[House Report 105-841]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Union Calendar No. 482
105th Congress, 2d Session - - - - - - - - - - - - House Report 105-841
REPORT OF THE ACTIVITIES
of the
COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY
for the
ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS
January 2, 1999.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
--------
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
69-006 WASHINGTON : 1999
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY
One Hundred Fifth Congress
FLOYD D. SPENCE, South Carolina, Chairman
BOB STUMP, Arizona RONALD V. DELLUMS, California \1\
DUNCAN HUNTER, California IKE SKELTON, Missouri \2\
JOHN R. KASICH, Ohio NORMAN SISISKY, Virginia
HERBERT H. BATEMAN, Virginia JOHN M. SPRATT, Jr., South
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah Carolina
CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas
JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado OWEN PICKETT, Virginia
JIM SAXTON, New Jersey LANE EVANS, Illinois
STEVE BUYER, Indiana GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi
TILLIE K. FOWLER, Florida NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York FRANK TEJEDA, Texas \3\
JAMES TALENT, Missouri MARTIN T. MEEHAN, Massachusetts
TERRY EVERETT, Alabama ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam
ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland JANE HARMAN, California
HOWARD ``BUCK'' McKEON, California PAUL McHALE, Pennsylvania
RON LEWIS, Kentucky PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island
J.C. WATTS, Jr., Oklahoma ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
MAC THORNBERRY, Texas SILVESTRE REYES, Texas
JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana TOM ALLEN, Maine
SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia VIC SNYDER, Arkansas
VAN HILLEARY, Tennessee JIM TURNER, Texas
JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida F. ALLEN BOYD, Jr., Florida
WALTER B. JONES, Jr., North ADAM SMITH, Washington
Carolina LORETTA SANCHEZ, California
LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina JAMES H. MALONEY, Connecticut
SONNY BONO, California \4\ MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina
JIM RYUN, Kansas CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas \5\
MICHAEL PAPPAS, New Jersey CYNTHIA A. McKINNEY, Georgia \6\
BOB RILEY, Alabama ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California \7\
JIM GIBBONS, Nevada ROBERT BRADY, Pennsylvania \8\
BILL REDMOND, New Mexico \9\
KAY GRANGER, Texas \10\
MARY BONO, California \11\
Andrew K. Ellis, Staff Director
Heather Hescheles, Research Assistant
----------
\1\ Mr. Dellums resigned from the House of Representatives on February
6, 1998.
\2\ Mr. Skelton was elected Ranking Member on February 9, 1998.
\3\ Mr. Tejeda died January 30, 1997.
\4\ Mr. Bono died January 6, 1998.
\5\ Mr. Rodriguez was elected to the committee on April 17, 1997.
\6\ Ms. McKinney was elected to the committee on May 14, 1997.
\7\ Mrs. Tauscher was elected to the committee on June 24, 1998.
\8\ Mr. Brady was elected to the committee on June 24, 1998.
\9\ Mr. Redmond was elected to the committee on July 23, 1997.
\10\ Ms. Granger was elected to the committee on February 11, 1998.
\11\ Mrs. Bono was elected to the committee on May 13, 1998.
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
----------
House of Representatives,
Committee on National Security,
Washington, DC, January 2, 1999.
Hon. Jeff Trandahl,
Clerk of the House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Trandahl: Pursuant to House Rule XI 1.(d), there
is transmitted herewith the report of activities of the
Committee on National Security for the 105th Congress.
Sincerely,
Floyd D. Spence, Chairman.
(iii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Powers and Duties, Committee on National Security--105th Congress 1
Background................................................... 1
Constitutional Powers and Duties............................. 2
House Rules on Jurisdiction.................................. 3
Investigative Authority and Legislative Oversight............ 3
Committee Rules.................................................. 4
Rules Governing Procedure.................................... 4
Composition of the Committee on National Security--105th Congress 13
Subcommittees of the Committee on National Security--105th
Congress....................................................... 14
Military Installations and Facilities Subcommittee........... 14
Military Personnel Subcommittee.............................. 14
Military Procurement Subcommittee............................ 15
Military Readiness Subcommittee.............................. 15
Military Research and Development Subcommittee............... 16
Full Committee Panels............................................ 17
Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare and Recreation.... 17
Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine............... 17
Committee Staff.................................................. 19
Committee Meetings............................................... 21
Legislative Actions.............................................. 21
Legislation Enacted Into Law................................. 21
Public Law 105-41 (H.R. 1585)............................ 21
Public Law 105-85 (H.R. 1119)............................ 21
Public Law 105-103 (H.R. 2813)........................... 24
Public Law 105-107 (S. 858).............................. 24
Public Law 105-129 (S. 1507)............................. 25
Public Law 105-152 (H.R. 2796)........................... 25
Public Law 105-222 (H.R. 3731)........................... 25
Public Law 105-261 (H.R. 3616)........................... 26
Public Law 105-371 (H.R. 2263)........................... 28
Legislation Reported but Not Enacted......................... 29
H.R. 695................................................. 29
H.R. 1778................................................ 29
H.R. 2786................................................ 29
Oversight Activities............................................. 31
Summary of Oversight Plan.................................... 31
Actions and Recommendations.................................. 31
Additional Oversight Activities.............................. 35
Other Activities of the Full Committee........................... 47
Budget Activity.............................................. 47
Full Committee Hearings...................................... 47
Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare and Recreation.... 50
Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine............... 51
Other Activities of Subcommittees................................ 53
Military Installations and Facilities Subcommittee........... 53
Military Personnel Subcommittee.............................. 54
Military Procurement Subcommittee............................ 55
Military Readiness Subcommittee.............................. 56
Military Research and Development Subcommittee............... 56
Publications..................................................... 59
Committee Prints of Laws Relating to National Defense........ 59
Committee Prints............................................. 59
Published Proceedings........................................ 59
House Reports................................................ 62
Public Laws.................................................. 63
Press Releases................................................... 65
Union Calendar No. 482
105th Congress Report
2d Session HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 105-841
=======================================================================
REPORT OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY FOR THE
105TH CONGRESS
_______
January 2, 1999.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Spence, from the Committee on National Security, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
ON
POWERS AND DUTIES, COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY--105TH CONGRESS
Background
The House Committee on Armed Services, a standing committee
of Congress, was established on January 2, 1947, as a part of
the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), by
merging the Committees on Military Affairs and Naval Affairs.
The Committees on Military Affairs and Naval Affairs were
established in 1882. In 1885, jurisdiction over military and
naval appropriations was taken from the Committee on
Appropriations and given to the Committees on Military Affairs
and Naval Affairs, respectively. This policy continued until
July 1, 1920, when jurisdiction over all appropriations was
again placed in the Committee on Appropriations.
In the 93rd Congress, following a study by the House Select
Committee on Committees, the House passed H. Res. 988, the
Committee Reform Amendment of 1974, to be effective January 3,
1975. As a result of those amendments, the jurisdictional areas
of the Committee on Armed Services remained essentially
unchanged. However, oversight functions were amended to require
each standing committee to review and study on a continuing
basis all laws, programs, and government activities dealing
with or involving international arms control and disarmament
and the education of military dependents in school.
The rules changes adopted by the House (H. Res. 5) on
January 4, 1977, placed new responsibilities in the atomic
energy field in the Armed Services Committee. Those
responsibilities involved the national security aspects of
atomic energy theretofore under the jurisdiction of the Joint
Committee on Atomic Energy. Public Law 95-110, effective
September 20, 1977, abolished the Joint Committee on Atomic
Energy.
With the adoption of H. Res. 658 on July 14, 1977, which
established the House Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence, the jurisdiction of the Armed Service Committee
over intelligence matters was diminished.
That resolution gave the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence oversight responsibilities for intelligence and
intelligence-related activities and programs of the U.S.
Government. Specifically, the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence has exclusive legislation jurisdiction regarding
the Central Intelligence Agency and the director of Central
Intelligence, including authorizations. Also, legislative
jurisdiction over all intelligence and intelligence-related
activities and programs was vested in the select committee
except that other committees with a jurisdictional interest may
request consideration of any such matters. Accordingly, as a
matter of practice, the Armed Services Committee shared
jurisdiction over the authorization process involving
intelligence-related activities.
The committee continues to have shared jurisdiction over
military intelligence activities as set forth in Rule X (10) of
the Rules of the House of Representatives.
H. Res. 5, adopted by the House on January 4, 1995,
established the Committee on National Security as the successor
committee to the Committee on Armed Services, and granted the
committee additional legislative and oversight authority over
merchant marine academies, national security aspects of the
merchant marine policy and programs, and interoceanic canals.
H. Res. 5 also codified the existing jurisdiction of the
committee over tactical intelligence matters and the
intelligence related activities of the Department of Defense.
Constitutional Powers and Duties
The powers and duties of Congress in relation to national
defense matters stem from Article I, section 8, of the
Constitution, which provides, among other things, that the
Congress shall have power to:
Raise and support armies;
Provide and maintain a navy;
Make rules for the government and regulation of the
land and naval forces;
Provide for calling forth the militia;
Provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the
militia, and for governing such part of them as may be
employed in the service of the United States;
Exercise exclusive legislation * * * over all places
purchased * * * for the erection of forts, magazines,
arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings; and
Make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for
carrying into execution the foregoing powers.
House Rules on Jurisdiction
Rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives
established the jurisdiction and related functions for each
standing committee. Under that rule, all bills, resolutions,
and other matters relating to subjects within the jurisdiction
of any standing shall be referred to such committee. The
jurisdiction of the House Committee on National Security,
pursuant to clause 2(k) of rule X is as follows:
(1) Ammunition depots; forts; arsenals; Army, Navy,
and Air Force reservations and establishments.
(2) Common defense generally.
(3) Conservation, development, and use of naval
petroleum and oil shale reserves.
(4) The Department of Defense generally, including
the Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force
generally.
(5) Interoceanic canals generally, including measures
relating to the maintenance, operation, and
administration of interoceanic canals.
(6) Merchant Marine Academy, and State Maritime
Academies.
(7) Military applications of nuclear energy.
(8) Tactical intelligence and intelligence related
activities of the Department of the Defense.
(9) National security aspects of merchant marine,
including financial assistance for the construction and
operation of vessels, the maintenance of the U.S.
shipbuilding and ship repair industrial base, cabotage,
cargo preference and merchant marine officers and
seamen as these matters relate to the national
security.
(10) Pay, promotion, retirement, and other benefits
and privileges of members of the armed forces.
(11) Scientific research and development in support
of the armed services.
(12) Selective service.
(13) Size and composition of the Army, Navy, Marine
Corps, and Air Force.
(14) Soldiers' and sailors' homes.
(15) Strategic and critical materials necessary for
the common defense.
In addition to its legislative jurisdiction and general
oversight function, the committee has special oversight
functions with respect to international arms control and
disarmament and military dependents' education.
Investigative Authority and Legislative Oversight
H. Res. 988, 93rd Congress, the Committee Reform Amendments
of 1974, amended rule XI, clause 1(b), of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, to provide general authority for each
committee to investigate matters within its jurisdiction. That
amendment established a permanent investigative authority and
relieves the committee of the former requirement of obtaining a
renewal of the investigative authority by a House resolution at
the beginning of each Congress. H. Res. 988 also amended rule X
of the Rules of the House of Representatives by requiring, as
previously indicated, that the standing committees are to
conduct legislative oversight in the area of their respective
jurisdiction, and by establishing specific oversight functions
for the Committee on Armed Services.
H. Res. 129, approved by the House on May 1, 1997, provided
funds for oversight responsibilities to be conducted in the
105th Congress, pursuant to rule X, clause 2(b)(1), of the
Rules of the House of Representatives (relating to general
oversight responsibilities), clause 3(a) (relating to special
oversight functions), and rule XI, clause 1(b) (relating to
investigations and studies).
COMMITTEE RULES
The committee held its organizational meeting on February
5, 1997 and adopted the following rules governing procedure and
rules for investigative hearings conducted by subcommittees.
(H.N.S.C. No. 105-1)
Rules Governing Procedure
rule 1. application of house rules
The Rules of the House of Representatives are the rules of
the Committee on National Security (hereafter referred to in
these rules as the ``Committee'') and its subcommittees so far
as applicable.
rule 2. full committee meeting date
(a) The Committee shall meet every Tuesday at 10:00 a.m.,
and at such other times as may be fixed by the chairman of the
Committee (hereafter referred to in these rules as the
``Chairman''), or by written request of members of the
Committee pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XI of the Rules of
the House of Representatives.
(b) A Tuesday meeting of the Committee may be dispensed
with by the Chairman, but such action may be reversed by a
written request of a majority of the members of the Committee.
rule 3. subcommittee meeting dates
Each subcommittee is authorized to meet, hold hearings,
receive evidence, and report to the Committee on all matters
referred to it. Insofar as possible, meetings of the Committee
and its subcommittees shall not conflict. A subcommittee
chairman shall set meeting dates after consultation with the
Chairman and the other subcommittee chairmen with a view toward
avoiding simultaneous scheduling of committee and subcommittee
meetings or hearings wherever possible.
rule 4. subcommittees
The Committee shall be organized to consist of five
standing subcommittees with the following jurisdictions:
Subcommittee on Military Installations and Facilities:
military construction; real estate acquisitions and disposals;
housing and support; base closure; and related legislative
oversight.
Subcommittee on Military Personnel: military forces and
authorized strengths; integration of active and reserve
components; military personnel policy; compensation and other
benefits; and related legislative oversight.
Subcommittee on Military Procurement: the annual
authorization for procurement of military weapon systems and
components thereof, including full scale development and
systems transition; military application of nuclear energy; and
related legislative oversight.
Subcommittee on Military Readiness: the annual
authorization for operation and maintenance; the readiness and
preparedness requirements of the defense establishment; and
related legislative oversight.
Subcommittee on Military Research and Development: the
annual authorization for military research and development and
related legislative oversight.
rule 5. committee panels
(a) The Chairman may designate a panel of the Committee
drawn from members of more than one subcommittee to inquire
into and take testimony on a matter or matters that fall within
the jurisdiction of more than one subcommittee and to report to
the Committee.
(b) No panel so appointed shall continue in existence for
more than six months. A panel so appointed may, upon the
expiration of six months, be reappointed by the Chairman.
(c) No panel so appointed shall have legislative
jurisdiction.
rule 6. reference of legislation and subcommittee reports
(a) The Chairman shall refer legislation and other matters
to the appropriate subcommittee or to the full Committee.
(b) Legislation shall be taken up for hearing only when
called by the Chairman of the Committee or subcommittee, as
appropriate, or by a majority of the Committee or subcommittee.
(c) The Chairman, with approval of a majority vote of a
quorum of the Committee, shall have authority to discharge a
subcommittee from consideration of any measure or matter
referred thereto and have such measure or matter considered by
the Committee.
(d) Reports and recommendations of a subcommittee may not
be considered by the Committee until after the intervention of
3 calendar days from the time the report is approved by the
subcommittee and printed hearings thereon are available to the
members of the Committee, except that this rule may be waived
by a majority vote of a quorum of the Committee.
rule 7. public announcement of hearings and meetings
Pursuant to clause 2(g)(3) of rule XI of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Chairman of the Committee or of
any subcommittee or panel shall make public announcement of the
date, place, and subject matter of any committee, subcommittee
or panel hearing at least one week before the commencement of
the hearing. However, if the Chairman of the Committee or of
any subcommittee or panel, with the concurrence of the ranking
minority member of the Committee or of any subcommittee or
panel, determines that there is good cause to begin the hearing
sooner, or if the Committee subcommittee or panel so determines
by majority vote, a quorum being present for the transaction of
business, such chairman shall make the announcement at the
earliest possible date. Any announcement made under this rule
shall be promptly published in the Daily Digest and promptly
entered into the committee scheduling service of the House
Information Systems.
rule 8. broadcasting of committee hearings and meetings
Clause 3 of rule XI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives shall apply to the Committee.
rule 9. meetings and hearings open to the public
(a) Each hearing and meeting for the transaction of
business, including the markup of legislation, conducted by the
Committee or a subcommittee shall be open to the public except
when the Committee or subcommittee, in open session and with a
majority being present, determines by rollcall vote that all or
part of the remainder of that hearing or meeting on that day
shall be closed to the public because disclosure of testimony,
evidence, or other matters to be considered would endanger the
national security, would compromise sensitive law enforcement
information, or would violate any law or rule of the House of
Representatives. Notwithstanding the requirements of the
preceding sentence, a majority of those present, there being in
attendance no less than two members of the committee or
subcommittee, may vote to close a hearing or meeting for the
sole purpose of discussing whether testimony or evidence to be
received would endanger the national security, would compromise
sensitive law enforcement information, or would violate any law
or rule of the House of Representatives. If the decision is to
close, the vote must be by rollcall vote and in open session,
there being a majority of the Committee or subcommittee
present.
(b) Whenever it is asserted that the evidence or testimony
at a hearing or meeting may tend to defame, degrade, or
incriminate any person, and notwithstanding the requirements of
(a) and the provisions of clause 2(g)(2) of rule XI of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, such evidence or
testimony shall be presented in closed session, if by a
majority vote of those present, there being in attendance no
less than two members of the Committee or subcommittee, the
Committee or subcommittee determines that such evidence may
tend to defame, degrade orincriminate any person. A majority of
those present, there being in attendance no less than two members of
the Committee or subcommittee, may also vote to close the hearing or
meeting for the sole purpose discussing whether evidence or testimony
to be received would tend to defame, degrade or incriminate any person.
The Committee or subcommittee shall proceed to receive such testimony
in open session only if a majority of the members of the Committee or
subcommittee, a majority being present, determine that such evidence or
testimony will not tend to defame, degrade or incriminate any person.
