Ike Skelton

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, this is the fifth speech I am giving on Bosnia. It contains good news. In my last address I stated that on March 28 I sent a letter to the President regarding the New York Times report that the United States is being urged to stay in Bosnia longer than a year. This would break the word of the administration and of the Secretary of State, who said that the American forces would be in Bosnia for only 1 year. The Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, said that 1-year limitation would give the warring parties the opportunity to have peace but it would not be a guarantee. Mr. Speaker, I have heard from the President today with a letter dated April 22. He clearly states that the IFOR mission should be complete in about a year. This is good news, and it is in contrast with the New York Times article. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record my March 28 and the President's April 22 letters. House of Representatives, Washington, DC, March 28, 1996. The President, The White House, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. President: The March 21 edition of the New York Times reported the U.S. and NATO are being urged to keep our forces in Bosnia after the end of the year. International civilian and military authorities are alleged to be pressing for continued NATO presence beyond our scheduled departure. To keep American troops in Bosnia past the announced date of departure at the end of 1996 would be a major mistake. First, it flies in the face of a clear statement by Secretary of State Warren Christopher: ``This is not a permanent commitment. This is approximately a one-year commitment. . . . If it can't be done in a year, perhaps it can't be done in a longer period of time.'' Second, it breaks faith with our American troops who are presently stationed in Bosnia, who expect to return to their families in nine months. Third, it contradicts what the American people were told about the duration of the mission. American forces are facing a difficult and challenging assignment in the NATO peacekeeping mission. The one-year deployment was intended to provide an opportunity for peace, not a guarantee of it. The people of Bosnia must assume the responsibility of ensuring their own peace. Already, American and NATO peacekeepers are being diverted from their original mission to the task of rebuilding Bosnia. This assignment shifts the focus of our military forces from peacekeeping to assisting in civil projects. Further, by several accounts, a cornerstone of the Dayton agreement--the continuance of the Muslim-Croat Federation-- appears severely weakened. The U.S. and NATO could well be in a quandary if that alliance should crumble. The push to keep U.S. and NATO forces in Bosnia, the expansion of mission assignments and the possible disintegration of the Muslim-Croat Federation could compel us to extend our commitment in Bosnia. We are on a slippery slope toward a lengthy deployment of five or even ten additional years. I commend Major General William L. Nash, Commander of the American sector of NATO forces in Bosnia, who stressed his determination to withdraw on schedule. He properly stated that the burden for peace is ``on the shoulders of those folk that live here.'' Mr. President, if the people of Bosnia truly want peace, one year is more than enough time to get it started. Very truly yours, Ike Skelton, Member of Congress.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I became quite concerned over this as a result of the New York Times article, and I subsequently wrote the President because the Secretary of State clearly said that we are not guaranteeing peace over there, that the 1 year of the IFOR and the American forces would give the warring parties the opportunity for peace, and the President in his letter dated April 22, which I received today, clearly states the administration's policy that they will be about a year. It gives the opportunity, though we are not guaranteeing it. That of course is good news for the families of all the Americans.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to an outstanding educational institution in my district. Sedalia Middle School has been chosen as one of 266 1994-96 Blue Ribbon Schools. After a rigorous and lengthy selection process Sedalia Middle School was selected as one of the most outstanding schools in the country. The award will be presented at a ceremony to be held in Washington, DC, in May. I ask my colleagues to join me in a salute to all of the teachers, parents, and students who worked so hard to achieve this extraordinary accomplishment.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, this is the fourth in a series of speeches I am giving on the status of the NATO peacekeeping mission in Bosnia. Our troops continue to do an outstanding job. They are fully deployed. They are completing tasks according to schedule, although not always under optimum circumstances. However, I have concerns about three conditions that may cause us to stay in Bosnia past our scheduled departure at the end of 1996. I outlined these three concerns in a letter I sent to the President this morning. I will place the letter into the Record at the end of my remarks. First, the March 21 edition of the New York Times reported the United States and NATO are being urged to keep our forces in Bosnia after the end of the year. International civilian and military authorities are alleged to be pressing for continued NATO presence beyond our scheduled departure. To keep American troops in Bosnia past the end of 1996 would be a major mistake. It flies in the face of a clear statement by Secretary of State Warren Christopher, who said: This is not a permanent commitment. This is approximately a 1-year commitment. If it can't be done in a year, perhaps it can't be done in a longer period of time. Staying in Bosnia breaks faith with our American troops who are presently stationed in Bosnia, who expect to return to their families in 9 months. It also contradicts what the American people were told about the duration of the mission. American forces are facing a difficult and challenging assignment in the NATO peacekeeping mission. The 1-year deployment was intended to provide an opportunity for peace, not a guarantee of it. The people of Bosnia must assume the responsibility of ensuring their own peace. Second, American and NATO peacekeepers are being diverted from their original mission to the task of rebuilding Bosnia. This assignment shifts the focus of our military forces from peacekeeping to assisting in civil projects. Third, and finally, by several accounts, a cornerstone of the Dayton agreement--the continuance of the Muslim-Croat federation--appears severely weakened. The U.S. and NATO could well be in a quandary if that alliance should crumble. The push to keep United States and NATO forces in Bosnia, the expansion of mission assignments and the possible disintegration of the Muslim- Croat federation could compel us to extend our commitment in Bosnia. We are on a slippery slope toward a lengthy deployment of 5 or even 10 additional years. Another issue that concerns me is the continued presence of Iranians in Bosnia who are training Bosnian Government soldiers. This is a clear violation of the Dayton peace agreement. Their presence also poses a threat to the safety of our troops, as some of these groups are opposed to our peacekeeping effort. I commend Maj. Gen. William L. Nash, commander of the American sector of NATO forces in Bosnia, who stressed his determination to withdraw on schedule. He properly stated that the burden for peace is ``on the shoulders of those folks that live here.'' If the people of Bosnia truly want peace, 1 year is more than enough time to get it started. Mr. Speaker, I urge the President to stick by the commitment and have our American troops home by Christmas. Mr. Speaker, I ask to include a copy of my letter to the President in the Record at this point. The letter referred to is as follows: House of Representatives, Washington, DC, March 28, 1996. The President, The White House. Dear Mr. President: The March 21 edition of the New York Times reported the U.S. and NATO are being urged to keep our forces in Bosnia after the end of the year. International civilian and military authorities are alleged to be pressing for continued NATO presence beyond our scheduled departure. To keep American troops in Bosnia past the announced date of departure at the end of 1996 would be a major mistake. First, it flies in the face of a clear statement by Secretary of State Warren Christopher: ``This is not a permanent commitment. This is approximately a one-year commitment. . . . If it can't be done in a year, perhaps it can't be done in a longer period of time.'' Second, it breaks faith with our American troops who are presently