S.1-RECODIFICATION OF THE FEDERAL CRIMINAL LAWS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP77M00144R000800020028-5
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 31, 2001
• Sequence Number: 28
• Publication Date: January 27, 1976
• Content Type: OPEN

pp
S 602 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE January 27, 1976
has worked, and today there are more Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask tapping, gun control, traffic in drugs and
birds than ever. unanimous consent that the order for capital
Within the past few months, local offi- the quorum call be rescinded. resolve th ese issues it is must
eventua
py
certainl
cials and members of the States' con- The ACTI RESIDENT unnecessary for the whole code to be held
gressional delegation have met with the pore. WithoQ do it is so ordered. until total agreement can be reached. They
ey
Secretary of the .Interior and the Attor- Mr. AN LD. r. President, I might more properly be left to separate enacted
ney General in an attempt to expedite yield in el mGnne. . lotion to be introduced, debated and enacted
the long-needed relief. The IN ES ENT at a later date.
Progress on,this count has been made, pore. The ens o141 Montana is rec- spread great S .I. Assither members has the
but time is of the essence if relief is to be ognized fo } miSenate Judiciary Committee have studied
forthcoming befor2 next year. The means this comprehensive and important legisla-
of relief which we are proposing can tion, the chances of its passage in somewhat
only be applied in wet and freezing S. 1-RECODIFICATION OF THE modified form have been greatly enhanced.
weather, and in Kentucky, such condi- FEDERAL CRIMINAL LAWS Defeat would be a severe blow to criminal
Lions rarely occur beyond March. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, the law reform in this country.
EDUND G. BROW,
Let me reiterate what my colleagues Senate Judiciary Committee is presently BEVERLY HILLS, CALIF., January 0,1976.
have noted, that the relief we are seek- considering S. 1-a most significant leg- P.S--The writer is former Governor of
ing through this legislation is only tem- islative reform that will recodify the Fed- California.
porary. Long-term solutions are being eral criminal laws. In its present form,
developed which could provide perman- I could not vote in favor of S. 1. I am S. 1 seeks to restore capital punishment
ent answers, confident, however, that the Judiciary and make it mandatory in a narrow u of
I urge my colleagues to join in support- Committee and ultimately the full Sen- homicides. It is silent on any form of gun
ing this measure. ate will perfect the recommendations control but adds additional years of Impris-when The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- contained in the present version of S. I arenused inl con already with i an offense uor
pore. The bill is open to amendment. If so that I can enthusiastically support it. when organized crime is involved. It retains
the question there be no amendment to be proposed, In today's New York Times an excel- a prison penalty for non-commercial private
third readings ton the he bill,ngrossment and lent letter from former Gov. Pat Brown possession of marl jauna but reduces the pres-
The bill (S. 2873) was ordered to be of California addresses this subject. I eat heavy punishment considerably. It pro--
engrossed for a third reading, read the agree with the recommendations and vises severe pee for traffic in hard
conclusions of Governor Brown's letter. drThs. It narrows the defense oh insanity.
third time, and passed, as follows: He chaired the Presidential Commission trated The f much of their fire c of the Senate bpl have s which
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of on the Reform of the Federal Criminal have been interpreted as provisionswhich
Representatives of the United States of Laws whose recommendations have
America in Congress assembled, That Con- Amendment rights. They foresee protest the
wiretap-
finds that in Kentucky and Tennessee formed the bases of this major effort to ping on an expanded scale and protest the
large concentrations of starlings, grackles. update the Federal criminal laws. An excuse of national security as its justifica-
blackbirds and other birds found in "black- excellent article appears as well In the tion. The bill has met intensive opposition
bird roosts" pose a hazard to human health current issue of Judicature dealing with from the political left, to whom demonstra- tion and safety, livestock and agriculture, that the the provisions of S. 1. all others. liberal right valued
have
S. almost
opponents above
roosts are reestablished each winter, that dip- I ask unanimous that both overlooked oth. The le
persal techniques have been unsuccessful, nt d in RECORD. First, r two factors of would importance. 1 have
that control is most effective when birds are articles be printed ri the First, mere defeat of S. 1 would leave intact
that control in water roosts, and tds a are There being no objection, the articles many of the provisions to which they are op-
emergency does exist which requires immedi- were ordered to be printed in the RECORD, posed since they are carry-overs from exist-
ate action with insufficient time to comply as follows: ing law. Second, and more important, the
with the National Environmental Policy Act. U.S. CRIMINAL CODE: THE IMPORTANCE OF S. 1 critics have been ignorant of, or have ignored,
the fact that h least ninety 2. (a) Upon certification by the Gov- To the EDITOR: y percent of the pr bill ernor of Kentucky and/or Tennessee to the thatisovi of the yo dotheireal law serious
Secretary of the Interior that "blackbird As chairman of the National Commission that Is virtually beyond the realm of serious
roosts" are a significant hazard "b human for Reform of Federal Criminal Laws, I have controversy. In consequence, while amend-
health, areor property az his state, the watched with deep concern the efforts of meat may be essential, total rejection would
health, safety the interior shall provide for some civil libertarians and representatives of be tragic. To vote S. 1 down would doom the
Sere deterf the through normal de f the press to kill 8.1, the pending bill to rep country to a continuation of totally unsatis.
