sign in sign up
<<
Home , Aloysius Stepinac, Jeremy Stone

2462 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS February .7, 1980

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS

NUCLEAR . WASTE ISSUES ·· NEED Interagency Review Group on Nuclear Department's Idaho National Engi­ RESOLUTION-ARTICLE RE- Waste Management. neering Laboratory: VIEWS HISTORY AND OPTIONS Specifically, the Commission would While meeting· Department of· Energy require the Dep~rtment of Energy to guidelines, • • • violates existing and pro­ HON. JENNINGS RANDOLPH investigate a minimum of three sites posed Environmental Protection Agency In­ representing a minimum of two geo­ jection regulations as well as State regula· OF WEST VIRGINIA logic media. However, the Commission tlons. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES fully expects the Department to Independent regulation of all De­ Thursda.y, February 7, 1980 submit a wider range of alternatives partment of Energy nuclear waste ac­ e Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President, I than the minimum suggested. Further, tivities is consistent with two prece­ call to the attention of the Senate a the Department would be required to dents estabished by the Congress in thoughtful article, "Radioactive analyze the suitability of a· variety of 1974 and 1975. First, in dividing up the Waste, Nuclear Energy's Dilemma," waste forms to be used in disposal. functions of the Atomic Energy Com­ which appeared in the fall 1979 issue We must be confident that our mission and the Joint Committee on of Amicus, published by the Natural knowledge permits us to determine Atomic Energy Commission, we ac­ Resources Defense Council. · The whether permanent disposal of high­ knowledge in the .nuclear context that author, Terry Lash, provides a . rea­ level waste presents a socially accept­ the responsibility for protecting the soned discussion of the nature of nu­ able risk. If it does, we must be satis­ public health and safety must reside clear waste and of the woefully inad­ fied that our knowledge permits us to in an entity sepa:r;ate from the organi­ equate attempts of industry and Gov­ determine the combination of geologic zation charged with promotional and ernment to dispose of it. Seen in light medium and waste form which will programmatic responsibilities. Second, of the record developed at the exten­ best protect the public health and in extending Nuclear Regulatory Com­ sive hearings on nuclear waste of the safety. We are currently unable to mission authority over long-term stor­ Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation, answer these questions. age facilitles for high-level nuclear chaired by my able colleague Senator Even when and if our expertise waste generated by defense production HART, this article enunciates a number· allows for these determinations, there activities, we_affirmed that independ­ of principles against which pending wn1 be little public confidence in the ent regulation of management of de­ legislation on this subject should be nuclear waste management program fense generated waste can be accom­ measured. unless there is genuine ·public involve­ plished in a manner consistent with Perhaps most disturbing in Lash's ment. This involvement must extend not only to the procedures for licens­ national security objectives. account is the pattern of repeated The Senate must acknowledge in the shifts in policy on the desired means ing a facility, but also to the ultimate of disposal, while the fundamental· question of whether a State wants context of waste management, as it question of whether safe, permanent such a facility located within its bor­ did in the Price Anderson amendments disposal of the most toxic forms of nu­ ders. This has been a matter of legiti­ of 1975 respecting tort liability for a clear waste is possible remains unre­ mate concern to the States·for almost nuclear accident,. that the nuclear fuel solved. · 20 years. · cycle represents an inherently danger­ That there is no disposal capacity It is true that there'is also a national ous technology, The principal objec­ for high-level waste available more interest to consider. Past policy defi­ tive of nuclear waste management must be to prote~t the public and the than 25 years after commercial gen­ ciencies have left us with a problem of 8 eration of this. waste began is a very n'ational proportions. Disposing of the environment, not merely to expedi­ persuasive argument for the creation existing volume of nuclear waste is a tiously eliminate an impediment to of an action-forcing mechanism. Legis­ national undertaking. The very exist­ the future growth of .commercial nu­ lation that ·would delay further the ence of this accumulation represents a ·clear power. final resolution of this national prob­ major Federal interest in proceeding According to the Government Ac­ lem by authorizing an expensive pro­ with permanent disposal, provided it counting Office, the Federal Govern­ gram of long-term storage of civilian does not pose an unacceptable risk. ment has expended $12.1 billion high-level waste, would be counterpro- This interest must be ·acknowledged in through 1978 in subsidies to the nu­ ductive. · defining the State role. clear industry. This estimate is exclusive In devising a mechanism to speed The article documents the formida­ of the subsidie$ conferred by Federal action on permanent disposal, howev­ ble difficulties in waste management programs to stimulate the mining of er, we must be careful to allow for de­ encountered by· the Atomic Energy domestic uranium and to indemnify liberate .consideration· of the serious Commission and its successor, the De­ and limit the liability of utilities sup­ technological questions and potential partment of .Energy. There·-can be pliers and contractors in the event of long-term impacts. Failure to do ·so little doubt this history requires an in­ an accident at a nuclear powerplant. would undermine public confidence in dependent and vigorous regulatory This last program of indemnification the entire disposal program. On the program that is consistent with other and liability limitation, established by vital question of nuclear waste disp6s· national objectives. the Price-Anderson Act, was essential ::\.1, we must assure the sort of reasoned These difficulties are not merely of for the very existence of the nuclear decisionmaking so often lacking in the historical interest. A report of the industry. . formulation of Federal policy on nu­ Inspector General's Office of the De­ Despite such an enormous invest­ clear power in the past. partment of Energy released on Janu­ ment, this Nation is today faced with a Central to such a decisionmaking ary 22, concludes that important man­ Three Mile Island accident on the one process is alternatives analysis. 'The agement policies and practices at the hand, and an entirely unresolved nu­ Nuclear Regulatory Commission in Department's Hanford nuclear waste clear waste situation on the other. proposed regulations published in the reservation are in need of complete This situation suggests that we must Federal Register of December 6, 1979, overhaul. Further, a State· task force now decide whether the Federal Gov­ employed an alternatives approach to appointed by Idaho Gov. John Evaris ernlnent should continue to promote the geologic disposal of high-level nu­ concluded on December 13, of last the commercial nuclear fuel cycle, or clear waste;· this is consistent with the year, that low-level w~te injection soould instead assume a posture of recommendations of the President's into the Snake Plain aquifer at the greater neutrality. e This "bullet" symbol identifies statements or insertions which are not spoken by the Member 'on the floor. February 7, 1980 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 2463 Mr. President, I commend this arti­ The build-up of new non-fissionable atoms trig, theft of radioactive materials, flooding cle to the- attention, of my colleagues and the depletion of uranium-235 makes of trenches containing radioactive wastes, and ask that it be printed in the sustalninc a chain reaction difficult in a nu­ and unellpected migration of wastes away clear power reactor. Ther~fore, e~h year, !rom trenches. The current situation is suf­ RECORD. about 30 percent of th~ fuel In a nuclear ficiently bad that the federal government The article follows: power reactOI' Is removed and replaced wiih may resume responsibility .for the burial of RADIOACTIVE W ASTS-NUCLEAR ENERGY'S fresh fuel. Tile removed fuel is said to· be commerCial low-level wastes as well as its . DILEMMA sPent. own wastes. In c011trast, In a reactor operated to pro­ Despite the ongoing problems with dispos­ Nowadays the unresolved problem of ra­ duce weapons srade plutonlurn-plutoniu~ ing of uranfum tailings and low-level wastes, dioactive waste disposal is often mentioned that has a hi&h percentace. of the 239 iso­ however, the greatest coricem is about the as the Achilles' heel of nuclear power. With tope-the fuel ·is withdrawn before a lot of high-level wastes. Currently, the inventory increasing frequency the unknowns and un­ uranium-235 fissioDS. Thus. the concentra­ of spent fuel is butlding up in water-cooled certainties about geologic disposal of high­ tfmi of· fission products and by-products in pcM')ls connected to nuclear power plants. level wastes are emphasized in official spent fuel from power· reactors is much Spa~e for storing more spent fuel ia running reports. Tbe noo.-t.echnologieal proble~. higher than in the fuel removed from the out, potentially jeopardizing operation of furthermore. seem no closer to. resolution so-called production reactors. nuclear power plants during the 1980s and today than in earlier years. This situation In the past, both types of used fuel were beyond.· The storage problem oceurs prinei­ contrasts sharply- with the optimism of 20 reprocessed in order to separate the unfls­ pally because the federal government did years age that technieaJ solutions existed. sioned plutOntum from all of the other not plan adequately for the backend of the The lack of subStantial progre~ ~ be at· atoms. The liquid residue from reprocessing, nuClear fuel cycle. ·Federal managers were tributed la~lJ to two factors: gross techno­ which contains very high leve!B of radioac­ overconfident about the ease of transferring logieal optimism and neglect of non-techno­ tivity. is waste. reprocess~n~ teehnology to the commercial logical Issues; Also. efforts to solve the Currently, there Is a moratorium on com­ sector, and they were negligent in assess­ waste disposal problem were greatly und~­ mercial reprocessing in this country, al­ menta of the risk posed by reproce&mlg and funded until recenUy. The character of the though plutOhium is stm being extracted at wide-spread commercla.l use of plutonium. problem is different today beca~e of i>ast · reprocessing plants on government reserva­ Also, too 1ittle effort was made t.O find an mistakes and the new national atmosphere ' tions in Idaho and South Carolina as part of acceptable way of ultimately disposing of of distmst of government and lai'B"e techno­ the nuclear weai>ons production and nucle&r high-level radioactive wastes. logical systems. Solviiig the waste disposal navy program&. Unless commercial reproe­ When measured bl' amount of radioactiv­ I)J"'blem now, mother words. Is much more essing is allowed to resume. the spent fueJ ity sig­ complicated than 26 years ago, when there from power reactors will be high-level radio­ nificant · quantities of commercial radioac~ was an opportunity to find a. $Olution before active waste. tive wastes have been . generated already, large quantities Of wastes were created and Although· the high-level wastes are the and th• wast.e inventories are growing rapid­ nuclear power became a major · national most toxic, other potentially dangerous ra­ ly. ·At l)resent about. '10 co~ercial nuclear issue. dioactive wastes are produced from operat­ reacton are operating within this countzy. Improved federal proKI'ams are needed for ing nuclear power plants. Supporting nucle­ and by the year 2000 perhaps 300 or more disposing of radioactive wastes. Greater ar power plants Ia a sertes of activitieS, con­ such reactors may be operating. When public understanding also is required to de­ stituting a · fuel cycle. that begins with the measured ·by the radioactivity of two of the velop a broadly accepted approach for solv­ mining of Uranium. ore. This ore contains more troublesome radionuclides, strontium- ing the existing waste disposal problem and many natural radioacti've isotopes from the 90 and cesium-13'1, the current Inventory of for determining whether more wastes radioactive decay of· uranium. These natural radioactive wastes In temporary storage is should be created by operating nuclear radioactiYe materials can cause . eaneer If expeeted ro double within three or four power plants.' they irradiate people. The uranium miners years; and the inventory produced by com­ have suffered the most frQm such expo­ menial reactors by the 'end of the century TYPES AN:D ORIGINS OP WAS'l;'E sures. Because radiation protectioo stand- may be. 19 to 20 times greatel' than that cur­ Nuclear power plants generate electricity ards have been too lax, the l»'em&ture rentlY on hand. Additional quantities of ra­ by using the heat created by nuclear fission. deaths· of hQ.Ildreds of min~rs .is occurring. dioactive wastes will be produced as a result or the splitting of atoms. The splitting Uranium mlnfng also results in releases· of of nuclear weapons programs ann. of radiation. Although ~tter practices are waste. Within the past year the federal gov­ Two broad categories of radioactive atoms followed today and more improved measures ernment has begun work to plan for such a resu:tt from the splittinB" process. First. are suggested for the future, there will eontingency. The technology for disposing there are the fission productS sueh as the remain an element of risk assoetated with of spent fuel haa not. be developed to date, rad1olsotopes strontium-90 and ceslum-13?. ·uranium tatlinp. because the presumpt.km until very recen.Uy The fission products are the smaller atomic If there is reprocessing of commercial had been that Ulere would be reproeessing. fragments of the. split ,uranium atoms. The spent fuel in the future, then la,rge. amol:lilts The nuclear fuel cycle where the spent fuel second ca~egory consists of the fission by- of low- and intermediate-level radioactive is disposed of as high-level waste is often re­ products. These are larger atoms, formed wastes will be produced. Now, substantial ferred to as the once-through fuel cycle. when other, nqn-fissionable large .atoms, amounts of commerclallow-leYel wastes are The current fuel cycle-based on an inde.fl­ such as uranium-238, capture neutrons. In · produced only at nuelear power plants. Ad­ nite deferral of recycling-may be called the fresh fuel. only the isotope uranium-235, ditional Quantities of low and Intermediate­ stowaway fuel cycle. which coml:)rise5 approximately 3 percent of level wastes are produeed · at government ·The large size of the current and antici­ th'e uranium in light wAter reaetol' fuel, is facilities and as a tesult of industrial. medl­ pated inventOJ'Y. of radioactive wastes pre­ fissionable. The predominant uranium iso- cal and research activities using radioactive cludes its dispersal irlto the general environ­ tope, urantum-238, rather than splitting materials. These other than high-level ment, making permanent isolation manda­ when bombarded by neutrons, may absorb a wastes have widely varying physical. chemi- tory. D~spite the absolute neceS&ity to con... neutron and through a series of nuclear re- cal and radiological properties. · tain the wastes permanently. the degree of actions. become plutonlum-239, which also In some notorious case3, the low-level risk Inherent in schemes to· dispose of the 'splits when it captures a neutron. The con- wastes have not been disposed of properly. wastes has not been assessed fully. by any centration of plutonium-23ft lnereases with •Four out of six commercial low-level waste competent organization. Indeed, a paper time so that when a reactor i& refueled burial sites are. now shut do'wn beeause of prepared for the Nuclear Replatory Com­ about one.-half of the nuclear energy results unsa.Usfactory perfonna.nce. Problems a~ mission by its own staff noted that existing from its fissioning. · these sites have included fires, poor p.ackag- analyses of the ~adioactlve wastes disposal 2464 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS February 7, 1980 Issue "are based on llmited data" and "in- materials ·may behave differently in the en­ Investigating committee of the National conclusive."