[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 8 (Thursday, February 3, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[Congressional Record: February 3, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the nomination.
The assistant legislative clerk read the nomination of William J.
Perry of California to be the Secretary of Defense.
The Senate proceeded to consider the nomination.
Mr. NUNN. Madam President, I am pleased that the Senate of the United
States is considering the nomination of William J. Perry, to be
Secretary of Defense. Earlier today the Armed Services Committee voted
unanimously to report this nomination to the Senate recommending our
approval of the nomination. President Clinton announced his intent to
nominate Dr. Perry to be Secretary of Defense on January 24, and the
Senate received Dr. Perry's nomination on January 26.
The Armed Services Committee considered Dr. Perry's nomination in the
same way we consider all other nominations of this importance. We sent
our standard committee questionnaire to Dr. Perry on January 24, the
same day the President made his announcement.
The following day, January 25, after consulting with the minority, I
sent Dr. Perry a lengthy series of policy questions for his answers to
be received in writing prior to the hearing. Dr. Perry returned the
committee questionnaire on January 28. He also provided the committee
his written responses to the policy questions on the same day, and
those responses were provided immediately to all members of the
committee.
The committee received the required opinions from the General Counsel
of the Defense Department and from the Office of Government Ethics
certifying the nominee is in compliance with all applicable laws and
regulations regarding conflict of interest.
We also reviewed the report of the FBI background investigation of
Dr. Perry. Yesterday, the committee held a public hearing with Dr.
Perry. Nineteen of the committee's 22 members attended the hearing,
which lasted about 4 hours.
Dr. Perry's testimony was comprehensive from my point of view and, I
think, most members'; it was impressive and it was straightforward.
Madam President, the record clearly shows that Bill Perry is highly
qualified to serve as Secretary of Defense. He has had distinguished
careers in Government service and academia and in the private sector.
Dr. Perry has substantial expertise on national security issues and has
consistently demonstrated the high standards of personal conduct and
integrity.
Last year, he was confirmed by the Senate to serve as Deputy
Secretary of Defense, the number two position in the Department of
Defense. It is my hope, Madam President, the Senate can act promptly on
Dr. Perry's nomination, hopefully today.
Dr. Perry will be delivering a major address on national security
policy at the Wehrkunde Conference in Munich, Germany, this weekend.
The President's fiscal 1995 budget will be released on Monday of next
week, and the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff are scheduled to present the fiscal 1995 budget as well as the
5-year defense plan to the Armed Services panel next Tuesday.
Before closing, I wish to acknowledge the tremendous contributions
that Secretary Aspin has made to our national security. As Secretary of
Defense for the past year, Secretary Aspin established a foundation for
the restructuring of our defense establishment through his Bottom-Up
Review and made important strides in integrating women more fully into
the military services. As a member of the House Armed Services
Committee for 22 years and chairman of that committee for 8 years, Les
Aspin was a vigorous leader in the Congress for a strong and effective
national defense. I am grateful to Les Aspin for his service to the
Nation, and I believe I speak for all of us on the Armed Services
Committee in wishing him continued success in whatever he undertakes in
the future.
Madam President, Dr. Perry is highly qualified and suited to serve
the Nation as Secretary of Defense. He has the strong and unanimous
support and endorsement of the Armed Services Committee. I urge all of
our colleagues to support his nomination.
Mr. THURMOND addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. THURMOND. Madam President, I am pleased to join the distinguished
chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Nunn, in
recommending the confirmation of Dr. William Perry to be the 19th
Secretary of Defense.
Dr. Perry has a long and distinguished career in the public and
private sectors. As the Deputy Secretary of Defense, he was at the
forefront of acquisition reform and the modernization of our Armed
Forces. As the Secretary of Defense, I believe he will distinguish
himself by maintaining our defense interests while streamlining the
Department of Defense. In my opinion he will continue to insure a
strong and well-trained military and provide for the welfare of the men
and women who proudly wear the uniforms of our great Nation.
