[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 7]
[Senate]
[Pages 9389-9390]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                        NOMINATION OF DAVID CHU

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I want to speak about something I have 
often spoken about in this Chamber. My colleagues have not heard me 
speak about this for a couple months. I try to follow on a very regular 
basis what is going on in the Defense Department because I want to make 
sure our defense dollars are spent wisely.
  I come to this Chamber today to explain my opposition to a Department 
of Defense nomination. This is the nomination of Dr. David Chu to be 
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness.
  On Friday, May 18, I placed a hold on Dr. Chu's nomination. It 
happens that Dr. Chu is a very talented person. Those people who know 
him may wonder why I have some question about him filling this position 
because he is so highly educated, holding a Ph.D. from Yale University. 
He has a very impressive resume, and he has an extensive management and 
analytical background. He is currently vice president at the 
prestigious Rand Corporation.
  In most ways, he is qualified for the position for which he has been 
nominated. I emphasize, he is qualified in

[[Page 9390]]

most ways, but in a most important one--the matter of integrity--I am 
not 100-percent certain.
  I have some unresolved questions about Dr. Chu's approach to telling 
it like it is--one might say his honesty. I am hoping these can be 
cleared up through negotiations.
  My questions about Dr. Chu's integrity go back 20 years, I am sorry 
to say, to 1982, an incident I had that involved the Director of the 
Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation. This is commonly called 
PA&E--program, analysis, and evaluation.
  PA&E was a very important office in the Pentagon in those days, and 
it was staffed with a very impressive cast of characters. It was set up 
in the 1960s to act as a devil's advocate for the Secretary of Defense.
  PA&E was supposed to help the civilian Secretary of Defense separate 
the wheat from the chaff. PA&E was supposed to ferret out questionable 
programs and help the Secretary eliminate those that were not 
necessary.
  From time to time, PA&E has to tangle with the brass at the Pentagon, 
and it took a very special person to do that. I think Secretary 
Rumsfeld is coming to grips with that very same problem right now.
  Over the years, PA&E developed a ruputation for being very hardnosed, 
but also being very smart. In the old days, PA&E put the fear of God in 
the hearts and minds of admirals and generals worried about their pet 
projects.
  Over the years, PA&E earned a solid reputation and well-deserved 
respect. That is how it came to be known as the home for the famous 
Pentagon ``whiz kids.'' One of the modern-day whiz kids is one I came 
to know quite well--Franklin C. Spinney, Chuck Spinney for short.
  Chuck Spinney worked for Dr. Chu in PA&E's tactical air division, 
where he still works this very day. Chuck Spinney's immediate boss was 
Tom Christie. Tom Christie is another distinguished PA&E alumnus. 
President Bush has just nominated him to be the next Director of 
Operational Test and Evaluation.
  Tom Christie deserves a lot of credit for protecting Chuck Spinney. 
He provided a sanctuary where Chuck Spinney could speak freely. He 
provided an environment where Chuck Spinney could do the kind of work 
that PA&E had always done. Unfortunately, this kind of work became 
increasingly unpopular during the Reagan defense build-up.
  That's when I met Chuck Spinney--in the early stage of the Reagan 
defense build-up. I came to know him as the author of a very 
controversial report entitled ``The Plans/Reality Mismatch.''
  The Plans/Reality Mismatch was an explosive piece of work. It was so 
explosive because it undermined the credibility of the Reagan defense 
build-up.
  Chuck Spinney's Plans/Reality Mismatch set the stage for an 
unprecedented hearing held in February 1983. This was a joint hearing 
between the Armed Services and Budget Committees that was held largely 
at my request.
  And Chuck Spinney, his Plans/Reality Mismatch, and stack of famous 
spaghetti charts were the centerpiece of the hearing. This was a 
hearing characterized by high drama. It was held in the Senate Caucus 
Room under the glare of television lights and intense media coverage.
  Chuck Spinney gained instant notoriety as the ``maverick Pentagon 
analyst.'' He appeared on the cover of the March 7, 1983 issue of Time 
magazine.
  My questions about Dr. Chu's integrity grew out of Chuck Spinney's 
Plans/Reality Mismatch.
  Leading up to the hearing, Dr. Chu withheld information about the 
Spinney report. He didn't tell us the whole story. He tried to keep it 
from me, Senator Gorton, and Senator Kassebaum.
  Mr. President, that's the bottom line: Dr. Chu was not forthright and 
honest with me.
  I laid out the entire matter in much greater detail in a letter I 
wrote to the chairman of the Budget Committee, my friend from New 
Mexico, Senator Pete Domenici.
  My letter to Senator Domenici is dated January 19, 1995.
  I wrote the letter because Dr. Chu was being considered as a possible 
Director of the Congressional Budget Office. I opposed his appointment 
to that position.
  My letter about Dr. Chu has remained a closely guarded secret for the 
past six years. Until recently, only Senator Domenici had seen the 
letter--and no one else.
  When I heard that Dr. Chu was being considered for a top-level post 
in the Pentagon, I shared the letter with the Director of White House 
Personnel. That was on March 8.
  Clearly, the existence of this letter has caused some heartburn in 
both the White House and Pentagon. It has generated a number of phone 
calls to my office.
  I continue to have strong reservations about Dr. Chu's nomination.
  When I was contacted by the White House about Dr. Chu, I made my 
position crystal clear:
  If Secretary Rumsfeld wants to make Dr. Chu the Under Secretary of 
Personnel and Readiness, then Secretary Rumsfeld will need a strong, 
independent Inspector General (IG).
  That's my position on the Chu nomination.
  One of the IG's toughest jobs is the investigation of allegations of 
misconduct by senior Pentagon officials. He will need a hard-nosed 
individual with plenty of hands-on experience to succeed at that job.
  I don't see the Pentagon moving in that direction--yet.
  Mr. President, I may have much more to say about Dr. Chu at a later 
date.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Wyoming.

                          ____________________