Congressional Record, Volume 142 Issue 105 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)

[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.

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.

____________________