Let transgender troops serve

If there was any further doubt about the content of President Trump's character, it was clarified by this week's triple-tweet banning of transgender troops.

In a clipped 62 words, the president betrayed an entire class of people, all for the sake of advancing a budget bill (to fund his border wall) and feeding red meat to his base (to counter discontent over his cyber bullying of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, a conservative favorite).

That's making America great again?

The transgender ban represents wrongheaded policy done the wrong way, as evidenced by word on Thursday that the Joint Chiefs of Staff were blindslided by Trump's Twitter blast.

Not surprisingly, the abrupt announcement produced more questions than answers, considering that hundreds of transgender troops are already serving openly in the military and have been for the past year. Are they to be immediately dismissed?

OPPOSING VIEW:

Trump's military transgender ban is unfair but correct

Attempting to provide some clarity and adult supervision, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Marine Corps Gen. Joseph Dunford, stated the obvious: that tweets are not official government doctrine. Dunford said Thursday that until the White House explains itself in clear and official guidance, transgender troops will not be impacted and will continue to be treated with respect.

How did it come to this?

According to an account in Politico, Trump had two problems to solve at once: He wanted to advance a defense funding bill that would, among other things, pay for his border wall — a measure stalled by a dispute over the military paying for the tiny number of transgender troops who seek gender reassignment surgery. He also wanted to dial back conservative anger over his abuse of Sessions, whom the president blames for recusing himself from the investigation of Russia's election meddling. 

Solution? Jettison transgender troops right out of the military. Impediments to his beloved wall? Gone. Social conservative doubts about Trump? Assuaged.

Never mind that Trump, during last year's presidential campaign, had vowed to protect the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community and be a "real friend." Never mind that perhaps thousands of transgender troops are serving honorably, some of them in combat zones. And never mind that Trump's move goes far beyond even what House Republicans wanted.

The commander in chief's claims — that transgender troops are a "tremendous" burden and a disruption — are baseless. A RAND study estimates that of the 1,320 to 6,630 transgender troops in the active-duty military, only about 45 per year will seek gender-transition surgery. Total medical costs for all transgender troops amount to about one-tenth of 1% of the military's health care budget, and about one-fifth of what the Pentagon spends on Viagra.

Eighteen other nations have transgender men and women serving in their armed forces, including Australia, Canada, Germany, Israel and the United Kingdom. The RAND authors concluded that allowing transgender personnel to serve openly will have "minimal impact on readiness."

The battle over discrimination in the U.S. military has been long and hard. Time and again, the armed forces have led the nation in breaking down barriers, first to African Americans, then women, and then gays and lesbians. 

Each time, traditionalists have howled that the changes would destroy military readiness and unit cohesion. Each time, the critics have been proven wrong. They will be again, if transgender troops are allowed to keep serving their nation.

USA TODAY's editorial opinions are decided by its Editorial Board, separate from the news staff. Most editorials are coupled with an opposing view — a unique USA TODAY feature.

To read more editorials, go to the Opinion front page or sign up for the daily Opinion email newsletter. To respond to this editorial, submit a comment to letters@usatoday.com.