(c) Notwithstanding the foregoing, and with the approval of
the Chairman, each member of the Committee may designate by
letter to the Chairman, a member of that member's personal
staff with Top Secret security clearance to attend hearings of
the Committee, or that member's subcommittee(s) which have been
closed under the provisions of rule 9(a) above for national
security purposes for the taking of testimony: Provided, That
such staff member's attendance at such hearings is subject to
the approval of the Committee or subcommittee as dictated by
national security requirements at the time: Provided further,
That this paragraph addresses hearings only and not briefings
or meetings held under the provisions of paragraph (a) of this
rule; and Provided further, That the attainment of any security
clearances involved is the responsibility of individual
members.
(d) Pursuant to clause 2(g)(2) of rule XI of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, no member may be excluded from
nonparticipatory attendance at any hearing of the Committee or
a subcommittee, unless the House of Representatives shall by
majority vote authorize the Committee or subcommittee, for
purposes of a particular series of hearings on a particular
article of legislation or on a particular subject of
investigation, to close its hearings to members by the same
procedures designated in this rule for closing hearings to the
public: Provided, however, That the Committee or the
subcommittee may by the same procedure vote to close up to 5
additional consecutive days of hearings.
rule 10. quorum
(a) For purposes of taking testimony and receiving
evidence, two Members shall constitute a quorum.
(b) One-third of the Members of the Committee or
subcommittee shall constitute a quorum for taking any action,
with the following exceptions, in which case a majority of the
Committee or subcommittee shall constitute a quorum:
(1) Reporting a measure or recommendation;
(2) Closing committee or subcommittee meetings and
hearings to the public; and
(3) Authorizing the issuance of subpoenas.
(c) No measure or recommendation shall be reported to the
House of Representatives unless a majority of the Committee is
actually present.
rule 11. the five-minute rule
(a) The time any one member may address the Committee or
subcommittee on any measure or matter under consideration shall
not exceed 5 minutes and then only when the member has been
recognized by the Chairman or subcommittee chairman, as
appropriate, except that this time limit may be exceeded by
unanimous consent. Any member, upon request, shall be
recognized for not to exceed 5 minutes to address the Committee
or subcommittee on behalf of an amendment which the member has
offered to any pending bill or resolution.
(b) Members present at a meeting of the Committee or
subcommittee when a meeting is originally convened will be
recognized by the Chairman or subcommittee chairman, as
appropriate, in order of seniority. Those members arriving
subsequently will be recognized in order of their arrival.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Chairman and the ranking
minority member will take precedence upon their arrival. In
recognizing members to question witnesses in this fashion, the
Chairman shall take into consideration the ratio of the
majority to minority members present and shall establish the
order of recognition for questioning in such a manner as not to
disadvantage the members of the majority.
rule 12. subpoena authority
(a) For the purpose of carrying out any of its functions
and duties under rules X and XI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, the Committee and any subcommittee is
authorized (subject to subparagraph (b)(1) of this paragraph):
(1) to sit and act at such times and places within
the United States, whether the House is in session, has
recessed, or has adjourned, and to hold hearings, and
(2) to require by subpoena, or otherwise, the
attendance and testimony of such witnesses and the
production of such books, records, correspondence,
memorandums, papers and documents as it deems
necessary. The Chairman of the Committee, or any member
designated by the Chairman, may administer oaths to any
witness.
(b)(1) A subpoena may be authorized and issued by the
Committee, or any subcommittee with the concurrence of the full
Committee Chairman, under subparagraph (a)(2) in the conduct of
any investigation, or series of investigations or activities,
only when authorized by a majority of the members voting, a
majority of the Committee or subcommittee being present.
Authorized subpoenas shall be signed only by the Chairman, or
by any member designated by the Chairman.
(2) Pursuant to clause 2(m) of rule XI of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, compliance with any subpoena issued
by the Committee or any subcommittee under subparagraph (a)(2)
may be enforced only as authorized or directed by the House.
(c) No witness served with a subpoena by the Committee
shall be required against his or her will to be photographed at
any hearing or to give evidence or testimony while the
broadcasting of that hearing, by radio or television, is being
conducted. At the request of any such witness who does not wish
to be subjected to radio, television, or still photography
coverage, all lenses shall be covered and all microphones used
for coverage turned off. This subparagraph is supplementary to
clause 2(k)(5) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, relating to the protection of the rights of
witnesses.
rule 13. witness statements
(a) Any prepared statement to be presented by a witness to
the Committee or a subcommittee shall be submitted to the
Committee or subcommittee at least 48 hours in advance of
presentation and shall be distributed to all members of the
Committee or subcommittee at least 24 hours in advance of
delivery. If a prepared statement contains security information
bearing a classification of secret or higher, the statement
shall be made available in the Committee rooms to all members
of the Committee or subcommittee at least 24 hours in advance
of delivery; however, no such statement shall be removed from
the Committee offices. The requirement of this rule may be
waived by a majority vote of a quorum of the Committee or
subcommittee, as appropriate.
(b) The Committee and each subcommittee shall require each
witness who is to appear before it to file with the Committee
in advance of his or her appearance a written statement of the
proposed testimony and to limit the oral presentation at such
appearance to a brief summary of his or her argument.
rule 14. administering oaths to witnesses
(a) The Chairman, or any member designated by the Chairman,
may administer oaths to any witness.
(b) Witnesses, when sworn, shall subscribe to the following
oath:
Do you solemnly swear (or affirm) that the testimony you
will give before this Committee (or subcommittee) in the
matters now under consideration will be the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
rule 15. questioning of witnesses
(a) When a witness is before the Committee or a
subcommittee, members of the Committee or subcommittee may put
questions to the witness only when they have been recognized by
the Chairman or subcommittee chairman, as appropriate, for that
purpose.
(b) Members of the Committee or subcommittee who so desire
shall have not to exceed 5 minutes to interrogate each witness
until such time as each member has had an opportunity to
interrogate such witness; thereafter, additional time for
questioning witnesses by members is discretionary with the
Chairman or subcommittee chairman, as appropriate.
(c) Questions put to witnesses before the Committee or
subcommittee shall be pertinent to the measure or matter that
may be before the Committee or subcommittee for consideration.
rule 16. publication of committee hearings and markups
The transcripts of those hearings and markups conducted by
the Committee or a subcommittee which are decided to be
officially published will be published in verbatim form, with
the material requested for the record inserted at that place
requested, or at the end of the record, as appropriate. Any
requests to correct any errors, other than those in
transcription, or disputed errors in transcription, will be
appended to the record, and the appropriate place where the
change is requested will be footnoted.
rule 17. voting and rollcalls
(a) Voting on a measure or matter may be by rollcall vote,
division vote, voice vote, or unanimous consent.
(b) A rollcall of the members may be had upon the request
of one-fifth of a quorum present.
(c) No vote by any member of the Committee or a
subcommittee with respect to any measure or matter may be cast
by proxy.
(d) In the event of a vote or votes, when a member is in
attendance at any other Committee, subcommittee, or conference
committee meeting during that time, the necessary absence of
that member shall be so recorded in the rollcall record, upon
timely notification to the Chairman by that member.
rule 18. private bills
No private bill may be reported by the Committee if there
are two or more dissenting votes. Private bills so rejected by
the Committee may not be reconsidered during the same Congress
unless new evidence sufficient to justify a new hearing has
been presented to the Congress.
rule 19. committee reports
(a) If, at the time of approval of any measure or matter by
the Committee, any member of the Committee gives timely notice
of intention to file supplemental, minority, additional or
dissenting views, that member shall be entitled to not less
than 3 calendar days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal
holidays) in which to file such views, in writing and signed by
that member, with the staff director of the Committee. All such
views so filed by one or more members of the Committee shall be
included within, and shall be a part of, the report filed by
the Committee with respect to that measure or matter.
(b) With respect to each rollcall vote on a motion to
report any measure or matter, and on any amendment offered to
the measure or matter, the total number of votes cast for and
against, the names of those voting for and against, and a brief
description of the question, shall be included in the committee
report on the measure or matter.
rule 20. points of order
No point of order shall lie with respect to any measure
reported by the Committee or any subcommittee on the ground
that hearings on such measure were not conducted in accordance
with the provisions of the rules of the Committee; except that
a point of order on that ground may be made by any member of
the Committee or subcommittee which reported the measure if, in
the Committee or subcommittee, such point of order was (a)
timely made and (b) improperly overruled or not properly
considered.
rule 21. public inspection of committee rollcalls
The result of each rollcall in any meeting of the Committee
shall be made available by the Committee for inspection by the
public at reasonable times in the offices of the Committee.
Information so available for public inspection shall include a
description of the amendment, motion, order, or other
proposition and the name of each member voting for and each
member voting against such amendment, motion, order, or
proposition and the names of those members present but not
voting.
rule 22. protection of national security information
(a) All national security information bearing a
classification of secret or higher which has been received by
the Committee or a subcommittee shall be deemed to have been
received in executive session and shall be given appropriate
safekeeping.
(b) The Chairman of the Committee shall, with the approval
of a majority of the Committee, establish such procedures as in
his judgment may be necessary to prevent the unauthorized
disclosure of any national security information received
classified as secret or higher. Such procedures shall, however,
ensure access to this information by any member of the
Committee or any other Member of the House of Representatives
who has requested the opportunity to review such material.
rule 23. committee staffing
The staffing of the Committee and the standing
subcommittees shall be subject to the rules of the House of
Representatives.
rule 24. committee records
The records of the Committee at the National Archives and
Records Administration shall be made available for public use
in accordance with rule XXXVI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives. The Chairman shall notify the ranking minority
member of any decision, pursuant to clause 3(b)(3) or clause
4(b) of rule XXXVI, to withhold a record otherwise available,
and the matter shall be presented to the Committee for a
determination on the written request of any member of the
Committee.
rule 25. investigative hearing procedures
Clause 2(k) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives shall apply to the Committee.
COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY--105TH CONGRESS
Pursuant to H. Res. 12, election of majority members, and
H. Res. 13, election of minority members (both adopted January
7, 1997), the following members served on the Committee on
National Security in the 105th Congress:
FLOYD D. SPENCE, South Carolina, Chairman
BOB STUMP, Arizona, Vice Chairman RONALD DELLUMS, California \1\
DUNCAN HUNTER, California IKE SKELTON, Missouri \2\
JOHN R. KASICH, Ohio NORMAN SISISKY, Virginia
HERBERT H. BATEMAN, Virginia JOHN M. SPRATT, Jr., South Carolina
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas
CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania OWEN PICKETT, Virginia
JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado LANE EVANS, Illinois
JIM SAXTON, New Jersey GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi
STEVE BUYER, Indiana NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii
TILLIE K. FOWLER, Florida FRANK TEJEDA, Texas \3\
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York MARTIN T. MEEHAN, Massachusetts
JAMES TALENT, Missouri ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam
TERRY EVERETT, Alabama JANE HARMAN, California
ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland PAUL McHALE, Pennsylvania
HOWARD ``BUCK'' McKEON, California PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island
RON LEWIS, Kentucky ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
J.C. WATTS, Jr., Oklahoma SILVESTRE REYES, Texas
MAC THORNBERRY, Texas TOM ALLEN, Maine
JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana VIC SNYDER, Arkansas
SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia JIM TURNER, Texas
VAN HILLEARY, Tennessee F. ALLEN BOYD, Jr., Florida
JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida ADAM SMITH, Washington
WALTER B. JONES, Jr., North LORETTA SANCHEZ, California
Carolina JAMES H. MALONEY, Connecticut
LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina
SONNY BONO, California \4\ CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas \5\
JIM RYUN, Kansas CYNTHIA A. McKINNEY, Georgia \6\
MICHAEL PAPPAS, New Jersey ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California \7\
BOB RILEY, Alabama ROBERT BRADY, Pennsylvania \8\
JIM GIBBONS, Nevada
BILL REDMOND, New Mexico \9\
KAY GRANGER, Texas \10\
MARY BONO, California \11\
----------
\1\ Mr. Dellums resigned from the House of Representatives on February
6, 1998.
\2\ Mr. Skelton was elected as Ranking Member on February 9, 1998.
\3\ Mr. Tejeda died January 30, 1997.
\4\ Mr. Bono died January 6, 1998.
\5\ Mr. Rodriguez was elected to the committee on April 17, 1997.
\6\ Ms. McKinney was elected to the committee on May 14, 1997.
\7\ Mrs. Tauscher was elected to the committee on June 24, 1998.
\8\ Mr. Brady was elected to the committee on June 24, 1998.
\9\ Mr. Redmond was elected to the committee on July 23, 1997.
\10\ Ms. Granger was elected to the committee on February 11, 1998.
\11\ Mrs. Bono was elected to the committee on May 13, 1998.
SUBCOMMITTEES OF THE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY--105TH CONGRESS
The following subcommittees were established at the
committee's organizational meeting on February 5, 1997:
Military Installations and Facilities Subcommittee
Jurisdiction pursuant to Committee Rule 4--Military
construction; real estate acquisitions and disposals; housing
and support; base closure; and related legislative oversight.
Mr. HEFLEY, Chairman
Mr. McHUGH Mr. ABERCROMBIE
Mr. HOSTETTLER Mr. SISISKY
Mr. HILLEARY, Vice Chairman Mr. ORTIZ
Mr. SCARBOROUGH Mr. UNDERWOOD
Mr. STUMP Mr. REYES
Mr. SAXTON Mr. SNYDER
Mr. BUYER Mr. BOYD
Mrs. FOWLER Mr. SMITH
Mr. EVERETT
Military Personnel Subcommittee
Jurisdiction pursuant to Committee Rule 4--Military forces
and authorized strengths; integration of active and reserve
components; military personnel policy; compensation and other
benefits; and related legislative oversight.
Mr. BUYER, Chairman
Mr. TALENT Mr. TAYLOR
Mr. BARTLETT Mr. SKELTON \1\
Mr. LEWIS Mr. PICKETT
Mr. WATTS, Vice Chairman Mr. MEEHAN \2\
Mr. THORNBERRY Mr. UNDERWOOD
Mr. GRAHAM Ms. HARMAN
Mr. BONO \3\ Mr. KENNEDY
Mr. RYUN Mr. MALONEY
Ms. GRANGER \4\ Mr. BRADY \5\
Mrs. BONO \6\
----------
\1\ Mr. Skelton resigned from the Military Personnel Subcommittee on
March 17, 1998.
\2\ Mr. Meehan was elected to the Military Personnel Subcommittee on
March 17, 1998.
\3\ Mr. Bono died January 6, 1998.
\4\ Ms. Granger was elected to the Military Readiness Subcommittee on
March 17, 1998.
\5\ Mr. Brady was elected to the Military Personnel Subcommittee on
July 7, 1998.
\6\ Mrs. Bono was elected to the Military Personnel Subcommittee on
June 24, 1998.
Military Procurement Subcommittee
Jurisdiction pursuant to Committee Rule 4--Annual
authorization for procurement of military weapon systems and
components thereof, including full-scale development and
systems transition; military application of nuclear energy; and
related legislative oversight.
Mr. HUNTER, Chairman
Mr. SPENCE Mr. SISISKY
Mr. STUMP Mr. SKELTON
Mr. HANSEN Mr. DELLUMS \1\
Mr. SAXTON Mr. SPRATT
Mr. TALENT Mr. EVANS
Mr. EVERETT Mr. BLAGOJEVICH
Mr. McKEON Mr. ALLEN
Mr. LEWIS, Vice Chairman Mr. SNYDER
Mr. WATTS Mr. TURNER
Mr. THORNBERRY Mr. BOYD
Mr. GRAHAM Mr. SMITH
Mr. BONO \2\ Mr. MALONEY
Mr. RYUN Mr. McINTYRE
Mr. PAPPAS
Mr. GIBBONS \3\
----------
\1\ Mr. Dellums resigned from the House of Representatives on February
6, 1998.
\2\ Mr. Bono died January 6, 1998.
\3\ Mr. Gibbons was elected to the Military Readiness Subcommittee on
March 17, 1998.
Military Readiness Subcommittee
Jurisdiction pursuant to Committee Rule 4--Annual
authorization for operation and maintenance; the readiness and
preparedness requirements of the defense establishment; and
related legislative oversight.
Mr. BATEMAN, Chairman
Mr. KASICH Mr. ORTIZ
Mrs. FOWLER, Vice Chairman Mr. SISISKY
Mr. CHAMBLISS Mr. PICKETT
Mr. JONES Mr. EVANS
Mr. RILEY Mr. TAYLOR
Mr. GIBBONS Mr. MEEHAN \1\
Mr. HUNTER Mr. UNDERWOOD
Mr. HANSEN Mr. McHALE
Mr. WELDON Mr. RODRIGUEZ \2\
Mr. McKEON Ms. McKINNEY \3\
Mr. REDMOND \4\ Mrs. TAUSCHER \5\
----------
\1\ Mr. Meehan resigned from the Military Readiness Subcommittee on
March 17, 1998.
\2\ Mr. Rodriguez was elected to the Military Readiness Subcommittee on
May 21, 1997.
\3\ Ms. McKinney was elected to the Military Readiness Subcommittee on
September 9, 1997.
\4\ Mr. Redmond was elected to the Military Readiness Subcommittee on
September 9, 1997.
\5\ Mrs. Tauscher was elected to the Military Readiness Subcommittee on
September 9, 1997.
Military Research and Development Subcommittee
Jurisdiction pursuant to Committee Rule 4--Annual
authorization for military research and development and related
legislative oversight.
Mr. WELDON, Chairman
Mr. BARTLETT Mr. PICKETT
Mr. KASICH Mr. ABERCROMBIE
Mr. BATEMAN Mr. MEEHAN
Mr. HEFLEY Ms. HARMAN
Mr. McHUGH Mr. McHALE
Mr. HOSTETTLER Mr. KENNEDY
Mr. CHAMBLISS Mr. BLAGOJEVICH
Mr. HILLEARY Mr. REYES
Mr. SCARBOROUGH Mr. ALLEN
Mr. JONES, Vice Chairman Mr. TURNER
Mr. PAPPAS Ms. SANCHEZ
Mr. RILEY Mr. RODRIGUEZ \1\
Mr. GIBBONS \2\
Mr. REDMOND \3\
Ms. GRANGER \4\
----------
\1\ Mr. Rodriguez was elected to the Military Research and Development
Subcommittee on September 9, 1997.
