DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT 1982

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 9
• Document Creation Date: December 21, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 24, 2008
• Sequence Number: 5
• Publication Date: July 15, 1981
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

I10~, Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0 141iA'
July 14 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE H 4329
cient administration of public philan-
thropy, encouraged careers in social
work and fought to prevent pauperism
through adequate wages and humane
working conditions.
Mary Lyon (1797-1849) utilized her
Inheritance of $37,000, her religious
fervor, teacher training, and her devo-
tion to women's education to raise the
funds and the public interest to found
Mount, Holyoke College.
Frances Perkins (1880-1965) was the
first female Cabinet member in the
Nation's history who brought to her
position as Secretary of Labor, three
decades of commitment to social
reform. Under her direction, the Im-
migration and Naturalization Service
was purged of racketeers, the Bureau
of Labor Statistics was greatly expand-
ed, the Division of Labor Standards
was established, the Women's and
Children's Bureaus turned in highly
competent performances, and an up-
graded Federal Mediation and Conci-
liation Service gained the confidence
of most labor leaders.
Lucy Stone (1818-93) was the first
Massachusetts woman to take a col-
lege degree and founded the Women's
Journal which for 47 years was the
voice of the women's movement in the
United States. A ceaseless abolitionist
and feminist, she helped to organize,
and served on the executive committee
of the American Equal Rights Associ-
ation, designed to press for both Negro
and women's suffrage.
Phillis Wheatley (circa 1753-84). the
first black woman poet in America,
was bought directly off a slave ship in
Boston at age 6, speaking no English.
Her talent for memorial, religious, and
occasional verse,won national approval
and was cited as proof of the antislav-
ery argument that people of her race
could profit by education.
It is these }2 outstanding Massachu-
setts women, and countless others
from the other 49 States, who will at
last receive appropriate recognition
The Clerk read the Senate ? joint res-
olution, as follows:
S.J. REs. 28
Whereas American women of every race,
class, and ethnic background helped found
the Nation In countless recorded and unre-
corded ways as servants, slaves, nurses,
nuns, homemakers, Industrial workers.
teachers, reformers, soldiers, and pioneers;,
Whereas American women have played
and continue to play a critical economic,
cultural, and social role In every sphere of
our Nation's life by constituting a signifi-
cant portion of the labor force working in
and outside of the home;
Whereas American women have played a
unique role throughout our history by pro-
viding the majority of the Nation's volun-
teer labor force and have been particularly
important In the establishment of early
charitable philanthropic and cultural insti-
tutions in the country;
Whereas American women of every 'race,
class, and ethnic background served'as early
leaders in the forefront of every major pro-
gressive social change movement, not only
to secure their own right of suffrage and
equal oppo'tunity, but also in. the abolition-
1st movement, the emancipation movement.
the industrial labor union movement, and
the modern civil rights movement; and
Whereas despite these contributions, the
role of American women in history has been
consistently overlooked and undervalued In
the body of American history: Now, there-
fore, be It
Resolved by the Senate and House of Rep-
resentatives of the United States of America
in Congress assembled, That the week be-
ginning March 8, 1981, Is designated as
"Women's History Week", and the Presi-
dent is requested to issue a proclamation
calling upon the people of the United States
to observe such week with appropriate cere-
monies and activities.
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. GARCIA
Mr. GARCIA. Mr. Speaker, I offer
an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. GARCIA: Page
2, line 3, strike out "March 8, 1981," and
Insert in lieu thereof "March 7, 1982,".
The amendment was agreed to.
The Senate Joint resolution was or-
dered to be read a third time, was read
the third time, and passed.
The title was amended so as to read:
"Joint resolution'designating the week
beginning March 7, 1982, as 'Women's
History Week'."
A motion to reconsider was laid, on
the table.
NATIONAL CYSTIC FIBROSIS
WEEK
Mr. GARCIA. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the Commit-
tee on Post Office and Civil Service be
discharged from further consideration
of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 212)
to designate the third week of Septem-
ber as "National Cystic Fibrosis
Week," and ask for its immediate con-
sideration.
The Clerk read the title of the joint
resolution.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New York?
There was no objection.
The Clerk read the joint resolution,
as follows:
H.J. Rss. 212
Whereas cystic fibrosis is the number one
genetic killer of children in America, and be-
tween one thousand five hundred and two
thousand five hundred are born each year
in this country with the disease; and
Whereas public understanding of cystic fi-
brosis is essential to enhance early detection
and treatment of the disease and reduce the
misunderstanding and confusion concerning
the symptoms of cystic fibrosis; and
Whereas a national awareness of the
cystic fibrosis problem will stimulate inter-
est and concern leading -to increased re-
search and eventually a cure for cystic fi-
brosis: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of Rep-
resentatives of the United States of America
in Congress assembled, That the third week
of September of each year Is designated as
"National Cystic Fibrosis Week", and the
President Is authorized and requested to
issue a proclamation calling upon the people
of the United States to observe that week
with appropriate ceremonies and activities.
Mr. GARCIA. Mr. Speaker, House
Joint Resolution 212 designates the
third week in September as "National
Cystic Fibrosis Week." This week is
designed to Increase public under-
standing of cystic fibrosis, which is the
No. 1 killer of children in America. Na-
tional awareness of the cystic fibrosis
problem will stimulate Interest and
concern leading to increased research
and eventually a cure for cystic fibro-
sis.
House Joint Resolution 212 has been
cosponsored by over 218 Members.
AMENDMENT OPIUM BY BM GARCIA
Mr. GARCIA. Mr. Speaker, I offer
an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by' Mr. GARCIA: Page
2, line 3. strike out "The third week of Sep-
tember of each year" and insert in lieu
thereof "the week beginning September 13
through 19, 1981.".
The amendment was agreed to.
The joint resolution was ordered to
be engrossed and read a third time,
was read the third time, and passed.
The title was amended so as to read:
"Joint resolution designating the week
beginning September 13, 1981, as "Na-
tional Cystic Fibrosis Week."
A motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
GENERAL LEAVE
Mr. GARCIA. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to
revise and extend their remarks, and
include extraneous matter, on the
joint resolutions just passed.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New York?
There was no objection.
DEP EFEN
SR.
HORIZATION A
Mr. PRICE. Mr. Speaker, I move
that the House resolve itself Into the
Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union for the further
consideration of the bill (H.R. 3519) to
authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 1982 for the Armed Forces for
procurement; for research, develop-
ment, test, and evaluation, and for op-
eration and maintenance, to prescribe
personnel strengths for such fiscal
year for the Armed Forces and for ci-
vilian employees of the Department of
Defense, to authorize appropriations
for such fiscal year for civil defense,
and for other purposes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is on the motion offered by
the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
PRICE).
The motion was agreed to.
IN THE COMMITTEE or THE WHOLE
Accordingly the House resolved
itself Into the Committee of' the
Whole House on the State of the
Union for the further consideration of
the bill, H.R. 3519, with Mr. DANIEL-
soN, Chairman pro tempore, in the
chair.
Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0
 Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0
H 4330 CONGRESSIONAL. RECORD - HOUSE
The Clerk read the title of the bi]
11 1050
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore.
When the Committee of the Whole
House rose on Tuesday, July 14, title
.IX had been considered as having
been read and open to amendment at
any point.
Pending was the amendment recom-
mended by the Committee on the Ju-
diciary, as amended, and an amend-
ment offered by the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. SHAW) to the committee
amendment, as amended,' on which a
recorded vote had been requested.
Does the gentleman from Florida
(Mr. SHAW) insist on his request for a
recorded vote?
Mr. SHAW. I do, Mr. Chairman.
RECORDED VOTE
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The
pending business is the demand of the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. SHAW)
for a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic
device, and there were-ayes 248, noes
168, answered "present" 1, not voting
15, as follows:
Akaka
Albosta
Alexander
Andrews
Anthony
Archer
Ashbrook
Badham
Bafalts
Bailey (MO)
Barnard
Beard
Bedell
Benjamin
Bennett
Bereuter
Bethune
Bevill
Bliley
[Roll No. 1291
AYES-248
Derwinskl Hubbard
Dickinson \ Huckaby
Dicks Hunter
Dorgan Hutto
Doman Hyde
Dougherty Ireland
Dowdy Jeffries
Dreier Jenkins
Duncan. Johnston
Dunn Jones (OK)
Dyson Jones (TN)'
Early Kazen
Edwards (AL) Kramer
Edwards (OK) LaFalce
Emerson Lagomarsino
English Latta
Erdahl Leath
Erlenborn LeBoutillier
Lee
Levitas
Lewis
Livingston
Loeffler
Lott
Lowery (CA)
Lujan
Lungren
Madigan
Marlene
Marriott
Martin (IL)
Martin (NC)
Martin (NY).
