There is no evidence that the presence of gay and lesbian colleagues would damage our military's ability to fight.

I do not find the arguments used to justify 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' convincing.

It's not a question of 'whether,' but a question of 'how' we are going to implement a repeal.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice applies to everyone, gay and straight.

If we can't get this repealed--and I hope we can--at a minimum, I hope we can suspend the discharges under these circumstances.

When you know somebody personally, you're much less likely to fear them, and I think that most discrimination is based on fear.

When you have a policy of discrimination in the United States, the burden has to be on those who are defending it.

What matters is a willingness and an ability to perform the mission, not an individual's sexual orientation.

Mr. Almy and Ms. Kopfstein were discharged solely on the basis of who they are.

I also believe it's unconscionable, when the Commander in Chief and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs have both said we should repeal a policy, for us to continue to discharge people solely because of their sexual orientation.

Repealing 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' will have absolutely no effect on that.

look, our closest military allies in the world, the Brits, have a policy by which homosexuals serve openly, and they have a great record.

I hope we can move quickly and deliberately to maximize the opportunity for all Americans to serve their country.

I don't think, respectfully, there's any basis for saying that, if we repeal 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' the number of homosexual assaults will go up.

the British military is a great military, and great allies of ours, notwithstanding their policy on homosexuals serving openly.

I'm in favor of repeal, and there's no doubt about that.

We probably have lost 13,000 or more Americans who are willing to serve, and that, to me, is a real loss of military effectiveness.

To me, that's vitally important in this kind of a pluralistic and diverse democracy that we have.

I rise to continue a discussion of amendment No. 3456, which has been offered by Senators Collins, Byrd, Feinstein, Voinovich, Ensign, and myself, which would reauthorize the Opportunity Scholarship Program for students, needy and…

I thank my colleague, Senator Collins, for coming to the floor, for being a cosponsor of this amendment. And for the passionate and reasoned way in which she spoke. Two things come to mind in listening to her remarks. One is, we are very…

First, I say officially as an Independent that the Senator from California has begun demonstrating her independence of mind, spirit, and heart. Secondly, I cannot tell the Senator how important it was that she did what she did with those…

I thank Senator Ensign for his cosponsorship, for his convincing and informed argument for this amendment. I couldn't agree more. There is such an irony here. Secretary Duncan of Education is a reformer. The President supports school…

this is a bipartisan amendment introduced by Senators Collins, Burr, Voinovich, Feinstein, Ensign, and myself. It would benefit schoolchildren in the District of Columbia, reauthorizing a program we created 7 years ago now that has worked…

Well, let's call it the Lieberman-Voinovich amendment. Senator Voinovich has spoken from his own experience in the Ohio case. As he said, sometimes people say opportunity scholarships or vouchers are constitutionally suspect or…

I rise to thank Senator Voinovich for his statement. He brings several thoughts to my mind. The first is: Senator Voinovich, I am going to miss you when you retire at the end of this year. You are a straight shooter, you are a straight…