stationed in Bosnia, who expect to return to their families in nine months. Third, it contradicts what the American people were told abut the duration of the mission. American forces are facing a difficult and challenging assignment in the NATO peacekeeping mission. The one-year deployment was intended to provide an opportunity for peace, not a guarantee of it. The people of Bosnia must assume the responsibility of ensuring their own peace. Already, American and NATO peacekeepers are being diverted from their original mission to the task of rebuilding Bosnia. This assignment shifts the focus of our military forces from peacekeeping to assisting in civil projects. Further, by several accounts, a cornerstone of the Dayton agreement--the continuance of the Muslim-Croat Federation-- appears severely weakened. The U.S. and NATO could well be in a quandary if that alliance should crumble. The push to keep U.S. and NATO forces in Bosnia, the expansion of mission assignments and the possible disintegration of the Muslin-Croat Federation could compel us to extend our commitment in Bosnia. We are on a slippery slope toward a lengthy deployment of five or even ten additional years. I command Major General William L. Nash, Commander of the American sector of NATO forces in Bosnia, who stressed his determination to withdraw on schedule. He properly stated that the burden for peace is ``on the shoulders of those folks that live here.'' Mr. President, if the people of Bosnia truly want peace, one year is more than enough time to get it started. Very truly yours, Ike Skelton, Member of Congress.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, the sad part of this whole debate is the fact that it attacks the confidence and credibility of an institution that has served Great Britain and the United States and our various States now for some 700 years, and that is the jury trial. Sure, juries are composed of humans, and you are going to find some cases that many people will disagree with the outcome of. Jessie James' brother, Frank James, for instance, was acquitted, even though there was hard evidence that he held up those banks. Many people disagreed with the outcome of the O.J. Simpson case. But overall, Mr. Speaker, the jury trial is a very basic institution. What this does is this takes it out of balance. I had the opportunity through the years to participate in the American justice system by trying cases, by defending people accused in civil cases, by representing others. So I think we should do our very best maybe to look at this again in light of the fact that we have a very sound institution called the jury system.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a great American, an outstanding Air Force officer, and an exceptional individual: Maj. Gen. (sel) Ronald C. Marcotte. On March 26, 1996, Ron Marcotte handed over command of the 509th Bomber Wing at Whiteman Air Force Base after serving as its commander from the beginning of its operational status--April 1, 1993. Major General Marcotte will be the new director, strategic target plans (J-52) and deputy director, plans and policy (J-5), at U.S. Strategic Command, Offutt Air Force Base, NE. During his command of the 509th, Major General Marcotte was responsible for the oversight and successful completion of the facility construction as well as the beddown of the B-2 fleet. His accomplishments, as expected, went far above and beyond his described duties. I ask my colleagues to join me in wishing Major General Marcotte a fond farewell from the 509th Bomber Wing at Whiteman Air Force Base. Missouri will truly miss him.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, March 28, I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall vote No. 106. I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall No. 106, final passage of H.R. 3103, the Health Coverage Availability Act.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, the debate over the American deployment to Bosnia has ceased and in this, my third floor speech regarding that troubled part of the world, I wish to say a good word about the Americans in uniform stationed there. From briefings that I have received and hearings before the National Security Committee, it is evident that the uniformed Americans are performing exceptionally well in this challenge called Bosnia. The Air Force is doing its duty flying above and flying into that country, delivering needed materiel. The Navy and Marine Corps stand guard in the Adriatic, ever ready to help if called upon. But it is the foot soldier, stationed in the American sector--the northeast corner--of Bosnia, on which I center my remarks. The Army is fully deployed, consisting of the 1st Armored Division and supporting units. To begin with, twin float bridges were built across the swollen Sava River. No other army has ever even attempted to bridge such a river, especially with the high water level. The first float bridge is the longest one in military history. Junior soldiers and officers are performing at ``levels far above any reasonable expectation, cheerful and willing under the most trying of circumstances, innovative, and hard-working to the extreme,'' according to the Army Chief of Staff, Gen. Dennis Reimer, who recently returned from Bosnia. The conditions under which our soldiers live are difficult. The winter snows are up to 10 inches. When the snow melts, the mud is deep. And yet, morale is high and military professionalism is the order of the day. The thousands of land mines in Bosnia continue to be a major problem for our troops. Since the peacekeeping mission began, NATO troops have reported 14 accidents involving mines. Five of these incidents resulted in injuries, including the death of one American soldier. At my urging, the Army has accelerated its program of mine detection under the leadership of the Army Vice Chief of Staff. The flag officers have been interviewed and quoted at length in the news media, but it is the enlisted ranks and junior officers that are making this peacekeeping deployment a success. The late Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman once said: ``We have good corporals and Sergeants, and some good lieutenants and Captains, and those are far more important than good generals.'' General Sherman's words still ring true. Our soldiers in and around the Tuzla area are reflecting the best of our American values. Their dedication and grit enable them to endure the challenges of land mines, deep mud, rock slides, and raging rivers. Their solid presence is winning the admiration and respect of the former warring parties. It is my hope that when their year-long deployment ends, they will be able to look back and see the valuable contribution they made in bringing stability to a sad and tragic corner of the globe. I know that every Member of this body joins in wishing our troops continued success in this precedent-making deployment.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I wish to associate myself with the position of the gentleman from New York in relation to this measure. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this measure, and I compliment the committee and the sponsors on bringing it to this Chamber for a vote. We all know what Castro has brought to the land of Cuba. This measure send a firm message that we, in this body, stand for freedom and democracy in Cuba. There are so many violations of human rights and rules of decency inflicted on the Cuban people by Castro. Further, we abhor the tragedy he caused regarding the American airplanes just a few days ago. Let us Americans stand together, let us vote for this bill and send an unequivocal message that we stand for democracy and freedom for the Cuban people.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I especially appreciate the gentleman's kind words. I am grateful for the opportunity to express my support for H.R. 2778. I commend the chairman of the committee, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Archer], the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Gibbons], the ranking member, and the Committee on Ways and Means for bringing this legislation to the floor. I especially thank the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Bunning] for his hard work. I commend him for his thorough and painstaking effort. It was a pleasure to work with him on this legislation. Mr. Speaker, late last year I began working with the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Bunning] to draft legislation providing tax relief for United States troops serving our Nation in contingency operations overseas, particularly those in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, and Macedonia. I introduced my own legislation, H.R. 2776, to meet this end. I am pleased the committee adopted a key provision originally from my bill that would expand a pay exemption. We need to take care of our troops. The American people can be proud of the fine service of the members of our Armed Forces. We are sending them into dangerous and difficult missions as participants in Operation Joint Endeavor and Operation Able Sentry, thousands of miles from their friends and families. It is only proper that we extend an exemption from Federal income taxes during their deployment, as we did those who served in the gulf war in Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm. In some instances, the living conditions and dangers are as bad or worse than some experienced in the gulf war. H.R. 2778 deserves, and I am sure will receive, a wide bipartisan support. Let us all express our support for our American troops by passing this legislation, hopefully unanimously, today.