Madam President, I am optimistic that Dr. Perry's confirmation as
Secretary of Defense will begin a new era of consultation and
cooperation between the Department of Defense, the White House and the
Congress. I look forward to working with him and urge my colleagues,
Republican and Democrat, to give him their unanimous support.
I yield to the distinguished Senator from Indiana.
Mr. COATS addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.
Mr. COATS. Madam President, Dr. William Perry will, undoubtedly,
bring a fine mind and extensive knowledge of the Pentagon and our
Nation's military establishment to the job of Secretary of Defense.
During his 10 months as Deputy Secretary, he has done an admirable job
in running the day-to-day operation of the Pentagon, and his abilities
in the areas of research, analysis, and defense procurement are well
known. I will support his nomination as Secretary of Defense, and I
certainly wish him success in his new role.
Today's post-cold-war world, however, will require more than
technical and administrative excellence. Dr. Perry's considerable
abilities will be significantly challenged.
While many believe that domestic agendas and budget shortfalls should
now be America's top priorities, the fact remains that the world today
is probably less stable than it has been at any other time in the last
45 years.
The pressure to divert already scarce defense dollars to pay for what
might seem like more immediate domestic concerns will be great. The
temptation to defer to louder or stronger voices may at times be
overwhelming. But America's military establishment needs decisive
leadership; our military men and women need a strong advocate; and the
Nation needs a strategic thinker with America's national security
interests at heart.
I truly hope that Dr. Perry is that person to address those important
concerns.
As evidenced by Somalia, Bosnia, the former Soviet Republics, Central
Europe, the Middle East, and the Korean Peninsula, the world still
holds the potential for threats that we may not yet even recognize. At
the same time, our allies have every right to expect us to uphold the
commitments we have already made.
We must maintain a high level of military readiness. We must, at all
cost, take pains to ensure that our haunting memories of the hollow
force of the 1970's does not become a painful reality in the 1990's and
beyond.
And finally, we must ensure that our policy with regard to
homosexuals in the military--a policy that goes to the very heart of
our ability to maintain a combat-effective military force--is not
undermined by the implementation of regulations that significantly
undercut that effectiveness or erode Congress' clear intent in drafting
and passing that law.
All of these concerns will be difficult enough to meet without
adequate resources, but they will be absolutely impossible to meet
without the right leadership. The President's recent rhetoric regarding
his commitment to a strong military is somewhat reassuring. Bill Perry
is a man with the talent and experience to translate that rhetoric into
policy. Whether or not he is backed up by an administration with the
determination to accomplish the job remains to be seen.
Madam President, we have heard some reassuring rhetoric from the
President recently, particularly in his address to the Congress about
his commitment to a strong military. We will need more than rhetoric .
We will need a man with the talent and experience to translate that
rhetoric into policy. Whether or not he is backed up by an
administration, we need someone with the determination to get this job
done.
I sincerely hope and trust that Dr. Perry is this individual.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Mr. NUNN. Madam President, I yield to the Senator from Michigan 2
minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan is recognized.
Mr. LEVIN. I thank my friend from Georgia.
Madam President, Dr. Perry is the right person to run the Department
of Defense. He has the experience and he has the temperament. He has a
balanced view of the world. He is thoughtful.
Some people have said that he is not charismatic; that you need
somebody who is charismatic to run the Pentagon. I disagree. We need
somebody who has the experience to change the culture there when it
comes to the procurement practices of the Pentagon. We need reform in
the way we operate the Pentagon in terms of management and in terms of
the way that we buy things. There are billions of dollars to be saved.
Dr. Perry said so yesterday.
It seems to me that if we are going to do what we must today, which
is meet those future threats--and they are real--and if we are going to
give the support to our fighting men and women--and we need to do
that--we must manage our budget a lot better. And we can do that with
Dr. Perry as Secretary of Defense.
So I think he does have the vision we need. He surely has the
thoughtful approaches that we need. He is totally committed to the
security of this country.