roosts mined y codify Title 18 of the U.S. Code. That bill factory criminal law at the federal level and
practices of the Department of the Interior incorporates a very substantial portion of the a dearth of reform in many state and local
to contain in excess of 500 thousand birds recommendations of our commission, and 95 jurisdictions.
to be,treated with chemicals registered for percent of its provisions constitute a major launch-
bird control purposes, unless the Secretary improvement over existing Federal criminal ingtof the taken a effort tolsecure revision during the
determines that treatment of a particular law. Those provisions have been found ac- administration of President Johnson to bring
roost would pose a hazard to human health, ceptable by all who have studied the legisla- the matter to a congressional vote. If a re-
safety or property. tion and they are really beyond the realm ` vised code
(b) The provisions of the National Envi- of serious controversy. down to sat revision can be
ronmental Policy Act of 1969 (83 Stat. 852), Y' counlikely nsummated a new effort at revison can e.
the Federal Environmental Pesticide Control I of course, agree with few some se of the bill's Meanwhile, in less t the another decade.
Act (86 Stat. 975), or any other provision of critics that there are a few sections of S.1 Meanwhile, crime marches on, and civil
law shall not 75) to o such blaconi which may be characterized as repressive, but liberties suffer as much under the present
control shall activities apply to nyn,? c or ef rd these are limited to a small number and in chaotic system as they would, in all likeli-
April 15, 1976, by the States of Kentucky or Se likelihood will beta
ken care of m the hood, under the most extreme provision of
Tennessee or the Federal Government within Senate Judiciary C efloor. The c amend- S. I.
m by
the States of Kentucky or Tennessee. meat on the Senate floor. The contention THE KILLING OF s. 1
that the whole bill must be defeated because The Wall Street Journal editorialized on
Mr. HUDDLESTON. Mr. President, I of these few sections is, in my opinion, with- August 22, 1975, on the subject of S. 1 and
move that the vote by which the, pre- out semblance of validity. condemned it roundly. In calling for the
ceding bill was passed be reconsidered. Recognizing the urgency of criminal code rejection of the bill, it stated, among other
Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I move to revision at this session of Congress, Senators things, that "[tjhe entire bill in its present
lay that motion the table. McClellan and Hruska, the sponsors of 9.1, form goes well beyond present law in re-
ion
The mmot to lay on the table was have informed me of their willingness to ac- stricting First Amendment rights, reducing
agreed to. c
the
ept some modifications which would meet public access to knowledge of the workings f the press and other Mr. HUDDLESTON, Mr. President, I With obajesimilarctions
se of critics. of
edents.rnment and revising civil rights prec-
suggest the absence of a quorum, With ators Kennedy and Hart are working toward The following comment was offered in
no time to be charged. securing the amendments necessary to make reply by Professor Louis B. Schwartz, Ben-
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- this bill perfectly acceptable to their liberal jamin Franklin Professor of Law at the Uni-
pore. Without objection, it is so ordered. constituencies. varsity of Pennsylvania and director of the
The clerk will Call the roll. There are some areas of the criminal law National Commission on Reform of Federal
The lark it callsla e r clerk which presently pose serious problems for Criminal Laws:
seeded to
assistant call the rogl. pro- the sponsors of code revision. The most ob-"Qn the vious examples are national security, wire competent anon-controversial ercentorderingI
and
A
roved For Release 2001/09/03 CIA-RDP77M00144R000800020028-5
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800020028-5
 Approved For-Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800020028-5
January 27, 1976
Kv.,
crops
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE
In ad
of pine fores
to livestock.
most severely
Montgomery
threat can be removed is by controll
the bird population.
