CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE RE : USE OF US FORCES IN LAOS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 16
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 5, 2001
• Sequence Number: 3
• Publication Date: December 15, 1969
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
December 15, 1969 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENA,I'E S ~
was attempting to get across to the Sen-
ate, about these young men operating as
lawyers and going around in Arizona and
New Mexico and engaging in anything
but legal activities,
The letter reads as follows:
DIEAn Mlt. IIINMAN: I full writing to express
illy opposition in tile strongest possible terms
to the patriotism program underway at
Church Rock, as described in tonight's Gal-
lup Indepoildcn.t. You are quoted as saying:
"These kids don't know the Star Spangled
Banner. They ought to have an awareness of
the greatness of their country". This is true,
but they ought to have an awareness of the
faults and errors of their country, as well, of
which there have been, and are, many. It is
especially appalling to realize that these are
Indian children who are being forced to par-
ticipate in , this program, when it is their
people who have been treated most shabbily
of all by the United States.
Are you in agreement with the statement
attributed to Mrs. Stanfield-
Mr. President, I digress to say here
that the Mrs. Stanfield referred to is not
Mrs. Stanfield but Mrs. Stafford, who
happens to be a Negro.
Continuing reading:
who is quoted as saying: "We should indoc-
trinate every child with the idea of being
loyal to his country."? (My emphasis.) if so,
I think that this is a sorry philosophy for a
public school, which should be dedicated to
the concept of free inquiry and exchange of
Ideas, as well as the presentation of all sides
of disputed issues.
I find it particularly offensive that you are
apparently associating "patriotism" with
support of the war in Viet Nam, which is,
unquestionably, the most controversial war
of our time, and, in the Opinion of many,
the most brutal and unjustified. Young chil-
dren are subjected to enough pressures from
the media, their parents, churches, etc. to
hold the view "my country, right or wrong".
The least you could do is to refrain from
adding to the imbalance In presentation of
viewpoints.
I note among the pictures appearing in
the Independent some of drawings of sol-
diers with guns and several with the phrase
"God Bless America". It is, indeed, unfortu-
nate that you are encouraging these children
to glorify war and all its attendant inhu-
manity. Likewise, it is deplorable for you to
stimulate the express of what is, in effect,
a prayer, in violation of the Supreme Court's
ruling that public schools are to refrain from
any such activities. There is simply no need
to offend the sensibilities of some persons by
indirectly stimulating the establishment of
the Christian (or Jewish) faith among a
people who have traditionally held conflict-
ing religious beliefs. This does not even take
into consideration these people who have no
faith whatsoever, or who simply wish to have
the business of religion and politics kept
out of the schools,
I would also suggest that you take a good
hard look at the sponsorship of the orga-
nization the Independent says your "Patri-
otism Committee" is affiliated with, the Free-
dom Foundation. I could be mistaken, but I
believe that this organization is one of the
-extreme right, either affiliated with, or simi-
lar to, the Birch Society, Minutemen, or
similar paramilitary and far-right groups.
If you are not willing to demonstrate that
your program is a balanced presentation, and
to remove any hint of religious exercises
from the curriculum, I shall take whatever
steps I can to investigate the matter my.
self, and, if necessary, institute legal pro-
ieedings.
Kindly show this letter to Mrs. Stanfield-
That is Mrs. Stafford-
and any other interested parties.
Sincerely,'
Mr. President, the program referred
to in the letter was a Veterans' Day pro-
grain held in a school whose enrollment
is 99 percent Indian children, at which
two Vietnam casualty families were
awarded medals and various patriotic
displays were in the school, including one
bulletin board display that read "God
Bless America."
I read this letter into the RECORD to
help to prove that these your? lawyers,
engaged a;;gainst the wishes of the
Navajo tribe, are not practicing law out
there They are practicing disruption of
the American way of life.
I anh amazed that the Republican head
of the Department that controls the
OEO would allow such things to go on. I
am going to continue to be critical of him,
even though he is a Republican. I believe
that he has a responsibility to the peo-
ple of this country to consider the feel-
ings of the people of this country long
before he has any obligation to a bunch
of formerly unemployed lawyers.
ORDER OF BUSINESS
Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President, I
suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk
will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the
roll. -
Mr. THURMOND. Mi'. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT
Messages in writing from the President
of the United States submitting nomina-
tions were communicated to the Senate
by Mr. Leonard, one of his secretaries.
EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED
As in executive session, the Presiding
Officer laid before the Senate messages
from the President of the United States
submitting, sundry nominations, which
were referred to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
(For nominations this day received,
see the end of Senate proceedings.) .
MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE
A message from the House of Repre-
sentatives, by Mr. Bartlett, one of its
reading clerks, announced that the
House had passed the bill (S. 3016) to
provide for the continuation of programs
authorized under the Economic Oppor-
tunity Act of 1964, to authorize advance
funding of such programs, and for other
purposes, with amendments, in which it
requested the concurrence of the Senate;
that the house insisted upon its amend-
ments to the bill, asked a conference with
the Senate on the disagreeing votes of
the two Houses thereon, and that Mr.
PERKINS, Mrs. GREEN, Mr. PucxNsxr, Mr.
BRADEMAS, Mr. O'HARA, Mr. CAREY, Mr.
HAWKINS, Mr. WILLIAM D. FoaD, Mr.
HATHAWAY, Ml's. MINK, Mr. MEEDS, Mr.
CLAY, Mr. AYRES, Mr. Qum, Mr. REID of
New York, Mr. ERLENBORN, Mr. SCXERLE,
Mr. DELLENBACK, Mr. ESOH, and Mr.
STEIGER of Wisconsin were appointed
managers on the part of the House at
the conference,
The message also announced that the
House had disagreed to the amendment
of the Senate to the bill (I-LR, 19580) to
Promote the foreign policy, security, and
general welfare of the United States by
assisting" Peoples of the World to ;i?chicvc
economic development Within a 1.1?a0ne-
tvork of democral,ic economic, social,
and political institutions, and for other
purposes; agreed to the conference asked
by the Senate on the disal;rceiil;;? votes
of the two Houses thereon, and that Mr.
MORGAN Mr. ZADLOCKI, Mr. BAYS, Mr.
FASCELL, Mr, ADAIR, Mr. MAILLIAID, and
Mr. FRELINGIIUYSEN Were appointed
managers on the part of the House at the
conference,
ENROLLED BILLS AND JOINT
RESOLUTION SIGNED
The message further announce;.l that
the Speaker had affixed his si na ure to
the following enrolled bills and joint
resolution:
S. 2864. An act to amend and extend laws
relating to housing and urban development,
and for other purposes;
II.R. 210, An act to eliminate requirements
for disclosure of construction details on pas-
senger vessels meeting prescribed safety
standards, and for other purposes;
H.R. 4244. An act to raise the ceiling on
appropriations of the Administrative Con-
ference of the United States; and
H.J. Res. 10. Joint resolution authorizing
the President to proclaim the second week of
March 1970 as Volunteers of America Week.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
APPROPRIATIONS, 1970
The Senate resumed the consideration
of the bill (H.R. 15090) making appro-
priations for the Department of Defense
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1970,
and for other purposes.
Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I
would like to warn my distinguished col-
leagues that funds for national defense
on most items have been out to the low-
est acceptable risk. In my personal opin-
ion, we have already cut entirely too
much' in the face of ever increasing.
Soviet military power.
This bill has been reduced by $5.9 bil-
lion from the estimated requirement.
Our worldwide forces are being cut back.
It is reported that President Nixon to-
night will announce further withdrawals
from Vietnam.
Mr. President, we have a very unique
and unusual situation this year in view
of the tremendous reductions already
made in our national defense pro-
grams. The manned orbiting labora-
tory-MOL-program has been ternhi-
nated. This amounted to a $400 million
reduction. I might point out that this
is one of the Soviet's main experimental
programs.
The Cheyenne helicopter program has
been stopped. This amounted to a reduc-
tion of $429 million. The Army's main
battle tank program has been cut back
with more than. a $20 million reduction.
A. letter from Secretary Packard to
Chairman RUSSELL indicates this might
be reduced another $10.? million but no
Approved For Release 2001/11/01 CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070.003-5
 S 16752
Approved For Release 2001/11/01: CIAO 1B '030007
CONGRESSIONAL R~ - ,,be?, 15, 1069
other reductions on the MBT-70 tank iri Mr. M A intention ITS. Mr. President, it was
should be made.
Mr. President, there are many other meat on Laos at this time but, pending
essential items of military hardware receipt of a copy of it for my own use, I
that have been reduced. Combat opera- suggest the absence of a quorum, without
tions in Vietnam have been curtailed relinquishing my right to the floor.
severely during the first 5 months of The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk
this fiscal year. The Secretary of Do- will call the roll.
Tense has cut the fiscal year 1970 pro- The bill clerk in?oceeded to call the roll.
grain by $3 billion. Our nation cannot Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask
expect to make any further cuts in the unanimous consent that the order for the
foreseeable future. quorum call be rescinded.
Efforts have been made to defer the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
procurement of the F-14 aircraft for objection, it is so ordered.
the Navy. The House disallowed $275 Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I call
million for this program. In Illy view, up the amendment at the desk and ask
this is a fatal mistake. Funds have been that it be SIDING OFFICER. The
restored in the Senate bill to provide for The PRESIDING
total of 12 F-14's for the test pro- amendment SICLrRIC. D G The BILL will be The stated.
Senator from
gram. This is a bare mfnigo forward (Mr. Coorsa) and the Senator
Navy must be permitted to go forward Kentucky
with this modern fighter for the fleet. from Montana (Mr. MANSFIELD) propose
Mr. President, there has been some an amendment as follows:
talk of not approving the funds for the on page 4G, between lines 8 and 9, Insert a
ABM which have been authorized. In new section as follows: .
"Src. 643. None of the funds appropriated
view of the extensive previous review by this Act shall-be used for the support of
and approval of this program by the local forces in Laos or Thailand except to
Senate, I strongly recommend that such provide supplies, materiel, equipment, and
Ideas be forgotten. Our urgent need for facilities, including maintenance thereof, or
this defense has been further document- to provide training for such local forces."
ed since my distinguished colleagues ap-
proved the minimum deployment of
i
t
S
e
ov
the ABM to defend against the
ICBM's. Anyone who proposes to cut
funds for the ABM will face strong op-
position.
The C-5A super transport has been
cut back from 123 aircraft to 81. This
will seriously reduce our flexibility for
response to reinforce our overseas forces
in time of peril.
This bill is already a compromise
which reveals risks to our national se-
curity due to the pressure of domestic
problems. Our present as well as our
future capabilities have been reduced.
Unanticipated requirements ins South-
east Asia cannot be met with our re-
duced military capability.
Mr. President, the slowdown of new
weapons development and the critical
reduction of our force structure are
coming at a perilous time in our his-
tory. For. the first time, the Soviets are
moving ahead of us in military capa-
bility.
The Russian naval fleet totals 1,575
vessels, as opposed to 894 for the United
States- Moreover. 58 percent of the U.S.
agreement, tacit or otherwise, with a pre-
vious Laotian Government has been
building a road down from Mcnt;lien in
Yunnan Province into Laos itself. And
the road terminates at a place called
Muong Soul.
There are shafts In both directions,
The one on the left, looking south, is an
extension which lrsls been begun along
Route 19 toward Dien Bien Phu. And, the
one on the right, extending toward Thai-'
land, has been extended only a very short
distance, despite the reports which have
come out recently that great activity is
underway in that particular area and
that the Chinese have two divisions there.
When I was in Laos in August, the
figure was anywhere from three to 10
battalions of Chinese along the road,
mostly labor troops and antiaircraft
personnel.
The consensus was that a figure of four
or five battalions would be closer to the
truth.
I note in the press recently where
Souvannah Phouma, the Prime Minister
of Laos has indicated that there is no
such thing as two divisions in Laos. And
he sets the number at five Chinese bat-
talions along the road primarily extend-
ing from Menglien in Yunnan down to
Muong Soui in northern Laos.
I was happy to note that the President
on several occasions has stated definitely
and without qualification that there are
no U.S. combat troops in 'Laos.
I believe that to be a true statement of
fact, if by that we mean the foot soldiers
as such. There are, of course, other types
of activities going on.
Certainly airlines are in operation
there. They are operating, at least in
.part-perhaps in large part-on Ameri-
can funds.
And what I am saying is nothing secret,
because it has been carried in the press
.and it is public knowledge.
The fact that the United States has
been carrying on additional sorties
against the North Vietnamese coming
down the Ho Chi Minh trail and is in
support of the Royal Laotians around
the Plaine des Jarres is, of course, open
knowledge.
The point of the Cooper amendment
is that we do. not want to become in-
volved in Laos. We do not want to be-
come involved in another Vietnam, no
matter where it would be. And, while
there is perhaps sonic justification for
what Is going on at the present time,
there certainly is no justification for
this country getting involved deeper and
deeper and, in effect, becoming the
keeper of the keys as far as the King-
dom of Laos is concerned.
Providing supplies, materiel, egcjp-
ment, and facilities, including, the a irin-
tenance thereof, end the providing of
training for local forces is being under-
taken at the present tiiile. We are pro-
viding supplies. We are providing ma-
teriel. We are providing equipment and
facilities. We are providing; training for
.local forces, those belonging in the
Royal Laotian Army as well as those
that operate on a small indepedent bas-
is, the Meo and the other tribesmen who
have been supplied by'us.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I join
with the distinguished Senator from
Kentucky, who is absent because of un-
avoidable circumstances, in sponsoring
the amendment.
As the Senator knows, there have been
some hearings held on the situation
which exists in Laos as it relates to our
participation in the war.
If my memory serves me correctly, the
number of sorties, so-called, which have
emanated from these bases has increased
considerably in recent months.
We know that the situation in Laos
has developed into a two-sided affair. It
seems that the main factors there are
the North Vietnamese on the one hand,
backing up the Pathet Lao, who number
something in the order of 50,000 and
who have been in constant violation of
the Geneva accords of 1962 since the
agreement was made. On our part when
the Geneva accords were reached, we
withdrew what uniformed elements we
had in Laos. However, with the passage
of time and the difficulty which beset the
royal Laotian army, we have stepped up
our activity in that unhappy kingdom.
more; but only 1 percent of the Soviet plies down the so-called Ho Chi Minh
navy is that old. trail, which goes through the panhandle
We have 143 submarines; the Soviets of Laos.
have more than 375. We have 81 nuclear There has also been air suport to the
powered units; the Soviets have 65, but Royal Laotian Forces in the carrying out
they are building one nuclear sub a of activities in the Plaine des Jarres
month, and may surpass us by the end and elsewhere in that country.
of 1970. By 1978, they may well have It is safe to say, I believe, that the
constructed between 100 and 150. Pathet Lao would not be able to function
This year, for the first time, the Soviets without the support of the North Viet-
surpassed us In the number of ICBM's namese on the one hand and, on the
and they continue to build at a constant other, that the Royal Laotian Army it-
rate. self would be placed in a very precarious
Mr. President, the security of our Na- ? position without the air support of the
tion must not be exposed to any further United States and the training given to
'sks to accommodate domestic needs. the few pilots which the Laotian king-
ho appropriations bill before us today dom has.
n view of pervious reductions is already I think there should be brought out
a grave risk. I strongly appeal to my col- also in a general discussion of Laos, the
leagues not to propose further reductions. fact which has been known for some
Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
 Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
December 15, 1969 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE S 16 75 13
They are carrying on clandestine ac-
tivities and making a contribution to-
ward stability in the areas in which they
live and in which they function.
The important thing, and I believe
this is the intention of the Senate and
the administration, is that one Korea
is more than enough, that one Vietnam
is more than enough, and that this
country does not want to become Involved
in any other area on a basis approximat-
ing that in which we find ourselves in
Vietnam at the present time.
