[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 105 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7983-S7987]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




       DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997

  The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. ABRAHAM). The Senator from Alaska.


                    Amendment No. 4575, As Modified

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send to the desk a modification of the 
amendment No. 4575, and ask it be considered immediately.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Specter, for 
     himself, Mr. Johnston, Mr. Cochran, and Mr. Lott, proposes an 
     amendment numbered 4575, as modified.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       On page 19, line 7, before the period insert the following: 
     ``: Provided, That of the funds provided in this paragraph 
     and not withstanding the provisions of title 31, United 
     States Code, Section 1502(a), not to exceed $25,000,000 is 
     available for the benefit of the Army National Guard to 
     complete the remaining design and development of the upgrade 
     and to increase gunner survivability, range, accuracy, and 
     lethality for the fully modernized Super Dragon Missile 
     System, including pre-production engineering and systems 
     qualification''.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask this amendment be agreed to because 
it will provide up to $25 million to upgrade the Dragon Missile System 
that is currently employed by the Army National Guard. It has been 
cleared on both sides, I believe.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Hawaii.
  Mr. INOUYE. We have no objection.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 4575), as modified, was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                    Amendment No. 4493, As Modified

  (Purpose: To provide $1,000,000 to assist the education of certain 
 dependents of Department of Defense personnel at Fort Bragg and Pope 
                    Air Force Base, North Carolina)

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask the clerk lay before the Senate 
amendment No. 4493, as modified.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens], for Mr. Helms, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 4493, as modified.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       On page 9, line 22, before the period, insert: ``: Provided 
     further, That of the funds appropriated under this heading, 
     $1,000,000 is available, by grant or other transfer, to the 
     Harnett County School Board, Lillington, North Carolina, for 
     use by the school board for the education of dependents of 
     members of the Armed Forces and employees of the Department 
     of defense located at Fort Bragg and Pope Air Force Base, 
     North Carolina''.

  Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, this amendment will help restore equitable 
treatment for Fort Bragg-based military personnel and dependents who 
live in and attend school in nearby Harnett County, NC. To achieve 
this, my amendment authorizes $1,000,000 from fiscal year 1997 Army O&M 
funds to be applied to the costs of Harnett County schools' providing 
quality education to dependent children of Fort Bragg personnel.
  This amendment will remedy the gross disparity that now exists in the 
distribution of impact aid dollars intended to help defray the costs of 
the schooling of military-connected dependents. Over the years, and 
despite a substantial increase in Fort Bragg-connected student 
populations, the Federal Government has provided a declining amount of 
impact aid dollars to Harnett County. Under current law, Harnett County 
no longer qualifies for any impact aid funding.
  Mr. President, much of the growth in Harnett County's public school 
system is directly attributable to the influx of military personnel. 
According to one housing developer in Harnett County, 98 percent of the 
families buying in one of his communities are military families.
  During the past few years, thousands of students have been added to 
the rolls of Harnett County's school system. Many of them are children 
of Army personnel and DOD civilians employed at Fort Bragg. This growth 
has caused severe school overcrowding in Harnett County. Many children 
attend classes in temporary facilities, such as cafeterias, gymnasiums, 
auditorium stages, libraries and trailers. In some schools, students 
must wait in line up to an hour to use the bathroom.
  Mr. President, projections indicate that Harnett taxpayers will have 
to spend $87,000,000 for new schools within the next decade merely to 
keep up with this growth. The county simply does not have the resources 
to build another school without substantial assistance.
  The Federal Government has an obvious obligation to provide for the 
education of military dependents. Because of the nature of military 
service which requires frequent moves and reassignments, military 
families seldom have an opportunity to establish strong roots in a 
community and to become active in local schools. The Federal Government 
has a duty to ensure that these parents need not worry about the 
quality of education afforded their children.

[[Page S7984]]

  To further exacerbate the education funding crisis, Fort Bragg is now 
seeking to purchase an 11,000-acre property--known as the ``Overhills 
property''--which will nearly double the amount of land the Federal 
Government presently owns in Harnett County--7,000 acres of the 
Overhills property are in Harnett County. This purchase by Fort Bragg 
will cause Harnett County to permanently lose an additional $24,000 
in annual tax revenues.