Mavroules
McCollum
McCurdy
McDade
McDonald
MeEwen
McGrath
Boggs Evans (IA)
Boner Evans (IN)
Bouquard Fascell
Bowen Fazio
Breaux Fiedler
Brinkley Fields
Broomfield Fithian
Brown (CO) Flippo
Brown (OH) Florio
Eroyh)d Fountain
Burgener Fowler
Butler Frenzel
Byron Fuqua
Campbl. Gaydos
Carman Gephardt
Chappell Gibbons
Chappee Gingrich
Cheney Ginn
Clausen Goldwater
Clinger Gramm
Coats Grisham
Coleman
Collins (TX)
Conable
Corcoran
Coughlin
Courter
Coyne, James
Craig
Crane, Daniel
Crane, Philip
Daniel, Dan
Daniel, R. W.
Dannemeyer
Daub
.Davis
de Is Cana
Derrick
Hagedom McKinney
Hall (OH) Mica
Hammerschmidt Michel
Hance Miller (OH)
Hansen (ID) Minish
Hansen (UT) Molinari
Hartnett Montgomery
Hatcher
Hefner
Heftel
Hendon
Hightower
Hiler
Hlllls
Holland
Holt
Hopkins
Morrison
Mottl
Myers
Napier
Neal
Nclligan
Nelson
Nichols
Nowak
O'Brien
Parris
Pashayan
Patman
Patterson
Pepper
Porter
Pritchard
Quillen
Railsback
Regula
Rhodes
Ritter
Roberts (KS)
Roberta (SD)
Robinson
Roemer
Rogers
Rose
Rostenkowski
Roth
Rousselot
Rudd
Sawyer
Scheuer
Addabbo
Anderson
Annunzio
Atkinson
AuCoin
Bailey (PA)
Barnes
Beilenson
Benedict
Biaggi
Bingham
Blanchard
Boland
Bolling
Bunker
Brodhead
Brooks
Brown (CA)
Burton, John
Burton, Phillip
Carney
Chisholm
Clay
Coelho
Collins (IL)
Conte
Conyers
Coyne, William
Crockett
D'Amours
Danielson
Daschle
Dellums
Dingell
Dixon
Donnelly
Downey
Dwyer
Dymally
Eckart
Edgar
Edwards (CA)
Emery
Ertel
Evans (DE)
Fary
Fenwick
Ferraro
Findley
Fish
Foglietta
Foley
Ford (MI)
Ford (TN)
Forsythe
Frank
Schneider
Schulze
Sensenbrenner
Shaw
Shelby
Shumway
Shuster
Siljander
Skeen
Skelton
Smith (AL)
Smith (IA)
Smith (NE).
Smith (NJ)
Smith (OR)'
Snowe
Solomon
Spence
St Germain
Stangeland
Stanton
Staton
Stenholm
Stratton
Stump
Tauke
NOES-168
Tauzin
Taylor
Thomas
Traxler
Trible.
Walgren
Watnpler
Watkins
Weber (MN)
Weber (OH)
Whitehurst
Whitley
Whittaker
Whitten
Williams (OH) -
Wilson
Winn
Wolf
Wortley
Wylie
Yatron
Young (AK)
Young(FL)
Young (MO)
Zablocki
Frost Murtha
Garcia Natcher
Gejdenson Oakar
Gilman Oberstar
Glickman Obey
Gonzalez - Ottinger
Gore Panetta
Gradison Paul
Gray Pease
Green Perkins
Gregg Petri
Guarini Peyser
Gunderson Pickle
Hall, Ralph Price
Hall, Sam Pursell
Hamilton Rahall
Harkin Rangel
Hawkins Ratchford
Heckler Reuss
Hertel Richmond
Hollenbeck Rinaldo
Horton. Rodino
Howard Roe
Royer Roukema
Hughes Russo
Jacobs Sabo
Jeffords Schroeder
Kastenmeler Schumer
Kildee Seiberling
Kindness Shamarwky
Kogovsek Shannon
Leach Sharp
Lehman Simon
Leland Snyder
Lent Solarz
Long (LA) Stark
Long (MD) Stokes
Lowry (WA) Studds
Luken Swift
Lundine Synar
Markey Udall
Marks Vento
Matsui Volkmer
Mattox Walker
Mazzoli Washington
McClory Waxman
McCloskey Weaver
McHugh Weiss
Mikulskl White
Miller (CA) Williams (MT)
Mineta' Wirth
Mitchell (NY) Wolpe
Moakley Wright
Moffett Wyden
Mollohan Yates
Murphy Zeferettt
ANSWERED "PRESENT"-1
Roybal
NOT VOTING-15
Applegate DeNardis Mitchell (MD)
Aspin Goodiing Rosenthal
Bonior Jones (NC) Santini
Cotter Kemp Savage
Deckard Lantos. Vander Jagt
01100
July 15, 1981
The Clerk announced the. following
pairs:
On this vote:
Mr. Jones of North. Carolina for, with Mr.
Mitchell of Maryland against.
Messrs. DYMALLY, EMERY, J XP-
FORDS, ECKART, and BONKER
changed their vote from "aye" to
no.
Messrs. PORTER, ANTHONY, HA-
GEDORN, LEVITAS, Mrs. BOU-
QUARD, Messrs. HIGHTOWER,
LAFALCE, BEVILL, PRITCHARD,
BROWN of Ohio, FRENZEL, and
NEAL changed their vote from "no" to
"aye." .
So the amendment to the Judiciary
Committee amendment, as amended,
was agreed to.
The result of the vote was an-
nounced as above recorded.
Mr. NELSON. Mr. Chairman, I
would like to take this opportunity to
express my strong support for Mr.
SHAW's amendment to H.R. 3519, an'
amendment that would significantly
enhance the power of civil authorities
to deter and eliminate the damage
that drug-related crime is inflicting
upon our society. '
I have Just returned from an 11-day,
29-stop tour with government officials
in the Caribbean region and I have
studied firsthand the transfer point on
the drug traffic highway. Our Nation's
Coast Guard and civil law authorities
have been losing the war in combating
an increasing flow of illegal drugs to
the United States and as a result, have
strained our current resources for
drug enforcement to the limit. We are
losing this battle because of our inabil-
ity to use all of the available resources
and equipment in our effort against il-
legal drugs.
My own State of Florida has long
been a receiving point for drug-related
traffic. The Coast Guard and civilian
authorities occasionally seize and ap-
prehend offenders, but all too often
the offenders escaje or go undetected
and the only traces are the bales of
marihuana that wash ashore on the
public beaches or. the shells of hol-
lowed out planes that are abandoned
on deserted airfields.
I support Mr. SHAw's amendment
because I believe it is vitally important
that we combine our efforts in order
to enhance the power of and the coop-
eration between our Federal, State,
and local authorities. Our U.S. Armed
Forces have the equipment and the ca-
pability to render assistance to the ci-
vilian authorities in locating and seiz-
ing ships and aircraft involved in drug
trafficking and I urge strong support
of this amendment so we may signifi-
cantly enhance our position in this
war on drug crime.
Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0
 July 15, 1981
Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
^ 1110
PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, I rise
to make a parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
will state his parliamentary inquiry.
Mr. HUGHES. As I understand the
parliamentary situation, Mr. Chair-
man, It is that the Hughes amend-
ment, as amended by the Shaw
amendment which just carried, is now
pending before the House. So, as I
seek an aye amendment on the
Hughes amendment, that is the next
order of business?
The CHAIRMAN. So the, Chair can
restate, we have before the Committee
now the Judiciary Committee amend-
ment, as amended by both the White
and Shaw amendments.
Mr. HUGHES. So the situation is
that the Hughes amendment is pend-
ing, as modified by the White amend-
ment, which was accepted by the Judi-
ciary Committee, and as just mofified
by the Shaw amendment? That is the
next order of business?
The CHAIRMAN. That is correct.
Mr. STRATTON.'Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike the requisite number of
words.