I do not think anyone would doubt,
or at least very few would doubt, the
fact that it was a mistake to go into
Vietnam. And it is just as well to state
it publicly.
My view does not agree with that of
some of my colleagues, because I think
the difficulty arose with the assassina-
tion of Ngo Dinh Diem in 1963. And
many of my colleagues looked upon Ngo
Dinh Diem as a dictator and as a hard
man.
Well, he may have been hard, but at
least he furnished a timely civilian sta-
bility to that government which kept us
from going in and which was able to
function on the basis of only a relatively
few American advisors being there.
I use the term relatively few American
advisers in comparison with the figures
today. However, with the assassination
of Ngo Dinh Diem, began a continual
succession of military dictatorships. And
that is what we still have in Vietnam
today, I believe, despite the so-called elec-
tion in September 1966. Under that suc-
cession, we have been ground down in
that area.
We have spent well in excess of $100
billion.
Our total casualties up to December
11, 1969, amounted to 307,242, and of that
number, 206,420 have been wounded in
battle, 39,742 have died in combat, and
7,080 have died in other than combat
situations. The total number as of De-
cember 11 is 307,242. While the figures
are declining, the end is not in sight,
even with the sizable withdrawal of forces
which this administration has under-
taken and which I hope it will speed up
and move as rapidly as it possibly can.
May I say in that respect that I am
delighted that this administration has
brought about a deescalation of the war
and that, rather than a step-up, or a
continuing increase in forces, or a stabil-
izing at the 548,000 or 550,000 level. The
figure now is somewhere, I believe, be-
low 480,000. The move in the right direc-
tion, the acceleration, is not fast enough.
I wish it could be faster. If I had my way,
it would be. The final responsibility rests
with the President and I am sure he is
doing all he can to bring about a decel-
eration of this war, a deescalation of this
war, and is trying to find a pathway to
peace which will bring about, in time,
a total withdrawal on the part of this
country.
Nevertheless the black boxes are still
coming home. Men are still dying in com-
bat, even though the deaths are de-
creasing.
Too many Americans are involved in
a country in which we really have no
vital interest. It is an area in which the
South Vietnamese themselves, of all
kinds and all sorts, will have to make the
final decision as to what kind of gov-
ernment they want, what kind of future
they envisage, and what kind of life
their people will lead. It is not up to us;
it is up to them.
So I hope that this amendment, offered
by the distinguished senior Senator from
Kentucky and myself, will be agreed
to, as a means of indicating that we do
not wish to become involved in another
Vietnam In Laos or Thailand or any-
where else.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. I congratulate the
distinguished majority leader for offer-
ing this amendment. I expect to support
It. I should like to ask one or two ques-
tions by way of clarification.
If I correctly understand the amend-
ment, it does not prohibit money in this
bill to provide training for local forces in
Laos. Is that correct?
Mr. MANSFIELD. In Laos or Thailand. .
Mr. FULBRIGHT. It does not prevent
supplies, materiel, equipment, and facil-
ities being supplied to those forces?
Mr. MANSFIELD. It does not.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Is there anything
in the hearings or in this bill that indi-
cates to the Members of the Senate what
we are doing by way of providing train-
ing to local forces in Laos?
Mr. MANSFIELD. I would have to refer
that question to the acting chairman of
the committee, who has been called on,
on short notice, to handle this bill.
As I recall, some information was given.
I do not know the details even though I
happen to serve on the particular sub-
committee. It had to do with training
pilots, servicing planes, and other activi-
ties carried on primarily in Thailand and
not in Laos itself, because of the Geneva
accords.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. May I ask it in a lit-
tle different way. Does the majority lead-
er believe that Members of the Senate
should be called upon to vote for the
appropriation in this bill, which is just
under $80 billion? Incidentally I want
to congratulate both committees for
having cut what seems to me a reasonable
amount. My question is whether Mem-
bers of the Senate are being called upon
to vote to appropriate money to pay for
a program which they are uninformed.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Yes, I think we
should, in view of a situation which has
developed over the years. After all, the
United States was responsible in large
part for bringing about the Geneva ac-
cords of 1962, which supposedly divided
Laos into a tripartite kingdom-the so-
called neutralists, the rightist groups,
and the Pathet Lao-who agreed to di-
vide the representation of the country
into three.
Since that time, this fiction has been
kept alive, at least on a theoretical basis,
and one-third of the seats in Vientiane
have been set aside for the Pathet Lao
to occupy, which they are loath to do.
Furthermore, in connection with that,
I think it should be pointed out that
there is stationed permanently in Vienti-
ane a 100-man Pathet Lao company-i
for what purpose, I do not know, but
at least it is there. We have involved the
Laotians to such an extent that we have
created an obligation which is most diffi-
cult for us to get out of at the present
time.
What I oppose is the stepup of activi-
ties there which carries with it the threat
of greater participation and which car-
ries with it the possibility that if it gets
out of hand or goes too far, we may be-
come involved in another Vietnam.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. I agree with the
Senator that it might amount to another
Vietnam. But I do not understand how
the Senate can exercise a proper judg-
ment in this matter if it Is not informed
as to what is being done with the moneys
In this program. This is the only case
I know of outside of a strictly intelli-
gence operation in which we are expected
to act without detailed information, I
am not suggesting that we should make
anything public. What I am suggesting
is that the Senate, in executive session,
should be informed by the sponsors of
the proposed legislation and by the ad-
ministration as to what we are being
asked to finance in this operation. Aside
from what we normally call the typical
intelligence operations, upon which tra-
ditionally we have not requested infor-
mation even in executive session, I be-
lieve we need Information now. I do re-
call, however, we did have one execu-
tive session last year to discuss that
matter.
But very large sums of money are in-
cluded in this bill. I believe they are con-
cerned with the activities that are men-
tioned in the amendment. But they are
not identified and no Members of the
Senate, or at least very few, know what
they are voting on.
It strikes me that we have come to such
a pass-as we became involved so deeply
in Vietnam-that we are threatened to
become involved in Laos. The Senate
should be informed.
The Senator from Montana congratu-
lated the President on deescalating the
war in Vietnam. But what good is this
going to do if we are escalating the war
in Laos at the same time as much as we
are deescalating in Vietnam?
Mr. MANSFIELD. That is a valid ques-
tion, and the Senator makes a fair com-
parison.
I would be prepared-this may cone
as a surprise; I just happened to think
of it-to suggest at an appropriate time
that the Senate go into executive session
to listen to this information, and in that
way to educate ourselves to a greater ex-
tent covering this particular matter.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. I appreciate that
from the majority leader.
On last Saturday, I sent to the chair-
man of the Appropriations Committee a
letter asking basic questions on money
and commitments to Laos. My purpose
was to give notice that I would expect
this information, which can be supplied
by the executive branch, by way of the
Committee on Appropriations. I think
that the Senate should have such infor-
mation before It is called upon to vote.
Mr. MANSFIELD. May I say-if the
chairman will pardon me-that, in my
opinion, without the American assistance
Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
 S1G754
Approved For Release 2001/11/01: CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-- SENATE December 1:5, 1969
now going to Laos, it would have fallen a
long time ago; that the Pathet Lao on
paper would have been successful, but in
reality North Vietnam, with its huge con-
centration of troops, would have assumed
actual and physical control; and that if
that happened, we would be confronted
with it situation with the Laotians or
North Vietnamese, whichever group wits
in control, at the Mekong,
I would point out that we have a treaty
relationship with Thailand which Is a
full-fledged member of the Southeast
Asian Treaty Organization. The head-
quarters are in Bangkok. Unlike the situ-
ation applicable to Laos, Cambodia, and
South Vietnam there is no question but
that we would be involved under the
terns of the Southeast Asian Treaty
Organization, but involved only through
constitutional processes because that is
included toward the ends of the treaty.
So we have a situation there which is
delicate, difficult, dangerous, extremely
hard to explain. It is tied very closely to
the war in Vietnam in which we never
should have become involved. It is not
only a mistake; it is a tragedy, on the
basis of these complex factors we find
that the situation developing in Laos has
increased our participation and activity
there. It has been responsible for the
questions raised by the chairman of the
Committee on Foreign Relations and
other Members of this body who are fear-
ful of what might happen in the future
if a curb is not established in this body.
Mr. YOUNG of North Dakota. Mr.
President, like the Senator from Mon-
tana, I was very much opposed to be-
coming involved in a war in Vietnam. I
want to make sure we do not get involved
in any more Vietnams.
I could support the proposal. This
would not prevent assistance to a coun-
try like Indonesia which fought off com-
munism. We could give them assistance,
such as military or economic, but no
manpower assistance.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Yes, in Laos, too.
These items, which are allowable, fit in
very nicely with the Nixon doctrine
which says, in effect, we are primarily a
Pacific power with peripheral interests
on the Asian mainland. The, purpose
would be that our friends would receive
logistical help and economic assistance,
but no further use of American man-
power on the Asian mainland, no further
use of American military power unless
there were a nuclear confrontation and
then all bets would be off.
This amendment would strengthen the
President's hand because it says to him
"The executive branch cannot go be-
yond what is now being done; the sit-
uation may have already gone a little
too far but you said that there are no
U.S. combat troops in Laos."
Secretary Rogers, In his appearance
before the National Education Television
commentators, on a television show,
stated that the President did not Intend
to become Involved in Laos. I am para-
phrasing, but that is what he said.
Mr. YOUNG of North Dakota. I be-
lieve the acting chairman of the com-
mittee said, regarding the money in this
bill, that it could be used in Laos.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, if it
is agreeable with the Senator, I would
like to yield to the Senator from Ver-
mont briefly.
Mr. ATICEN. Mr. President, as a matter
of fact, I have seen no evidence that this
administration desires to engage in any
more Vietnanns in Laos or anywhere
else; and if the administration should
change in the future I ain satisfied the
Senate would never approve of any more
Vietnam like conflicts.
However, I rose to speak in reference
to what the majority leader said earlier
in regard to Vietnam. As of December
11, last Thursday, I find that our troop
strength in South Vietnam was 472,500.
That indicated a reduction of 2,700 for
the week of December 4 to December
11. Previous to that, the previous week,
there was it reduction of 4,500. This
means a total of something over 71,000
troops having been withdrawn from
South Vietnam, largely within the last
3 months, at it rate of about 20,000 a
month. That rate of withdrawal may not
hold good for each of the months ahead,
but at the present time the withdrawal
program is 11,500 ahead of schedule,
ahead of what was projected for Decem-
ber 15, with 4 days yet to go. It is quite
apparent that, at anywhere near the
present rate of withdrawal, 80,000 troops
will be withdrawn before the beginning
of the year; and probably 100,000 by
the first of February and possibly more.
I just do not know, but that is my best
guess at this time.
I thought those figures would be
worthwhile to place in the RECORD at this
time for the benefit of Members of the
Senate, as well as for those who read the
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
thank the Senator for performing a com-
mendable service. I am delighted that he
has placed the figures in the RECORD.
I congratulate the President for being
11,500 ahead of schedule, 4 days before
the withdrawal date, December 15, which
is today.
Mr. AIKEN. That is right.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
wish to quote now from the statement
by the distinguished Secretary of State
in a National Education Television net-
work interview. He was asked about
whether or not Laos would develop Into
another Vietnam-type conflict. He said:
The President won't lot It happen.
Continuing, he said:
I mean we have learned one lesson, and
that is we are not going to fight any major
wars in the mainland of Asia again and we
are not going to send American troops there,
and we certainly aren't going to do it unless
we have the American public and the Con-
gress behind us.
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield very briefly?
Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield.
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I think
what I wish to say would fit in before
the explanation by the Senator from
Louisiana (Mr. ELLENDER) as to the
money. I wish to ask a question, which
I arranged to ask on behalf of the Sen-
ator from Kentucky (Mr.. COOPER).
It is a fact, when he allows rus,ler, i
and training you rnurt coil terepla'.Y; cc;-
Lain American personnel in inc tr, ia1iIv
or logistical handling: of the materiel. I;,
that correct?
Mr. MANSP.fELD. I did not get the
last part; of the quc.,,tion,
Mr. JAVIIS. When you o,s,%u; ( iii
Laos or Tha.ilaiut wr will ble r;iviu:: Raga',
support, actively t,r~ fining;. cub so toll:,
there will be Am ci it;a n in; ripon r r in-
volved, will there noi.?
Mr. MANSI''IltLD. Yes, there would be
American manpower, involved: there is
American manpower involved. There are
the intelligence activities which the dis-
tinguished chairman of the Committee
on Foreign 'Relations referred to, and
that is to be understood.
Mr. JAVITS. Correct.
Mr. MANSFIELD. But as far as the
training is concerned, most of it would
be in Thailand, to observe the concept
of neutrality. We have an extra large
military mission in Laos, and I suppose
in view of the circumstances that may
be understandable.
Mr. JAVITS. One of the questions the
Senator from Kentucky and I want to
clarify is: If our advisory people, who
are military representatives, advisers and
so forth, come under attack, should not
the record be perfectly clear that U.S.
advisory troops are free to defend them-
selves; that is, they have the right of
self-defense but again we should utter
caution that that should not represent
general authorization to engage in com-
bat operations or to draw us in because
U.S. troops have been attacked who are
engaged in some advisory role.
Would the Senator care to give a
response?
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, U.S.
troops in any country in the world would
.have very right to protect themselves and
I would hope they would. We do not have
too many-and we really have no troops.
as such, in Laos, but what we do have
is a military mission which represents
the four services, the Marine Corps, the
Navy, the Army, and the Air Force, sta-
tioned at Vientiane. From what I gather,
they attend, pretty much, to their own
knitting.
Mr. JAVITS. The Senator from Ken-
tucky and I wanted to know the effect
on this amendment of the commitment
resolution. Is it not a fact that that is
intended here is an actual implementa-
tion in advance of our being faced with
the issue of the commitment resolution
which has already passed the Senate and
which says that matters that will in-
volve us in any major military respon-
sibility must be referred to the Senate
under the constitutional processes which
relate to Congress.
Mr, MANSFIELD. Without question. I
think that Secretary Rogers made that
tacit recognition when he said in effect-
and I quote it again, because it is a very
important passage from his interview:
I mean we have learned one lesson, and
that is we are not going to light any major
wars In the mainland of Asia again and we
are not going to send American troops there,
and we certainly aren't going to do it unless
we have the American public and the Con-
gress behind us.
Approved For Release 2001/11/01: CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
 Decet)t.bet? 15 .1960 Approve1(T?0Vg?s& R01/11/Q ? 9A_RD NABS' 364R000300070003-55 7675
J
That means congressional consultation tions as the interdiction of the Igo Chi Mr. ELLENDER, Mr. President, I in
before an action is taken which would Minh Trail would riot be, affected by my in thorough agreement with. the din-
go beyond what they are doing now. amendnimit. Our military pcrronnol would tinguished Senator from Arizona all thr
Mr. JAVITS. If it is of any major clear- of oourso have ilia right of rctf-clefcnse. Points he has just made, that if we do
actor necessitating congressional action, The other bombing operationv that arc
taking. place, however, are of such a an- have an executive session, in a matter
Whatever that may mean- Lure and niagnitLido that the Senate should of minutes, not hours, but minutes, the
Mr. MANSFIELD, That is right, so far fully understand from the AdDiini,;tration whole of tllo pt?e,cs will know about it.
as that is concerned, and under the why such operation., are being undertakeii So far as I aill persontJly co'lcer? ed1, f
SEATO organization we can only be- before approval is given and fcinda appro- do not see anything: wr01l;, W'i h ac ;ci?t..
conic involved, at least it says so, through printed. There are ci augers of c.'aCalat1011 of inc" the amendment.
the constitutional processes of this court- . the kind that have taken place In Vietnam. As I su
The United States should not be involved g[';estCd to the ciisl.in!;uisliecl
try. That is something which we have in a widening of the war in South Asia. Senator from Arkansas, this matter can
been prone to forget in recent years, and Because of the tragic experience of Vict- go to conference and no doubt the con-
something which I think we should re- nam, I felt it necessary that through fun ferces could delve into that matter them-
member constantly from now 011. discussion in closed session, if required, that selves.