- vironment or human body. Atom for atom, Academy of Sciences dating ·as early as 1955, The underlying fact about the fission or molecule for molecule, the radiotoxicity the AEC and then ERDA refused to stop process utilized in nuclear reactors is that it tends to be far greater than the chemical using the soil as a radioactive garbage unavoidably produces large quantities of toxicity of· any given substance, including dump. Instead, so-called 'Intermediate-level man-maae radioactive materials that are so heavy metals which with radioactive.wastes liquid wastes were simply poured Into open­ destructive of life that they must be perma- share the property of not being destroyed in bottom trenches and cribs where the soil nently prevented from entering the living the environment. For example, on an atom-· wa.S relied on to retard their migration Into enVironment. The special hazards of these for-atom basis, the radioactive isotope lead­ the groundwater and the Columbia River. wastes result from the emission of radiation, 210 is 20 million times more toxic than the Shortly before it was disbanded •by the which cannot be detected by human senses non-radioactive form of lead. This high tox­ AEC, the NAS-NRC Committee re-empha­ except in massive doses. Radiological effects icity of very small amounts of radioactive .sized its opposition to the discharge of ra­ are cumulative and may not be evident for substances is another important basic dif­ dioactive liquids to the soU: "Throughout some time-as in the case of cancer develop- terence between chemically toxic and radio­ the fabric of the 10-year history of the ment and genetic damage. Radiation can toxic materials. Committee's deliberations run some con­ harm both an individual and, by impairlng High-level waste management began at tinuing threads of purpose and conviction. the reproductive cells, future generations of the federal Hanford Reservation in the een­ Prominent among them is the realization our descendents. To the best of our knowl- tral part of Washington~ The 'Reservation that none of the major sites £including the edge, any increase in the background level remains the country's largest waste storage Hanford Reservation] at which radioactive of radiation will Inevitably resulb 1n injury facUlty. The high-level radioactive wastes at wastes are being stored or disposed of is geo­ to a {>roportion of the exposed population. Hanford are stored as alkaline liquid solu- logically suited for safe disposal of any Shortly after the congressional decision 1n tions 1n carbon steel tanks-some with only manner of radioactive wastes other than 1954 to commercialize nuclear power, aNa- single walls. This storage method was select­ very dilute, very low-level liquids • • • ." tional Academy of Sciences committee of ge- ed because prior experience with it during By 1972 the AEC admitted there was a ologtsts and geophysicists that was estab- the 1940s had been satisfactory. The choice, risk Involved 1n ground disposal of radioac­ lished to consider· ways to dispose of radio- however, turned out to be unwise. Shortly tivity. In fact, the AEC even concluded that active wastes stressed the need for great· after they were placed 1n use, some of the the . P<>SSibutty of a spontaneous nuclear care 1n their handling: "Unlike the disposal . tanks began to leak. The principal problem chain ·reaction existed 1n one such open­ of any other type of waste, the hazard relat- was the Inherent susceptibility of carbon bottom trench. ed to radioactive wastes is so great that no steel to chemical attack-a problem not Up to the present time the Department of element of doubt should be allowed 'to exist nearly as severe with stainless steel. There Energy's commercial waste management regarding safety." . have been 18 such tank leaks and several program can be most aptly characterized as Many radioactive elements do not disperse leaks in pipes connecting the tanks. Ap­ ad hoc. Disposing of nuclear garbage has ln the .environment, but rather concentrate proximately 500,000 gallons of. high-level ra­ never been a priority during the develop­ In some plants and animals and, thereby, dioactive wastes have seeped Into the Han­ ment of commercial nuclear power. At the work their way up food chains to· man. . In ford soU and permanently contaminated it. outset, the AEC and its advisors focused on general, the complex behavior of radioactive The radioactivity in the soU at Hanford will bedded salt deposits as the most likely geo­ materials 1n the often subtle Interrelation- have to be monitored for as long as man In­ logical formation .for disposal of the long­ ships-among the various life forms and· their habits the area, 1n order to ensure that lived wastes. Then, 1n the 1960s, the AEC physical enviro'nment makes prediction of physical and biological transport mecha­ de-emphasized the goal of achieving federal­ the harm caused by releases of radioactive nisms are not releasing radionuelldes into ly regulated, deep geologic disposal. Instead, wastes highly uncertain. · an exposure pathway for humans. it proposed to delegate responsibility to ln­ Unlike ·other possible environmental eon- A large leak during the· spring of 1973- d~try under a plan that contemplated In­ tamlnants, radioactive wastes are immune which went undiscovered for 55 days, allow­ definite storage of reprocessed high-level to outside lnfluence. Each radionuClide lng 115,000 gallons of high-level wastes to waste 1n liquid form 1n near-surface storage decays and emits radiation at its own partie- seep into the soU'-suggests what can tanks and th~-repeated transfer of these ular rate regardless of temperature,. pres- happen with a little carelessness. Among wastes to new tanks as the old storage tanks sure or chemical environment and continues other things, although waste-level readings wore out. · to do so no matter what is done to it. Cur- were ~aken 1n the tank each day, on-site per­ This program, instituted at a storage fa­ rently, allowing radionuclides to decay natu- sonnel did not recall the previouS day's cUlty near West Valley, New York, was rally is the only practical means of eliminat- readings, and their superiors, charged with marked from the beglnnlng by Inadequate lng the radiol<>gical hazards of radioactive comparing readings, were over-burdened study and unforeseen safety problems. Al­ wastes. Therefore, all proce$81ng and storing · with other work and did not make the com­ though the liquid · wastes at West Valley· of radioactive wastes must be considered as parisons. were placed 1n storage tanks, no plan was es­ only Intermediate steps leading finally to Another common problem which has ad­ tablished 1n advance to ~nsure that the disposal by decay-a very long process for versely affected waste managemen,t at Han­ wastes could be safely removed when it some radioactive materials. Some wastes ford is institutional disinclination to spend etuDe time to transfer them to new tanks. must be securely stored for centuries while the money required to provide safety mar­ Then, 1n 1970, the problem at West Valley­ other wastes, particularly those eontalnlng gins. A 1968 General Accounting Office was compounded when the AEC promulgat­ plutonium and the other man-made transu- study revealed, for example, that the major­ ed new regulations requiring all high-level ranie elementS, must be isolated from the ity of tanks at Hanford were over ten ye_ars wastes generated 1n the future to be soltdi­ environment for hundreds of thousands of old and, therefore, vulnerable to leaks, but fied within five years of their generation. yew:s. that the only spare tanks available for This new policy also stated that a specific The hazardous properties of radioactive transfer 1n case of a leak were used tanks proceeding on the future of West Valley wastes are quite different from the toxico- . which $tudies had Indicated should not be wastes would be Initiated. Almost a decade logical characteristics of chemical contami- brought back Into _service. ' later, no such proceeding has started Even nants in the environment. Required to halt the tank leaks as quickly worse, no satisfactory, safe removal method The toxicity of chemical non-nuclear as possible, the AEC at Hanford was forced has been developed, and additional special wa,ste is dependent upon the detailed molec- Into another well-known institutional prob­ research must now be conducted .to recbify ular configuration of its constituent ele- · lem-f,ixlng errors 1n ways that often lead to past errors 1n decisionmaking. ments. For inStance, the aromatic hydrocar- other' larger, long-term problems. To limit The cost of rectifying the waste disposal bon benzene is highly toxic when inhaled. If leakage the AEC began to solidify the high­ problem at West Valley may be a b1llion dol­ the benzene is completely burned, the com- level liquid wastes at Hanford. While this lars. Although the state of New York is ulti­ .bustion pro.ducts, carbon dioxide and water,_ minimizes leakage, at the same time it mately responsible for managing the radio­ possess relatively .Innocuous characteristics greatly aggravates the problem of finding active wastes at West Valley, the state Indi­ that are entirely different than the toxico- an adequate long-term storage solution 'for cated that it is unable to resolve the techni­ logical properties of the original benzene. In these wastes. . This is because the alkaline cal and economic Issues for an adequate other words, the ring-shaped benzene mole- wastes must be reduced to a salt cake/ and Congress are still looking for an accept­ elements forming the molecule. In contrast, sludge form which will be extremely diffi­ able sharing of responsibility. In the mean­ if · the original benzene molecule were cult to remove from the tanks or handle but time, the wastes . are still stored under formed from radioactive isotopes of carbon which will over time require a more perma­ wholly unsatisfactory conditions. In sum, and hydrogen, the combustion products nent storage treatment. So, 1n this case, the the West Valley disposal experiment has would continue to be radiologically toxic response to an immediate problem has led been a radioactive waste nightmare from and pose a hazard if released into the envi- to another larger, but perhaps deferrable, the 1960s to the present. ronment. Chemlcal _or physical changes in problem. _ In the late 1960s the government renewed materials· contalnlng radionuclides do not Another dubious practiCe at Hanford was its emphasis on the development of a deep reduce the basic radiotoxie properties of the that of pouring concentrated radioactive liq­ geologic repository for commercial wastes, materials, except insofar as the modified uids into the soU. Despite protests from an and the AEC selected an abandoned salt February 7, 1980 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 2465 mine near Lyons. Kansas. as the loeation for projection of future societal habits ·and de­ isolation of radioactive wastes. from the bio­ a pilot repository. However. later investiga­ mography. and. finally. the relative impor­ sphere. tion disclosed U1a.t water from adjacent tance of various potential initiating From the mid-19508 to the present time mining ·operations might seep into the re­ events... ~Environmental Survey of the Re­ the federal waste geologic disposal program pository and dissolve the salt; and there processing and Waste Management Portions has focused on bedded or domal salt depos­ .were uncertainties ·resulting from the pres­ of the LWR Fuel Cycle. NRC. 1976. its. The attractive features of salt forma­ ence of old wells near the mine. among A report prepared by the Jet Propulsion tions are frequently cited. Usually unstated. other technic& questions. Because of these Laboratory for the President•s Office of Sci-­ however. are the potentially serious disad­ tecbnieal problems and opposition to the ence and Technology Polley. reached a simi­ vantages of salt formations for the disposal burial of wastes by scientists. politicians. lar conclusion: "The re.crults of this study in­ of high-level wastes. and citizens in the state. in early 1972 the dicate that the U.S. program for high-level First. salt is highly soluble. If· groWld­ Lyons. Kansas. proJect was abandoned. waste management has significant gaps and· water should intrude on a repository Jn salt. Next. in May 1972. the AEC announced its inconsistencies. Area& of greatest concern its integrity will be lost. plan to build a so-ea.lled "retrievable surface include: the adequacy of the scientific data Second. salt is.' chemically corrosive. and storage facility .. or "RSSF.. -an engineered base for geological disposal; programs for water with a high dissolved salt content facility constructed near the surface of the the disposal of spent fuel rods; interagency would more readily transport waste than earth-to s~re the wastes for an indetermi­ coordination and uncertainties in NRC reg­ typical groundwater. Waste containers nate period of time. while the prolonged ulatory requirements for disposal of both placed in direct contact with salt probably search for an acceptable. safe geological site eommereial and military high-level waste.••-Jet,Propulsion Labor.atol'y Publica­ will be breached in less than 10 years. Thus continued. Three years later. however. the any such containers will be important only waste prO«r&&J1 changed direction once tion 77-59. August. 19'77. for handling purposes and not as barriers to again. In the spring of 1975. the Energy Re­ The UJ;lited State& General Accounting release of the . waste. Because salt forma­ search and Development Administration Office has concluded that the facts do not tions always contain some water the waste inevitably will be funding for the RSSF. although the RSSF posal is assured: "After several decades of in direct contact with highly salty water was purportedly retained as a back-up work. AEC did not. and ERDA has not yet and steam. These conditions could lead -to system in case "other repository plans (1) demonstrated acceptable solutions for the conversion o.f the radioactive wastes failed ... long-term storage and/or disposal of its from a relatively insOluble oxide form to the With a resurrected emphasis on the devel­ high-level waste and .<2> satisfied the scien­ soluble chloride .and hydroxide forms. If opment of a deep geologic repository. ERDA tific community that present storage sttes there is groundwater flow through the re­ expanded its efforts to locate a potential are geologically suited for long-term storage pository the high salt concentrations also geologic formation. and in 19'16 focused ulti­ or disposal." would reduce the sorPtion of radionuclides mately on a salt formation in the state of • • • on other rocks and soils. as the waste was Michigan. However. in June. 1977. after resi­ "The Energy Re::;earch and Deve~opment carried to the biosphere. dents of northern Michigan had voted over­ Administration has begun a program to whelmingly to prohibit the siting of a waste Third. salt is often associated with valua­ repository within their state. the feEler&! demonstr.ate by the mid-1980s the feasibility ble natural resources (e.g•• oil. gas. potash. and safety of placing radioactive wastes in gypsum) and it is itself a valuable mineral. government abandoned its efforts to locate deep geological formation. GAO points out This is of concern both because disposal uf the commercial waste repository in the state that not only has progress been negligible wastes should not preclude the use of valua­ of Michigan. to date. but that future program goals are ble resources and because the repository The government is now beginning. another overly optimistic because the Energy Re­ should not be breached by unintentional ac­ search for potential salt or other geological search and Development ·Administration tiqns of man. Future generations may formations that can serve as a permanent faces many unsolved social. regulatory. and . invade a repository by searching for re­ disposal facility. However. in addition to the geological obstacles. •• -Nuclear Energy•s Di­ sources. or they may want to mine the salt unresolved technical problems. serious polit­ lemma: Disposing of HazardoUs Radioactfve itself. If they ate unaware of the presenCe ical and social resistance to the development Waste Safely. GAO. 1977. of the wastes. the consequences could be of a geologie repository is mounting DOE officially continues to express confi­ severe. particularly in the latter case. Thus. throughout the country. For example. ten dence that geol6gical waste disposal will pan salt formations are unattractive for waste states already have introduced bills banning disposal. high-level waste disposal repositories within out. The primary basis for DOE's technolog­ ical optimism was expressed most recently· These disadvantages of salt are ot immedi­ .their borders. as follows: · MGSt recently. the once strong political ate practical concern. because DOE appar­ and citizen support for the proposed waste "There appears to be a aub3tantive consen­ ently still hopes to locate the -first high­ disposal facility near Carlsbad. New . sus and valid tech'nical basis for the view level waste disposal facility in salt. In partic­ has dramatically changed to opposition as a that present plans and actions should rely ular, DOE would like to emplace high-lever result of a DOE task force report which con­ on geological containment of wastes which wastes in the proposed Waste Isolation Pilot eludes that there is. a significant danger of can be achieved in a aa.Je and environmen­ Plant near Carlsbad. New Mexico. groundwater intrusion into the proposed tally .acceptable mann.er., The proposed site highlights the gP.neric ·site. For several years DOE representatives This view has been promulgated by inde­ concerns about salt summarized earlier. A had reassured the local populace that the pendent assessments ranging from that of recent report to Sandia Laboratories. the wastes would be buried only in a fully re­ the National Academy of Sciences in 1957 entity responsible for developing the Carls­ trievable mode. Even the scientist who is in DOE. 1978. tion's." As a result of citizen opposition, These opinions by experts and informed ware basin.> The final recommendation of scientists deserve serious consideration and the. report is as follows: "Extensive regiona.I DOE appears to have returned to the con­ and localized disSolution in the Delaware cept of retrievable burial of the wastes. weight. But they should not be accepted as scientific fact and conclusive for several rea­ basin and the random distribution and on­ TECHNICAL UNCERTAINTIES sons. First. they are based on lit-tle detailed going nature of localized dissolution sug­ A common· and naive explanation for the technical analysis but on the expert's gener­ gests that this particular basin may have failure to develop a high-level waste dispos­ al understanding of the stability of geologi­ already progressed to a stage of dissQlution al facility is that sound technical proposals cal fonnations and assumptions about the where geological estimates of site integrity have been stopped by irrational fears. But characteristics of waste forms and reposito­ may not be obtained with the required even the NRC staff acknowledges that ries and the types of interactions that may degree of certainty. Studies of the statistical many uncertainties must be resolved before take place within the loaded repository. probability of the .Present and future occur­ safe waste disposal is achieved: Second. thorough ·independent review ·of rence of localized dissolution should be. un­ "Past wnrk does not. however. fully cover geological disposal of high-level wastes has dertaken. This information • • . (combined the risk situations that should be explored. been limited. Few researchers in universi­ with other information} should be used to Representative studies have been·done with ties. for instance. have .studied geologic dis­ review and reevaluate the Delaware basin varying degrees of depth and sophistication. posal. And third, the existing analyses gen­ itself as an acceptable site for disposal of but· there are still uncertainties in areas erally have not been subjected to rigorous high-level radioactive waste.-Reporl to such as the effect of waste presence on re­ peer review. Until competent, independent Sandia Laboratories on Deep Dissolution of pository stability; the probabilities and con­ earth scientists have reviewed the bases for Salt. 1978. sequences of intrusive acts by humans; the DOE's expressions of confidence in detail. Clearly. if the hypothesis about the so­ validity of data used in modeling studies; there will not be anything even approaching called deep dissolution of the I)elaware the design and regulatory: actions needed to a scientific consensus that geologic disposal basin Is confirmed. the proposed site for minimize possibilities of repository ·failure; as proposed by DOE wffi achieve adequate WIPP would be unacceptable.· At. the very