Mr. Chairman, I take this time in an
effort to clarify a point that has been
raised by the adoption of the Shaw
amendment. The White amendment,
which was adopted previously with the
approval of the Committee on the Ju-
diciary, said in effect that no equip-
ment could be operated in the land
area of the United States, except for
the use of monitoring:and communi-
cating air and sea traffic;; or, second, is
engaged in entering or leaving the
land area of the United States.
The Shaw ? amendment, which
amended the White amendment, says
that the Armed Forces can assist drug
enforcement officials in drug seizures
or arrests outside the land area.of the
United States.
My question to the gentleman from
Texas '(Mr. WHrrE), the author of the
original amendment, is just how he in-
terprets-and I think we ought to have
it in the legislative history-just what
As the area involved in "entering or
leaving" the land area of the United
States? Are we talking about the 200-
mile limit, which would severely limit
these antidrug activities. I think this is
a matter that might be of interest to
Members of the House if they are ever
entering or leaving the coastal waters
in their own boats, and I think we
ought to define precisely what is in-
volved. Is it the 200-mile limit or Is it
just the area directly In shore?
I would appreciate the gentleman
from Texas giving his understanding.
Mr. WHITE. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. STRATTON. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Texas (Mr. WHixE).
Mr. WHITE. I thank the gentleman
for yielding. The amendment contem-
plated that this equipment could be
used to monitor, track, and conduct
surveillance at any point of the land
area. That did not mean the 200-mile
limit, but right to the land. In fact,
the Attorney General's office inter-
prets this to permit hot pursuit.
With the Shaw amendment added
on to the bill, forgiving the power of
arrest at sea, principally at sea, then I
would assume, then, that hot pursuit
could also cover arrests, too. In other
.words, if a would-be violator or sus-
pected violator were to dodge Into a
reef area or make the land, then I
would believe they could come to that
land area to grab them, and to arrest
at that point.
This was the objective, not to give
them a sanctuary over the 200-mile
limit.
This amendment authorizes the use
of military personnel, uniformed and
civilian, to assist civilian law enforce-
ment officials in the operation and
maintenance of equipment which has
been made available under proposed
section 372 of title 10. This type of
direct operational assistance Is gener-
ally prohibited by the Posse Comita-
tus Act (18 U.S.C. 1385). The tradition
of creating exceptions to the impor-
tant, doctrine of separating the. mili-
tary from civilian law enforcement is
maintained by limiting the application
of the section to three sets of specific
criminal statutes and to narrowly pre-
scribed circumstances.
The type of military assistance
which will be rendered under this sect-
gion consists of the operation and
maintenance of sophisticated equip-
ment in circumstances where it would
not be practical or feasible to train ci-
vilians. The types of laws which can
justify the requests for military assist-
ance. are Federal statutes which fre-
quently involve the movement of ves-
sels or aircraft into or out of the
United States. Three separate types of
offenses are listed: Drug laws, immi-
gration laws, and customs-related stat-
utes. The first two sets of statutes are
included by reference to the criminal
statutes which would form the basis of
the investigation and possible criminal
charge. The third category, that is
customs related laws, is described ge-
nerically.
The word "arrival" is used to encom-
pass all those criminal statutes which
prohibit the introduction, bringing in,
entry or Importation. of property Into
the United States. The term "depar-
ture" is used to mean the exportation
or attempted exportation of goods or
,materials from the United States in
contravention of a criminal statute.
For example, the arrival of certain
merchandise is proscribed by the
Tariff Act of 1930, the Gun Control
Act, for example (18 U.S.C. 892(a)(3),
18 U.S.C. 922(a)) and by chapter 27 of
title-18. The departure branch-of this
type of statute includes violations, orr
attempted violations, of 22 U.S.C. 401,
relating to illegal exportation of war
materials; 22 U.S.C. 2778, relating to
control of arms exports and imports;
50 U.S.C. App. 2401 et seq., relating to
114331
the Export Administration Act of
1979. The other terms used with re-
spect to violations of the customs laws
are defined by reference to an existing
statute. These terms are used in order
to preserve the judicial and adminis-
trative Interpretations used In the ref-
erenced citation.
The grant of authority to the mili-
tary personnel to take such action in-
cidental to the operation or mainte-
nance of equipment is meant to be
read in conjunction with the limita-
tions-of section 374. Proposed section
374 requires the Secretary of,Defense
to promulgate regulations which pro-
hibit the use of military personnel in
"any search and seizure, and arrest or
other similar activity." The use of the
term "incidental" is designed to con-
tinue the current policy of the Depart-.
ment of Defense which authorizes mil-
itary, personnel to take actions to
defend themselves and Federal proper-
ty when such action is undertaken in
response to the exigencies of the situa-
tion. See, for example, Department of
Defense Directive 3025,12 V-C-1-b,
August 19, 1971.
Subsection (b) of proposed section
375 places several limitations on the
types of operational assistance which
may be granted. Nothing in this sec-
tion limits the permissible locale of
maintenance assistance authorized
under subsection (a). Under subsection
(b) the operational assistance must
take place in the land area of the
United States with certain defined ex-
ceptions. The exceptions are set forth
in order to meet legitimate law en-
forcement needs and to answer ques-
tions which arose in the Committee on
the Judiciary when a similar amend-
ment was under consideration. See
House Report 97-71, part II at 12 n. 3.
The term "land area of the United
States" is used to create a line of de-
marcation which will permit the oper-
ation of equipment in coastal waters,
estuaries, and other 'major. navigable
bodies of water. These waterways are
frequent routes of drug trafficking
into the United States. Examples of
places where such operational assist-
ance would be authorized Include the
coastal waters surrounding offshore is-
lands of South Carolina, Georgia, and
North Carolina. The estuaries where
such assistance could take place in-
clude places like the Chesapeake and
Delaware Bays. It is not intended,
however, that military personnel be
used to operate equipment to interdict
pleasure craft whose passengers may
be using illegal drugs while cruising on
inland waters, lakes, and rivers.
The two exceptions to this rule
against domestic assistance by the mil-
itary are designed to meet legitimate
law enforcement concerns. The first
exception would allow the operation
of radar or other types*of electronic
surveillance or tracking equipment.
The second exception 'covers two dif-
ferent types of situations. The first
branch of this exception reaches oper-.
Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0
 ti H 4332 Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0
'1.v1vvl%lraa1U1NAL Kh(;UKD - HOUSE July 15, 1981
ational assistance on the land area of States. That is the modification which - The real reason I want a vote on this
the United States when such oper- has been made as a result of the Shaw is because I would hope that we would
ation is the point of departure or ar- amendment. I would hope that in this pass that you could seize on land. And
rival of the equipment. For example, form this body would see fit to sup- why would I want to seize on land?
an Air Force pilot based in the United port -the Judiciary Committee `amend- Well, really, there is only one place
States could operate an aircraft when ment, as amended by the amendments that I have much concern about, and
the law enforcement mission was to that have been adopted which were of. that is the Rio Grande. I do believe
occur outside the United States. The fered by the gentleman from Texas that once the drug smugglers feel that
second circumstance ? under which (Mr. WHITE) and the gentleman from they are cut off from the sea and from
operational assistance, could occur Florida (Mr. SHew).
within the land area of the United, Mr. STRATTON. I think the crucial tthe air, will use te hundreds of
housands they
of millions h, h or so, a year
States would be when a suspected vio- question is what the amendment of- that come In illegally from Mexico,
lator was entering the air or sea space fered by the gentleman from Texas and the sellers will try to prevail on
of the United States and the military (Mr. WHITE) did, and I am happy that those people to bring in the dr:_gs.
equipment was tracking such entry. it has not provided a 200-mile sanctu- Well, I think that pushers ought to
This type of tracking would most fre- ary:
quently result from hot pursuit by Mr. McCLORY. The language re- thknow that is not a that
em Therefore, Idoor
would p is oen to refer military ships or aircraft, but could, on lates to the physical land area of the having the Hughes amendment, as
occasion, be the result of electronic ob- United States, not the 200-mile limit, perfected as it is. I would rather have
servations. Mr. SEIBERLING. Mr. Chairman, I the thing that is actually In the bill. If
Mr. STRATTON. In other words, move to strike the last word. there are an im
this might allow the AWACS, for ex y perfections that are
ample, to determine what pwere Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from not just exactly perfectly written In
coming to
o what boats what planes l le ere Illinois (Mr. MCCLORY) inadvertently the amendment which I drafted origi-were Mr. WHIT w I think the AWACS referred to the Hughes amendment, as nally-I do not know of any-but If
could have been used in any event, amended by the White and Shaw there are any things of that type, they
whether have eene used Shaw amend- amendments, as allowing searches and can be handled In the conference.