\2\ Ms. Gibbons resigned from the Military Research and Development
Subcommittee on March 17, 1998.
\3\ Mr. Redmond was elected to the Military Research and Development
Subcommittee on September 9, 1997.
\4\ Ms. Granger was elected to the Military Research and Development
Subcommittee on March 17, 1998.
FULL COMMITTEE PANELS
The following full committee panels were appointed February
4, 1997:
Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare and Recreation
Purpose--Oversight responsibility for all aspects of
nonappropriated fund activities, including appropriated funding
in support of those activities, within the Department of
Defense, including commissaries, exchanges, clubs and related
activities.
Mr. McHUGH, Chairman
Mr. STUMP Mr. MEEHAN
Mr. BATEMAN Mr. SISISKY
Mr. BARLETT Mr. ORTIZ
Mr. WATTS Mr. PICKETT
Mr. CHAMBLISS, Vice Chairman Mr. UNDERWOOD
Mr. SCARBOROUGH Ms. SANCHEZ \1\
Mr. JONES
----------
\1\ Ms. Sanchez was elected to the Special Oversight Panel on Morale,
Welfare and Recreation on February 27, 1998.
Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine
Purpose--Oversight responsibility for all issues, including
funding, related to the national security aspects of the
Merchant Marine.
Mr. BATEMAN, Chairman
Mr. HUNTER Mr. UNDERWOOD
Mr. WELDON Mr. TAYLOR
Mr. SAXTON Mr. ABERCROMBIE
Mrs. FOWLER Ms. HARMAN
Mr. SCARBOROUGH, Vice Chairman Mr. KENNEDY
(vacancy) Mr. ALLEN
(vacancy) Mr. SMITH
COMMITTEE STAFF
By committee resolution adopted at the organizational
meeting on February 5, 1997, or by authority of the Chairman,
the following persons were appointed to the staff of the
committee during the 105th Congress:
Andrew K. Ellis, Staff Director
Robert S. Rangel, Deputy Staff Director
Henry J. Schweiter, General Counsel (resigned January 6, 1998)
Rita D. Thompson, Professional Staff Member
Brenda J. Wright, Professional Staff Member
Kathleen A. Lipovac, Professional Staff Member
Frank A. Barnes, Staff Assistant
Betty B. Gray, Staff Assistant
Peggy Cosseboom, Staff Assistant
Marilyn A. Elrod, Professional Staff Member (resigned August 31, 1998)
Peter M. Steffes, Professional Staff Member
Ernest B. Warrington, Jr., Staff Assistant
Diane W. Bowman, Staff Assistant
Steven A. Thompson, Professional Staff Member
Michael R. Higgins, Professional Staff Member
Tracy A. Walter, Staff Assistant (resigned July 31, 1998)
Jean D. Reed, Professional Staff Member
Douglas C. Roach, Professional Staff Member (resigned January 10, 1997)
Christopher A. Williams, Professional Staff Member (resigned
February 2, 1997)
George O. Withers, Professional Staff Member
Sheila A. McDowell, Staff Assistant (resigned September 2, 1998)
Karen V. Steube, Staff Assistant (resigned April 10, 1998)
Jeffrey M. Schwartz, Professional Staff Member (resigned October 6, 1997)
Philip W. Grone, Professional Staff Member
Andrea K. Aquino, Professional Staff Member (resigned July 17, 1998)
H. Lee Halterman, Counsel (resigned December 31, 1997)
Dudley L. Tademy, Professional Staff Member
John D. Chapla, Professional Staff Member
Hugh N. (Rusty) Johnston, Jr., Counsel (resigned February 22, 1998)
Stephen P. Ansley, Professional Staff Member
Donna L. Hoffmeier, Professional Staff Member (resigned
November 30, 1998)
Douglas H. Necessary, Professional Staff Member
Dionel M. Aviles, Professional Staff Member
Peter V. Pry, Professional Staff Member
David J. Trachtenberg, Professional Staff Member
Jason E. Bruzdzinski, Professional Staff Member (resigned March 6, 1998)
Thomas M. Donnelly, Professional Staff Member
Rebecca J. Anfinson, Staff Assistant
William M. Marsh, Staff Assistant (resigned August 3, 1997)
Maureen P. Cragin, Press Secretary
Laura R. Haas, Executive Assistant to the Staff Director (resigned
June 19, 1998)
Heather L. Hescheles, Research Assistant
R. Christian Barger, Staff Assistant (resigned July 28, 1998)
Roger M. Smith, Professional Staff Member
B. Ryan Vaart, Press Assistant
Laura M. Billings, Staff Assistant (resigned July 11, 1997)
Bridget M. Keator, Staff Assistant (resigned March 19, 1998)
Peter J. Berry, Professional Staff Member
Mieke Y. Eoyang, Professional Staff Member
Subrata Ghoshroy, Professional Staff Member (resigned March 31, 1998)
Robert W. Lautrup, Professional Staff Member
Joseph F. Boessen, Professional Staff Member (appointed January 3, 1997)
Christian P. Zur, Professional Staff Member (appointed January 31, 1997)
John F. Sullivan, Professional Staff Member (appointed February 1, 1997)
Nancy M. Warner, Staff Assistant (appointed February 2, 1997)
Aaron M. McKay, Staff Assistant (appointed February 19, 1977;
resigned May 9, 1997)
Lara L. Roholt, Professional Staff Member (appointed February 24, 1997;
resigned December 18, 1998)
Brian R. Green, Professional Staff Member (appointed March 31, 1997)
Noah L. Simon, Staff Assistant (appointed June 2, 1997)
Michael A. Khatchadurian, Staff Assistant (appointed June 9, 1997)
Thomas E. Hawley, Professional Staff Member (appointed July 1, 1997)
Thomas P. Glakas, Professional Staff Member (appointed January 5, 1998)
Michelle L. Spencer, Research Assistant (appointed January 12, 1998)
Christopher T. Peace, Professional Staff Member (appointed
March 5, 1998)
William H. Natter, Professional Staff Member (appointed April 1, 1998)
Monica M. Barron, Executive Assistant to the Staff Director (appointed
April 9, 1998)
Jeremy D. Wagner, Staff Assistant (appointed June 8, 1998)
Sheila A. Dearybury, Counsel (appointed July 20, 1998)
Erica A. Striebel, Staff Assistant (appointed July 20, 1998)
Ashley D. Godwin, Staff Assistant (appointed July 27, 1998)
Elizabeth A. Sharp, Staff Assistant (appointed August 19, 1998)
John J. Pollard III, Professional Staff Member (appointed
September 1, 1998)
COMMITTEE MEETINGS
A total of 155 meetings were held by the Committee on
National Security, its subcommittees and panels during the
105th Congress. The Committee held 18 joint meetings. A
breakdown of the meetings and briefings follows:
Full Committee................................................ 37
Subcommittees.................................................
Military Installations and Facilities..................... 14
Military Personnel........................................ 19
Military Procurement...................................... 27
Military Readiness........................................ 19
Military Research and Development......................... 29
Full Committee Panels.........................................
Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare and Recreation. 6
Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine............ 4
LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS
Legislation Enacted Into Law
PUBLIC LAW 105-41 (H.R. 1585)
To allow postal patrons to contribute to funding for breast cancer
research through the voluntary purchase of certain specially issued
United States postage stamps, and for other purposes
Referred to as the Stamp Out Breast Cancer Act, H.R. 1585
requires the U.S. Postal Service to establish a special rate of
postage for first-class mail to be offered as an alternative
that patrons may use voluntarily to contribute to funding for
breast cancer research. This measure was referred to the
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, as well as
Committees on Commerce, and National Security. H.R. 1585 passed
the House by recorded vote on July 22, 1997 under suspension of
the rules and passed the Senate July 24, 1997 by unanimous
consent. H.R. 1585 was signed by the President and became law
on August 13, 1997.
Date of enactment: August 13, 1997.
PUBLIC LAW 105-85 (H.R. 1119)
To authorize appropriations for fiscal years 1998 and 1999 for military
activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military
personnel strengths for fiscal years 1998 and 1999, and for other
purposes
Public Law 105-85 authorizes funds totaling
$268,301,837,000 for national defense functions fiscal year
1998 and provides a budget authority level of $268,196,880,000.
Division A
Division A of Public Law 105-85 authorizes funds for fiscal
year 1998 for the Department of Defense.
Subtitle A of Title I authorizes $45,773,761,000 for
procurement of aircraft, missiles, weapons and tracked combat
vehicles, ammunition, and other procurement for the armed
forces, Defense Agencies and reserve components of the armed
forces.
Subtitles B through E of Title I establish additional
program requirements, restrictions, and limitations, authorize
transfer of or earmark funds for specified programs for the
armed forces, including Army helicopter modernization and M113
vehicle modifications; Navy new attack submarine, and CVN-77
nuclear aircraft carrier ship programs; Air Force B-2 bomber
and ALR radar warning receiver programs, as well as NATO joint
surveillance/target attack radar system (JSTARS).
Subtitle A of Title II authorizes $36,536,952,000 for
research, development, test and evaluation for the armed forces
and the defense agencies, including amounts for basic research
and development-related matters.
Subtitle B of Title II establishes certain program
requirements, restrictions, and limitations on 7 separate
research and development-related matters.
Subtitles C through F of Title II address ballistic missile
defense programs, miscellaneous reviews, studies, reports and
other matters.
Subtitle A of Title III authorizes $93,794,227,000 for
operation and maintenance (O&M) and $2,031,900,000 for working
capital funds for the armed forces and defense agencies, Armed
Forces Retirement Home; and for the transfer from National
Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund.
Subtitles B through G of Title III address military
readiness issues; environmental provisions, depot-level
activities, commissaries and nonappropriated fund
instrumentalities, as well as other matters such as the program
to investigate fraud, waste and abuse within the Department of
Defense.
Title IV provides military personnel authorizations for the
active and reserve forces and for military training student
loans for fiscal year 1998 and authorizes appropriations of
$69,470,505,000 for military personnel for fiscal year 1998.
The end strengths for active duty personnel for fiscal year
1998 are as follows:
Army, 495,000
Navy, 390,802
Marine Corps, 174,000
Air Force, 371,577
The Selected Reserve end strengths for fiscal year 1998 are
as follows:
Army National Guard, 361,516,000
Army Reserve, 208,000
Naval Reserve, 94,294
Marine Corps Reserve, 42,000
Air National Guard, 108,002
Air Force Reserve, 73,447
Coast Guard Reserve, 8,000
The end strengths for reserves on active duty in support of
the reserve components for fiscal year 1998 are as follows:
Army National Guard, 23,310
Army Reserve, 11,500
Naval Reserve, 16,136
Marine Corps Reserve, 2,559
Air National Guard, 10,671
Air Force Reserve, 867
Title V sets military personnel policy, including
provisions that address officer personnel policy; the reserve
components; military technicians; improving recruit quality and
reducing recruit attrition; military education and training;
commission on military training and gender-related issues;
decorations and awards; military justice matters and other
matters such as sexual harassment investigations and reports.
Title VI addresses compensation and other personnel
benefits, including pay and allowances; bonuses and special and
incentive pays; travel and transportation allowances; retired
pay, survivor benefits and related matters.
Title VII contains military health care provisions,
including health care services; the TRICARE program; uniformed
services treatment facilities; changes to existing laws
regarding health care management and other matters.
Title VIII addresses acquisition policy, acquisition reform
and other matters such as the use of major range and test
facility installations by commercial entities.
Title IX contains Department of Defense organization and
management provisions, including Department of Defense
personnel management, schools and centers and intelligence-
related matters.
Title X addresses general provisions relating to financial
matters; naval vessels and shipyards; counter-drug activities;
miscellaneous report requirements and repeals; matters relating
to terrorism, matters relating to defense, and other matters.
Title XI addresses Department of Defense civilian
personnel.
Title XII concerns matters relating to other nations
including United States armed forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina;
export controls on high performance computers, and other
matters such as defense burdensharing.
Title XIII addresses arms control and related matters.
Title XIV concerns Cooperative Threat Reduction with states
of Former Soviet Union.
Title XV addresses Federal Charter for the Air Force
Sergeants Association.
Division B
Division B of Public Law 105-85 authorizes appropriations
in the amount of $9,173,748,000 for military construction and
family housing in support of the active forces, the reserve
components and the NATO security investment program for fiscal
year 1998. In addition Division B contains military
construction program and military family housing changes; real
property and facilities administration; defense base closure
and realignment; as well as land conveyances and Sikes Act
improvement.
Division C
Division C of Public Law 105-85 authorizes appropriations
in the amount of $11,520,344,000 for Department of Energy
national security programs for fiscal year 1998. Division C
includes an authorization for the Defense Nuclear Facilities
Safety Board; the National Defense Stockpile; Naval Petroleum
Reserves; the Panama Canal Commission, and the Maritime
Administration.
The Committee on National Security reported H.R. 1119,
amended, to the House on June 16, 1997. The measure passed the
House, amended, on June 25, 1997, and the Senate on July 11,
1997. After the House agreed to a conference report on October
28, 1997, and the Senate on November 6, 1997, H.R. 1119 was
signed by the President and became law on November 18, 1997.
(H. Rept. 105-132; S. Rept. 105-29; H. Rept. 105-340;
H.N.S.C. 105-2; H.N.S.C. 105-3; H.N.S.C. 105-4; H.N.S.C. 105-5;
H.N.S.C. 105-6; H.N.S.C. 105-7; H.N.S.C. 105-8; H.N.S.C. 105-
12; H.N.S.C. 105-13)
Date of enactment: November 18, 1997.
PUBLIC LAW 105-103 (H.R. 2813)
To waive time limitations specified by law in order to allow the Medal
of Honor to be awarded to Robert R. Ingram of Jacksonville, Florida,
for acts of valor while a Navy Hospital Corpsman in the Republic of
Vietnam during the Vietnam conflict
H.R. 2813 was referred to the Committee on National
Security November 4, 1997. The measure was considered under
suspension of the rules and passed the House by recorded vote
on November 8, 1997. H.R. 2813 passed the Senate by unanimous
consent on November 10, 1997 and was signed by the President
and became law on November 20, 1997.
Date of enactment: November 20, 1997.
PUBLIC LAW 105-107 (S. 858)
To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1998 for intelligence and
intelligence-related activities of the United States Government, the
community Management Account, and the Central Intelligence Agency
Retirement and Disability System, and for other purposes
Public Law 105-107 authorizes appropriations for fiscal
year 1998 for intelligence and intelligence related activities
of the United States Government, including Department of
Defense intelligence-related activities within the jurisdiction
shared by the Committee on National Security and the Permanent
Select Committee on Intelligence.
Public Law 105-107 addresses the Community Management
Account and the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and
Disability System. Within the General Provisions is an
amendment to the National Security Act of 1947 to authorize the
detail of employees within the intelligence community to
positions in the Intelligence Community Assignment Program, for
a maximum of three years with an additional one-year extension
in the public interest.
S. 858 passed the Senate June 19, 1997. A similar bill,
H.R. 1775, which the Committee on National Security was
discharged from consideration on July 1, 1997, passed the
House, amended, on July 9, 1997. The House struck all after the
enacting clause of S. 858, and inserted in lieu thereof the
provisions of H.R. 1775 as passed by the House. A conference
between the House and the Senate began on July 21, 1997 where
the speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on National
Security. A conference report was agreed to and passed the
Senate by unanimous consent on November 6, 1997 and passed the
House on November 7, 1997. S. 858 was signed by the President
and became law on November 20, 1997.
(S. Rept. 105-24; H. Rept. 105-350 (H.R. 1775)
Date of enactment: November 20, 1997.
PUBLIC LAW 105-129 (S. 1507)
To amend the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1998 to
make certain technical corrections
Public Law 105-129 makes technical corrections to the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998. S.
1507 passed the Senate by unanimous consent November 9, 1997
and passed the House by voice vote under suspension of the
rules November 12, 1997. The measure was signed by the
President and became law on December 1, 1997.
Date of enactment: December 1, 1997.
PUBLIC LAW 105-152 (H.R. 2796)
To authorize the reimbursement of members of the Army deployed to
Europe in support of operations in Bosnia for certain out-of-pocket
expenses incurred by members during the period beginning on October 1,
1996, and ending on May 31, 1997
Referred to as the Army Reserve-National Guard Equity
Reimbursement Act, Public Law 105-152 authorizes the Secretary
of the Army to reimburse members of the Army who were deployed
to or from Europe between October 1, 1996, and May 31, 1997, in
support of operations in Bosnia, for expenses incurred in the
shipment of personal property that would have otherwise been
covered by a temporary change authorized by the Department of
the Army. H.R. 2796 was referred to the Committee on National
Security on November 4, 1997. The measure passed both the
House, under suspension of the rules, and the Senate, by
unanimous consent, on November 13, 1997. H.R. 2796 was signed
by the President and became law on December 17, 1997.
Date of enactment: December 17, 1997.
PUBLIC LAW 105-222 (H.R. 3731)
To designate the auditorium located within the Sandia Technology
Transfer Center in Albequerque, New Mexico, as the ``Steve Schiff
Auditorium''
The National Security Committee was discharged from
consideration of H.R. 3731 by unanimous consent on July 15,
1998. The measure passed the House by recorded vote on July 16,
1998 and the Senate by unanimous consent on July 30, 1998. H.R.
3731 was signed by the President and became law on August 7,
1998.
Date of enactment: August 7, 1998.
PUBLIC LAW 105-261 (H.R. 3616)
To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1999 for military
activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military
personnel strengths for fiscal year 1999, and for other purposes
Public Law 105-261 authorizes funds totaling
$271,547,636,000 for national defense functions fiscal year
1999 and provides a budget authority level of $270,496,915,000.
Division A
Division A of Public Law 105-261 authorizes funds for
fiscal year 1999 for the Department of Defense.
