Change in Administration Equals Status Quo for Those in Uniform

There is a widely believed misconceived notion that those serving in the Armed Forces of the United States favor presidential candidates and Commander’s in Chief that have formerly also served. While this may apply to a small population, the idea of civilian control of the Armed Forces is truly a cornerstone of our Department of Defense.

It is crucial to understand that while soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines take an oath that we will ‘obey the orders of the President of the United States’ we promise to ‘support and defend the Constitution of the United States’, not the President, nor any other body of government.

So, what does all of this mean in the grand scheme of a change in administration with two concurrent major conflicts, what some may call an economic crisis, and several other domestic and international issues facing our great nation?

Consider that Secretary of Defense Gates, under both the Bush and Obama administration, has been able to consistently show the ability to cross party lines. He has further gone to Congress stating that other agencies such as the State Department must play a greater role in current operations and supports an increase in their funding, at considerable risk to seeing his own budget decrease to make this a possibility.

Both Presidents Bush and Obama routinely meet with strategic and operational level commanders and put great consideration in their viewpoints and recommendations regarding the way ahead. When one considers the elements of national power as “diplomacy, information, military, and economic”, our nation has been consistently turning to the military to be statesmen as well as soldiers due to an underfunded and undermanned State Department. The problem with this use of the military is that if we view the military as a ‘hammer’ then everything begins to look like a ‘nail’ and we use the military for missions that it may not be well suited or well trained.

So what kind of candidate does a member of the Armed Forces support? Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice states that:

“Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the 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 he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”

With this in mind, it is no surprise that there is a small population within the Armed Forces (including senior leadership) that does not vote as they believe that their vote against an incumbent or a lack of support for a Commander in Chief can be viewed as a ‘contemptuous act’ as an extension of a ‘contemptuous word’. Personally, I feel that I have an obligation as a citizen first, to fulfill my obligation by voting.

When any citizen, to include a member of the military votes, it is of course, anonymous. While I cannot speak for all those in the military, my vote is cast with several issues under consideration, not just how the President as Commander in Chief will view and utilize the military.

Put simply, regardless of who sits in the Oval Office will continue to ‘support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic’. I view my service to our nation as a privilege and a sacred trust between myself and the citizens, and I will continue to serve to the best of my ability no matter who the president is.

Mark L. Tromblee

I’ve received a few emails asking what I think about recent polls showing Obama and McCain in a tight election race. My answer – What race? The 2008 Presidential race hasn’t yet started in earnest. Neither side has announced their Vice Presidential pick (each is probably waiting for the other to blink first), there are no scheduled debates until September, and the 110th Congress is on vacation. That pretty much leaves only the hardcore political junkies to follow the candidates and, unfortunately, our numbers are few and don’t have much of an impact on elections anyway. This begs the question of which groups DO impact elections. The answer is older voters, men, women, immigrants, labor and special interest groups etc. – basically, any group other than the historically unreliable “youth vote.”

Even though the youth vote was up slightly in 2004 and looks like it might-just-perhaps-possibly-could be up again in 2008, it’s still a pretty safe bet that America’s youth won’t make much of an impact in spite of their huge potential. Amazingly, our youngest eligible voters (18-24 year olds) are less than half as likely to vote as older Americans. Personally, this has never surprised me and, quite frankly, it doesn’t bother me much either. Why not? Because young people are very often less informed (at best), or misinformed (even worse) than older potential voters. They are also more likely to vote based on one issue than older folks, or was I the only one who to notice how many stoners mobilized and sent money to Ron Paul?

I was listening to local Boston talk radio over the internet recently when they reported on an Obama rally dominated by enthusiastic youths. When asked why she supported Obama, a young lady replied because of the “apathy” he’s shown throughout his career to the needy. This is a person who should not vote. Others would include Madonna, who recorded a Public Service Announcements on the importance of voting while she herself wasn’t even registered, and Ben Affleck, who traveled the U.S. campaigning for Gore in 2000 (presumably to appeal to young people and fans of bad movies) but didn’t vote or even bother to register to vote until 2003. This does not bother me. On the contrary, I wish more young people and celebrities would follow suit.

Voting for the sake of voting is not something to be commended. “Just vote, exercise your right” is not good advice. Chances are that anybody bullied to the polls by such pleas will do little more than vote for whomever the bully does with little thought. Wouldn’t a better message be to first find out what the issues are and where the candidates stand on them?

Let me be clear lest anyone is confused by my rambling today – please do not vote unless you personally want to and are aware of the candidates’ positions on things you consider important. Don’t vote because a hypocritical celebrity asked you to and you think it’s cool. Voting isn’t cool. It’s a solemn and sacred act. If you’re up for it – great. If not, please go back to your bongs and game consoles or to acting in bad movies. You can’t do as much harm there.