuts that satisfies Republicans’ demands or persuade one more Republican to join their cause. Neither scenario appears particularly likely, however, which is why many unemployed Americans are bracing for the worst come Nov. 30.

“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”

A long-awaited Pentagon study on ending the practice of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the 17-year-old law that requires military service members to keep their sexual orientation secret, isn’t due to President Obama until December 1, but early media reports indicate that it will buttress gay rights advocates’ arguments to repeal the law. More than 70 percent of the respondents in the Pentagon survey indicated that repeal would have either positive, mixed or nonexistent effects, leading the authors to conclude that the military can lift its ban on gay and lesbian Americans serving openly in uniform while incurring minimal risk in its current war efforts.

If the study brings good news to those hoping to repeal the law, however, the current situation in the Senate should not. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) attempted to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” before the midterm elections, tacking the provision onto a defense reauthorization bill that failed to overcome a Republican-led filibuster in the Senate. The bill was weighed down by many add-ons — including the DREAM Act, which seeks to extend a path to citizenship to some undocumented immigrants who attend college or serve in the military — giving too many senators excuses to vote against it, but advocates remained hopeful that repeal could pass along with the defense bill when Congress resumed for its lame-duck session.

Now Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), ranking member of the Armed Services Committee, is said to be negotiating with Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), the committee chairman, to remove the DADT repeal provision from the defense bill. McCain had previously voiced openness to authorizing a repeal of the law following the Pentagon’s review, but since that time his views have hardened. During his re-election battle earlier this year, McCain faced a primary challenger from the right and promised during his campaign to preserve the law.

In the absence of support from McCain, advocacy groups have identified 10 senators who have indicated in the past that they’d like to see the Pentagon’s study before deciding on whether to lift the military’s policy. The list includes Sens. Scott Brown (R-Mass.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), Oympia Snowe (R-Maine), George Voinovich (R-Ohio) and Jim Webb (D-Va.). Once the results of the study are known, gay rights groups hope these senators will take them to heart and vote for repeal. If they follow McCain’s lead and renege on their previous openness to getting rid of the law, however, it may be a long time before Congress can muster sufficient votes to repeal the policy.

Campaign finance reform

Following an election season that saw record amounts of cash — including a fair chunk from undisclosed sources — spent on political advertising by outside groups, campaign finance reform advocates are still hoping that Democrats in Congress might take advantage of their remaining time in charge of both chambers to pass legislation to shore up the loophole-ridden landscape of campaign finance law. The most popular effort, by far, during the last year has been a bill called the DISCLOSE Act, which would require all groups spending money on electioneering activities in future elections to disclose their major donors.

While premised on a fairly bipartisan concept of full disclosure, the bill soon ran into trouble in the Senate over additional components that had been added on to it. Measures to prohibit campaign spending by companies holding government contracts or those exceeding a certain threshold of foreign ownership were read by Senate Republicans as an attempt to privilege union speech over that of corporations. Traditional campaign finance reform advocates like Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) held onto such objections and voted against cloture for the bill when Democrats declined to take them out.

Now Democrats in the Senate are contemplating one last attempt to pass a stripped-down version of the DISCLOSE Act — one that sticks strictly to the principle of transparency that Republicans once advocated as their gold standard for effective campaign finance legislation. But Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), a staunch opponent of nearly all campaign finance legislation, might prove an even bigger obstacle to the bill’s passage than any single aspect of the legislation. While Snowe or Collins, or even Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) or Senator-elect Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), might prove receptive to the measure in principle, it appears highly unlikely that any of them are willing to buck their party leadership for the cause.

Energy/environment

Even if the lame-duck session likely represents the best opportunity for Democrats to pass key pieces of energy legislation before a more Republican Congress comes to town, it seems unlikely that anything significant will move.

The House, for its part, has already passed a cap-and-trade bill and an oil spill response bill, and all eyes are now on the Senate. But it looks like major energy action in the chamber will have to wait until next year, if it happens at all.

One clean energy advocate with close ties to Congress downplayed the likelihood that energy legislation will pass during the lame duck. “Little will happen, probably,” he said.

The only energy-related bill that is likely to see the light of day during the lame-duck session is a proposal to encourage the production of electric and natural gas vehicles. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has scheduled a cloture vote for Wednesday on the bill, the Promoting Natural Gas and Electric Vehicles Act of 2010. The bill has bipartisan support.