I am proud to support him by voting for his confirmation this
afternoon.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Mr. NUNN. Madam President, does the Senator from South Carolina need
any time?
I will be glad to yield the Senator from Virginia 3 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I wish to compliment the distinguished
chairman of the committee and the ranking member, the senior Senator
from South Carolina, for the very swift yet thorough manner of this
nomination. It is important that there be continuity in our defense
leadership.
I wish to compliment President Clinton in handling a different and a
difficult situation in the retirement of Secretary Aspin, for whom we
have great respect and gratitude for his service, and the very swift
selection of an absolutely well-qualified individual in Dr. Perry.
I have always taken an interest in this particular nomination, having
been privileged to serve in the Department under three Secretaries of
Defense, and during my tenure in the Senate having worked with five
other Secretaries.
Dr. Perry will rank at the very top among the finest of those
Secretaries of Defense in the history of the United States.
We saw yesterday in his testimony responses to the most difficult of
questions, such as North Korea--complex, unanswerable in many ways.
Yet, he went to the very heart of that serious problem consistently and
explicitly, and sent a message to this Nation.
Then he shifted to the mundane yet no less important battle of
dealing with waste, fraud, and abuse, primarily in the procurement
process in the Department of Defense.
The American taxpayer is totally intolerant, totally intolerant of
the waste, fraud, and abuse which has plagued that Department no matter
how strenuously previous Secretaries have fought that battle. Dr. Perry
is imminently qualified to deal with that problem.
Madam President, it is a privilege to have the opportunity to speak
on behalf of the nomination of Dr. William J. (Bill) Perry to become
the next Secretary of Defense. The unanimous vote for Dr. Perry by the
Armed Services Committee says a great deal about this gentleman, and he
is a true gentleman, in every sense of the word. This unanimous vote
attests to the confidence and trust the members of this committee have
in Bill Perry.
I have known Bill Perry for many years and have served with him in
many different circumstances and capacities. He has always
distinguished himself with the utmost intelligence, reason, and
integrity. He has been recognized for a long time by Senators on both
sides of the aisle as one of the most knowledgeable and respected
authorities on national security issues.
Madam President, I was particularly moved by Dr. Perry's statement
before the Armed Services Committee yesterday in his nomination hearing
and I ask unanimous consent that his statement be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the statement was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Statement by William J. Perry Before the Senate Armed Services
Committee, February 2, 1994
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I am proud to be
before you today, and humbled by President Clinton's decision
to nominate me as Secretary of Defense.
We welcome the end of the Cold War, but in the past year we
have learned to be less sanguine about the benefits we hoped
for. Many argued that with the end of the Soviet Empire there
would be little need for military forces. The ending of the
Cold War has not brought about, as Professor Fukuyama has
suggested, ``the end of history.'' History continues to be
made every day, in the hills of Bosnia, in the dusty streets
of Somalia and in the underground bunkers of North Korea.
In the past year a diverse set of national security
problems has demonstrated a critical need for strong,
flexible and ready military forces.
Today they are deployed around the globe in a variety of
postures--peacekeeping, peacemaking, border monitoring,
humanitarian relief, and deterrence through presence. Some
troops overseas are in garrisons, some are deployed for
training, but more than 80,000 are this day involved in
active operations, daily engaged in difficult duties that
only they have the skills and training to accomplish.
This past year has reemphasized that old threats can still
pose new dangers to peace and security--I refer to the
potential for conflict on the Korean Peninsula. The prospect
of the rogue regime of North Korea acquiring a nuclear
weapons capability to add to their massive conventional
forces is emblematic of proliferation problems we face. We
are continuing aggressive diplomatic efforts to deal with
this nightmare scenario, but the presence of 100,000 US
soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines in the Western Pacific
is a major factor in our deterrence planning.