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this conference report. I urge Members to support it as I support it strongly. For more than a year I have been concerned that there is a mismatch between the Nation's military strategy and the level of defense resources. Last February, I testified before the House Committee on the Budget and proposed a budget with additional and necessary funding for the military. My concerns were many. I spoke of a shortfall in funding for modernization, maintenance and infrastructure, daily operations and training. For fiscal year 1996 alone, I proposed a minimum increase of at least $6 billion over the administration's request as a necessary requirement to sustain a quality force into the future. I am pleased that this conference report authorizes an increase of nearly $7 billion. However, this conference report is not perfect. But I do point out that it does have the necessary pay increase for the young men and young women in uniform, that it has the necessary housing allowance increase. Those are so terribly important for those people who wish to make a career of our military. There are provisions I would have deleted and others I would have added. But compromise has been necessary, and the report is a step in the right direction. It authorizes an end to the freefall in defense expenditures and includes many necessary policy initiatives. Most important, the report includes a permanent endstrength floor for personnel levels in each of the respective services. This provision alone warrants support from this body. The endstrength floors are necessary to counter and to offset low moral resulting from the strains of increased training schedules and overseas deployments. As our Nation sends additional troops into the Balkan region, I ask my colleagues to assure the uniformed ranks of our commitment to them. If you are for a first rate naval and marine force, then you should support this report. If you are for a healthy and capable Army, then you should support this measure. If you are for a robust and well- equipped National Guard and Reserve, you should support this package. And if you are for a strong Air Force with an unmatched B-2 bomber force, then you must support this legislation.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, today I am giving this second in a series of speeches updating the Congress on the state of our peacekeeping mission in Bosnia. Last night in his State of the Union Address the President thanked the American troops taking part in the Bosnian peacekeeping mission and the families that support them in their efforts. Also, it was good to see the President make a visit to the forces in Hungary and in Bosnia just a few days ago. The Americans in uniform seemed to appreciate this. I am pleased the President made the trip. Mr. Speaker, the men and women in our country's military deserve the full support of every Member in this body and the American people. There continue to be causes for concern regarding our peacekeeping mission in Bosnia. First, there is the enduring presence of Muslim extremists in that country. According to news reports, most recently in an article in last Sunday's Washington Post, some Muslim extremists who previously aided the Bosnians in their military efforts have not left the country. Many of these groups oppose the presence of our troops. Their stated opposition to our mission poses a serious threat to the success of our peacekeeping effort and the safety of American troops. On January 18 I sent a letter to President Clinton asking that the American-led effort to arm and train the Muslim Croat Federation be delayed until groups such as the Iranians and Mujaheddin leave Bosnia. I asked the President to require Bosnia to certify on a regular basis that no such outside extremist Muslim forces remain. If any of these groups reappear, the arming and training effort would cease. For several months I have voiced concern that assisting the Federation would jeopardize the neutrality of the U.S. troops. Although the U.S. military will not have a direct role in arming and training, independent contractors, including retired U.S. military officers, will conduct the operation. But if the administration insists on arming and training the Federation through soldiers for hire, we should use the effort as a club to make sure Muslim extremists leave the country. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record a copy of the January 18 letter. The letter referred to is as follows: Congress of the United States, House of Representatives, Washington, DC, January 18, 1996. The President, The White House, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. President: It appears the Administration is proceeding with arming and training the Muslim-Croat Federation, not with our military as originally proposed, but by independent contractors. It further appears the contractors are former U.S. military leaders. I remain opposed to any arming and training of the Federation, as I believe there exists a military balance between the Federation and the Serbs. Also, this effort still has American fingerprints, with only a short distance between the contractors and our military. It reinforces the perception that we are not neutral in the peacekeeping mission. This effort is proceeding, despite the resolution that passed the House 287-141 on Dec. 13 which states ``the United States Government in all respects should be impartial and evenhanded with all parties to the conflict.'' If the Administration proceeds, I urge you to require the Bosnian government to ensure all Muslim fundamentalists, such as Iranians and mujaheddin, have been expelled before any arming and training begins. According to news reports, some Muslim extremists who previously aided the Bosnians in their military efforts have not left the country. Their stated opposition to our mission poses a threat to the success of the peacekeeping effort and the safety of American troops in the region. Bosnia should certify on a regular basis that no such outside Muslim fundamentalists remain. If any of these groups reappear, the arming and training effort paid for by American tax dollars should cease. This is a basic issue. Such certification will not only strengthen the outcome of the peace effort, but will enhance the safety of our American forces in that region. If the Administration insists on arming and training the Federation through ``soldiers for hire'', we must use this effort as a club to ensure Muslim extremists leave the country. Very truly yours, Ike Skelton, Member of Congress. Second, Mr. Speaker, there is the concern of mission creep for our forces in Bosnia. I addressed this concern in my January 3 speech. Recently the Americans have been urged to provide security for investigators looking into Serb atrocities. The commander of the forces in the region, Adm. Leighton Smith, is to be commended for his resistance to deeper American involvement in these investigations. Third, there seems to be a serious breach of the Dayton peace agreement by the refusal of all three sides to release prisoners of war, despite a stipulation in the accord that required doing so by last Friday. This refusal bodes ill for the future prospects of peace. These are three ongoing concerns that this body and the American people should keep in mind. Our hopes and our prayers are with the success of the mission and the safety of the uniformed Americans in Bosnia. This is a difficult task, but I remain so very proud of the men and women who wear the American uniforms.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. In other words, it is going to cost the Americans more?

Mr. SKELTON. As a supporter of the Democratic Coalition conservation budget, there were an awful lot of people that did vote for it, and it is looking better and better every day. I would like for you to explain what you touched on a moment ago about the larger deficit on the operating expenses, please.

Mr. SKELTON. The budget I voted for, the Democratic Coalition budget, does not do that? Is that correct?