Unfortunately, all nonlethal means
of ridding the area of blackbirds have
proven ineffective. The best method, of
destroying the birds currently available
involves use of the chemical Tergitol.
After filing an environmental Impact
statement and receiving the approval of
a Federal district court, the Depart-
ment of the Army last year used Tergitol
to help in controlling a large blackbird
population at Fort Campbell, Ky.
This year. efforts by local authorities
to use Tergitol to control birds through-
out the area have been stalled by a law-
suit filed by the Society for Animal
Rights, an a:rirnaI protective organiza-
tion headquartered in New York. As a
result of the ;suit, the Department of the
Interior has agreed, not to use the chem-
ical until a national environmental im-
pact statement has been completed or
unless an emergency health threat Is
found to exist. While the Secretary of
the Interior I s expected to make an emer-
gency deterrr ination on an area-by-area
basis, that determination is also sub-
ject to challenge in the courts, creating
further delays. The impact statement,
which has been under preparation for
several years, is not expected to be issued
in final form until April of this year, too
late for any action which will resolve the
difficulties now facing the people of af-
fected Tennessee and Kentucky.
The bill which we introduce today was
drafted to meet a narrowly defined,
emergency situation. It provides an ex-
emption from the National Environmen-
tal Policy At and the Federal Environ-
mental Pesticide Control Act for black-
bird control activities undertaken by the
States of Tennessee and Kentucky until
April 15 of this year. In order to qualify
for the exer..rption, the Governors of the
two States must certify to the Secretary
of the Interior that the blackbird roosts
are a significant hazard to human
health, safety or property. If the Secre-
tary determines that treating certain
roosts with chemicals registered for bird
control puruoses would pose a hazard to
human health, safety, or property, he
may block use of the chemical In those
areas.
Mr. President, I have been a sl~aunch
supporter of the National Environmental
Policy Act and Its provisions for some
time, and I would oppose legislation
which would weaken the intent of the
law or provide broad exemptions .from it
for activities of a questionable environ-
mental impact. The situation which con-
fronts the States of Tennessee and Ken-
tucky, however, Is one In which an im-
minent health hazard exists. The chem-
ical which would be used In controlling
the birds has been used in the area be-
fore with no harmful environmental ef-
fects, and an environmental impact`
statement on that use was filed last year.
The delay which has been caused al-
ready by litigation in this case has re-
sulted in an. increase in the number of
victims of histoplasmosis, and every day
those birds are permitted to roost in the
area increases the danger to residents of
all ages. I urge the Senate to act
promptly on this emergency measure so
that steps can be taken now to control
ade by the Congress to in-
Mr. President, I rise in
support of the ill and to express my
gratitude to my olleagues from Ken-
tucky and Tenness@ for introducing this
much-needed piece emergency legis-
We have children in hospital today
because the Government s no come to
grips with a. fundamenta roblem that
affects life and property our two
This bill will give us a very ort pe-
riod of time to deal with the preen in
an environmentally safe and mound
ceed to the passage and enactment in
law.
S601
Incidence of the disease histoplasmosis
is increasing greatly. There is no logical
reason that it should, had the Govern-
ment not delayed and delayed. Prior to
1974. in Montgomery County, Tenn., for
example, the histoplasmosis was identi-
fied `n two to four children per year. For
the years 1974-75, the incidence increased
to wore than 25 cases per year. On the
basis of such health findings, I can only
lend my strongest support to this emer-
gency bill. .
M:?. President, it is incredible that we
ever. have to come to Congress in this
fash ion. Our Government cannot have
gro?=n to the point of insensitivity, yet
in Vie face of mounting evidence, we see
no .alternative to this legislation. This
measure is necessary, and I hope that it
will provide a short-term solution so that
we 'nay seriously look toward final and
lastng solutions. The people of Tennes-
see and Kentucky have 'suffered long
eno;gh.