Subtitle A of Title I authorizes $49,898,362,000 for
procurement of aircraft, missiles, weapons and tracked combat
vehicles, ammunition, and other procurement for the armed
forces, defense agencies and reserve components of the armed
forces.
Subtitles B through E of Title I establish additional
program requirements, restrictions, and limitations, and
authorize transfer of or earmark funds for specified programs
for the armed forces including Army Longbow Hellfire Missile
and armored system modernization; Navy CVN-77 nuclear aircraft
carrier and seawolf submarine program; Air Force F-22 and C-
130Jaircraft programs, and other matters such as the chemical
stockpile emergency preparedness program.
Subtitle A of Title II authorizes $36,007,938,000 for
research, development, test and evaluation for the armed forces
and the defense agencies, including amounts for basic and
applied research.
Subtitle B of Title II establishes certain program
requirements, restrictions, and limitations on 8 separate
research and development-related matters.
Subtitles C through E of Title II address Ballistic Missile
Defense and other matters such as NATO alliance ground
surveillance concept definition.
Subtitle A of Title III authorizes $92,891,511,000 for
operation and maintenance (O&M) and $1,746,137,000 for working
capital funds for the armed forces and defense agencies,
including the Armed Forces Retirement Home, and transfer from
National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund.
Subtitles B through F of Title III address program
requirements, restrictions and limitations; environmental
provisions; information technology; defense infrastructure
support improvement; commissaries and nonappropriated fund
instrumentalities, and other matters such as the Department of
Defense readiness reporting system.
Title IV provides military personnel authorizations for the
active and reserve forces for fiscal year 1999 and authorizes
appropriations of $70,592,286,000 for military personnel for
fiscal year 1999. The end strengths for active duty personnel
for fiscal year 1999 are as follows:
Army, 480,000
Navy, 372,696
Marine Corps, 172,200
Air Force, 370,882
The Selected Reserve end strengths for fiscal year 1999 are
as follows:
Army National Guard, 3657,223
Army Reserve, 208,003
Naval Reserve, 90,843
Marine Corps Reserve, 40,018
Air National Guard, 106,992
Air Force Reserve, 72,243
Coast Guard Reserve, 8,000
The end strengths for reserves on active duty in support of
the reserve components for fiscal year 1999 are as follows:
Army National Guard, 21,986
Army Reserve, 12,807
Naval Reserve, 15,590
Marine Corps Reserve, 2,362
Air National Guard, 10,931
Air Force Reserve, 992
Title V sets military personnel policy, including
provisions that address officer personnel policy; reserve
component matters; military education and training;
decorations, awards and commendations; administration of
agencies responsible for review and correction of military
records; reports and other matters.
Title VI addresses compensation and other personnel
benefits, including pay and allowances; travel and
transportation allowances; retired pay, survivor benefits and
related matters.
Title VII contains military health care provisions,
including health care services; the TRICARE program; health
care services for medicare-eligible Department of Defense
beneficiaries; other changes to existing laws regarding health
care management and other matters such as Department of Defense
Organ and Tissue Donor program.
Title VIII addresses acquisition policy, acquisition
management and related matters; amendments to general
contracting authorities, procedures, and limitations.
Title IX contains Department of Defense organization and
management provisions, including Department of Defense Officers
and Organization; Department of Defense Financial Management;
joint warfighting experimentation, and other matters.
Title X contains general provisions relating to financial
matters; naval vessels and shipyards; counter-drug activities
and other assistance for civilian law enforcement,
miscellaneous report requirements and repeals; armed forces
retirement home; matters relating to defense property and other
matters such as aviation accident investigations.
Title XI addresses Department of Defense civilian
personnel.
Title XII addresses matters relating to other nations
including United States armed forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina;
matters relating to contingency operations; matters relating to
NATO and Europe and other matters such as the transfer of
excess UH-1 Huey and AH-1 Cobra helicopters to foreign
countries.
Title XIII concerns Cooperative Threat Reduction with
states of the Former Soviet Union.
Title XIV addresses domestic preparedness for defense
against weapons of mass destruction.
Title XV concerns matters relating to arms control, export
controls and counterproliferation including arms control
matters; satellite export controls; other export control
matters, and counterproliferation matters.
Division B
Division B of Public Law 105-261 authorizes appropriations
in the amount of $8,443,742,000 for military construction and
family housing in support of the active forces, the reserve
components, the NATO security investment program and Juniper
Butte Range withdrawal. In addition, Division B contains
miscellaneous and general provisions that concern military
construction program and military family housing changes; real
property and facilities administration; defense base closure
and realignment; land conveyances; and other matters.
Division C
Division C of Public Law 105-261 authorizes appropriations
in the amount of $11,967,660,000 for Department of Energy
national security programs for fiscal year 1999. Division C
includes authorization for the Defense Nuclear Facilities
Safety Board; National Defense Stockpile; Naval Petroleum
Reserves; Panama Canal Commission; Maritime Administration;
increased monitoring of products made with forced labor; fair
trade in automotive parts and Radio Free Asia.
The Committee on National Security reported H.R. 3616,
amended, to the House on May 12, 1998. The measure passed the
House, amended, by recorded vote on May 21, 1998 and passed the
Senate, amended, on June 25, 1998 by unanimous consent. The
House agreed to a conference report on September 24, 1998, and
the Senate on October 1, 1998, both by recorded vote. H.R. 3616
was signed by the President and became law on October 17, 1998.
(H. Rept. 105-532; S. Rept. 105-189; H. Rept. 105-736;
H.N.S.C. 105-27; H.N.S.C. 105-28; H.N.S.C. 105-30; H.N.S.C.
105-31; H.N.S.C. 105-32; H.N.S.C. 105-33; H.N.S.C. 105-34;
H.N.S.C. 105-41;)
Date of enactment: October 17, 1998.
PUBLIC LAW 105-371 (H.R. 2263)
To authorize and request the President to award the congressional Medal
of Honor posthumously to Theodore Roosevelt for his gallant and heroic
actions in the attack on San Juan Heights, Cuba, during the Spanish-
American War
H.R. 2263 was referred to the House National Security
Committee on July 25, 1998. The measure passed the House under
suspension of the rules by voice vote on October 8, 1998, and
passed the Senate by unanimous consent on October 21, 1998.
H.R. 2263 was signed by the President and became law on
November 12, 1998.
(H.N.S.C. 105-44)
Date of enactment: November 12, 1998.
LEGISLATION REPORTED BUT NOT ENACTED
H.R. 695
To amend title 18, United States Code, to affirm the rights of United
States persons to use and sell encryption and to relax export controls
on encryption
H.R. 695, reported to the House as the Security and Freedom
through Encryption (SAFE) Act of 1997, was referred to the
National Security Committee, as well as the Committees on
Judiciary, International Relations, Commerce and the Select
Committee on Intelligence on February 12, 1997. H.R. 695, as
reported, amended, by the Committee on National Security would
have recognized the potential threat to national security posed
by relaxed export controls and provided measures to ensure that
the federal government retain the ability to review encryption
exports. At the same time the resolution would have provided
flexibility to permit the government policy to stay current
with the rapid pace of technological advances in this area.
H.R. 695 was reported, amended, to the House by the
Committee on September 12, 1997. It was placed on the union
calendar on September 29, 1997. No further action was taken.
(H. Rept. 105-108, Part III; H.N.S.C. 105-23).
H.R. 1778
To reform the Department of Defense
H.R. 1778, introduced as the Defense Reform Act of 1997,
was referred to the Committee on National Security as well as
the Committees on Commerce, Transportation and Infrastructure,
and Government Reform and Oversight. The measure was reported
to the House, amended, on June 17, 1997. H.R. 1778 was placed
on the Union Calendar on June 4, 1998. No further action was
taken. However, provisions of the Defense Reform Act were
included in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85).
(H. Rept. 105-133, Part I.; H.N.S.C. 105-16).
H.R. 2786
To authorize additional appropriations of the Department of Defense for
ballistic missile defenses and other measures to counter the emerging
threat posed to the United States and its allies in the Middle East and
Persian Gulf region by the development and deployment of ballistic
missiles by Iran
H.R. 2786 would have authorized appropriations for the
Department of Defense for fiscal year 1998 for defense-wide
research, development, test, and evaluation, for specific
programs to counter the threat posed by the development and
deployment of ballistic missiles by Iran. The measure was
reported to the House by the National Security Committee,
amended, as the Theater Missile Defense Improvement Act of 1998
on March 26, 1998. H.R. 2786 passed the House by voice vote on
March 30, 1998. It was received in the Senate and referred to
the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 31, 1998. No
further action was taken.
(H. Rept. 105-468, Part I.).
OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES
The oversight responsibilities of the Committee on National
Security were conducted primarily within the context of the
committee's consideration of the annual defense authorization
bill, which covers the breadth of the operations of the
Department of Defense (DOD) as well as a significant portion of
the annual operating budget of the Department of Energy. The
roughly $270 billion annual National Defense function budget
involves millions of military and civilian personnel, thousands
of facilities, and hundreds of agencies, departments, and
commands located throughout the world.
SUMMARY OF OVERSIGHT PLAN
The committee continued its oversight and assessment of
threats to U.S. national security and U.S. interests and the
preparedness of the U.S. armed forces to address these threats.
Throughout the 105th Congress, the committee received
classified and unclassified briefings on the international
threat environment. In consideration of the fiscal years 1998
and 1999 defense budget requests, the committee conducted
appropriate oversight hearings with the Secretary of Defense,
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the individual
service Secretaries and Chiefs of Staff, regional Commanders-
in-Chief, other officials of the Department of Defense and the
military departments, officials of the Central Intelligence
Agency and other defense-related intelligence agencies, and
officials of the Department of Energy.
While most of the committee's oversight agenda was designed
to serve primarily in support of the annual authorization bill,
much of the committee's most demanding oversight activity was
event-driven and not subject to prior planning.
ACTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The following specific areas and subjects were designated
for special attention during the 105th Congress:
READINESS AND QUALITY OF LIFE
The committee continued to focus on the readiness and
quality of life of the armed services and the adequacy of the
Administration's defense spending priorities to support
sustained readiness and modernization of our military during
the 105th Congress. The committee also continued the
comprehensive review of both short and long-term readiness
problems begun in the 104th Congress. These reviews revealed
contradictions between official reports of military readiness
and the reality confronting military personnel out in the
field. Where official reports and testimony before the
committee portrayed the overall readiness of U.S. armed forces
as high, soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines increasingly
admitted that their units are continuing to slip below
standards. In an effort to assess current levels of readiness,
the committee conducted a series of hearings--both in
Washington and at various military installations throughout the
United States--to hear the views of operational unit commanders
and senior non-commissioned officers from all of the military
services on this issue. The testimony confirmed the committee's
concerns that personnel are working harder and longer than ever
before and that the readiness of U.S. military forces is
declining. To address these problems, the committee applied
additional funding to several critical readiness accounts while
protecting core readiness accounts from the diversion of funds
to pay for continued unbudgeted contingency operations.
Specific attention was paid to readiness areas such as
operating forces, mobilization and training, recruiting, base
operations, spare parts and real property maintenance,
maintenance of operational equipment, and quality of life
programs supporting military personnel and their families.
Additional attention was given to the following: an
examination of the current state of readiness and training of
the armed services; revising the current methods of measuring
the readiness of military units to provide an accurate
reflection of unit readiness; a major revision to the depot-
level maintenance procedures of the Department of Defense; a
continuing examination of the training required for the
maintenance of a high state of readiness and whether training
requirements are properly funded; examination of the impact of
the high pace of deployments on service personnel and their
families; a major review of logistics, supply operations, and
the privatization of military functions; officer and enlisted
recruiting, accessions, promotions, separations, and
retirements; assessment of pay, compensation, and other
benefits of military service; assessment of the current quality
of military health care; examination of family support
programs, including child care and dependent education; review
of the current quality and adequacy of the military family
housing supply; review of the current quality and adequacy of
barracks, bachelor enlisted quarters, and dormitories; and
examination of the backlog in the repair and maintenance of the
military housing supply.
Particular attention was also given to the oversight of
Morale, Welfare and Recreation (MWR) programs including the
examination of military exchanges and commissaries and
oversight of nonappropriated fund construction programs and
other nonappropriated fund instrumentalities. This active
oversight resulted in a number of initiatives contained in the
National Defense Authorization Acts for Fiscal Years 1998 and
1999 (Public Laws 105-85 and 105-261). These included
protecting the funding of the Defense Commissary Agency by
requiring the Department to manage and fund the agency,
establishing the pricing policy of tobacco products in
commissaries; expanding reserve commissary privileges from 12
to 24 visits per year; and requiring the Department to allow
authorized patrons unfettered access to exchange and commissary
items overseas. Other initiatives included expanding the types
of merchandise that military exchanges may sell and prohibiting
further closure of libraries on military installations.
MILITARY MODERNIZATION
Despite the fact that the 104th Congress added over $11
billion to DOD procurement budget requests for fiscal years
1996 and 1997--a 15 percent increase for each of those years--
DOD officials testified at the beginning of the 105th Congress
that the most serious shortcoming in future budget requests was
in the area of modernization. Based on numerous hearings,
extensive testimony, and a concerted effort to identify
unfunded requirements, the committee continued to increase the
procurement accounts in the 105th Congress in an attempt to
move them significantly closer to the $60 billion annual goal
established by the immediate past Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff (JCS). This goal was also endorsed by the current
Secretary of Defense. The committee applied these additional
funds toward major weapon systems and on the less-glamorous,
yet mission-essential items that are critical for the day-to-
day readiness of the troops in the field. Similarly, in
addition to increasing funding for the active forces, the
committee also continued its commitment to the total force by
adding aircraft, vehicles, and various upgrades to existing
equipment for the national guard and reserve components.
The committee addressed the Department's modernization
needs by conducting numerous broad-based hearings with the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology, the
Service Acquisition Executives, the Service Chiefs, and the
senior requirements oversight officials of the JCS. The
committee also held more focused hearings in the following
areas: shipbuilding requirements to maintain a 300-ship Navy
into the next century; near- and long-term tactical aircraft
modernization; long-range aircraft/deep attack weapons
modernization; new attack submarine program; critical
infrastructure protection/information assurance; and airborne
reconnaissance/unmanned aerial vehicles.
NATIONAL MILITARY STRATEGY AND FORCE STRUCTURE
During the 105th Congress, the committee gave particular
attention to the central issues of national military strategy
and U.S. military force structure raised by the Quadrennial
Defense Review (QDR) and National Defense Panel (NDP), the two
congressionally-mandated strategic reviews conducted in 1997.
In three full committee hearings, a briefing by members of the
NDP and extensive briefings by the Department of Defense and
NDP members and staff on the process and substance of the QDR
and NDP reports, the committee thoroughly analyzed the
budgetary, strategic and tactical assumptions underlying the
two reviews and the force structure designed to support the
national military strategy of the United States. Particular
attention was devoted to understanding the range of U.S.
national security interests, threats to those interests, and
strategic methods for responding to those threats as outlined
in the QDR and NDP. Moreover, the committee undertook extensive
analysis of the force structure requirements and levels of
operational readiness required and assumed by both reviews.
Finally, the committee closely scrutinized the proposed defense
budgets and programs forecast by the QDR and the NDP, both for
their adequacy in support of the national security and national
military strategies and their fiscal soundness. These
activities formed the basis of committee legislative actions on
the fiscal year 1998 and 1999 defense authorization bills.
MANPOWER REDUCTIONS
Throughout both sessions of the 105th Congress, the
committee perceived a growing propensity of the Department of
Defense to accelerate manpower reductions in order to achieve
savings that could be reapplied to modernization and current
operations funding requirements. Believing that such
accelerated personnel reductions exacerbated readiness and
other problems created by significantly increased operations
tempo, the committee fought successfully against the
Department's efforts to repeal mandated floors on military
personnel end strength.
BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE
The committee placed a high priority on ensuring that the
U.S. ballistic missile defense (BMD) program is well funded,
well managed, and directed toward deployment of modern, highly
capable systems to protect the American people and our troops
abroad. Throughout the 105th Congress the committee devoted
particular oversight attention on plans for conductingresearch
and development on missile defense systems; plans for deployment of
national missile defenses and advanced theater missile defenses for
forward deployed U.S. military forces and friendly forces and allies;
and examining the rapid evolution of serious theater and long-range
ballistic missile threats--including the report of the Commission to
Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States, a.k.a. the
``Rumsfeld Commission'' (see ``Additional Oversight Activities''). The
committee also received numerous briefings on ballistic missile
developments in North Korea and Iran.
The committee also reported, and the House approved, the
Theater Missile Defense Improvement Act of 1998, H.R. 2786,
which provided additional funding to meet rapidly evolving
theater ballistic missile threats. Much of this funding was
incorporated in the fiscal year 1998 emergency supplemental
appropriations act. The National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261) also restructured the
Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) program to allow
program managers to proceed with the successful radar and
battle management portions of the program while using
appropriate technical and price competition to advance the
THAAD missile. Substantial funding was also added to the Navy
Theater Wide missile defense program to accelerate that
important effort.
BASE CLOSURE AND REALIGNMENT (BRAC)
Particular attention was given to the examination of the
management of the drawdown in defense infrastructure under the
base closure and realignment process and an assessment of the
adequacy of estimates provided to Congress on the costs and
savings associated with base closures and realignments in 1988,
1991, 1993, and 1995.
MILITARY APPLICATIONS OF NUCLEAR ENERGY
Particular attention was given to the following: the health
and stability of the nuclear weapons production complex, the
viability of science based stockpile stewardship, the
Accelerated Strategic Computing Initiative (ASCI), national
laboratory cooperation with the Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization (BMDO), tritium requirements and production
technology, and Department of Energy (DOE) budgeting practices.