mentor not, because it was for surveil- seizures on offshore. It does not allow The reason I asked for this 5 min-
lance and tacking. - searches. One of the anomalies of the utes was just simply to express that
Mr. STRATTON. I thank the gentle- Shaw amendment is that it allows ar- when the'vote comes upon the Hughes
man. rests and it allows seizures,- but it does amendment, I will ask for a recorded
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, will not allow searches. How are you going vote. I hope some Members will stand
Mr-gentleman yield? . to determine whether a person should up with me. I hope we will have a re-
the re-
Mg nTRATTON. Iyield to the gee- be arrested, how are you going to de- corded vote. I hope we will vote down
tleman . from New Jersey. what should be seized, if you the Hughes amendment, even though
Mr. HUGHES. Just for further en- cannot make a search? it has been very much improved, be-
Mr. HUGHES. larea that en- I just think the record ought to be cause that will leave the original lan-
light to, ent, the land t we made clear that we have a very guage of the bill intact. , is ree r t too of course the
United States. land h area of anomalous thing in the language of Mr. SAWYER.,. Mr. Chairman, I
the Shaw amendment. move to strike the last word.
0 1120 Mr. McCLORY. If the gentleman Mr. Chairman, I would just like to
Mr. HUGHES. And we envision the will yield, I thank the gentleman for address the gentleman from Florida
taking off from and landing of air- the clarification. (Mr. BENNETT), If I may have 'the gen-
planes or helicopters, for instance, on But I was just trying to explain the tleman's attention.
bases in the interior of the country, as status of the legislation. I accept the Let me clarify that the only thing
well as the right to use that equip- gentleman's clarification. that is not permitted is actual arrests
ment in the estuaries and along the Mr. SEIBERLING. I just wanted the or seizures by the military.
coast of the United States, because record clear so that somebody reading The DEA, Customs, and other law
often the pursuit. does involve those it would not think that it also author- enforcement agencies are totally em-
estuaries. ized searches, which would be an even powered to make such arrests and set-
Just so the record is clear, that we greater infringement. zures, with the assistance of military
have tried to anticipate allof those sit- Mr. BENNETT. Mr. Chairman,, I equipment.
uations where the law enforcement move to strike the last word. Mr. BENNETT. The gentleman's ob
community will need that equipment Mr. Chairman, I want to congratu- servatlon is correct. -
or that manpower to operate the late the House on giving very careful Mr. SAWYER. The military, the
equipment. thought to this matter that was PLEA, and others testified in hearings
Mr. STRATTON. I just wanted to brought to their attention, everybody before our subcommittee that they
make sure that we did not have a 200- doing exactly what they thought was have adequate personnel always avail-
mile sanctuary area where a lot could best for our country, and, I think the able to do the actual arresting and
happen that was not too good. results have been good, seizure. So I do-not think we have a
Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman, will I do feel that, when it comes to a problem.
the gentleman yield? vote on the Hughes amendment, since Mr. BENNETT. As long as you are
Mr. STRATTON. I yield to the. gen- it does leave out a substantial thing, not actually seizing anybody, as long
tleman from Illinois (Mr. MCCLORY). . which .1 think ought to be added, I am as you are not actually making an
Mr. McCLORY. I thank the gentle- going to ask for a recorded vote; and arrest, you have plenty of people to do
man for yielding. hopefully a majority vote since the bill ' it.
Mr. Chairman, what the Judiciary as unamended is still a stronger meal- The point Is,, we are not getting
Committee did was to provide the full ure
range of activities that was recom- But I must say that, from my stand- enoIt Is ugh kind these people.
to say
ent
mended by the Armed Services Com- point and the view that I have of this that when your are losing ssing gm g5nt r
mittee, with the exception of searches, matter, it Is about a 90-percent victory, of, the stuff that Is enteeriigthisecot n-
seizures, and arrests by the military. as it now is, because it does allow most try, you have got plenty of people to
Under the amendment offered by of the things that the original legisla- seize it. Well, of course you have
the' gentleman from Florida (Mr. tion, the amendment to the Armed plenty of people to seize it, because
Sxaw), which was just adopted the Services Committee bill, allowed. d It is
searches, seizures, and arrests can take The thing that It does not allow Is, it you like saying if you are not gong to
place beyond the land area, that is the does not allow the possibility of seiz- arrest anybody, you have plenty of
physical land area,, of the United ing on land.
people to arrest them. I think that is
Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0
 Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0
`July 15, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL. RECORD - HOUSE
true. But I think the bill .would be Im-
proved by turning down the Hughes
amendment, as amended.
Mr. HERTEL. Mr. Chairman, I move
to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I think if we look
clearly under all of the confusion here
in the House, we'see that the Hughes
amendments, as amended by White, is
good. It Is good because the great
problem that we found throughout
this controversy is that we cannot use
legally the AWACS to give the infor-
mation to local and State law enforce-
ment agencies, to intercept, to arrest,
which is their duty.
It is ironic that when this House has
cut the Coast Guard budget, when one
of the primary duties of the Coast
Guared is to interdict this type of il-
legal traffic, that here we are saying,
"Now,, the Army and the Navy should
do the job that is charged to the Coast
Guard."
The Coast Guard has testified in op-
position to the Army and Navy getting
involved. And I ask the question at
this time: Since we lose a lot of our
drug arrests in court because the ar-
rests are not done properly, under
proper procedures, is there any money
in the amendment that was just
passed by this House to train Army
and Navy personnel to make proper
drug arrests?
Because we have a great problem
with even our local law enforcement
officials not always doing that.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. HERTEL. I yield to the gentle-
man from Michigan.
Mr. CONYERS. Mi., ? Chairman, I
want to thank my colleague, the gen-
tleman from Michigan, for yielding to
raise this question: Where is the
money going to come from?
Well, the military has already ? testi-
fled that the reason that they do not
want it is because it will require addi-
tional resources, additional training,
different from that of military person-
nel, to enforce civilian laws.
So the answer is probably it Is not
coming from anywhere, which means
that the Secretaries of the respective
branches of the armed services under
the exemptions included in the
Hughes amendment are not going to
do a? darn thing about sending1 in the
military because it is a Catch-22.situa-
tion.
^ 1130
Mr. HERTEL. Mr. Chairman, I
would say that what the House should
be doing is spending the money prop-
erly. Increasing the Coast Guard
budget is the job we have got to do
rather than cutting the Coast Guard
budget. The money we are going to
lose, especially when we are under-
staffed now in our Armed !Services! by
diluting the strength in trying to train
new people for new jobs, could more
effectively be spent by putting that
money where it should be and to in-
crease 'greatly the Coast Guard
budget.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr.. Chairman, will
my colleague yield further?
Mr. HERTEL. I yield.
Mr. CONYERS. I thank my col-
league for yielding. The reason that
we are In a more difficult situation is
contrary to the statement of my other
colleague from Michigan, from Grand
Rapids, who said that the DEA testi-
fied before this committee that it has
adequate resources. They testified just
the opposite. As a matter of fact, the
former head of DEA no longer works
there anymore. Pete Bensinger has
now gone the way of the CIA chiefs,
and we are meeting here today with
testimony in the subcommittee of this
committee chaired by the gentleman
from New Jersey, that they did not
even have the adequate forces to cover
the perimeter of the United States, in-
cluding the Florida area, which the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. BENNETT)
has been so persistent in arguing that
we are inadequate in supplying the re-
sources.
And so there you have it. Do we
have enough resources? Well, if we
had enough we would not have to
bring the military into this in the first
place. In the second place, the testimo-
ny before that committee was that the
head of the DEA does not have suffi-
cient resources,' does not have man-
power, does not have equipment, and
does not have the cooperation of the
other branches of law enforcement.
So, ? the gentleman's point is ? well
stated.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Michigan has expired.
(At the request of Mr. BIAGGI and by
unanimous consent, Mr. HERTEL was
allowed to proceed for 4 additional
minutes.)
Mr. BIAGGI. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. HERTEL. I yield to the honor-
able chairman of the Merchant
Marine Subcommittee.