Asked about the prospects for energy legislation during the lame duck in the Senate, Regan Lachapelle, a spokeswoman for Reid, said, “We filed cloture on a motion to proceed to a natural gas bill before we left. Other than that, we have many items that are possible for consideration during the lame duck.” Lachapelle did not elaborate on the pieces of legislation to which she was referring.

Backers of a renewable energy standard, which would require that a certain percentage of the country’s electricity come from renewable sources like wind and solar, are keeping their fingers crossed that such a proposal can move in the lame-duck session. “We’re optimistic about the lame duck,” said one RES proponent who was not authorized to talk on the record.

Reid and Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) spoke on the phone Tuesday about the possibility of moving an RES during the lame duck. Bingaman’s spokesman, Bill Wicker, would not discuss the call. “This was a private conversation between two Members, so I have to respect that,” he said in an email. “But we all should know more about the lame duck before much longer.”

But a senior Senate aide with knowledge of the conversation downplayed the possibility that an RES would be brought up for a vote during the lame-duck session. “They had a good conversation and agreed it will be challenging to get 60 votes for expedited consideration of an RES during the limited time left in the session,” the aide said of discussion between Reid and Bingaman. Indeed, RES supporters would need to secure the support of two to four Republicans in addition to the four who already support the bill in order to get 60 votes.

An oil spill response bill and various pieces of legislation to promote energy efficiency and home weatherization are all pending in the Senate. But it looks like consideration of those bills will have to wait until next year.

DREAM Act

Reid and Pelosi have vowed to push for a lame-duck vote on the DREAM Act, a bill that would allow some undocumented young people who came to the United States as children to gain legal status for attending college or serving in the military.

In the House, the vote could come as early as this week, Democrat sources told Politico. Reps. George Miller (D-Calif.) and Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.) were reportedly tasked by Pelosi with determining whether the caucus would be able to pass the bill.

If the act does not pass in the lame-duck session, it has very little chance of passage before 2013. Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), who is expected to head the House subcommittee on immigration, refers to the DREAM Act as “amnesty” and promised he would use his authority in the GOP-led House to block the act. GOP gains in the Senate also lessen the likelihood of passing the bill next session.

Reid recently said he would need support from “a handful of Republicans” to pass the bill during the lame duck, echoing estimates by bill sponsor Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) that at least five Republicans would need to support the bill for it to pass. A spokesman for Reid confirmed last week that he plans to bring up the DREAM Act for a vote during the lame-duck session, although it is still unclear whether it would be as a standalone measure or as an attachment to another bill.

The problem is that Reid doesn’t have much time — or sure support for the DREAM Act from his caucus. The act last came up for a vote in 2007, and seven of the eight Democrats who voted against it then are still in the Senate. While a few might support the bill this time around, five told The Hill in September they are still undecided on the DREAM Act.

Complicating matters, Mark Kirk’s assumption of Roland Burris’ seat in the Senate turns a sure “yes” vote into a likely “no.” Kirk has been lobbied heavily by DREAM Act supporters, but said before the election that he would vote against the act unless border security measures were pushed first. “It’s not time for the DREAM Act right now,” he told reporters in October. “If the DREAM Act came up for a vote right now, I would vote ‘no.’”

All current Republican senators voted in September to filibuster the defense authorization bill after Reid announced plans to attach the DREAM Act. But given the additional controversy over that bill — it included a repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and would have allowed for only limited changes from Republicans — it’s tough to extrapolate much from it about how senators would vote on the DREAM Act as a standalone bill.

Sen. Robert Bennett (R-Utah) said he would support the bill if it were brought to the floor on its own, even though he opposed it as part of the defense authorization bill. Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), who co-sponsored the bill, would also almost certainly vote for it if it comes up in the lame-duck session.

Several other Republicans voted for the DREAM Act in 2007, but their support this year remains uncertain because of rightward shifts on immigration policy and the possibility of the bill again being attached to other legislation. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) was an original sponsor of the bill when it was first introduced in 2001 and voted for it in 2007. This year, he said the government should secure the borders before it focuses on the DREAM Act.

Written by Jesse Zwick, Andrew Restuccia and Elise Foley.