Mr. JAVITS. I should like to identify the facts essential for sound judgment would Another thing, as I understood the'
myself with my colleague's statement on be obtained, answers to the questions propounded by
that score, and also express to him my I regret that the serious illness of my the distinguished Senator from Arkan-
mother has prevented me from being Ili the
support of the amendment. sas, the Senator from Montana is in
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- the mSenateajority today. leader, good Senator friend and MANSFIELD, , h has a. colleague, agreement, evidently, with the wording
sent that a statement prepared for de- kindly agreed to introduce tile amendment of section 638(a) on page 43 of the bill
livery by the senior Senator from Ken- for me in my absence. There is no better which states:
tucky, Senator COOPER, concerning his expert on Asian affairs in the Senate. His SEC. G38. (a) Appropriations available to
amendment regarding Laos and Thai- wisdom and knowledge on this issue will give the Department of Defense during the cur-
land, be printed in the RECORD. Senator the Senate a full understanding of the pur- rent fiscal year shall be available for their
on the pose of the amendment introduced today. stated purposes to support: (1) Vietnamese
COOPER is not able to be present e
and floor for the debate. Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President, will local forces in Laos s and Thailand; and for
Mr. President, in my judgment Sena- related costs, on such terms and conditions
tor CooPER-as always-has made a wise Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield. as the Secretary of Defense may determine.
.and knowledgable statement which. de- Mr. GOLDWATER. I want to ask the
serves the close attention of the Senate majority leader and distinguished chair- Mr. MANSFIELD. That is right, but
and the Nation. man of the Foreign Relations Committee what this does is spell out what the See-
As my colleagues will recall from tile why they feel that any meeting of this rotary of Defense may determine in an
body on this subject should be secret? area with which we are all in accord.
RECORD of the debate on Senator Coop- Mr. MANSFIELD. I just raised the Mr. ELLENDER. If that ever comes
ER's amendment to the Defense procure- about, the matter can be brought to the
Tent authorization bill, I find myself in question, may I say, to the distinguished Senate and to the President, and he can
great agreement with my colleague on Senator from Arizona, in case the chair- act upon it.
this vital matter. man and the others of the committee on
both sides felt it would be more applica- Mr. MANSFIELD. That is the strength
Iv;anf?. There by being no objection ....... the state- ble. Frankly, I have read about this for of the amendment about which there
Can.,f-.,,. n ..........
to De plrntea in the RECORD, as follows: it is my belief that not much that is Mr. ELLENDER. It was suggested a
STATEMENT DY SENATOR COOPER known would be made known. while ago that I give to the Senate a
On August 12, I introduced an amend- Mr
GOLDWATER
tunA
I
t I short 'A
f th
i
ht
t
f
th
.
.
s
e amoun
m
g
o
o
money,
say
a
Tent to the Military Procurement Authori- was in Thailand 2 days ago and there and I now read from the statement:
zation Bill which would have prohibited the
use of funds to support U.S. personnel in are 110 major secrets there as to what The recommendations of the subcommit-
Laos or Thailand in support of local we are doing. tee include approximately $DO million for the
forces engaged in the local war there. My I am sure that a secret meeting of this support of local forces in Laos. These funds
amendment provided that supplies, ma- body would be the property of the press are included in the bill pursuant to the au-
terials, equipment and facilities, includ- within minutes after it was finished. thority granted in section 401 of the Depart-
ing maintenance thereof and training, I realize that there are some things, ment of Defense Procurement and Research
could be given to local forces In Laos or and Development Act of 1970.
Thailand. On September 17, the amendment as there are some matters in all military
operations, that we cannot and should Mr. President, at this point I ask unan-
was adopted 86-0, and although its _
of pur
not talk about but I think that if the imous consent to have printed in the
pose f tike was Armed clearly
ed d Services understood, Committee, Chairman
Senator American public is to be informed, we RECORD the entire text of that act.
Stennis, manager of the bill, was of the would be better off talking about it on There being no objection, the act was
opinion that my amendment did not cover the floor, as to what the commitments ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as
all the funds available for programs in Laos are, and why we feel those commitments follows:
and Thailand. The Amendment was de- to be right, and so forth and so forth. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROCUREMENT AND
leted in conference. Frankly, I would be more in favor of RESEARCII AND DEVELOPMENT AUTsIORIZA-
I have offered once again an amendment an open hearing than I would be in favor TION ACT, 1970 (PUBLIC Lew 91-121)
the pending Defense Which Appropriations bill reads as for Pol- the
Department of Defense of a secret hearing, because I think it is TITLE I-PROCUREMENT
Department
"None of the funds appropriated by pretty much public property now, with SEC. 101. Funds are hereby authorized to
this Act shall be used for the support of the exception of testimony that I would be appropriated during the fiscal year 1970
local forces in Laos or Thailand except to expect would be kept confidential, for the use of the Armed Forces of the United
provide supplies, material, equipment, and Mr. MANSFIELD. I would agree with States for procurement of aircraft, missiles,
facilities, Including maintenance thereof, or the distinguished Senator. So far as I naval vessels, and tracked combat vehicles,
to provide training for such local forces." as authorized by law, in amounts as follows:
The purpose of the amendment is again am concerned, I would rather it be out AIRCRAIF'T
in the open, but if for some reason mem-
the same, to prevent the United States from For aircraft: for the Amy $570,400,000; for
backing into a war that has not been con- bets of the particular committees affect- the Navy and the Marine Corps, $2,391200,-
sidered or approved by Congress. It is Devi- ed-and I refer to the Appropriations 000; for the Air Force, $3,905,700,000: Pro-
dent from newspaper reports and from the Committees, both subcommittee and full vidcd, That of the funds authori?ecl to be
testimony given on the Symington Subcom- committee-felt it would be advisable to appropriated for the procurement of aircraft
mittee that there is a serious danger of have an executive session, I would go for the Air Force during fiscal year 1970, not
becoming more deeply involved in the situ- along with it; but, speaking personally, ' to exceed $28,000,000 shall be available to
ation In Laos. My amendment would pro- I agree with the distinguished Senator. initiate the procurement of a fighter aircraft
habit all actions not already approved
place in Let it be out in the open and let everyone tSoutheast meet he Asia, needs
the Congress that are now talon
and to Free orate the wlthn
Laos and Thailand. The situation in Laos know about it. drawal of United States forces from South
is very complex. Insofar as the bombing in Mr. GOLDWATER. I thank the Sena-'. Vietnam and Thailand; the Air Force shall
Laos affects the war in Vietnam, such opera- tor. (1) prior to the obligation of any funds ap-
Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5.
 S iu 40 Approved For F00W1 ,'1`Jm'f'dM- Ufa-BO AF CIb030007060i3(,5)zbei? 15, propriated pursuant to this authorization, Increased by the total authorized strength of State:; for any research, development, tort or
conduct a competition for the aircraft which such units and by the total number of such evaluation, or al ;r L!.oernber 31, 1563, '.o
shall be selected on the basis of the threat individual members. or for the use of any armed force of the
as evaluated and determined by the Secretary Src. 303. Subsection (c) of section 264 of United States for tYle pr oCurcmenl: of traci:ecl
Pu'nic'.. w o..oa. a.....,.. a ... ..... .... .- ----- ---
rescarcli, development, test, and evaluation. In the last line of the last sentence of sub-
change
ithin"
d "
f
ti
,
ter
c wor
w
section (c) a
the figures "G0" to "90".
TITLE IV-GENERAL PROVISIONS
Se:c. 401. Subsection (a) of section 401 of
Public Law 119. 367 approved March 15, 1069
(80 Stitt. 37) as amended, 13 hereby amended
to read as follows:
"(a) Not to exceed $2,500,000,000 of the
funds authorized for appropriation for the
use of the Armed Forces of the United States
under this or any other Act are authorized to
be made available for their stated purposes to
support: (1) Vietnamese and other Free
World Forces in Vietnam, (2) local forces In
Laos and Thailand; and for related costs, dur-
ing the fiscal year 1970 on such terms and
conditions as the Secretary of Defense may
determine."
Sec. 402. (a) Prior to April 30, 1070, the
Committees on Armed Services of the House
of Representatives and the Senate shall
jointly conduct and complete a comprehen
.save study and investigation of the past and
projected costs and effectiveness of attack
aircraft carriers and their task forces and a
thorough review of the considerations which
went into the decision to maintain the pres-
ent number of attack carriers. The result of
this comprehensive study shall be considered
prior to any authorization or appropriation
for the production or procurement of the
nuclear aircraft carrier designated as CVAN-
70.
(b) In carrying out such study and investi-
gaticn the Committees on Armed Services
of the House of Representatives and the Sen-
ate are authorized to call on all Government
agencies and such outside consultants as
such committees may deem necessary.
SEc. 403. Funds authorized for appropria-
tion under the provisions of this Act shall
not be available for payment of independent
research and development, bid and proposal,
and other technical effort costs Incurred
under contracts entered into subsequent to
the effective date of this Act for any amount
in excess of 93 per centum of the total
amount contemplated for use .for such pur-
pose out of funds authorized for procure-
ment and for research, development, test,
and evaluation. The foregoing limitation
shall not apply in the case of (1) formally
advertised contracts, (2) other firmly fixed
contracts competitively awarded, or (3) con-
tracts under $100,000.
SEc. 404. (a) Section 136 of title 10, United
States Code, is amended-
(1) by striking out "seven" in subsection
(a) and inserting in lieu thereof "eight"; and
(2) by inserting after the first sentence
in subsection (b) the following new son-
tences: "One of the Assistant Secretaries
shall be the A,cil; Iaut Secretary of Defense
for IfealLli Alralra. Ile shall have its his prin-
cipal duly the overall supervision of health
affairs of the Department of Denfense."
(b) Section 5316 of title 5, United States
Code, is amended by striking out Item (13)
and inserting in lieu thereof the following:
11(13) Assistant Secretaries of Defense (8),
SEc. 405. Section 412(b) of Public Law 86-
149, as amended, is amended, to read as
follows:
"(b) No funds may be appropriated after
December 31, 1960, to or for the use of any
armed force of the United States for the pro-
curement of aircraft, missiles, or naval ves-
sels, or after December 31, 1932, to or for
the use of any armed force of the United
States for the research, development, test,
or evaluation of aircraft, missiles, or naval
vessels, or after December 31, 1003, to or for
the use of any armed force of the United
United States for tYe ltrocurerr,cnt of other
weapons unless the appropriation or such
funds has been. authorized by legi::l.itlnn
enacted after such (later."
Sicc. 406. Section 2 of the Act of Anr,u:;t 3,
1050 (64 Stat. 4(111), it,; anu;nded, is further
amended to rca'I aD follows:
"Src. 2. After July 1, 1070, tie active duty
poissonncl :;tren!;hi of the Armed For ?r?o; c :-
clusivc of pose; I1cl of the (;,);1: 1, Gu;.r(l. por-
sonnel of the 13:-scree cwuprn,cuu; on
duty for t?alnlnfp purposes only, :id ncr;con-
ncl of the Arnicd Forces employed in the
Selective Service S;;stcm, shall not exceed it
total of 3,285,000 pc:?s?orts at any time (ictr;n;
the period of suspension prescribed in the
first section of this Act except when the Pre,;-
ident of the United State:; determines that
the application of this ceiling will seriously
jeopardize the national security interests of
the United States and informs the Congress
of the basis for such determination."
Sec. 407. (a) After December 31, 1969,
none of the funds authorized for appropria-
tion by this or any other Act for the use of
the Armed Forces shall be used for payments
out of such funds under contracts or agree-
ments with Federal contract research centers
if the annual compensation of any omcer
or employee of such center paid out of any
Federal funds exceeds $45,000 except with
the approval of the Secretary of Defense
under regulations prescribed by the Presi-
dent.
(b) The Secretary of Defense shall notify
the President of the Senate and the Speaker
of the House of Representatives promptly
of any approvals authorized 'under subsec-
tion (a), together with a detailed statement
of the reasons therefor.
SEc. 408. (a) The Comptroller General of
the United States (hereinafter in this section
referred to as the "Comptroller General")
is authorized and directed, as soon as prac-
ticable after the date of cnacamerat of t;is
section, to conduct it study and restew on
a selective representative basis of the pro: is
made by'contractors and subcontractors on
contracts on which there is no formally ad-
vertised competitive bidding entered into by
the Department of the Army, the Depart-
ment of the Navy, the Department of the
Air Force, the Coast Guard, and the Natlcl,at
Aeronautics and Spac.s Adlriinl:;tratlon ureter
the authority of cloipter 157 of title 1.0,
United States Code, and on contratets en-
tered into by the Atomic Energy Commission
to meet requircmcnt:4 of the Department of
Defense. The results of such study and re-
view shall be submitted to the Congress 'as
soon as practicable, but In no event later
than December 31, 1970.
(b) Any contractor or subcontractor re-
ferred to in uub:,rction (a) of this ;;cotton
shall, upon the requci;t? of the C.unaptroller
General, prepare mail sitbi it, to the General
Accounting Otlice such ittfornla tion niiiin-
tained in the normal course of business by
such contractor as the Comptroller General
determines necessary or appropriate in con-
ducting any study and review authorized by
subsection (a) of this section. Information
required under this subsection shall be sub-
mitted by a contractor or subcontractor in
response to a written request made by the
Comptroller General and shall be submitted
in such form and detail as the Comptroller
General may prescribe and shall be submitted
within a reasonable period of time.
(c) In order to determine the costs, includ-
ing all types of direct and indirect costs, of
performing any contract or subcontract re-
ferred to in subsection (a) of this section,
and to determine the profit, If any, realized
under- any such contract,. or subcontract,
For missiles: for the Army, $880,460,000;
for the Navy, $851,300,000; for the Marine
Corps, $20,100,000; for the Air Force, $1,486,-
400,000.
NAVAL VESSELS
For naval vessels: for the Navy, $2,033,-
200,000.
TRACKED COMBAT VEIIICI?r?.S
For tracked combat vehicles: for the Army,
$228,000,000; for the Marine Corps, $37,700,-
000: Provided, That none of the funds au-
thorized herein shall be utilized for the
procurement of Sheridan Assault vehicles
(M-551) under any new or additional con-
tract,
TITLE II-RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT,
TEST, AND EVALUATION
Sec. 201. Funds are hereby authorized to
be appropriated during the fiscal year 1070
for the use of the Armed Forces of the United
States for research, development, test, and
evaluation, as authorized by law, in amounts
as follows:
For the Army, $1,646,055,000;
For the Navy (including the Marine
Corps), $1,968.235,000;
For the Air Force, $3,156,552,000; and
For the Defense Agencies, $450,200,000.
SEc. 202, There is hereby authorized to be
appropriated to the Department of Defense
during fiscal year 1970 for use as an emer-
gency fund for research, development, test,
and evaluation or procurement or produc-
tion related thereto, $75,000,000.
SEc. 203. None of the funds authorized to
be appropriated by this Act may be used tO
carry out any research project or study un-
less such project or study has a direct and
apparent relationship to a specific military
function or operation.
SEc. 204. Construction of research, develop-
ment, and test facilities at the Kwajalein
Missile Range is authorized in the amount of
$12,700',000, and funds are hereby authorized
to be appropriated for this purpose.
