Ike Skelton

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, let me first begin by complimenting the chairman, Duncan Hunter, as well as the subcommittee chairmen and ranking members. This is an excellent bill. I hope it will pass in due course by the substantial vote by this body. It authorizes $462.9 billion for defense programs. It also authorizes a supplemental authorization for $50 billion that I believe we should go beyond budgeting for foreseeable war costs in a supplemental fund. We should do it the proper way because we know at least within the realm of possibility what they are, and we would authorize those programs and activities. However, it is being done this way, and we will make the most of it, and we are at least following what is correct by authorizing that $50 billion. This also increases the end strength of the Army, Marines, protective vests, armored Humvees and additional equipment for the National Guard. Though it is still going to be short-changed, we are making substantial steps in equipping the National Guard. I think that a supplemental does not go far enough in that regard. The bill also reserves the administration's plan or reverts to the administration's plan with regard to the Army National Guard and it fully funds the end strength at the authorized level. The administration recommended authorizing the full amount of troops for the Army National Guard that are there now, but paying for that number only rather than for the full amount that it should. We changed that in this bill. We also take a look at the area regarding the Persian Gulf, and it is so very, very important that we take a look at that area. The bill addresses important quality-of-life issues that are at the top of the agenda for members and their families, a 2.7 percent pay raise. It also does what we should have done some time ago, preserves the retiree benefits by keeping health care premiums under TRICARE at their current levels. With this bill we take steps to ensure that our troops have the best possible equipment. We take a step toward doing better in the Navy by fully funding the ship steaming days and adding an additional $400 million for advanced procurement for the Virginia class submarine; $300 million more for the National Guard equipment, including the prepositioned stocks. The bill also includes important bipartisan initiatives to address the future challenges. It directs the Secretary of Defense to provide Congress with a report on the Department's 10-year strategy for addressing threats posed by Iran to our country and to international security. This is terribly important because Iran is on the horizon, and hopefully we can take a good look at this and see what the report from the Department of Defense will say, which specifically addresses Iran's nuclear activities and the destabilizing influence that country has on the entire Middle East. Given the great challenges posed by Iran, that is a very important provision. The bill also takes the first step at enhancing interagency coordination so that the United States truly is able to engage in a full range of national powers and pursue our national interest. A number of years ago we passed what is known as the Goldwater- Nichols bill, which created a jointness among the various services. We need one hundred-fold of the coordination between the agencies of our government so we can pursue the national interest far better than we are today. The left hand often does not know what the right hand is doing. But even with all these positive steps, this bill would be improved by a number of amendments that I am hopeful, Mr. Chairman, the Rules Committee will make in order: My amendment to lower the increased retail pharmacy copay fees for military families; the amendments offered by Mr. Hoyer, Mr. Udall and Mr. Gordon on energy security; the amendment offered by Mr. Andrews and other colleagues to increase funding for nonproliferation programs. We are simply not doing enough to deal with the weapons of mass destruction threat. The amendment by Mr. Israel to require that chaplains demonstrate sensitivity, respect and tolerance towards service members of all faiths, that is terribly important. Mr. Chairman, I sincerely hope that these amendments at the next go- round of the rules decisions will be made in order to make this bill all the better. Mr. Chairman, let me take this opportunity to say a special thanks to Joel Hefley and to Lane Evans. Joel Hefley, a subcommittee chairman for many years, Lane Evans, ranking member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, will be leaving us. This will be their last bill. We are so grateful for their tireless service through the years. We wish them all the best in the days ahead. We owe a special thanks to Joel Hefley and Lane Evans. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ortiz).

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie). (Mr. ABERCROMBIE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SKELTON. I yield such time as he may consume to the ranking member of the Personnel Subcommittee, the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Snyder).

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes).

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt).

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall).

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Loretta Sanchez).

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews). (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, may I ask, does the gentleman from California have additional speakers?