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California, my good friend, former chairman of this committee. Mr. Speaker, we have troops in Bosnia. We have troops on the way to Bosnia. The least we can do is to pass this authorization bill to go to conference, because there are so many, many items in this bill that are noncontroversial that will help the troops, that will help their families, that will give them better living conditions, that will help retrain them in the military, and will also give them that very necessary money for training. Mr. Speaker, if we do not pass an authorization bill, it will be something that has not happened for decades, over 2 decades in this body. We cannot let this body, or the other body, not pass an authorization bill which means so much to those men and women, whether they be aboard ship, in airplanes, or on the ground in Bosnia. Mr. Speaker, I support this motion, and I compliment the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence], the gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums], my friend, and the effort that they have put into this. I especially appreciate the discussion that my friend from California had regarding the housing allowance and the pay raise that the troops are so greatly entitled to. Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of this motion.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, in all of this discussion and debate about who goes to work, who does not go to work, who gets paid, who does not get paid, who will have the tools and the gasoline and the wherewithal to do their work, I am reminded of the comment once made by my fellow Missourian, Mark Twain: ``The more you explain it to me, the more I don't understand it.'' It was Lyndon Johnson who liked to use the phrase ``Let us come and reason together.'' If we did that as a body collectively, this Nation would be far better off. It would drive us irresistibly to two conclusions: No. 1, we would adopt what the Senate has done, under the leadership of Senator Dole, from my neighboring Kansas; it would also cause us to look seriously at the Democratic conservative coalition proposal that got a substantial number of votes on this floor. Thre is an answer to this impasse: reason. Adults, people of good will, can reach those decisions. That is what we should do.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, in all of this business about the budget, there are some dedicated Americans we should not overlook. The votes in this Chamber on the issue of Bosnia do not end our interest or attention to the American forces now arriving in that troubled region. Mr. Speaker, we should continue to show our attention to the mission and concern for the troops. It is our sincere wish that their mission be successful and safe. Our uniformed Americans, who will be in the Balkans on an unprecedented peace mission, are professional and well- trained. So far, our troops have been well-received by the people of Bosnia. As we begin the new year, our thoughts and prayers are with our service men and women in that sad corner of the world. As our troops slowly occupy the Tuzla sector, I have four concerns-- let me spell them out: The first is that of accidents to our troops. Already, one of our soldiers, Specialist Martin Begosh from Maryland, has been injured by a land mine as he drove his Humvee vehicle along a back road. Second is the threat of terrorists who oppose the peace process. We know there will be rogue elements on each side, who do not favor the Dayton peace agreement. The Bosnian Moslem Government has agreed to expel Iranians and other fundamentalist forces, but the terrorist threat is still one of concern. Third, the American efforts to equip and train the Moslem-Croat Federation may well cause our forces problems as the Serbs might view Americans as enemies and federation forces may expect favors. In addition, we should be particularly concerned with the end-game associated with this effort. We should ask ourselves whether the equip and train mission will lead to a longterm security guarantee in the region. Fourth is the possibility of mission creep. Already, two American counterfire radar system units are going to Sarajevo, which is in the French sector. Also, an article in this morning's Washington Post discusses the danger of United States Army involvement in both investigating Serb atrocities and participating in Bosnian political and judicial matters. Let us closely follow the American military effort in Bosnia, and at the same time be mindful of the four concerns just mentioned. I know that all Members of this body wish only the best for our troops, wherever they may be, especially those who will attempt to bring stability to a war-torn region. The troops should know that this body will support them and assist them in this unique challenge. So as we begin the year 1996, we wish these fine Americans all the best.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, on October 17, 1995, the new Army Chief of Staff addressed the annual AUSA luncheon here in Washington. Gen. Dennis Reimer stressed the need to have quality and sufficient numbers in the U.S. Army. This speech is set forth herein: AUSA Luncheon Speech (By General Reimer) Thank you very much, Mr. Paul, for that kind introduction. I must say that I have been on the dais for this luncheon for the last 5 years but not in this particular spot. I also want to say that it's a great view from up here. This vantage point gives me the opportunity to recognize America's Army--Active, United States Army Reserve, Army National Guard, and DA Civilians--and what a great group they are--what a wonderful group and I'm honored to be part of such an organization. It also gives me the opportunity to tell our Allies who are here today in great numbers that your presence is important to us. Most of all, we appreciate your support and willingness to carry your share of the load. To our supporters from Capitol Hill, the Members of Congress, the Professional Staff Members, let me say how much we appreciate all you've done. I know that your choices are not easy but you need to know that all of us are inspired by your willingness to stand up and be counted and your example of dedicated service to our Nation. To corporate America, thanks for being here. You've been here with us through the good times and the bad and I would just simply say that we need you more now than ever. To AUSA, 45 years old this year, I must also say thanks for being such a great friend. And thanks most of all for your efforts to improve the quality of life for our soldiers. You have helped us recruit and retain the best soldiers in the world. And, finally, to all our friends--friends of the United States Army, let me say that your friendship means everything to us. This is my first opportunity as Chief to address such a large and important audience and I want to share with you some thoughts on Today's Army and where we are headed in the future. As this audience certainly knows, the primary mission of the Army is to be trained and ready to defend the Nation's security and freedom. Clearly, the fundamental responsibility of any Chief of Staff is to ensure that the Army is ready to execute this mission. Recently I participated in two events which highlighted for me the importance of maintaining a Trained and Ready Army. I was in Hawaii in early September for ceremonies celebrating the 50th Anniversary of the end of the War in the Pacific. I was also fortunate to participate in a ceremony dedicating the Korean War Memorial in late July. The contrast between these two events, separated by less than 5 years in history, was striking. I could not help but reflect on the differences the 5 years between the end of World War II and the outbreak of the Korean War had made on our Army. In August 1945, the American Army was the largest and most powerful Army in the world. Its 89 divisions had been instrumental in destroying the military might of the Axis powers--a tribute to the millions of brave men and women who served and the tremendous capabilities of corporate America. However by June 1950, America's Army had been reduced to a shell of its former self. We had rapidly gone from 89 divisions and 12 million soldiers to 10 divisions and less than 600,000 soldiers. As a consequence, at 0730 on 5 July 1950, a hastily assembled, ill-trained, and poorly equipped group of brave American soldiers waited in the cold rain--just north of Osan, Korea--as 33 North Korean tanks advanced toward their position. Behind these 33 tanks on the highway, in trucks and on foot, was a long snaking column stretching for over 6 miles. Due to poor weather the American soldiers had no air support. Due to the rapid drawdown they were poorly trained and under-manned. They were called Task Force Smith because we had to take soldiers from other battalions to make a battalion-sized organization. Their equipment reflected the lack of maintenance which is inevitable when readiness is not the top priority. In the next few hours of fighting--these conditions were starkly played out on the battlefield. Our weapons could not stop their tanks--but they