TITLE III-RESERVE FORCES
SEc. 301. For the fiscal year beginning July
1, 1969, and ending June 30, 1970, the Se-
lected Reserve of each Reserve component of
the Armed Forces will be programed to at-
tain an average strength of not less than
the following: ? ?
(1) The Army National Guard of the
United States, 393,208.
(2) The Army Reserve, 255,601.
(3) The Naval Reserve, 129,000.
(4) The Marine Corps Reserve, 49,489.
(5) The Air National Guard of the United
States, 86,624.
(6) The Air Force Reserve, 50,775.
(7) The Coast Guard Reserve, 17,500.
Sec. 302. The average strength prescribed
by section 301 of this title for the Selected
Reserve of any Reserve component shall be
proportionately reduced by (1) the total au-
thorized strength of units organized to serve
as units of the Selected Reserve of such com-
ponent which are on active duty (other than
for training) at any time during the fiscal
year, and (2) the total number of Individual
members not in units organized to serve as
units of the Selected Reserve of such com-
ponent who are on active duty (other than
for training or for unsatisfactory participa-
tion in training) without their consent at
any time during the fiscal year. Whenever
any such units or such individual members
are released from active duty during any
fiscal year, the average strength for such
fiscal year for the Selected Reserve of such
Reserve component shall be proportionately
Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
 December 15, 1969 Approve eW lei?IQ'1TOV1/i ii X36 - 6 IO364R000300070003-5 S 16757
either on a percentage of the cost basis, per-
centage of sales basis, or a return on private
capital employed basis, the Comptroller Gen-
eral and authorized representatives of the
General Accounting Office are authorized to
audit and inspect and to make copies of any
books, accounts, or other records of any such
contractor or subcontractor.
(d) Upon the request of the Comptroller
General, or any officer or employee designated
by him, the Committee on Armed Services of
the. House of Representatives or the Commit-
tee on Armed Services of the Senate may
sign and issue supenas requiring the pro-
duction of such books, accounts, or other
records as may be material to the study and
review carried out by the Comptroller Gen-
eral under this section.
(c) Any disobedience to a subpena issued
by the Committee on Armed Services of the
House of Representatives or the committee
on Armed Services of the Senate to carry
out the provisions of this section shall be
punishable as provided in section 102 of the
Revised Statutes.
(f) No book, account, or other record, or
copy of any book, account, or record, of any
contractor or subcontractor obtained by or
for the Comptroller General under authority
of this section which is not necessay for de-.
(3) the Secretary ban insI lemenLed any
precautionary measures reconimended In ac-
cordance with paragraph (2) above (includ-
ing, where practicable, the detoxification of
any such agent, if such agent is to be trans-
ported to or from a military installation for
disposal) : Provirlccl, however, That In the
event the Secretary finds the recommenda-
tion submitted by the Surgeon General
would have the effect of preventing the pro-
posed transportation or testing, the Presi-
dent may determine that overriding consicl-
orations of national security require such
transportation or testing be conducted. Any
transportation or testing conducted pur-
suant to such a Presidential determination
shall be carried out in the safest practicable
manner, and the President shall report his
determination and an explanation thereof to
the President of the Senate and the Speaker
of the House of Representatives as far in ad-
vance as practicable, and
(4) the Secretary has provided notification
that the transportation or testing will take
place, except where a Presidential determi-
nation has been made: (A) to the President
of the Senate and the Speaker of the House
chomleal or any hlolr,t;icai a.-rfa:r! agent, Cr
for the procurerent of arm, j): ,r' nr cornpr,n-
cut of any such delivery sy;::ern. unle:n tine
President shall certify to the Conrrere: that
such procurement is essential to the safety
and security of the United State:;.
SLc. 410. (a) As u:;cd in this ; ceder,--
(1) The term "former military ohticer"
means a former or retired cornmissioncd of-
ficer of the Armed Forces of the United
States who-
(A) served on active duty in the grade
of major (or equivalent) or above, and
(I3) served on active duty for a period of
ten years or more.
(2) The term "former civilian employee"
means any former civilian officer or employee
of the Department of Defense, including
consultants or part-time employees, whose
salary rate at any time during the three-
year period immediately preceding the ter-
mination of his last employment with the
Department of Defense was equal to or
greater than the minimum sa.l;ry rate at
such time for positions in grade GS-13.
(3) The terra "defense contractor" means
any Individual, firm, corporation, partner-
ship, association, or other legal entity, which
provides services. end materials to the De-
partment of Defense under a contract di-
rectly with the Department of Defense.
(4) The term "services and materials"
means either services or materials or serv.
ices and materials and includes construc-
tion.
(5) The term "Department of Defense"
means all elements of the Department of
Defense and the military departments. .
(6) The term "contracts awarded" means
contracts awarded by negotiation and in-
cludes the net amount of modifications to,
and the exercise of options under, such con-
tracts. It excludes all transactions amount-
ing to less than $10,000 each.
(7) The term "fiscal year" means a year
beginning on 1 July and ending on 30 June
of the next succeeding year.
(b) Under regulations to be prescribed by
the Secretary of Defense:
(1) Any former military officer or former
civilian employee who during any fiscal year,
(A) was employed by or served as a con-
sultant or otherwise to a defense contractor
for any period of time,
(B) represented any defense contractor
at any hearing, trial, appeal, or other action
in which the United States was a party and
which involved services and msireials pro-
vided or to be provided to the Department
of Defense by such contractor, or
(C) represented any such contractor In
any transaction with the Department of De-
fense involving services or materials pro-
vided or to be provided by such contractor to
the Department of Defense,
shall file with the Secretary of Defense, in
such form and manner as the Secretary may
prescribe, not later than November 15 of the
next succeeding fiscal year, a report con-
taining the following information:
(1) His name and address.
(2) The name and address of the defense
contractor by whom he was employed or
whom he served as a consultant or other-
wise.
(3) The title of the position held by him
with the defense contractor.
(4) A brief description of his duties and
the work performed by him for the defense
contractor.
(5) His military grade while on active
duty or his gross salary rate while employed
by the Department of Defense, as the case
may be.
(6) A brief description of his duties and
the work performed by him while on active
duty or while employed by the Department
of Defense during the three-year period im-
mediately preceding his release from active
termining the profitability on any contract,..
as defined in subsection (a) of this section,
between such contractor or subcontractor
arid the Department of Defense shall"'be
available for examination, without the con-
sent of such contractor or subcontractor, by
any individual other than a duly authorized
officer or employee of the General Accounting
Of:nce; and no officer or employee of the Gen-
eral Accounting Office shall disclose, to any
person not . authorized by the Comptroller,
General to receive such information, any In-
formation obtained under authority of this
section relating to cost, expense, or profit-
ability on any nondefense business transac-
tion of any contractor or subcontractor.
(g) The Comptroller General shall not dis-
close in any report made by him to the Con-
gress or to either Committee on Armed Serv-
ices under authority of this section any con-
fidential information relating to the cost,
expense, or profit of any contractor or sub-
contractor on any nondefense business trans-
action of such contractor or subcontractor.
Ssc. 409 (a) The Secretary of Defense shall
submit semiannual reports to the Congress
on or before January 31 and on or before July
31 of each year setting forth the amounts
spent during the preceding six-month period.
for research, development, test and evalua-
tion and procurement of all lethal and non-
lethal chemical and biological agents. The
Secretary shall include in each report a full
explanation of each expenditure, including
the purpose and the necessity therefor.
(b) None of the funds authorized to be ap-
propriated by this Act or any other Act may
be used for the transportation of any lethal
chemical or any biological warfare agent to
or from. any military installation in the
United States, or the open air testing of any .
such agent within the United States until
the following procedures have been imple-
mented.
(1) the Secretary of Defense (hereafter
referred to in this section as the "Secretay")
has determined that the transportation or
testing proposed to be made is necessary in
the Interests of national security;
(2) the Secretary has brought the particu-
lars of the proposed transportation or testing
to the attention of the Secretary of Health,
Pducation, and, Welfare, who in turn may
direct the Surgeon General of the Public
Health Service and other qualified persons
Ito review such particulars with respect to
any hazards to public health and safety
which such transportation or testing may
-pose and to recommend what precautionary
measures are necessary to protect the pubUo
health and safety,
of Representatives at least 10 days before
any such transportation will be commenced
and at least 30 days before any such test-
ing will be commenced; (B) to the Gover-
nor of any State through which such agents
will be transported, such notification to be
provided appropriately in advance of any
such transportation.
(c) (1) None of the funds authorized to
be appropriated by this Act or any other
Act may be used for the future deployment,
or storage, or both, at any place outside
the United States of-
(A) any lethal chemical or any biological
warfare agent, or
(B) any delivery system specifically do-
signed to disseminate any such agent,
unless prior notice of such deployment or
storage has been given to the country exer-
cising jurisdiction over such place. In the
case of any place outside the United States
which is under the jurisdiction or control of
the U.S. Government, no such action may
be taken unless the Secretary gives prior
notice of such action to the President of
the Senate and the Speaker of the House
of Representatives. As used in this para-
graph, the term "United States" means the
several States and the District of Columbia.
(2) None of the funds authorized by this
Act or any other Act shall be used for the
future testing, development, transportation,
storage, or disposal of any lethal chemical or
any biological warfare agent outside the
United States If the Secretary of State, after
appropriate notice by the Secretary whenever
any such action Is contemplated, determines
that such testing, development, transporta-
tion, storage, or disposal will violate inter-
national law. The Secretary of State shall
report all determinations made by him under
this paragraph to the President of the Senate
and the Speaker of the House of Represent-
atives, and to all appropriate international
organizations, or organs thereof, in the event
such report is required by treaty or other
international agreement.
(d) Unless otherwise indicated, as used in
this section the term "United States" means
the several States, the District of Columbia,
and the territories and possessions of the
United States.
.(e) After the effective date of this Act,
the operation of this section, or any portion
thereof, may be suspended by the President
during the period of any war declared by
Congress and during the period of any na-
tional emergency declared by Congress or by
the President.
(f) None of the funds authorized to be
appropriated by this Act may be used for the
procurement of any delivery system specific-
ally designed to disseminate. any lethal
Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
 S 1 6758
Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070.Q 03-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE ecemrie;' -1.5, 1969
ciuty or the termination of his civilian em-
ployment, as the case may be.
(7) The date on which he war, released
from active duty or the termination of his
civilian employment with the Department of
Defense. as the case may be, and the (late on
which his employment, as an employee, con-
sultant, or otherwise with the defense con-
tractor began and, if no longer employed 1-y
such defense contractor, the (late on which
such employment with such defense contrac-
tor terminated.
(8) Such other pertinent information as
the Secretary of Defense may require.
121 Any employee of the Department of
Defense, including consultants or part-time
employees, who was previously employed by
or served as a consultant or otherwise to a
defense contractor in any fiscal year, and
whose salary rate in the Department of De-
fense is equal to or greater than the mini-
mum salary rate for positions in grado GS-
13, shall file with the Secretary of Defense,
in such form and manner and at such tines
as the Secretary may prescribe, a report
containing the following information:
(1) His name and address.
(2) The title of his position with the Do-
par ianent of Defense.
(3) A brief description of his duties with
the Department of Defense.
(4) The name and address of the defense
contractor by whom he was employed or
whom he served as a consultant or other-
wise.
(5) The title of his position with such de-
fense contractor.
(6) A brief description of his duties and
the work performed by him for the defense
contractor.
(7) The date on which his employment as
a consultant or otherwise with such con-
tractor terminated and the date on which
his employment as a consultant or otherwise
with the Department of Defense began there-
after.
(8) Such other pertinent information as
the Secretary of Defense may require.
(c) (1) No former military officer or former
civilian employee shall be required to file a
report under this section for any fiscal year
in which he was employed by or served as a
consultant or otherwise to a defense contrac-
tor if the total amount of contracts awarded
by the Department of Defense to such con-
tractor during such year was less than $10,-
000,000, and no employee of the Department
of Defense shall be required to file a report
under this section for any fiscal year in
-!hick he was employed by or served as is
consultant or otherwise to a defense contrac-
tor if the total amount of contracts awarded
to such contractor by the Department of
Defense during such year was less than
$10,000,000.
(2) No former military officer or former
civilian employee shall be required to file a
report under this section for any fiscal year
on account of active duty performed or enn-
ploymont with or services performed for the
Department of Defense if such active duty
or employment was terminated three years
or more prior to the beginning of such fiscal
year: and no employee of the Department of
Defense shall be required to file a report
under this section for any fiscal year on
account of employment with or services per-
formed for a defense contractor if such em-
ployment was terminated or such services
were performed three years or more prior
to the effective date of his employment with
the Department of Defense.
(3) No former military officer or former
civilian employee shall be required to file a
report under this section for any fiscal year
during which he was employed by or served
as a consultant or otherwise to a defense
contractor at a salary rate of less than $15,-
000 per year; and no employee of the Do-
partment of Defense, including consultants
or part-tune employees, shall be required to
(ire a report under this section for any fiscal
year during which ho Was employed by or
served as a consultant or otherwise to a de-
fense contractor at a salary rate of less than
$15,000 per year.
(d) The Secretary of Defense shall, not
later than December 31 of each year, file
with the President of the Senate and the
Speaker of the House of Representatives a
report containing a list of the names of
persons who have filed reports with him for
the preceding fiscal year pursuant to sub-
sections (b) (1) and (b) (2) of this section.
The Secretary shall include after each name
so much information as he deems appro-
priate aucl shall list the names of such per-
sons under the defense contractor for whom
they worked or for whom they performed
services.
(c) Any former military officer or former
civilian employee whose employment with or
services for a defense contractor terminated
(luring any fiscal year shall be required to
file a report pursuant to subsection (b) (1)
of this section for such year if he would
otherwise be required to file under such sub-
section; aucl any person whose employment
with or services for the Department of De-
fense terminated during any fiscal year shall
be required to file a report pursuant to sub-
section (b) (2) of this section for such year
if he would otherwise be required to file
under such subsection,
(f) The Secretary shall maintain a file
containing the information filed with him
pursuant to subsection (b) (1) and (b) (2)
of this section and such file shall be open
for public inspection and at all times during
the regular workday.
(g) Any person who fails to comply with
the filing requirements of this section shall
be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall, upon
conviction thereof, be punished by not more
than six months in prison or a fine of not
more than $1,000, or both.`
(h) No person shall be required to file a
-report pursuant to this section for any fiscal
year prior to the fiscal year 1971.
Mr. ELLENDER. Mr. President, these
funds are for the support of the Royal
Laotian Army and are comparable to the
funds included in the Military Assistance
Appropriations prior to fiscal year 1968.
In that connection, I may further state
that these funds are made available in
the same manner as they were made
available under the foreign aid bill.
Under the foreign aid bill it was clearly
understood that it did not involve man-
power but only the materials of war.
Now I have often criticized the Gov-
ernment in the past for having sent to
many countries, where aid is given, peo-
ple to teach the defense departments of
the countries how to use the materials
of war sent to them. This has been done
for many, many years now. Personally,
I see no objection to that, but it is some-
thing which has occurred in the past and
I do not bcieve that we should go any
further now than we have in the past.
The history of the increase in the funds
is significant. During the period of the
fiscal years 1965 through 1967, when the
funds were included in the military as-
sistance program, as I have just said,
the sum recommended in the bill rep-
resents an increase of approximately
16.7 percent of the amount included in
the Department of Defense appropriation
amount for fiscal year 1969. As I have
said, the bill includes approximately $90
million for the support of the Royal
Laotian Army.
The purpo~;e for which these fundl;
will he uacd axe char ;hied, and I cannot
disregard that classification. 11w.,. ever,
I have the information at my desk and
will be glad to make it available to any
Senator who desires to see it.