Highlights of the Defense Authorization Acts for Fiscal Years
1998 (Public Law 105-85) and 1999 (Public Law 105-261)
included: additional funding for the production complex; a
provision requiring that the Department of Energy identify
clear criteria by which to judge the success of science-based
stockpile stewardship; a modest decrease to funding requested
for the ASCI program, intended to allow that effort to proceed
at an aggressive and reasonable pace; provisions requiring a
memorandum of understanding to facilitate the use of DOE labs
by BMDO and designating DOE funds for ballistic missile defense
research; additional funding for tritium production and a
requirement that the Department sustain two tritium production
technology options through fiscal year 1999; and a provision
requiring that the Department submit a report assessing how it
might revise its budgeting practices.
ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
The committee continued its aggressive examination of the
organization and management of the Department of Defense, the
military departments, and the defense agencies with a view to
improving efficiency and reducing costs. The committee believed
that the failure to reprioritize scarce defense resources from
administrative ``overhead'' accounts into modernization,
readiness, and quality of life programs will threaten the
future viability of the U.S. military. Highlights of the fiscal
year 1998 and 1999 defense authorization bills' organizational
and managerial reforms included: mandated reductions in the
acquisition workforce and in the Office of the Secretary of
Defense; reduced the number of assistant secretaries of defense
from 10 to 9; reduced the Advisory and Assistance Services
(AAS) accounts and prohibited the Department from classifying
more than 30 percent of its AAS expenses as ``miscellaneous''
in its fiscal year 2000 budget request, and no more than 15
percent in following years; required the Secretary of Defense
to report annually to Congress on the personnel and budgetary
resources dedicated to non-mission activities as compared to
mission related activities; and terminated the Patent Advisory
Board and transferred its functions to the Defense Technology
Security Administration. The committee also performed detailed
oversight of Secretary Cohen's 1997 Defense Reform Initiative
to include holding a hearing with testimony from the Deputy
Secretary of Defense.
Additional Oversight Activities
BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT
For the past four years, the committee has been concerned
with the vulnerability of the United States to ballistic
missile attack, the ability of the U.S. intelligence community
to foresee the emergence of ballistic missile threats in
sufficient time to allow deployment of an effective defense,
and the Administration's disinclination to move forward more
aggressively with the rapid development of technologies that
would defend the American people against such threats. This
concern led the committee to increase funding for ballistic
missile defense programs beyond requested amounts.
During the 104th Congress, the committee legislated
creation of an independent Commission to Assess the Ballistic
Missile Threat to the United States (a.k.a. the ``Rumsfeld
Commission'') as part of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201). However, because of
delays in the appointments process, the commission's charter
was re-authorized in the 105th Congress in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85).
The committee held an open hearing and a closed briefing to
receive the report of the commission. The commission reported
its unanimous conclusions that ballistic missiles armed with
nuclear or biological weapons not only ``pose a growing
threat'' to the United States, its forces abroad, and U.S.
allies, but that the threat ``is broader, more mature and
evolving more rapidly than has been reported in estimates and
reports by the intelligence community.'' The commission also
found that the global proliferation of technical information
and advanced technologies, the relaxation of U.S. export
controls, and the increased ability of other states to conceal
their ballistic missile development programs may leave the
United States with ``little or no warning'' prior to the
emergence of a ballistic missile threat to the United States.
SUPERCOMPUTER EXPORTS
Concerned that the Administration was decontrolling
supercomputer exports for commercial reasons, while
disregarding the risk of potential adversaries using
supercomputers in the development and maintenance of nuclear
weapons, the committee continued its monitoring effort begun in
the 104th Congress. The committee's concerns were borne out
early in the 105th Congress when, on January 13, 1997, the
Russian Minister of Atomic Energy, Victor Mikhailov, announced
that Russia had obtained U.S. manufactured supercomputers for
its nuclear weapons labs, Arzamas-16 and Chelyabinsk-70.
Mikhailov said the computers would be used to help Russia
maintain the reliability of its nuclear weapons stockpile.
While exports to such weapons programs were prohibited by
federal regulation, the exports were made possible by the
Administration's relaxation of supercomputer export controls in
1996. The new export policy put U.S. exporters, instead of the
government, in the role of determining whether a potential
supercomputer recipient in a country of national security or
proliferation concern was a benign civil end-user, or an end-
user involved in the development of nuclear weapons or other
military systems. This was a particular problem when dealing
with closed societies or countries that secretly develop
weapons of mass destruction.
The committee held two hearings on supercomputers in the
105th Congress and received testimony from the General
Accounting Office, the Department of Defense, the Department of
Commerce, and non-governmental experts on the military
application of supercomputers. The testimony on recent
supercomputer exports revealed that the Administration's new
export process did not work, and had resulted in a number of
exports to entities of national security or proliferation
concern.
Therefore, the committee included in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85) a
provision that required that 10 days before the export of a
supercomputer to a country of proliferation concern, the
exporter identify to the U.S. government the intended foreign
recipient. If the government has concerns about the prospective
end-use or end-user of the computer, the government can then
require the exporter to apply for an export license before the
computer is shipped. This will allow the intelligence community
and other agencies of the government to more carefully examine
the potential end-user and determine whether they are involved
in military operations or the development of weapons of mass
destruction. If the government finds this to be the case, they
can block the export by denying an export license.
ENCRYPTION CONTROL POLICY
The U.S. military has made information warfare a key
element of U.S. military strategy. It is a tenet of this
element of U.S. strategy that the United States must be able to
protect its own communications from interception while
exploiting the weaknesses in the information systems and
communications of potential adversaries. The explosive growth
of the Internet and the rise in electronic commerce in recent
years have led to increased concerns over information security.
A growing number of individuals and businesses now have access
to the information superhighway and the capability to transmit
volumes of personal and proprietary data from one user to
another nearly instantaneously. As technology advances, the
risk that the secure transmission of this information may be
compromised by computer ``hackers'' is increasing. This risk
has resulted in calls for greater encryption capabilities.
During the First Session of the 105th Congress, H.R. 695,
the ``Security and Freedom Through Encryption (SAFE) Act of
1997'' was introduced and sequentially referred to the National
Security Committee for its consideration. The committee was
concerned that this legislation would significantly liberalize
U.S. encryption policy by allowing commercially-available
encryption software--along with any computers containing such
software (including supercomputers)--to be exported without a
government-issued export license. The committee was also
concerned that this legislation would potentially nullify the
supercomputer provisions of National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85). The committee held a
hearing on the national security implications of the
legislation on July 30, 1998. The Deputy Director of the
National Security Agency (NSA) testified that ``the passage of
H.R. 695 would negatively impact NSA's missions . . . the
immediate decontrol of strong encryption products without
restriction would make our signals intelligence mission much
more difficult and ultimately result in the loss of
intelligence . . . This would greatly complicate our
exploitation of foreign targets, including military targets.''
The Deputy Director concluded that H.R. 695 ``will do
irreparable harm to national security . . .'' Based in part on
such testimony, the committee amended H.R. 695 to preserve
encryption software export controls by a vote of 45-1.
EXPORT OF SATELLITES FOR LAUNCH IN CHINA
In April 1998 press accounts began to emerge about a
federal grand jury investigation of allegedly illicit
technology transfers to China by U.S. satellite manufacturers
Space Systems/Loral and Hughes Electronics. According to the
press accounts and subsequent Administration briefings and
testimony, the two satellite firms provided the Chinese
government with technical assistance to correct launch vehicle
flaws after a 1996 launch failure involving a Loral satellite.
The Department of Defense reportedly concluded that ``United
States national security has been harmed'' by this technology
transfer. The technical assistance was provided without a
Department of State-approved technical assistance agreement as
required by federal regulation.
Earlier in 1998, while the Loral/Hughes investigation was
on-going, the President approved another Loral satellite launch
from China over the objections of the Department of Justice.
Justice Department officials were reportedly concerned that
such an approval would appear to sanction the transfer of the
same technology that Loral and Hughes were accused of illicitly
transferring. Further claims surfaced in the press that the
President had ignored national security concerns of officials
from the Department of Defense and the Department of State in
1996 prior to transferring the export licensing jurisdiction
for satellites from the more stringent Department of State
regime to the Department of Commerce, which takes industry's
economic goals into consideration when making export licensing
decisions. In addition, because satellites were transferred out
of the Department of State regime, proliferation sanctions
against the Chinese could be avoided, and Chinese launch of
U.S. satellites could go forward. The wisdom of allowing and
assisting in the launch of U.S. manufactured satellites on
rockets in China was eventually questioned because the launch
of a satellite involves the same technologies that are used to
launch warheads on ballistic missiles.
To address these questions, the committee received a number
of briefings and documents from the Department of Defense, the
Department of State, the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency,
and the Department of Commerce. Committee staff was also
briefed repeatedly by various agencies on issues related to the
launch of U.S. satellites on Chinese boosters. The committee's
oversight review of Chinese satellite launch issues culminated
on June 17, June 18, and June 23, 1998 with joint hearings
between the House Committee on National Security and the House
Committee on International Relations. During the hearings the
committees received testimony from non-governmental
nonproliferation organizations, the Department of Defense, the
Department of State, and the Department of Commerce.
Due to the sensitivity of technologies involved in
satellite launch that could be used in the development and
refinement of ballistic missiles, the committee included a
number of provisions on the control of satellite exports in the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public
Law 105-261):
(1) Requirements that before a U.S. satellite is
exported for launch in China, the President must
certify that the launch will not measurably improve
Chinese missile or space launch capabilities, or be
detrimental to the U.S. space launch industry;
(2) A reversion of satellite export licensing
jurisdiction to the Department of State from the
Department of Commerce; and
(3) Requirements for technology transfer control
plans, monitoring of foreign launches of U.S.
satellites, intelligence community involvement, and
congressional notification.
TACTICAL AVIATION
The committee is concerned that the DOD procurement budget
for the three major tactical aircraft programs--the Navy F/A-
18E/F, the Air Force F-22, and the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)--
is inadequate and that the production schedules for these three
programs, as approved by the Department, will result in a huge
bow wave of annual costs and annual aircraft production numbers
during the years when these programs will simultaneously be in
full rate production. To address this issue, the committee held
briefings and hearings on the procurement budget's ability to
provide for the more than $300 billion for the three major
tactical aircraft programs already in development. The
committee also requested the Congressional Budget Office to
study these three next-generation aircraft based on the most
current DOD program schedules.
DEFENSE AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE--UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES (UAVs)
The committee carefully examined the growth in the Defense
Airborne Reconnaissance Office (DARO) and the lack of
successful completion of any of the critically needed UAVs for
which the office was responsible. The committee initiated
activities during the fiscal year 1998 budget cycle to
eliminate the DARO and return program control and funding
responsibilities of the various UAV programs back to the
military services. These actions were successfully enacted in
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998
(Public Law 105-85).
LONG RANGE AIR POWER
The committee devoted significant effort to understanding
the requirements of the long range bomber force, the role this
force will play in the mix of deep attack weapons, the future
of the B-2 bomber, and conventional weapons upgrades for the
bomber force. In April 1998, the committee held a hearing on
the Report of the Panel to Review Long Range Air Power. The
Panel concluded that additional funding for the B-2 should be
used to maximize the effectiveness of the current fleet,
advocated upgrades to the B-1 and B-52 fleets, recommended that
additional procurement of bombers should be deferred, and
determined that a long-range plan to sustain the bomber force
is needed. The committee required such a plan in its fiscal
year 1999 Defense authorization bill. The committee also led
the effort to add substantial funds to improve B-2 performance
in both the National Defense Authorization Acts for Fiscal Year
1998 (Public Law 105-85) and 1999 (Public Law 105-261).
MERCHANT MARINE AND PANAMA CANAL
Particular attention was given to the following:
examination of programs to maintain the U.S. flag merchant
fleet and its role in strategic and sustainment sealift; the
condition of the National Defense Reserve Fleet (NDRF) and its
capability to meet surge requirements, and oversight of the
implementation of Public Law 104-239, the Maritime Security Act
of 1996 by the United States Maritime Administration and the
United States Transportation Command. The committee also
continued its oversight of the Panama Canal Commission and the
scheduled transfer of its functions and assets to the Republic
of Panama as specified by treaty on December 31, 1999.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY FOREIGN VISITOR PROGRAM
During the 104th Congress, the committee expressed its
concern in the committee report on H.R. 3230, the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (H. Rept. 104-
563) regarding the increasing number of foreign nationals that
visited the Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear weapons
laboratories. In that report, the committee directed the
General Accounting Office to determine how well the Department
of Energy controls foreign visits to the weapons labs, and
whether these visits raise any security or nonproliferation
concerns.
The General Accounting Office reported to the committee
during the 105th Congress (GAO/RCED-97-229, September 25,
1997). The report concluded that security procedures were not
being effectively implemented, even though the nuclear weapons
labs were being visited by an increasing number of foreign
nationals from countries of national security and proliferation
concern. As a result, individuals had been admitted to the
weapons labs without the Department's knowledge that some of
the individuals had suspected foreign intelligence backgrounds.
In 1998 the committee was also informed that in response to
counterintelligence concerns within the Administration, the
Department of Energy had established an Office of
Counterintelligence reporting directly to the Secretary of
Energy. Committee staff received briefings on the justification
for the new office, and how it will be organized and operate.
The committee also held a hearing on October 6, 1998, where
the General Accounting Office testified on their 1997
recommendations and whether the DOE labs were acting to
implement those recommendations. The committee also received
testimony from the Deputy Secretary of Energy and the directors
of the Los Alamos, Lawrence Livermore, and Sandia National
Laboratories. These officials testified on actions they are
taking to deal with the increasing number of foreign nationals
that visit their labs each year. In closed session, the
committee also received testimony from the director of DOE's
Office of Counterintelligence, and from the Department's
Special Advisor for Intelligence Activities. These officials
provided testimony on counterintelligence matters.
MILITARY RETIREMENT AND COMPENSATION
The committee examined a wide range of compensation issues
in preparation for the defense authorization bill for fiscal
year 1998. During hearings, the committee pursued concerns
about the adequacy of the military pay raise, the process for
increasing the elements of military pay, the reform of
allowances for quarters and subsistence, the adequacy of
special and incentive pays, the adequacy of family separation
pay, and the adequacy of pay during deployments. The
committee's review resulted in legislation to increase basic
pay, family separation pay, and certain special and incentive
pays being incorporated in the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85). The Act also
included major reforms of both housing and subsistence
allowance systems, a provision to protect total income level
during deployments, and the authority to restructure
compensation during deployments.
During consideration of the defense authorization bill for
fiscal year 1999, the committee continued to explore evidence
that the reduction in military retirement benefits, growth of
the gap in basic pay increase rates between military members
and private sector workers, and erosion of special pays and
bonuses were hampering the ability of the services to recruit
and retain quality personnel. During calendar year 1998, the
testimony of DOD civilian and military leaders established that
retirement benefits and compensation were issues of growing
concern. Accordingly, the committee included a 3.6 percent
military pay raise to keep pace with private sector pay
increases, a pay raise for cadets and midshipmen at the service
academies, a requirement for the Secretary of Defense to review
the adequacy of military retirement benefits and submit a
legislative proposal to reform the system, and several
legislative provisions to extend, reform, and increase special
pays and bonuses, especially for officer and enlisted aircrews.
RECRUITING AND RETENTION
The committee added $100 million to recruiting advertising
and administrative support budgets within the military services
during fiscal years 1995 and 1996 to counter rapidly developing
recruiting problems. When confronted with increasing accession
requirements and flat recruiting budgets, recruiting continued
to suffer during fiscal year 1997. The committee conducted a
hearing March 13, 1997 to assess the decision by the Secretary
of the Army to reduce recruit quality objectives and the
initiatives within the other services to overcome increased
recruiting difficulty. During fiscal year 1998, the committee
again dedicated a hearing to examine the response of the
services to recruiting challenges that grew worse as the year
progressed. In a disturbing development during fiscal year
1998, both the Navy and the Army failed to meet the numerical
objectives for new accessions--the Navy by almost 12 per cent--
and all the services suffered reductions in recruit quality.
The committee again enhanced recruiting programs and added
funding to recruiting accounts in both the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85) and
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999
(Public Law 105-261).
During the drawdown, enlisted retention was difficult to
assess because the military services implemented a variety of
incentive programs to encourage separations and de-emphasized
the need for retention. Now, in the wake of the drawdown, the
committee observed negative retention trends that became
increasingly alarming during fiscal years 1997 and 1998. The
committee responded with a wide range of compensation and
quality of life initiatives in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85) and
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999
(Public Law 105-261) as a hedge against further erosion of
retention with its potentially serious implications for force
readiness.
While officer retention remained generally good, the Navy,
Marine Corps, and the Air Force have experienced decreasing
retention among aviators as the airline industry has increased
hiring. A similar long-term retention problem also exists with
nuclear qualified officers in the Navy. During fiscal year
1998, the committee also became aware of significant negative
trends in retention among Navy surface warfare and special
operations officers. In these cases, the committee acted to
authorize major increases to retention bonuses and special duty
pay in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
1998 (Public Law 105-85) and the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261), and to encourage
the services to examine the issues and propose legislative
solutions for future consideration.
BOARDS FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (BCMRs)
The committee identified a series of problems associated
with the processes for correcting military records within each
of the services. A committee review revealed major management
problems within the boards for correction of military records
operated by each military department that affected the
timeliness, equity, and impartiality of board decisions.
The committee included provisions in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261)
that prevented the military departments from reducing board
manpower levels, required the assignment of certain
professional staff, limited ex parte communications by the
boards, imposed timeliness standards on board decisions, and
set clear limits on cases that fall under board jurisdiction.
MILITARY FUNERAL HONORS FOR VETERANS
The committee observed that military veterans were being
laid to rest without even the most fundamental rendering of
military honors. The committee sought to find a national
solution to ensure that no family is disappointed and that no
veteran is overlooked.
Accordingly, the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261) included a provision that
directed the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs, to jointly develop alternative
methods to improve and increase the availability of military
funeral honors for veterans.
RESERVE COMPONENTS
The committee paid particular attention and focus on the
Department's increasing the reliance upon and readiness of the
reserve components. As a result, the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85),
provided new authority for the President, without Congressional
approval, to mobilize up to 30,000 members of the individual
ready reserve as part of a Presidential Selective Reserve Call-
up. This measure corrected an unresolved issue from the Desert
Shield/Desert Storm experience. Then, because the President had
no authority to quickly call-up members of the individual ready
reserve, the Department of Defense was forced to call up
elements of later-deploying units in order to provide
individual fillers for early deploying reserve component units.