tried. One young lieutenant fired 22 rockets--from as close as 15 yards, scored direct hits on the tanks--but could not destroy them. Courage alone could not stop those tanks. Rifles and bayonets were no match for tanks and the wave of infantry behind them. In this short engagement, 185 courageous young Americans were killed, wounded, and captured; and the history of Task Force Smith was burned into the institutional memory of our Army forever. In the summer of 1950 we were not prepared. We sent poorly equipped and untrained soldiers into battle to buy time for the Army to get ready. it certainly wasn't the fault of these soldiers or their leaders that they weren't ready--the system had let them down. Once again we were surprised and once again we paid a very steep price for our unpreparedness. As General Abrams said to this same gathering in 1973, ``We paid dearly for our unpreparedness during those early days in Korea with our most precious currency--the lives of our young men. The monuments we raise to their heroism and sacrifice are really surrogates for the monuments we owe ourself for our blindness to reality, for our indifference to real threats to our security, and our determination to deal in intentions and perceptions, for our unsubstantiated wishful thinking about how war could not come.'' In the harsh crucible of combat we relearned the lessons of tough training, good organization, and proper equipment. We must never again learn these lessons on the battlefield. As I shook hands with those veterans--at the dedication of the Korean War Memorial--I was reminded that the monument is not the only tribute to their courage, selfless service, and dedication. The real legacy can be seen in America's Army today. Our quality soldiers--Active, Reserve, and Guard--have the best equipment that the Nation can provide; and our tough, realistic training program has resulted in our status as the world's best Army--trained and ready for victory. No one with a lick of common sense really disputes this. As a footnote to this chapter, let me cite a personal experience. In 1987 when I was serving in Korea, General Brad Smith, that brave battalion commander whose courageous soldiers fought so well in 1950, came over and conducted a battlefield tour of where his task force fought. When he returned he sent me the handwritten training guidance that he had given to the battalion after the Korean War. That guidance talked about tough, realistic training and lots of live-fire. Today, the Gimlets--hisold battalion--have that guidance--and more importantly they execute it. That's the real legacy of Task Force Smith. However, there are similarities between 1950 and the situation we face today. in 1950: We lived in an uncertain world; the US was the world's greatest economic power; the US was the world's greatest super power; the US had a virtual nuclear monopoly; the US had the world's best Air Force and the most powerful Navy; the next war was expected to be a push button war with new weapons and machines taking over from men; and because of that we felt we could greatly reduce the size of our ground forces--and we did so very rapidly. Today: We continue to live in an uncertain world; again, the US is the world's greatest economic power and the greatest super power; the US has the largest Navy in the world, capable of sweeping any conceivable adversary off the seas in a matter of days, assuring us access to all the world's oceans; the Nation also has the most powerful Air Force in the world, capable of sweeping any adversary from the sky in a matter of hours. It is right, and proper, and necessary for the US as a world super power and leader to have these naval and air capabilities. I wouldn't want it any other way. However, today the active Army is the eighth largest in the world. Size by itself is not the most important thing, and America can still take pride in having the world's best Army because what we lack in quantity we more than make up in quality. Our world-class young men and women--who receive tough, realistic training and are equipped with the best equipment and weapons systems in the world--thanks in large part to what many of you here have done and continue to do-- are the envy of every nation. But no amount of training or abundance of sophisticated equipment will suffice it we do not have enough quality soldiers to carry out the Nation's bidding. Numbers matter. To accomplish our missions many of our soldiers have had back-to-back deployments and extended separations from their family. The average American soldier assigned to a troop unit now spends 138 days a year away from home--and many special units such as MP's, air defense and transportation have been carrying a heavier load. To accomplish the requirements of our national security strategy, we must be a credible and effective ground fighting force. Peace is the harvest of preparedness. We must, however, temper our desire for peace with the realities of history. In 1950 we learned that deterrence is in the eye of the beholder. Stalin and Kim II Soong looked at South Korea and were not deterred by the 10 under strengthen and ill equipped American divisions. We must always have an Army of sufficient quality and size to deter potential adversaries and meet our international obligations. While the quality of today's force is unquestioned, I must tell you in all candor that I am concerned that we have reached the limit on how small our Army can be and still credibly accomplish the tasks currently assigned to us. Today we do not have the luxury of time--nor will we in the future. We must be ready to deal with the world as it is now, not as wish it to be. We have paid the price--in blood--too often--to relearn that lesson. With your help--we will not have to pay that price again. The best example that the lessons of history are sinking in is that during the past 6 years--under the leadership of Generals Vuono's and Sullivan--we have reshaped ourselves and still remain trained and ready. It's been over 5 years since Operation DESERT STORM and in many ways it is tempting to pat ourselves on the back and rest on our laurels. But we cannot afford to do that. We must build the Army of tomorrow, the Army that will be required to meet the needs of a vastly different world. Let me share with you our vision of that Army. A vision that is a direct legacy of the bloody lessons learned on the battlefield. A vision that is rooted in the tradition of 221 years of selfless service and mission accomplishment--it is a vision which--will ensure our ability to meet the Nation's needs of the 21st century. In our vision we see the world's best Army--trained and ready for victory--a total force of quality soldiers and civilians: A values based organization; an integral part of the joint team; equipped with the most modern weapons and equipment the country can provide; able to respond to our Nation's needs. Changing to meet the challenges of today, tomorrow, and the 21st Century. It's not just the words but the meaning behind these words. Let me explain. The world's best Army. A bumper sticker that has been earned by our soldiers. Trained and ready for victory. The most important job for any army, a job in which we must not fail. A total force of quality soldiers and civilians. We tend to take for granted, I think, the dedication, selfless service and sacrifice of our great citizens soldiers in the National Guard and Reserves. We are also fortunate to have a quality civilian force that embodies the best of this great Nation. This recognizes that as General Abrams said, the Army is not made up of people, the Army is people. A values based organization. Values are important to us; selfless service, dedication, sacrifice, duty, honor, country are not just words but a code by which we live. An integral part of the joint team. We recognize the tremendous contributions of our sister Services and are happy to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with them as we keep this great Nation free. Equipped with the most modern weapons and equipment the country can provide reflects our realization that we must invest in a modernization program for the 21st Century. Able to respond to our Nation's needs. We must be relevant to the needs of our country. And changing to meet the challenges of today, tomorrow, and the 21st Century simply reflects that the only constant in the world today seems to be change. We are dealing with it, we are growing more comfortable with it every day, and we will continue to have to deal with it in the 21st Century. Our vision is set against the world as we see it. It reflects an environment in which missions are expanding both in terms of quantity and diversity. It reflects decreased resources, a loss of 34 percent of our buying power since '89. It recognizes, as President Clinton said, a world in which the line between domestic and foreign policy has becoming increasingly blurred. We live in a Global Village. It recognizes a modernization program that is currently at the irreducible minimum and badly in need of more resources. Today the Army allocation of the DOD Modernization dollars is only 13 percent. We have the smallest