CXXVI--U56-P&rt 2 2466 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS February 7, 1980 least, the plant should be delayed while this ·Congress has held numerous oversight the technical basts for confidence that possibility is investigated further. hearings on questions concerning radioac· wutes can be pennanenently disposed of Th~ most Important and Immediate issue tive wastes, but no clear conclusions have.· safely and the adequacy of DOE's programs is whether the generation of large quanti· emerged. Several bills that address the ma­ for assuring safe disposal. NRC's proceeding ties of additional high-level radioactive jority pollcY. issues have been introduced or should be a. national forum for objectively wastes should be permitted to continue una­ are being prepared. but the lack of widely addressing waste disposal issues. Third, bated in light of the extended period that accepted· alternatives to the current situa­ states should be given explieit authority to will be necessary to develop a satisfactory tion suggests that meaningful legislation condition siting of nuclear poRr plants on disposal facility. The House Committee on will not be passed soon. In this respect, Con­ the progress ·made in disposing of wastes. Government Operations has concluded that; gress reflects the indecisiveness in the Ad­ Because failure to develop. a repository in a tilnely manner could interrupt operation of "It is incumbent upon the Federal decl~ ministration and the state& sionmakers, whoever· they may be, to care­ Given the history of mistakes In handling nuclear power plants, the states might have fully weigh the costs and dangers relative to wastes, lack of attention to waste disposal to e.xerctse their traditional responsibilities the back end of the fuel cycle before blindly issue, and the connection with the debate of assuring reliable supplies of electricity. forging ahead, even for a moment and for over nuclear power, there are no apparent California already has asserted this right, whatever distance. simple solutions to the current stalemate. but the nuclear power mdustry has chal­ lenged the state in cour.t. "The time for that evaluation is now. The But there are several actions that would im· nation cannot wait any longer.''-H.R. prove the chances for progress in safely dis­ To increase the technical capability of the posing of wastes. Most importantly, the Ad­ waste management and disposal program, Report No. 95-755. ministration must establish mature, techni­ and to enhance the program's scientific In the past. the impetus for resolution of cally competent leadership that will be credibility, the resources of universities, the waste disposal problem has been lacking widely respected by state officials, Congress professional societies, and independent precisely because reactor licensing and the and public interest groups. think tanks must be utilized to ,a greater development of a waste disposal facility In particular, the of directing waste extent. Such efforts could be funded in part have proceeded in isolation of each other. management programs must be elevated in through the National Science ~oundation, Because the continued licensing of reactors bureaucratic importance so that the prob­ the National Academy of Sciences, and state was not conditioned on the speedy develop­ lem will receive needed attention and fund­ organizations. Federal agencies other than ment of safe waste disposal, the government ing. Perhaps we should have an assistant DOE, such as CEQ, also should fund studies· has lacked adequate incentive, and conse­ .secretary for radioactive wastes at DOE. A of waste disposal issues and problems. quently its waste disposal program has been . mechanism for'" coordinating the pro8Tams To the greatest possible degree, scientific beset by a host of delays, missteps and of different agencies and ensuring their ade· research should be subjected to peer review. changes in direction. quate support also should be created, possi­ As is custom.a.iy in areas of academic re­ A real danger of present policy is that as bly by continuing the Intetagency Review search, papers· should be presented at our dependence on nuclear power increases, Group. professional meetings and published in re­ the nation's tolerance of inadequate and· Improvements are also needed in federal­ ferred Journals. Original technical critiques possibly dangerous waste disposal options state relationships so that DOE can conduct of waste disposal plans, such as Were used in will also increase. Indeed, most nuclear a thorough search for geologic sites to build Sweden recently, should be encouraged Ad­ power proponents already argue that it is waste repositories. The national interest is ditionally, technically capable public inter­ too late to turn back from nuclear power best served by these investigations. The est groups should be funded to review the while we seek to develop an acceptable solu~ states, how.ever, must be able to represent scientific merit of the federal program. tion to the waste disposal problem. They their citizens' interests effectively. It ap­ The most important aspect of the pro­ argue that we should 'place our trust in pears that precise mechanisms for achieving gram ts · the quality of the federal waste those -same engineers who. have -been trying these two goals will have to be developed management decisionmakers. In the past, for 30 years to find a waste disposal solu­ separately for each state. The productive~ the best nuclear scientists and managers tion. ness of these discussions probably will were concerned about reactor .design and The second major policy Issue vigorously .depend upon the perceived technical compe­ safety. Although in recent years there has debated today is the degree of states' au­ tency and credibility of DOE's program. In· been some improvement, more l)ighly capa­ thority to control DOE's actiVities to site a creasing the states' capability to understand ble decisionmakers must be put in charge of geological repository for ultimate disposal the technical aspects of waste disposal and the federal program. Reorganization, in­ of commercial high-level wastes. Some evaluate DOE's plans would also increase creased funding, and more studies will not states such as Ohio and Michigan have in­ the likelihood of gaining states' agreement solve the waste disposal problem unless structed DOE not to study their geological to allow search~s for possible repository some of the best talent in the country is fo­ formations for suitability as a host for a sites. Cused on it. The importance of waste dispos­ waste repository. There is, not surprisingly, Measures should be taken, furthermore, al for human he~th justifies assigning our substaittial public pressure on other states to assure the states that NRC licensing pro­ best people to the job.e to veto ang proposed repository within their ceedings for repositories will be. fair, com­ boundaries. A few states are allowing geo­ plete inquiries trito the adequacy of DOE's logic investigations and, in some,· testing and plans. States should feel that the NRC. experimentation have been permitted; but would not permit DOE to build repositories REPRESENTATIVE McHUGH PRO· these federal activities take place under the that would not adequately protect the VIDES .GRAIN RESERVE ARTICLE close supervision of state officials. health of their citizens. DOE is attempting to develop detailed The federal government should admit plans for working with states so that prohi­ that there is not an immediately available HON. PAUL SIMON bition on studies will not occur and so that. technical solution to the problem of ulti­ OF ILLINOIS eventually, several repositories can be built. mate disposal. Before a repository can be DOE's proposed "consultation and concur­ constructed, additional research and testing IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES rence" process remains basically undefined, must be completed; and the basic concept of Thursday, FebruaT'JI 7, 1980 however ~ because of disagreement over the geologic disposal of· high-level radioactJve appropriate role of states in relation to the wastes must be viuidated. Several specific e Mr. SIMON. Mr. Speaker, the Presi­ federal government, and because there is a sites suitable for constructing repositories dent's decision to embargo all grain wide diversity of views among state officials must be found. Completing these activities scheduled for the has about what authority and responsibilities will require years of work. generated a lot of discussion on the they want. But without strong presidential In the meantime, decisions must be made -economic impact on the Soviet Union leadership this issue may not be resolved for about whether additional large amounts of and on our own country. To date, little some time. wastes should be created by operating nu­ Soon after assuMing office, President clear power plants. Debate over this issue attention has been focused on what Carter officially recognized the need to im­ continues to be bitter. Satisfactory resolu­ are the potential effects on other prove the federal radioactive waste, manage­ tion only can oceur if fair, open decision­ countries, particularly developing ment and disposal programs. A ·year later he making processes are initiated soon. There countries, who have been the recipi­ established an Interagency Review Group are at least three components to an accept­ ents of a variety of food aid programs on Nuclear Waste Management able overall process. in the past. which spent another year reviewing all as· First, the Administration must openly rec­ Our colleague, MATT McHuGH, one of pects of the problem and obtaining exten­ ognize the linkage between nuclear power sive public comment and independent scien­ development and safe waste disposal. Feder­ the finest Members of our body, has tific advice. The White House has had the al officials must accept that unrestrained written a thoughtful piece which ap­ IRG's report for months but has delayed operation of nuclear power plants cannot peared in ....on Feb­ action. In the meantime, opportunities for occur without significant progress in the ruary 6. He has addressed an issue new Initiatives by 1the Administration are waste disposal program. Second, the NRC which has been debated in this body fast disa_npeariQ&.. should conduct a thorough review of both for several years-a grain reserve. AI· February 7, 1980 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 2467 though I do -not fully agree with the This could be accomplished by early pas­ His rise xrom a peasant background grain embargo, it is a reality. If we are sage of the Food Security Act of 1979, legis­ in Krasic, , through military lation that has been co-sponsored by 96 service and his dramatic· and momen­ to maintain this policy, then I think members Qf the House. his suggestion warrants close atten­ tous leadership qualities as a prince of Originally proposed by the late Senator peace of the Catholjc Church, will live tion. I urge my colleagues' to read the Hubert H:· Humphrey, this blll would au­ following article which appeared in thorize the Oovei'runent to purchase and on in the hearts of free men forever. the New York Times: store up to four million metric tonS of His 16-year prison sentence in 1945 USING EMBARGOED GRAIN wheat. The reserve could be used solely to for denouncing the evils of commu­ meet emergency food needs in developing nism was a horrendous one. After Pius WASHINGTON.-Now that Congress has re­ convened, it. must come to grips with a countries when sufficient supplies were not XII named him Carpinal in 1952, and number of issues raised by President Cart­ available under our Food ·for Peace Pro­ despite the urging of to leave the gram, and would effectively isolate from do­ country, he. chose to remain with his er's decision to embargo graiit shipments to mestic markets wheat now being purchased the Soviet Union in retaliation for the inva­ by the Carter Administration. · flock, and died on , 1960, in sion of , including what to do Establishment of such a reserve would not the small town where he was born. with surplus grain purchased by the Gov­ solve all the problems created by the embar­ I am honored to join with the hun­ ernment. go. It could not, for example, be a means for dreds of thousands of Croatian Ameri­ American farmers are rightly concerned cans throughout the United States at that this grain could adversely influence the storing surplus feed grain. It also does not domestic market, exerting significant down­ represent a complete answer to world food this dedication. I wish to commend ward pressirre on prices. Although a drop in problems. However, as the United Nations­ Rev. Slavko Soldo, pastor of sponsored World Food Conference in Cyril arid Methodius Church and farm prices could have a· modest short-term pointed out in 1974, reserves can play a vital impact on inflation at home, lower prices ~aint 's Church, as \Vell as_all role in helping to assure survival under those who worked to have the city of could also force many farmers to throw in . emergency conditions and in promoting the towel. Thus, it is important to isolate some measure of political stability. New York unanimously pass a resolu­ Gov~rnment purchases from domestic mar­ tion on November 27, 1979, dedicating kets, a policy the Carter Administration has The President's decision to embargo grain said. that it will pursue but that depends is an appropriate response to Soviet aggres­ this area. solely on administrative discretion. sion. Beyond demonstrating American re­ Cardinal Stepinac Place will be lo­ If grain purchases are isolated from do­ solve, however, the embargo provides the cated in this-perhaps, the most heav­ mestic markets, what should be done with President and CongreSs with a .fresh oppor­ ily trafficked area in the world. This is the grain? One view that enjoys substantial tunity to establish a permanent food re­ doubly symbolic because it befits Car­ public support is that the surplus should be serve. It is an opportunity that should not dinal Stepinac's ·love for humanity. _disposed of abroad in the developing na­ be missed.e Tender and loving in his dealings with tions. At first blush, such a course may look those in need, he was indeed a man of attractive. It would allow us to continue CARDINAL STEPINAC steel when it c~me to defending the putting pressure on the Soviet Union, help right of all people to worship in the maintain crop prices at home, reduce Feder­ REMEMBERED al budgetary pressures, and could ·be justi­ manner they choose. fied as another gesture to help starvfug and How right he was to fight the Com­ malnourished people. HON. FRANK J. GUARINI munist· menace, which again today is. At a tinie when per-capita food production OF NEW JERSEY on the march seeking to crush all in Africa has dropped to a level 10 percent IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES those . who · love individual freedom. below what it was a decade ago, and when The annals of. history will indicate one out of every three children on that con­ Thursday, February 7, 1980 that the U.S. Congress joined the.free tinent will die before the age of five, an e Mr. GUARINI. Mr. Speaker, I have world in hailing Cardinal Stepinac as a appeal to our. conscience may well be in been honored by an invitation to par­ order. Indeed, some of the surplus grain can for faith and freedom. be disposed of to meet emergency needs in ticipate in the dedication ceremonies. "To live in the hearts of those you countries such as , East Timor, So­ of "Cardinal Stepinac Place" in New love is not to die." Aloysius Cardinal malia and Pakistan. York City, on Sunday, February 10, Stepinac indeed will live forever. On the other hand, any systematic effort 1980. I am sure that my colleagues will to dispose Of surplus grain abroad could It is indeed, my pleasure to take part join on Sunday in silent tribute to this have devastating long-term consequences in this ceremony proclaiming West man of strength whose human mortar for the developing nations. 41st Street in New York City, "Cardi­ will cement the faith of generations­ Those nations' food deficits will increase nal Stepinac Place." This ceremony fighting for the freedom of mankind­ dramatically in the next two decades unless they substantially improve their own agri­ marks the· 20th anniversary of the for many years to come.e cultural productivity. The· United Nations death of the martyred Croatian, Alo­ ysius Cardinal Stepinac. Food and Agriculture Organization has pro­ TAX-EXEMPT HOUSING BONDS jected a net annual grain deficit exceeding Because of the great contributions 90 million metric tons by 1985 barring such Saints Cyril and Methodius Church WORTH SAVI~G progress, and the International Food Policy and Raphael's Church have Research Institute, a private Washington­ made to our Nation, and specifically in HON. MARTIN OLAV SABO based research organization, puts the figure OF MINNESOTA at 120 million metric tons by 1990. this area, the designation of "Cardinal The United States will not be able to Stepinac Place" is an ideal one. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES make up deficits of these magnitudes, and · Many Croatian Americans live in the Thursday, Feburary 7, 1980 this is why the major thrust of our develop­ 14th District of New Jersey that I rep­ ment assistance in recent years has focused resent. The families residing in west • Mr. SABO. Mr. Speaker, I would like to include in the RECORD, for the on improving agricultural productivity in ~ew York, Weehawken, Jersey City, the developing. nations themselves ..Much of Union City, Hoboken, and Guttenberg perusal of my colleagues, an edito.rial the progress that has resulted from this are making valuable contributions to published in the Minneapolis Tribune new direction could be undermiiled if the the American-way of life. on February 2, J980, reg~rding ·H.R. United States were now to resume a policy 57 41, the Mortgage Subsidy Tax Act of of systematically dumping surplus . grain American Croatians uphold the prin­ ciple of family cohesiveness, the single 1979. The bill is being considered in abroad. conference committee with the wind­ Small farmers scattered throughout the most important· element in our society third world would. be deprived of incentives today. Hard-working God-fearing indi­ fall profit tax bill. to improve production, and their govern­ viduals, they cherish . the religious TAX-EXEMPT HOUSING BoNDS WORTH SAVI!JG ments might· be encouraged to ..subsidize freedom America has- to offer, and Tax-exempt state and city bonds to fi­ cheap -food as a way of dampening public strive to instill the spirit of love and nance construction and rehabilitation of unrest.. single-family homes are a valuable housing One alternative to a policy of dumping respect for their neighbors. These are tool in Minnesota and many states. But would involve creation of a Government­ the values Cardinal Stepinac upheld, these bonds are in real danger of being out­ owned food reserve, as recommended in tes­ ·and the ones for which he suffered. lawed in Congress. That would be a mis­ timony to the Presidential Commission on But Cardinal Aloysius Stepinac and take-at least until Washington finds a World Hunger. his spirit will live forever. better way to subsidize this needed housing. 