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to add one more word about this bill. It is an excellent bill, reflects the best of bipartisanship. I thank the chairman, Duncan Hunter, all of the subcommittee chairmen and ranking members for the very, very hard work that they did. I certainly hope that we are able to return tomorrow with some amendments that need to be debated and discussed, including the prescription drug amendment that I have offered.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Chairman, let me compliment the gentlewoman on this amendment. It eminently makes sense. It adds the words that the frequency of assignments during service career as one of the several factors that the Secretary of Defense should consider in calling Selected Reservists to active duty. I think it is well done. As you know, a good number of them have been asked on a frequent basis to serve, when in truth and fact, if they look at the records closely, they might not very well have called those particular people. It just requires them to consider and take a good look at it. I compliment the gentlewoman.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, let me take this means to congratulate 15- year-old Rebekah Nastav of Amoret, Missouri. Miss Nastav's design for a new stamp won the Federal Junior Duck Stamp Design Contest on April 20, 2006. Miss Nastav's acrylic painting of a redhead duck, entitled ``Morning Swim,'' will be featured on the 2006-2007 Junior Duck Stamp. More than 34,000 Junior Duck Stamp designs were submitted from all 50 states. Miss Nastav's stamp will be made available by the Fish and Wildlife Service for $5.00 to the general public on June 1, 2006. Proceeds from the Junior Duck Stamp sales will be used to support environmental education efforts. Mr. Speaker, I am certain that the Members of the House will join me in congratulating Miss Rebekah Nastav and in wishing her luck in all her future endeavors.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, let me take this opportunity to recognize the long and distinguished career of Colonel Sharon S. DeRuvo, who is retiring after serving our Nation's military with distinction for over 20 years. Colonel Sharon S. DeRuvo was commissioned through the Walter Reed Army Medical Center Institute of Nursing in 1989. She graduated from the University of Maryland with a Bachelor of Science Degree in Nursing and received a Master of Science Degree from the University of Arizona in 1992. She also earned a Master of Strategic Studies Degree in 2003 from the Army War College. Colonel DeRuvo has held a variety of positions culminating in her current assignment as Commander, General Leonard Wood Army Community Hospital, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. Past assignments include staff nurse positions at Fitzsimons Army Medical Center, Denver, Colorado and Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas. She also held positions as Head Nurse, Hematology-Oncology, Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas; Director, Quality Assurance, Brooke Army Medical Center, Texas; Assistant Chief, Department of Clinical Investigation, Tripler Army Medical Center, Hawaii; Chief, Medical Nursing Section and Chief Clinical Nursing at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, Germany; and Deputy Commander for Health Services, Fort Carson, Colorado. Colonel DeRuvo has earned numerous decorations and badges for her outstanding service in the military. Her awards include the Meritorious Service Medal with Four Oak Leaf Clusters, the Army Commendation Medal, and the Army Achievement Medal with Four Oak Leaf Clusters. She has received several Tri-Service Nursing Research Grants, and was awarded the Orthopedic Surgeons and Nurses National Research Award. She is a member of the Order of Military Medical Merit and the Sigma Theta Tau Nursing Honor Society. Mr. Speaker, I know the Members of the House will join me in paying tribute to Colonel Sharon S. DeRuvo for her exceptional service to the United States and will wish her and her family all the best in the days ahead.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, let me take this means to congratulate second grade teacher Teresa Shockley, who received the Missouri State Teacher's Association (MSTA) Southwest Region Elementary Educator of the Year award. On April 10, 2006, Mrs. Shockley received the award for the southwest region of Missouri for her innovation in the classroom. Mrs. Shockley teaches using hands-on lessons three to five times a week. Currently, her students are growing tadpoles and plants and preparing for a musical. She also has the children in her class create mini-economies, in which the students set up counties, cities, and city councils. Mrs. Shockley has been teaching for twelve years, the last three of which she has taught second grade at Conway, Missouri's Ezard Elementary School. After she graduated from Conway High School in 1989, she attended Southwest Missouri State University. Mrs. Shockley earned her Master's degree from Southwest Baptist University while teaching fifth grade at Joel E. Barber School near Lebanon, Missouri. She has written various grants including, ``Time Travel Through Literature,'' and ``Consumers in Training.'' She also stays active in the community through her involvement in the Community Teacher's Association and the Professional Development Committee at Ezard Elementary School. Mr. Speaker, I am certain that the Members of the House will join me in congratulating Mrs. Teresa Shockley and in thanking her for her commitment to education.