We also have seen that the road to democracy and stability
in Russia is going to be rocky and twisted. The emergence of
powerful reactionary forces is challenging progress toward
the building of democratic institutions and traditions. No
national security issue is more important to us and to our
children than a stable government in Russia dedicated to
democracy.
Of course we cannot control the outcome of events in
Russia--only the Russian people can; but we can have a
significant positive influence. President Clinton has made
assisting Russian democratic reform a top national security
priority. And the Department of Defense has played a key role
in this effort.
We have initiated actions to facilitate a safe and speedy
reduction in nuclear forces. The trilateral nuclear agreement
recently signed by Presidents Clinton, Yeltsin and Kravchuk
is a concrete result of these actions.
We have initiated actions to assist US businesses in the
effort to convert Russian defense enterprises to the
production of commercial products.
We have promoted military-to-military contacts at every
level. Whatever happens in Russia, the military will continue
to be an influential institution, and we want to do what we
can to encourage the Russian military to be a force for
reform, not an opponent of reform.
And President Clinton's leadership has been instrumental in
launching the Partnership for Peace initiative with NATO. The
Department will have the key US role in carrying out the
practical implementation steps.
All of these efforts are dedicated to supporting the
Administration's efforts to integrate Russia with the rest of
the world and lock in democratic reforms. These efforts are
conditioned on progress. We must stay engaged with our Allies
in case the process is reversed, but we must be patient and
not be deterred by temporary setbacks.
These are just several examples of the important and
diverse missions that the US military is performing and will
continue to perform in the post-Cold War era.
All of these missions are occurring in a period of
declining defense budgets. The decline is consistent with the
reduced threat to the United States and US interests. But it
does present us with the difficult problem of managing these
assets and forces during the transition.
Historically we have not managed well such budget declines
and attendant downsizing. The experiences are will known and
well documented. The rapid contraction after World War II
gave us forces which were inadequate to the challenge of the
onset of the Korean War. The post-Vietnam downsizing gave us
the ``hollow force'' of the mid-70's. This time we must get
it right, or we will pay the cost later either in blood or
treasure or both.
This is the daunting challenge facing the Secretary of
Defense today, and I understand the difficulty of the
problems I will face if I am confirmed. I am proud of the
confidence shown in me by President Clinton in asking me to
undertake the responsibilities of the US Secretary of
Defense.
Broadly summarized, I see those responsibilities falling
into six areas.
First, the Secretary of Defense has the responsibility to
oversee the Joint Staff and the CINCs in their direction of
military operations. If I am confirmed as Secretary, I pledge
to give first priority to reviewing and assessing war plans
and deployment orders, and I pledge to provide the required
support to CINCs as they direct our forces in the field.
Second, the Secretary of Defense has the responsibility to
ensure readiness through oversight of the services as they
equip and train our forces. They are right now, as President
Clinton said: ``they will remain the best equipped, the best
trained, and the best prepared fighting force on the face of
the earth.''
Third, the Secretary of Defense must be a key member of our
national security team. President Clinton, in his recent
summit meetings, demonstrated the vision we need. But the
waters are uncharted, and we owe the President our best
advice and counsel in planning strategy as we maneuver
through the shoals of the post-Cold War era. If confirmed, I
pledge to work constructively and with the best of my ability
as an active member of that team, fully engaged on all issues
of national security significance.
Fourth, the Secretary of Defense is responsible for the
military component of our national security strategy. This
requires strong relations with the respect for the military
leadership so we can make full use of their talents and
expertise to get the best ideas and options. Secretary Aspin
left us an excellent legacy in his Bottom Up Review. We will
build on that excellent base. If confirmed, I pledge to lead
a strong team effort, of military and civilians alike, in the
Department to prepare the military strategy and options we
need.
Fifth, the Secretary of Defense must prepare for approval
by the President and congress the annual defense budgets
which make difficult resource allocations and program
decisions. If confirmed, I pledge to work with the military
and the Congress in that effort. But I will not shirk from
making the tough choices necessary to ensure we provide the
nation with the ready forces necessary to carry out our
strategy.
