[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 26, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2846-S2847]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            NAVAL PROMOTIONS

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, 2 weeks ago I spoke in support of the 
Senate Armed Services Committee not granting promotion to Comdr. Robert 
Stumpf. Last Thursday night I had an opportunity to listen to Senator 
Coats, Senator Byrd, and Senator Nunn speak on the same subject. I 
agree with everything they said. I will speak, once again, on that same 
subject but put it in a little broader context.
  Before I do that, there was, last Thursday, in the Washington Post 
this article about Commander Stumpf and the Navy, pushing for his 
promotion to be granted again. I suppose that means it will come back 
to the Senate Armed Services Committee sometime in the future.
  If people wonder why this might not be granted, I read a paragraph 
from this article. It talks about the Tailhook conference 4 years ago 
in Nevada. It talks about the behavior at the Tailhook convention in 
September 1991. It drew scrutiny on at least two accounts about the 
behavior of Commander Stumpf. It says he was present in a hotel room 
hosted by his squadron where two strippers performed, although he left 
the room before one of the women engaged in a sex act with another 
airman. Now, he avoids all responsibility for that. I assume that is 
the moral of the story, why it should not be considered in whether or 
not he gets a promotion.
  It would be similar if I had a Christmas party for my staff and I 
hired a couple of strippers, and before they did their act, before 
other things would happen, I leave the party and claim no 
responsibility for that. Commander Stumpf was the commander. It was his 
group that was involved. He thinks he can avoid responsibility for what 
goes on there. I think not.
  But also for the entire Navy, I point out that when you have that 
sort of convention, it is under the auspice of the U.S. military, and 
we have two strippers hired and a sex act performed with an airman, I 
remind the Navy--and I say this because farming is my background and my 
son operates our family farm--that is the way animals operate. Animals 
operate that way. Human beings, in their interaction with people of 
opposite sex, do it with love and with concern and of course with the 
goals that every act of love has. That is what separates human beings 
from animals. I suggest to the Navy that they act like human beings and 
not like animals.
  I want to put this whole thing in a different context because the 
latest tremors concern the future career of this Navy Commander, Robert 
Stumpf. Commander Stumpf's promotion to the rank of captain has been 
blocked, and properly so. The committee remains opposed to the 
promotion because Commander Stumpf is suspected of inappropriate 
behavior, as I described at this Tailhook convention.
  Last week, under intense pressure and lobbying, the committee 
reexamined the promotion one more time, and the outcome was sustained. 
Commander Stumpf is off the promotion list and will stay off. I said 2 
weeks ago that I support the committee's action, and I support their 
reconsideration by taking no action.
  Unfortunately, Mr. President, I do not think we have heard the last 
from Commander Stumpf. A recent report in the Washington Times suggests 
that Commander Stumpf's name will be on the 1997 captain's promotion 
list. Now the good commander is suing Secretary of the Navy Dalton for 
helping the Senate to improperly block his promotion.
  Commander Stumpf's predicament is a sign of a much bigger problem. It 
is the ``problem of naval leadership,'' as one naval aviator put it 
recently. The Navy's leadership problem neither begins nor ends with 
Commander Stumpf. The root cause of the problem may be much higher up 
in the chain of command. I believe the Navy's leadership problem may 
lie at the very top, with people like Secretary Dalton and the Chief of 
Naval Operations, Admiral Jeremy Boorda.
  Mr. Dalton and Admiral Boorda should have been flagged--just like 
Commander Stumpf was--when their promotions came up here to be at these 
highest ranks. Unresolved issues in their past raise questions about 
their integrity and their ability to lead the Navy. The adverse 
information in their background should have been exposed to public 
scrutiny and debated, but that did not happen.
  Surely these troublesome facts lay buried in Government files 
somewhere during the confirmation process. We were sleeping at the 
switch when they were slipped quietly through the Senate confirmation 
net. Mr. President, we had no reason to ask questions about Mr. Dalton. 
Mr. Dalton was presented to the Senate as a financial wizard with 
extensive business and managerial experience. He got a green light 
instead of a red warning flag that his wizardry deserved.
  Mr. Dalton was confirmed on July 21, 1993. Exactly 1 year later, the 
damaging information in Mr. Dalton's background began leaking into the 
public domain. The New York Times ran a front-page story on July 22nd, 
1994. It was written by Mr. Jeff Gerth. This is how it began:

       When President Clinton announced that he had picked John H. 
     Dalton to be Secretary of the Navy, he praised the nominee's 
     true leadership ability as a Texas businessman.