14lr. FORD. Mr. President, today I am
,joining with my distinguished colleagues
fro;ar Kentucky and Tennessee in intro-
ducing legislation to provide relief to
communities in the two-State area, suf-
fering from an infestation of blackbirds,
starlings, and grackles.
We offer this legislation for one pur-
pose-to protect the health a nd well be-
ing of those who live there.
For more than 6 years, these people
have patiently tolerated the serious
health, agricultural and economic prob-
Ien:s which have developed as a result of
the presence of these birds. They have
seeae their feed and grain crops destroyed.
They have borne the loss of ,livestock due
to she disease carried by these birds. And
they have watched helplessly as this
disease spread to their family and
fri nds.
y have worked with them, first iin the
sty tehouse and now in the Senate, to
resolve this serious situation. As Gover-
nor of Kentucky, I acted twice in 1974
to declare that states of emergency
being faced by the children. t ho live in
areas affected by the birds.
Mr. President, the shameful aspect of
this situation is the foot dragging which
has occurred over the past few years. It
has come to the point that the people are
crying out for help from their Govern-
ment but are not confident that their
Government can or will provide any help.
Unfortunately, after trying to deal with
this problem for many, many months
now, I almost have to agree.
ng with here 'is more
people's lives and tb 'ves of their child-
r-n.
Alternate means o ".controlling the
bird populations have seen tried in re-
ecrit years, all to no avail. Portions of
some of the roosts have been relocated
through the use of recorded distress calls
and pyrotechnics. Forests were ?thinned
to discourage roosting in critical areas.
And Kentucky State government has in-
vested thousands of dollars in efforts to
ssyt up bird-control programs. Nothing
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800020028-5
 Approved For Release 2001/09/03 CIA-RDP77M00144R000800020028-5
January 27, 1976 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
modernizing of the antiquated arbitrary The Section of Criminal Justice studied
hodge-podge that is our present criminal the Brown Report and S. 1 over a period of
justice system. If there ever was a counsel four years. It is certainly to be commended
of despair, of throwing out the baby with the for its recognition of the importance of pur-
bath water, it is the suggestion in your edi- suing federal criminal law. revision, and un-
torial that S. 1 be abandoned rather than questionably its proposed 'amendments
amended, as it easily can be to remedy its would strengthen and improve the Senate
defects." bill. Yet its recommendations and the action
Is prison forever to be the only method of of the House of Delegates are disappointing
punishing crime? in several important respects.
He than gave a sampling of the numerous The subject matter of S. 1 deserved some-
improvements incorporated in S. 1 which thing more than a mere legalistic analysis
would be jettisoned if the Journals counsel
were followed:
"A rational scale of.penalties under which
like offenses are subject to like sentences;
"Systematic distinction. between first of-
fenders and multiple or professional crimi-
nals;
"Appellate review of abuse of discretion in
sentencing;
"An improved basis for extraditing crimi-
nals who flee the country;
A system of compensation for victims of
violent crime;
"The first democratically adopted state-
ment of the aims of the criminal justice sys-
tem for the guidance of courts, enforce-
ment officials and correctional agencies."
Professor Schwartz concluded:
"In short, although there are a dozen spe-
cific amendments required to make S. 1 ac-
ceptable, the overall aim and substantial ac-
complishment of the bill is to promote re-
spect for the law by making the law re-
spectable. The reform of the federal criminal
code should be rescued, not killed."
H.R. 10850
Belatedly, on November 20, 1975, Repre-
sentatives Kastenmeler (D. Wisc.), Mikva (D.
Ill.) and Edwards (D. Cal.) Introduced H.R.
'10850, a new bill to revise Title 18 which was
prepared in large part by the American Civil
Liberties Union. It tracks S. 1 closely, and
departs materially from the bill only in the,
relatively few areas where major disagree-
ment by the ACLU with the Senate bill was
only to be expected. The provisions in ques-
tion deal with: the insanity defense, treat-
ment of classified material, marijuana, the
of the language of a complex bill: One may
well wonder how helpful anyone could find
the main paragraph of the long resolution
of the House of Delegates. It reads-in part
as follows:
"Be it resolved . that the American
Bar Association endorses in principle the
provisions of S. 1 and its counterpart H.R.
