The New York Daily News broke the story early Feb. 22. "I've been asked by both the White House and by advocacy groups in the gay rights community to be the lead sponsor, and I am glad to do," Lieberman told columnist James Kirchick.

By mid-morning, Lieberman issued a statement. "I will be proud to be a sponsor of the important effort to enable patriotic gay Americans to defend our national security and our founding values of freedom and opportunity," he said, noting his long-standing opposition dating back to its inception.

 "To exclude one group of Americans from serving in the armed forces is contrary to our fundamental principles as outlined in the Declaration of Independence and weakens our defenses by denying our military the service of a large group of Americans who can help our cause," he said.

In his remarks, Lieberman credited President Obama for his "leadership," as well as "support" from Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Michael Mullen.

For any number of reasons, lift-the-ban proponents believe Lieberman, a strong military defense "hawk," is best suited to champion repeal, including his seniority on the armed services committee, close ties to the defense establishment, and credibility with the active duty service members and veterans, according to Alexander Nicholson, executive director of Washington, D.C.-based Servicemembers United, the nation's largest organization of gay and lesbian troops, veterans and allies. 

Additionally, repeal advocates hope Lieberman's status as an Independent would bridge between the partisan divide over repeal, with few Republicans favoring repeal and many Democrats in support. Lieberman even has close ties with McCain, who ardently opposes any changes in the policy.

Sure enough, all eyes are on U.S. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine. As ranking member on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, she serves along with Lieberman, its chairman. His good working relationship with her could help bring her on board as a co-sponsor.

"We remain hopeful the Senate bill introduction will be bipartisan and look forward to the specifics on language and a timeline," said Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Washington, D.C.-based Servicemembers Legal Defense Network ( SLDN ) , which seeks to provide information and assistance to service members threatened or discharged under the policy.

  "We hope the Lieberman bill closely mirrors the Military Readiness Enhancement Act in the House of Representatives," he added, referring to a bill introduced to lift the ban by Rep. Patrick J. Murphy, D-Penn., an Iraqi war veteran, which now has 187 House Sponsors—just 31 votes shy of the 218 votes to assure repeal in the House.

Meanwhile, the details of Lieberman's proposed legislation have not yet been made public. Accordingly, Nicholson of Servicemembers United declined to comment "about the extent to which our proposal is being utilized to construct the bill," he said. Still, " We've been working with [ Lieberman's ] office closely and the White House, though, so I think we'll be pleased."

Several weeks ago, Servicemembers United in fact released a repeal proposal, right after Secretary Gates and Joint Chiefs chair Adm. Mullen, testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee, indicating their support for allowing gays to serve, but only after a year-long study, which would allow the Pentagon to analyze implementation before the actual repeal takes effect. 

Gates voiced hope that within 45 days steps could be taken to ease enforcement of the current policy.

So far the reaction from leaders of leading gay-rights organizations has been immediate and upbeat. "Senator Lieberman's announcement of the introduction of a Senate repeal bill is a welcome development following what has already been a historic several weeks in the campaign to end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell,'" said Human Rights Campaign ( HRC ) President Joe Solmonese.

  "As a member of the Armed Services Committee and a longtime leader on issues of national security and foreign policy, Senator Lieberman's leadership on this bill is another positive sign that 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' can end this year."

Grassroots activists and gay-rights organizations show little sign of letting up in marshalling of public support to end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." HRC, the nation's largest gay political organization, recently launched a lift-the-ban initiative, called "Voices of Honor," to organize veterans in key states that may lobby for critical to votes in the House and Senate to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

Additionally, Internet activists have ramped-up advocacy, with a bloggers' "swarm" announced last week calling on HRC to press its influence on Congress and the White House for repeal.

The California-based Courage Campaign, an Internet based advocacy organization, preservers with a letter writing campaign—now nearly 500,000 strong—of correspondence to the President Obama, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and the Army in support of ending "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

The push to lift the ban on gays in the armed forces took off last month when the president called for its repeal during the State of the Union Address. Secretary Gates' and Admiral Mullen's testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, days later, boosted repeal efforts.

Since then former Secretary of Defense Colin Powell and former Vice President Dick Cheney have also called for a review and end to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," adding more momentum.

Passed by Congress in 1993 and signed into law by President Bill Clinton, "Don't Ask Don't Tell" mandates the discharge of openly gay, lesbian, or bisexual service members. So far nearly 14,000 service members have been fired for forced out under the law since its implementation in 1994, including 800 people with specialties such as Arabic language expertise, according to SLDN.

But gay-rights advocates believe repealing the ban is long overdue, pointing to changes in public opinion polling that show overwhelming support for allowing gays to serve. A recent Washington Post/ABC News poll, for example, conducted last week found that 75 percent of Americans believe openly lesbian and gay citizens should be able to serve in the U.S. military, compared to 44 percent who favored openly gay service in 1993 polling.

What's more, recent polling data form the Center for American Progress found that voters value skills over sexual orientation and that repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is not a polarizing issue among likely voters, even in 2010 battleground congressional districts and Senate races.

The price tag of enforcing the policy is staggering, another reason offered for repeal. A 2005 estimated from the Government Accountability Office ( GAO ) found that the cost of discharging and soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen fired because of their sexual orientation during the first ten years of the policy totaled at least $190.5 million, amounting to roughly $20,000 per service member discharged.

And yet a more recent study by the Palm Center, a think tank at the University of California, Santa Barbara, found that the GAO's analysis left out of consideration the high cost of training discharge commissioned officers for being gay. Factoring in that cost, the Palm Center calculated a $363.8 million total cost to taxpayers, representing a $173.3 million increase—or 91 percent, more than the GAO's original estimate.

Meanwhile, debate continues this week on Capitol Hill over ending "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, with testimony expected before the Senate Armed Services Committee from the secretaries of the Army and Navy, along with their respective service chiefs.

This week, the Palm Center is also set to release a report, a comprehensive new study on foreign militaries that already allow openly gay service members. The 152-page report, "Gays in Foreign Militaries 2010: A Global Primer" concludes that a quick implementation of the change is not disruptive and in fact is the preferred strategy.

The study's principal author, Nathaniel Frank, who also wrote the book "Unfriendly Fire: How the Gay Ban Undermines the Military and Weakens America," said in telephone interview that the study's finding stands in direct opposition to the views of Pentagon leaders, who have asked for a year or more to end and are also opposed to the 1993 Rand Report, which found that "phased-in implementation might allow enemies of the new policy to intentionally create problems to prove the policy unworkable."