2468 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS February 7, 1980 Two main arguments are used against the AFGHANISTAN AND THE SOVIET side. their traditional sphere of influ­ tax-exempt bonds. First, investors don't pay STRATEGIC CHALLENGE ence. This is a qualitative change of federal taxes on their bond earnings. That's It true, but .the subsidy for _housing is none­ the first magnitude. reflects a new theless worthwhile, and serves a better pur­ HON. GERALD B. H. soviet judgment ot both their own ca- pose than many other state and local tax­ oP NEW YORK pabilities · and of the risks they per­ free bonds. Second, a few· states and cities ceive in engaging in adventurism have provided housing to families with in­ IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES abroad. We have to assume that they comes well above average. That's true, too, Thursaay, Februa771. 7. 198tr believe their own capabilities to be but the cure Is a simple congressional llmit ·e Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, the high and the risks low. Developments on the income .of eligible families. Soviet invasion of Afghanistan repre- so far appear to be proving them iight. Instead, the cure that the Carter adminis­ sents· a new and extremely dangerous And so we are entering a very dan­ tration and the House Ways and Means turn· in world events. It is most signifi- gerous period-both for ourselves and Committee have offered for that iilness is to cant for what it suggests about pres- our allies. The Soviet Union is now in kill the patient. That indicates an overrid­ ent and future Soviet strategy in the- a strong strategic position in Afghani­ ing interest in the treasury's take at the ex­ world arena. The lesson for us is no stan from which they can threaten pense of urban housing needs. The Ways less than alarming. · not only Pakistan and , but also and Means Cqmmittee has approved a bill What is· important to recognize traffic through the Persian Gulf itself. · that would eliminate tax-exempt housing ·about the Afghan crisis is the .qualita- The hard truth of the matter is that bonds while · providing an ill-advised tax tive change in Soviet geopolitical doc- today, as a result of decisions taken break on savings accounts . Soviet-American relations were States does not have the ability to Although the bill woutd· eliminate the marked by a relative balance. The. project force credibly irito the Middle housing bonds, the Ways and· Means Com­ leadership in' the Kremlin was aware . East or other distant areas of the mittee also sent an amendment along to the of and respected the military strength world. We do not have the strength to full House for floor debate. The amendment of the United States. Firsthand experi- face down the Soviets in the event of a would restrict the use of state and local tax­ ence in the Berlin and crises had major confrontation. We can rebuild exempt housing bonds, but not eliminate shown Moscow that the United States our strength, but this Win take time. them outright. The White House and the was prepared to use that power in the · In the meantime, our security and ·Treasury Department, ignoring the Housing defense of its 0}\'11 interests and that that of our friends in the world hangs and Urban Development Department's of its allies. Sd long • as the United in the balance. If there is any positive housing concerns, support the amendment. States retained a clear'military edge or result which might come from the­ That is consistent with the Carter adminis­ at the least a relative balance of mill- Afghan crisis, it is that at. last the tration's basic position since shortly after tary power with the Soviet Union, American people and many of' the na­ hearings on the issue began last May. therefore. the Soviets were deterred tions of the world have been awakened The catch is that amendment's restric­ from any overt challenge to American to the danger of Soviet expansionism. tions are so severe.-bY design-that they all interests in the world. For the people of Afghanistan this re- but rule out the use of tax-exempt bonds, This was an uneasy balance, and in- alization has come too late. I only hope housing lobbyists maintain. The Minnesota creasingly a precarious one. As the that it has not come too late for us.e Housing Finance Agency, for · example, balance of power and influence shifted would find it "virtually impossiple" to con­ steadily in favor of the Soviet Union, tinue its sing}e-family mortgage or rehabili­ Soviet meddling in thJid countries tation programs, says director James Solem. became increasingly open and activist. WHAT'S RIGHT WITH CONGRESS That mortgage program has provided nearly The recent history of Asia .and par­ 9,000 new housing units since 1973, or about ticularly of Africa is a testament to HON. PAUL SIMON a third of the agency's units, which also in­ clude toWnhouses and apartments. this change. Still, the possibility of a OP ILLINOIS substantive American or Western re­ IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES The amendment has only oRe virtue. It sponse led the Soviets to take a cau­ Thursday, February 7, 1980 stops short of freezing the House into a po­ tious approach~ Surrogates or proxies sition of flat opposition to tax-exempt hous­ from Cuba were sent into areas of the e Mr. SIMON. Mr. Speaker, certainly ing bonds. This makes it more likely that Third World where . the ·presence of one of the most respected Members of the House might eventually agree to a more Soviet combat forces might have been Congress, riot only in this session, but flexible Senate bUl, which contains income considered overly provocative. in this centt.lry, is our colleague PETER limits and other sensible, workable restric­ Like a slowly opening flower. the W. RODINO, JR. Of New Jersey. tions. As Rep. Bill Frenzel put it, "We will truth of the international situation Some weeks ago he had an article in have to rely on the Senate to repair the flaws:• must have become clear to the Soviet the Wa..c;hington. star titled "What•s leadership only in stages, and when. Right With Congress." So the outlook is shaky for housing propo- they at last perceived it, I' am sure It suggests. both some things that nents. ·But another catch makes their· sttua- they could not have been mm-e de­ are right and so:m.e areas where we tion even worse. The issue of tax-exempt lighted. Their proxy forces, deployed need to have some improvement. housing bonds is not even being debated at in the tens of. thousands throughout I call it to the attention of my col­ the moment on its own merits-it has been Africa, met no challenge from the leagues who may not have seen the ar­ added to maneuverings of a House-Senate . West. In one case, ip fact, the Ameri­ ticle when it originally i,Lppeared: conference committee on the windfall-prof- can Ambassador to the United Nations [From the Washington Post, Dec. 9, 19791 its tax. For complicated reasons, that is per- described them as a "stabilizing force." missible under congressional niles. But it is At the same time;the covert action ca­ WHAT'S RIGHT WITH cONGRESS also highly unusual, since the full House pability of our Central Intelligence rove a <1 > Congress reflects the moods of the CONCERNED ABOUT BOYCOTI' point and create a financial loss for Russia. American people. The reflection is I).Ot often Even this we would do, but please relate to exact, and frequently the parliamentary HON. NEWT GINGRICH President Carter that· this is the Most we result is disagreement or inaction. But that feel should be. done in boycotting. Also, as is an inevitable consequence of our repre­ OF GEORGIA parents of a son in our U.S. Army, we per- sentative system of government. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES sonally feel that he has been given the op- <2> Congress can check arbitrary action or Thursday, F'ebruary 7, 1980 . portunity to make his decision of service abuse of authority at other levels of govern­ and sacrifice for oilr Country: please urge · ment, as we ·witnessed through the hearings e Mr. GINGRIC~. Mr. Speaker, I President Carter not to deny our other son on Watergate and the subsequent impeach­ would like to share with my. colleagues his own freedom: of choice without fear of ment resolutions in 1973 and 1974. a letter from some dear friends of repercussion. Somehow there must be an al­ <3> The passions, the tensions and the con­ mine from back home. They · have . a temative route to take. flicting aspirations which often simmer in America need to be expressed and relieved. son who is a ch"mpion athlete ~d is In· sharing our concern, there is a good Open debate, in Congress, covered by the on tl\e Olympic team. He does not lesson we learned early in the competition. riews media, can provide-at times-a re­ want to miss out on the main event The example rs of a sporting ·family attend­ lease of excessive national tensions: after training many years and getting ing a large competitive affair, bringing <4) Through the necessity to reach deci­ as far as he has. His parent's letter ex- along others, athletes from their home sions on the most pressing issues, Congress presses the pain of people in such a , t(>wn. During the competiti~n. they became finally brings some national order to the delicate position. It is sad. to ~ee · this disenchanted with the officiating. Instead mass of opinions, yeamlngs, conflicts and family's dreams put in limbo. of protesting and awaiting the due process, viewpoints of all the people. And-though The letter follows: they got up and left, taking along all the the members must attend to local needs­ DEAR.. NEWT: Speakirig as concerned par- athletes they had brought with them. Who they try to articulate a national identity. ents of both an Olympic hopeful and a son l~t out? The athletes. .The "adults" , got <5> The Congress and the Constitution are in the u.s. Army, and as friends.of athletes, mad and went home. What kind of a lesson vitally linked. Congress is as responsible for we ask your help in urging President carter was this for young. impressionable· people? the preservation of the Constitution as are to reconsider his Summer Olympic boycott Likewise, do we want our Country to appear -the other'two branches of government. It is thus one of the bulwarks in protection of in­ decision. It is not too late to send our coun- sa these people just mentiQned? Please dividual rtghts and freedoms in America. try's best athletes to the Soviet Union and think about the consequences. <6> The institutional traditions, prece­ show the Soviets that ~deed we Are the Su- At this time, we are hearing that the U.S. dents and rules of Congress provide an perior Nation! Our athletes can do that for boycott is being supported by some other us, for they will win for us. The pride of countries Please be assured that few if · ' order and continuity to the legislative proc­ being the best can help this nation a great ~ f ... any ess. But Congress also has the internal flexi­ deal at this time when our self-esteem is soi 0 ~hese _countri~s are the great . sports bility to permit each member to function as low. We need to feel more powerful-and powers that we are. They do not stand to an influential and creative individual, which our athletes can help us to that end. lose as much as we do, and ..most are not, in is the only way imaglriative leadership can If we do not suppon the Summer Olympic fact, committed to the boycott. .evolve. movement, only our summer sports athletes Please, let's let freedom rini-let our Na­ HUMAN STRENGTHS will be deprived-not the U.S. public, not tiona! Anthem i1.ng tD the ears. of the'world Some special human strengths. of Con­ the U.S. Government; only our summer as each of our U.S. athletes stands up for gress have become apparent to me in recent sports athletes. If the President's boycott is his medal each time "we the U.S. wins!" years. to be valid and fair, it must also include bar- · The most obvious personal strength of ring Russian participation in the Lake Our family would be pleased and honored, today''s Congress is the conscientiousness of Placid Winter Olympics. In addition, with- Newt, ~ meet with anyone who could aid us the members. They are, generally, a harder­ out support of all our other Allies, the boy- in our efforts to help our President see that · workil'lg group than any I have observed in cott will fail. With the support of but a few the OlYtllPic athlete boycott will give the my .31 years in ·Congress. The habit of hard of ohr Allies, the boycott will be- ineffectivef Soviet Union and unfair political and athlet- . work transcends political self-interest. It is and only those athletes of counties opting ic advantage, will be a sacrifice by only our not uncommon to see members who have to pull out with us will be deprived. Certain- summer Olympic athletes, and unless sup-. decided on retirement, continue to work at a 'Iy those countries wh·o remain in competi- . ported by all nations, it will necessarily be fast pace from early in the morning until tion will be given fuel for their braggadocio ineffective. late at night, with no further hope of of "the best" in the world. We can be as- Let's somehow find a better way! reward or recognition. · _ · sured that if the U.S. in particular fails to Most members of Congress today are will­ attend, the Soviets will publicize that they Sincerely, ina to make severe sacrifices to do:their Jobs are indeed the Superior Power-and our BoB ,AND Lois LUNDQUIST.e 2470 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS February 7, 1980 CHRONOLOGY OF AMERICA'S 1978-Rhodesian war escalated. by Soviet/ 1979-Radical Moslem. occupation ·of U.S. SLIDE TO ·NO. 2 POSITION IN Cuban-backed Patriotic Front-as Embassy in Teheran-still occupied­ Rhodesia moved toward Black Rule, no solution in sight. THE WORLD U.S. and Britain reneged on all Kissin-:­ 1979-80-Massive occupation of Afghanistan ger promises s.e HON. LARRY Mci)9NALD gave diplomatic support to the Patri· otic Front. OFG~RGIA 1978-Zaire invaded by Soviets using ~ban EVADING POLICY DECISIONS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES and East German troops. Carter again Thursday, February 7, 1980 cut back o:ri aid to Zaire. and Belgium intervened and again saved HON. BARBER B. CONABLE, ·JR. e Mr. McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, the Mobutu Regime. or NEW YORK while we may all argue about the de­ 1978-The Hom 'Of Africa conquered by the IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVEs tails of this. or that past event, there is Soviets with the most massive airlift no doubt that the position of America since WWII and the · use of 20,000 Thursday, February 7; 1980 in the world has sadly declined since Cuban · troops. Carter reneged on 1945. Our prestige hB$ seldom been promised arms aid,to Somalia and • Mr. CONABLE. Mr. Speaker, the forced Iran and Saudia Arabia to cut new budget ~ubmitted to Congress by lower in . the world and· militarily we arms aid to Somalia subsequently ' lost the President demonstrates again an are No. 2 despite some ·huffing arid . the war to Ethiopia, Russia, and CUba. Unwillingness to make tough decisions puffing from the White House and its 1978-Panama Canal was given by the u.s. on spending which would restrain· the spokesmen. Therefottf. it might be to the pro-CUban; ·pro-Soviet Marxist growth of Government, the increase ot useful to recite how we got to this sad Torrijos regime. taxes, and the surge of inflation. He is state. A chronology of this retreat 1978-Nicaragua revolution began, led by letting spending· and taxation rise un­ from greatnesS follows: . Soviet/CUban-backed Marxist Sandan· checked· so that taxpayers will paft a istas guerriilas, Carter Administration " CHRoNoLOGY or EvENTs backed sandanistas against the pro- greater portiQll of their income in 1945-U.S. won WW n. The Western Somoza. taxes and · the ratio of taxes to the world was in a shambles- and the U.S. 1978-U.S. began pullout of troops from gross national product· will - be the was in the driver's seat. At·the Yalta South Korea amidst massive North highest-in our history~ excepting only and Potsdam Conferences, the U.S. Korean military · buildup. General the peak World War II year of 1944. gave all of to- the Rus­ sians, including East. . , Singlau.b fired by carter for warning Robert J. · Samrielsoh, a · respected , , Hungary, Ru­ 197~1c:=::;ell to Soviets. . economic wri~r for National Journal, mania, , and Bulgaria. h1 recently examined this failure of eco- 1949-U.S. lost Mainland to the com­ 197~~~~~~kg'U:=~ inv.aded .c • nomic le&.dership in an article reprint- munists (650 million people) by cut­ 1978-u'.s. broke relatjons with . 'I'aiwan. ed in the Washington Post of Febru­ ting vital arms ~d support to our war­ scrapped U.S.- Mutual Defense ary 5. \Vllile l do not concur with all time ally, Chiang Kai Shek. Treaty, recognized Red China andes- of Mr. Samuelson's observations, he 1951-U.S. fought our first "non-win war" In tablished diplomatic and trade rela- presents an iinportant analysis which Korea against the communists. , Mac­ tiona with the PRC. I submit for the RECORD and commend Arthurrung. was fired. for advocating win· 1978-Iranian Revolution heated up. to the attention of nlY colleagues: 1979-Shah of fran toppled by radical Mos- 1956-Hungarian Revolution was crushed by lems, Soviet XGB, Iraniti.n Communist WRITE HOUSE DRII'Til'fG, BUDGET PLAN Russia. The West didn't lift a finger. Party, PLO, and Liby~. 20 . billion In SHOWS 1958-Cuba fell to R\l.SI!Iia. U.S. Gove~e~t U.S. arms lost. Iran biecame radically In ·the 1960's, there was a glib slogan that first pulled the _rug out from ~der anti-Western. Carter Administration went like this: if you're not part of the solu­ Batista by cutting off vital arms and withdrew support from Shah at crit1· tion, you're part of the problem. Somehow, supplies and giving covert aid to cal point in revolution: ;that's the thought inspired by the White Castro forces. · 1979-Communist South Yemen Invaded House's latest batch of budget and economic 1962- ·War began. Our second "no- pro-West North Yemen. Thousands of proposals. win war." · CUban troops and Sovtet advisors cur- Except for the budget's s~. which at $616 1968-Czeeh<>Slovakian independence revolt rently massing in South Yemen for bllllon In fiscal 1981 is so 18.rge that the crushed by ·Russia. The West didn't conquest of North.Yemen and 0~ nUmber seems increasingly meaningless, the lift a finger. · 1979-China invaded Vietman in defiance of theme 1s that there is no .theme. For all the 1972-U.S. pUllout from Vietnam began- the SQViets and won a Umited war. rhetoric-deploring inflation, promoting 8.fte~ 10 years and 50,000 American 1979-Baudi Arabia moving to normalize re- savings and urging restrained spending-the dead-on terms the communists had lations. with the Soviet Union and latest proposals do little to ste~ dependence demanded in 1964. Called "peace with moving away from·the United States. on on imports and promise significantly honour". ·

