Too Late For UAW Says Marines

Annie

Diamond Member
Nov 22, 2003
50,848
4,827
1,790
:clap:

http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0503/15/A01-117640.htm

...Facing intense criticism, UAW President Ron Gettelfinger reversed his decision to ban Marine Corps reservists driving foreign cars or displaying pro-President Bush bumper stickers from parking at the union's Solidarity House headquarters in Detroit.

"I made the wrong call on the parking issue, and I have notified the Marine Corps that all reservists are welcome to park at Solidarity House as they have for the past 10 years," Gettelfinger said in a statement.

Wounded by what they consider an unpatriotic ambush, the Marines rejected the union's olive branch and secured an alternative parking lot.

"I talked to Ron; I let him know that I understand he has rescinded his decision," said Lt. Col. Joe Rutledge, a top-ranking officer at the reserve infantry rifle battalion. "However, I've made my decision -- either you support the Marines or you don't."
[...]
 
well although military is supposed to be neutral every american
citizen should be able to display their political support without
being discriminated against.
 
nosarcasm said:
well although military is supposed to be neutral every american
citizen should be able to display their political support without
being discriminated against.

No, military DOES NOT have to remain neutral. Oftentimes leaders choose to, very different than HAVE TO.
 
well from my German perspective you have a problem when the military
gets too involved in politics, thats what brought down the Weimar
Republic. So caution is necessary imo.

But that only really applies to the leadership level not to the basic
soldier.

You see my point ?
 
Kathianne said:
No, military DOES NOT have to remain neutral. Oftentimes leaders choose to, very different than HAVE TO.

Ahem.

http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/militarylaw1/a/milpolitics.htm

Military Folks and Politics
From Rod Powers,
Your Guide to U.S. Military.


What You Can and Cannot Do
During the last Presidential Elections, I received an email from a person (presumably on active duty) which read, "Help to Make Sure Al Gore Does Not Sign my Retirement Certificate." The email included a link to George W. Bush's campaign Site, and included a "signature" with a military rank and last name.
I wonder if this person knows that he/she may have violated the law by sending this email out?

As we enter a new presidential race, I've been receiving more and more questions about what military members are allowed and not allowed to do when it comes to politics.

Federal Law (Titles 10, 2, and 18, United States Code), Department of Defense (DOD) Directives, and specific military regulations strictly limit a military active duty person's participation in partisan political activities.

DOD defines "partisan political activity" as "activity supporting or relating to candidates representing, or issues specifically identified with, national or State political parties and associated or ancillary organizations."

A "Nonpartisan political activity is defined as "activity supporting or relating to candidates not representing, or issues not specifically identified with, national or State political parties and associated or ancillary organizations.

Issues relating to constitutional amendments, referendums, approval of municipal ordinances, and others of similar character are not considered as specifically being identified with national or State political parties."
The military wants its personnel to participate in our democratic process -- within limits. DOD encourages active duty military members to vote, and has established several programs to help active duty personnel to register and cast absentee ballots. What career military officer or senior NCO has never had to pull a stint as unit "voting officer," or "voting NCO?" But, when it comes to actively campaigning for a specific political candidate or partisan objective, the military draws the line.

It should be noted that these prohibitions do not apply to members of the National Guard or Reserves, unless they are currently serving on active duty. For the purposes of political activity restrictions, DoD defines active duty as: Full-time duty in the active military service of the United States regardless of duration or purpose, including:

Full-time training duty;

Annual training duty; and

Attendance, while in the active military service, at a school designated as a Service school.
What Active Duty Members Can and Cannot Do
Can - Register, vote, and express a personal opinion on political candidates and issues, but not as a representative of the Armed Forces.

Can - Promote and encourage other military members to exercise their voting franchise, if such promotion does not constitute an attempt to influence or interfere with the outcome of an election.

Cannot - Participate in any organized effort to provide voters with transportation to the polls if the effort is organized by, or associated with, a partisan political party or candidate.


Cannot - Speak before a partisan political gathering, including any gathering that promotes a partisan political party, candidate, or cause.

Cannot - Participate in any radio, television, or other program or group discussion as an advocate for or against of a partisan political party, candidate, or cause.

Can - Join a political club and attend its meetings when not in uniform.

Cannot - Serve in any official capacity or be listed as a sponsor of a partisan political club.

Cannot - March or ride in a partisan political parade.

Cannot - Sell tickets for, or otherwise actively promote, political dinners and similar fundraising events.

Can - Serve as an election official, if such service is not as a representative of a partisan political party, does not interfere with military duties, is performed when not in uniform, and has the prior approval of the Secretary concerned or the Secretary's designee (example, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of the Army, Secretary of the Air Force, ect.).

Can - Sign a petition for specific legislative action or a petition to place a candidate's name on an official election ballot, if the signing does not obligate the member to engage in partisan political activity and is done as a private citizen and not as a representative of the Armed Forces.
Cannot - Conduct a political opinion survey under the auspices of a partisan political group or distribute partisan political literature.