Mr. BIAGGI. I thank the gentleman.
for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, this is the second day
of debate on this issue. It is the kind
of an issue that interests all of us. The
surest way to attract attention in law
enforcement is to raise the specter of
narcotic trafficking. In fact, it is more
than a specter, it is a reality.
For the new Members of this House,
I would like to inform them of the fact
that I spent 23 years of my life in the
police department of the city of New
York, on patrol and in charge of detec-
tives, and no one is more committed to
the enforcement of our drug laws in
this House than myself. I have served
as chairman of the Coast Guard Sub-
committee. While I served in that posi-
tion we had hearings, especially In the.
Caribbean area, and we found out very
clearly that there were a number of
loopholes. The Congress last year re-
sponded in closing one of the loop-
holes to put some teeth in the pros-
ecution, the ability of law enforcement
H 4333
officials to arrest and prosecute suc-
cessfully, as contrasted to the previous
experience of turnstile process.
The arrest was made, the prosec-
tuion would fail to prosecute because
they did not have the authority nor
the evidence. The law was changed.
Another thing we learned is that we
had the facilities, the land agencies
.had the facilities to make arrests, but
they did not have the required infor-
mation, information that was readily
available and obtainable, If the
AWACS had the authority to transmit
that information to the land agencies.
The fact of the matter is, they were
prohibited by virtue of posse comita-
tus, and that is one of the reasons-
frankly, that is the only reason and
the only need that the law enforce-
ment agencies require, an ability to
obtain information. When the
AWACS, which is always in the air for
those who are uninformed, it is always'
flying and it is always making observa-
tions, and it can very effectively detect
the typical profile of the aircraft that
is transporting narcotics day after day,
and can Identify the typical vessel
that transports narcotics. All that is
necessary is the identification and lo-
cation, and then the land agencies can
come into play, effectively come into
play and interdict at that point. That
is all the law enforcement agencies re-
quire.
Now, the notion of bringing in the
military and to in fact substitute
them, supplement the law enforce-
ment agency, make them policemen, Is
a little strange. To begin with, there is
sufficient testimony to the fact that
the military is not interested. The mil-
itary does not have resources. That Is
clear; that is clear.
I know why people vote for certain
amendments. It is an easy political
vote. I understand it, but 'it is 'not a
correct vote. It is not responding pre-
cisely to the need, and we are endan-
gering the total question by perhaps
trespassing into - the constitutional
area. I do not know whether it is or is
not. I have heard debate back and
forth, and some people say yes, and
some people say no. But, I think we
should put that question aside. It does
not belong here. .
We should deal more narrowly with
the immediate need. The language we
find in the Hughes amendment is criti-
cal language, as amended by White.
That is all that is necessary. I ask the
Members of the House, do not think in
terms of easy political vote; think in
terms of what is necessary and what
can be productive because in the end
the actual implementation of the
amendment by Mr. SHAW, who is in
full support and is as concerned as any
one of us-and he is to be commended
for his efforts and I understand his
special concern, coming from Florida-
in the end the military will not be able
to effectively deal with the matter. I
suggest that they wilt not respond
Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0
 4334 Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0
HOUSE July 15, 1981
given the notion that the Secretary of tration, the Justice Department, and Mr. MINISH. Mr. Chairman, will the
Defense opposes it. _ the Defense Department have asked
gentleman
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, I for certain guidelines, and we have Mr. HUGHE HES?
move to strike the requisite number of tried to incorporate S. I yield to the gentle-
words. porate those into the Ju- man from New Jersey.
(Mr. HUGHES asked and was given diciary Committee legislation. Mr. MINISH, Mr. Chairman, I thank
permission to revise and extend his re- Let me just tell the Members briefly the gentleman for yielding.
mars.) some pf the differences between the it is my understanding that in Ger-
rk HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, col- so-called Hughes version and the Ben- many, where they do have a drug
leagues of the House, I hope that I nett version. In the Bennett version of problem as certified by the militar,
, and if the bill there. Is provided the right of and sonny member of the Armed
will the Members not need rthe e full just 5 ust bear minutes, If the military to assist in arrest and seiz- Forces is involved, can the military
for just a few mill jes perhaps we can ure. There Is no suggestion that they police make an arrest under the gen-
gen-
move on t the mvotes other
inutes and on to we can would have the authority, however, to ? tleman's amendment?
Issues. operate equipment. The very thing
We have right now, for the first time that the law enforcement community
not 'HUGHES. Of c ssc We have
in along time, two members leading needs-equipment and manpower to enforcement. that. This is y i vhian law
operate it-is not covered In the Ben- pnn. The military has pre
the Crime Subcommittee with a lot of nett version of the bill, mart responsibility for arrests in the
experience in law enforcement-the Mr. military community.
entire-
ranking minority member, who was a man yield? r. Chairman, will the to c that.
problem, . and is an do not
prosecutor for a number of years, and gentleman yieltouch that. probl, and we do not
this mwho has served for 10 Mr. HUGHES. I will be happy to We are talking about civilian law en-
this member, mber enforcement. Our Sub- yield after I have finished.
en-
committee on Crime Is going to give Mr Chairman, the second problem forcement The Justice Department is
the Members an opportunity in the is that-inadvertently, I am sure-the
months ahead to vote on a tough anti- Bennett version would make the Coast
crime package, and our first priority, Guard, which is one of the lead agen.
let me assure the Members, Is in the Gies in drug enforcement, subservient
area of drugs. But, let me tell the to the Department of Defense. -Here
Members what they have done in the we have an agency-the Department
budget now before the Congress. of Defense-that -does not want to co-
Do you realize that there is not one operate, and we are going to take
penny-I will repeat that-not one them In peacetime and. make them
penny in this budget for an anticrime subject to the Secretary of Defense.
package? Do you realize that the Drug Does, that make sense to the Mem-
Enforcement Administration since bets? It does not make sense to me.
1978 has lost real dollars each and I will ask the Members to listen to
every year, that in fact ? their task this next provision. It is incredible. In
force operation was to have been dis. the Bennett language the Secretary of
mantled tinder the budget
one of the Defense, in order to provide th
,
e
e equip
s, They are not
most successful task force operations ment and in order to provide the per- versed in law enforcement. We have
that we have in law enforcement? sonnel for assisting in arrest and seiz. enough difficulty preserving. evidence
That training program's are bein
ure, has to make a findi
to court with trai
d l
g
ne
ng that the
aw enforcement
gutted? If Members will look at the drug enforcement operation would not officials without making that task
Bureau of Alcohol. Tobacco, and Fire. succeed without personal military as. even more difficult.
arms, in the area of arson in and Fire- sistance. How In the' world can the So, Mr. Chairman, I urge my col-
tions, it. Is being dismantled. Their Secretary of Defense make that find. leagues to support the so-called
handgun tracing efforts are in peril. ing? He is not a law enforcement offs- Hughes amendment.
The FBI and the Marshals programs cial with such expertise. How can he Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I
have been cut. know whether a A
We have cut across the board, at a
time when the crime rate is taking off.
What have we done? What we have
said in essence is that we are going to
take money from the military budget
to beef up the training for the military
to give soldiers the right to arrest and
seize, but deny those funds and re-
sources to our police.
So what we have said in essence is
that' we are not going to give law en-.
forcement officers more training, but
we are going to give our soldiers and
sailors that.trafning in order for them
to assist law enforcement. Neither the
military nor the law enforcement com-
munity wants or needs the right to
arrest and seize. It is incredible that
we have done this. But we have, and I
respect the will of this body.
So where do we go from here? The
fact of the matter is that the Judiciary
Committee did take extensive testimo-
ny, and we have tried to craft a bill
that meets'the needs of the law en-
forcement community.- The adminis-
rug operation is move to strike the requisite number of
going to succeed without his assist. words.
ante? Yet we have help subject to that (Mr. CONYERS asked and was given
finding. permission to revise amid extend his re-
The difficulty we have had with the marks.)
