[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 70 (Wednesday, June 8, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: June 8, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
SOLOMON AMENDMENT ON MILITARY RECRUITMENT ON CAMPUS INTRODUCES A USEFUL 
                       MEASURE OF ACCOUNTABILITY

                                 ______


                           HON. DOUG BEREUTER

                              of nebraska

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, June 8, 1994

  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, shortly before this body recessed for the 
Memorial Day district work session, this body approved an amendment to 
the defense authorization that prohibits research grants to colleges 
and universities who prohibit military recruiters from using their 
campus facilities. This Member strongly supported the amendment, and 
congratulates the distinguished Member from New York [Mr. Solomon] for 
raising the issue.
  At the present time, military recruiting is banned at over 130 
institutions of higher learning, largely in response to the Pentagon's 
position on homosexuals in the military. In banning military 
recruiters, the universities are making wholly inappropriate value 
judgments about the Armed Forces, and they undermine the absolutely 
essential efforts of the Armed Forces to recruit and retain the highest 
quality military force.
  While a university may have the right to ban military recruiters on a 
matter of principle, it is also true that the U.S. Government can 
respond by denying the billions of dollars of defense research grants 
that traditionally go to these institutions. This is precisely what the 
Solomon amendment would have done, and in doing so, an important 
measure of accountability would have been introduced into the matter.
  As was noted in a May 25, 1994 editorial in the Omaha World Herald,

        No one proposed to take away their freedom to weigh their 
     options and decide what is more important--protesting the 
     ROTC policy or being eligible for the coveted research funds. 
     Those are the kinds of moral choices that individuals and 
     organizations have to make all the time. No reason exists 
     that universities shouldn't have to face the consequences of 
     their actions.

  Mr. Speaker, this Member would ask to place in the Congressional 
Record the Omaha World Herald editorial, entitled ``If Recruiters Not 
Welcome, Forget the Cash.'' This Member would commend it to his 
colleagues.

              [From the Omaha World Herald, May 25, 1994]

               If Recruiters Not Welcome, Forget the Cash

       The U.S. House Tuesday advanced an amendment that, if it 
     becomes law, should help some colleges and universities 
     follow their principles more consistently.
       It applies to institutions of higher education that won't 
     let military recruiters use campus facilities. By a vote of 
     271-126, the House said that no recruiting should mean no 
     research money from the Department of Defense.
       That logical philosophy is the work of Rep. Gerald Solomon, 
     a New York Republican. * * * Solomon said he considers it 
     outrageous that recruiting isn't allowed on a number of 
     campuses. Branches of the State University of New York, among 
     others, have banned it in retaliation for a Reserve Officers 
     Training Corps policy of not accepting gays and lesbians as 
     ROTC cadets. SUNY administrators said the Solomon amendment 
     would cost the system's 29 campuses about $21 million a year.
       Nationwide, recruiting is banned at an estimated 130 
     colleges and universities. Alarm about Solomon's amendment 
     was quick to materialize. Critics said withholding defense 
     contracts would harm some of the nation's best universities.
       But the nation's best universities will be harmed only if 
     they let themselves be harmed. No one proposes to take away 
     their freedom to weigh their options and decide what is more 
     important--protesting the ROTC policy or being eligible for 
     the coveted research funds. Those are the kinds of moral 
     choices that individuals and organizations have to make all 
     the time. No reason exists that universities shouldn't have 
     to face the consequences of their actions.
       The Solomon amendment, if enacted, would present logical 
     consequences to be considered. It would also present an 
     opportunity for colleges and universities--the opportunity to 
     resolve the moral contradiction they create when they snub 
     military recruiters while soaking up all the Pentagon 
     research dollars they can get their hands on.

                          ____________________