I recognize that I have not answered
all the questions that may have been
raised by the Senator from Arkansas.
However, I feel that I have fulfilled
my responsibilities to the Members of
this body as floor manager of the pend-
ing bill.
As I said, I can see no objection to the
acceptance of this amendment, which, as
I understand, is to he read in context
with section 638 of the present bill.
This will give the conferees in oppor-
tunity to review thoroughly all of the is-
sties invoved and make any perfecting
amendments that are required.
Mr. FUI,BPIGI-IT. Mi'. President, I
would like to address a question, too, for
the purposes of clarification, to the ma-
jority leader and/or the acting chairman
of the Appropriations Committee.
Would this amendment prohibit the
U.S. aircraft based in Thailand from
flying tactical missions in support of
the Laotian army in Northern Laos,
having nothing whatever to do with the
interdiction of the Ho Chi Minh Trail?
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I am
afraid that I am not in a position to give
the kind of definitive answer I would
like to, the question raised by the dis-
tinguished chairman of the Foreign
Relations Committee.
There is no question that air support
would be allowed to be continued to de-
crease or to stop the infiltration of men
and materiel down the Ho Chi Minh
Trail through the Laotian panhandle.
It is a moot question as to whether or
not the support missions, or the sorties, -
as they are called, and which number in
the hundreds, very likely the thousands,
in support of Royal Laotian troops, would
hold. That is another matter.
Those sorties are not so much against
the Pathet Lao as they are against the
North Vietnamese troops, who are the
backbone and support of the Pathet Lao
forces. They outnumber the Pathet Lao
by at least 3 to 1. They are far more vigor-
ous fighters, and they are the ones who
determine what shall be done.
The question is, How do you look at
the North Vietnamese in Laos iii relation
to the North Vietnamese along the trail
and in South Vietnam itself?
Mr. FULBRIGHT. If I understand the
Senator, his amendment would prohibit
the use of American Air Force and other
personnel related to flying tactical mis-
sions in support of the Laotian army in
the civil war now taking place in north-
ern Laos, It has nothing to do with the
Ho Chi Minh Trail.
Mr. MANSFIELD. "Civil war" is a term
you have to use with discretion. If it
were a struggle between the Pathet Lao
and the Royal Laotian forces, it would
be a civil war; but when 50,000 North
Vietnamese are backing up and sup port-
ing the Pathet Lao, then you have to gee.
ognize that a foreign government has in-
tervened in what lied become up to that
time a civil war, but what, with this in-
tervention, became other than a civil war.
Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
 Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP771 00364R000300070003-5~ 167:~
December 15, 1969 CONGRI SSIONAL Ri CORD- SENA 11 Mr. FULBRIGHT. Then, is it not for- eutihorire, with their votes, this kind of Mr. MANSFI71D. Mr. Prc,.ident, a
lowing a pattern very similar to what program, if it is the kind I believe it to parliamentaiy inquiry.
happened in Vietnam? be, they ought to know. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
Mr. MANSFIELD. No; because, under I. have been hornswoggled long ator from Montana will state it.
the Geneva Accords of 1962, all for- enough-ever since the previous adinin- Mr. MANSFIELD. What is the pending
cign troops agreed to withdraw except istration and its Tonkin Gulf Resolution, motion?
for a small French military mission when I did not know the administration The PRESIDING OFFICE1t. The ques-
which was located partly in Vientiane was misrepresenting the facts. All I am tion is on the motion to table the amend-
and partly around Savanna khet. It is the saying is that all Senators should know meat by the Senator from Montana (Mr.
only training mission o.? that type which what they are voting for before they MANSFIELD) and the Senator 11?om Ken-
was allowed under the Geneva Accords vote. Lucky (Mr. Coot?iss).
of 1962, but we did withdraw our forces In my vir.w, there is it lot of money Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. Presicirnt, a psmt
in 1962 in accordance with the accords. In this bill for activities which bear it of order. We should not begin voting;
The North Vietnamese did withdraw very great probability of involving us in until the Chamber has been made open.
a small contingent of their troops, but another full-scale war in Laos, if it is Mr. MANSFIELD. The Chamber is
since that time they have not only re- not already a full-scale war. We are does- open. It was opened 2 minutes ago, I
stored that withdrawal, but increased the calating in Vietnam, but I shall read understand.
number by, I would say, 150 percent. some letters a little later, which are not The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
Mr. FULBRIGHT. I am not sure in classified, which came from soldiers and ate has now resumed its open session.
view of the attitude of the Senator from wives of soldiers, which I believe con- The question is on agreeing to the
.Arizona and the manager of the bill. elusively prove that we are escalating motion to table the amendment of the
These questions, I thought, would have the war in Laos just as much as we are Senator from Montana and the Senator
been more properly asked in executive deescalating it in Vietnam. from Kentucky.
session, but if they prefer that they be I think it is a very serious matter; it On this question the yeas and nays
asked in open session, I suppose we is not something that ought to be pushed. have been ordered, and the clerk will
should proceed. under the rug merely by saying, "I will call the roll.
Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, will the accept the amendment and take it to The assistant legislative clerk called
Senator yield? conference," and then let it be buried the roll.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. I yield. there. Mr. KENNEDY. I announce that the
Mr. TOWER. Does he not think we Mr. MANSFIELD. I do not think that Senator from New Mexico (Mr. ANDER-
may got into highly sensitive matters is what the Senator from Louisiana said. SON), the Senator from Minnesota (Mr.
that should not be publicly disclosed? As I recall, he and the Senator from MCCARTIIY), the Senator from Georgia
Mr. FULBRIGHT. I thought so, but North Dakota said they were in favor (Mr. RUSSELL), the Senator from Mis-
the Senator from Arizona and the Sen- of the amendment. souri (Mr. SYMINGTON), the Senator from
ator from Louisiana did not think so. I Mr. FULBRIGHT. He said, "I will ac- Maryland (Mr. TYDINGS), and the Sena-
understand the Senator from Montana cept it," meaning that he would take it tor from New Jersey (Mr. WILLIAMS) are
thought this was a matter better dis- to conference in order to avoid further necessarily absent.
cussed in open session. I had suggested, discussion here. I further announce that the Senator
and I thought the majority leader was Mr. ELLENDER. Why does not the from West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH) is
of the view, that we should go into execu- Senator from Arkansas proceed to give absent on official business.
tive session. the Senate the information he has heard I also announce that the Senator from
Mr. MANSFIELD. May I say that all from soldiers? Washington (Mr. JACKSON) is absent be-
this information is public. All one has to Mr. FULBRIGHT, I submitted a ques- cause of a death in his family.
do is read the newspapers. All that has tionnaire to the chairman and the rank- I further announce that, if present and
been suggested is carried in public print. ing minority member of the Committee voting, the Senator from New Jersey
Mr. TOWER. Yes, but a good deal more on Appropriations last week and asked (Mr. WILLIAMS) and the Senator from
could be said that perhaps should be questions that related to this activity. West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH) would
said in closed session. I had understood that the Senate would vote "nay."
Mr. FULBRIGHT. That is what I said go into closed session so that these mat- I further announce that, if present and
before. I thought it should be in execu- ters could be discussed. The information voting, the Senator from Washington
tive session. Perhaps they have changed should come from the sponsors of the (Mr. JACKSON) would vote "yea."
their minds. For example, I was going proposed legislation. The sponsors, the Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the
to ask the distinguished Senator from members of the Committee on Appro- Senator from Iowa (Mr. MILLER) is nee-
Louisiana to identify the ? $90 million in priations, ought to be prepared with offi- essarily absent.
this bill for military support to the cial information as to what the money is The Senator from Kentucky (Mr.
Royal Laotian army. I wonder if he desired for. That is all in the world I am COOPER) is absent because of illness in
would not Identify than in the bill, Is trying to propose: That when the corn- his
Senator from South Dakota (Mr,
it for the U.S. Air Force missions in Laos? mittee comes before the Senate, and asks
Is there any way the Senator can identify us to vote for almost $80 billion, we ought MUNDT) is absent because of illness,
that amount? to know what we are voting for. It is that The Senator from Iowa (Mr. MILLER)
Mr. ELLENDER. The $90 million is in simple. is paired with the Senator from Ken-
tucky (Mr. COOPER). If present and vot-
several appropriations.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Well, it
identified.
(At tills point, tike Senate went alto
can be closed session.) ing the Senator from Iowa would vote
d the Senator from Kentucky
n
Mr. ELLENDER. It can, but, as I sug-
gested to the Senator, it strikes inc that
we gain nothing by having a closed ses-
sion. As I stated a while ago, as man-
ager of the bill, it might be well to
accept the amendment, and if the con-
ferees are desirous of going Into more
detail, let them go into it, and they can
act accordingly.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. The only thing I
have in mind at the present time is that
Members of the Senate, aside from the
three or four, perhaps, who are on cer-
tain supervisory committees of the CIA,
do not know what is being done in this
bill in regard to Laos. I think, before they
(The following proceedings occurred yea a
in legislative session, following the closed The vote "nay."
The result was announced--yeas 41,
session:)
only as long as it will take to ring the
two bells.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk
will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call
the roll.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
objection, it is so ordered.
o.,c AA
nc fnllnlvsc
YEAS-41
Allen
Ellender
McGee
Allott
Ervin
Murphy
Baker
Fannin
Pearson
Bellmon
Fong
Scott
Bennett
Goldwater
Smith, Maine
Bible
Griffin
Smith, 111.
Cannon
Gurney
Sparkman
Hansen
Stennis
Cotton
Holland
Stevens
Curtis
Hollings
Talmadge
Dodd
Hruska
Thurmond
Tower
Williams, Del.
Eastland
Mcolelian
Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
 Approved For Release 2001/11/01: CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
December 15, 1969 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE S 16759
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Then, is it not fol-
lowing a pattern very similar to what
happened in Vietnam?
Mr. MANSFIELD. No; because, under
the Geneva Accords of 1962, all for-
eign troops agreed to withdraw except
for a small French military mission
which was located partly in Vientiane
and partly around Savanna khet. It is the
only training mission o22 that type which
was allowed under the Geneva Accords
of 1962, but we did withdraw our forces
in 1962 in accordance with the accords.
The North Vietnamese did withdraw
a small contingent of their troops, but
since that time they have not only re-
stored that withdrawal, but increased the
number by, I would say, 150 percent.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. I am not sure in
view of the attitude of the Senator from
.Arizona and the manager of the bill.
These questions, I thought, would have
been more properly asked in executive
session, but if they prefer that they be
asked in open session, I suppose we
should proceed.
Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mr. FULBRIGHT. I yield.
Mr. TOWER. Does he not think we
may get into highly sensitive matters
that should not he publicly disclosed?
Mr. FULBRIGHT. I thought so, but
the Senator from Arizona and the Sen-
ator from Louisiana did not think so. I
understand the Senator from Montana
thought this was a matter better dis-
cussed in open session. I had suggested,
'and I thought the majority leader was
of the view, that we should go into execu-
tive session.
Mr. MANSFIELD. May I say that* all
this information Is public. All one has to
do is read the newspapers. All that has
been suggested is carried in public print.
Mr. TOWER. Yes, but a good deal more
could be said that perhaps should be
said in closed session.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. That is what I said
before. I thought it should be in execu-
tive session. Perhaps they have changed
their minds. For example, I was going
to ask the distinguished Senator from
Louisiana to identify the ?$90 million in
this bill for military support to the
Royal Laotian army. I wonder if he
would not identify than in the bill, is
it for the U.S. Air Force missions in Laos?
Is there any way the Senator can identify
that amount?
Mr. ELLENDER. The $90 million is in
several appropriations.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Well, it can be
identified.
Mr. ELLENDER. It can, but, as I sug-
gested to the Senator, it strikes me that
we gain nothing by having a closed ses-
sion. As I stated a while ago, as man-
ager of the bill, it might be well to
accept the amendment, and if the con-
ferees are desirous of going into more
detail, let them go into it, and they can
act accordingly.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. The only thing I
have in mind at the present time is that
Members of the Senate, aside from the
three or four, perhaps, who are on cer-
tain supervisory committees of the CIA,
do not know what is being done in this
bill In regard to Laos. I think, before they
ruthorize, with their votes, this kind of
program, if it is the kind I believe it to
be, they ought to know.
I have been hornswoggled long
enough-ever since the previous admin-
istration and its Tonkin Gulf Resolution,
when I did not know the administration
was misrepresenting the facts. All I am
saying is that all Senators should know
what they are voting for before they
vote.
In my view, there is a lot of money
in this bill for activities which bear a
very great probability of involving us in
another full-scale war in Laos, if it is
not already a full-scale war. We are does-
calating in Vietnam, but I shall read
some letters a little later, which are not
classified, which came from soldiers and
wives of soldiers, which I believe con-
clusively prove that we are escalating
the war in Laos just as much as we are
deescalating it in Vietnam.
I think it is a very serious matter; it
is not something that ought to be pushed
under the rug merely by saying, "I will
accept the amendment and take it to
conference," and then let it be buried
there.
Mr. MANSFIELD. I do not think that
is what the Senator from Louisiana said.
As I recall, he and the Senator from
North Dakota said they were in favor
of the amendment.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. He said, "I will ac-
cept it," meaning that he would take it
to conference in order to avoid further
discussion here.
'Mr. ELLENDER. Why does not . the
Senator from Arkansas proceed to give
the Senate the information he has heard
from soldiers?
Mr. FULBRIGHT. I submitted a ques-
tionnaire to the chairman and the rank-
ing minority member of the Committee
on Appropriations last week and asked
questions that related to this activity.
I had understood that the Senate would
go into closed session so that these mat-
ters could be discussed. The information
should come from the sponsors of the
proposed legislation. The sponsors, the
members of the Committee on Appro-
priations, ought to be prepared with offi-
cial information as to what the money is
desired for. That is all in the world I am
trying to propose: That when the com-
mittee comes before the Senate, and asks
us to vote for almost $80 billion, we ought
to know what we are voting for. It is that
simple.
(At this point, the Senate went into
closed session.)
(The following proceedings occurred
in legislative session, following the closed
session:)
I /Ir. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
suggest the absence of a quorum, to last
only as long as it will take to ring the
two bells.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk
will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call
the roll.
Mr. MANSFIELD, Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, It is so ordered.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, a
parliamentary inquiry.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator from Montana will state it.
Mr. MANSFIELD. What is the pending
motion?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques-
tion is on the motion to table the amend-
ment by the Senator from Montana (Mr.
MANSFIELD) and the Senator from Ken-
tucky.(Mr. Coorrn).
Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, a point
of order. We should not begin voting
until the Chamber has been made open.'
Mr. MANSFIELD. The Chamber is
open. It was opened 2 minutes ago, I
understand.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ate has now resumed its open session.
The question is on agreeing to the
motion to table the amendment of the
Senator from Montana and the Senator
from Kentucky.
On this question the yeas and nays
have been ordered, and the clerk will
call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called
the roll.
Mr. KENNEDY. I announce that the
Senator from New Mexico (Mr. ANDER-
soN), the Senator from Minnesota (Mr.
MCCARTIIY), the Senator from Georgia
(Mr. RUSSELL), the Senator from Mis-
souri (Mr. SYMINGTON), the Senator from
Maryland (Mr. TYDINGS), and the Sena-
tor from New Jersey (Mr. WILLIAMS) are
necessarily absent.
I further announce that the Senator
from West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH) is
absent on official business.
I also announce that the Senator from
Washington (Mr. JACKSON) is absent be-
cause of a death in his family.
I further announce that, if present and
voting, the Senator from New Jersey
(Mr, WILLIAMS) and the Senator from
West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH) would
vote "nay."
I further announce that, if present and
voting, the Senator from Washington
(Mr. JACKSON) would vote "yea."
Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the
Senator from Iowa (Mr. MILLER) is nee-,
essarily absent.
The Senator from Kentucky (Mr.
CoorEa) is absent because of illness in
his family.
The Senator from South Dakota (Mr.
MUNDT) is absent because of illness.
The Senator from Iowa (Mr. MILLER)
is paired with the Senator from Ken-
tucky (Mr. COOPER). If present and vot-
ing the Senator from Iowa would vote
"yea" and the Senator from Kentucky
would vote "nay."
The result was announced-yeas 41,
nays 48, as follows:
[No. 232 Leg.]
YEAS--41
Allen
Plllender
McGee
Allott
Ervin
Murphy
baker
Fannin
Pearson
Bellmon
Fong
Scott
Bennett
Goldwater
Smith, Maine
Bible
Griffin
Smith, 111.
Cannon
Gurney
Sparkman
Cook
Hansen
Stennis
Cotton
Holland
Stevens
Curtis
Hollings
Talmadge
Dodd
Hruska
Thurmond
Dole
Jordan, N.C.
Tower
Dominick
Long
Williams, Del,
Eastland
Moololleu
Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP71 B00364R000300070003-5
 ;;11,710
Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
G ' 3.3.~:`I,`... ;. CG G-5 i t~4iZ
CO iJ, 1110,
?
NAYS--4lt
Alk~?n
Hart
bS~r.~rt
l irtyll
I larikr,
M",,1Iae
1In, ;n
I IaLfleld
N(AV)fl
lirut,ke
11,1 hc;t
Packwood
Verdi,-k
1nouyo
Pastoro
Byrd, Va.
Javits
11011
Byrd, W. Va.
Jordan, Idaho
Percy
Case
Kennedy
Prouty
Church
Magnuson
Proxmire
Cranston
Mansfield ?
Rlbicoff
Eagleton
Mathias
Saxbe
Pulbright
McGovern ?
Schweiker
Goodell
McIntyre
Spong
Gore
Metcalf
Yarborough
Gravel
Mondale
Young, N. Dak.
Harris
Montoya
Young, Ohio
NOT VOTING-l1
Anderson
Miller
Symington
Cooper
Mundt
Tydings
Jackson
Randolph
Williams, N.J.
McCarthy
Russell
So Mr. McGEE's motion to lay on the
table was rejected.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question now recurs on agreeing to the
amendment of the Senator from Ken-
tucky and the Senator from Montana.
Mr. CHURCH, Mr. President, on behalf
of the Senator from Colorado (Mr. AL-
LOTT), the Senator from California (Mr.
CRANSTON), the Senator from New York
(Mr. JAVITS), and myself, I send to the
desk a substitute amendment, which
reads as follows-
The PRESIDING OFFICER. . The
amendment will be stated.
'Mr. CHURCH. I ask unanimous con-
sent that I may read the amendment to
'the Senate instead of the clerk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, Is there
objection? The Chair hears none, and it
is so ordered.
Mr. CHURCH. The amendment reads
as follows:
On page 46, between lines 8 and 9, insert
a new section as follows:
"SEc. 643, In line with the expressed in-
tention of the President of the United States,
none of the funds appropriated by this act
shall be used to finance the introduction of
American ground troops into Laos or Thai-
land without the prior consent of Congress."
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the name of the distinguished
senior Senator from Arkansas (Mr. Mc-
CLELLAN) be added as a cosponsor of
the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER, Without
objection, it is so ordered,
Mr. CHURCH, I ask for the yeas and
nays on the substitute amendment.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Mr. CHURCH. I ask unanimous con-'
sent also that the name of the Sena-
tor from Tennessee (Mr. BAxER) be
added as a cosponsor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield for a question?
Mr. CHURCH. I am happy to yield.
Mr. TOWER, Does the amendment
mean that we would have to immediate-
ly withdraw all ground troops we now
have in Thailand? Because we do have
Army troops and pre-positioned equip-
ment in Thailand. The way the substitute
amendment is written, it would " seem
to mean the troops we have there now
would no longer be permitted.
Mr. CHURCH. I think the answer. to
the Senator's question is clearly con-
taincd in the language of the proposed
substitute,
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Will the
Senator su:7;encl, so that we may have
order?
Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield another half minute?
I hope the members of the Appropri-
ations Committee, if we are going to
have a discussion on the substitute, will
see if they cannot come down to the
committee room, and we can come back
for the rollcall,
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
wonder if it would not be possible to
vote on this question in 5 minutes, It
should not take much discussion. Would
that be sufficient, the time to be equally
divided?
The PRESIDING Or FICER. Is
there objection?
Mr. DOMINICK. Mr. President, re-
serving the right to object, we should
extend it a little longer than 5 minutes.
Mr. CHURCH. I ask unanimous con-
sent for 15 minutes on each side.
Mr. MANSFIELD, One-half hour, to be
equally divided.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection? The Chair hears none, and
it is so ordered.
Mr. CHURCH. Now, Mr. President, I
ask for order. ,
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ate will be in order.
Mr. CHURCH. In response to the ques-
tion of the Senator from Texas (Mr.
TowEa), the pertinent part of the
amendment reads:
None of the funds appropriated by this
Art shall be used to finance the introduction
of American ground troops into Laos or
Thailand.
It is true that we have personnel there.
But the amendment conforms to the ex-
pressed intention of the President; it
reinforces the presidential position; and
,yet it asserts the constitutional right of
the Senate, in an appropriation bill, to
determine how public funds will be used,
and makes it clear that the Senate is
opposed to the introduction of ground
combat troops into either country, un-
less we first have an opportunity to pass
judgment on that question.
Mr. TOWER. Will the Senator yield
for a further qucAtion?
Mr. CIIURCiI. I am happy to yield.
Mr. TOWER. The term "ground com-
bat troops" still could include those that
are there, because those that we have
there are capable of engaging in combat.
They are trained for combat. They are
not actually in combat, true, and it is not
anticipated that they ever will be. We
hope they will not be. But they are com-
petent to engage in combat.
Mr. CHURCH: As the Senator knows,
we presently have no ground troops in
Laos engaging in combat.
Mr. TOWER. That is true.
Mr. CHURCH. The President has said
so. The language conforms to the Presi-
dential position, and if there is any
question concerning our meaning or in-
tent, it should be cleared up by the dis-
cussion we are now having on this floor.
Mr. TOWER, That is all I am trying.
to do, establish the legislative Intent.
Mr. PASTORE E. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mr. CHURCH.I y1C:d.
Mr. PASTORS If we have un_,
ing shadows of doul;t, a,hy not 1;:,;; the
words to support local forces"? Why not
say "the introduction of American com-
bat troops to support local forces"? Then
we will have no ambiguity.
Mr. CHURCH, I respectfully say to the
Senator that the bill authorizes money,
which is now being used, to support local
forces in Thailand and Laos. There is
no question about that. What we are
trying to achieve here is a limitation
on the use of money for the purpose of
financing the introduction of American
ground forces into these two countries.
I think the amendment should be
supported. It is in line with the ex-
pressed intention of the President and
accords with our constitutional respon-
sibilities. Moreover, it puts the President
on notice that, if there is ever a change
of policy that might involve the possible
introduction of American combat forces
into these two countries, then, in accord-
ance with the Constitution, that question
should be brought back to Congress, and
Congress should exercise its will,
Mi'. McCLELLAN. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. CHURCH, I am happy to yield to
the Senator from Arkansas.
Mr. McCLELLAN. In the executive
session, I raised some questions about
the original resolution. This substitute
amendment, together with the state-
ment by the distinguished majority lead-
er in executive session in response to my
questions, answers the questions that I
had in mind, and I am happy to support
it. I commend the Senator for its word-
ing and its purpose, and for recognizing
that the President has given his pledge,
and that we support the President in
that pledge.
Mr. CHURCH. I thank the Senator
very much, and I appreciate his support.
I now yield to my distinguished co-
sponsor, the Senator from Colorado (Mr.
ALLOTT).
Mr. ALLOTT. Mr. President, I joined
in the cosponsorship of this amendment
because I believe it is preferable to the
very vague, in my judgment, amendment
now pending before the Senate. I think
it says what the Senate would like to say,
and I sincerely hope that Senators will
support it.
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mr. CHURCH. I yield to the Senator
from New York.
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, just 1
minute. I think we are trying hard-
and I hope the majority leader is listen-
ing-to deal with a situation in which,
he, feeling bound by the language of the
Senator from Kentucky-and I do not
blame him-did not want it interfered
with, and yet to express what N e sense to
be the will of the Senate. I think that has
been done best by the combined brain-
power of a number of us here, and I
hope very much that the Senator from
Montana (Mr. MANSrIELD) and the Sen-
ator from Kentucky (Mr. CoorxR) will
feel they, have been successful, rattier
Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
 Approved For Release 2001/11/01: CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
S 1(7G 11
Decor 1 i' 15, 1969 CONGRESSIONAL I RECORD - SE NATE
than that some substitute has been sug-
gested for the idea they presented to the
Senate. I am confident that my col-
league would agree with me in that.
Mr, CHURCH. Mr. President, I cer-
tainly concur in what the Senator from
New York has said.
This amendment was really offered
reluctantly. The Senate has made its
decision to speak out, in rejecting the
motion to table. It is now clear that we
intend to take a position on this very
sensitive and important question. I think
we should take that position in clear and
precise terms, so that everyone-the
President of the United States, the ad-
ministration, and the American people-
will know exactly where the Senate
stands. We should avoid a repetition of
the mistake we made in the Gulf of Ton-
kin resolution, when we carelessly
drafted it, only to discover later that it
was much broader than many who voted
for it intended.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. CHURCH. I yield.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. That one having
been broader than we thought, we ought
to be careful lest the one that restricts it
be broader than we thought. Is the Sen-
ator's proposal to be interpreted as an
- authorization for continued bombing, or.
expansion of the bombing, in the north?
Mr. CHURCH. No. I would say, after
the debate we had in the Senate during
the closed session, that no one was quite
certain what the original amendment
meant.
This substitute amendment is purely
limiting in its terms. The bill provides
money for local forces both in Laos and
Thailand. All my amendment does is to
make it clear that none of the money in
the bill is to be used for the purpose of
financing the introduction of American
ground combat troops into Laos or
Thailand.
As such, it is a limitation in the bill. It
is in line with our constitutional respon-
sibility. I think it avoids the flaw In the
Tonkin Gulf joint resolution which was
drafted in much broader language than
intended at the time Congress voted in
such haste.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, to me
the important significance is that that
was assumed to be a grant of authority.
This is a restriction, I am not at all sure
that there is, and I do not believe there
is, really authority for doing what we
are doing now in north Laos. There is a
very great question as to whether there
is authority.
I wonder what the effect of this will be
on the granting of authority by having
only a restricted application to ground;
that is, the combat troops only.
Mr. CHURCH. No. Nothing in this
amendment grants any new authority
to the Government.
The question the Senator raises is a
separate one. All this amendment does
is to limit the use of the money in the
bill to make certain it is not employed for
the very purpose. the Senator from Ar-
kansas does not want.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. There may be other
activities in addition to using ground
troops for which I do not want them to
employ it.
The Senator from Mississippi said a
moment ago that he thought the amend-
ment of the majority leader would re-
strict bombing disconnected or not di-
rectly connected with Vietnam.
I do not know as between the two
amendments. I do not wish to authorize
the President to use ground troops or air-
power in a local war in northern Laos
which is not directly connected with the
Ho Chi Minh Trail and the war in Viet-
nam.
Mr. CHURCH. I think the Senate
should speak plainly or not at all.
The substitute amendment is intended
to make our purpose plain. The amend-
ment offered by the distinguished ma-
jority leader, I think, is ambiguous and
unclear.
If we are to act at all, we should act
in a way that is understandable to the
Government and to the American peo-
ple. For that reason, I would hope that
the Senate would adopt the substitute
amendment.
Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, to be
precise and clear, does the amendment
say ground troops or ground combat
troops? I am trying to get to the point
of the Senator from Texas.
Mr. CHURCH. It says ground combat
troops.
Mr. HOLLINGS. It says only "ground
troops" here. Could the Senator by unan-
imous consent change that to read
"ground combat troops"?
Mr. CHURCI-I. Yes, that is how my
amendment reads. In line with the ex-
pressed intention, the pertinent part
should read:
None of the funds appropriated by this
Act shall he used to finance the introduc-
tion of American ground combat troops into
Laos or Thailand without the prior con-
sent of Congress.
If the text of the amendment at the
desk does not conform with my read-
ing of'the amendment, I ask unanimous
consent that it so conform.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. HART. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mr, CHURCH. I yield.
Mr. HART. Mr. President, I hope this
is not repetitious. We say that the
moneys shall not be used to finance the
introduction of American ground combat
troops. What about American aircraft
and American ships? Are we saying that
is all right?
Mr, CHURCH. We are simply not un-
dertaking to make any changes in the
status quo. The limiting language is pre-
cise. And it does not undertake to repeal
the past or roll back the present. It looks
to the future.
Mr. HART. Is the existing status quo
inclusive of the action by air, ground,
and ships, and are we saying now we
should cut out the ground forces?
Mr. CHURCH. The Senator is aware of
the intent. He is aware from the closed
debate, In Laos and Thailand, it was
never proposed in any amendment offered
to roll back or change the existing situa-
tion.
We are striving to prevent aon:. and
Thailand from becoming new Vietnam:,.
That is the purpose of the amendment.
And I think it is well drafted to serve
that purpose.
Mr. HART. We could make it more
explicit by eliminating the other features
of American might.
Mr. GOODELL. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mn CHURCH. Mr. President, how
much time remains?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sel:-
ator from Idaho has 2 minutes remain-
ing. ?
Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, 1 would
prefer not to yield the remainder of my
time. Could the other side yield some
time?
Mr. ELLENDER. Mr. President, I yield
2 minutes to the Senator from New York.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator from New York is recognized for
2 minutes.
Mr. GOODELL. Mr. President, would
the Senator agree that his amendment
grants no authority, that it in no way
approves or disapproves of what is going
on, but that it is simply directed toward
making sure that in the future no ground
combat troops will be introduced into
Laos or Thailand?
Mr. CHURCH. Without the prior con-
sent of Congress.
Mr. GOODELL. That is correct, That
will not be done without the prior con-
sent of Congress.
Mr. CHURCH. The Senator is correct.
That is the intent.
Mr. GOODELL. That is vital. The im-
plication has been raised that we are
giving some kind of approval to the
status quo of what is going on. This is
a prohibition against the future occur-
rence of what is now going on. This
grants no authority or approves nothing
that is going on.
Mr. CHURCH. The Senator is cor-
rect. There is nothing in the text of the
amendment itself, or the debate upon it,
that could give any basis for such an
interpretation. The Senator has correctly
construed the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time
of the Senator has expired.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mr. ELLENDER. Mr, President, I yield
2 minutes to the Senator from Maine.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator from Maine is recognized for 2
minutes.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, is it the
intent of the amendment to prohibit or,
at least, to inhibit the introduction of
any additional elements of American mil-
itary strength in Laos beyond the present
level of military support for our allies in
Laos and Thailand?
Mr. CHURCH. The intent of the
amendment conforms with the language
used. And the language used, the opera-
tive language used, is as follows:
None of the funds appropriated by the Act
shall be used to financo the int.roduotion of
American ground combat troops into Laws
or Thailand without the prior consent of
Congress.