Defense Department Is that they do Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman,
not want to cooperate at times. Field before we get ready to vote, we might
commanders are now rejecting from Just want to determine what the testi-
time to time requests for equipment mony was before the $ubcommfttee on
and assistance from the Drug Enforce- Crime, which heard from Peter Ben-
ment Administration because of a lack singer, former head of the DEA, on
of clear policy directives. Here we are, the drug problem. One member of the
giving the Defense Department an. subcommittee who was there has said
other out. All the Defense Depart- that Mr. Bensinger testified that DEA
ment has to do is to say that they . has adequate resources.
cannot determine the operation would I happen to have been there and
succeed without assistance, so we are questioned him rather carefully on
actually undermining what good we this subject, and I happen to have
have done.. We at least now have an in. heard something different.
formal understanding between the De- What did Mr. Bensinger say? Did he
fense Department and the law en-- say that we need the military, the
forcement community to share intelli- Army, the Navy, and the Marines, to
Bence, equipment, and personnel from join with the Coast Guard, with the
time to time. We are even undermin- DEA-which operates worldwide on
ing that by this language, about $10 billion per annum-with the
So, Mr. Chairman, in essence there FBI, with the CIA, and with all the
are some major differences even now State governments' law enforcement
between the Bennett bill and the agencies? Did he say that we need the '
Hughes version. military?
adamantly opposed to that approach,'
and evey law enforcement agency
which testified before our committee
is opposed to that.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from 'New Jersey (Mr:
HUGHES) has expired.
(By unanimous consent, Mr. HUGHES
was allowed to proceed for 1 additional
minute.) ?
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, the
Defense Department does not want
the arrest and seizure authority for a
good reason-they want to keep their
personnel as soldi
r
Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0
 Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0
July 15, 1981
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- HOUSE
Well, I want to tell the Members
that Mr. Bensinger said we need re-
sources inside DEA. He said we need
additional personnel and additional re-
sources. We are not even covering the
perimeter of the United States in Flor-
ida, where planes can be seen flying in
narcotics cargoes and where, if the
drug pushers Just fly in five planes.
they will get one through on the law
of averages. DEA does not have the re-
sources to cover the perimeter on a 24-
hour-a-day basis.
What I am suggesting to the Mem-
bers is that what we have done here Is
to confound the issue utterly. I am
now predisposed to" offer an amend-
ment to strike the entire posse comita-
tus provisions from he defense bill
under which it has been so unthought-
fully brought: I will ask the Members
to please hold their applause down. It
is not in order to raise these public
outcrys of approval.
We have taken on an amendment
that permits the military to make ar-
rests and permits the military to make
seizures but not searches. Imagine the
situation of a law, enforcement officer
who makes an arrest and a seizure and
in court finds out, when the bag is
opened, that the contents are sawdust
and not dope? There is no search per-
mitted under the amendment just
Mr. Chairman, I apologize for impos-
ing upon the time of an obviously im-
patient House, but I speak as chair-
man of the Subcommittee on the
Coast Guard in this Congress.
One of the reasons I was not able to
participate in -the debate yesterday
was-and I find this somewhat ironic-
that the Subcommittee on the Coast
Guard was having the second in a
series of six oversight hearings on the
entire mission of the U.S. Coast
Guard, and I rise at this point simply
to point out that we, I fear, are In the
process of doing one of those things
which we do best, which is kidding
ourselves.
If any Member of this House thinks
seriously that the proposition we are
in the process of debating, and tin-
doubtedly adopting in a moment, is
going to have any constructive, major.
substantive impact on the interdiction
of Illegal drug trafficking In this coun-
try, he Is indeed kidding himself.
As has been pointed out by a
number of Members, there is not one
penny of additional resources made
available for the Armed Forces In this
bill, and let me tell my colleagues
sofnething about the U.S. Coast
Guard.
The Coast Guard estimates that
they are at the moment interdicting,
adopted. . approximately 15 percent of the illicit
Mr. Chairman, I urge that the Mem- narcotics which they are targeting.
bers consider what we have done here The Coast 'Guard has just been cut
today and how we might best straight- again for the umpteenth consecutive
en it out. My solution is to strike the year by this body in Its infinite
entire section from this bill. ' wisdom in the adoption of the current
Mr. BEARD. Mr. Chairman, will the budget. We are losing.
gentleman yield? The Coast Guard has a number of
Mr. CONYERS. I yield briefly, if it missions, as Members know, in addi-
is appropriate to what I have just said. tion to drug enforcement. One of them
'Mr. BEARD. Certainly. I would happens to be search and rescue, the
never do otherwise, I say to my col- responsibility for the safety of life and
league. I property at sea. More Americans are
Mr. CONYERS. The gentleman fre- dying, lives that could, in the judg-
I ment of the Coast Guard, have' been
quently does otherwise
That is wh
.
y
made that condition.
Mr. BEARD. Mr. Chairman, let me
Just ask the gentleman this: I think
the gentleman's point about the
search aspect or the lack of search ca-
pabilities in the bill or the amendment
Is a very appropriate one.. Would the
gentleman be disposed to support or
offer an amendment to include the
search?
^ 1150
Mr. CONYERS. No; I will 'not.
Would the gentleman who asked me
that question be predisposed to offer
one?
Mr. BEARD. I ' think I might just
consider that.
Mr. CONYERS. Then tie gentleman
may just offer It and find out what
this gentleman does on it at the point
the gentleman does make that offer. I
will be waiting with baited bfeath to
see what the gentleman does. ,
Mr. BEARD.-I take that for granted.
Mr. STUDDS. Mr. Chairman, I move
to strike the requisite number of
words.
H 4335
We have given them the resources to
interdict roughly 18 percent, and In
the budget just adopted by this House.
in real dollars, we cut that and we cut
it substantially.
It Just seems to me that while it
might make some, of us' feel better and
`some feel worse, depending on wheth-
er we have constitutional reservations
about what we are about to do. let me
assure the Members that with respect
to the substance of the question, the
potential interdiction of illicit narcot-
ics, we are accomplishing absolutely
nothing.
While we may, as I said at the begin-'
ning, be doing what we do so remark-
ably well, namely kidding ourselves
and in the process, perhaps, the
American people, we are not solving,
the problem.
Mr. FASCELL. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. STUDDS. I yield to the gentle-
man from Florida.
Mr. FASCELL. I thank the gentle-
man for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I certainly share the
gentleman's frustrations with respect
to the Coast Guard. I cannot think of
any service that is more worthy, that
has been treated more shabbily by this
Congress, and the administration.
I would vote for a $2 billion Increase
in the budget for the Coast Guard
right now so they could do their job,
but I am frustrated; too. This adminis-
tration wants to abolish DEA; It did
not fund LEAA; it cut back on funds
for the Immigration and Naturaliza-
tion Service and other law enforce-
ment-all to cope with a drug problem
that is subverting the entire country,
not just the State of Florida.
So, I look at $1,650 trillion to _be
spend in the next several years for the
defense budget, and they are going to
have to spend about $1, billion a day
for the next 5 years.
of the judgment of this Congress that The cooperation sought by the
we should reduce rather than Increase
the resources of the U.S. Coast Guard.
The Commandant of the Coast
Guard, in response to a question as to
what additional resources he would
need in order, to interdict 50 percent of
the drugs which, he is after, said, "I
would need additional appropriations
of between $1% and $2 billion."
Let me tell my colleagues two things,
first of all. about the entire budget of
the Coast Guard. The annual budget
of the U.S. Coast Guard is roughly $2
billion. The Commandant informs us
that, in order to interdict roughly one-
half of the drugs estimated to be
coming in, he would need that budget
doubled again with the increase devot-
ed solely to drug interdiction.
Let me give my colleagues another
figure. We are told that in order to
have any meaningful impact on the
trade, in order to seriously impact it,
we would have to interdict 75 percent
of the drugs. That Is the target offi-
cially,of the Coast Guard. They are at-
tempting to interdict 75 percent.
amendment will make no dent in that
budget. Frankly I am so frustrated at
the failure of the Federal Government
to come to grips with the crime and
drug problem and with the inability to
enforce our immigration laws, I am
ready to turn it all over the the mili-
tary. They have the budget--but for
now I urge my colleagues to support
the effort of the distinguished gentle-
man from Florida and the pending
amendment.
Mr. STUDDS. I appreciate the gen-
tleman's frustration and I, too, sup-
port the amendment.
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. STUDDS. I yield to the gentle-
man from New Jersey.,
Mr. HUGHES. I thank the gentle-
man for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I serve on the Coast
Guard Subcommittee and I was the
member who asked the Commandant
the question referred to by my col-
league from Massachusetts (Mr.