Sixth, the Secretary of Defense must manage resources,
particularly during this difficult drawdown period. If
confirmed, I pledge to institute innovative management
techniques, to vigorously foster acquisition reform and to
preserve the necessary industrial base. I also pledge to tell
you what help I need from Congress to allow me to fulfill
this responsibility.
Finally, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I
pledge myself to the service of the men and women who today
wear the uniform of the United States military, and to those
men and women who will wear it in the future.
In the Pentagon, in the stairwell near my office, is a
painting of a soldier in church praying with his family,
perhaps before a deployment overseas. Below it are inscribed
the words from Isaiah: ``Whom shall I send and who will go
for us?'' The men and women in uniform have responded to the
nation's call with, ``Here am I: Send me.'' We owe them, I
owe them, my best possible effort, and they shall have it.
Thank you very much.
Mr. WARNER. Madam President, Dr. Perry spoke eloquently about the
challenges which face our Nation and which he, in particular, will face
if he is confirmed by this body as the Secretary of Defense. He also
pledged his best possible effort to the men and women in uniform who
serve our Nation.
Dr. Perry has demonstrated the highest standards of professionalism
and experienced success in positions of great responsibility in both
the Government as well as the private sector. His knowledge of
Government acquisition is without equal and will continue to be of
great value to the Department of Defense as we strive to achieve more
and more defense out of each dollar we spend.
I was impressed, by the way Dr. Perry considered the impact on his
family prior to accepting the President's nomination to this demanding
position. Having met his family, I understand clearly why they would be
a factor in his decision-making, but his taking the time to consider
the impact of his decision on his family says a great deal about this
man.
One of Virginia's greatest statesmen, Thomas Jefferson, once said,
``God grant that men of principle shall be our principal men.'' Bill
Perry is such a man.
The President has chosen wisely by sending forward a nominee of such
stature and character and I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of his
nomination.
Madam President, in closing, I would also like to say a few words
about my good friend and colleague, Les Aspin with whom I worked many
years on national security issues here in the Congress and during his
tenure as the Secretary of Defense. Les Aspin has given greatly and
unselfishly of himself to the Nation and has had a great impact on this
Nation's military forces and the successful outcome of the cold war. He
was also one of the first and most steadfast supporters of President
Bush's stand against Iraq in the war in the Persian Gulf.
I am sure that all my colleagues join me in thanking Les for his
great service to the Nation and in wishing him success in all his
future endeavors. I hope that we will not lose his great expertise in
national security issues and that he will continue to contribute in
some way to those matters that affect the security of this Nation.
Madam President, I yield the floor.
Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I inquire if there are any more
Republicans who wish to speak on this nomination. If not that is all we
have.
statement on the nomination of dr. william j. perry to be secretary of
defense
Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. President, I am very pleased to see that the
nomination of Dr. William J. Perry--to be Secretary of Defense--was
reported out of the Armed Services Committee by a unanimous vote today.
Dr. Perry has been the number two official at the Pentagon for the past
year. Prior to his Pentagon experience, he was recognized for his
brilliant work in Silicon Valley. Because of his work on the stealth
fighter, which we saw so effectively used in the Persian Gulf war, he
has been called the father of stealth technology.
At his confirmation hearings this week, he addressed all questions
posed to him in a remarkable fashion. During the committee hearing,
Secretary-designate Perry talked about the possible tragic quagmire we
may yet face in North Korea. He feels that we should use a ``carrot and
stick'' approach in North Korea. I would agree with him, but I feel we
should be more coherent than we have been to date.
North Korea must realize that they must conform with international
law and the International Atomic Energy Agency's ruling regarding the
inspection of nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, this administration has
sent mixed signals to North Korea, and I would hope that policy does
not continue under William Perry.
I know this man. I met him when he was serving in the Carter
administration. I have high personal regard for him. He will do us
proud. My wife Ann and I wish him and his fine and capable wife Lee,
our very best in their new endeavors for our country.