CXXVI--157 Pa.rt 2 2482 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS February 7, 1980 of us met· with President Carter at the dent p:rior to the Three Mile Island accl­ addition to numerous· media· appear­ Whlte House where we ·received the nrmest dent. ances. she will 'be present at a special commitment given by a President since the SOLAR POWER showing of the film. At this event, she ~nergy crisis began to increased coal use. will speak about: the conditions in J.P. As I believe coal IS one of the keys to our COAL PROGRESS Stevens plants and factual events· be· short range energy future, neither can we Two key Congressional actions in recent forget _about the long range, and solar hind scenes in the-movie. months can help with coal production. One power is. well on the way to being the key In reviewing the practices of the bill stimulates the move toward synthetic for 1980 and beyond. Solar research is still J.P. Stevens Co. and itS flagrant viola­ fuels needed and l.8st year I voted for solar power tions· of labor laws, I was startled to and directs the President to reach a produc­ research. learn the magnitude of business this tion of 500,000 barrels of oil equivalent a GASOHOL day by 1990. I co-sponsored this bill in the firm conducts with the Federal Gov­ House of Representatives. A second bill cre­ Some experts are stni uncertain about· t:l!le ernment. Despite 18 encounters with ates an Energy Mobilization Board to put long-term impact of gasohol on car engines the National Labor Relations Board, key energy projects on a "fast track" to and whether modifications in those engines speed up· federal, state, and local decision may be needed. Still, gasohol can provide all of which found J.P. Stevens to be making so we end cases like the one where a significant ·savings a.nd I voted for · an ex­ in violation of National Labor Rela· western oil pipeline plan was dropped be­ p_anded program of gasohol research. tions Act provisions, the Government dif. continues to award this company coo­ cause the company had to face some 700 HIGH MILEA.GE CARS ferent permit requirements. tracts which total millions of dollars GAS RATIONING Because · of Congre~ional mandates the each year. Through such actions we I ·Joln with a majority of Washington offl· ne-et mileage average for cars has indreased are. in essence, condoning the prac­ from about 14 mpg to l9 mpg. I was one of tices of a firm that chooses to violate ci8.Is in· hoping we can get by without gaso­ the Congressmen who arranged the visit to line rationing. The reasons for that opinion -Washington of . Ralph Moody and his 80 Federal law and continues to deny pre- are: 1> the b\H'eaucratlc cost of any ratlon­ mpg car in 1979. He has developed some scribed employee rights. ing·plan; Z> the f~ that any ratloriing plan problems in his research, but we need to en- I believe, Speaker, that· the time Is unfair to some people; and 3> that ration­ Mr. courage this kind of work, and I understand has come for us. to amend our -actions• .ing represents another intrusion by W~h­ ington into our private lives. In 1979, howev­ the major auto manufacturers are also now We must take steps to insure that the er, I voted to give the President s~-by involved in this tn>e of research. U.S. Government, which enforces the gasoline rationing power. This itves the Ad· MASS TRA.JUIT la'WS P$SSed by this very Congress, ministration.the power to- draft an emergen- 'l'he ptesident has proposed a riew 10 year does not continue to reward.those-who . cy plan to be used in ~e a ma.tbr cut-off of $13 billion mass transit program. Congress · . stand in flagrant violation of our laws. oil creates a potential disaster where ration· is now consideriDg it. While most-of the ing Is a necessity. Our best rationing, work would be don,e in urban areas, any sav- I am writing President Carter to re- though, comes from volun~y actions by_in· 1ngs in energy makes more supplies availa- ).quest a special·investigation · which wUl dlvldual citizens which are starting to pro­ ble for rural areas like ours that are more encompass a clo~ scrutiny and. review vide consldetable energy savings. dependent on automobiles. of our Federal contracting policies. I OIL SUPPLIES ENERGY nm>.m'l'MJ!!11rl' believ~ that our Goveniment should A key question during the gas · lines. of Some people have suggested doing 'away assume the neCessary role in reaffirm· 1979 was where all the oil actually was. At with it as a bureaucratic nightmare. 1 was fng the foundations of' fair labor prac­ the time I wro~ to the Energy Department complaining the allocation system :was one of the co-sponsors of the bill that ere- tices, rather than. eneouragfug their unfair to rural areas, and some adJustments ated the Energy Department a couple years repeated abuse.e ' haye been made since. Also, I voted for a bill ago. . We drafted that bill to end a bureau- requiring Congress be given more ~~­ crat~c nightmare where ene~gy responsiblli· tion on the oil ·mpply situation. Also, the ty was split between ~any agencies and bU· Department of Energy has now developed reatts. I agree it has·not met allits goals" in its own supply figures rather than relying the -early years of Its operation, but it now ANALYSIS OF CETA BUDGrr AND on the oil industry as in the past. has a ·ne..w management team, and I. am optl· YOUTH EMPLdYMENT lNm:A­ mistlc It will function better during the TIVE WINDFALL PROFITS ~Coming years. I voted .for the House-passed bill to impose THE ENERGY ACT OP 1978 a 60 p~rcent windfall profits tax on crude-oil HON. BOB EDGAR prices where they result from increased on I served on the Task Force tha~ passed prices. The billions of dollars raised by this the major energy· bUl approved late in 1978. OP PENNSYLVANIA Many of Its provisions· on natural gas pric· tax would be used for energy research proj­ IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES· ects. I felt the House tim struck a fair bal­ conservation, and other areas are only now Thursday, Feliruarv 7, 1980 ance between raiSing needed revenue and starting to take hold. The key part of that leaving the oil companies· with an incentive bill survived in con«ress by only 1 vote. e Mr. EDGAR. Mr. Speaker• . the fol;. to search· for n~w domestic·oil supplies. Tqat sll.ows · how difficult It has been· to lowing is an analysis:·of the' President's reach agreement on most~ energy issues. LOW INCOME ENERGY ASSISTANCE proposed. budget' for CETA and· his Now, though, it is the cornerstone of our youth employment initiative. The I voted for a new round of $1.35 billion in pollcy, and with the· .ideas outUned here, emergency assistance to help needy people plus others, we can build upon it for the analysis has ·been' done by the North~ pay fuel costs. I . am also re~iewing many of kind of major. energy activity our Nation east-Midwest Congressional COalition. the roles of that plan because it seems some needs.e BUDGET BRIEP-COMPREHElfSIW EMPLOYMENT needy families have been excluded. While . AND TRAIJUNG ACT (CETA) we all share a primary desire to see that no family suffers U1 health because of simply NORMA RAE BroBLIGRTS being unable to pay for heating their home, In his' fiscal 1981 budget proposal~ Pre.SI­ I also want Congress, to focus· more o:ri aid dent. Carter has chosen to "hold the line" programs, ·because the high fuel prices are HON. TONY P. HALL OF OHIO O:Q. expenditures at $9.7 billion for the Com~ also causing hardships for middle class and prelienstve Education and Training Act ·retired ·families. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES . preferring to target· some new em­ 'NUCLEAR ENERGY Thursday, February 7, 1980 -ployment ·and training assistance to selected I voted ln 1979 to reject a moratorium on • Mr. HALL. of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, needy populations, and to emphasize long­ future nuclear powerpla,nt construction. but "Norma Rae," a film depicting the term job skills development' and priVate­ I also voted for stiffer safety regulations sector job creation. .The administration's re­ . and requirements. Our dependence on. for­ struggles of J.P. Stevens textile plan~ ­ quest represent a decrease in the number of eign oil makes our situation so precarious workers to gain union representation, real dollars available for CETA employment. that we simply cannot afford not to use nu-, was released last year. For the first 8Jld training when the $1.1' billion proposed clear power to provide energy through the time, the real story of this battle for budget authority for ''new" youth initiatives plants we already have. But Washington employee rights was revealed. On Feb­ Is taken titto account. Tbe impact of -this de­ agrees very strongly that steps must be ruary 15, 1980, Crystal Lee Sutton, the cre~e will be disproportionately felt In taken to insure: greater satety than was evl· "real~' Norma ~ae will be in Dayton. In Northeastern and Midwestern states. February 7, 1980 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 2483 BUDGET SUMMARY total allocations. Therefore, 1f the econo~ the program "will provide education, work sours' appreciably. the Northeast-Midwest experience, training, labor market informa­ [Dollars in millions] region will bear disproportionately the tion, and other services to an addi.tional brunt of a short ~all in CETA Jobs. 450,000 young people." Although budget au~ thority of more than $2 btllion w1ll be avati­ BUDGET BRIEF-YoUTH EMPLOYMENT able in 1982, outlays for fiscal 1981 are onlY' INITIATIVE $717 million. No information on the ·pro­ HIGHLIGHTS posed expend.lture pattern for these outlay& has been relea8ed. The labor Department· In recognition of the prevatling high un­ General training ~ comvonent \Vill provide work "experie~cet~ employment programs: employment rate amQ_ng youth ahd the even but no salaried jobs. The administration Budget authority...... $2,054 $2,117 3.1 -5.1 higher rate among mlnority youth, the ad· may be proposing to substitute a program Outlays .... ~ •••.••••••••••••••• 1,948 2,011 3.2 -5.0 ministration has proposed what it calls a $2 which spreads some additional services to a Number af jobs .• ;.;;...... 250,000 250,000 ...... " billion "new initiative" to be shared by the Private-sector program: · Departments of Labor and Education. The greater nur.nber of youth for current pro­ Budget authority...... 325 150 -53.8 -57.5 grams providing jobs and services to a small­ Outlays ••••••••••••••••••••• - 164 30t 88.4 73.5 new initiative will ·raise total budget author­ er number. The proposal appears to be rely­ Public seMce employment; ity to $6 btllio:ilin fiscal 1982. · ing on the private sector to provide the jobs Budget authority •••••••••••• 3,112 4,598 47.8 36.1 In real dollar terms, the new Initiative will Outlays ...... _... 4,415 U · for youth who would be somewhat better 3,977 11.0 increase current youth training and employ­ prepared for the labor market. But projec­ Number af jobs ...... · 200,000 200,000 ·······~·-...... ~···- ment outlays of the Labor Department by · Youth programs: tions for the Northeast and Midwest suggest Budget authority ••• _.,_ 2,101 1 2,789 32.7 22.2 slightly more than 1 percent in fiscal -1981. these jobs will not materialize in the region. Outlays •••••••••••••••••••• _ 2,500 2,784 11.4 2.5 whiie real spending in the 'Department -of CETA total: Education for youth actually will decline by .The administration bas not revealed how 'Budget authority •••••••• - •• 7,592- 9,654 27.2 11.1 0.5 percent. · it plans td ·provide "financial· incentives" tO . Outlays ...... " 8,589 9,519 10.8 2.1 encourage greater cooperation between CETA sponsors, local employers, and ·school s $1.1 bitr.on win be ~ fir 111e Labor Departmenrs portion of 1111 is Presidenrs )'OUih initiative. · . BUDGET SUMMARY systems. This program apparently . de­ signed to lure. students who have dropped [Dollars ill milfiOIIS] out before high school graduation .back into Background.-'l,'he administration's budg­ some sort of training program, but details aa .et request fixes tne number of employinent to how this will take place, where it w1ll 'and trainlng ~itlons under CETA at occur, and , who w1ll get money have not 450,000-the same number of positions pro- 1979 1980 1981 t>een announ~d Coincidentally · this new vi~ed in fiscall.980. . · initiative comes at a time when the number The reauthorization of CETA programs In of youth in the nation, bOth employed and 1978 gave the president the authority to unemployed, is decreasing every year. adjust the number of public service jobs and ~andsecoricfaly · The Education Department's parallel pro­ education: . tralnlng slots with fluctuations in the pre­ Budget authority: grain, as of yet unspecified,· is intended to :vaillng ·national unemployment rate. Under Existi~~ .~ams...... $3,671 $3,742 $4,094 33.5 22.9 provide basic employment edueation ,and the countercyclical funding mechanism · New.mitiative ...... 900 ...... skills to one mtllion Junior and senior high adopted-by Congress in Title VI of CETA, Outlays: school students in the nation's 3,000 "poor­ 3,631 8.0 -.61 ~bove Exis~~ .~s...... 3,133 3,409 will when employment rose 4 percent na­ New mitialiYe ...... ;•••••••••••••••••••• 50 ...... _...... est" school districts. Budget authority tionally, sufficient funds were made availa­ Youth traiping and be $2 btllioii over current services when .ble to provide positions for 20 peroent of employment; fully implemented in 1982, but actual out­ those out of work. U the unemployment Budget authority: lays in 1981 are only $50 million. Because of rate reached 7 percent, additional monies Existi~~ .pr~ms...... 2,024 . · 2,101 1,664 .32.8 22.2 inflation, real education spending for youtb New mitialive ...... 1,125 were released to subsidize public service em­ Outlays:- ·~·············""" trainln.g' will fall by 0.5 percent. ployment for 25 percent of the ..unemployed Existi~~ .~rams...... 2,048 2,330 . 1;844 9.9 1.2 . New.lllltiative ...... 717 ...... According to Education Department pro-· in excess of 4 percent. . motional materials, the program :will go to By fundjng the program below authorized school districts for remedial education, Eng­ levels, the president is limiting the capacity lish skill tralnlng, finding new ways to moti­ :of the CETA program to respond to down­ Background.-Recognlzing that one-quar­ vate students to stay in school, and VOca· ward fluctuations in the ecQnomy. · ter of the .nation's unemployed is between tiona! education. · In assessing the CETA budget, it iS impor­ the ages of 16 and 19, President Carter pro­ Unanswered questions about the Educa-· posed a -$2 btllion youth employment and tion pepartment's component of the 'youth tant to note that two of president Carter's education initiative to be shared• by the maJor. domestic policy initiatives will affect Labor and Educaiton Departments. When initiative include how the term "poor school "the number of CETA Jobs. The president's added to existing budget authority, the new districts" will be defined and what services welfare .reform legislation proposes to reap­ programs will "dovetail": -the Education De­ will be added to those already provided for portion 195,000 existing Job and tralnlng. po­ partment component will aid youth in the one mtllion stude._nts. sitions· from CETA Title 11-B and u:D. school while Labor Department activities Regional Implications.-To .properly re-· The . president's youth employment initia­ will help those outside the educational fleet the education needs of ~outh in the tive will have a maJor impact on CETA Title system. ' Northeast-Midwest region,- geographic dif· IV, which is up for reauthorization at the . The Labor Department's portion of the .ferences in living costs _must be taken into end of this year. initiative will refinance three existing pro- account when determining eligibility. More­ Regional Implicatioris.-Economic projec­ grams slated to expire in 1980 under CETA over, the administration has not determined tions for fisCal 198l made by Chase Econo­ Titles IV and VIII: Youth Communl_ty Con- the method which will be used to select the If metrics, . Inc. indicate that unemploym~nt servation and Improvement, Youth Employ- 3,000 recipient school districts. determina­ rates could be significantly higher than ad- · ment and Training, and Youth Incentive tion is based on sheer numbers of students Entitlement. In addition, the administration currently eligible for aid under the Aid to ministration figures of 7.4 percent, with un- proposes an additional new program, the de- Families with Dependent Children . employment in-Northeastern and Midwest­ tails of which have yet to be announced. To · program, the formula will favor the nation's em states averaging 8.4 percent, consider­ fund even the .three existing programs at very large school districts. On the other ably above the 7. 7 percent level Chase pre- current real dollar levels in fiscal 1981, how- hand, if eligibility is based on the propor­ dicted for the,entire nation. · ever, would require outlays of $1.045 billion. tion of "poor" students in the district, as a _Northeastern and Midwestern states WC(re The proposed new initiative replaces tnese percentage of total district enrollment, particularly hard-hit by, and slow to recover prog_rams with additional outlays of $717 · small rural districts may be favored. mtllion to .consolidate and refinance the . from, the recession of 1973-74, and a.study three existing programs as well as to pro- The unerpployment ra~ for youth in the conducted by the Advisory Council on Inter­ vide for the new one. Because of modest 1n- Northeast-Midwest region currently ~ 16 governmental Relations indicates creases in some existing programs and some · p~rcent, about tlie same as the national the same pattern is likely to occur in an­ carryover of outlays for soon-to-expire pro- average. SeveraJ large states, however, have. other recession. CETA programs were seen grams, the president's new initiative will rates substantially higher, while others are .as 8.n effective tool in reviving the economy mean real spending increases of 1.2 percent much· lower. The region's minority youth after the last recession. for youth employment in 1981. unemployment is currently more than 40 In 1978, Northeastern and Midwestern According to the Labor Department's pro- percent, higher than the national average of states wer~ recei~ 58 percent of CETA's motional material, when fully implemented, 36 percent. 2484 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS February 7, 1980 TOTAL- YOUTH AND MINORITY YOUTH UNEMPlOYMENT issues which the American Citizens ACA•s REIO:WED QUESTION RATES 1-1978 Abroad consider· crucial to their situa­ W.e wonder how the President wm explain tion living and working overseas: why overseas mJSsiopartes, mlnlaters and priests serve the "Interests· of the United IsSUE No. 9:._NATURALIZATION OP ALIEN States Government". It was our understand-~ SPOUSES' inc that the Government was supposed to u.s. total ...... 