3907, now pending in the 94th Congress,
1st Session, as a desirable basis for the re-
form of the federal criminal laws; noting
however that the Commission on Correc-
tional Facilities and Services urges the par-
ticular importance of amendments to reflect
the general principles set out in Recommen-
dations 28, 31? 33 and 34 in Appendix A
hereto and the relevant sections of the ABA
Standards Relating to the Administration of
Criminal Justice...."
Furthemore, the most critized ommissions
or inclusions of $. 1 are almost ignored. The
ABA takes no position on the absence of
provision for gun control; it has ducked the
question of capital punishment, taking
refuge in the fact that it is sub judice in the
Supreme Court; it has withheld recommen-
dations on the S. 1 handling of the drug
problem, pending a study by the association
"in depth." In addition, the Section report,
and consequently the House of Delegates' ac-
tion, fails to call attention to the important
fact that the vast majority of the bill pro-
visions constitute law reform that is virtu-
ally beyond controversy. The ABA criticism
and simultaneous support of S. 1 cannot be'
dismissed as unhelpful, but the Association
has done considerably less than sound a
tocsin summoning Congress to get on with
ity and the like. It may be anticipated that THE BAR'S RESPONSIBILITY
the liberal view of the framers of H.R. 10850 In light of the wreckage that crime is
may incite as violent opposition from con- causing throughout the country (one family
servative elements inside and outside of out of every four victimized); of the finan-
Congress as some of the repressive measures cial burden that crime and its prevention
of S. 1 did from the liberals, imposes upon us annually (around $100
The introduction of the ACLU legislation billion, or a tenth of the gross national prod-
is bound` to increase the polarization among uct) ; and of the unique capability of lawyers
members of Congress and hurt the cause of to provide leadership in a field in which they
revision, yet two points may be made in its have more expertise than almost all others,
favor. The bill follows the provision number- the apparent lack of concern of the profession
log of S. 1 and consequently makes easy an is difficult to explain.
examination of the sections in which the We are apparently ready to stand by and
sponsors of the two bills run at cross pur- allow Congress to resolve some of the most
should bring out forcefully how much agree- with scarcely a word of advice, support, or Mr. GOLDWATER, Mr. President, I
ment resides on each side with respect to the even opposition, from the organized bar. ask unanimous consent that the order
vast majority of the provisions of both bills. Within the framework of revision of Title 18
Only on a limited number of highly contro- as a whole, rest among others the following for the quorum call be rescinded,
versial issues does significant disagreement great questions of the day: The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr:
exist, Are sentences of imprisonment to be left, STONE). Without objection, it is so
THE ABA CONTRIBUTION as heretofore, to the whim of a judge who ordered.
At the 1975 annual meeting of the Ameri- may be guided entirely by the theory that Who yields time? We are under con-
can Bar Association, the Section of Criminal only severity of punishment will block crime, trolled time.
Justice secured virtually unanimous ap- or should sentencing be placed on a more
proval by the House of Delegates of a resolu- uniform, scientific basis conforming to mod- Under the previous consent agreement,
tion endorsing S. 1 in principle, subject to a ern principles of penology? debate on any amendment, except an
series of thirty-eight suggested amendments. Should we continue to fight drug abuse amendment based on article VII of the
In a few instances the Section preferred the only with the savagery of heavy punishment, Conservation Treaty of 1958, on which
counterpart section of H.R. 333; in several or with up-to-date principles of crime pre- there shall be 3 hours of debate, with
it disapproved of the S. 1 provision in its en- vention and control? only 11/2 hours of that time to be utilized
tirety (treatment of the insanity defense, Do victimless crimes and plinor infrac- today, shall be limited to 1 hour with 10
control of prostitution, crime in federal en- tions of law deserve the inordinate share of minutes on any debatable motion or
claves) ; but in most the S. 1 approach was police time and effort now devoted to them appeal,
approved, subject to amendments to make at the cost of serious diminution of the
it conform to the Standards Relating to the protection of society from crimes of vio- Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr: President, I
S 603
give up the absolute right of everyone to
bear all kinds of arms for whatever purpose?