I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this nomination.
Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I know that in just a few moments the
Senate will be voting on Bill Perry to be the Secretary of Defense. I
look forward to voting for Bill Perry for that position. Many of us
know of the very effective work he has done in the Defense Department a
number of years ago and during these recent months as Deputy Secretary
of Defense.
All of us who have watched Bill Perry, have been impressed by the
contributions he has made to public policy, even when he has not been
in the Defense Department--even when he was not serving in any
administration. This was true at Stanford University; true at the
National Academy of Sciences. He worked as one of our most important
and distinguished advisers in the Office of Technology Assessment, at a
time when the OTA had become one of the most invaluable institutions
available to this Congress in making tough and difficult decisions on
matters of technology. His life has been associated with public
service, and all of us who know him and who have worked with him know
that we are extremely fortunate to have his continued service as the
Secretary of Defense.
I applaud the work of a very valued and dear former colleague of
mine, Les Aspin, and pay tribute to his very distinguished life and
service as a Congressman, as chairman of the Armed Services Committee
in the House, and as Secretary of Defense. I look forward to his
continued involvement in public policy, and I look forward to voting
for Bill Perry.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I wish to express my wholehearted support
for the nomination of William J. Perry to be the next Secretary of
Defense. Mr. Perry's eminent career both with the Government and in the
private sector demonstrates that he is the man that the Department of
Defense needs at this critical juncture. The country is indeed
fortunate that the President of the United States has tapped this very
capable man to lead the Defense Department.
Mr. Perry's distinguished career is part of the public record, so I
will not reiterate his many accomplishments now. Nevertheless, his
career shows an individual who is highly qualified to manage the needed
reductions in the Defense Department while at the same time ensuring
that the United States remains capable of defending freedom and
protecting democracy around the world. His initiatives to streamline
the defense acquisition process, while saving the taxpayers a great
deal of money, will cut needless bureaucratic red tape and make the
process more responsive to our operational commanders. Furthermore, his
understanding of the defense industrial base will ensure that much
needed capabilities in the industrial base are retained and that
needless duplication is eliminated. We should all be optimistic about
the future of the defense establishment while it is in the hands of
this very capable individual.
I would like to add that, from my personal experience, I have found
Mr. Perry to be very helpful when dealing with the Congress and to be
sensitive to local needs. In Livingston, MT, it appeared that a
contentious issue was developing over the construction of a tower for a
relay node of the Ground Wave Emergency Network. Mr. Perry's personal
intervention as the Deputy Secretary of Defense quickly averted any
chance for continued controversy, and as a result, the interests of
national security and the local community were served equally well. Mr.
Perry's sound and sensitive judgment made the difference.
So, Mr. President, I add my strong support in favor of Mr. Perry's
nomination to be the next Secretary of Defense. His capable leadership
and sound judgment will successfully take the Department through the
interesting challenges that lie ahead. I look forward to working with
him on the many important defense issues that are in front of us.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I wish to express my support for the
nomination of Dr. William Perry to be Secretary of Defense. During this
period of continued uncertainly in the world, it is essential that the
Pentagon have a strong and steady voice in the formulation of our
national security policy. I hope that his counsel will be taken
seriously.
I am very concerned about both the size and the pace of defense
reductions. Since 1985, the national defense budget has declined by 34
percent, and if we continue down the track laid out last year by the
Clinton administration, we will have reduced real defense spending by
43 percent by 1998. The devastating impact of the planned future cuts
will greatly exceed the level of pain experienced by defense industry
and the Armed Forces in the drawdown to date.
One of the greatest responsibilities of the Secretary of Defense is
to ensure that adequate resources are available to maintain the
capability and readiness of our Armed Forces to ensure our security,
respond to future crises, and support our international commitments. I
seriously question whether this administration's Defense budget is
adequate to sustain the force levels required to carry out the stated
strategy.