piece of a small pie. Our vision recognizes that we must not repeat the Task Force Smith scenario. We must realistically face the challenges of today. Sacrificing our youth is not the solution. We will build no new monuments to our blindness to reality. We are trained and ready today, but our ability to dominate land warfare is eroding. And our modernization plan does not forecast filling the gap fast enough. We have a plan to make this vision a reality--Force XXI. Simply stated Force XXI projects our quality people into the 21st Century and provide them the right organization, the most realistic training, an adequate and predictable sustainment package during both peace and war, and the best equipment and weapons systems our Nation can provide given the resources available. We intend to leverage technology in order to arm our soldiers with the finest most lethal weapons systems in the world. The power of information will allow the ultimate weapon--the individual soldier--to successfully meet the challenges of the 21st century and achieve decisive victory. Force XXI provides the framework for the decisions we must make today so that tomorrow's force will remain as trained and ready as we are right now. That vision is very clear in my mind--however, achieving our vision is not preordained. We face a number of resource challenges as I have alluded to already. The basic challenge is to balance near term readiness, quality of life, and future modernization. Internally we will do our share to ensure the most effective use of our limited resources. We will continue to improve our operational and institutional efficiency in order to ensure we devote a many dollars as possible to modernization. In this regard, we intend not to be bound by traditional approaches. We are willing to make profound changes in the way we do business as long as they increase our efficiency and do not degrade our core competencies. Efficiencies such as velocity management, total asset visibility, integrated sustainment maintenance, and improved force management are all keys to becoming more effective. Most people talk about the four tenets of the revolution of military affairs. I believe the Army, in order to be successful in this revolution, must embrace a fifth tenet; efficiencies. We must get the most bang out of every buck. We owe that to the taxpayer--but, more importantly, we owe it to our soldiers. The key to achieving this vision--as it has been since 1775--is high quality soldiers. We must never forget that quality soldiers are the essence of our Army--always have been and always will be. For the past two decades we have demonstrated that an All Volunteer Army can be the world's premier fighting force. Quality soldiers attracted by a profession that allows them to be all they can be deserve adequate pay and compensation. They deserve to have their entitlements and benefits safeguarded from erosion. They deserve a quality of life equal to that of the society they have pledged their lives to defend. We must never allow our commitment to quality soldiers to diminish. As I travel around the world I am continually impressed by the sacrifice and dedication of our soldiers. The state of readiness of the Army is more than its weapons, equipment, and doctrine. A key but intangible part is the spirit of our soldiers. General Patton said ``It is the cold glitter in the attacker's eye not the point of the questing bayonet that breaks the line. It is the fierce determination of the drive to close with the enemy not the mechanical perfection of the tank that conquers the trench.'' Today nothing has changed. When I met the survivors of the Bataan Death March in Hawaii they still had that glint in their eye and you could feel the indomitable spirit that allowed them to fight on against overwhelming odds. In Germany, Korea, Hawaii, at the NTC, JRTC, and CMTC I see the same thing in our soldiers today. When I see those soldiers doing their job so magnificently I'm reminded of a story from the 8th Division in World War II. In September of 1944 on the Crozon Peninsula the German General Herman Ramcke asked to discuss surrender terms with the American Army. General Ramcke was in his bunker when his staff brought in the 8th Infantry Division's Assistant Division Commander, Brigadier General Charles Canham. Ramcke addressed Canham through an interpreter and said ``I am to surrender to you. Let me see your credentials.'' Pointing to the American infantrymen crowding the dugout entrance, Canham replied ``These are my credentials.'' This is as true today as it was then. Soldiers are still our credentials. Yesterday we honored some of these magnificent soldiers and we are fortunate to have some of them with us today. I would like for you to have a good look at the heart and soul of America's Army. Sergeant First Class Anita Jordan, the Active Duty Drill Sergeant of the Year from Fort Jackson, South Carolina. SFC Jordan said that the reason she entered the Army was ``I knew I wanted to do something and be somebody.'' As a drill sergeant, she coaches, teaches, and develops soldiers--one at a time--24-hours-a-day. She is somebody. Sergeant First Class Bruce Clark, the Reserve Drill Sergeant of the year from the 100th Division, at Fort Knox, Kentucky. He is a real estate developer and a law student. Successful in two careers, he is indeed twice the citizen. Sergeant First Class Cory Olsen, the Active Duty Recruiter of the Year from the Denver, Colorado Recruiting Battalion. An infantryman, he was deployed to Panama, Honduras, Scotland, and the Sinai. He understands selfless service. Sergeant First Class Alan Fritz, the Reserve Recruiter of the Year from the Syracuse, New York Recruiting Battalion. An MP, he served on active duty in both Germany and Korea before he joined the Reserves. He illustrates the seamless blend we seek for America's Army. Specialist Hellema Webb, the Soldier of the Year from Eighth Army in Korea. A mortuary affairs specialist, she deployed in 192 to Mogadishu and now serves with the distinction across the world. She received a max score of 200 on the promotion board and is presently on the Sergeants Promotion Standing list. A model NCO who will help lead soldiers into the 21st century. Specialist Troy Duncan, the Soldier of the Year at USAREUR. An MP, he has already served his 6-month tour of duty in Macedonia, is married with a 3-month-old daughter, and voluntarily teaches bicycle safety classes and assists young children in learning the sport of bowling. He understands the true meaning of commitment to the nation and service to the community. Specialist Anthony Costides the FORSCOM Soldier of the Year. Born in Greece, he is a graduate of the Combat Life Saving Course, PLDC, and has 2 years of college. He is a Tracked Vehicle Mechanic in the 1st Infantry Division at Fort Riley, Kansas. He found an environment where he could be all he could be. Sergeant Christopher Uhrich, the Virginia National Guard Soldier of the Year. A Fuel Handler who served in the United States Air Force prior to transferring to the National Guard in Virginia. He has over 7 years of service to his Nation. He embodies the sacrifice, dedication and commitment to our citizen soldiers. Ladies and Gentlemen, these soldiers represent the best of America's Army. They are indeed special. They ask for so little. We owe them a great deal and I couldn't be more proud to say to you--these are our credentials.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, today I wish to recognize Cmd. Sgt. Maj. (Ret.) James Justin Heinzler for serving over 42 years in the Missouri Army National Guard. He served from April 22, 1952, to September 11, 1994. Command Sergeant Major (Ret.) Heinzler's most recent service with the Missouri Army National Guard was with the 1st Battalion, 128th Field Artillery. He served in this position for his last 16 years of service. Throughout his career, he has strongly committed himself to all that is required. He has gone beyond to provide guidance and support for his fellow officers. He has received numerous military awards throughout his career. The awards are the Army Service Ribbon, the National Defense Service Medal, the Army Reserve Components Achievement Medal with silver oak leaf cluster, the Armed Forces Reserve Medal with three 10 year devices, and the Army Commemoration Medal. He is submitted for the Meritorious Service Medal. Command Sergeant Major (Ret.) Heinzler has not only provided faithful and dedicated service to the Missouri National Guard, but to his country as well. I urge my colleagues to join me in congratulating him on his service.