Is prison forever to be the only method
of punishing crime, or might a modern sci-
entific effort be made to utilize probation as
a supplementary method?
Must we accept recidivism as unconquer-
able rather than try to arrest it by a whole-
hearted system of rehabilitation?
The mere delineation of those issues should
make clear how hopeless it would be to ex-
pect a single piece of legislation to resolve
every one of them satisfactorily. It seems
obvious that several of the questions demand
separate legislation carefully drafted and
followed by time for what' may be prolonged
debate. To attempt to package all the solu-
tions in an omnibus treatment, as have the
framers of S. 1 and H.R. 10850, simply invites
the possible rejection by Congress of any
revision whatever.
It is here that one might have expected
the leadership of the profession to offer
guidance to the Congress. Instead of being
content to stand by and witness the crush-
ing to death of this important legislation be-
tween the extremists of the right and those
of . the left, the American Bar Association
might well have called for the elimination of
the controversial provisions and the enact-
ment of the portions of S. 1 on which nearly
everyone can agree.
That is not to say that the provisions of
the code governing wiretapping, drug abuse,
capital punishment, obscenity and gun con-
trol should be ignored. Obviously, they are
in great.need of reexamination and revision.
The bar should call for new legislation in
those areas without delay. There is no per-
suasive reason, however, why the other por-
tions of Title 18 should be hung up until'
MAGNUSON FISHERIES MANAGE-
MENT AND CONSERVATION ACT
OF 1976
The Senate continued with the con-
sideration of the bill (S. 961) to extend,
pending international agreement, the
fisheries management responsibility, and
authority of the United States over the
fish in certain ocean areas in order to
conserve and protect such fish from de-
pletion, and for other purposes.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I sug-
gest the absence of a quorum without the
time being taken from either side.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem-
pore. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk pro-
few of the proposed amendments could be Must we continue to suffer the present The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk
characterized as sweeping. - annual slaughter by homicide rather than will call the roll.
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800020028-5
 S 604
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800020028-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE January 27, 1976
The assistant legislative clerk pro-
ceeded 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.
RECESS UNTIL 12:45 P.M.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the Senate stand
in recess until 12:45 p.m. today.
There being no objection, the Senate,
at 11:18 a,.m.. recessed until 12:45 p.m.;
whereupon the Senate reassembled,
when called to order by the Presiding
Officer 3 Mr. FORD)
QUORUM CALL
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair
suggests the absence of a quorum.
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.
EXTENSION OF TIME FOR FILING
REPORT
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr.. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the Committee
on Armed Services and the Committee
on Foreign Relations may have until
midnight tonight to file a report on
House Joint Resolution: 549, dealing with
the covenant with the Northern Mari-
ana Islands.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk
will call the roll.
The se,,ond assistant legislative clerk
proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McINTYRE. Mr President, I ask
unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. (Mr.
GLENNJ. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
EXECUTIVE SESSION-NOMINATION
OF GEORGE BUSH TO BE DIREC-
TOR OF CENTRAL. INTELLIGENCE
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under
the previous order, the hour of 1 o'clock
having arrived, the Senate will now go
into exeimtive session to consider the
nomination of Mr. George Bush to be
Director of Central Intelligence.
The clerk will state the nomination.
The assistant legislative clerk read as
.follows: .
Nomination, Central Intelligence, George
Bush of Texas, to be the Director.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Debate on
this nomination is limited to 2 hours to
be equally divided and controlled by the
Senator from South Carolina (Mr.
THURMOND) and the Senator .from New
Hampshire (Mr. MCINTYRE) with the
vote thereon to occur'at 3 p.m.
The Senator from New Hampshire. of the agency, these are. surely not the
Mr. McINTYRE. Mr. President, I ask best of circumstances.
unanimous consent that two members of To confirm any nominee to this post
my staff, Mrs. Elizabeth Webber and
David LaRoche be granted the privileges
of the floor during this debate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. McINTYRE. Mr. President, I yield
myself 5 minutes.
Mr. President, yesterday in this Cham-
ber I expressed my reasons for opposing
the confirmation of Mr. George H. Bush
as Director of the Central Intelligence
Agency.
