[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 145 (Friday, October 7, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: October 7, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                    NOMINATION OF BUSTER C. GLOSSON

  Mr. GRASSLEY. For the benefit of people who maybe want to speak on 
any of the subjects that are before the Senate tonight, three 
nominations and the national park bill, I am going to speak just for 3 
or 4 more minutes on Glosson, and then I hope to later on involve 
myself with some questioning of the chairman of the committee, after he 
has spoken. I still have not spoken at all on the Barry nomination or 
the Bolton promotion, and I have in that area a lot of things that I 
wish to say, as well. So I will be speaking just for 3 or 4 more 
minutes, finishing up one point that I wish to make on Glosson, and 
then I intend to yield the floor.
  Before I yielded to the distinguished floor managers to take care of 
a lot of other business, I was complimenting the Armed Services 
Committee for all the efforts they had put forth to clean up the 
promotion process and some of the problems connected with it.
  I see the Glosson nomination as something sitting there reminding us 
all the time that this situation has not improved from the problems 
that were brought up as far back as Secretary Weinberger.
  So we have had these three senior Air Force generals step forward and 
they blew the whistle. They did that at great personal risk.
  That is how this whole process is supposed to work. I think that is 
the way the committee wanted it to work. That is the way it should 
work. And that is how we want it to work. As General Sullivan testified 
before the committee when the committee was holding hearings on this 
subject, honesty in the officer corps depends upon an honest promotion 
process. I think he was saying that honesty breeds honesty. And honesty 
is the cornerstone of leadership. A good leadership is key to a strong 
military force.
  All of the committee's hard work will go down the drain, in my 
estimation, if we let this bad example of Glosson abusing the system, 
trying to peddle influence--if this nomination goes through and the 
stamp of approval is on it, it is just like the Senate has turned its 
back on all those problems that have been so well exposed by the Senate 
Armed Services Committee. It is just a step backwards. The entire Armed 
Forces and, most importantly, senior Air Force officers I believe are 
watching us closely, waiting to see what we do on the Glosson 
nomination.
  Now, as I said earlier, maybe you do not get a clear picture of these 
junior officers and other military people calling your office and 
telling you of problems like this, and that Glosson should not get a 
nomination, and it sends a bad signal--or letters that I have received. 
Maybe I should not make my judgment that that is the basis for saying 
that this is a bad example, but I have to draw that conclusion.
  I know that because of these many telephone calls and letters that I 
have received. That is the message I am getting. I think it is loud and 
clear. If we reject the nomination, I think that would be a stern 
warning that if anybody is going to tamper with the board, you will get 
nailed. That would deter others from tampering with selection boards 
down the road. That is the signal that I believe we in the Senate 
should be sending when we consider this nomination. If we approve of 
the Glosson nomination, I think senior officers may say to themselves, 
well, if Glosson can do it and get away with it, then I am going to do 
it.
  In a sense, Mr. President, this is where the rubber meets the road. 
Do we hold Glosson accountable and keep trying to bring integrity to 
the selection process or do we cave in to pressure? Do we reward 
Glosson and do we forget about integrity in the process?
  Mr. President, in my mind, we do not have a choice. We have a 
responsibility to hold General Glosson accountable for misconduct, as 
unpleasant as that may be.
  Misconduct must have unpleasant consequences. Without accountability, 
nothing else the Senate does will count for much. All of the fancy 
words and all of the well-meaning legislation will be nothing more than 
hollow promises.
  Rules must be followed, rules must be enforced, and when rules are 
broken, those responsible must be held accountable. That is where we 
are with the Glosson nomination. General Glosson broke the rules. It 
seems to me he must face the music. Confirmation by the Senate is a 
reward and an honor, a reward and an honor given only to those who have 
demonstrated the highest levels of integrity and outstanding 
performance of duty.
  Lt. Gen. Buster Glosson does not meet those standards. General 
Glosson does not deserve the honor of Senate confirmation.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. CRAIG addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Simon). The Senator from Idaho.

                          ____________________