  Some may ask why Harnett County should be singled out to benefit from 
this amendment. It is because it's the right thing to do. Harnett is 
the only county in the Fort Bragg Impact Area that suffers an economic 
loss due to its location near Fort Bragg. According to 1990 figures, 
Harnett County has been losing $122,000 per year because of Fort Bragg.
  Since then, impact aid funding has been eliminated, the number of 
military dependents has soared, and the Army has proposed to erode 
further the tax base. Without help, the situation will worsen further.
  Let there be no doubt, I fully support the acquisition of the 
Overhills property by the Army--provided that Harnett County's school 
system is given the assistance it needs and deserves.
  Mr. President, North Carolinians are proud of the several great 
military installations within our borders. For more than 50 years, 
North Carolinians have been especially proud of Fort Bragg, home of the 
United States Army's XVIII Airborne Corps and the 82nd Airborne 
Division. These units and other units stationed at Fort Bragg are on 
the front line of our Nation's defense; standing ready to deploy 
anywhere, any time, to preserve freedom in the world.
  Mr. President, I spent four non-heroic years in the Navy during World 
War II. I have great affection and respect for the soldiers and defense 
support personnel who are devoting their lives to the defense of our 
country. I will do anything in my power to ensure that they are 
provided everything they need to do their jobs.
  This includes not merely providing an adequate training area, 
equipment and hardware; they also deserve the quality of life and peace 
of mind to enable each soldier to focus on his mission, accomplish it, 
and return home safely.
  Unmistakably essential to that quality of life is the proper 
education of their children.
  Mr. President, I urge Senators to support this amendment which takes 
a small step towards addressing the educational needs of the children 
of our Nation's finest soldiers.
  I ask unanimous consent that ``Education Equity Fact Sheet'' be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                      Education Equity Fact Sheet

       The Helms amendment would authorize $1 million over two 
     years to ensure that Fort Bragg-connected dependents who 
     attend school in Harnett County, N.C. are treated the same as 
     Fort Bragg-connected dependents who attend school in 
     Cumberland County, N.C.


                           critical situation

       Currently, Harnett is the only county in the Fort Bragg 
     Impact Area that suffers an economic loss due to its location 
     near Fort Bragg. (Fort Bragg-Pope AFB Impact Assessment, 
     Sept. 1990).
       Military dependents are attending classes in makeshift 
     classrooms including cafeterias, gymnasiums, auditorium 
     stages, libraries, and trailers. It is projected that 
     $87,000,000 is needed to provide for new school facilities 
     over the next 10 years. (Harnett County News, Apr. 10, 1996).
       According to 1990 figures, Harnett loses $122,000/year and 
     that deficit has substantially worsened as the number of 
     post-related personnel and dependents moving into the county 
     has increased dramatically. (Id.)
       It costs the same amount to educate a child in Harnett 
     County as it does to educate a child in Cumberland County.
       No child of a military service member should be treated as 
     a second-class citizen.
       The federal government's responsibility to provide for the 
     education of military dependents should not depend upon where 
     their parents live.


