    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1996, Book I)]
    [February 10, 1996]
    [Pages 226-227]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    [[Page 226]]

    Statement on Signing the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
    Year 1996
    February 10, 1996

        Today I have signed into law S. 1124, the ``National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996.'' This Act authorizes
    appropriations for Department of Defense military activities, including
    military construction, and defense activities of the Department of
    Energy. It also provides, extends, or amends various authorities
    relating to national defense programs and activities.
        I vetoed the original version of this legislation, H.R. 1530, on
    December 28, 1995. Since that time, the Congress has addressed my three
    central national security concerns about the earlier bill. First, the
    Congress deleted the provisions requiring deployment by 2003 of a costly
    missile defense system designed to defend against a long-range missile
    threat, which our intelligence community does not foresee in the next
    decade. Such a course of action would have prevented us from deploying
    the best possible technology if a real threat were to emerge at a later
    time. Moreover, implementation of the system called for in H.R. 1530
    would probably have been inconsistent with the Anti-Ballistic Missile
    Treaty.
        Second, the Congress deleted the requirement that the President
    submit a supplemental appropriations request within a defined time
    period after commencement of certain contingency and other operations,
    such as the ongoing military operations in Bosnia. The Act does,
    however, continue to contain unwarranted restrictions on the manner in
    which such operations may be funded.
        Third, the Congress deleted the restriction on the President's
    authority to make and implement decisions relating to the operational or
    tactical control of elements of the U.S. armed forces, a restriction
    which clearly infringed on the President's constitutional authority as
    Commander in Chief.
        The Act also includes a number of provisions of great importance to
    our national defense and to the men and women in our armed forces,
    authorizing critical defense programs to be continued and new ones to be
    initiated. The Act authorizes the full 2.4% increase in pay and
    allowances for our military personnel. It authorizes the Military
    Housing Privatization Initiative, which provides new authority to
    acquire and improve military housing and supporting facilities through
    the use of private expertise and capital. It authorizes necessary
    military construction and NATO infrastructure programs. It continues the
    Department of Energy's science-based Stockpile Stewardship program. It
    provides for the sale of the Elk Hills Naval Petroleum Reserve.
        The Act also contains the Administration's proposal to allow the
    United States to extradite indicted war criminals and provide evidence
    directly to the International War Crimes Tribunals for the Former
    Yugoslavia and Rwanda--a provision that should encourage others to
    cooperate fully with the War Crimes Tribunal.
        And, this legislation makes important strides in the area of
    procurement reform, which will help produce a better-equipped military
    for less money. The legislation gives agencies enhanced authority and
    flexibility in their use of computers and telecommunications, while
    insisting on accountability. Consistent with the Administration's
    efforts under the National Performance Review to create a government
    that works better and costs less, the Act encourages agencies to adopt
    the best practices of successful companies in the private sector. And
    the Act includes measures to facilitate the purchase of commercially-
    available goods and services, to streamline and clarify procurement
    integrity laws, and to substantially improve the process for resolving
    bid protests for information technology.
        All of these measures are important to the effective and efficient
    operation of our armed forces. I regret, however, that this legislation
    continues to contain a number of provisions, identified in my earlier
    veto message, that will adversely affect the Defense Department's
    ability to carry out its national defense mission.
        First, I am strongly opposed, as is the Department of Defense, to
    the provision requiring the discharge of military personnel living with
    the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), where such discharge is not
    required by any medical, public health, or military purpose. This
    provision is blatantly discriminatory and highly punitive

    [[Page 227]]

    to service members and their families. People living with HIV can and do
    lead full and productive lives, provide for their families, and
    contribute to the well-being of our Nation. The men and women affected
    by this provision are ready, willing and able to serve their country
    with honor and should be allowed to continue to do so.
        Therefore, I strongly support the current efforts in the Congress to
    repeal this provision before a single service member is discharged from
    the armed forces.
        Moreover, the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint
    Chiefs of Staff have advised me that the arbitrary discharge of these
    men and women would be both unwarranted and unwise; that such discharge
    is unnecessary as a matter of sound military policy; and that
    discharging service members deemed fit for duty would waste the
    Government's investment in the training of these people and would be
    disruptive to the military programs in which they play an integral role.
        I agree.
        Consequently, I have concluded that this discriminatory provision is
    unconstitutional. Specifically, it violates equal protection by
    requiring the discharge of qualified service members living with HIV who
    are medically able to serve, without furthering any legitimate
    governmental purpose. As President Franklin D. Roosevelt said in 1943,
    explaining his decision to sign an important appropriations bill
    notwithstanding the fact that it contained a provision that infringed
    upon individual rights, ``I cannot . . . yield without placing on record
    my view that this provision is not only unwise and discriminatory, but
    unconstitutional.''
        In accordance with my constitutional determination, the Attorney
    General will decline to defend this provision. Instead, the Attorney
    General will inform the House and Senate of this determination so that
    they may, if they wish, present to the courts their argument that the
    provision should be sustained.
        Further, to mitigate any unfair burden that this legislation could
    place on these service members and their families pending any repeal or
    judicial invalidation, I have directed the Secretaries of Defense,
    Veterans Affairs, and Transportation, in carrying out the provisions of
    this Act, to take all steps necessary to ensure that these service
    members receive the full benefits to which they are entitled--including,
    among other things, disability retirement pay, health care coverage for
    their families and transition benefits such as vocational education.
        I am troubled by another provision in this Act, which restricts the
    ability of service women and military dependents to obtain privately-
    funded abortions in military facilities overseas. I remain firmly
    opposed to this provision. In many countries, these U.S. facilities
    provide the only accessible safe source for these medical services. I
    will support congressional efforts to repeal this and a similar
    provision that became law in the ``Department of Defense Appropriations
    Act, 1996.''
        Finally, I note that section 1404 of the Act expresses the sense of
    the Congress that the Secretary of Defense should not take any steps
    toward dismantling or retiring specific strategic nuclear delivery
    systems until the START II Treaty enters into force, and it prohibits
    obligating or expending funds in fiscal year 1996 for such steps.
    Reading the provisions of section 1404 together, I interpret the section
    to prohibit obligations or expenditures only before the START II Treaty
    enters into force. The explanation of Section 1404 in the conference
    report supports this interpretation.

                                                          William J. Clinton

    The White House,

    February 10, 1996.

    Note: S. 1124, approved February 10, was assigned Public Law No. 104-
    106.