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, let me take this opportunity to recognize Mr. Burton Hoffman of Nevada, Missouri. Born on August 7, 1903, Mr. Hoffman celebrates his 103rd birthday this year. Mr. Hoffman has lived a very full and productive life. He married his late wife in 1925 and remained devoted to her until her death in 1999. He was a long-time employee of Farm and Home Savings and Loan in Nevada, Missouri. Mr. Hoffman joined Osage Lodge 303 of the Ancient Free and Accepted Masons in February 1934 and was raised to the level of Master Mason on April 20, 1934. He is also a member of the Elks lodge. In 2004, Mr. Hoffman was presented with a 70-year pin from the Missouri Grand Master, Stanley Thompson, and he was honored by the Elks in 2005. Mr. Speaker, I am certain that my colleagues will join me in wishing Mr. Burton Hoffman all the best in the days to come.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, let me take this opportunity to congratulate the KJLU-FM public radio station of Lincoln University in Jefferson City, Missouri. KJLU was named Black College Radios Station of the Year at the 28th Annual Black College Radio and Television Conference in Atlanta, Georgia. KJLU, founded in 1973, was presented with the Station of the Year award for excellence in broadcasting on April 1, 2006. The station had previously been honored as Station of the Year in 2003, with the Program Director of the Year award in 2004, and as Station with the Most Community Involvement in 2005. KJLU continues to help the community by aiding in local fund-raising and recording and distributing public service announcements. Mike Downey, one of KJLU's station producers, was recently named United Way's Missouri Volunteer of the Year. Mr. Speaker, I am certain that the Members of the House will join me in congratulating the students and staff at KJLU for their accomplishments and in wishing them luck in all their future endeavors.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, let me take this means to congratulate the National War College on 60 years of excellence in national security policy and strategic thinking education. On April 5, 2006, I had the privilege to address the Commandant's dinner in celebration of this anniversary and I am proud to share that speech with the Members of the House: National War College 60th Anniversary The Next 60 Years Ladies and Gentlemen, thank you. I am honored that you asked me to be your speaker. And thank you, General Peterson for that generous introduction. First, I have to say Congratulations. What you have built here is truly a national treasure. You can be proud, as the entire nation should be, of this school and your product-- because your product literally is the strength of this nation as we anticipate and respond to world events. Among your students and your faculty, you have educated some of the finest strategists this country has ever produced. I was going to give a short speech. But then I thought about the critical time we live in and got excited all over again about National War College. I don't want to take too much time with serious thoughts, but it is important to reflect on our past in order to respond to the challenges ahead. Sixty years ago, it was a novel idea--to create a college that would focus on grand strategy and bring together a diverse student body and faculty--senior officers from all the services and senior officials from the state department and, later, other agencies. This was a place where students were presented with strategic dilemmas, with a curriculum that ``focused on the interrelationship of military and non-military means in the promulgation of national policy.'' In 1946 Ambassador George Kennan, the first deputy for foreign affairs here, explained that in those days of ``transition and uncertainty,'' there was little in the policy world being done on the relation between war and politics. Kennan noted, ``American thinking about foreign policy had been primarily addressed to the problems of peace, and had taken place largely within the frameworks of international law and economics. Thinking about war, confined for the most part to military staffs and institutions of military training, had been directed . . . to technical problems of military strategy and tactics--to the achievement, in short, of victory in purely military terms.'' Kennan saw this school--its curriculum and its student/ faculty interaction--as a home for the development of new strategic thinking at the beginning of the Cold War. Through the years, National War College faculties have done a magnificent job teaching national security policy and strategy. This College's special place among the senior schools of Professional Military Education has been based on your attention to grand strategy. As Lieutenant General Leonard T. Gerow--President of the Board which recommended the War College's formation--said, ``The College is concerned with grand strategy and the utilization of national resources necessary to implement that strategy . . . Its graduates will exercise influence on the formulation of national and foreign policy in both peace and war.'' It has also been based on your insistent attention to academic rigor. And, your excellence has been based on the inclusion, from the beginning, of interagency and international students. These elements of excellence, in the context of a residential program that builds lasting ties between officers of different services, different countries and different agencies, is unmatched anywhere. Congress has been supportive of your continuing advances in all these areas. I guess I don't have to remind you of my role in the Goldwater-Nichols reforms to increase ``jointness'' among the services and my investigations of the Professional Military Education system. But we can't rest here. Keeping your institution relevant and on the sharp edge takes the constant attention of Congress and the Chairman in support of each new Commandant, and Dean, and the faculty. Your graduates test your teaching every