[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 193 (Wednesday, December 6, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S18059]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   OPERATIONAL TESTING AND EVALUATION

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I want to address the Senate for just 
maybe 3 or 4 minutes, 5 or 6 at the most, on something that Senator 
Pryor and Senator Roth have already addressed, something that we three 
have worked on over quite a few years. It deals with a matter of 
defense and an operation within defense that is going to make sure that 
we get the most money for our defense dollar and to make sure that a 
weapon system that we are producing is effective and safe.
  Mr. President, I am amazed that I have to stand before you to say 
what I am about to say. I never thought I would have to rise to speak 
out to defend this program. But, then again, I continue to be 
astonished by the shortsighted and misguided actions of so many people 
in this town.
  Nearly 12 years ago, there was a bipartisan effort to create the 
Office of Operational Test and Evaluation [OT&E] at the Department of 
Defense. OT&E was created in response to a very simple idea: We should 
not spend billions of dollars of the taxpayers money before we know 
that a weapons works and will be safe and effective for our men and 
women in uniform.
  The OT&E Office has been an unqualified success. It has saved the 
taxpayers billions. The cancellation of that boondoggle, the Sgt. York 
[DIVAD] antiaircraft weapon, was due in part to the work of OT&E. 
Cancelling the DIVAD saved the taxpayers billions. More important, it 
ensured we didn't give our soldiers poor, unsafe equipment.
  But far more important, OT&E has saved lives. There is no question 
that the modifications made to the Bradley fighting vehicle to enhance 
its survivability ensured that many young soldiers came home from the 
Persian Gulf.
  Former Defense Secretary Dick Cheney said that the vigorous, 
independent testing oversight put in place with the creation of OT&E by 
Congress saved more lives than perhaps any other single initiative.
  Now, what is our response to these accolades? To these successes? Why 
of course, we get rid of it. Incredibly this is actually being proposed 
right now by the DOD authorization conferees.
  OT&E asks the tough questions on weapons effectiveness, and it looks 
closely at the answers. It does this independent of the services and 
the procurement bureaucracy at the Pentagon. So why would we want to 
eliminate this important check and balance?
  Simply put, OT&E is a vital check in ensuring that the taxpayers get 
the best bang for the buck and that the safety of our troops is the top 
priority.
  The people who are clamoring to get rid of OT&E are upset because 
OT&E is a roadblock to their top priority: ripping the money sacks open 
at both ends, and pitchforking dollars to defense contractors as 
quickly as possible.
  These are people who must believe DOD exists merely as an expressway 
to pad the coffers of contractors. And they want to get rid of this 
small speed bump, the Office of Operational Test and Evaluation, 
because it slows down the flow of money.
  Mr. President, I am particularly saddened that this is happening 
under a Republican Congress. I have been assured by Republican House 
leaders that Pentagon reform is around the corner, even though in the 
DOD authorization bill we are throwing more money at the Pentagon. But 
I must say, if this is their idea of reform, they'll have an unexpected 
battle on their flank. And I'll be leading the charge once again, just 
as I did in the mid-1980's. And we will win again.
  House Republicans say they want to reform the Pentagon so much that 
it will become a triangle. This action undermines any claims by 
Republicans in the Congress that they are for reforming the Pentagon.
  I am very fearful that this Congress has badly confused its 
principles. Being for a strong defense means ensuring that our troops 
get the safest and most effective weapons for our troops. It does not 
mean ensuring only a steady and increasing cash flow for defense 
contractors.
  And let me say, while the actions of the Congress are inexcusable, 
the administration's actions are no better.
  We have heard not a word from the administration about the 
elimination of OT&E. How the administration, in the middle of sending 
our troops into Bosnia, can sit idly by and say and do nothing while 
OT&E is being eliminated is beyond comprehension. What kind of signal 
does that send to our troops?
  Mr. President, as I said at the beginning of my speech, I am 
astonished that I am standing on the Senate floor having to debate this 
issue. This is a sad day for the taxpayers and even a sadder day for 
our troops.
  I strongly hope the conferees will reconsider this disastrous 
proposal and not bring the DOD authorization bill to the floor until it 
is resolved.
  I also wish to commend my colleagues, Senator Roth and Senator Pryor, 
for their staunch support for this office, both at its creation, and 
especially now. Their eloquent speeches on this floor earlier today 
speak to their leadership on this issue. And I would like to add my 
support to their effort to give our troops the very best equipment for 
their safety.
  Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________