16.3 36.2 SUMliiARY' OP THE PROBLEM stay out of religious actlvtties at home and abroad. Northeast·Midwest reaion ...... _ ...... _ 16.1 40.2 u.s. law estabUshes that ari allen spouse New England: can be naturalized as an American citizen by · Secondly, even acceptlna that the citizens COilnectlcut...... 16.0 . of the cloth are somehow doing the Oovem.. Maine ...... y ...... 16.3 ?i~ two different· methods. Either the spouse. Massachusettt...... 15.9 « 4 comes . to reside for three years 1n the ment's. work abroad ~ it really true that 12.2 they are contributing more to the United tteHa::~~:::::::::::::::::~~:::::::: 18.2 ·~· ~ United States; or the spOuse caD · ~ Vennont...... - 9.1 u~s. nationality without any residence In States than American doctors. lawyers. eng!~ Total ...... 16.1 the United States if the American cStizen- neers. professors, poets or architects aisq MicJ.AIIanllc: . ~ work.Jng abroad? n· would rather severely Delaware ...... 20)1 50.0 maJTtage partner Is one of a privlleged · 15.7 33.3 group of citizens. . strain credUlity tO make such a ctatm.. 11.6' 42.3 Thirdly; why Js the criteria that of fur.. 2l.J. 35.8 · The Jaw states that speetal priVileges fol' tir.::::::::::=:::::::~~::::::::: 18.0 44,4 the immediate naturalization of an alle!f thering · the Interests of the Governmen~ ""f~:::::::::::::::::::::::::: lU- w spouse accrue to U.S. Government Emplo~­ and not· that of the "peop_le" of the Uni~ Midwest: . States? nrmois ...... 15.0 ees. employees of American Institutions of lnclana ...... ; 17.3 research. employees of an American firm or. Polirthly, why··bave any such·value Judge­ Iowa ...... _,_...... '1f~ corporation engaged in. promottna foreign ments·at all? ::.=.·:::::::::::::::::::~:::::::::: 9J trade; employees of International organiza­ The President seeks to Justify the present ~ Ohie ...... -- 14.9 tions. priests' and ministerso ancl mi!Sion­ discr1mination in the lilw·by saying to make' Wisconsin ...... 12.8 aries. Total ...... --·--.. 14.5 the immediate naturaliza--tion of a· spouse~ ACA'S QUJ:STIQK abroad· a privilege available: to an overseas Alnerlcans woUld be· an tnJuatlee to alieni Why has the Government found it neces.; spouses in the United States who would still! sary tO separate,. overseas Americans Into have to fulfffi- thefr thJoee yeat residency re-1 two classes of citiZens? Why 18 a· GOvern­ quirements' for naturalization. It is not.clear ment fnlng clerk deservlna of a prtvnege why· discr1mination needs': to take umbraie· "that is withheld from iL university professor;. In an equally questionable legal, require-. a -doctor, lawyer, poet, consultant or archi··· ment. The President surely doesn't wish ·to teet? Why are not all Americans equal suggest·· that there must be at least one A. C. MAcKINNEY before the law? group that-muat sl~ at the back of the bua ·. TID PRESIJ?DrS lt!:PLY abroad·tO avold,havtiJ.g to teconsider a relat­ ed law back home. HON.IKE SKELTON "In . recognition of the fact· that- many We ask the President to· work with us to OP IIISSOt7RI . United StateS citizen spouses are regularly assigned abroad in the course of their em­ continue to ·rid U.S. l&w of an ·attempts to IN THE HOUSE OP REPREsENTA'tiVIS ployment, and· that these asstgmnenta are make value judgements among Americans Thursday, FebruaT'JI 7, 1980 for extended periods of time, Congress en­ 1Mn.g away from· home. All Americans abroad should be equal before the law. We e Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Spe~er, a fine acted.section 319- which waives-the three­ year residence reqUirement 1n those cas~ ­ seek~• . public servant and a good friend of where the citizen spouse is .directed abroad· mine in Lafayette County. Mo., recent­ on a regular (as opposed to temporary) as­ ly -passed away. A. C.- MacKinner, signment of the type set forth In the stat­ Issuz No~ 10-:E!»ueAnoN ·o• .AlulucAK former probate judge of Lafayette ute. Under the statute,· many millta:ry Cml.DRBN ABilOAD County.. served the people of our spouseS and those married to employees of SUJOIARY' OP 'l"RR: PllOBLEII county faithfully and well for 10 ~ears organizations or f1rms defined 1n the · su~­ Whfie eonslderable_ amounts of Federal tn that position. tion have been naturalized early to accom­ revenues· are returned· to the Individual' Judge MacKinney has been a rest~ . pany or Join the employed person· abroad. SU.tes of the United States each- year to dent of Higginsville for 20 years and The statute requires such persons to declare help ~tt<>vide ' for" the education of American tlieti.lntention to resume· permanent resi­ childreri. tliere is almost no comparable su~ was a former minlster of the Central dence 1n · the United States upon tenntna­ Christian Church In Higginsville. He port gtven to· Amerteans Uvfng overseas to· tlon of the tour of duty abroad." educate American children abroad. was a member . of the Lafayette· "Section 319 attempts to define certain ACA'S QUI:STlON · County Bar· Association, the Missouri types of ()~ligatory employment abroad­ Association of Judges and Kappa wJilcn furthers the Interests of the United Why · doe8 the UniHd states not. take Sigma and has practiced as an,· attor­ States Government. It was not the Intention better care of the-overseaa American child ney in the area. of Congress tO benefit those who choose-to In terms of· providing more adequate. educa­ He was , born ,pn April 16,. 1894, · in go abroad to run their 9WD busin~. work· tiOI,lal' assiSW1ce? Cincinnati, Ohio, the son._of John Wil­ for foreign employers. or for letsw"e pur­ liam and Virginia Leora MacKinney. poses. If. all spousea of United States oitl· THE PRESIDENT'S REPLY He wa.S~ married to Doria · Kathryn zens Uvtng abroad were entitled to ID\medl-o-' ate natun.Uzatlon; discr1mination would be .. 'Some: have proposed that the' Federal Long on March 14, 1926. . Government contribute 1D, some. direct. way, effected ag~ those·United States citizens' He is survived by his. wife, Doris who choose to live In this co\mtry and to the-education ofr children of an Ameri­ MacKinney or the home, a son, whose spouses 'have-to fulfill the three-year cans: Uvtnc abroad. Pointing out that some Arthur C. MacKinney, Jr., and three residence .requirement provided in section other government& make. substantial budget grandchildren. · 319." . ' expenditures:. fo~ th1a purpose. The United States Government, under the authority of Judge MacKinney left many friends · The President's answe~ is extraordtnai'Y• . the Fulbrlght-Hays and Foreign Assistance and fond memories among all who The law· gives priVileges· .to those who· fur.. Acts has for some tln\e proVided support to practiced before him and who knew ther the interests· of-the United states Gov.­ man3t ·Amerlcan~sponsored primary and sec­ him.e · ernment. That premise fs_1n itself doubtful· .ondary schools abroad. This progra.rri is ad­ gi\ren the heterogeneous· categories of· prtvi· mlnlstered by the· Department of State. The leged ·Americans identified· by the statute. Congress· annually appropriates funds to AMERICAN CITIZENS ABROAD Even mMe basic, again, is the notion tha.t tl'l._!! state Departmen~. the Agency for In­ selections should be made among Amertearur" ternational Development and· the- Interna­ who live: abroad 1n terms of some a priori tional Communication Agency to finance HON. BILL ALEXANDER judgement of the merit and contribution· this. support. . Aa ln. the United States, no OPARKANSAS being made by classes of American citizens. Federal funds are provided for tuition grants to Thursday, Februa.ru 7, 1980 leges for those who are bureaucrats rather private schools. Such grants would raise a e Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. Speaker, I than entrepreneurs is a determined and per- serious constitutional question in many would iike to continue presenting the vasive one. · cases." February 7, 1980 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 2485 ACA'S RENEWED QUESTION THE ROPE TO HANG US And, yes, let's stop selling them "the roPe to One of the major objectives of t:ne Carter hang~·"• Administration has been the creation of a HON. ·GLENN M. ANDERSON Cabinet-level Department of Education. LESS FREE. LESS SECURE 'l'lul;t. ihere was· feit to be ~uch. a need ior ··a. OF CALIFORNIA of Department at the highest ievel govern­ IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ment is eloquent testimony to the role that HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR. . the Federal Government is expected to play Thursday, Februa7'1/ .7, 1980 c)p·mCHIGAN in education matters In the. United States. e Mr. ANDERSON. of California. Mr. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES To then claim that It would be lmproper·for­ the u.s. Government 'to be more greatly Speaker, in the ·1930's, Hitler, wrote, Thursday, February 7; 1980 concerned with .the educational problems of for all the world to read, his basic Phl· • Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, the overseas children does not seem consistent. losophies. But the world chose to proposed,. revision of our Nation's The U.S. Government should be. con­ ignore them. They were .ignored whlle crlmlnal laws is an undertaking that cerned with helping educate the American he marched through Europe, and they has overwhelmiJ)g implications for our child abroad for two basic .reasons. First It J,s were ignored while Jews were being system of government and the civil lib- in the interest of the United .States for all persecuted in Germany. and German- t· f h d ·t· It h nilnated lands. And then the-world er 1es o eac an every c1 1zen. as of Its citizen.S to have an education which do been the source of controversy for sev­ will best prepare them to fulfill their full expressed surprise when they woke to eral years since the introduction of obligations ''of citizenship· and participation find that Hitler really meant what he s. 1 under the Nixon administration. in our nation, whether this. is by being phys­ had earlier Written. . · the 95th Congress, the House Ju- Ically presen~ at home, or abroad. Secondly, Iri 'it Is Important that help for the education We cannot repeat this mistake with · olitical 1Jnqer­ spect~ves.e end? Let's just remember what Lenin said. taking that is far more significant than its' 2486 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS February 7, 1980 legal complexities. The code embodies the The bill would prohibit picketing, parad­ Persons who engage in peaceful demon· ·governing philosophy of the American ing, displaying a sign or otherwise demon­ strations would run serious risks of punish­ people and-their leaders. strating within 100 feet of a federal court­ ment under various provisions of the law. If This 1s well understood by the framers of house while any judicial proceeding was in as few as 10 persons create a disturbance at the bill and by its opponents. It was well un­ progress

. And the crime of a site, for example, of a nuclear-energy derstood by former President Richard M. oonspiracy could be brought to bear on the plant, all the demonstratol'8 could be Nixon: The histO'ry of S. 1722 is the history planning of· a ·demonstration that potential­ charged with engaging in a riot on the basis of a political struggle over what instruments ly could cause a disruption of a government that they "disregarded the risk" that a dis­ of power should or should not be given to function, even though the demonstration turbance might occur. If a journalist inter­ ~ government. did not occur . viewed one of the demonstratorS' and de­ The struggle began, absent niuch public First Amendment rights are subjected to clined to surrender his notes to police, the interest; with the appointment by President particular stress in times of emergency and reporter could be prosecuted for hindering Lyndon B. Johnson of a National Commis­ national excitement. Under this bill . These laws have been interpreted in Ala.) charged, "There aren't five senators Senate. This S. 1 was an attack on basic the past to cover a broad area of informa­ American liberties. In sum, it would have ... who have an idea what's going on.... " tion-relating to national defense, and could And Sen; James A. McClure said enhanced the power of government, dimin­ severely restrict the kind of information ished individual righ.ts and gone far to insu­ the bill had "become a law unto itself, a needed by the pubiic to reach judgments on massive recreation :whose full implications late the government froin effective political government policies relating to national de­ criticism. Former Sen. Sam Ervin ." charged that the bill would have established Sections. 1344 and 1525 would make it pos­ Among the few who have studied the pro­ "what is essentially a police state." sible for the government to prosecute feder­ posal is Sen. Alan Cranston of California, s. 1 failed, but the cause of revising the al employees who reveal information about who is a politician of cautious instincts. He code was taken up under the powerful spon­ government wrongdoing, or news reporters opposed the legislation when it came up sorship of Sen. Edward · M. Kennedy is workil)g its versions, but would have retained many of before they had been. tried. This would un­ way through the House subcommittee on their defects. The House subcommittee on dercut a basic assumption of American jus~ criminal justice under Rep. Robert F. tice-that a person is innocent uritil proved Drinan . the subcommittee chair­ cr~al Justice · rejected the . ·omnibus reform approach, and favored revising the guilty. man. The tentative House version is report­ code step by step. The bill would incorporate the present so­ ed to be significantly better than S. 1722, With Kennedy as the driving force behind called immunity-use law that forces wit­ but the subcommittee draft is not likely to it, this latest measure, S. 1722, is said to be a nesses to testify even after they have survive the full Judiciary Committee, and it significant improvement over its predeces­ claimed their Fifth Amendment privilege to is less likely to remain intact on the House sors, and it does contain some beneficial remain silent. Use immunity is a device to floor. If the Drinan bill reaches conference changes. One would be the repeal of the savage the Fifth Amendment by granting with S. 1722, the Semi.te measure likely will Smith Act, which made it a criminal offense witnesses partial immunity from prosecu­ prevail. Opponents of the legislation are merely to talk about the overthrow of the tion as a result of their testimony. now concentrating their attention on H.R. government. Another would narrow the S. 1722 would make it an offense to give a 6233 in an effort to prevent it from reaching power of judges to punish for contempt of false oral statement to a law-enforcement the House floor. court persons engaged in First Amendment officer. Although some corroboration would The body of federal criminal law can be activities. In the inchoate-crimes area

TRIBUTE TO JOS~ V. TOLEDO, he was appointed to the position of forces rushing to meet an attack on Paki­ . CHIEF JUDGE, U.S. DISTRICT judge of the U.S. District Court for stan. COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF the District of Puerto Rico in 1970. These actions amount to the drawing of ~RTORICO . . It to lines in Southwest Asia and daring the Rus­ was really a privilege litigate sians to cross them. Yet the key feature of cases before him and it was more than the President~ State of the Union message HON. BALTASAR CORRADA pleasurable reading his opinions and was the absence of such hard and fast lines. OF PUERTO RICO orders. What stands out in my own A global strategist, like a chess player, must memories of Judge Toledo was his retain flexibility by putting his adversary in !N THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES sense of fairness, compassion, doubt about lines of attack and strategies of Thursday, February 7, 1980 strength, and energy. Judge Toledo defense. He does not declare in advance Mr. CORRADA. Mr. Speaker, I rise was a jurist and judge by heart. when and where and how he will strike. e trict of Puerto Rico. Cr.iminal Law of the Judicial Confer­ The "ga.me" in this case is not chess, but Those of us who were his colleagues ence\of the United States. war, so there is an inclination to search for in Puerto Rico have lost a dear friend His last months were heroic; illness rules to follow by refighting past wars. 'rhus and the court has lost a highly compe­ ravaged his body but he was not at all on one side we have those who point to the VietNam War as warning against any mili­ tent,. hard worlting, and excellent stopped from working. Judge Toledo tary i;nvolvement anywhere. On the other judge. His wife Clara, and his family used all his energies until the last side, there are those who cite the Munich have suffered the irreparable loss of a minute to take care of his workload agreement as a warning against appease­ beloved husband and father .. Certain­ an'tl the smooth operation of the ment anywhere. But if history offers rules ly, no words spoken here today can be court. for the present problem, they are more adequate to express my grief for the There· will always be a special place likely found in the Balkans during the death of Judge Toledo. · of remembrance in the hearts of those period ·preceding . There. the Judge Toledo was born in Arecibo, who knew Judge Toledo in person, as I various European powers has locked them­ selves into a series of commitments so dan­ Puerto Rico, on August 14. 1931. He did, and by his dedicated services ' to gerous and delicate that a single assassina­ studied in the public schools in the the Federal Judiciary in Puerto Rico. tion was enough to plunge the world into city of Arecibo, graduated from Cole­ His loss will be deeply felt not only by war. gio San Jose High. School in Rio Pie­ his dear family and Clarita his widow, Another of history's lessons is that aggres­ dras, Puerto Rico, obtained hiS bache­ but by the court and by the people of sors do not triumph merely by taking terri­ lor's degree in arts from the Universi­ Puerto Rico.e tory. They also must keep it. America's past ty of Florida in Gainesville a.nd re­ victories came not frOln drawing Maginot ceived his bachelor in law degree from lines and holding them at all costs, but in the University of Puerto Rico in 1955. THE WEAKNESS OF THE arousing itself to drive the aggressor back CARTER DOCTRINE from his conquests. The Russians can un­ ·Pepe, as. ·I and his many friends and derstand that-it was an aroused America colleagues called him, was a district that saved them from Hitler's aggression. judge of the Commonwealth of Puerto HON. EDWARD J. DERWIN SKI Yet our leaders now are committing us to Rico until August 1956, when he OF ILLINOIS holding _specific lines under circumstances joined the Armed Forces of the United that may seem clear today, but could tum States. 