Approved For Release 2001/11/01: CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
 present administration to These I can accept, tnougn 1 wua.n have been killed or are missing in a war
determined to continue the regulations of unsteady minds. they never knew existed.
ngerousQpart of that pol- What I have much difficulty accepting is a
.whim our secret war in which non-military, CIA aeon- The following came from a woman
A roved For R e l e a s e 220p 1~1 1/ P7 3 R000300P WA
Sy l pp CONGRT: ~~ ;t'1;. LF ~ c~@ ? r 1:>, 1IC3
,) 7,521
Mr. MUSKIE. Let me put this proposi- military activities arc wrapped-insti- eared fighters lay the groundwork for U.S.
tioll. It seems to ale that by being silent tuted during the Kennedy administra- military destruction.
I appeal to you and your fellow conga>s-
on the gilestioll of possible enlargement troll and continued during the Johnson rnen to stop the I ol;:;rinr;,s or the American
of our land activity in Laos or Thailand,' Years. involvement in South-:;L Asia. Stop the
the Senator's amendment may, in effect, Mr. President, at this late date, is it secrecy, stop the fighting, stop the death.
approve that kind of enlargement of our too much to ask that the administra- in a few short months, my presence in
activity in Laos or Thhailand, tion come forward to the. Senate, at least, Tha.ilanci ha:, assured use of the wrorIgne s
Mr, CIIURCII, I think that the ex- and (rive to the majority of the Members of our position here. We will never Will by
change between the Senator from Now here the details on our activities in Laos? wippl ing arms na oldlcrs. We will only
York and myself negates such an inter- The Defense Appropriations Act before that we now destroying the
and by getting our
he people instead
pretation. us finances those activities. This money wealth into the mouths of
The legislative history is being written bill is the only opportunity the Senate of into the hands of dishonest leaders of
right here on the floor. will have to discuss and in any way affect indigent countries.
It would not be practical to attempt to these activities in Laos,
legislate in a way that would unduly To my knowledge there is no treaty Or the following from a Navy man
hamper the President in relation to the or joint resolution granting any Presi- aboard a carrier off Vietnam:
delicate problems he faces in Thailand dent authority to send military air or It would be conservative to say that at our and Laos. ground forces into Laos. We have been leastehalf or ended perhaps for the
We have only one objective of saying, told by the State Department there are has been trained solsolely he
at this time, that we do not intend any no executive agreements or written past st Yet, six months hs ha b t n and oa r such m-g used for the purpose of introducing led to our involvement. tivities. It seems evident that the attack
American ground combat troops it Laos Why then are we there and what are aircraft carrier Navy is no longer a force used
or Thailand. we doing? against North Vietnam but rather is engaged
There are many other things we might These questions are not unique to me, in a private but related war in another
do, but they are not covered here. For almost 2 months-since the ques- country.
Mr. MUSKIE. That indicates one rea- tion of Laos was first raised in the Sen- The keeping enormous carriers of nion y e i recd d
son why the distinguished majority ate Foreign Relations Committee-I and in kkeepng chesucrier operatin the its
leader prefers the ambiguity of his lan- other members of the committee have manpower rn rp o obliga o But of more
gunge rather than the language offered received a steady flow of letters from Leo- an to importance make is public su the long r.:ngo efa;c:sy of ore
in the closed session. pre asking the same question. Most of corning more deeply comr fitted in .`touthcez;t
Mr. CHURCH. No one was certain of them are concerned because of what they Asia and perhaps the loss of more American
what the other language meant. read in the newspapers. But a few are lives in the future. Thus, I encourage you to
if we are going to act, we should act worried because of their direct personal bring these activities before the public as
with sufficient certitude that the Govern- knowledge. soon as possible.
ment and the people of the country know Last week, for example, I received the Or the following from an AID con-
what we mean. following from a young mail in the tract employee in Laos who freely on-
Mr. MUSKIE. We all respect, and I re- Army: cusses the mercenary Lao Army teams
spect, the intention on that point. I do I recently completed a course at Ft. Hua- that call in U.S. Air Force bombing
not challenge it, chuca, Ariz., called [deletedl. This is a classi- and
cc all concludes:
I think this colloquy and the other col- fied course electronic warfaregto with a combat eguerilla o(sic) All of this, althougin it stem.; to be more
loquy eaching has suggested the difficulty of eiwarfare, or less common knowledge hero, is denied by
TeMr. CHURCH. The decision. During this course, I asked an instructor, the Embassy. They have "no comment" on
r
Mr. There is that trued difficulty d bombing which is apparently ? free"
In any action we take. We have tried to Lt. (deletedl, if there was a good chance we would get sent to Laos or Cambodia. He throughout the territory held by the Pathet
Lao and North Vietnamese, directed at any not.
not.
the language that expresses pre- said there was. Lao they can see, ameser military at
C1SeIy the intent we have in mind. Now, my question is this, "What is our it appears that once a,-gin the U.S. Ls involved
I reserve the remainder of my time. relationship to Laos and Cambodia?" and in something of which it has reason to be
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, this "Are we allowed to have combat troops in not want the world
evening, with great public. fanfare, the either Laos or Cambodia?" aasshaitsmed, own which people it d dooes know.
President of the United States is sched- If the Army's action is illegal, I hope that' I do not like to see an agency of our gov-
uled to make a statement in which- you will expose to the American people the ernment maintaining its own mercenary
according to all the reports I have seen- dangers of spreading the war in S. Vietnam army in Laos, not subject to the public con-
he will announce further withdrawal of to all of Indochina. trol intended by our Constitution.
troops from South Vietnam. Or, take these words from an Air Force I wish to help the people here, and I be-
Similar widely publicized announce- officer in Thailand: livve the U.S. should help them. But if we
meats have been made concerning earlier. In the last few months we have had dozens cannot find any way to help them that does
not also require indiscriminate bombing of
cutbacks in troop levels not only in South of Laotian Army battle casualties in our n them and require Indis a mercenary army of g Vietnam but also in Thailand. USAF hospital here. in the last few months, their midst, aint I do not rce a we my should then
This administration's announced col- I have looked and listened: I have seen and be here.
icy of a lessening direct military involve- heard much.
ment in Asia has also been given a good Although I do not have a top secret se- Or the following from another AID
deal of publicity. curity clearance (and most of what goes on contract employee who finished his tour
it is against this chorus of administra- here requires that), any airman can count. and remained in Laos:
tion public announcements of a policy in the numbers of jet fighter-bombers taking While military activity has dc-escalated to
ripen- off fully loaded with ordinance. Anyone here some extent in South Vietnam over the last
one direction that I voice my app can pass the runway and see dozens of year, it has greatly intensified here in Laos.
sign over continuing administration unmarked aircraft parked at the Air America Restraints wge wein force he both sides
silence over policy in Laos where our and Continental Airlines ramp. Any drunk- in on
military involvement appears to be grow- on pilot will tell of the fighting, bombing, since 1954 have been lifted. The future pres-
and killing for which we, here at Udorn, are ages continued escalation and increased
ing rather
in V ietna etnam , , the Nixon the Nixon administra- responsible. Not in Vietnam, not in an open. American involvement. The recent investiga-
As in V
tion tion inherited a Laotian policy. Unlike war, but in Laos, 35 miles to the north, Lion more of timely your , and I committee wish to could not contribute haven een y
Vietnam, where some changes appear There are many things which I have way possible to them.
underway, the new administration seems learned to accept here. The censorship of our another group of letter writ-
to anti TV station; the application of arbi- There is
to hav^ accepted everything hang we have trary curfews; arbitrary rules and regula- ers, women who have a different typo of
proved For Release 2001/11/01: CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
 Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003~5 6'"`'
December 15, 1969 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENA E ~~~
whose son was killed flying a combat Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- s? what is the amount or per:;car el, Gpcr-
sent to have printed at this point in the ating and maintenance and military assist-
' mOn over ancc funds included in this bill for Laos and
On May 23, 19G9 we buried an unopened RECORD a copy of a lettC]' I sent to the Laos-rcla Ced 0.Ctivities?
casket in Arlington National Cemetery. chairlllan of the Committee or. Appro- Mr. PULT;RIOJIT Mr. PI esidcllt, I ask
We have written repeatedly inquiring more priations.
detailed information. We would like to know There being no objection, the letter unanimous consent to have printed in
who recovered our sons body, Americans or was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, the RECol:D on article entitled, o? ers
Laotians or whoever It was. We also under- as follows: Admits Laos Arms Ro1C.''
stand that they were losing OIA pilots like DECEMBER 12, 1009. There being no objection, the article
flies 1n that particular area. We would like Hen. RICHARD B. RUSSELL, was ordered to he printed in'the RECORD,
to know why they send OIA planes unarmed Chairman, Committee on Appropriations, as follows:
(like the one our son piloted to his death) U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. ADMITS LAOS ARMS ROLE
in heavily entrenched enemy territory? DEAR Mn. cIIAIRMAN: During the past few ROGERS (gy MTSrey Marcher)
We have written to our congressman, but weeks some members of the Committee on
he has been unable to receive much informa- Foreign Relations have examined in depth Secretary of State William P. Ptogors in-
tion except that its classified information. the nature of American military involve- directly conceded yesterday that for years
There seems to be an awful lot of hush, hush ment in Southeast' Asia with. particular the United States has financed, rimed and
about Laos and I would like to see it come emphasis on Laos and Thailand. It had been trained a clandestine army of'35,000 guerril-
out in the open. our impression that American supported m11- las in Laos.
Or take the dilemma of this woman itary activities there were directly related In the first acknowiedgcnlent ever made
whose husband was lost over Laos, is to the war in Vietnam and it was with deep- on the public record, Rogers treatscl the U.S.
ening concern that we learned that the involvement in the semi-secret w:ue in Lacs
missing and perhaps captured: United States is becoming directly involved as a matter of common knowledge. But
Do you see how all of this secrecy jeop- . in escalating military activities in Laos. Rogers avoided explicitly St2tin,: precisely
ardises any chance of ever hearing about Furthermore, what once ~rght have been what he was acknowledging, and said there
these men? They are no doubt rotting (if viewed as a small, secret intelligence-type are no plans to stop or change present opera-
still alive) In some jungle stockade prob- operation has now become of such magnitude tions in Laos.
ably tended by Pathet Lao. Can you imagine that I feel strongly that the Senate should "I had thought that the Congress was faI-
what that is? It is enough to send men oil be aware of its size and possible future costs , miliar with the developments in Laos,"
to this questionable "commitment" in Viet- in men and money. Rogers said. "Certainly they are familiar with
ham, but for a military man to then end up Under these circumstances, I would appre- Ilion-, now . . . I thought Congress under-
missing in a country in which we do not ciate it very much if, during Senate discus- stood it."
admit to activities, loses him all his rights. sign of the Defense Appropriation Act, the "This is really quite extraordir:ary," said
To whom can we turn to beg for Informix- ?. managers of the bill would provide Mein- Sen. J. W. Fulbright (D-Ark.). 130th were
tion and mercy for these men missing in bers of the Senate wl.o.? must act on the commenting after Rogers testilcd behia:d
Laos? My husband has been (if still alive) legislation with answers from the'Adminis- closed doors for three and a half hours be-
captured for 31/ years. How much longer tration to the questions which I have at- fore the Senate Foreign Relations Commit-
can he live? When will someone admit to tached. If the only way this information can tee, which Fulbright heads.
the truth of the war in Laos? Can we send be made available to the, Senate would be "It is quite ordinary for a dictatorship,"
men to war and then disclaim responsibility In an executive session, I would hope this said Fulbright, "but to be conducting quite
for them once they are taken by the So- could be arranged. as large a war as this (in Laos) without
called enemy?' I am sending a copy of this letter and authorization is quite unusual."
enclosure to Senator Milton Young as rank- Fulbright said in an intervie-.1 Tuesday
Mr. President, we are not an. Asian ing minority member of the Defense Appro- that through the Central Intelligence
kingdom. No President is a king or priations Subcommittee. Agency, the United States, under three ad-
prime minister, entitled to make secret Sincerely yours, ministrations, has been supplying, arming,
arrangements and send American men J. W. FULBRIGIsT, training and transporting the clandestine
into war with the understanding their Chairman. Laotian army of Meo tribesman headed by
. Vang Pao.
activities will not be publicly acknowl- Gen.
WiTn LAOS SECRET The cost to the United States for military
edged. QUESTIONNAIRE assistance to Laos, Fulbright said, is be-
Mr. President, the secrecy over our 1. What treaties, agreements or declara- tween $50 and $160 million this year. Other
involvement in Laos has gone on to tions provide the basis for our defense com- sources said yesterday that about half this
long. It had been my hope that the e mitment and military assistance to the Royal amount is used to finance the Moo guerrilla
transcript of the Symington Subco]n- Laotian Government? force, and the rest goes to other military
mittee's detailed hearings on Laos would 2. What commitment, written or implied, needs in Laos. But uncounted in the $160
have been released by now permitting exists between the United States or its agen- million total this year, these sources said,
the Senate and the public an oppor- Iles and the present Royal Laotion Govern- are the costs of U.S. bombing support from
tunity to study and debate the issue. ment or its Prime Minister, Souvanna Thailand for operations in Laos.
Phouma? Rogers, when newsmen put Fulbright's
The odminisratith, owever, has re- 3. What military assistance, including man- specific statements to ilia., said:
fused to declasssify, the n necessary details power, material and training, is the United "Well, the operations In Laos, as you know,
and the subcommittee has, Correctly I States providing through this bill? were started in the time of President Iien-
believe, refused to publish a document 4. As of today, what is the total number nedy" and continued through the Johnson
that it believes would be misleading. of United States military personnel in Laos and Nixon administrations. When ho was
Therefore, because I deeply believe and describe the manner in which they asked if they will be halted now, Rogers re-
operate. sponded, "No, I don't think there is going to
as I a of this what they hould t- , 5. Describe in detail activities over Laos of, be a change in policy, not now."
that Members
aware-as hat thare vow- the United States Air Force, including both There are no U.S. "ground forces in Laos."
I11g on when they whhey approve the bill we those activities, if any, based in Laos and Rogers reiterated, but there are still "45,000
have before us, I have sought to have those, If any, based in Thailand. North Vietnamese forces in Laos." It con-
the administration-through the man- If pertinent, include: tinues to be the United States' hope, he said,
agers of the bill-provide basic factual a. What, if any, is the current monthly that an end to the war in Vietnam Will solve
information on our activities in Laos. sortie rate over northern Laos for the the problems of Communist penetrations
I would hope that my colleagues would United States Air Force aircraft? into Laos and Cambodia as well.
b. How does that rate, if any, compared to a Newsmen asked Rogers for comment on
join me in requesting the administra- year ago and two years ago? Fulbright's charge Tuesday that the extent
Lion to provide the information. An eX c. The contemplated sortie rate, if any, over _ of the U.S. involvement in Laos may be un-
eeutive session can be called-if it is so northern Laos in the coming 12 months. constitutional. "I doubt very much If It is
desired-to permit the discussion of that d. How these sortie rates, if any, compare unconstitutional," replied Rogers.
material which the administration con- to United States Air Force sorties directed to- "What about the public's 'right to know?"'
siders classified. ward the Ho Chi Minh trail. asked a reporter. Said Rogers, "Well, I think
T believe the public has a right to G. What, if any, have been the total num- the public, if they have been reading the
her of United States military personnel papers, know."
know everything It can. But I more killed, wounded, and missing in northern Pulbrlght, when told later that Rogers said
strOllRly believe the Senate and each of Laos 1;1nce 1.9027 he expects no ChanRo In U.S. policy in bags,
its Members has a personal respond- 7. HOW does tills total compare to personnel said: "I regret it, if that's what lie said." which
havL bility to his constituents to learn the lost in operations solely against the Ho Chi duoted Heariin exec five session by a sub e m~it-
facts on this matter before he votes. Minh trail?
Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
 S 16761
Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
CONGRESSIONAL. RECORD. -- Si NAT December 15" 1:66
Mr. JAVITS. The Senator Is correct
about that, because this must be read
with the commitlllents resolution, which
does call for the way in which Congress
may consent to such a situation.