                   unjustifiable impact aid disparity

       FY96 Cumberland--$2,586,932.00/14,143 Students=$183 per 
     student.
       FY96 Harnett--$47,176.00/1,025 Students=$46 per student.
       However, under current law, Harnett County no longer 
     qualifies for any impact aid funding, even though their base-
     connected student population is soaring.
       Fort Bragg wants to buy a Rockefeller Estate known as the 
     ``Overhills Property'', lying primarily in Harnett County--
     the purchase will almost double the amount of land the 
     federal government owns in Harnett County, causing an 
     additional annual tax loss of $24,000.
       Each new resident pays an average of only $231 per person 
     in taxes to Harnett County while it costs the county $500 to 
     educate each child.
       Military families flock to Harnett.--Fayetteville Observer-
     Times--Sun., Dec. 3, 1995.
       ``Ninety-eight percent of the families buying [in Heritage 
     Village] are in the military.''--Bill Arnold, Partner in the 
     Kilnarnold Corp.
       Out of room.--Harnett County News--Wed., April 10, 1996.
       ``We've reached the critical stage for Harnett County. No. 
     1 we're a low wealth county and No. 2, we're fast growing. 
     We're picking up 600 extra students a year.''--Hank Hurd, 
     Assistant School Superintendent.
       ``Western Harnett Middle is now in an extremely overcrowded 
     situation right now. . . . It's a crisis situation as far as 
     the school facilities needs of our county are concerned.''--
     Harnett's Assistant School Superintendent Hank Hurd.
       ``We're going to see more and more mobile classrooms. But, 
     it's no long term solution. The more mobile classrooms you 
     put in, the more bathrooms and cafeterias are overtaxed.''--
     Hank Hurd.
       ``We need construction that is stable in our classrooms 
     that will last for years to come instead of this patchwork. . 
     . . Sometimes students don't understand why we don't have the 
     same things that we need as other students in the main 
     building have.''--Special Education Teacher Angela Williams.
       ``Sometimes we have to wait at least one hour in line to 
     use the bathroom. . . . The bathroom we have to use has only 
     four stalls for 50 girls. . . . Then when we are late for 
     class, we get written up by our teachers.''--Student Sandra 
     McNeill.
       ``All of these trailers were supposed to have handicapped 
     ramps to follow federal guidelines. . . . We do have a 
     special-ed child who walks on crutches. . . . We had a 
     Physical Education class out here last year and they had to 
     carry the child up the steps.''--Angela Williams.
       ``They have educational TV's in the main classrooms and we 
     can't even get a TV in our hut classrooms.''--Angela 
     Williams.
       Growth squeeze in Harnett County Schools.--The News & 
     Observer--Sat., Feb. 3, 1996.
       ``It will be years before the needs of our children are 
     met.'' Comments on the schools condition without the prospect 
     of outside help, county schools superintendent Bob Beasley.
       ``We spend a lot of our time just figuring out what we're 
     going to do next'' in an effort to make room for new 
     students, Principle Ned White.
       ``To one new schoolhouse per year,'' that the county needs 
     ``but can't afford to be built.'' The space needed to 
     accommodate the estimated 500 new students per year, for the 
     next three to five years, Chairman H.L. Sorrell Jr. of the 
     county commissioners.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment has been cleared on both 
sides. I ask for its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 4493), as modified, was agreed to.
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I yield to the Senator from Indiana for a request.


                         Privilege Of The Floor

  Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent a staffer of mine, 
Maj. Sharon Dunbar, be granted the privilege of the floor during debate 
on the defense appropriations bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I wonder if I can inquire of the Senator 
from Alaska whether he anticipates there will be any time for 
additional morning business, or does he have a full schedule on 
appropriations?
  Mr. STEVENS. We would be happy to. How much time does the Senator 
wish?
  Mr. COATS. Mr. President, 5 minutes at most.
  Mr. STEVENS. We promised the Senator from Iowa he could proceed with 
his amendment. As soon as he is finished, we will be glad to consider 
that, if that is agreeable.


                           Amendment No. 4890

(Purpose: To permit up to $10 million of appropriated funds to be used 
to initiate engineering and manufacturing development of airborne mine 
                         countermeasure system)

  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment proposed 
by Senators Dodd and Lieberman and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:


[[Page S7985]]


       The Senator from Hawaii [Mr. Inouye], for Mr. Dodd, for 
     himself and Mr. Lieberman, proposes an amendment numbered 
     4890.

  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       On page 29, on line 20, strike the period and insert in 
     lieu thereof: ``: Provided further, That up to $10 million of 
     funds appropriated in this paragraph may be used to initiate 
     engineering and manufacturing development for the winning 
     airborne mine countermeasure system.''

  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise to offer an amendment on behalf of 
myself and Senator Lieberman that will help to preserve strong 
technological innovation in the State of Connecticut, as well as 
contribute to the safety of U.S. troops.
  The amendment will allow the Navy to spend up to $10 million to 
initiate engineering and manufacturing development of the Magic Lantern 
airborne mine countermeasure system, which was created by the Kaman Co. 
of Connecticut.
  This important measure maintains the ability of one of Connecticut's 
businesses to continue development of vital antimine technology. The 
Magic Lantern system was deployed in a prototype stage during Desert 
Storm, and in subsequent tests, the improved system has met and 
exceeded every Navy-established criteria, including probability of 
detection and classification, area coverage, and false alarm rate.
  Mr. President, I understand this amendment will be agreed to, and I 
am pleased that the Magic Lantern program will be able to continue to 
contribute to both the economy of Connecticut and the safety of U.S. 
troops.
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, this amendment has been cleared by both 
managers.
  Mr. STEVENS. This deals with using funds within appropriations to 
initiate engineering and manufacturing development of an airborne mine 
countermeasure system.
  I urge the adoption of the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 4890) was agreed to.
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.


                           Amendment No. 4463

  (Purpose: To prohibit the use of funds for support of more than 68 
          general officers of the Marine Corps on active duty)

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I call up an amendment filed at the 
desk, No. 4463.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Iowa [Mr. Grassley] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 4463.
       On page 88, between lines 7 and 8, insert the following:
       Sec. 8099. Funds appropriated by this Act may not be used 
     for supporting more than 68 general officers on active duty 
     in the Marine Corps.