When the later deploying units were, in turn, called up, it
took far longer than necessary to rebuild them.
In addition, during both of the authorization cycles for
fiscal year 1998 and 1999, the committee turned its attention
to reforming and expanding the full-time support force so
critical not only to the long-term readiness of the reserve
components, but also to the ability of the reserves to fully
participate in peacetime contingency operations. As a result,
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998
(Public Law 105-85), directed the Department to reform and
revitalize the military technician (dual status) program. In
the subsequent authorization act, the committee provided
additional funding to enable the Army National Guard to retain
nearly 800 military technicians (dual status), and to increase
by 1,000 the numbers of Army reservists on active duty in
support of the reserves.
The committee reviewed the Ready Reserve Mobilization
Income Insurance Program for reserve members involuntarily
called to active duty and concluded that the program was
ineffective as a result of poor design and implementation. In
order to limit the ultimate cost of the program, the committee
determined that the program could not be salvaged and directed
the program be terminated in the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85).
The committee has also been concerned about pay equity
between reserve and active duty members when they are serving
under identical or similar conditions. The committee recognized
an unjustified disparity in the payment of imminent danger pay
and included a provision in the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261) that corrected
the inequity.
Finally, in recognition of the growing threat to the nation
from the employment by terrorists of weapons of mass
destruction, and the unique capabilities in the reserve
components to respond to such missions, the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261),
provided authority to organize regional response teams from the
reserve components, and to permit full-time national guard and
reserve personnel to train for and conduct operational
missions.
SEXUAL MISCONDUCT AND MILITARY BASIC TRAINING
In response to allegations of widespread sexual misconduct
involving drill sergeants and cadre members at the U.S. Army
Ordnance Center and School in Aberdeen, Maryland, as well as at
other Army training centers, the committee conducted a
comprehensive, bi-partisan investigation of sexual misconduct
in the training centers of each of the military services.
The committee's effort focused on examining how our
nation's military is being prepared to fight and win America's
wars, and on whether the military services have established
value systems that cut across race and gender. Specifically,
the effort focused on assessing whether the services are
instilling rigor and warrior spirit into the training
environment, and whether the training programs are producing
graduates who are, first and foremost, soldiers, sailors,
airmen or marines.
Committee members visited basic and advanced training
centers of each of the military services; received numerous
briefings on issues ranging from military criminal
investigativeprocedures to the military justice system; visited
several other military installations around the world; conducted a
hearing to review the Army's investigations into sexual misconduct in
the service; issued an interim report on the committee's investigation
that highlighted emerging issues of concern and summarized actions
taken in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998
(Public Law 105-85), to address many of these concerns; and conducted a
hearing to review the findings and recommendations of the Federal
Advisory Committee on Gender-Integrated Training and Related Issues, an
independent panel appointed by Defense Secretary William S. Cohen.
Specific actions taken by the committee in the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-
85), included a requirement for an independent review of the
ability of the military criminal investigative services to
investigate crimes of sexual misconduct; a series of reforms to
drill sergeant selection and training; and the establishment of
a commission on basic training and gender-related issues. The
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public
Law 105-261), directed the service secretaries to provide
physically-separated and secure housing for male and female
recruits during basic training; and to restrict after-hours
access to recruit housing areas to drill sergeants and training
personnel who are of the same gender as the recruits housed in
the area, or to opposite-gender superiors in the chain of
command of the recruits who are accompanied by a member of the
same gender (not a recruit) as the recruits housed in the area.
MILITARY HEALTH SYSTEM
Military service members consistently list health care as a
top quality of life issue. The committee took numerous actions
to ensure that military members, retirees and their families
have access to quality health care. The committee continued to
urge the Administration to provide adequate funding for the
Defense Health Program, and it restored $274 million to an
underfunded Defense Health Program in fiscal year 1998.
Additionally, the committee directed numerous improvements
to the new TRICARE program to ensure that the program provides
a quality, uniform health benefit for all military
beneficiaries. The National Defense Authorization Acts for
Fiscal Years 1998 and 1999 (Public Law 105-85 and Public Law
105-261), included several initiatives to improve the program:
a requirement for the Secretary of Defense to prepare a plan
for expanding the HMO option of the program--TRICARE Prime--
into areas outside the 40-mile radius of military medical
treatment facilities (MTFs) to provide military beneficiaries
with greater access to less expensive health care coverage; a
requirement for the Secretary of Defense to establish a system
to measure the performance of MTFs and TRICARE contractors in
meeting the standards for timely access to care; and authority
for the Secretary of Defense to improve claims-processing
procedures in an effort to minimize collection actions against
military beneficiaries.
The committee also aggressively sought ways to improve
health care coverage for military retirees and their families,
particularly those retirees who are over age 65 and are
Medicare eligible. Specifically, the committee worked closely
with the Committee on Ways and Means and the Committee on
Commerce to establish a three-year demonstration program to
allow Medicare-eligible military retirees to receive
comprehensive health care at military facilities that would be
reimbursed by Medicare; established a three-year demonstration
program to allow up to 66,000 Medicare-eligible retirees and
their families to enroll in the Federal Employees Health
Benefits Program beginning January 1, 2000, under the same
cost-sharing arrangements as other federal employees; directed
the Department to plan a complete redesign of its pharmacy
system to ensure that all military beneficiaries, including
retirees, have access to a universal, uniform pharmacy benefit;
established a demonstration program to test the feasibility of
providing TRICARE coverage as a supplement to Medicare for
eligible retirees and their families; and expanded eligibility
for the retiree dental insurance program established in the
104th Congress.
PERSIAN GULF ILLNESSES
The Committee is concerned about the illnesses from which
many Gulf War veterans have suffered since the end of the
Persian Gulf War. Department of Defense disclosures reveal that
many veterans may have been exposed to low levels of chemical
agents. Criticisms by the General Accounting Office and the
Presidential Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses
on the Department's handling of issues surrounding these
illnesses and exposures have also served to fuel widespread
concerns. As a result, the committee conducted a hearing on the
status of the investigations into Persian Gulf illnesses.
Furthermore, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85), included several provisions that
addressed concerns relating to Persian Gulf illnesses.
Specifically, it provided funds to evaluate treatments to
relieve the symptoms of Gulf War illnesses; required the
Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to
develop a comprehensive plan for providing health care to all
veterans, active-duty members and reservists suffering from
symptoms of Gulf War illnesses; and directed the Secretary of
Defense and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to develop
measures for monitoring the effectiveness and quality of
follow-up health care services provided to Persian Gulf
veterans experiencing symptoms of Gulf War illnesses. It also
required the Secretary of Defense to establish a medical
tracking system to be used during all overseas contingency or
wartime operations, including humanitarian operations, for all
deployed military members, including reservists, and required
the Secretary of Defense to provide clear notification to
service members that a drug being administered is an
investigational new drug.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999
(Public Law 105-261), included a requirement for prior consent
to be obtained from members of the armed forces before an
investigational new drug can be administered by the services.
However, the provision allowed the Secretary of Defense to
request that the President waive the requirement for prior
consent if the Secretary determines that obtaining prior
consent is not feasible, is contrary to the best interests of
the member involved, or is not in the best interests of
national security. The National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261), also included a
provision that provides the Secretary of Defense with authority
to establish a center devoted to a longitudinal study to
evaluate information on the health conditions of members of the
armed forces upon their return from deployment on military
operations in order to rapidly identify trends in illnesses or
injuries among these members.
POW-MIA
As an enhancement to reform measures passed during the
104th Congress, the committee sponsored a comprehensive package
of legislation that improved the ability of the nation to
ensure the fullest possible accounting of POW/MIAs. The
provisions, which were included in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85),
will better protect U.S. citizens who become missing during war
or operations other than war and provide for increased
involvement of the next of kin in the accounting process. The
committee continued its oversight of DOD's implementation of
these changes during a comprehensive hearing held near the
conclusion of the 105th Congress.
OTHER ACTIVITIES OF THE FULL COMMITTEE
Budget Activity
On March 20, 1997, the committee forwarded its views and
estimates regarding the budget for National Defense (function
050) for fiscal year 1998 to the Committee on the Budget. The
committee noted that the President's Budget continued to
provide inadequate resources for National Defense and, when
adjusted for inflation, represented a reduction of over two
percent from fiscal year 1997 spending levels. The committee
also expressed its concern over the Administration's
underestimation of defense outlays in the President's Budget in
order to avoid domestic program reductions. The committee
reemphasized its dedication to the priorities established in
the 104th Congress to restore and preserve military readiness,
to ensure technological superiority through timely
modernization, to enhance the quality of life for military
personnel and families, and to reform inefficient Department of
Defense bureaucracies and processes. The committee further
recommended National Defense (function 050) authorization
levels of $268.2 billion in budget authority and $267.5 billion
in outlays.
On March 16, 1998, the committee forwarded its views and
estimates regarding the budget for National Defense (function
050) for fiscal year 1999 to the Committee on the Budget. The
committee noted that although the defense spending level in the
President's Budget was generally consistent with the defense
spending budget authority cap set forth in the Balanced Budget
Act of 1997, it represented a decline of one percent when
adjusted for inflation. The committee noted that the
Administration's estimate for defense outlays in the
President's Budget was $3.6 billion lower than that of the
Congressional Budget Office. The committee expressed its
growing concern over the continuing inability of the White
House's Office of Management and Budget and the Congressional
Budget Office to achieve concensus on these annual estimates.
The committee did not recommend specific National Defense
(function 050) authorization levels for budget authority or
outlays, but instead urged renegotiating the Balanced Budget
Act of 1997 to increase the defense spending cap in order to
permit sufficient funding of critical readiness, modernization
and quality of life requirements of the military services.
Full Committee Hearings
During the 105th Congress, the Committee on National
Security held numerous hearings in accordance with its
legislative and oversight roles. An examination of existing and
emerging threats to U.S. national security interests provided
the thematic overlay for the committee's consideration of the
fiscal years 1998 and 1999 defense budget requests. Other full
committee hearings focused on the deployment and employment of
U.S. military forces abroad in places like Bosnia and the
Persian Gulf, defense reform, the Quadrennial Defense Review
(QDR), and technology transfers.
(H.N.S.C. 105-1; H.N.S.C. 105-2; H.N.S.C. 105-11; H.N.S.C.
105-14; H.N.S.C. 105-15; H.N.S.C. 105-16; H.N.S.C. 105-23;
H.N.S.C. 105-24; H.N.S.C. 105-25; H.N.S.C. 105-27; H.N.S.C.
105-39; H.N.S.C. 105-40; H.N.S.C. 105-42; H.N.S.C. 105-43;
H.N.S.C. 105-45; H.N.S.C. 105-50; H.N.S.C. 105-51; H.N.S.C.
105-52).
POSTURE HEARINGS
Early in each session of the 105th Congress, the committee
sought and received testimony from Administration officials
with respect to the Administration's overall national security
policy, plans, and programs, and the budget proposals requested
to implement them. As part of its oversight obligations, the
committee requested and received posture statements from the
Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, the uniformed service chiefs, and the service
Secretaries.
In the first session, during deliberations on the Fiscal
Year 1998 Defense Authorization Bill (H.R. 1119), the committee
received testimony from Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen
and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General John
Shalikashvili on February 12, 1997. Subsequently, the committee
received testimony from the uniformed service chiefs; Gen.
Dennis J. Reimer, Chief of Staff of the Army; Adm. Jay L.
Johnson, Chief of Naval Operations; Gen. Charles C. Krulak,
Commandant of the Marine Corps; and Gen. Ronald R. Fogleman,
Chief of Staff of the Air Force, on March 5, 1997. The
committee received testimony from the service secretaries; Togo
D. West, Jr., Secretary of the Army; John H. Dalton, Secretary
of the Navy; and Sheila E. Widnall, Secretary of the Air Force,
on March 12, 1997.
In addition, the committee heard from regional commanders-
in-chief. On March 6, 1997 the committee met to receive
testimony from Gen. John H. Tilelli, USA, Commander in Chief,
U.S. Forces Korea (USFK); Adm. Joseph W. Prueher, USN,
Commander in Chief, U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM); and Gen. John
J. Sheehan, USMC, Commander in Chief, U.S. Atlantic Command
(ACOM); and on March 19, 1997 from Gen. J.H. Binford Peay, III,
USA, Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM); Gen.
George A. Joulwan, USA, Commander-in-Chief, U.S. European
Command (EUCOM); and Gen. Wesley K. Clark, USA, Commander-in-
Chief, U.S. Southern Command (SOCOM).
During the second session, the committee began its
consideration of the Fiscal Year 1999 Defense Authorization
Bill (H.R. 3616) with its first posture hearing on February 5,
1998, receiving testimony from Secretary Cohen and Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Shelton. This was followed by
a closed hearing on February 25, 1998 with Gen. John A. Gordon,
Deputy Director Central Intelligence and Lt. Gen. Patrick M.
Hughes, USA, Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency.
Subsequently, the committee received testimony from regional
commanders-in-chief. On March 4, 1998 the committee received
testimony from Adm. Joseph W. Prueher, USN, Commander in Chief,
U.S. Pacific Command; Gen. John H. Tilelli, USA, Commander in
Chief, U.S. Forces Korea; and Adm. Harold W. Gehman, Jr., USN,
Commander in Chief, U.S. Atlantic Command; and on March 5, 1998
from Gen. Wesley K. Clark, USA, Commander in Chief, U.S.
European Command; and Gen. Anthony C. Zinni, USMC, Commander in
Chief, U.S. Central Command. On March 12, 1998 the committee
heard from the uniformed service chiefs; General Dennis J.
Reimer, Chief of Staff, Department of the Army; Admiral Jay L.
Johnson, Chief of Naval Operations, Department of the Navy;
General Michael E. Ryan, Chief of Staff, Department of the Air
Force; and General Charles C. Krulak, Commandant, U.S. Marine
Corps. The committee concluded its posture hearings on March
26, 1998, receiving testimony from the service secretaries;
Robert M. Walker, Acting Secretary of the Army; John H. Dalton,
Secretary of the Navy, and F. Whitten Peters, Acting Secretary
of the Air Force.
(H.N.S.C. 105-2; H.N.S.C. 105-27).
THREATS TO U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY
On February 13, 1997, the committee heard from former
Directors of Central Intelligence, James Woolsey, William
Webster, and James Schlesinger, to review the current and
prospective threats to U.S. national security. This hearing,
following the appearance of the Secretary of Defense and
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, provided additional
context early in the budget cycle for consideration of the
Administration's fiscal year 1998 budget request. This approach
was repeated during the committee's consideration of the fiscal
year 1999 budget request, as former Directors of Central
Intelligence James Woolsey and John Deutch appeared before the
committee on February 12, 1998 to offer their views on existing
and emerging threats facing the United States.
(H.N.S.C. 105-11; H.N.S.C. 105-40).
U.S. POLICY TOWARD BOSNIA
During the 105th Congress, the committee continued its
oversight of U.S. policy toward Bosnia and the Balkans region.
Through hearings and numerous classified intelligence and
operations briefings, the committee intensified its activities
as the Administration lifted its deadline for the withdrawal of
U.S. forces in the region and additional units were rotated
through Bosnia, Macedonia and elsewhere in the region. The
committee participated in a number of Congressional fact-
finding delegations to the region, and prepared a series of
reports outlining and analyzing U.S. policy toward Bosnia and
the Balkans, focusing especially on the operational and
readiness strains caused by the extended presence of U.S. and
NATO forces. These activities covered every aspect of that
policy, from broad issues of political reconstruction in Bosnia
and the former Yugoslavia to issues of NATO military
burdensharing and the cost and preparedness of U.S. forces for
an open-ended mission in the region. As the crisis in Kosovo
developed, the committee hosted a series of classified
briefings for all Members of the House of Representatives on
these issues.
As part of its efforts to gain a thorough understanding of
U.S. policy toward Bosnia and to provide comprehensive
oversight of U.S. military deployments to the former
Yugoslavia, the committee also received testimony from the
Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, the Secretary of State, Department of Defense officials,
the intelligence community and non-governmental experts
familiar with the region.
(H.N.S.C. 105-43).
U.S. POLICY TOWARD IRAQ
During the 105th Congress, the committee's oversight role
with respect to military deployments in the Persian Gulf region
peaked as relations between Iraq and the United States worsened
and strong U.S. military actions were contemplated. As the
crisis continued throughout 1997 and 1998, the committee
received a series of Administration operational and
intelligence briefings on the situation regarding Iraq. In
addition, a series of informal committee meetings were held
with Middle East experts, former U.S. government officials, and
former UN weapons inspectors. In response to the worsening
overall situation, the committee held a hearing on September
16, 1998, to explore U.S. policy toward Iraq and the long-term
viability of the weapons inspections regime. In both the fiscal
year 1998 and fiscal year 1999 defense authorization bills, the
committee extended the Department of Defense's authority to
provide UN weapons inspectors in Iraq with expertise,
equipment, and materiel in support of the UN-mandated weapons
inspection mission.
(H.N.S.C. 105-51).
Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare and Recreation
The Special Oversight Panel on Morale, Welfare and
Recreation was appointed for the 105th Congress on February 4,
1997.
The panel conducted four hearings under its jurisdiction
during the 105th Congress. Reviews of the fiscal year 1998
budget request for morale, welfare and recreation (MWR)
programs were conducted on March 20, 1997 and April 10, 1997,
while reviews of the fiscal year 1999 budget request were
conducted on March 3, 1998 and March 12, 1998. The panel
continued its oversight of the military services' MWR programs
and operations of the Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA) and the
military exchanges. Issues examined included the adequacy of
military service MWR capitalization programs; examination of
the pricing policy for tobacco products; the importance of the
military resale system as a non pay benefit; and efforts to
improve the efficiency of the operation of the commissaries,
exchanges, and MWR activities.
