[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 74 (Thursday, May 23, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3851-S3852]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. King):
  S. 1051. A bill to amend title 37, United States Code, to ensure that 
footwear furnished or obtained by allowance for enlisted members of the 
Armed Forces upon their initial entry into the Armed Forces complies 
with domestic source requirements; to the Committee on Armed Services.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bipartisan 
bill cosponsored by Senator King that would ensure the Department of 
Defense provides military recruits with athletic footwear made in the 
U.S.A.
  The Berry Amendment, established by Congress in 1941, requires the 
Department to give preference to clothing and other items made in the 
United States for any contract valued at $150,000 or more.
  For decades, the military issued American-made uniforms, including 
athletic footwear, for our troops. However since fiscal year 2002, the 
purpose and intent of the Berry Amendment have been undermined by a 
change in DOD policy. The Army, Air Force, and the Navy now provide a 
cash voucher that incoming servicemembers use to purchase athletic 
footwear, without providing any preference for domestically 
manufactured footwear.
  DOD claims that a soldier's individual purchase of athletic footwear 
with a DOD-provided cash allowance is not subject to the Berry 
Amendment because such individual purchases fall below the simplified 
acquisition threshold of $150,000.
  Yet, the cash allowances provided with Federal funds for athletic 
shoes are valued at about $15 million annually, an amount that is 100 
times the minimum contract value at which the Berry Amendment applies.
  Like all other clothing items issued directly by the military 
services, athletic footwear should be made in the U.S.A. by American 
companies. It is time for DoD to treat athletic footware like every 
other uniform item, including boots, and buy them from American 
manufacturers.
  This bill would require DOD to comply with the Berry Amendment for 
footwear either issued directly to or through a cash allowance to 
servicemembers upon initial entry into the Armed Forces. In other 
words, athletic footwear would be treated like boots and all other 
uniform items.
  In the past, opponents of ensuring compliance with the Berry 
amendment have argued there is an insufficient domestic market for 
athletic shoes, that Berry compliant shoes somehow would not provide 
adequate comfort or safety, and that athletic shoes are not uniform 
items. None of these objections withstands scrutiny.
  After the Senate Armed Services Committee required DOD to conduct a 
market survey to determine vendor interest, DOD found that vendor 
interest and capacity do exist to support a Berry compliant shoe 
market. The report also found that at least two American companies can 
produce high-quality Berry compliant footwear right now in the quantity 
and at the price point needed. Today, a 100 percent Berry compliant 
shoe is on the market at a price of $68, $6 less than the current Army 
allowance of $74, and without requiring waivers.
  The comfort argument is also based on the unfounded premise that 
recruits somehow would not enjoy the same degree of comfort or safety 
with a Berry compliant shoe. Yet the military makes no distinction for 
boots or other uniform shoes, to no adverse effect upon recruits. To 
address this concern, however, the amendment would exempt 
servicemembers requiring a waiver for medical reasons.
  Finally, I dispute the characterization that athletic shoes are not 
uniform items. Federal funds are used to

[[Page S3852]]

purchase the shoes, and recruits are required to wear them. If this is 
not a uniform item, why are we allocating Federal funding at all? I 
would also suggest that any initial entry trainee who arrives at a 
physical training formation without athletic shoes would also dispute 
the characterization.
  This bill is consistent with several Congressional interventions that 
have corrected a pattern of Federal agencies ignoring or narrowly 
interpreting domestic sourcing statutes contrary to Congress's intent.
  During the Senate Armed Services Committee markup of the fiscal year 
2013 NDAA, the Committee unanimously adopted an amendment offered by 
Senator Graham to require the fabric of clothing provided to 
Afghanistan security forces comply with the Berry Amendment without 
exception or exemption.
  In July 2012, 12 Senators introduced legislation to require the 
United States Olympic Committee adopt a policy that ceremonial athletic 
uniforms, including accessories such as shoes, be produced in the 
United States.
  If American-made uniforms are appropriate for U.S. Olympic athletes 
and Afghan security personnel, surely our servicemembers deserve the 
same. Federal funds for clothing worn by new recruits should benefit 
American workers and American companies rather than workers overseas.
  This is about supporting American manufacturing jobs and having 
American soldiers fight and train in American-made footwear. I urge my 
colleagues to support this bill to provide military recruits with 
athletic footwear made in the U.S.A.
                                 ______