STUDDS) as to the size and shortcom-
Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0
 H 4336
Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD HOUSE July 15, 1981
ings of the Coast Guard budget. Let
me make one more. observation. The
one man in the entire administration,
Peter Bensinger, who was trying to do
something about putting money back
into the budget for drug operation,
was fired. He was fired precisely be-
cause he sought additional moneys to
combat the illicit traffic in drugs.
What a tragedy for this country.
I would assume my colleague sup-
ports the Hughes amendment and I
would hope that we can get on to a
vote.
POSSE COMITATUS
O Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chair-
man, I want to express my strong sup-
port for the efforts to amend the
Posse Comitatus Act to allow assist-
ance from our military forces in the
fight against drug traffickers. This
legislative effort is long over due.
I am a sponsor of similar legislation,
H.R. 3506, which is also aimed at ad-
dressing this growing problem that is
devastating not only my home State of
Florida but our entire Nation.
I want to take a moment to compli-
ment my good friend and colleague
from Florida (Mr. BENNETT) for his Ini-
tiative in utilizing this fiscal year 1982
DOD authorization bill as the vehicle
for accomplishing our mutual objec-
tive. He has done a tremendous service
to our Nation and I believe we all owe
him a debt of graditude.
As Members from the State of Flor-
ida, Mr. BENNETT and I know first
hand. the problem our law enforce-
ment officials are running into in at-
tempting to stem the tidal wave of
drugs that continue to pour into our
country from foreign nations-princi-
pally, Colombia, Jamaica, Bolivia, and
Peru. Our State is practically caught
In the middle of a war between the
heavily armed and equipped drug
smugglers and our law enforcement of-
ficials. Unfortunately, as of today we
are still losing the battle. It is time for
us to declare war on the drug traffick-
ers. Utilization of the assets of the
Department of Defense will enable our
law enforcement officials to meet this
threat head on and hopefully we can
win this war eventually and save mil-
lions of Americans from the misery
and horrors of drugs.
According to Florida's attorney gen-
eral, Jim Smith:
It is estimated that at least 40 percent of
all marihuana and cocaine shipments from
South America, regardless of where deliv-
ered, in some way touch Florida. Even If the
actual delivery takes place elsewhere, the
negotiations, importation arrangements and
payments take place here in transactions
worth $25 billion a year.
Adding to this problem is the fact
that Florida's topography is a major
asset to the drug smuggler. Florida's
shoreline Is over 8,000 miles which
allows any of the 200,000-plus private-
ly.owned boats to off-load contraband
with little fear of being caught. In ad-
dition, the large number of rural roads
and undeveloped flat terrain are used
to off-load and refuel aircraft. There
are in excess of 9,000 privately regis-
tered -aircraft in Florida and more
than 250 registered airports. Even
though the State of Florida requires
landing strips to be registered, there
are literally dozens of unregistered
strips capable 'of handling DC-3's and
C-46's.
A clear example of the severity of
the drug problem in the State of Flor-
ida is the increase in the number of
violent crimes being committed, much
of which is due to drug-related vio-
lence. In 1980, there were a total of
1,387 murders committed in the State
of Florida, an increase of 28 percent
over 1979. By way of comparison, the
national increase was 7 percent. In
1980, the volume of reported crime in
Florida increased 18 percent, while the
increase nationally was 10 percent. In
1980, arrests for narcotics violations in
Florida were up 12.2 percent over 1979.
In addition to the serious crime asso-
ciated with the immense quantities of
drugs moving into the United States
through Florida, there are other obvi-
ous considerations: The Drug Enforce-
ment Administration estimated that
drug transactions through Florida are
worth $25 billion annually. It is also
estimated that $2.5 billion in drug
profits have been invested in Florida
real estate, much of it in the anonym-
ity of blind trusts concealing the iden-
tity of the owners.
In one recent investigation, the Flor-
ida Department of Law Enforcement
estimated that a narcotics importer
had been grossing $7 million per
month in one drug smuggling oper-
ation. In another investigation, the
drug smuggling organization was
bringing an average of one to three
loads of marihuana per week Into the
State of Florida. Each of these loads
averaged 40,000 to 80,000 pounds, with
a street value of $500 per pound, of
marihuana. The estimated value per
load, then, was $20 to $40 million. As
has been mentioned earlier by other
speakers, the gross value of the nar-
cotics industry in the United States is,
at the very least, in excess of $60 bil-
lion per year..
It is apparent to me that if we are
going to be successful in our war
against the drug smugglers we need to
utilize all the resources at our dispos-
al. We need to enhance the capabili-
ties of the DEA, the Coast Guard and
the Customs Service both in terms of
manpower and equipment. By allowing
our law enforcement officials to utilize
the assets of the Department of De-
fense we will be greatly enhancing the
capability of our country In the war
against the drug smugglers. Amending
posse comitatus is by no means the
final answer to this problem, but it
nevertheless represents a major step
forward and puts the world on notice
that the United States is indeed seri-
ous about attacking the narcotics
problems
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the Judiciary Committee amendment,
as amended.
The question was taken, and, the
Chairman announced that- the ayes
appeared to have it.
RECORDED VOTE
Mr. BENNETT. 1 Mr. Chairman, I
demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic
device, and there were-ayes, 362, noes
49, answered "present" 6, not voting
15, as follows:
(Roll No. 1301
AYES-362
Addabbo
de Is Garza
Hartnett
Akaka
DeNo,rdls
Hatcher
Albosta
Derrick
Heckler
Alexander
Derwinski
Hefner
Anderson
Dickinson
Heftel
Andrews
Dicks
Hendon
Annunzio
Dingell
Hertel
Applegate
Dixon
Hightower
Archer
Donnelly
Hiler
Ashbrook
Dorgan
Hollenbeck
Atkinson
Downey
Horton
AuColn
Dreier
Howard
Badham
Duncan
Royer
Bailey (MO)
Dunn
Hubbard
Bailey (PA)
Dwyer
Huckaby
Barnes
Dyson
Hughes
Bedell
Early
Hutto
Beilenson
Eckart
Hyde
Benedict
Edgar
Ireland
Benjamin
Edwards (AL)
Jeffords
Bereuter
Edwards (CA)
Jeffries
Bevill
Edwards (OK)
Jenkins
Biaggi
Emerson
Johnston
Bingham
Emery .
Jones (OK)
Blanchard
English
Jones (TN)
Bliley
Erlenborn
Kazen
Boggs
Ertel ? .
Kemp
Boland
Evans (DE)
Kildec
Bolling
Evans (GA)
Kindness
Boner
Evans (1A)
Kogovsek ?
Bonlor
Evans (IN)
Kramer
Bonker
Fary
LaFalce
Bouquard
Fasces)
Lagomarsino
Bowen
Fazio
Leach
Breaux
Fenwick
Leath
Brinkley
Fiedler
LeBoutilller
Brodhead
Fields
Lee
Brooks
Findley
Lehman
Broomfield -
Fish',
Leland
Brown (CO)
Fithian
Lent
Brown (OH)
Flippo
Levitas
Broyhill
Florio
Lewis
Burgener
Foglietta
Livingston
Burton, John
Foley
Loeffler
Burton, Phillip
Ford (MI)
-Long(LA)
Butler
Ford (TN)
Long (MD)
Byron
Forsythe
Lott
Campbell
Fountain
Lowery (CA)
Carman
Fowler
Lowry (WA)
Carney
Lujan
Chapple
Frenzel
Luken
Cheney
Frost
Lundine
Clausen
Fuqua
Lungren
Clay
Garcia
Markey
Clinger
Gaydos
Marks
Coats
Oejdenson
Marlenee
Coelho
Gephardt
Marriott
Coleman
Gilman
Martin (IL)
Collins (IL)
Gingrich
Martin (NC)
Collins (Tx)
Glickman
Matsui
Conable
Goldwater
Mattox
Conte
Gonzales
Mavroules.
Corcoran
Gore
Mazzol l
Coughlin
Gradison
McClory
Courter
Gray
McCloskey
Coyne, James
Green-
McCollum
Coyne, William
Gregg .
McCurdy
Craig
Grisham
McDade
Crane, Daniel
Guarini
McEwen ?
Crane, Philip
Gunderson
McGrath
D'Ainours
Hall (OH)
McHugh
Daniel, R. W.