1N THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES out later to be ambiguous. Pakistan's Balu­ On January 11, 1957. he received a Thursday, February 7, 1980 chistan province, for example, has Qeen in commission as first lieutenant in the periodic revolt for years. Although the e Mr. DERWINSKI. Mr. Speaker, the rebels have had some Soviet support, their Judge Advocate General Corps-legal so-called. Carter doctrine was eloquent­ mood is more nationalist than Marxist. So division of the Army-and served for a ly stated, but dubious in its reality and at what point will we go to war to save Balu­ term of. 3 years at Fort Brooke, San its trustworthiness. I wish to insert an chistan for Gen. Zia ul-Haq? And are we Juan. P.R. editorial whieh appeared in the Febru­ prepared to loose the nuclear genie to save On January 11 •. 1960, Judge Toledo ary 6 Chicago Tribune. The editorial Azerbaijan for Ayatollah !Glomeini? was appointed assistant U.S. attorney comments on the basic weaknesses Perhaps we wil!, and perhaps we won't. for the district of Puerto Rico, posi­ found in the Carter doctrine. The edi­ But the time for such commitments is not tion which he occupied for 1 year. On torial follows: now. Having made threats before the world. January 1961, he joined the law firm will we find ourselves stampeded into carry­ (From the Chicago Tribune, Feb. 6. 19801 ing them out in circumstances that are bQth of Rivera Zayas, Rivera Cestero & disadvantageous and dangerous? Rua and on January 1962, was made a THE CARTER DOCTRINE CRUMBLES Barely a fortnight has passed since the It is possible that the administration can partner of said law firm. On May 1963, still salvage its Carter Doctrine. It is unfor­ 'he formed a law firm together with at­ President galvanized the world with a State of the Union message that outlined the tunate. however, that after getting such torneys Aldo Segurola de Diego and basis for a "Carter Doctrine•· in Southwest good advice in stating it, the President is Carlos Romero Barcelo, now Governor Asia. The message held promise for a new now getting such poor advice in carrying it of Puerto Rico, called Segurola, cohesiveness in the country•s floundering out.e. Romero .& Toledo. From 1967 to 1970, foreign policy, something missing since the he was a partner in the law firm of trauma of Viet Nam. T-oledo & Cordova. But what began as a carefully reasoned ROCK AND ROLL JAMBOREE When I was Chairman of the Puerto and deliberately broad statement of U.S. in­ FOR HEART DISEASE 1980 Rico Civil Rights Commission. Judge· terest anct· intentions has somehow become an incautious and dangerously specific cry HON. CARROLL HUBBARD, JR. Toledo was a member and secretary of of war. The President's advisers, and the the Commission. We worked hard to President himself, have so. confused the OF KENTUCKY find solutions to the important issues meaning of his· message that there is noth­ IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES :ought before the Commission. As I ing left of it to be called a "doctrine." recall, the sense of dedication, inter­ Consider, for example, the gaffe of Clark Thursday, February 7, 1980 est, and fairness placed by him ln the Clifford-whose vast experience should e Mr. HUBBARD. Mr. Speaker, I discharge of his responsibilities were have taught him· better-when he declared would like to draw the attention of the not only stimulating but a clear indica­ in that if the Russians move on the House to a very important and worth­ tion of his vocation to the bench. The Persian Gulf "it means war:• Or the anony­ while and unique program conducted mous Defense Department officials who grounds for his future endeavor were blithely leaked a supposedly secret report by the residents of many of our Na­ laid when he acted as a member of the on the possibility of using tactical nuclear tion's nursing homes. I refer to the Commission. weapons if the Russians enter Iran. Or Zbig­ fourth annual Rock 'n Roll Jamboree The high point of Jose. V. Toledo's niew Brzezinski's promise [made to an unre­ sponsored by the American Health career as a public servant, came when liable military. dictator] to send . American Care Association, the Nation's largest 2488 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS February 7, 1980 federation of nursing homes and allied ly, convalescent and chronically ill, other agencies whose missions relate long term health care· facilities. that much brighter.e to productivity. ' The Rock 'n Roll .Jamboree is a le­ The Council is intended to serve as .a gally registere·d charitable activity focal point for Federal actions to im­ FEDERAL POLICY TO IMPROVE prove productivity: It is directed to de­ which benefits the American Heart PRODUCTIVITY Association's battle against our No. 1 velop a national productivity improve­ killer, heart disease. As conceived by ment plan, to conduct studies and Mr. James J. Brennan, community re­ HON. STANLEY N. LUNDINE analyses of Government programs and lations director of First Health Care oF NEW YORK regulations, to disseminate informa- Corp. of Lexmgton, Mass., the Rock 'n IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES tion On productivity improvement ac­ Roll Jamboree involves thousands of tivities in the private sector. It is fur- elderly and convalescent Americans Thursday, February 7, 1980 ther authorized to hire staff, contract who rock in rocking chairs for speci­ e Mr. LUNDINE. Mr. Speaker, today I for services. and draw upon the re.. fied time periods, and roll in ·Wheel­ am introducing legislation to establish sources of a 15-member advisory board chairs for specified distances, against a new independent unit within the ex- composed of representatives of busi­ pledges- -made - rn- tne-commiliiltleS ecutive branch with specific authority ness, labor, and academia. A similar to develop and coordinate Federal measure is being introduced in the .where the nursing homes are located. policy to improve productivity. Senate by Senator BENTSEN. The money raised helps to support the There is growing recognition both in Many of our competitors-particu- American Heart Association's research and outside of government that the 'larly Japan and Germany-have recog­ and education efforts. current slowdown in national produc- nized the value of making a coordinat­ From its inception in 1977, the Jam­ tivity growth poses fundamental prob- ed national effort to raise productivity boree has raised the incredible amount lems for our economy. After gains of growth. In both of these ·Countries, of over $2 million, each year breaking about 3 percent a year for nearly two productivity centers receive substan­ its own record as the largest single decades, productivity growth began to tial support from ·government and · source of American Heart ASsociation decline in the mid~1960's. The trend have been exceptionally active in contributions. Over $1,200,000 of this grew worse in the 1970's. to the point recent years. . was raised in 1979, and the 1980 goal is where productivity virtually ceased to Finally, in advocating the establish­ $1.5 million. improve in the last few years. and ac- · ment of a new Council, I would argue All money raised is turned over to tually declined by about 1 percent in that its work and direction should lead local Heart Association chapters and 1979. · the participating agencies to give most remains in the.community where A strong productivity growth rate greater emphasis to the issue as they it was ral$ed to further programs on makes possible real gains in earnings carry out their OWn programs. The po­ heart disease. No money is retained by and opportunities to increase produc- tential for improving productivity the nursing homes or their residents. tion and employment without adding should figure heavily in the invest­ ·Besides being an effective fund­ to inflationary pressures. Unless we re- ment decisions made by tbe Economic raiser, the Rock 'n Roll Jamboree is, verse the patterns of the last decade, I Development Administration of the as its slogan tells u's, a "Fun Raiser." question our ability to combat infla- Commerce· · Department. or. in the It was meant to be, and it has turned tion and maintain a stable, prosperous types of Job and training programs out to be, a valuable community ~ctivi­ economy. funded by the Department of Labor. ty for many elderly and ill people who In 1975, Congress established a Na- For ultimately, I am convinced it will might have felt cut off from their tional Center for Productivity and the take a broad effort, addressing the communities because .of their age or Quality of Working Life as a way of multiple. aspects of the problem to physical conditions. If nothing else, focusing Government policies toward achieve and sustain a rate of prodtic­ the American Health Care-Association improving productivity. The Center tivity growth upon which our econom­ Rock 'n Roll Jamboree is proof that was not a regulatory agency, but had a ic stability depends.e our Nation's elderly can play a vital ma.ndate to develop a plan for raising national productivity growth and to and direct role in community and civic. TRIBUTE TO N. SCHUTZ, affairs if given the chance. AHCA, a coordinate relevant Federal activities. The administration decided not to COMMUNITY LEADER, JOUR­ leading humanitarian and professional NALIST AND FRIEND health care association, is to be com­ seek a reauthorization of the Center in mended for providing such an oppor­ 1978, claiming that the agency had not tunity . and for the success it has been effective and that its functions HON. BILL ROYER achieved. could be carried out capably by exist­ OF CALIFORNIA ing departments. To provide some di­ IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES The American Health Care Associ­ rection to such activity. the adminis­ ation encourages its members to orga­ tration created an interagency council Thursday, February 7, 1980 nize local Rock •n Roll Jamborees be­ by Executive order. In 15 months, this • Mr. ROYER. Mr. Speaker, on the tween the beginning of February and council has met four times. With no evening of February 8, 1980, many the end of March. Many do so, quite budget and only minimal staff sup­ friends and associates will gather to appropriately, on Valentine's Day, · port, the cow;1cil is simply not honor David N. Schutz on the occasion February 14. Thus, as we embark on equipped to undertake a concerted, of his retirement. another Rock 'n Roll Jamboree long-range effort to improve the Na­ Dave Schutz was born on September season, I ask the House to Join me in tion's productivity performance. 8, 1917, in Reno. Nev. His family asking all Americans to urge their While I don't necessarily dispute the moved to Oakland, Calif. in 1922 and local nursing home members of the reasons for ·abolishing the National to San FranciSco in 1930. Dave gradu­ American Health Care Association, to Center, I believe there mus.t be a sus­ ated from Lowell High School and ·re­ ·Participate in jamborees at their area tained, committed effort within the ceived his bachelor's degree from San facilities, and to give generously to Federal Government to deal with the Francisco State University. He then this effort to eradicate heart disease. problem. The mea.Sure I am proposing moved to Evanston, Ill. where he re­ In closing, I would like to offer a today provides tor .a new Productivity ceived his master's degree in journal­ note of thanks to the American Council, with an ·annual authorization ism from Northwestern University in Health -Care Association, whose na­ of $5 million. · The bill requires the 1940. Shortly thereafter, in a combina­ tional secretary, Mrs. ·sandra T~ Hig­ President to appoint a full . time, paid tion of both luck·and wisdom, he mar­ gins of Senior Citizen Nursing Home chairperson for the Council, whose ried· his college sweetheart, Sibyl in Madisonville, Ky., is a longtime members would include the heads of Hurning. friend and valued constituent, for .sup­ the Office of Management and To the good fortune of my home­ porting this effort and for making the Budget, the Departments of Labor, town, Dave and Sibyl decided to make lives and futures of our Nation's elder- Commerce. ~d Treasury, and nine Redwood City, Calif. ., their home. February 7, 1980 EXTENSIONS O·F REMARKS 2489

Dave joined the Redwood City Trib CARTER'S ON·E-WAY BIPARTISA~ With Harold Brown beaming nearby, une on July 10, 1944; 4 months later . FOREIGN AFFAIRS EFFORT President Carter announced a reversal of he .was promoted to managing editor. the Ford-Rumsfeld decision to build a fleet of 244 B-1 bombers-a few dozen of which In January 1949 'he was promoted to HON. EDWARD J. DERWINSKI would have provided invaluable assets in editor-a post he held until the Central Asia. · merger of the Redw.ood City Tribune OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES · All three cruise missile programs were and Palo Alto Times into the Peninsu­ stretched out. The neutron warhead was la Times-Tribune_in April 19'l9. Dave Thursday, February 7, 1980 canceled by Carter in a craven cave-in to a retired last month after over 35 years. e Mr. DERWINSKI. Mr. Speaker, propaganda campaign about its "immoral­ of service. ity" emanating from a Kremlin now em­ what the administration calls a bi­ ploying nerve gas against Afghan tribesmen. During his professional career, Dave partisian foreign affairs effort appears The MX missile, designed to compensate for Schutz received many honors. In 1968, to be a. one-way street. The Carter ad­ the vulnerability of the Minuteman force, he became the first editor of a Califor­ ministration calls upon the Republi­ was put off from '1984 until the end of the nia newspaper to become president of cans in the name of natiQnal unity, yet decade. The Trident submarine force was the Associated Press Managing Editors· they continue to criticize the past Re­ reduced in number and stretched out in Association. He served as president of public~n administrations. This point is production. the northern California chapter of very effectively made in a column by As the Soviets deployed the first great Sigma Delta Chi, chairman of the Edi­ Patrick Buchanan, carried in the Feb­ blue water navy in Russian history, Presi­ dent Ford budgeted 15-7 new vessels for the tors Conference of the California­ 7 ruary edition of the Chicago Trib­ U.S. fleets. Preside~at Carter cut that Newspaper Publishers Association, une. This column follows for the Mem­ number in half to 83; and then claimed and headed a committee of editors bers' attention: credit for raising it back to 95. that worked to strengthen and pre­ CARTER SUPPORTED AND FoRD SLANDERED And where was Brzezinski when Jimmy serve the journalism program at WASHINGTON.-Without former President Carter accepted the applause of the disar­ Hayward State University. In 1978, Gerald Ford's support. the Panama Canal mament lobby for an unprecedented veto of Dave served as chairman of th'e Cali­ treaties would have perished in the Senate. a military appropriations bill because it con~ fornia Freedom of Information Com- In standing, literally, alongside President tained a nuclear carrier which Carter . mittee. He continues to serve as co­ Jimmy Carter-and calling in upon his own wanted lesS than he wanted more billions chairman with Superior Court Judge position the artillery fire of the Republican for his CETA program? ·Melvin Cohn of the San Mateo County Right-Ford was acting in an · established As late as last year, the White House was Bench, Bar and Media Committee. tradition. Ex-Presidents of one l)art.y do not resisting as overkill a niggardly 5 per cent undermine their successors on foreign increase in defense -spending-when the So­ Aside from his professional duties­ policy. viets were outspenQing the United States by and honors, Dave Schutz has been a Dwight Eisenhower did not savage . the 50 percent. leader in our community. He has young John F. Kennedy for the bungled The proposition that Nixon in the Viet served as president of the Redwood Bay of Pigs. He invited him to his Gettys­ Nam years, and Ford in the post-VietNam City-San Mateo County Chamber of burg farm and offered moral support. era, were busy dismantling the Pentagon­ Commerce, the · Redwood City Rotary Lyndon Johnson and Dean Rusk never while a heroic liberal Democratic Congress sniped at the Vietnam policies of Richard was fighting a rearguard action for more Club, the Fraternal Order of the ·Nixon and Henry KissiQger, Nixon and Ford fundS for defense-is so ludicrous as to con­ Eagles and the Suburbans. For · 12 have been statesmanlike in criticism of stitute a Big Lie. years he served as a director of the Carter policies they are known to oppos~. ve­ That President Carter condones by silence Golden Gate Chapter and Sequoia hemently; or they have remained silent. the continued propagation of this deceit Region of the American Red Cross, When Jimm~ Carter was in need of bi­ tells us something about his bankrupt and on the Board of Directors of the· partisan· support-for· the sale of superjets foreign policy, his political desperation, his ·Boy Scouts of America. Dave was a to Saudi Arabia, the lifting of the Turkish sense of gratitude, his credibility, his founder and director of the Redwood arms embargo, the recognition of Peking­ decency.e City Police Youth Club and of the Ford provided that support. . Redwood· City Emergency Hunger: Now Carter has shown his gratitude by Fund. He has served in many capaci­ dragging his foreign policy tutor, Zbigniew TOWN OF CLIFTON BACKS Brzezinski, out of the D.C. discos and send­ PRESIDENT ties dl:lring his 36 years of membership ing him out to slander and distort the in the congregation at Temple Beth record of the Ford adminstration. · Jacob. In separate interviews with U.S. News & HON •. HERBERT E. HARRIS II Over the years that I served my World Report and the Wall Street Journal, OF VIRGINIA community as a city councilman, BrzeZinski has shifted the blame for the de· mayor, and county supervisor my ac­ cayed state of national defense upon "eight IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES years Qf sustained Republican neglect." Thursday, February 7, 1980 tivities and proposals were often sub­ This charge, by a scholar of Brzezinski's jected to Dave's sharp editorial pencil. reputation, fits precisely a behavior pattern • Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, the While we did not always agree, cer­ academicians define as ''intellectual dishon­ Town of Clifton, Va., which is located tainly :{10 one can challenge his ability esty." Ford, who has held off c.riticizing his in the Eighth Congressional District, to arouse .community support or oppo­ successor on Iran or Afghanistan, is said to has sent me a copy of a re.sOlution re­ sition. I am certain that no individual be injured and angry at carter's agents' cently passed ,by the city counciL It is again will have such an influence on "clearly falsifying the record for partisan a resolution of support for our hos­ public opinion in Redwood City. political purposes." Ford is too beneficient toward these backstabbers. tages in Iran. Hopefully, this example The opinions . ·written by Dave What. is the truth? will encourage other towns and cities Schutz wflich will probably be/ best re­ As any' semiliterate follower of national across the United States to take simi­ membered reflect his passionate belief politics knows, .President Carter was elected lar action. As Mayor Mynor F. Mcin­ that secrecy in government is funda­ in 1976 on a promise to cut $7 billion from tyre· has stated in a cover letter to mentally undemocratic, .and that open Ford's defense budget, a feat about which President Carter: "It is only through a . debate and discussion of public issues Carter's minions were boasting as late as unified nation. that we can expect the are necessary to the health of our soci­ 1978. After taking power, the McGovemites in unconditional return of our illegally ety. It would indeed be difficult to find . Carter's government took a long look at held fellow Americans." · anyone with as deep a faith in the Ford's six-year rearmament program and At this time. I would like to share rights of free expression and free pub­ lopped $24 billion from the strategic pro­ this resolution with my colleagues and lication under the first amendmept as gram, $25 billion from the general purpose commend the town of Clifton for their Dave Schutz. forces, $10 billion fr.om research and devel­ patriotic initiative: opment. To Dave and Sibyl, their family and RESOLUTION friends, I offer my thanks for choosing Reflect upon what went down the sewer and you will ~ why the United States is Whereas the citizens of Clilton of(er their Redwood City as their home. Redwood almost at the mercy of the Soviet Union in sympathy and m,oral support to our 50 hos­ City is . a better place because of the Persian Gulf region where Carter has tages in Iran. and to their families across them.e drawn his line. our nation; 2490 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS February 7, 1980