I- said that the appointment of so
clearly perceived a political figure to di-
rect the rebuilding of this Agency would
undercult two self-evident priorities:
First. The need to restore CIA probity
by insuring the Agency's future adher-
ence to its statutory purpose and by in-
sulating the Agency from political cor-
ruption of that purpose.
Second. And, equally important, the
need to convince the American people
that the restoration effort is sincere and
that the end result can be trusted.
We are about to vote on this matter,
Mr. President, but I would like to take
a few minutes to emphasize those funda-
mental considerations.
The majority report on the nomination.
makes two important points:
First. That whoever is named to this
post must be insulated from political
considerations if he or she is to be effec-
tive and objective in intelligence gath-
ering, and that he or she must use the
substantial and secret power of the office
scrupuously within the law, even when
political or personal interests may pres-
sure otherwise.
Second. That the intelligence commu-
nity, the Congress, and the American
people must always have full confidence
in the character of the Director of Cen-
tral Intelligence.
Can anyone in this Chamber question
those objectives? They are from the ma-
jority report on this nomination.
If the answer is "no," as it ought to
be, then why, I ask, did the President
choose this particular moment in the
CIA history to nominate an individual
so certain to inspire skepticism?
Why now, of all times, does he ask us
to break the 27-year history precedent
of nonpolitical Directors of the CIA?,
This is not a routine Executive ap-
pointment wherein the President's desire
for a "team player" has some legitimacy.
This is not a Cabinet appointment
wherein the nominee is expected to serve
his President as an instrument of Execu-
tive policy and power.
This is not even comparable to the
nomination of a Supreme Court Justice,
wherein the President's desire for an ap-
pointee who shares his court philosophy
is understandable and precedented, and
where the ultimate independence of the
justice is carefully insulated by tradition
and the Constitution.
No, my colleagues, this nomination is
for the directorship of an agency whose
functions are vital, yet difficult to recon-
at any time requires an act of faith on
the part of each Member of this body,
acting in behalf of the public at large.
To confirm this nominee, at this time,
under these circumstances demands
more than an act of faith, it requires an
insensitivity to public skepticism over
the prudence and propriety of the nom-
ination itself.
In short, Mr. President, the nomina-
tion of a clearly perceived political per-
sonage to insure the purpose and protect
the integrity of an agency so recently
vulnerable to political subornation does
not inspire public confidence. It simply
raises suspicion, doubts, and cynicism at
a time when the CIA desperately needs
trust, faith, and confidence.
One more point, Mr. President.
Shouldhe be confirmed, Mr. Bush will
be the fourth CIA Director in only 3
years.
When it considered the nomination,
the committee addressed the important
question of tenure, and properly stressed
the need for continuity of leadership at
this critical stage in the life of the
agency.
The majority of the committee was
satisfied on this point when the President
took Mr. Bush off the list of Vice Presi-
dential possibilities, ostensibly assuring
us that the nominee would occupy the
post at least through the upcoming cam-
paign.
But if extended tenure is a real con-
sideration, as I believe it is, how is that
concept served by confirming a political
person in that post during a Presidential
election year?
Where is the guaranty of tenure be-
yond January 20, 1977, if anyone other
than Mr. Ford is sworn in as President?
Where is the guaranty of tenure there?
And where does this leave the CIA?
Can the prospect of a political appointee
as Director, and all that this portends,
improve morale within a demoralized
Agency any more than it can inspire
public confidence outside the Agency?
I fear not, Mr; President. I fear not.
In conclusion, then, I urge my col-
leagues to weigh very carefully the prec-
edent we are being asked to set today
and to ask themselves whether this
nomination is, in fact, in the best inter-
ests of the CIA or will in any way en-
hance public confidence in the Agency
or, for that matter, in the Senate of
the United States.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who
yields time?
Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, will the
the Senator yield me 6 minutes? I under-
stand the Senator from South Carolina
has control of the time.
Mr. THURMOND. I yield 6 minutes to
the Senator from Mississippi.
Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, this
nomination before the Senate, for Di-
rector of Central Intelligence is, of
course, one of overwhelming importance.
The nominee is Mr. George Bush, as is
well known.
cile with the values of a free people After hearings in December last the
under the best of, circumstances. And Committee on Armed Services voted 12
with all the evidence of abuses by and to 4 to favorably report this nomination.
Approved For Release 2001/09/03 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800020028-5