day in a very complex environment. Senior decision makers have made some mistakes that have increased the difficulty of their missions. I know the current students review successes and difficulties as case studies so they will be even better prepared. But while today's wars demand our focus, we need to be careful we don't become so myopic that we fail to see the great challenges and opportunities ahead. One challenge is that, with all our advanced technology, when we still have failures. I believe this is because we are ill-equipped intellectually and because we don't work together well enough. Our successes are achieved because our most astute military and civilian leaders understand people, cultures, and root causes of problems or conflicts. And they anticipate opportunities. In Iraq, Afghanistan, the global war on terror, and even with Katrina and beyond, human interactions have caused great uncertainty for our security at home and abroad. Just these few examples show why any success we have is not just a matter of doctrine and technology. We can all think about failures among leaders at transitional periods such as Robert E. Lee at Gettysburg. He failed to grasp the impact on war of the transition from an agricultural to an industrial age. This lesson shows that what might appear to be tactical mistakes are really strategic! And I'm convinced, we are once more at a transitional period in our history just as Kennan was sixty years ago. Today we not only face the continuing transition from the industrial to the information age, but we are also recognizing that adversaries can capitalize on technologies in unanticipated ways. As new technologies have increased the complexity of our world, we see two other phenomena. Our adversaries use tactics we would be familiar with if we studied history. And, with our focus on technology, we must not neglect the critical dimension of human interaction. This brings me to my real point. The challenges and opportunities before us place as great an intellectual demand on our national security professionals as at any time in our history. And while their understanding of the art of war and international relations might be pretty good today, it must be even better tomorrow. And it must be broader. It must be even better integrated across all the instruments of national power. And it must be more expansive to include nontraditional national security partner agencies and departments, as well as more and different foreign partners. Beyond the employment of joint forces, beyond the effort to pursue the newest technologies of the science of warfare, you know that National War College graduates must be prepared not just to adopt technical transformation, but also must understand the art of statecraft as well as war. While I do not pretend to understand the Future Combat System or the avionics of the F-22, I do know they will be useless unless we have wise leaders who know the value of all the instruments of national power and have the skills to use them at the appropriate times and in the appropriate combinations. I know it's easy to measure the increased payloads and speeds brought by new technology. But while it's difficult to quantify the value of a Kennan, a Powell, or a Pace, it's more important than ever to recognize the value of our best strategists. As we used to say about jointness, ``this can't be a pick up game.'' Now, it's our interagency planning and operations, and our focus on a broader definition of national security that must not be ad hoc or ``come as you are.'' What would help? I want to challenge the Services and other agencies, to design systems that deliberately select the right people for the right level of professional education and the right school for strategic studies. They should be able to articulate why they send one person to Air, Naval or Army War College and another to this College or ICAF, or to a Fellowship. At the same time, they need to place a real value on how well their members take on what is taught. Your graduates' future assignments should not only reflect that they went to the premier interagency national security strategy institution. Their selection for command, senior leadership, and interagency positions should be based in greater measure on how well they perform here. Did National War College Distinguished Graduates and outstanding faculty get treated any differently by their Service detailers or their agency human resource directors than those who did not do quite as well, or as those who were not selected for this outstanding education? Perhaps they went back to the very same job they were doing. This is what I mean when I have spoken about the Services taking intellectual performance at PME seriously. This is what I mean when I critique them for not promoting officers who have excelled teaching or studying world affairs and the art of war and politics. Is this impossible? Only if we're wedded to machine age personnel systems. The Services and agencies need information age human resource systems that can recruit, retain, train and educate the innovative people we need in government and the military. And, we need a sufficient number of people in the Services and agencies if we are going to build intellectual capital, fight these wars and prepare for the next catastrophe or conflict. We have to have enough people to be able to send exceptional military and agency leaders to be students or faculty in school assignments. The cost of preparing for the challenges of tomorrow pale in comparison to the price we will pay if we are caught without the cadre of wise leaders we need for the future. You know, whenever I haven written the Chairman, or NDU President or you as Commandants a letter, I have been pretty consistent in my questions. Do you select the right officers and civilians to