This active oversight resulted in a number of initiatives
contained in National Defense Authorization Acts for Fiscal
Years 1998 and 1999 (Public Laws 105-85 and 105-261). These
included protecting the funding of the Defense Commissary
Agency by requiring the Department of Defense to manage and
fund the agency, establishing the pricing policy of tobacco
products in commissaries; expanding reserve commissary
privileges from 12 to 24 visits per year; and requiring the
Department of Defense to allow authorized patrons unfettered
access to exchange and commissary items overseas.
Other panel initiatives included expanding of types of
merchandise that military exchanges may sell, and prohibiting
further closure of libraries on military installations. The
panel also continued its annual review of the commissary
surcharge and nonappropriated fund construction program.
(H.N.S.C. 105-8; H.N.S.C. 105-33)
Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine
The Special Oversight Panel on the Merchant Marine was
appointed for the 105th Congress on February 4, 1997. On March
19, 1997, the panel held a hearing to receive testimony on the
budget request for fiscal year 1998 for the Panama Canal
Commission and on legislative proposals to ease the transition
of the canal to the government of Panama on December 31, 1999.
Representatives of the Panama Canal Commission testified on
these matters. On June 4, 1997, the panel recommended
authorization levels for the Panama Canal Commission for fiscal
year 1998. The panel also provided recommendations for
additional changes to the Commission's organic statute to ease
the transition. These recommendations were adopted by the
committee on June 11, 1998, by unanimous voice vote, and were
subsequently included in title XXXV of Division C of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public
Law 105-85).
During the March 19, 1997 hearing, the panel also received
testimony on the budget request for the Maritime Administration
for fiscal year 1998. On June 4, 1997, the panel provided
recommendations to the committee on authorization levels for
the Maritime Administration. These recommendations were adopted
by the committee on June 11, 1997 by unanimous voice vote.
These recommendations were included in title XXXVI of Division
C of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
1998 (Public Law 105-85).
On March 10, 1998, the panel held a hearing to receive
testimony on the budget request for fiscal year 1999 for the
Panama Canal Commission and on legislative proposals to ease
the transition of the canal to the government of Panama on
December 31, 1999. The Honorable Togo D. West, Chairman of the
Board of Directors of the Panama Canal Commission, and Alberto
Aleman, Administrator of the Panama Canal Commission testified
on these matters. On April 29, 1998, the panel recommended
authorization levels for the Panama Canal Commission for fiscal
year 1999. The panel also provided recommendations for the
final legislation to facilitate the smooth transition of
control of the canal to the government of Panama on December
31, 1999. These recommendations were adopted by the committee
on May 6, 1998, by unanimous voice vote, and were subsequently
included in title XXXV of Division C of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261).
During the March 10, 1998 hearing, the panel also received
testimony on the budget request for the Maritime Administration
for fiscal year 1999. On April 29, 1998, the panel provided
recommendations to the committee on authorization levels for
the Maritime Administration. These recommendations were adopted
by the committee on May 6, 1998 by unanimous voice vote. These
recommendations were included in title XXXVI of Division C of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999
(Public Law 105-261).
(H.N.S.C. 105-13; H.N.S.C. 105-34).
OTHER ACTIVITIES OF SUBCOMMITTEES
Military Installations and Facilities Subcommittee
The Military Installations and Facilities Subcommittee held
several hearings in support of its consideration of the fiscal
year 1998 and fiscal year 1999 budget request for the military
construction, military family housing, and other related
programs of the Department of Defense and the military
services. In addition to its consideration of the annual budget
request, the subcommittee considered and reported legislation
in each session of the 105th Congress which was included in
division B of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85) and the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261). In
both instances, the legislation included alterations to the
management of the military construction program and the
military family housing program, modifications of the defense
base closure and realignment process, and provisions affecting
the conveyance, exchange, transfer of jurisdiction, or
modification to existing statutory authority on the disposition
of real property. The subcommittee reported legislation to
reauthorize the Sikes Act.
The subcommittee took testimony from senior officials of
the Department of Defense and senior officials and active and
reserve component officers of the Department of Defense, the
Department of the Army, the Department of the Navy, including
the Marine Corps, the Department of the Air Force, the
Congressional Budget Office, the General Accounting Office, the
Air Force Sergeants Association, the Fleet Reserve Association,
the National Military Family Association, the Non-Commissioned
Officers Association, the Reserve Officers Association and
members of Congress.
(H.N.S.C. 105-7; H.N.S.C. 105-32)
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MILITARY HOUSING PRIVATIZATION INITIATIVE
During the 105th Congress, the subcommittee met on March
13, 1997, and March 10, 1998, to conduct oversight hearings on
the implementation by the Department of Defense and the
military departments of the Military Housing Privatization
Initiative (subchapter IV, chapter 169 of title 10, United
States Code). The subcommittee took testimony from senior
officials of the Department of Defense and the military
services.
(H.N.S.C. 105-7; H.N.S.C. 105-32)
CURRENT IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES IN BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE ACTIONS
The subcommittee met on March 18, 1997 to conduct an
oversight hearing on the current implementation issues in base
realignment and closure actions. The subcommittee took
testimony from senior officials of the Department of Defense
and Congressional Budget Office.
(H.N.S.C. 105-7)
OVERSEAS QUALITY OF LIFE INFRASTRUCTURE
The subcommittee met on April 8, 1997 to conduct an
oversight hearing on the overseas quality of life
infrastructure. The subcommittee took testimony from senior
officers of the military services.
(H.N.S.C 105-7)
LONG-TERM PLANNING FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION
The subcommittee met on April 10, 1997 to conduct an
oversight hearing to assess the military construction component
of the Future Years Defense Plan (FYDP) and the adequacy of the
FYDP in addressing future facilities recapitalization and
modernization requirements. The subcommittee took testimony
from a senior official of the Department of Defense.
(H.N.S.C. 105-7)
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPLICATIONS OF THE DEFENSE REFORM INITATIVE
The subcommittee met on March 18, 1998, to conduct an
oversight hearing on the infrastructure implications of the
Defense Reform Initiative. The subcommittee took testimony from
senior officials of the Department of Defense and the General
Accounting Office.
(H.N.S.C. 105-32)
Military Personnel Subcommittee
The Military Personnel Subcommittee held a series hearings
to review the manpower portion of the fiscal years 1998 and
1999 defense budget requests: February 11, 1997, on the status
of the investigation into Persian Gulf War illnesses; February
27, 1997, on the Department of Defense health care alternatives
for military Medicare-eligible beneficiaries; March 4, 1997
(joint hearing with Military Readiness Subcommittee), readiness
and personnel: views from the field; March 13, 1997, military
compensation reform and recruiting/retention issues; April 8,
1997, review of general and flag officer authorizations; May 8,
1997, the status of the ready reserve mobilization income
insurance program; July 29, 1997, reserve component issues from
the Quadrennial Defense Review; October 1, 1997, Department of
the Army reports on and corrective actions related to recent
cases of sexual misconduct and related matters; January 29,
1998, the Quadrennial Defense Review and National Defense Panel
recommendations--how new perspectives of force structure,
mission, and resource allocation impact manpower resources and
personnel policy; February 26, 1998, status of the TRICARE
program; March 12, 1998, military recruiting, retention and
related personnel programs and policies; March 17, 1998,
findings of the Federal Advisory Committee on Gender-Integrated
Training and Related Issues and Department of Defense response;
March 20, 1998 (joint hearing with Military Readiness
Subcommittee), assess readiness of Army follow-on forces and
review Army-National Guard integrated divisions; September 24,
1998, adequacy of the fiscal year 1999 Defense Health Program
budget; September 25, 1998 (joint hearing with Readiness and
Military Installations Subcommittees), readiness realities;
September 28, 1998, awarding of the Medal of Honor to Theodore
Roosevelt; and October 2, 1998, POW/MIA oversight. Briefings
held: March 6, 1997, reserve component personnel; March 18,
1997, the link between strategy and force structure; April 8,
1997, military criminal investigative procedures; April 23,
1997, military criminal investigative procedures. Meetings held
with POW/MIA groups: May 1, 1997, and October 29, 1997. Staff
briefings: November 7, 1997, on General Accounting Office
report on April 15, 1994, shootdown of Black Hawk helicopters;
April 1, 1998, Surgeons General on the promotion process.
(H.N.S.C. 105-6; H.N.S.C. 105-9; H.N.S.C. 105-10; H.N.S.C.
105-19, H.N.S.C. 105-31; H.N.S.C. 105-44, H.N.S.C. 105-46;
H.N.S.C. 105-47)
Military Procurement Subcommittee
The Subcommittee on Military Procurement conducted numerous
oversight hearings and briefings during the 105th Congress in
its consideration of the fiscal years 1998 and 1999 Department
of Defense and Department of Energy (DOE) budget requests:
February 25, 1997 and February 25, 1998 (joint briefings with
Military Research and Development Subcommittee), intelligence
community assessments; February 26, 1997 (joint hearing with
the Military Research and Development Subcommittee), Navy
shipbuilding; March 5, 1997 (joint hearing with the Military
Research and Development Subcommittee), tactical fighter
aircraft modernization; March 11, 1997, destruction of the U.S.
chemical weapons stockpile; March 11, 1997 and March 5, 1998
(joint hearings with Military Research and Development
Subcommittee), Army modernization; March 12, 1997, B-2 bomber
production; March 18, 1997, new attack submarine program; March
19, 1997 and May 15, 1997 (joint hearings with Military
Research and Development Subcommittee), ballistic missile
defense issues; March 20, 1997 (joint hearing with Military
Research and Development Subcommittee), information assurance;
April 8, 1997, acquisition workforce; April 9, 1997 (joint
hearing with Military Research and Development Subcommittee),
airborne reconnaissance/unmanned aerial vehicle programs; April
10, 1997 and March 19, 1998, Department of Energy programs;
November 6, 1997, February 26, 1998, and October 8, 1998 (joint
hearings with Military Research and Development Subcommittee),
defense-wide modernization issues; March 4, 1998 (joint hearing
with Military Research and Development Subcommittee), Navy and
Marine Corps modernization issues; March 10, 1998 (joint
hearing with Military Research and Development Subcommittee),
Air Force modernization issues; April 1, 1998, long range
airpower; and June 11, 1998 (joint hearing with Military
Research and Development Subcommittee), critical infrastructure
protection.
In addition, the subcommittee held other hearings on other
matters: April 15, 1997, sale or transfer of supercomputers to
foreign entities or governments engaged in nuclear weapons
research and the impact of such transfer on U.S. national
security interests; September 29, 1998 (joint hearing with
Military Research and Development Subcommittee and with Space
and Aeronautics Subcommittee, Committee on Science), U.S. space
power in the 21st century; October 6, 1998, DOE foreign visitor
control program; and October 8, 1998, procedures for the
donation of naval vessels stricken from the register.
(H.N.S.C. 105-3; H.N.S.C. 105-12; H.N.S.C. 105-26; H.N.S.C.
105-28; H.N.S.C. 105-41; H.N.S.C. 105-48; H.N.S.C. 105-49;
H.N.S.C. 105-53)
Military Readiness Subcommittee
The Military Readiness Subcommittee conducted a review of
the operations and maintenance portion of the fiscal years 1998
and 1999 Department off Defense authorization requests and held
a series of hearings within its jurisdiction. Major areas of
the subcommittee's examinations included: military readiness
trends and perspectives; defense reform initiatives; DOD
efforts in measuring readiness; depot-level maintenance issues;
DOD acquisition workforce; operation and maintenance financial
management issues; mission capability rates; improving
readiness capabilities; military training issues; quarterly
readiness reports; assessing the readiness of Army follow-on
forces and Army National Guard integrated divisions; and issues
concerning the Naval Petroleum Reserves and the National
Defense Stockpile of strategic and critical materials. In
addition, the subcommittee conducted a series of field hearings
at the following locations: Langley Air Force Base, Virginia;
North Island Naval Air Station, Fort Monroe, Virginia; and Fort
Riley, Kansas.
The subcommittee undertook a detailed and extensive
examination of issues concerning the outsourcing of DOD
activities to the private sector which culminated in a major
legislative initiative in this area. In addition, the
subcommittee conducted an in-depth review of the financial
management practices of the Department of Defense with a
special emphasis on the Defense Working Capital Fund
activities.
In the first session of the 105th Congress, the
subcommittee developed a legislative package to permit the
leasing of Naval Oil Shale Reserves numbered 1 and 3 and
required the revenue from any leases be applied towards
environmental remediation of these reserves; and in the second
session, developed a legislative package that provided for the
transfer of the remaining reserves contained in the Naval
Petroleum Reserves to the Department of the Interior.
(H.N.S.C. 105-5; H.N.S.C. 105-17; H.N.S.C. 105-30; H.N.S.C.
105-54).
Military Research and Development Subcommittee
The Subcommittee on Military Research and Development
conducted numerous oversight hearings to review programs
included in the DOD research and development budget requests
for fiscal years 1998 and 1999 during the 105th Congress. In
addition to traditional budget oversight reviews, the
subcommittee conducted a number of hearings jointly with the
Subcommittee on Military Procurement to address specific areas
of concern to both subcommittees. Issues addressed during these
hearings included proliferation of ballistic missiles in North
Korea, Iran, and China; recent developments in security and
control of Russian nuclear weapons; threats to the U.S.
national and military critical information infrastructure; and
Federal response to domestic terrorism involving weapons of
mass destruction.
The subcommittee also conducted hearings and briefings
during the 105th Congress to address concerns over inadequate
future year funding for the Department's tactical aviation
programs and to conclude efforts initiated during the 104th
Congress to streamline the Department's ineffective Defense
Airborne Reconnaissance Office and revitalize the military
service unmanned aerial vehicles programs. The subcommittee
also received testimony on the Administration's program for
critical infrastructure protection, information superiority for
the 21st century battlefield, and the status of the defense
science and technology base.
(H.N.S.C. 105-04; H.N.S.C. 105-12; H.N.S.C. 105-18;
H.N.S.C. 105-20; H.N.S.C. 105-21; H.N.S.C.105-22; H.N.S.C. 105-
28; H.N.S.C. 105-36; H.N.S.C. 105-37; H.N.S.C. 105-38; H.N.S.C.
105-48)
PUBLICATIONS
Committee Prints of Laws Relating to National Defense
Committee Prints
1. Committee rules, adopted February 5, 1997.
2. A Ceremony Unveiling the Portrait of The Honorable
Ronald V. Dellums, September 24, 1997.
Published Proceedings
H.N.S.C. 105-1--Full committee organization. February 5,
1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-2--Full committee hearing on the National
Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1998 H.R. 1119
Authorization and Oversight. February 12, March 5, 6, 12, and
19, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-3--Military Procurement Subcommittee hearings
on Title I--Procurement of H.R. 1119, to authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 1998 for military activities of
the Department of Defense, to prescribe military personnel
strengths for fiscal year 1998, and for other purposes. March
11, 12, and 18, April 8, 10, and 15, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-4--Military Research and Development
Subcommittee hearings on Title II--Research, Development, Test,
and Evaluation of H.R. 1119, to authorize appropriations for
fiscal year 1998 for military activities of the Department of
Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal
year 1998, and for other purposes. February 27, 28, March 6,
13, and May 7, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-5--Military Readiness Subcommittee hearings on
Title III--Operation and Maintenance of H.R. 1119, to authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 1998 for military activities of
the Department of Defense, to prescribe military personnel
strengths for fiscal year 1998, and for other purposes. March
3, 4, 11, 12, 18, and May 7, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-6--Military Personnel Subcommittee hearings on
Title IV--Personnel Authorizations, Title V--Military Personnel
Policy, Title VI--Compensation and Other Personnel Benefits,
and Title VII--Health Care Provisions of H.R. 1119, to
authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1998 for military
activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military
personnel strengths for fiscal year 1998, and for other
purposes. February 27, March 13, April 8, and May 8, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-7--Military Installations and Facilities
Subcommittee hearings on Division B--Military Construction
Authorizations (H.R. 909) of H.R. 1119, to authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 1998 for military activities of
the Department of Defense, to prescribe military personnel
strengths for fiscal year 1998, and for other purposes.
February 27, March 4, 13, 18, April 8, 10, and May 8, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-8--Morale, Welfare and Recreation Special
Oversight Panel hearings on morale, welfare and recreation and
commissary issues. March 20 and April 10, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-9--Military Personnel Subcommittee hearing on
the Department of the Army reports on and corrective actions
related to recent cases of sexual misconduct and related
matters. October 1, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-10--Military Personnel Subcommittee hearing on
the status of the investigation into Persian Gulf War
Illnesses. February 11, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-11--Full committee hearing on threats to U.S.
National Security. February 13, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-12--Military Research and Development
Subcommittee hearings on Title II--Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation jointly meeting with Military Procurement
Subcommittee hearings on Title I--Procurement of H.R. 1119, to
authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1998 for military
activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military
personnel strengths for fiscal year 1998, and for other
purposes. February 26, March 5, 11, 19, 20, April 9, and May
15, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-13--Merchant Marine Special Oversight Panel
hearing on annual authorization of the Panama Canal Commission
and the annual authorization for the United States Maritime
Administration. March 19, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-14--Full committee hearings on the Quadrennial
Defense Review. April 16, May 21 and 22, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-15--Full committee hearing on the United
States Policy regarding NATO Expansion. July 17, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-16--Full committee hearings on the Defense
Reform Act of 1997. February 26 and June 17, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-17--Military Readiness Subcommittee hearing on
Operation and Maintenance financial management practices. July
22, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-18--Military Research and Development
Subcommittee hearing on the threat posed by electromagnetic
pulse (EMP) to U.S. military systems and civil infrastructure.
July 16, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-19--Military Personnel Subcommittee hearing on
the reserve component issues from the Quadrennial Defense
Review. July 29, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-20--Military Research and Development
Subcommittee hearing on Ballistic Missile Threat Posed by Iran.