  As Mr. Gerth pointed out, ``There was a part of Mr. Dalton's 
background that most Senators were unaware of.''
  His leadership was not advertised. We did not know he was deeply 
involved in the management of at least two failed savings and loan 
institutions. Mr. Dalton's S&L's were bailed out at the cost to the 
taxpayers of $100 million.
  As president of one S&L institution, Mr. Dalton was threatened with a 
suit by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation for violating State 
and Federal laws and for gross negligence. The institution's insurance 
companies had to pay $3.8 million to settle a civil suit.
  Now, Mr. President, this is very damaging information, I believe. It 
raises questions about the Secretary's integrity and his ability to 
lead the Navy. How did he skate right through confirmation without red 
warning flags? Commander Stumpf got the flag treatment for the big 
question marks in his file, and rightly so. Why did Mr. Dalton not get 
flagged and confronted?
  We had an identical experience with Admiral Boorda's nomination. He, 
too, slipped right through the confirmation net. Admiral Boorda should 
have been flagged. Admiral Boorda was confirmed on April 1, 1994. About 
2 months later I picked up a newspaper and saw this headline, ``Court 
Says Navy Brass Shielded Official's Son: Lenient Treatment is the 
Latest Plight in the System.'' That is a headline. This report appeared 
in the Washington Post June

[[Page S2847]]

15, 1994. It was written by Mr. Barton Gellman.
  Mr. Gellman's report went on to say, ``Some of those criticized by 
the court in the case remain in important posts. Among them is Admiral 
Boorda.'' That really bothered me, so I got the court document and read 
it. I was truly dismayed by what I saw--a bunch of senior naval 
officers behaving in dishonest ways. So I came to the floor of this 
body, and on June 28, 1994, spoke on this subject. If the people are 
wondering what I spoke about a year ago on this subject, they can find 
it in the Congressional Record S7744 to S7745. Those are the pages.
  My concern about Admiral Boorda's character comes directly from that 
military court document. Specifically, an opinion by the United States 
Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review in the case of the United 
States versus Chad E. Kelly, U.S. Navy. The document is dated June 13, 
1994.
  This was a clear-cut case of command influence and abuse of command 
authority.
  The court document clearly indicates that Admiral Boorda may have 
interfered with a criminal investigation. Now, Admiral Boorda claims he 
was unaware of the suspect's criminal activities when he had him 
transferred to his own headquarters. That may be. The suspect was a 
low-ranking enlisted man who happened to be Navy Secretary Garrett's 
son. He was suspected of drug use, larceny, credit card fraud, receipt 
of stolen property, and lying under oath. That is very heavy stuff.
  Once Admiral Boorda realized criminal behavior was involved, Garrett 
should have been ordered back to the scene of the crime--consistent 
with common Navy practice. But that did not happen. Why not?
  Now, Mr. President, this brings me back to Commander Stumpf. We 
should not be surprised, when Commander Stumpf sets a bad example. A 
follower likes to imitate a leader's behavior. He is not blind. He sees 
the big boys abusing the system, doing bad things, and getting rewarded 
for it. So he figures it should be OK for him to do it as well.
  No aspect of leadership is more powerful than setting a good example. 
If the Secretary and Chief of Naval Operations expect integrity, 
discipline, courage, and competence from their followers, then they 
must demonstrate those very same qualities themselves. Herein lies the 
crux of the Navy leadership problem.
  Mr. Dalton and Admiral Boorda demand excellence from Commander 
Stumpf, but failed to deliver it themselves. ``Flagging'' is good for 
junior officers, but somehow not for admirals and above. That attitude 
does not sit well with junior officers. The big boys are asking their 
troops to do something they are unwilling to do themselves, and that 
just does not work.
  So we cannot begin to address shortcomings in the leadership at 
Commander Stumpf's level until those at the top, like Mr. Dalton and 
Admiral Boorda, set an example of excellence in their personal 
behavior.
  I suggest, once again, that as far as what went on at the Tailhook 
scandal, I want to remind the Navy that those things are things that 
are done in the animal kingdom, and human beings should not be involved 
in that sort of sexual behavior.
  I yield the floor.
  Mrs. BOXER addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Coverdell). The Chair recognizes the 
Senator from California.

                          ____________________