And one of the greatest challenges facing the new Secretary of
Defense, regardless of the budget topline, will be to manage the
ongoing builddown of our military forces. Some hard decisions are
required to ensure that scarce defense dollars are wisely spent.
I am very concerned about the deleterious impact of steadily
declining Defense budgets on the All Volunteer Force, on the men and
women in uniform, especially minorities, and on military families. The
current drawdown of over 400,000 military personnel and another 100,000
civilians has created severe hardships for those involuntarily
separated from the force, even though transition benefits are in place.
We will need to watch carefully how many service members voluntarily
accept transition benefits as we continue to draw down the force, and
we may want to consider fine tuning this program if the results are not
as beneficial as expected.
In addition, the negative impact on recruiting, as well as morale and
unit cohesion in the Active Force, is becoming more serious. These
factors, if ignored, will seriously impair our Nation's ability to deal
effectively with any future national security threats.
Within this body, I intend to pursue the elimination of unnecessary
and wasteful pork-barrel spending and earmarking, which could save as
much as $5 or $6 billion every year for important military
requirements. And this figure does not even include the cost of the
Seawolf submarine program--a high-technology boondoggle--which is the
largest single pork-barrel item in the Defense budget today. Funds set
aside for these programs could instead be used to minimize further end
strength cuts and for other validated military requirements. I hope
that Dr. Perry will act decisively to propose rescission of
unauthorized appropriations and congressionally earmarked funds.
Another place to look for funds that could be better used to fund
military requirements is in the defense conversion accounts. I applaud
the impetus behind allocating defense funds to convert defense
industries to commercially viable enterprises. However, my fears have
been realized: Defense conversion has become a slush fund for Congress
to earmark dollars for noncompetitive university or institutional
grants with little or no benefit for either the military or commercial
enterprise. We should look carefully at the Technology Reinvestment
Program and other accounts to ensure that the billions of dollars set
aside for conversion are used for their intended purpose.
Mr. President, I know that Dr. Perry shares my goal of maintaining a
high level of readiness of our much smaller military force. As early as
last July, when I asked for information from the Service Chiefs, I
found that serious indications of declining readiness had already
emerged in many areas. Again, dollars wasted on pork-barrel projects
could be spent for training, depot maintenance, spare parts, and other
areas where the readiness trends are declining. I look forward to
reviewing the fiscal year 1995 budget request with an eye toward
rectifying these problems, and I trust Dr. Perry will work with the
Congress to ensure that these shortcomings are addressed quickly.
Finally, on the issue of defense industrial base requirements, the
Congress anxiously awaits the Department's recommendations on this
urgent issue. It has become a popular political tool to claim that any
program which may be cut or reduced is somehow vital to the defense
industrial base. That claim helped defeat my amendment last year to
reassess the Seawolf Program. Industrial base concerns have been
invoked for everything from ammunition plants to manufacturers of
chemical protective clothing. We need the input of the Department of
Defense in order to properly assess these statements. I am confident
Dr. Perry will do everything possible to submit the Department's views
to Congress as quickly as possible.
Mr. President, I must also note that I intend to pursue with Dr.
Perry an area of serious disagreement on a policy matter. I have had
the opportunity to review a Brookings publication entitled ``A New
Concept of Cooperative Security,'' which Dr. Perry coauthored. To my
dismay, this publication appears to set forth a premise which is a
matter of some concern to me; namely, that multilateral cooperative
engagement is the new strategic imperative which should take precedence
over actions based on unilateral national security concerns. In
addition, many of the statements made in the paper appear to endorse
the establishment of a standing U.S. military force--a prospect with
which I strongly disagree. I have not had an opportunity to raise these
issues with Dr. Perry, and I hope that he will be able to clarify his
views on these matters.
Mr. President, Dr. Perry's qualifications are impressive, and he has
an excellent record of public service. I support his nomination and
look forward to working with him during a very challenging period for
the Pentagon and for U.S. national security overall.
____________________