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Just to bring my colleagues up to date as to where we 
are on this amendment, I have spoken a long time on it. I have one more 
point I want to make.
  I have been told two individuals want to speak, one who wants to 
speak for my amendment and one against it. I do not think Senator 
Stevens cares to prolong the vote on this amendment. When the time 
comes, I will be willing to do that. I am saying, a couple of others 
want to speak. I am not sure they will be able to speak. I notified 
their offices. If they do not come over, as far as I am concerned, we 
can go to the completion of the amendment. Is that all right with the 
Senator from Alaska?
  Mr. STEVENS. I am pleased to agree with that procedure. We normally 
try to get a time agreement, if the Senator wishes a time agreement. We 
do not know how many other Members wish to speak on the Senator's 
amendment, so we will defer that. Has the Senator submitted his 
amendment?
  Mr. GRASSLEY. It is called up.
  If you will remember, my amendment, just read, would not fund the 12 
additional Marine Corps generals that the Marine Corps wants, and the 
money is in this bill to do that. My argument, obviously, was as the 
number of marines has gone down from 199,000 to about 172,000 to 
173,000, it seems to me that as we are downsizing, we should not be 
topsizing the administrative overhead from the standpoint of adding 12 
more generals.
  We have seen a reduction in the number of generals and admirals--
maybe not enough--but we have seen a reduction in the other three 
forces. They still are not as efficient from the standpoint of the 
number of generals and admirals as the Marine Corps is.
  Regardless of that, it seems to me inconsistent with balancing the 
budget, when the Secretary of Defense is pointing out to us the need 
for every dollar that we can get going into modernization, that we do 
not spend more money on administrative overhead. If 70 generals were in 
charge at the time there were 199,000, it seems to me we do not need 80 
generals when we have 172,000 marines.
  One argument that has been made by the Senate Armed Services 
Committee, the authorization committee, is that this issue should be 
decided in conference between the House and the Senate on the 
authorization bill and should not be a point to discuss when we have 
the Senate defense appropriations bill up.
  I disagree with that, and I disagree with that because this is a 
legitimate appropriations matter. The Marine Corps requested 12 
additional generals, and these generals do cost extra money. In fact, 
it involves a lot more money. That extra money is in the bill that is 
before the Senate right now. Regardless of what the Senate Armed 
Services Committee said, if the money is not in this bill, then the new 
generals do not get paid. Period. You cannot pay people if there is no 
money appropriated for it. You cannot pay these new generals based on 
the authorization bill. DOD cannot write one check based on an 
authorization.
  The money is in the military personnel account. You can turn 
yourself, if you want to see it, to pages 6 and 7 of the committee 
report, and there you find a listing of the branches of the military, 
the number of people who are being funded by this legislation. You are 
not going to receive a paycheck if there is not money appropriated, 
because you cannot spend money in our Government without the 
consequence of an appropriations bill.
  So these generals are expecting to be paid. They will only be paid if 
the money is in this bill, and my amendment would take that money out. 
It would leave the money to the Defense Department, hopefully to do 
what the Secretary of Defense said should be done, and that would be to 
modernize our military capability.
  The last point--at least I think it will be the last point I will 
have to make because we have not had the debate on this amendment that 
I hoped we were going to have, particularly from people on the Senate 
Armed Services Committee. Most of their arguments have been procedure, 
that this is in their bailiwick, it should not be decided now. They 
have not been willing to state their case. Maybe somebody will come 
over here and do it, and I hope they will.
  But the last point I want to make is that if there is a real need for 
additional personnel to be funded in the Marines, it is for more 
sergeants and more lieutenants, because those are the people who lead 
Marine platoons in battle. That is the place where there is a 
tremendous shortfall in the number of qualified people who are needed, 
and I will refer to a study in just a minute.