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, On October 14, 1995, Capt. Marty Smith, commander of the U.S.S. Jefferson City addressed the annual Mid- Missouri Navy League Navy Birthday Ball in Jefferson City, MO. This speech is set forth herein: Speech Given at the 1995 Mid-Missouri Navy League Navy Birthday Ball held on October 14, 1995 in Jefferson City, MO Congressman and Mrs. Skelton, President Green, members of the mid-Missouri Navy League, and citizens of Jefferson City, it's a great honor and privilege for me to speak to you all tonight in the ship's namesake city. I, along with my eleven shipmates, have had a wonderful time since we arrived here Friday. Crew members who have been here before have told us of the friendliness and hospitality of the great state of ``Missoura'', and we are finding it all true. Everyone has been wonderful, starting with Herman Smith and Petty Officer Wall who picked us up in St. Louis early Friday morning, to the host families who have gone out of their way to make us feel like adopted sons. Well, we missed you all last year, because as most of you know, last October, the ship was in the middle of a Western Pacific deployment, having all sorts of adventures in the Sea of Japan with the Kitty Hawk Battle Group. And yes, next year you'll have toast us in absentia because we'll once again be deployed, this time with the Karl Vinson Battle Group in the Arabian Gulf. Perhaps you'll be able to delay the festivities for awhile until we return in mid-November! I don't get paid to make speeches, but if there's one thing about public speaking I do know, it's that the hardest audience in the world is a bunch of submariners and submariner supporters sitting around waiting for the speech to end so they can resume the party. So let me just fill you in briefly on what we've been up to in the past year, and what our future schedule holds. We got back from our maiden deployment last year a couple of days before Christmas, and what a deployment it was * * * So unique, with so many challenges, for such a relatively inexperienced crew. I can't possibly convey to you how proud I was of the crew as they put in 110 percent every single day for six months away from their friends and loved ones. They did such a good job, as a matter of fact, that as Congressman Skelton can tell you, I was asked to give a debrief of the deployment to the top admiral of the Navy, the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Boorda. This kind of recognition, by the way, only happens to a very few ships every year. In addition, the crew was awarded a total of 4 Navy Commendation Medals, 25 Navy Achievement Medals, and over 50 Flag Officer Letters of Commendation. I can't give you the details of our deployment, obviously, for security reasons, but JFC, as we're known in message traffic shorthand, accomplished many unique firsts, achieved innovative and significant tactical breakthroughs across the spectrum of submarine operations, including anti-diesel ASW, tomahawk strike warfare, and very shallow water operations. We visited Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong for Thanksgiving, and Pearl Harbor on the way home. The crew was underway, underwater, for over 78 percent of the six months, enjoyed great liberty visits, and even found time for a humanitarian project at an orphanage in Singapore. The ship steamed more than 40,000 miles on nuclear power with no major equipment problems, which was especially notable since we had only a single ten-day maintenance period over the entire six months. The contributions Jefferson City made to the Kitty Hawk battle group were real and played a major role in helping Admiral Blair, the Battle Group Commander, to complete his assigned mission--to provide a stabilizing and influential presence in the Western Pacific after the dictator of North Korea, Kim il Sung, died in early July 1994, with no apparent successor. As you may remember, there was more than a little concern because of the leadership void and the vast military forces which North Korea has poised just north of the 39th parallel. So Jefferson City and the rest of the Battle Group remained tethered to the South Korean peninsula, instead of going to the beautiful Arabian gulf, and we followed the traditions of several famous WWII submarines, such as CDR Mush Morton and Electrician's Mate Herman Smith seated in the back there, in seeing just how yellow the yellow sea can be. In recognition of our efforts, Jefferson City received the first of many unit commendations she will undoubtedly receive during her 30-year career, a Meritorious Unit Commendation, which is represented by a ribbon you see on our chests tonight and a pennant which we fly proudly from our sail inport. Anyway, I or any of the crew here tonight will be glad to answer your questions about the ship or the deployment. We also brought the ship's photo album here, which you're welcome to take a look at. It's too bad that the old COB, Master Chief Harden, isn't here to explain a couple of those pictures! Since the deployment, Jefferson City has been tasked with several local operations in the Southern California area with other ships and submarines, some torpedo testing in the Pacific Northwest on a couple of trips, a major tactical inspection which we did very well on, and had the distinct pleasure of hosting some of you for a VIP cruise last June. In August we started a 3-month shipyard modernization period in San Diego. Right now the boat is in drydock, getting many improvements, which will make us quieter, faster, and deadlier to our potential adversaries. When Jefferson City returns to sea in late-November, we will head up to Alaska for sound trials and then return to port just before Christmas following a big engineering inspection. In February and March we conduct training exercises with our new boss, the Karl Vinson Battle Group, and then start our second six month deployment in mid-May. And for those of you waiting to visit the ship until we move to Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, that date has been firmed up and is now November of 1997. You may have also heard about another VIP cruise we hosted, this one for Mr. George Will, the national political columnist who writes in Newsweek and over 250 news papers nationwide. After his cruise he wrote a very impressive essay for Newsweek magazine which resulted in several nice accolades for the ship. I'd like to quote the beginning paragraph from Mr. Will's essay for those of you who didn't get a chance to read it. The back cover page of the Sept 3 issue of Newsweek begins thusly: ``Aboard the USS Jefferson City (SSN 759) underway off San Diego--Submariners say there are just two kinds of ships: submarines and targets. Feel free to disagree, but smile when you do, because the 140-man crew of this fast attack nuclear submarine is armed. It carries torpedoes, Harpoon anti-ship missiles for distances torpedoes cannot travel--far over the horizon--and Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles. (Two submarines of this class, one in the Red Sea and one in the Mediterranean, launched a total of 12 tomahawks during the gulf War). The Jefferson City can cruise quietly at above 25 kts submerged and its acoustic detection systems can find quiet adversaries. The psalmist didn't know the half of it when he wrote that they who go down to the sea in ships see ``wonders in the deep.'' This ship is a wonder of tightly packed technology. End quote. Mr. Will then goes on with an insightful and accurate discussion of the contribution of the nuclear submarine to modern warfare and why the United States needs to keep on the leading edge of undersea warfare, in front of the Russian submarine force and other countries with modern submarines. What Mr. Will doesn't discuss is the sailor or officer, the Petty Officer Campbell's and the LT Smiths, standing watch, day and night, 6 hrs on and a quick 12 hrs off, for weeks on end away from his friends and loved ones, deep under the ocean's surface. These men and women are something that no country can buy from a Russian army-navy surplus store, and is, and will always be, the difference between the United States Navy and all other navies. These people are why we are here, celebrating the 220th birthday of the greatest navy in the world. Our top boss of the Pacific Fleet, Admiral Zlatoper, who toured our ship last summer in Japan, sent out the following message this past week: quote ``The Navy's 220th birthday finds the Pacific Fleet emerging from it's restructuring as a lean formidable, combat ready force with a strong commitment of quality of life for our people. America needs its navy more than ever as we contend with regional conflicts, proliferation of weapons, and political uncertainties around the globe. Today the Navy- Marine Corps team is forward-deployed, first on the scene, and flexible enough to respond to almost every contingency from the sea. With fewer U.S. bases overseas and uncertain access to bases of the nations, the Navy will be the primary guarantor of American interests in the Pacific for decades. End quote.'' And the Navy needs your continued support as Navy League members, educating the public on the need to maintain a strong maritime armed service and helping to recruit quality people like the officers and crew you see here tonight. I was on a Trident ballistic missile submarine on alert patrol in the Northern Pacific when the Soviet Union dissolved, ending the Cold War. Yet there was no celebration or overt glee-- just the feeling that our mission had changed in ways we didn't quite know yet. And today, one gulf war later, the world is not a safer, more stable place for you and your children, but more unstable than ever before. And the United States is the only country which will make the right things happen, when we choose, because our Navy, first on the scene, has the ``right stuff.'' As George Will concludes his Jefferson City essay, ``And the history of this century teaches a grim truth: When at peace the nation should always assume that it may be living in what subsequent historians will call ``interwar years.'' But now I'd like to conclude my remarks so that we can all enjoy these interwar years. (Pause) And I'd like to especially thank Melody Green for her dedicated work as President of the Navy League in maintaining what is undoubtedly one of the strongest and closest ties between a ship and her namesake city. I know that this visit is one of the highlights of my naval career, and I think it is for my crew here tonight as well. Knowing how much you support us, and your warmth and friendship, makes us work a little bit harder every day and puts a proud gleam in our eyes when we say we are on the USS JEFFERSON CITY. On behalf of my crew, I would like to express our heartfelt appreciation for your wonderful hospitality, and your work as members of the Navy League in keeping the United States Navy such that generations to come can continue to enjoy such birthday celebrations as we enjoy tonight. Thank you all very much.