[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 49 (Tuesday, April 28, 1998)]
[House]
[Page H2340]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     DOUBLE STANDARDS ARE INAPPROPRIATE FOR OUR MILITARY PERSONNEL

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 21, 1997, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) is recognized 
during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BUYER. Madam Speaker, before I give remarks, I think the American 
people can see that the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) is 
perhaps one of the most partisan Democrats here in this body. I think 
he takes pride in that, and I applaud that because there really is not 
anything wrong with partisan politics; this is a political body, so 
that is what this is about.
  Madam Speaker, I rise as chairman of the Subcommittee on Military 
Personnel here in the people's House on behalf of the American people 
and the 1.2 million active military personnel worldwide and those in 
the Reserves. I am here to send a message to this administration, and 
in particular to the President, on his conduct as Commander in Chief.
  The message is that military personnel look to the Commander in Chief 
to set the high standard of ethical behavior and morality. Military 
personnel are required to set a high example of conduct in order to set 
an example to those they lead. Adherence to high moral standards is the 
fabric of good order and discipline in the military. When military 
leaders fall short of this ideal, then there is confusion and 
disruption.
  Today, many see a double standard in the military. There is a double 
standard because the Commander in Chief has allegedly conducted himself 
in a manner that would be a court-martial offense for military 
personnel for sexual assault and sexual harassment regarding the 
allegations by the Democrat staffer in the White House, Kathleen 
Willey.
  What about the double standard in the White House of those claiming 
that the Air Force general did not qualify as the Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff because he had a relationship with a woman pending a 
divorce, and then we look at the President's own admitted adultery.
  What about the Secretary of Defense? William Cohen stated in an 
interview recently that the President's alleged conduct is having no 
effect on troop morale. I respectfully disagree. This is not just my 
concern.
  Let me share with my colleagues a letter I received recently from a 
retired Army officer with 30 years of service, Colonel John Hay. What 
he stated was, ``From the earliest days of service, our new enlisted 
men and women and officers are taught the necessity of military ethic, 
chain of command, standards of conduct and principles of leadership; 
all enforced by the Uniform Code of Military Justice. These standards 
and values instilled early and continued throughout a career in the 
military are necessary to maintain the essential trust between the 
military and the Nation's civilian command authority. These military 
ethics, values and standards of conduct are generated by the fact that 
the activities conducted by the Armed Forces are official acts of the 
Nation. Since ours is a Nation that conducts itself within a set of 
stated high values, the manner in which our forces perform their duties 
must be carried out with the same set of high values. Thus, the 
consistent support of the Nation can only be maintained by expecting 
and enforcing the highest ethical standards upon every echelon of the 
military chain of command from the President, as our Commander in 
Chief, down to and including every individual soldier, sailor, marine 
and airman.''
  The Founding Fathers were concerned about the ethical standards of 
the military leaders. Madam Speaker, it was John Adams that included 
the first naval regulations, language that called for naval officers to 
have high moral and ethical standards. This language was codified for 
naval officers by Congress in 1956 and for the Army and the Air Force 
in 1997 in last year's bill.
  This language calls for officers to ``show themselves a good example 
of virtue, honor and patriotism and to subordinate themselves to those 
ideals, and to guard against and to put an end to all dissolute and 
immoral practices and to correct all persons who are guilty of them.''
  Madam Speaker, there is frustration and confusion in the military. 
Over the last 18 months, I have traveled to a number of military 
installations and training centers, not only here in the United States, 
but all over the world, as I have conducted extensive review in sexual 
misconduct and sexual harassment in the United States military. I have 
heard the questions from military personnel about the behavior of the 
President as the Commander in Chief. As a Member of Congress and as an 
officer in the Army Reserves, I myself find these questions disturbing.
  Each of the services is recruiting young people all across the 
Nation. At boot camp they are infusing these young men and women with 
moral values of honor, courage and commitment. They are teaching self-
restraint, discipline and self-sacrifice. Therein lies the 
understanding of deserving honor. Military leaders are required to 
provide a good example to these young recruits, yet when they look up 
the chain of command, they see a double standard at the very top.
  That is why I have decided to include in my chairman's mark on 
Thursday for the military personnel section to the National Defense 
Authorization Act language that will apply John Adam's original 
guidance on ethical conduct for military officers to our national 
command authority, in particular the Secretary of Defense and the 
President, while acting as Commander in Chief.
  I hope this language sends a loud and clear message to the 
administration. They are being watched. From the 18-year-old recruit to 
the admiral, they all look to the Commander in Chief to set the tone 
and serve as an example of high moral and ethical behavior.
  Madam Speaker, I believe that it is worthier to deserve honor and 
hold it with humility than to have it, shamelessly flaunt it, and not 
deserve it.

                          ____________________