  Earlier in this debate, I talked about the driving force behind the 
request for 12 more Marine Corps generals. I said even though the 
Marine Corps said that war fighting was the reason they needed more 
generals and even though the Senate Armed Services Committee said war 
fighting was not the reason for needing more generals, in either case, 
this cannot be justified because these positions are not going to war 
fighting, and it is not because of Goldwater-Nichols.
  With all due respect, I think people who make these arguments are 
using smokescreens. If war fighting were the top priority, the Marine 
Corps would be adding more platoon sergeants, not more generals to fill 
the highest levels

[[Page S7986]]

in headquarters positions. I said the Marine Corps has a critical 
shortage of sergeants and lieutenants. I said that in one of my earlier 
statements today. These are the people, lower in the ranks, who train 
the force and keep it ready to go. If war breaks out, they would lead 
our platoons into battle.
  Everyone knows that the heart and soul of the Marine Corps fighting 
force is its 27 infantry battalions. That is what the Marine Corps is 
all about. Everything the Marine Corps does is focused on moving, 
protecting and supporting those units. If those 27 battalions are not 
healthy, then the Marine Corps is not strong.
  Well, a doctor has been examining the battalion's vital signs, and 
they are not up to snuff. I repeat what I said a moment ago, there is a 
critical shortage of platoon sergeants. That statement is based on an 
important piece of information. It is based on the Marine Corps 
briefing paper that I have in my hand, ``Making the Corps Fit to 
Fight.'' It is called a unit cohesion task force interim report.
  This review was conducted by the unit cohesion task force in April of 
this year, just 3 months ago. It was under the leadership of Marine 
Col. G. S. Newbold.
  I ask unanimous consent to print a portion of this briefings in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

 Making the Corps Fit To Fight--Unit Cohesion Task Force Interim Report


              unit cohesion task force--col. g.s. newbold

     MM
       Sgt. Maj. J.H. Lewis III.
     MMEA
       Lt. Col. B. Judge.
       Maj. J.P. Diffley.
       Maj. D.J. Donovan.
       Maj. S.J. Jozwiak.
       Maj. R.J. Vandenberghe.
       Mr. R.W. Spooner.
     MMOA
       Maj. J.M. Lynes.
       Maj. R.A. Padilla.
       Maj. M.J. Toal.
     MMP
       Lt. Col. G.R. Stewart.
     MA
       Lt. Col. R.L. Reece.
     RAM
       Maj. R.B. Harris.


                               the legend

       First to Fight.
       Most ready when the Nation is least ready.
       The Nation's 9-1-1 Force.


                              the reality

       Infantry Battalions are staffed at 57% of ASR requirements 
     for 0311 Sergeants.
       The inventory of MPs/Corrections Marines exceeds that of 
     Artillerymen.
       We have more Utilities Specialists than Tankers and 
     Amtrackers combined.
       Less than 50% of Enlisted Marines remain with the same 
     Infantry Battalion for two deployments.


                            officer reality

       88% of Majors are not in the FMF.
       Nearly 15% in Northern Virginia.
       Only 11% of 0302 Lieutenants & 29% of 0302 Captains make 
     two deployments with the same Battalion.
       Despite aviator shortage, nearly 52% of all aviators are 
     not in the FMF.


                        reality from commanders

       ...We had to pull our boat platoon from the CAX before 
     FINEX to get them to Little Creek to start the [MEU SOC] 
     cycle.
       Our training cycle is not in sync with the personnel cycle.
       Without stabilizing our ranks, cohesion's benefits are lost 
     and training is the equivalent of pouring water into a 
     bottomless bucket...
       If maneuver warfare seeks to shatter the enemy's cohesion, 
     we must seek to strengthen our own as a matter of self-
     protection.
       I have lance corporals as platoon sergeants and sergeants 
     as platoon commanders.
       Three weeks ago we went on a battalion run and fell out 
     with 121.
       The concept that numbers are more important than morale, 
     cohesion etc., must be reconsidered.
       We do have quality NCOs and SNCOs, but the best go off to 
     other key billets (DI/Recruiting).


                          enabling philosophy

       In order to fulfill its role as the Nation's crisis 
     response force, the Marine Corps will re-establish the 
     primacy of the operating forces by creating manpower and 
     training policies and programs that support cohesion and 
     stability.


                         priorities (pillar 4)

       The FMF will be manned at 90% of T/O--General C.E. Mundy, 
     Jr., 1990.
       Reality--enlisted 88%; officers 84%.
       ``Our system is geared to the success of individual careers 
     vice the success of individual units''