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to salute a distinguished servant of the Congress and the Nation in the area of national defense and national security. On Wednesday, January 3, 1996, John M. Collins will retire after 22\1/2\ years as the Senior Specialist in National Defense of the Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress. Since 1972, Mr. Collins has provided authoritative, in-depth, and profound analysis and advice to the Congress on a range of national defense issues unparalleled in its breadth and scope. Mr. Collins' retirement closes a lifetime of Government service which mirrors the tumultuous history of the past 50-odd years. A native, I am proud to say, of my State of Missouri, he began his public service with his enlistment in the U.S. Army in May 1942--after being rejected by the Marine Corps, a fact he reiterates with great delight and good humor to numerous Marines and friends over the years. As a young enlisted soldier he came ashore over the Normandy beaches a few days after D-day, in 1944. As a captain he served in the Korean war. As a colonel he served as Chief of the Campaign Planning Group in General Westmoreland's headquarters in Vietnam during 1967-68--managing to get involved in, and survive as the winner, a point-blank shootout with a North Vietnamese soldier in the ruins of Hue City in early 1968. In between these wartime duties he served in intelligence and contingency planning posts in Japan and the Middle East; training assignments in the United States; commanded a battalion in the 82d Airborne Division; was one of the principal planners for the possible invasion of Cuba which, fortunately, never had to take place during the fateful days of the Cuban missile crisis in October-November 1962; and graduated from the Industrial College of the Armed Forces. He closed his 30-year Army career as a faculty member and chief of the strategic studies group at the National War College during 1968-72. Immediately upon retirement from the Army, Colonel Collins joined the Congressional Research Service as Senior Specialist in National Defense. From the beginning of his CRS career he showed a willingness to examine fundamental assumptions. One of his first CRS reports examined whether the strategic nuclear triad of bombers, ground-based ICBM's, and submarine-launched ballistic missiles had been arrived at rationally, and whether it was in fact the only possible method of constructing U.S. strategic nuclear forces. At the height of the first Arab oil embargo, in 1975, he and a CRS coauthor, Clyde Mark, poured cold water on the idea that seizing Arab oil fields by military force would be an easy task. He wrote a book-length examination of overall U.S. defense planning processes, and how they might be improved. John Collins' single greatest service to the Congress and the Nation, however, was provided in the form of a series of book-length reports, beginning in 1976 and running through 1985, which meticulously documented the relentless military buildup and geostrategic expansion of the Soviet Union and its client states in almost every category of military power and area of the world. His comparisons of United States Soviet military forces, together with the respective allies of both countries, demonstrated with clarity and precision how American military capabilities, relative to our interests, were steadily declining, and those of the Soviet Union were increasing. Widely read, quoted, and debated, John Collins' works on the United States-Soviet military balance unquestionably played a role in persuading the American people and their elected representatives that, by the early 1980's, major increases in United States military forces and defense spending were required to restore our national credibility and deter and prevent Soviet expansionism. This was not an easy time for John Collins. Some were not happy with what he had to say about the shifting balance of military power in favor of the Soviet Union, and he had to withstand considerable bureaucratic and political pressure to continue to do his job. However, those who exerted such pressure against him are gone. He and his works remain. By helping alert the country to the growing menace of Soviet military power in the late 1970's and early 1980's, Mr. Collins can also said to have played a role in the ultimate demise of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact. Without the American military resurgence of the 1980's, it is difficult to see how the Soviet military-political juggernaut of the mid and late 1970's could have been halted, turned inward, and forced to collapse of its own internal strains. Indeed, in October 1985, only a few months after Gorbachev assumed power in the Soviet Union, he presciently suggested that ``the whole Soviet security apparatus in Central Europe is coming unraveled.''\1\ \1\ Collins, John M. What Have We Got for $1 Trillion? The Washington Quarterly, Spring 1986: 49, based on testimony before the Defense Policy Panel, House Armed Services Committee, October 9, 1985. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The thawing of the cold war and the eventual demise of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact in no way lessened Mr. Collins' output. He produced authoritative studies of military space forces, United States and Soviet special operations forces, lessons learned from America's small wars, and a host of other reports and analyses. During the Persian Gulf war, he was frequently interviewed on national and international radio and television, and wrote numerous short analyses of possible issues and problems related to war with Iraq. At one point, well over a hundred congressional staffers gathered to listen with rapt attention to this veteran of three wars outline not the possible nature of a ground war with Iraq--not just in academic, and analytical terms, but how ground combat was ``close up, and personal, and dirty.'' Within the past few years, his talents have turned to as diverse a set of subjects as counterproliferation, U.S. prepositioned military equipment, nonlethal weapons, and criteria for U.S. military intervention overseas. His last CRS report, finished just days ago, deals with the military aspects of NATO enlargement. Mr. Speaker, although John Collins is completing almost 54 years of total Federal service when he retires from CRS, he has no intention of remaining inactive. General Shalikashvili, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has had the eminent good sense to agree to provide Mr. Collins with some office and study space at the National Defense University at Fort McNair. With the time he now will have, plus the assistance from DOD, Mr. Collins intends to write books on military geography and military strategy. He will have more time to spend with his wife Gloria, to whom he has dedicated many of his books; his son Sean, holder of a doctorate in aeronautical and astronautical engineering from MIT, and a contributor to national defense and security in his own right in the field of ballistic missile defense; and his grandchildren. Few people have devoted so much of a long life to the service of the United States as has John Collins. I wish him well as he enters yet another stage of that service.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, of course I intend to support this bill. I was sitting in the back of the Chamber listening to the rhetoric, and some of it rather fiery and some of it rather tough, and here in this season, the season supposed to be that of good will and peace, and I think that we lack that element here in this whole debate, that of good will. I hope that in the days ahead, not just for this body, a very special revered body in this country, but for the people back home, that we reexamine and have good will and work toether and get the people's work done.