serve as faculty and in the right balance? Have you kept your faculty to student ratio low with 10-12 students per seminar? Are you emphasizing history, political science and foreign area studies? Does the faculty have these credentials? Do you have the resources to ensure your students are able to conduct field or regional studies? Do your resources enable faculty to contribute to national strategy and policy through research and sabbaticals? Do you stay relevant by using real world and historical case studies? Have you fully integrated your reserve component, civilian and foreign students? To me these are not academic questions, if you will pardon the expression. These are about the character and the continued relevance of this school. Let me be clear. We know that the National War College has no counterpart among civilian universities. Not Harvard, not Princeton, not Stanford--none of them has a faculty, or curriculum or student body remotely comparable. This College must be protected and supported as the elite institution it is. The nation's future security requires it. The quality of the faculty, of the instruction, of the curriculum, of the students must not be compromised. A false choice must never be forced on us between spending on current operations and new military technologies, and investing in the education of our future premier national strategists. For sixty years the National War College has been the crown jewel of Professional Military Education. Since the days when President Harry Truman sat in student seminars to learn about the Soviet Union, this College has been the place where strategic thinking has been nurtured, taught and refined. At a historic moment of great challenge and peril George Kennan, worked in this building, to formulate the containment strategy that ultimately won the Cold War without a nuclear exchange. Today, at another moment of great challenge, the need for strategic direction and thinking could not be greater. The price of failure is far too high. We have to get it right. We have to have wise people, with the right education, in the right positions, to think through these challenges and take action in concert. When you think about all the political debates, the expedient compromises, and the resource trade-offs that take place in this town each day, it's a miracle that a college of this quality has been able to survive and prosper within the larger bureaucratic confines of the government. In a more immediate sense, I have always been concerned that bureaucracies can kill even the healthiest intellectual organization. A college such as this can decline and die if bureaucracies and administrative arms bloat while they cut corners, dumb down, impose numbing uniformity, enshrine group think, standardize mediocrity or gorge themselves on the resources meant to be spent on the real stuff of education--the interaction between small groups of faculty and students wrestling with the profound issues of the day. The National War College has always embodied something unique. As I look at you leaders of this college during different eras of war and peace, I sense a continuity of intellectual engagement and energy in these historic halls. It is called excellence. Why is it here? Yes, you have an outstanding faculty, and superior students, an ever adapting curricula and your wonderful location here in Washington. But the key, from the beginning--the genius of General Eisenhower's vision--is that experienced professionals from various backgrounds and come together, over an extended period of time, to learn from each other, and to tackle problems together in an environment that fosters understanding. This is one institution that has had no agenda other than to make wise and thoughtful leaders. In the current atmosphere of partisan tensions, this College remains a refuge from the bureaucratic skirmishes and wars. As the first War College Commandant, Admiral Harry T. Hill explained, his intention was to ``make the students ponder'', to give the students practical problems upon which to think and arrive at individual conclusions. This is a safe space for men and women to engage each other in the search for a better understanding of each others' agencies and departments. They can gain a true appreciation of the character and conduct of war, the complexity of strategy, and the utility of the diplomatic, political and economic instruments of state. Your product is strategists. They are still critical to our future. I can see this in your graduates . . . General Pace, our Chairman; General Martin Dempsey on the ground now in Iraq; David Sedney, our first senior State Department officer in Afghanistan after 9/11 and now deputy chief of mission in China; Buzz Mosley, Chief of Staff of the Air Force . . . generals, ambassadors, foreign military officers, and interagency leaders. Even one of our newest Armed Services Committee staffers, Lorry Fenner, is a former member of your faculty and a National War College graduate. I could go on and on . . . This is a proud tradition and serves as the foundation for the next 60 years ahead. I hope the War College will continue to lead the way in inter-agency and inter-service strategic education. As we broaden our definition of the national security community to include homeland defense and increased international cooperation, I hope that the War College model and experience can be used to broaden government's approach to our nation's challenges. George Kennan, typing away in his office right next door to this room, charted a strategy to meet a past threat . . . a policy that endured and was adapted, through Administrations of both parties. You all have been the watchful guardians of this heritage. I want to challenge you tonight continue to work with us in Congress and at this College to think about how to improve interagency planning and operations to defeat our adversaries and to capitalize on opportunities. Lend your wisdom to the significant questions we face today--should we be working on a National Security Act for 2007 or 2009? How can we adapt a Goldwater-Nichols type reform to the interagency process? These are only two of the topics we wrestle with. You can see how significant they are and imagine the sustained, long term effort they will require. So, we enjoy a celebration tonight, but tomorrow we must start again to renew and reinvigorate this great project of creating national security strategists. Given your history, and the imperative for the future, I am confidant this College's faculty and students are up to this challenge. Thank you for including me in your celebration. I welcome your continued engagement on these issues.