Mr. CHURCH. That is correct. I ap-
preciate the comment by the Senator
from Now York.
Therefore, I offer the amendment ill
new form, striking the words "without
prior consent of Congress" from the text.
So that the revised amendment would
read:
Sac. 643. In line with the expressed inten-
tion of the President of the United States,
none of the funds appropriated by this Act
shall be used to finance the introduction of
American ground combat troops into Laos or
Thailand.
I ask for the yeas and nays on the
amendment, Mr. President.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques-
tion is or, agreeing to the amendment of
the Senator from Idaho (Mr. CHURCH).
On this question, the yeas and nays have
been ordered, and the clerk will call the
roll,
The assistant legislative clerk called
the roll.
Mr. KENNEDY. I announce that the
Senator from New Mexico (Mr. ANDER-
SON), the Senator from Georgia (Mr.
RUSSELL), the Senator from Missouri
(Mr. SYMINGTON), the Senator from
Maryland (M "r. T YDINGS) , and the Sen-
ator from New Jersey (Mr. WILLIAMS)
are necessarily absent.
I further announce that the Senator
from West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH) is
absent on official business.
I also announce that the Senator from
Washington (Mr. JACKSON) Is absent be-
cause of a death in his family.
I further announce that, if present and
voting the Senator from West Virginia
(Mr. RANDOLPH), the Senator from New
Jersey (Mr. WILLIAMS), and the Senator
from Washington (Mr. JACKSON) would
each vote "yea."
Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the
Senator from Iowa (Mr. MILLER) is
necessarily absent.
The Senator from Kentucky (Mr.
Coorl?:a) is absent because of illness in his
family.
The.Senator from South Dakota (Mr.
MUNDT) is absent because of illness.
If present and voting, the Senator from
Iowa (Mr. MILLER) would vote "yea." .
The result was announced-yeas 73,
nays 17, as follows:
INo. 233 Leg.]
YEAS-73
tee headed by son. Stuart Symington (I)-
mo.), show that the United States is "enor-
mously over-committed" in Laos, Fulbright
said, and "I don't think there is any author-
ity for it."
Symington declined to make any direct
comment at this time on his Laos inquiry,
except to say, "I've never known him (Ful-
bright) to make a misstatement in this field."
In Rogers' testimony yesterday, Fulbright
said, "There was no effort whatever to deny
what was in the papers" about U.S. clancles-
tine operations in Laos, and Fulbright's com-
ments on them.
The Symington subcommittee now has
finished taking testimony on Laos. The ques-
tion is how much of a struggle there will
be between the subcommittee and the Nixon
administration over making the testimony
public. A major witness in the inquiry, on
Tuesday, was CIA Director Richard Helms.
There is disagreement about the degree to
which Congress has been aware of the clan-
destine U.S. operations in Laos in support of
anti-Communist forces there. Senate Demo-
cratic leader Mike Mansfield (Mont.), a spe-
cialist on Southeast Asia, was quoted yester-
day as saying that "I've really found noth-
ing new in the (Laos) hearings that I didn't
know."
But Fulbright and other senators said they
had no indication that covert U.S. activity
in Laos was more than what Fulbright called
"very minor, peripheral," apart from "the
bombing of the Ho Chi-Minh trails." With
the present administration's contention that
it thought Congress "understood" what was
going on in Laos, pressure is now likely to
mount for oflIcial disclosure of the details of
the CIA-run operation there,
Mr. ELLENDER. Mr. President, it will
be recalled that before we went-into ex-
ecutive session, I suggested that the
amendment be taken to conference, and
it seems that this amendment places the
Senate in a very confusing position.
I note that this amendment is based on
a contingency which is legislative. I
make the point of order that this amend-
ment is not in order, in that it is legis-
lation on an appropriation bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
HUGHEs in the chair). The Chair sus-
tains the point of order.
Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, I suggest
the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk
will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk pro-
ceeded to call the roll.
Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, it is the
understanding of the Senator from
Idaho that the inclusion of the phrase
"without the prior consent of Congress"
at the very end of the proposed amend-
ment renders it legislative in character
and therefore subject to the point of
order.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator is correct.
Mr. CHURCH. I invite the attention of
the Senate to the fact that the final
in regard to the real question before us.
The defect in the amendment, as it is
presently written, can be cured simply
by striking this final phrase.
Allott
Dole
Javits
Baker
Dominick
Jordan, N.C.
Bayh
Eagleton
Jordan, Idaho
Bellmon
Tannin
Magnuson
Bennett
.gong
McClellan
Bible
Goldwater
McGovern
Boggs
Goodell
McIntyre
Brooke
Gravel
Metcalf
Burdick
Griffin
Mondalo
Byrd, Va.
Gurney
Montoya
Byrd, W. Va.
Hansen
Moss
Cannon.
Harris
Murphy
Ilartke
Nelson
Church
Hatfield
Packwood
Cook
Holland
Pastore
Cotton
Hollings
Pearson
Cranston
Heuska
Pell
Curtis
Hughes
Percy
Dodd
Inouye
Prouty
Proxmire
Smith, Ill.
Tower
Ribicoif
Sparkman
Williams, Del.
Saxbo
Sr'o:;r,
Y arborov. g'n
Schwciker
Stevens
Young, N. Dal.
Scott
Talrnud;.,a
Smith, Maine
i lurrnond
NAYS-17
Aiken
Core McCarthly
Allen
Hart McGee
Eastland
Kennedy Muslzie
Ellcnder
Lou;; Stenni.>
Ervin
Mansfield Young, Ohio
Fulbright
Mathias
NOT VOTING-l0
Anderson
Mundt
Tydln,'s
Cooper
Randolph
Williams, N.J.
Jackson
Russell .
Miller
Symington
So Mr. CHURGH's amendment was
agreed to.
Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, I move
to reconsider the vote by which the
amendment was agreed to.
Mr. ALLOTT. I move to lay that mo-
tion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
ask for the yeas and nays on the Cooper
amendment, as amended.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
a sufficient second? There is a sufficient
second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Mr. ELLENDER. Mr. President, before
we proceed with the vote on the amend-
ment, I would like to announce that we
shall try to complete action on the bill
this evening. As far as I know there are
only two more amendments. One of theni
is sponsored by the Senator from Mis-
souri (Mr. EAGLETON), and deals with the
main battle tank 70. The committee is
willing to accept this amendment because
of a letter received from the Deputy Sec-
retary of Defense in respect to a cutback
of $20 million from the $50 million rec-
ommended for this tank.
The next amendment will be offered
by the Senator from Maine (Mrs.
SMITH), and it deals with the ABM. Since
there has been so much discussion on
the ABM heretofore, I am very hopeful
that we can got through with these two
amendments this evening. I understand
the distinguished Senator from Maine
(Mrs. SMITH) has a speech which she will
make.
I hope other Senators will not take too
much time in discussing this matter In-
asmuch as we had this matter before us
for 2 months.
Mr. ALLOTT. I have one short matter,
not an amendment but a legislative clari-
fication.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques-
tion is on agreeing to the Cooper-Mans-
field amendment, as amended. On this
question the yeas and nays have been
ordered and the clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called
the roll.
Mr. KENNEDY. I announce that the
Senator from New Mexico (Mr. ANDS
soN), the Senator from Georgia (!Mgr.
RUSSELL), the Senator from Alabama
(Mr. SPARKMAN), the Senator from Mis-
souri (Mr. SYMINGTON) , the Senator from
Maryland (Mr. T)nDINGs), and the Sena-
tor from New Jersey (Mr. WILLIAMS) are
necessarily absent.
Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
 Approved For Release 2001/11/01 : CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5
December 15, 1969 CONG ESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE S 1676.5
I further announce that the senator
from West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH) is
absent on official business.
I also announced that the Senator from
Washington (Mr. JACKSON) is absence be-
cause of a death in his family.
I further announce that, if present and
voting, the Senator from West Virginia
(Mr. RANDOLPIH), the Senator from Ala-
bama (Mr. SnARI{MAN), the Senator from
New Jersey (Mr, WILLIAMS), and the
Senator front Washington (Mr. JACKSON)
would each vote "yea."
Mr. GRIFFIN. I announce that the
Senator from Iowa (Mr. MILLER) is nec-
essarily absent.
The Senator from Kentucky (Mr.
CoorER) is absent because of illness in
his family.
The Senator from South Dakota (Mr.
MUNDT) is absent because of illness.
If present and voting, the Senator from
Iowa (Mr. MILLER) and the Senator from
Kentucky (Mr. COOPER) would each vote
?yea.,,
The result was announced-yeas 80,
nays 9, as follows:
[No. 234 Leg.]
YEAS-80
Aiken Gore . Mondale
Allott Gravel Montoya
Baker Griffin Moss
Bayh Gurney Murphy
Bennett Hansen Muskio
Bible Harris Nelson
Boggs Hart Packwood
Brooke Hartko Pastore
Burdick Hatfield Pearson
Byrd, Va. Holland Pell
Byrd, W. Va. Hollings Percy
Cannon Hruska Prouty
Case Hughes Proxmire
Church Inouye Rihicofl
Cook Javits Saxbe
Cotton Jordan, NO. Schwelker
Cranston , Jordan, Idaho Scott
Curtis Kennedy Smith, Maine
Dodd Magnuson Smith, 111.
Dominick
Eagleton
Fannin
Fong
defense as carefully as it does other
smaller, but no less important, programs.
In this vein, I wish to commend, as I am
sure the American taxpayer does, the
Senate Appropriations Committee under
its distinguished chairman, Senator Rus-
SELL, for cutting much of the fat from
Department of Defense requests.
H,R. 15090 as reported by the Senate
Appropriations Committee is $8,507,544,-
000 less than the original budget re-
quest; $5,945,544,000 less than the re-
vised budget request, and $627,302,000
under the amount allowed by the I-Iouse.
Conflicting pressures and reasons con-
verged this year to make these cuts, and
even deeper ones, possible.
The overriding need to control ramp-
ant inflation-causing prices to rise at
more than 5 percent per year-at tunes
at 6.4 percent, the highest rate in 13
years-and interest rates to climb to 8.5
percent---driving many young Americans
out of the housing market and many
senior citizens to the brink of despair-
certainly was an important factor in de-
fense cuts.
The need to exercise prudence in gov-
ernmental spending of all public moneys,
especially the least economically produc-
tive type-military spending-has never
been more clear.
Reasonable and responsible cuts, such
as those recommended by the Appropria-
tions Committee, will assist in curbing
inflation-and should be hailed by every
taxpayer.
And yet the need for increased spend-
ing in some domestic areas has never
been more clear. Recognition of urgent
domestic needs, so long untended, and
domestic challenges so long unmet, Make
the redirection of Federal moneys all the
more imperative.
The Commission on Violence recently
Mathias Stevens argued that $20 billion per year must be
McCarthy Talmadge found to reconstruct American society
McClellan Williams, Del. - 'd A
t ? It cannot all
sas Cl
t
Fuibright McGovern
Goldwater McIntyre
Goodell Metcalf
NAYS-0
;
.
0 aV0 i
Yarborough if we are
Young, N. Dak. be found in one year, but a start must
Young, Ohio be made now-and an important step
Allen Ellender Stennis
Bcllmon Ervin Thurmond
Eastland Long Tower
NOT VOTING-11
Anderson Mundt Symington
Cooper Randolph Tydings
N
recognize that substituting the term "cost
growth" for "cost overrun," as the De-
partment of Defense apparently plans to
do, is not enough. Waste is not a rose
by any other name and no amount of
"Pentagonese" can make it one.
Mr. President, I ass: unanimous consent
that the following article from the De-
cember 17, 1969, edition of the Federal
Times be entered in the PscosD at this
time along with a recent article entitled
"Defense Deletes 'Cost Overrun,' " by
Bernard D. Nossiter of the Washington
Post.
There being no objection, the articles
were ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
IFroin the Federal Times, Dec. 17, 19091
CosT OVERRUNS of $20 Bn.LION i3REN FOR 35
CURRENT WEAPONS SYSTEM.S>
WASHINGTON, -A Defense Department re-
port indicates taxpayers are to be saddled
with about $19.9 billion in cost overruns on
35 weapons systems currently under devel-
opment.
The quarterly reports, which cover only
major procurement projects, are the first to
be received by the Senate Armed Services
Committee. And, Sen. John Stennis, D-Miss.,
chairman, said he is not very happy with the
way the reports are prepared.
Just before Stennis announced the massive
overruns, Sen. William Proxmire, D-Wis.,
said a Government Accounting Office in-
vestigation revealed massive profit margins
in smaller defense contracts,
Citing one example, Proxmire said GAO
had found that an "Air Force procurement
unit, the Oklahoma City Air Materiel Area
(OCAMA), has been so lax in keeping track
of prevailing prices in the market that a
California contractor realized a 1.-103 per cent
profit on one small-item contract negotiated
by OCAMA."
Stennis said programs covered in his re-
ports are "estimated to cost a total of $94
billion with additional programs to be added
in future periods."
He said the largest overruns occurred in
eight project areas.
$1.379 billion in the Poseidon submarine-
launched ballistic missile program.
$4.011 billion in the 1,1111 series aircraft
program.
$1.661 billion In the F15 aircraft program.
$1.049 billion in the SRAM missile pro-
gram.
$2.580 billion in the Mark-48 torpedo pro-
gram.
$1.540 billion in the DXGN nuclear frigate
program.
$1.685 billion in the DD9G3 destroyer pro-
. gram,
Jackson Russell . Williams,
Miller Sparkman air on crowded, unsafe, often antiquated $1.591 billion for the C5A program, which
So the Cooper-Mansfield amendment, thoroughfares which run through the does not include 81 planes dropped by the
as amended, was agreed to. poverty-bound slums of our dilapidated Air Force.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill is cities to the fear-bound suburbs under- Stennis pointed out that the Navy's Mark-
open to further amendment. stands it, too. 48 torpedo project experienced the greatest
Mr. EAGLETON. Mr. President, I call The time to channel public moneys to overrun. Its costs have grown 395 per cent
up my amendment, which I offer on be- meet the domestic challenges of the lat- over the initial estimate.
half of myself and the Senator from ter third of this century is now. And de- prediction of cost growth over original
Oregon (Mr. creased defense spending is necessary if estimates, Stennis said, is difficult. He said,
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk funds are to be forthcoming. "One factor is that both the original and cur-
But perhaps the most important fag- rent estimates are projections into the future
will state the amendment. for in 1969 was the discovery that the De- which is a challenging and not very exact
The ASSISTANT LEGISLATIVE CLERK. It 1S partment of Defense is pursuing research science."
proposed, on page 16, line 4, to strike out and development of new weapons systems Factors with which Pentagon cost experts
"$4,264,400,000" and insert in lieu there- as well as their procurement in a manner must content include inflationary factors,
of "$4,254,400,000"? that can charitably be described as often technological Improvements to weapons sys-
tems, increase of the initial estimate cost
THE MBT-70 haphazard and sloppy. baseline and -program delays.
Mr. EAGLETON. Mr. President, this Taxpayers find themselves saddled He did not arbitrarily excuse overruns, es-
year the Congress of the United States with $20 billion in cost overruns on 35 , pecially those "which are dug In whole or in
has begun to reassert its right, and in- weapons systems currently under devel- part to poor or inadequate managraent or
- -
deed its duty, to scrutinize spending on opnient-and they are angry. They fiscal control."
toward that goal is the restoration o
sanity to our search for security.
We, as legislators, need only to reread
the all-too-familiar litany of pressing,
recognized, and still unmet domestic
needs to understand the urgency for ac-
tion and the danger of continued -inac-
'Approved For Release 2001/11/01: CIA-RDP71B00364R000300070003-5