Can - Write a letter to the editor of a newspaper expressing the member's personal views on public issues or political candidates, if such action is not part of an organized letter-writing campaign or a solicitation of votes for or against a political party or partisan political cause or candidate.

Cannot - Allow or cause to be published partisan political articles signed or written by the member that solicits votes for or against a partisan political party, candidate, or cause.

Can - Make monetary contributions to a political organization, party, or committee favoring a particular candidate or slate of candidates, subject to the limitations of law.

Cannot - Make a contribution to another member of the Armed Forces or a civilian officer or employee of the United States for the purpose of promoting a political objective or cause, including a political campaign.

Cannot - Solicit or receive a contribution from another member of the Armed Forces or a civilian officer or employee of the United States for the purpose of promoting a political objective or cause, including a political campaign.

Cannot - Solicit or otherwise engage in fundraising activities in Federal offices or facilities, including military reservations, for a partisan political cause or candidate.

Can - Display a political sticker on the member's private vehicle.

Cannot - Display a large political sign, banner, or poster (as distinguished from a bumper sticker) on the top or side of a private vehicle.

Can - Attend partisan and nonpartisan political meetings or rallies as a spectator when not in uniform.

Cannot - Attend partisan political events as an official representative of the Armed Forces.

Cannot - Participate in partisan political management, campaigns, or conventions (except as a spectator when not in uniform), or make public speeches in the course thereof.

Cannot - Perform clerical or other duties for a partisan political committee during a campaign or on an election day.

Cannot - Use official authority or influence to: interfere with an election, affect the course or outcome of an election, solicit votes for a particular candidate or issue, or require or solicit political contributions from others.

Cannot - Use contemptuous words against the officeholders described in 10 U.S.C. 888 (10 U.S.C. 888 lists the following officeholders: President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which the military member is on duty).
It's interesting to note at this point that Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) makes it a crime for commissioned officers to use contemptuous words against the above officeholders. Commissioned officers who violate this provision can be court-martialed for a direct violation of Article 88. But, what about enlisted members and warrant officers?

DOD Directive 1344.10 - POLITICAL ACTIVITIES BY MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES ON ACTIVE DUTY, extend these same requirements to all individuals on active duty. Active duty enlisted members and warrant officers who violate these provisions can be charged under Article 92 of the UCMJ, Failure to Obey an Order or Regulation.

So, what about retired members? Well, DOD Directive 1344.10 only applies to active duty, so retired enlisted and warrant officers can pretty much say anything they want concerning the above office-holders. However, Article 2 of the UCMJ specifically states that retired members are subject to the provisions of the UCMJ. Does that mean that retired commissioned officers are prohibited from using contemptious words against the above officeholders? Technically, yes. A retired commissioned officer who utters contemptuous words against the President or other designated officeholders is technically in violation of Article 88. However, DOD Directive 1352.1 - MANAGEMENT AND MOBILIZATION OF REGULAR AND RESERVE RETIRED MILITARY MEMBERS, prohibits recalling a retired military member to actively duty solely for the purpose of subjecting them to court-martial jurisdiction. Therefore, unless that retired commissioned officer was recalled to active duty for other purposes, it would not be possible to subject them to court-martial for a violation of Article 88

I don't know about you Kathianne, but the way I read this, and what I was told while in the service, I'd say this pretty much "encourages" military neutrality in politics.
 
Merlin1047 said:
Ahem.

http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/militarylaw1/a/milpolitics.htm



I don't know about you Kathianne, but the way I read this, and what I was told while in the service, I'd say this pretty much "encourages" military neutrality in politics.

Merlin, no matter how you look at it, you have the right to vote and be involved in politics, as long as you do not do it as appearing as a rep of the armed forces. While there are curtailments of 'rights', I grant you, you do not abandon your citizenship by nature of enlistment. Most commissioned officers would NOT voice any opinion for all the 'reasons' stated above.
 
nosarcasm said:
well from my German perspective you have a problem when the military
gets too involved in politics, thats what brought down the Weimar
Republic. So caution is necessary imo.

But that only really applies to the leadership level not to the basic
soldier.

You see my point ?


While in uniform people in the military are required to remain nuetral in politics. It was a standing order and you can be punished for making statements against it.
 
no1tovote4 said:
While in uniform people in the military are required to remain nuetral in politics. It was a standing order and you can be punished for making statements against it.

While in uniform, you are representing the armed forces, that was my point.
 
I was in uniform during the 2000 elections. I had a Bush yard sign in the back of my truck. I was right on the edge of the line - but I confirmed that what I was doing was legal - showing support for a candidate on my privately owned vehicle. Since Bush is the CinC, that support should be even more allowed.
 
gop_jeff said:
I was in uniform during the 2000 elections. I had a Bush yard sign in the back of my truck. I was right on the edge of the line - but I confirmed that what I was doing was legal - showing support for a candidate on my privately owned vehicle. Since Bush is the CinC, that support should be even more allowed.


You were on the line here. I would have asked before hand as well. You did the right thing.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top