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, let me take this opportunity to recognize the long and distinguished career of Colonel Michael J. Conrad, Jr., who is retiring after serving our Nation's military with distinction for 27 years. Colonel Conrad received a Bachelor of Science degree from West Point, a Masters of Engineering degree in construction management from the University of Florida, and a Masters of Strategic Studies from the U.S. Army War College. He is a graduate of the Engineer Officer Basic and Advanced Courses, Airborne School, Ranger School, the Combined Arms Services Staff School, the Army Command and General Staff College, the Joint and Combined Staff Officer School, and the U.S. Army War College. Colonel Conrad has served in many critical positions as an Army Engineer. His Corps of Engineer assignments included serving as a research coordinator at the Corps' Information Technology Laboratory, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi, and as Deputy Area Engineer and Deputy District Engineer with the New Orleans District. He then served as a joint staff officer with the United States Forces Japan at Yokata Air Base, Japan. He served 2 years at the U.S. Army Engineer School, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, as the Director of Instruction and the Director of Training. Colonel Conrad deployed to Iraq in 2003 for 6 months and led a multi-functional Corps of Engineers team supporting the United States Agency for International Development. His outstanding service culminated as the Chief of the Programs Division, Office of the Chief, Legislative Liaison. Mr. Speaker, I know the Members of the House will join me in paying tribute to Colonel Michael J. Conrad, Jr., for his service to the United States and will wish him and his family all the best in the days ahead.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, it is with deep sadness that I inform the House of Representatives of the passing of my friend, the Honorable John J. Pollard of Lexington, Missouri. He was 96. Judge Pollard was born on November 14, 1909, in Lexington, Missouri. After he graduated from Lexington High School in 1928, Judge Pollard worked various odd jobs. Judge Pollard was offered a special commission as deputy constable in 1931 and began, like his father before him, a lifelong career in law enforcement. In 1934, he was appointed deputy sheriff, designated the court bailiff, and moonlighted as a city fireman. Judge Pollard married Genevieve Bray on January 11, 1936. That same year, Judge Pollard first campaigned for public office and was elected Constable. Judge Pollard was elected Constable twice more; in 1938 and again in 1940. He also continued as deputy sheriff until 1940. In the fall of 1940, a conversation with Senator Harry S. Truman from Independence, Missouri, led to a position as one of the very first members of a security force being established at the new Lake City Ordinance Plant. Shortly after Judge Pollard was hired as a dispatcher and firearms inspector, war was declared. During World War II, the ammunition plant would reach a high of 23,000 employees, 600 of whom were on the security force. After World War II officially ended on September 2, 1945, Judge Pollard received a special ``Certificate of Meritorious Conduct'' from the United States Army, recognizing his service to the war effort. Judge Pollard was the only security man kept on staff after the Lake City Ordinance Plant closed a month after the war. When the plant reopened in 1949, Judge Pollard was made Chief of Security. When the Korean Conflict began in 1950, the plant once again aided in the war effort and Judge Pollard, as head of security, held the military rank equivalent of Colonel. Before retiring in 1974, Judge Pollard attended a 40-hour course in shooting at the FBI Academy; completed the MP School of the Army at Fort Gordon, Georgia; and graduated from the U.S. Army Intelligence School. He also took courses in industrial security management, effective speaking, human relations, communications, and job relations. In 1978, Judge Pollard was elected to the office of Municipal Judge of Lexington. When the legal qualifications to hold the office changed a year later, he was in the first group of judges to take the Supreme Court's mandatory test for Municipal Judges. His background in law enforcement served him well and he easily passed the test. He was held in high esteem by the local lawyers and was invited to become an ex- officio member of the Lafayette County Bar, a high honor for a non- lawyer. Judge Pollard resigned from office on May 30, 1989, having served for eleven years and one month. Mr. Speaker, Judge John J. Pollard was more than a civil servant, he was a true friend. He is survived by his son Jack Pollard; Jack's wife Beth; one brother, Dale Pollard; and two grandchildren. He will be missed and I know the members of the House will join me in extending heartfelt condolences to his loved ones.