November 5, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-21--Military Research and Development
Subcommittee hearing on the federal response to domestic
terrorism involving weapons of mass destruction and the status
of the Department of Defense support program. November 4, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-22--Military Research and Development
Subcommittee hearings on nuclear terrorism and countermeasures.
October 1 and 2, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-23--Full committee hearing on H.R. 695, The
Security and Freedom Through Encryption Act. July 30, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-24--Full committee hearing on the President's
Line-Item Veto Action on fiscal year 1998 Defense And Military
Construction Appropriations Bills. October 22, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-25--Full committee hearing on U.S.
supercomputer export control. November 13, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-26--Military Procurement Subcommittee hearing
on Department of Defense modernization plans. November 6, 1997.
H.N.S.C. 105-27--Full committee hearing on the National
Defense Authorization Act For fiscal year 1999, H.R. 3616
Authorization and Oversight. February 5, March 4, 5, 12 and 26,
1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-28--Military Procurement and Military Research
and Development Subcommittee hearings on the National Defense
Authorization Act for fiscal year 1999, H.R. 3616 Authorization
and Oversight for Titles I and II, Procurement and Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation. February 26, March 4, 5, 10,
April 1, June 11, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-30--Military Readiness Subcommittee hearings
on the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1999,
H.R. 3616 Authorization and Oversight for Title III--Operation
and Maintenance. February 24, 25, March 6, 11, 13, 16, 18, and
20.
H.N.S.C. 105-31--Military Personnel Subcommittee hearings
on the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1999
H.R. 3616 Authorization and Oversight for Title IV--Personnel
Authorizations, Title V--Military Personnel Policy, Title VI--
Compensation and Other Personnel Benefits, Title VII--Health
Care Provisions. January 29, February 26, March 12 and 17,
1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-32--Military Installations and Facilities
Subcommittee hearings on Division B--Military Construction
Authorizations (H.R. 3695) of H.R. 3616, to authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 1999 for military activities of
the Department of Defense, to prescribe military personnel
strengths for fiscal year 1999, and for other purposes.
February 26, March 3, 10, and 18, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-33--Morale, Welfare and Recreation Special
Oversight Panel hearings on morale, welfare and recreation and
commissary issues. March 3 and 12, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-34--Merchant Marine Special Oversight Panel
hearing on annual authorization of the Panama Canal Commission
and the annual authorization for the United States Maritime
Administration. March 10, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-35--Full committee hearing on consideration of
resolution honoring The Honorable Ronald V. Dellums. February
4, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-36--Military Research and Development
Subcommittee hearing on Russian National Security Issues. March
19, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-37--Military Research and Development
Subcommittee hearing on federal response to domestic terrorism
involving weapons of mass destruction training for first
responders. March 21, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-38--Military Research and Development
Subcommittee hearing on U.S./Russian national security issues.
August 4, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-39--Full committee hearing on the Defense
Reform Initiative. March 11, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-40--Full committee hearing on threats to
United States national security. February 12, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-41--Military Procurement Subcommittee hearing
on the Department of Energy budget request for fiscal year 1999
and related matters. March 19, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-42--Full committee hearing on competition for
depot maintenance workload. June 4, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-43--Full committee hearing on U.S. policy on
Bosnia. March 18, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-44--Military Personnel Subcommittee hearing on
the awarding of the Medal of Honor to Theodore Roosevelt.
September 28, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-45--Full committee hearing on the finding and
conclusions of the Commission to Assess Ballistic Missile
Threat to the United States. July 16, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-46--Military Personnel Subcommittee hearing on
adequacy of the fiscal year 1999 Defense health program budget.
September 24, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-47--Military Personnel Subcommittee hearing on
POW/MIA oversight. October 2, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-48--Military Procurement Subcommittee hearing
on the Department of Defense modernization plan. October 8,
1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-49--Military Procurement Subcommittee hearing
on the navy ship donation procedures. October 8, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-50--Full committee hearing on the U.S. Policy
regarding the export of satellites to China. June 17, 18 and
23, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-51--Full committee hearing on the U.S. policy
towards Iraq. September 16, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-52--Full committee hearing on the state of
U.S. military forces and their ability to execute the national
military strategy. October 7, 1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-53--Military Procurement Subcommittee hearing
on Department of Energy foreign visitors program. October 6,
1998.
H.N.S.C. 105-54--Military Readiness Subcommittee hearing on
readiness realities. September 25, 1998.
House Reports
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Report number Date filed Bill number Title
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
105-108, part 3......... Sep. 12, 1997.......... H.R. 695............... To amend title 18, United States
Code, to affirm the rights of
United States persons to use and
sell encryption and to relax export
controls on encryption.
105-132................. June 16, 1997.......... H.R. 1119.............. To authorize appropriations for
fiscal years 1998 and 1999 for
military activities of the
Department of Defense, to prescribe
troop strengths for fiscal years
1998 and 1999, and for other
purposes.
105-133, part 1......... June 17, 1997.......... H.R. 1778.............. To reform the Department of Defense.
105-340................. Oct. 23, 1997.......... H.R. 1119 Conf. Rept... To authorize appropriations for
fiscal years 1998 and 1999 for
military activities of the
Department of Defense, to prescribe
troop strengths for fiscal years
1998 and 1999, and for other
purposes.
105-468, part 1......... Mar. 26, 1998.......... H.R. 2786.............. To authorize additional
appropriations for the Department
of Defense for ballistic missile
defenses and other measures to
counter the emerging threat posed
to the United States and its allies
in the Middle East and Persian Gulf
region by the development and
deployment of ballistic missiles by
Iran.
105-532................. May 12, 1998........... H.R. 3616 Conf. Rept... To authorize appropriations for
fiscal year 1999 for military
activities of the Department of
Defense, to prescribe military
personnel strengths for fiscal year
1999, and for other purposes.
105-736................. Sep. 22, 1998.......... H.R. 3616.............. To authorize appropriations for
fiscal year 1999 for military
activities of the Department of
Defense, to prescribe military
personnel strengths for fiscal year
1999, and for other purposes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Laws
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Law number Date approved Bill number Title
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
105-41.................. Aug. 13, 1997.......... H.R. 1585.............. To allow postal patrons to
contribute to funding for breast
cancer research through the
voluntary purchase of certain
specially issued United States
postage stamps, and for other
purposes.
105-85.................. Nov. 18, 1997.......... H.R. 1119.............. To authorize appropriations for
fiscal years 1998 and 1999 for
military activities of the
Department of Defense, to prescribe
troop strengths for fiscal years
1998 and 1999, and for other
purposes.
105-103................. Nov. 20, 1997.......... H.R. 2813.............. To waive time limitations specified
by law in order to allow the Medal
of of Honor to be awarded to Robert
R. Ingram of Jacksonville, Florida,
for acts of valor while a Navy
Hospital Corpsman in the Republic
of Vietnam during the Vietnam
conflict.
105-129................. Dec. 1, 1997........... S. 1507................ To amend the National Defense
Authorization Act for fiscal year
1998 to make certain technical
corrections.
105-152................. Dec. 17, 1997.......... H.R. 2796.............. To authorize the reimbursement of
members of the Army deployed to
Europe in support of operations in
Bosnia for certain out-of-pocket
expenses incurred by the members
during the period beginning on
October 1, 1996 and ending on May
31, 1997.
105-222................. Aug. 7, 1998........... H.R. 3731.............. To designate the auditorium located
within the Sandia Technology
Transfer Center in Albuquerque, New
Mexico, as the ``Steve Schiff
Auditorium''.
105-261................. Oct. 17, 1998.......... H.R. 3616.............. To authorize appropriations for
fiscal year 1999 for military
activities of the Department of
Defense, to prescribe military
personnel strengths for fiscal year
1999, and for other purposes.
105-371................. Nov. 12, 1998.......... H.R. 2263.............. To authorize and request the
President to award the
Congressional Medal of Honor
posthumously to Theodore Roosevelt
for his gallant and heroic actions
in the attack on San Juan Heights,
Cuba, during the Spanish-American
War.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRESS RELEASES
First Session
January 7, 1997--Chairman Spence Announces Leadership of
House National Security Committee.
February 6, 1997--Chairman Spence's Reaction to the Clinton
Defense Budget.
February 6, 1997--Subcommittee Chairman Hefley Reacts to
the Clinton Defense Budget.
February 6, 1997--Subcommittee Chairman Weldon Reacts to
the Clinton Defense Budget.
February 10, 1997--Chairman Spence Announces 105th Congress
Subcommittee Assignments.
February 12, 1997--Chairman Spence's Statement at FY 1998
SecDef/CJCS Posture Hearing.
February 13, 1997--Chairman Spence's Statement at Hearing
on Threats to U.S. National Security Interests.
February 14, 1997--Chairman Spence Announces 105th Congress
HNSC Panel Assignments.
February 26, 1997--Chairman Spence's Statement at Full
Committee Hearing on Defense Reform.
February 26, 1997--Press Advisory: HNSC Subcommittee on
Military Readiness to Hold Field Hearing at Langley AFB.
March 3, 1997--Press Advisory: HNSC Readiness and Personnel
Subcommittees to Continue Evaluation of U.S. Force Readiness.
March 5, 1997--Chairman Spence's Statement at the Military
Chiefs' Hearing.
March 5, 1997--Spence Criticizes Defense Budget.
March 6, 1997--Chairman Spence's Statement at the Hearing
on U.S. Defense Posture with Regional U.S. Commanders in Chief.
March 12, 1997--Chairman Spence's Statement at the Military
Service Secretaries' Hearing.
March 13, 1997--Subcommittee Chairman Buyer Outlines Plans
for Congressional Oversight of Sexual Misconduct in the
Military.
March 14, 1997--Chairman Spence Appoints HNSC Vice-Chairs.
March 19, 1997--Chairman Spence's Statement at Hearing with
EUCOM, CENTCOM, and SOUTHCOM CINCS.
March 20, 1997--Chairman Spence Calls for Withdrawl of U.S.
Troops from Bosnia.
April 8, 1997--Chairman Spence--China: U.S. Obstacle to
Superpower Status.
April 8, 1997--Selected Military Capabilities of the
People's Republic of China.
April 9, 1997--Chairman Spence Warns of Worsening Military
Readiness.
April 9, 1997--Military Readiness 1997: Rhetoric and
Reality.
April 16, 1997--Chairman Spence's Statement at Full
Committee Hearing on the Quadrennial Defense Review and
National Defense Panel.
April 29, 1997--Military Personnel Chairman Buyer, and
Reps. Fowler and Harman Following the Court Martial Verdict of
Staff Sergeant Delmar G. Simpson.
May 6, 1997--Chairman Spence Responds to Reports of
Administration Funding Shortfalls for National Missile Defense.
May 6, 1997--Chairman Spence Responds to Cohen's Call for
BRAC.
May 7, 1997--Members of the House National Security
Committee to Visit Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.
May 19, 1997--The QDR: ``Deja Vu All Over Again''.
May 21, 1997--Chairman Spence's Statement at the Full
Committee Hearing on the QDR.
May 22, 1997--Chairman Spence's Statement at the Military
Service Chiefs Hearing on the QDR.
June 4, 1997--Chairman Spence: Monitoring Exports to Hong
Kong Critical for National Security, Nonproliferation Reasons.
June 5, 1997--House National Security Committee Leadership
Introduce H.R. 1778, The Defense Reform Act of 1997.
June 11, 1997--Chairman Spence's Statement at the Full
Committee Hearing Mark-Up of H.R. 1119, The FY 1998 Defense
Authorization Act.
June 11, 1997--Chairman Spence's Statement at the Full
Committee Mark-Up of H.R. 1778, The Defense Reform Act of 1997.
June 11, 1997--Chairman Spence Upon Committee Approval of
H.R. 1778--The Defense Reform Act of 1997.
June 12, 1997--H.R. 1119: Chairman Spence upon Committee
Approval of H.R. 1119, Summary of Major Provisions, and Chart
Indicating Actions on Major Programs in the bill.
June 12, 1997--H.R. 1119: Summary of Major Provisions as
Reported by the House National Security Committee.
June 17, 1997--Chairman Spence's Statement at the Hearing
on H.R. 1778, The Defense Reform Act of 1997.
June 23, 1997--Chairman Spence Applauds House B-2 Decision.
June 25, 1997--House Votes to Balance Defense Priorities.
June 26, 1997--Subcommittee Chairman Buyer Releases Interim
Report on Sexual Misconduct in the Military.
June 26, 1997--Buyer, Fowler, Harman Release Report on
Sexual Misconduct Investigation.
June 26, 1997--Sexual Misconduct in the Military: A
Congressional Review (Interim Report).
July 17, 1997--Chairman Spence's Statement at Hearing on
NATO Expansion.
July 30, 1997--Chairman Spence's Statement at Hearing on
Encryption.
September 9, 1997--Chairman Spence's Statement at Mark-Up
of H.R. 695--The Security and Freedom through Encryption (SAFE)
Act.
September 10, 1997--Chairman Spence and Ranking Member
Dellums Release Report Declaring Administration Supercomputer
Policy ``Inadequate for National Security Purposes.''
September 11, 1997--Statement of Subcommittee Chairman
Buyer, and Representatives Fowler and Harman on the Army's
Release of Sexual Misconduct Investigation Findings.
October 6, 1997--Chairman Spence Reacts to Line Item Veto
of Military Construction Bill.
October 22, 1997--Chairman Spence's Statement at Hearing on
the President's Line Item Vetoes of the FY 1998 Defense and
Military Construction Appropriations Bills.
October 23, 1997--Chairman Spence: Conferees Reach
Agreement on FY 98 Defense Authorization Bill (H.R. 1119),
Summary of Major Provisions, and Chart on Major Programs in the
bill.
October 31, 1997--Chairman Spence: DOE Lax on Background
Checks of Foreign Visitors to Nuclear Weapons Labs.
November 10, 1997--Chairman Spence: Secretary Cohen's
Release of DOD Reform Task Force Recommendations.
November 13, 1997--Chairman Spence's Statement at Full
Committee Hearing on Supercomputer Export Controls.
Second Session
January 6, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement on The Death
of Representative Sonny Bono.
January 30, 1998--Spence, Dellums Make Appointments to
Commission on Military Training and Gender Relations.
February 5, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement at Full
Committee Hearing on the FY 1999 Defense Budget.
February 12, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement at Full
Committee Hearing on Threats to United States National
Security.
March 2, 1998--Press Advisory: National Security
Subcommittee on Readiness to Conduct Field Hearing in San
Diego.
March 4, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement at Full
Committee Hearing with Regional Commanders-In-Chief (I).
March 5, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement at Full
Committee Hearing with Regional Commanders-In-Chief (II).
March 11, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement at Full
Committee Hearing on the Defense Reform Initiative.
March 11, 1998--Press Advisory: National Security
Subcommittee on Readiness to Conduct Field Hearing at Fort
Monroe, Virginia.
March 12, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement at Full
Committee Hearing with Service Chiefs.
March 16, 1998--Press Advisory: National Security
Subcommittees to Conduct Field Hearing at Fort Riley, Kansas.
March 17, 1998--Chairman Spence Calls for Renegotiation of
Balanced Budget Agreement, Increased Defense Spending.
March 17, 1998--Press Advisory: National Security
Subcommittee on Research and Development to Conduct Field
Hearing on Federal Response to Domestic Terrorism in
Indianapolis, Indiana.
March 17, 1998--Media Advisory: Former Secretary of the
Russian Security Council to Testify Before National Security
Committee.
March 17, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement at National
Security Committee Markup of H.R. 2786.
March 17, 1998--National Security Committee Approves H.R.
2786, The Theater Missile Defense Improvement Act of 1998.
March 18, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement at Full
Committee Hearing on Bosnia Policy.
March 26, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement at Full
Committee Hearing with Service Secretaries.
March 30, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement during the
Floor Debate on H.R. 2786, The Theater Missile Defense
Improvement Act of 1998.
April 21, 1998--Dear Colleague from Chairman Spence on
Supercomputer Export Controls.
April 21, 1998--National Security Report: Sales or
Security: Supercomputers and Export Controls.
April 23, 1998--National Security Committee Bipartisan
Leadership Call for Increased Defense Spending.
May 6, 1998--National Security Committee Reports Defense
Bill Out of Committee.
May 6, 1998--National Security Committee to Investigate
Competition of Depot Maintenance Work.
May 6, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement at Full Committee
Markup of H.R. 3616, the FY 1999 National Defense Authorization
Act.
March 21, 1998--House Endorses Defense Authorization Bill.
June 4, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement at Full Committee
Hearing on Competition for Depot Maintenance Workload.
June 10, 1998--Two House Committees to Hold Joint Hearings
on Administration's Policy on U.S. Satellite Launches in China.
June 17, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement at Joint House
National Security Committee & House International Relations
Committee Hearing on U.S. Satellite Export Policy to China.
July 15, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement on Bipartisan
Commission On Ballistic Missile Threat: ``Wake Up Call For All
Americans''
July 15, 1998--Executive Summary of the Report of the
Commission To Assess The Ballistic Missile Threat To The United
States.
July 16, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement at Full
Committee Hearing on the Report of The Commission On The
Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States.
July 22, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement on Motion to
Instruct Conferees On H.R. 3616, FY 99 Defense Authorization
Bill.
September 16, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement at Full
Committee Hearing on U.S. Policy in Iraq.
September 18, 1998--Conferees Reach Agreement on H.R. 3616:
The FY 99 National Defense Authorization Act.
September 23, 1998--Chairman Spence Welcomes President's
Recognition of the Need to Increase Defense Budget to Address
Serious Shortfalls.
September 24, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement on the
Conference Report on H.R. 3616, the FY99 National Defense
Authorization Act.
October 6, 1998--Chairman Spence Remarks Upon the
Enrollment of the FY 1999 Defense Authorization and
Appropriations Bills.
October 7, 1998--Chairman Spence's Statement at Full
Committee Hearing with Former Chiefs and Vice Chiefs.
October 23, 1998--Release of National Security
Accomplishments of the 104th and 105th Congresses.