                               principle

       Since our heart and soul is our warfighting capability, 
     service in the FMF must be our top priority.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. I want to quote selectively from this paper.
  The first slide has this title, ``The Legend,'' with bullets, ``First 
to Fight,'' ``Most Ready When the Nation Is Least Ready,'' ``The 
Nation's 9-1-1 Force.''
  Who is going to argue with that about the Marines? They have that 
reputation. They live up to that reputation, and we ought to support 
that reputation.
  Colonel Newbold is talking about the Marine Corps' mission. Then, of 
course, he gets down to the guts of his briefing, what he calls ``The 
Reality.'' Of course, this is what we ought to be concerned about. In 
fact, we ought to be disturbed about this.
  The very first bullet is a blockbuster. I want to quote: ``Infantry 
Battalions Are Staffed at 57 Percent of ASR for O311 Sergeants.'' Of 
course, a O311 sergeant is an infantry noncom. He is a platoon 
sergeant. Every platoon must have a sergeant, and a platoon is in deep 
trouble without a good one.
  So what does the Marine Corps do with 43 percent of its platoon 
sergeants missing, at the very same time when the command of the Marine 
Corps is asking for 12 additional generals?
  Another slide is entitled ``Reality From Commanders.'' This provides 
an answer. The commander's answer:

       I have lance corporals as platoon sergeants and [I have] 
     sergeants as platoon commanders.

  At a time when the Marines are asking for 12 additional generals, and 
they are using lance corporals as platoon sergeants and sergeants as 
platoon commanders. The commander, of course, has to make good with 
what he has, but that is not good enough.
  Corporals are normally squad leaders, and lieutenants are platoon 
commanders. If corporals have to do the job of a sergeant, and 
sergeants are called upon to do the lieutenant's job, then why cannot 
colonels do a general's job?
  I referred to that in the sense that every one of these so-called 
vacancies that is called for, the need for these new generals, all but 
one is filled with colonels who are getting the job done. If the 
colonels would take up some of the slack--and it is being done already, 
and the job is being done well--what is the need for 12 additional 
generals, when we need sergeants and lieutenants, when we had 70 
generals here when it was 199,000, and we are down to 172,000 now, and 
we have 68 generals? Why do we need 80?
  The briefing paper does indicate that the quality of the noncoms and 
the sergeants on hand is excellent. Unfortunately, the good ones are 
being shipped off to nonoperational, noncombat assignments.
  This is what the briefing paper says: ``We do have quality NCO' and 
SNCO', but the best go off to other key billets,'' like drill 
instructors and recruiting duty.
  This is Colonel Newbold in his task force report,``Making the Corps 
Fit to Fight.''
  Mr. President, recruiting duty, that is where some of the new 
generals would go. We have been told that by this report. If recruiting 
duty is not a good place to send your best NCO's, then why is it a good 
place to put generals?
  The briefing paper concludes with this piece of philosophy. I quote 
from the briefing paper.

       In order to fulfill its role as the Nation's crisis 
     response force, the Marine Corps will re-establish the 
     primacy of the operating forces by creating manpower and 
     training policies and programs that support cohesion and 
     stability.

  Those are very profound words by people in charge who are going to 
get the job done even though they do not seem to get the support of 
people higher up. Because I do not think they are getting the support 
when they need sergeants and lieutenants and we are putting the money 
into generals.
  We are downsizing the Marine Corps and topsizing the administrative 
part of it. If the operating forces are the top priority, why are only 
25 percent of the Marine Corps general officers command combat 
officers? Well, the paper draws a conclusion to that.
  I want to quote from the paper again.

       Our system is geared to the success of individual careers 
     versus the success of individual units.


[[Page S7987]]


  Mr. President, this is what my amendment is all about, promotions at 
the top versus the needs of the infantry battalions, sergeants versus 
generals. What does the Marine Corps need more, sergeants or generals? 
If we want the Marine Corps to be the 911 force, always ready to go, 
then we should make sure that the 27 infantry battalions are rock 
solid. We better make sure they have the essentials to be effective. We 
better make sure that they have a full complement of sergeants and 
lieutenants.
  It would be irresponsible to give the Marine Corps more generals when 
its heart and soul is short of the stuff that it needs to do battle. 
The Marine Corps should not be topsizing while it downsizes. As the 
Marine Corps gets smaller, it seems to me it is legitimate to cut the 
brass at the top, as the other services have already done. I had a 
chart here to demonstrate that.
  Of course, most importantly, the point was made by our Secretary of 
Defense of how important modernization is. Those at the top of the heap 
should have what they need to get the job done. By voting for my 
amendment, you will send the right message to the Marine Corps. I yield 
the floor.
  Mr. STEVENS addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to yield, as in 
morning business, to the Senator from Indiana for such time--how much 
time would the Senator wish? Five minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. COATS. I want to thank the Senator from Alaska for yielding this 
time.

                          ____________________