Hall, Ralph
McKinney
Danielson
Hall. Sam
Mica
Dannemeyer
Hamilton
Michel
Daschle
Hansen (ID)
Mlkulskl
Daub
Hanson (UT)
Miller (CA)
Davis
Harkin
Miller (OH)
Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0
 Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0
July 15, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
Mineta
Richmond
St Germain
Minish
Rinaldo
Stanton
Mitchell (NY)
Ritter
Stark
Moakley
Roberts (KS)
Staten
Moffett
Roberts (SD)
Stokes
Molinari
Robinson
Studds
Mollohan
Rodino
Swift
Moore
Roo
Synor
Moorhead
Roemer
Tauke
Morrison
Rogers
Tauzin
Mottl
Rose
Thomas
Murphy
Rostenkowski
Traxler
Murtha
Roth
Udall
Myers
Roukema
Vander Jagt
Napier
Ruttsselot
Vento
Hatcher
Roybal
Volkmer
Neal
Rudd
Wnlgren
Nelligan
Russo,
Walker
Nelson
Sabo
Wampler
Nowak
Sawyer
Watkins
O'Brien
Srheuer
Waxman
Oakar
Schneider
Weaver
Oberstar
Schroeder
Weber (MN)
Obey
Schulze
Weber (OH)
Ottinger
Schumer
White
Panetta
Sciberting
Whittaker
Parris
Sensenbrenner
Whitten
Paabnyan
Shamansky
Williams (MT)
Patterspn
Shannon
Williams (OH)
Paul
Sharp
Winn
Pease
Shaw t
Wirth
Pepper
Shelby
Wolf
Perkins
Shumway
Wolpe
Petri
Shuster
Wortley
Peyser
Sil)ander
Wright
Pickle
Simon
Wyden
Porter
Skeen
Wylie
Price
Smith (AL)
Yates
Pritchard
Smith (NE)
Yatron,
Kahan
Smith (N3)
Young (AK)
Railsback
Smith (OR)
Young (MO)
Ratchford
Snows
Zablocki
Regula
Snyder
zeferetti
Rhodes
Solari
NOES-49
Anthony
Hammerschmldt Reuss'
Befalls
Hance
Skelton
Barnard
Hillis
Smith (IA)
Beard
Holland
Solomon
Bennett
Holt
Spence
Bethune
Hopkins
Stangeland
Chappell
Hunter
Stenholm
Daniel. Dan
Jacobs ,
Stratton
Doman
Kastenmeier
Stump
Dougherty
Latta
Taylor
Dowdy
McDonald
Trible
Dymally
Montgomery
Whitehurst
Erdahl
Nichols
Whitley
Gibbons
Putman
Wilson
Ginn
Pursell
Young (FL)
Gramm
Quillen
Hagedorn
Rangel
ANSWERED "PRESENT"-6
Chisholm
Dellunrs
Washington
Conyers
Hawkdns
Weiss
NOT VOTING-18
Arpin
Ferraro
Martin (NY)
Brown (CA)
Ooodling
Mitchell (MD)
Cotter
Jones (NC)
Rosenthal
Crockett
Lantos
Santini
Deckard
Madigan
Savage
01210
Mr. BAFALIS changed his vote from
"aye" to "no."
Messrs. VOLKMER, LEATH of
Texas, UDALL, HUTTO, HARKIN,
BEVILL, FOUNTAIN, and SMITH. of
Alabama changed their votes from
"no" to "aye."
So the Judiciary Committee amend-
men , as amended, was ,agreed to.
r. FOWLER., Mr. Chairirlan, I
move to strike the requisite number of
words.
(Mr. FOWLER asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. FOWLER. Mr. Chairman, I
intend to vote for H.R. 3519 because,
on balani e, many of its major provi-
sions are necessary for our Nation's
defense. Among the specific initiatives
contained in H.R. 3519 that I heartily
endorse are:. Its provision of a much more ade-
quate, and realistic, level of funding
for such essential readiness items as
spare parts, training, and mainte-
nance;
? Its programs aimed at upgrading our
Reserve and National Guard Forces;
Its support for mobility forces, espe-
cially fast sealift and readily available
airlift;
Its support ' for more cost-efficient
production levels for a number of
major weapons systems; and
Its establishment of a new armed
services procurement policy, including
statutory authority for multiyear de-
fense contracting which should pro-
duce significant cost savings over time.
However, as one might expect in any
legislation that authorizes $136 billion
in Federal spending, I do have serious
reservations about a number of the
provisions of H.R. 3519. I recorded my
H 4337
numbers are 14.4 percent projected by
the Reagan administration and 18.9
Percent estimated by CBO. For re-
search and development the story is
similar: 16.4 percent inflation in the
Reagan budget, 21.9 percent. inflation
assumed by CBO.
When you add all these numbers up;
based on CBO projections H.R. 3519 is
underestimating real defense inflation
costs by $6.4 billion. Even halfing the
differences between the OMB and
CBO estimates produces a shortfall of
$3.2 billion. Clearly, there are deficien-
cies In our current defense budgeting
procedure and unless we move to cor-
rect them, from both sides of Pennsyl-
vania. Avenue, we will see a continu-
ation of the problems cited in the
Armed Services Committee report:
Cuts in procurement of equipment,
stretchouts of critically needed pro-
grams, and highly publicized cost over-
runs.
A second area that I am concerned
about in H.R. 3519 is the bill's lack of
attention to vital command, control,
and communications-C'-programs.
Here the problem is. not just money,
though I am troubled by cuts in the
concerns' about -the particular' M-X ;extremely, low frequency (ELF) pro-
and strategic bomber programs man- gram for communications with our
dated by the House Armed Services strategic submarine fleet and in other
Committee .last week during the
amendment process.
Now, prior to final passage of the
fiscal year 1982 defense authorization,
I would like to register a few more
general reservations -that could not be
addressed by simple amendment.
First of all, I join with the House
Armed Services Committee in being
"deeply concerned with the systematic
underestimation of inflation rates in
the defense budget." To quote further
from the committee report on H.R..
3519:
During the fiscal year 1982 authorization
hearings, the committee heard witness after
witness decry the unrealistically low infla-
tion indices that were imposed by the Office
of Management and Budget ? ? Historical-
ly, this has led to reductions in defense
equipment purchases, stretch-out of vital
programs, and highly visible cost overruns
? ? ? The defense programs requested in the
fiscal year 1981 supplemental and fiscal
year 1982 budget have been subjected to the
same unrealistic budgeting processes that
have been practiced in the past ? ' ? The
fiscal year 1982 budget assumes a lowering
of the inflation rate from the previous Ad-
ministration's unrealistically low 9.7 percent
to a rate of 8.7 percent. '
Yet despite these findings, all of
which I concur with, the bill before us
makes those same unrealistic budget
assumptions. If the executive branch
has a responsibility for truth in de-
fense budgeting, so does the Congress.
Based on figures I have received
from the Pentagon and from the Con-
gressional Budget Office, for the
period 1980 to 1982, the President's de
fense budget and H.R. 3519 assume a
compounded inflation rate for oper-
ations and maintenance of 19.4 per-
cent compared to CBO's projection of
25.7 percent. For procurement the
C' programs.
What is"more disturbing, however, is
the lack of visibility and priority that
is afforded to C', not just in the Con-
gress but in the Pentagon as well. The
other body made a step in the right di-
rection, in my opinion, by including In
this year's Department of Defense au-
thorization committee report a sepa-
rate section devoted to strategic C
and the committee's Initiatives in this
area; but throwing more money at the
problem is not the total answer.
Last session we heard a great deal
about the need for heightened con-
gressional attention to operations and
maintenance. I wholeheartedly agree
with this assessment and Iam pleased
with the initial results from the new
operations and maintenance authori-
zation procedure. .
In my opinion, we now need to focus
the same degree of attention and con-
cern on command, control, and com-
munications, both strategic and tacti-
cal. We cannot afford to let programs
like the ELF communications system
or the E-4B airborne command post be
canceled or stretched out by default.
It Is my belief that our C3 systems,
whether strategic or tactical, are the
most vulnerable link In our military
forces and are hence the most likely to
face initial enemy attack. Unless we
devote adequate effort and resources
to upgrading these systems all of our
other, far more massive weapons in-
vestments, whether for new ICBM's,
strategic bombers, or conventional ar-
maments, will be seriously compro-
mised.
I strongly concur with the other
body's directive to the Secretary of
Defense:
A
Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP85-00003R000100020005-0