Since its introduction in 1993, the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy of the United States armed forces has been controversial. The federal law, signed by President Bill Clinton, prohibits gay people from making their sexual orientations public while actively serving in the military.

Initially enacted in an effort to protect the well-being of the gay community in the armed forces, many believe the policy has actually had the opposite effect, prompting the discharge of upwards of 12,000 service members since its inception on the grounds of sexual orientation, whether actual or suspected.

The Michigan Daily sat down with four University experts on the topic from several disciplines, including women’s studies, psychology, history and theories of sexuality to get their take on the subject.

While the experts believe that President Barack Obama is an ally of the gay community, they are anxious for the changes that his campaign platform promised.

During his campaign and since his election, Obama has advocated for the repeal of the policy. At the Human Rights Campaign dinner last month, he said definitively: “I will end ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’. ”

The American public, for the most part, appears to be on the same page.

A May 2009 Gallup Poll found that 69 percent of American adults — including 58 percent of conservatives — were in favor of allowing openly gay men and women to serve in the military.

When asked why he believed Obama has yet to address the policy, David Halperin, professor of the history and theory of sexuality, said that while a number of military leaders have recently spoken out against the ban, the president may seek further support on the issue.

“It may be that Obama is waiting until enough such people provide him with cover,” he said.

Jonathan Marwil, professor of history, pointed out that although a majority of Americans favor a repeal, the president must carefully measure both the benefit and detriment of lifting the ban as well as the personal political costs of the decision.

If Obama moves forward with a repeal, not only will he be following through on one of his campaign promises, but he would also please gay rights advocates. On the other hand, he would be feeding into a long-standing criticism employed by Republicans that Democrats are soft on national security and hostile toward military forces and agendas.

Marwil also noted that if Obama were to fight for the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” he would likely face opposition from the military for the remainder of his time in office.

“He would have the (military) on his case the rest of his administration,” Marwil said. “He’d never get out from under it.”

Marwil went on to say that the greatest ramification Obama faces in doing nothing is disappointing, even angering, many of his supporters.

“They’re already angry with him over some things,” he said. By choosing not to act on the ban, Obama risks the possibility that these former supporters “will make his life hard.”

Given both sets of potential implications, Marwil said Obama’s decision would ultimately boil down to whether he believes the majority of Americans who support the repeal can shield him from the backlash.

Marwil noted that among those who claim to support the repeal, many might disagree with him on other issues, which limits the extent to which they can “protect him.”

“What benefits does he get from the very vocal minority?” he asked.

Either way, “there’ll be a certain fallout, and he’ll have to measure whether or not it’s worth the fallout,” Marwil said. “There’s always a downside of doing something like this where you know you have people who are pretty strongly against what you’re trying to do.”

Though Obama has vowed to allow gays to serve openly in the military, he has been criticized for not providing a timeline for doing so.