[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 98 (Thursday, June 15, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1253]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996

                                 ______


                               speech of

                        HON. CAROLYN B. MALONEY

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, June 13, 1995

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1530) to 
     authorized appropriations for fiscal year 1996 for military 
     activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe 
     military personnel strengths for fiscal year 1996, and for 
     other purposes:

  Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise to briefly discuss the amendment--
included in the en bloc amendment--of the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. 
Gillmor] and the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Edwards].
  Mr. Speaker, although the Civilian Marksmanship Program is but a 
minuscule piece of the Federal Government, I think this is a historic 
occasion.
  It is noteworthy because as the leading opponent of the Civilian 
Marksmanship Program in Congress over the past 3 years, I now support 
much of what the leading proponents are trying to do--change and reform 
this long out-dated program.
  My colleagues, it has taken 92 years to begin to do the right thing.
  Founded in 1903 after the Spanish-American War, the program was 
intended to teach our new recruits how to shoot straight.
  We won that War. And it is long past time to declare victory and get 
rid of this program.
  But for nearly a century, U.S. taxpayers were called upon to spend 
their money--last year it was $2.5 million--on a program which the 
Department of Defense said serves absolutely no military purpose.
  Instead, the program gives away 40 million rounds of free ammunition, 
along with cut-rate guns to rifle clubs to use in target practice 
competitions.
  It simply make no fiscal or military sense.
  And lately, the Civilian Marksmanship Program took on a more sinister 
appearance, which the gentleman's amendment acknowledges. Investigative 
reporting uncovered clear links between participants in this program 
and extremist militias.
  I am pleased that Mr. Gillmor's proposal moves us in the right 
direction on a number of these issues.
  First and foremost, the annual $2.5 million giveaway of taxpayer 
money is gone.
  The program will cease to be an instrument of the military--where it 
serves absolutely no purpose--and instead will become a private 
nonprofit corporation associated with the U.S. Olympic Committee.
  I have always stated that I have no problem with teaching rifle 
safety and sharpshooting. But I consistently objected to the taxpayers 
footing the bill under the guise of military preparedness.
  Mr. Speaker, I do have some very serious concerns about the 
amendment.
  I am not at all comfortable with its provision to turn over an 
inventory of 70,000 M-1 rifles to the new corporation, and to allow a 
new type of weapon--.22 caliber rifles--to be sold as well.
  It seems to me that we need less, not more, excess Government 
weaponry spread around our country. I will be watching this program 
very closely over the coming months to ensure that these weapons are 
not being abused.
  As troubled as I am by this provision, it is clear that the gentleman 
from Ohio has the votes, and he and my friend from Texas, Chet Edwards, 
have made a good faith effort to reform this pork-ridden boondoggle.
  The amendment, while not perfect, it a vast improvement over current 
law.


                          ____________________