Whereas the Clifton Town Council strong~ heads.• Our own strategic force plan... United· States had very littl~ informa· ly endorses our go~ment's demand _. for 'hing would be· based on this assump· tion ·about Soviet. nuclear research. the release of our ·hostages; .arid tion;. and our intelligence agencies Before , the detonation,. GEm. Leslie. Whereas. · the ·citizens· ··of· C1if~t\ .. ',hlLve would be concentrating. on verifying. Groves,, wartime director of tfte· Man­ shown thefi' backing by dtsp:iaylrig the Soviet compliance. Now, without hattan· project, predicted'· tllat' Ameri­ Am~rican flag, or yellow· ribbons;· or other visible means of encouragement to our hos-· SALT II, all we ·.have to go on is this . e-a's atomic mono-poly woula last 20 tages, 'l'herefore be it new . intelligence estimate of the. years. Scientists involved\ tn· the proj­ -Resolved that the Clifton 'town Council. future, and· who knows whether it has ect, on the other hand, thougJ1.t in direct's itS Mayor to fuform the President ot validity or not?· In any event, if U.s. . 1'945 til\a~ the Soviets would duplicate· the United States of our support and con­ policymakers betreve it is valid; then. our achievement within 5 years:: cern, sending ai copy of his>letter to the they will have to think about the ex­ The scientists' expectation ·encour· President! a.Jld accompany.ihg resolution, to pansion of U.s: strategic nuclea-r a;ged the .Atomic Energy Commission the hostages· in' Iran• . the Embassy· of! Iran in . forces quite differently. Tens of' bil~ to establish, through tfte .Air Force, a· Washington; and• a representative of the: llons of ·dollars pot~ntially ride . on a. pl'ogram for- airborne collection of ra~ ­ families of· ou11 hostages. decision whether to trust this intelli­ dioacti\re particles in the atmosphere, Signed by the· members of the Town· gence estimate.? Which would detecti the tncplbsion of Council, on January 8;.1980. How good are we·at this task o'f stra­ -any ·atomic device anywhere in· the MYNOR,.::P. MciNTYRE, tegic forecasting? As the passages woi'ld .. 'Fhe' program began ope!lations Mayor. 3 KENNETH D. :aucKLEY, quoted above indi'Cate, this question is· in 1948. and continues to this day: · Councilman. highly controversial. Over the yeam, As the end of the decade approaehedt CALVIN D. Cox, many analysts, particularly those·-in\ and no Soviet A-bomb materialized~ Councilman. circles, nave contended• for the intelligence community the: RICHARD H. DYGVE, that we have consistently nveres.timat. year of anticipated danger receded and Councilman; ed Soviet strategic capabilities. . More receded. Just before the Soviets actu­ RoBER'll F. I:..IN:OHOLM, recently,. other ana.lysts, not generally ally detonated an atomic device in Councilman. associated with arms control., have. 1949, they were officially .exnected· to· WAYNE 1t._ NlcKt1M, argued that we have fu; fact consistent.. do so in 1952 at the earliest.•' Councilman. • ly underestimated Soviet strength. The hydrogen bomb, set ·off by th·e· This contr.oversy can, to some Soviets -in•-1'95B, came· as· less·-o'f a· sur­ extent, be resolved b'y examining the. -prise; the United· States had predicted1 THE· INTELLIGENCE GAP:. U.S. record: Taking the major develop-· tl\e Soviets would~ achieve tl\at mile• FORECASTS . OF SOVIET STRA-­ ments in tJie history of the nuclear stone by 1954'. TEGIC STRENGTH- arms competition,. we can ask if the Why did· General Groves· overestfl.· U.S: intelligence community has· been mate, the scientists' correctly estimate, right or wrong· in its forecasts; if and later' most anal~si.s overes·t1mate' HON. LES ASPIN wrong, in. which direction . and why?- The key develop­ Soviets to explode· an A-bomb? And! IN 'l'HE HOUSE' OF llEPRESEN"l'ATIVES ments. have beeri{ . why were· we so close on the H--bomb· Thursday, February 7, 1980 First, .the first. Soviet explosions of prediction? · an atomic and a hydrogen bomb- The problem was not one of opti...­ e Mr. ASPIN. Mr. Sp·eaker, 1949-54; miSm about Soviet intentions. Indeed~ It is . . . ·a · matter o! record that the Se.cond, the "bomber gap•':...... f955-58; in tbe ·first 5 years afte:r· the wal'; offi· growth of the Soviet ICBM force·was under­ Third, the· "misstle gap"-:-fg58-61; cial circles·· in Washington· general)y estimated for a decade after the "missile Fourth, Soviet . deployment of an held an alarmist. image of· a . Soviet gap" by· the entire intelllgence community­ anti-ballistic-mtsstle ('ABM> sy.stem- including Pentagon ·~hawks."-Gem Daniel• Union bent on constant, impl~able Graham• 1962 on; · expanSionism. The intelligence error But the history of the past twenty years Fifth, SOviet deplo·yment Cff missiles. on the A-bomb. hinged· more on habit shows quite the reverse. Few indeed are the wtth ·multiple independently .targeta­ and ·personal int~ition. instances When the Soviet military threat bfe re-entry· vehicles -1965- .General Groves thought the Soviets. later turned out to be greater t'han the esti­ 74; would take 20 years to build the bomb mated "worst case." U'suany, the govern· Sixth, projection of Soviet intercon­ because, llke President Truman, he ment's experts overestimated ~ tlte danger:~ tinental ballistic miSsile and siinply did not beli-eve tlrat 11those Asi­ George B. Kistiakowsky. submarine-launched ba)listic missile· atic": Russians,s· brave and \?a:lia:nt' as­ The death of SALT II .turns the , deployments-fi~62 .:. 69; and they might be in standing up to· Nazis. focus o1 U.S. intelligence a-way from Seventh, rate of bnprovements in on the battlefield, had the technologt­ 1 verification and back to the old bust~ Soviet ICBM accuracy and yield-1969 cal .talents to' duplicate what his brtght ness of forecasting. SALJ' provided on: boys at Los-Alamos took 4 years to ac­ some degr~e of' restraint and certaihty. From~ such an analysis, we· should cmn.plish. We knew· how far tlie Soviets were al­ get some· idea or· how· well t1.S: intelli­ The scientist's' prediction' that the· lowed"to go, and our task was to verify· gt}nce will be· al:ile to estimate future· SOviets woulcf have a bomb within 4 or their compliance with these restric­ Soviet defense. capabilities: in· the ab­ 5' yeats was modeled on· their' own ex­ tfons. Without SALT, there are no sence.of SALT~ perience. That is how long it took limits or guidelines. We must rely TUE .\·BOMB AND'THg H·BOMS tl\em to buifd the· bomb; it was a:·.fairly purely on' our skills in ·strategic fore­ When the Soviets exploded their straightforward problem of physics casting, in guessing about the· future, first atomic bomb in August 1949, tl)e and engineering, of which they to determine what Ute Soviets are up thought theit Soviet counterparts to. 1 Getler & Robert G. Kaiser. "Intelli­ quite capable. · gence Estimate Said to Show Need for SALT," Intelligence estimators, in the end,l The first forecast since the deferral Washington Post, January 31, 1980. . · overestimated the time it would take1 of SALT II has ·been completed and ~ This cuts both. ways. Acceptance of the estimate leaked to the press. the new· Nationar mai lead to great:er spendtng· lnsome strategic because of what th·e atomic scientist, I. lntelligence Estimate-NIE 1138-79...... :.­ artn.s, but it may also lead to rejection of the land­ Rabi, called a "peculiar k-ind; of psy..-· based multiple-shelter basing scheme for the M-X After making one estimate reportedly· indicates that without missile on grounds that· too many shelters would chol1 p. 64; Richard G. Hewlett & Oscar E. · an extension of SALT II beyond its Journal, March 11; 1977, p. 16; George B: Kistia­ Anderson, History of the AEC, Vol. I ; The New 1985 expiration date would allow the kowsky, "Fajse Alarm: Tlre Story ·Behin. pp. 358-60; Herbert York, · The Advisors: Op·· Graham Is former Dltectol' of the befertse Intelll­ penheimer, Teller and the Superbomb

in 1945 that the Soviets ~ could get a before 1956 and a substantial force not at the time-and we kliow only in retro­ bomb in 4 or 5 years, "every year that deployed before 1960. 8 spect-to be false. went by, you kept on saying '5 years:·~ · The ·next May Day parade, in 1955, Air Force fntelligence warned in the The very close guess on the Soviet's rudely upset these calculations; or at November 1957 NIE that the Soviets H-bomb detonation in 1953 was purely least appear~d to do so. Although the could deploy 500 ICBM•s by the a matter of cpance-a very good gu~ss,_ aviation section of the parade wa.S can­ middle of 1960. and 1,000 by 1961: The and little more. The principle of radi- celed, Western observers ·.reported . CIA thought a more reasonable esti­ ation pr~ssure, the essence of the --u.:. seefug as many as 20 of th~ long-range mate was 100 ICBM's· by 1960 arid 500 bomb. was not even demonstrated in bombers in the air during parade re­ l)y 1961. . the United states until 1951. Indeed, hearsals. Intelligence updated its earu:. · The wide difference in the two esti­ some: officials believed· the Soviets est .estimates based on these reports. mates hinged on conflicting views of could get an H-bomb' before: 1953. In The design of the plane was now as.; when the Soviets· would be able to sumed to have been completed 2 years begin mass production of their first an attempt. to encQurage President earlier than the original finding. and ICBM. the SS-G. A halt in the Soviet Truman . to forge ahead with the mass production was now assumed to test program, in April 1958, was inter­ American H-bomb project in 1950, have begun . in 1954. .If . the soviets· preted by tne Air Force as an indica­ General Loper of the AEC~s Military could produce 20 aircraft per month tion .that the missile was ready for de­ Liaison Committee wrote him a memo- over the next 3 years, then a force of ployment. while the CIA saw it as evi- · -randum arguing that available intelli- 700 ~rcraft by 1959 was plausible.•o gence was consistent · However. in 1956 and 1957, U-2 dence that the missile was experienc­ with a theory that the Soviets already· flignts produced hard evidence that ing technical difficulties. Renewed test 8 launches in. i959 proved the CIA cor­ had the hydrogen bomb. · Soviet production rates fe.U ·far below rect. THE soMBER aAP the pace estimated by U.S. intelligence An entirely separate issue, however, In 1955, Air Force intelligence pre- 2 years earlier. .Two factors were in· was how many missiles the Soviets dieted that the soviets would. field a valved in this error-first. a spotting would produce . each year. The Air force of 600 to 700 long-range bombers error; second. a :rilisunderstandilig of Force seems to have picked 500. and h ti 1 i t lli Soviet strat~gic intentions. b Y 1959 · T e na ona n e gence es- First. unbeknownst to ·the Western the CIA 100, because they were round timate for that year was slightly attach~s. the Soviets were ·flying the numbers. Since nobody at that time more modest. predicting about 500. same bombers back and Jorth at the knew the location of Soviet missile bombers by mid~1960. As it turned out• . 1955 parade preparations; the attach~s production factories. an actual count. by mid-1961, the Soviets had·deployed mistakenly counted each -overflight as or an inference from industrial 7 only 190 long-range bombers. · a separate bomber.11 Second, the volume, 'was impossible. Estimates of bombers grew· out of a United states. thinking that we wer-e Nor did anyone know what a Soviet projection made in 1950-incorporated the ultimate target of the · sovi~t ICBM emplacement would look like. in a milestone document Union•s . nuclear ambitions, naturally The Air Force anticipated camou: called NSC-68-that·the Soviets would assumed that the Soviets would pro­ flaged sites. while the CIA argued that possess· a stockpile of 200 atomic · duce intercontinental .bombers at the the deployment sites would ·resemble bombs by 1954.8 This projection· was fastest rate possible. However. the So­ the missile test launcbers at Tyura· based, in part. on the rate ·at Which Viets decided that the real threat to tam. Repeated U-2 flights along Soviet the United ·States had been able to them lay around the periphery ·of the railways could not locate any depioyed build bombs. Given this projection and U.S.S.R. ·landmass, from where they ICBM's, although Air Force intelli­ NSC-68•s explicit assumption that the had historically been threatened and gence suspected various buildings were Kremlin was bent on expansion and where the United· States happened to camouflaged structures hiding missiles that the Vnited States was commu- be stationing its own nuclear strike inside. Among these were a Crimean nism's chief enemy, intelligence agen- forces. Thus. the· Soviets used most of War memorial and a medieval tower. 14 cies naturally began thinking about their productio'n capacity to build A U.S. photoreconnaissance satellite how the Soviet Union would deliver medium-range bombers rather than a took the first clear pictures of a Soviet the bombs to U.S. territory. long-range force. 12 ICBM site.at Plesetsk in August 1960- In.19_54, Western attach~s in Moscow THE MISSILE GAP 13 laid out. as tlie CIA had predicted. just observed · a new Soviet long-range The Soviet Union launched. its first· like the site at Tyuratam. According to bomber flying overhead at the May satellite in October 1957. Although the early Air Force projection, the So­ Day military par~de. From this report, the CIA had foreseen this develop­ viets should have deployed more than U.S. intelligence made some assump- ment years in advance, the actual 500 ICBM's by this time, but sa_tellite tions about when the Soviets had launching awakened fears that the coverage ·detected no similar sites any­ begun development of this bomber United States would soon be vulner­ where else. and how quickly they might be able tQ able to an ICBM attack. Sputnik: The The identification of an operational deploy it in significant numbers. A word alone evoked a .nightmare vision, SS-6 site reopened the issue of how study concluded that the bomber•s r~flecting an impression that the Sovi· quickly the Soviets could produce the design had been completed in 1952 and ets led the Americans in missile tech­ missiles. From studies of the So,viet its first prototype flight made in ·1953. nology. Khrushchev exploited this economy and the cost of. American On U.S. experience. it was estimated American fear by publicly making out­ ICBM's the CIA assumed.that the So­ that mass production could not begin rag~ous statements about the capabili- viets could start off. producing ICBM's ties of Soviet missiles which he knew either on an "orderly" schedule of 3 8 Cited In Freedman, op. cit., p. 64; and private per month on.a "crash" program of 15 conversation with D. A. Rosenberg. . ' Freedman, op. cit., pp. 65-66. per month. Assuming that the Soviets •u.s. Senate Select Committee·To Study Govern­ 10 Ibid. had been producing missiles since mental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Ac­ llJbid. . tivities , p. 56; Freedman; pared with 613 Badger medium-range bombers and op. cit., p. 67; The Military- Balance, 1975-1976. 80 Backfires that have limited Intercontinental ca­ have 36 operational SS-6's by Novem­ tlmate, see p._ Bottome, The Missile Gap: A Stud:!! of the Formula­ .u Material in this section is based on Freedman, 251. For a thorough analysis of NSC-68, see Paul Y. tion of Military ·and Political Policy ; Freed­ Debate: Strategic Defense and National Security Warner R. Schilling, PaulY. Hammond & Glenn man, op. cit.; Arnold Horelick & Myron Rush, Strd.· ; Ronald Tammen,. MIRV and the . From this, model, the So­ programs as utfJerly undisturbed by still far short of the Air Force estJ:.­ viets developed the Calash and Grif­ bureaucratic· impulses or quirks. and m""8.te· of soo·per· year. fon interceptors, which used many of mistake&. ANTIBALLISTIC MISSILES 14 The CIA eventually adopted, the the same componentS. view. that as. late as 19671 or· 1968', the Throughout the 1'960'1;, i~telllgence . Galosh was, and is, an-ABM. Sixty­ analysts repeatedly predicted that the Soviets s~ill intende..d to deploY' Oalosh four of them~ remd.in deployed around· Soviets would d~ploy tt nationwide a:n .. nationwide,. buti that improvement& in Mos~ow: However, Ute Galosh radars Alnericd.n strategic forces-particular-. tiballistic missife . system.: !n use a mechanima; means, o·r tracking the early 19'60's~ tlie intelligenctf com­ lY· the MIRV system-cortvinced ·them· ICBM warheads, d.n extremely diffi­ they needed to1go , back to the drawin·g munity estimated that tbe S"oviets cult technique. By 1967. U.S.: intell&. would deploy som~ 2-:ooo exd-atntos­ boards. This htghly dubious· argument gence . analysts· began; raising· doubts restored . the institutional selfl..esteem pheric and 8,000 endb-a:tmosphertc· whether· the: Sov·letls woufd ever· Invest interceptors. 1 ~~' In 1963-64, the NIE on· of;· the Air Force ~d DIA by agreeing much further in· a . system so ineffec- with thei:r &rg\}ment that. the' Soviets strategic defensi"9e forces. predicted tive. · -that before 1975, the Moscriw intended the Galosh and· Grif:fon· tQ; be: ABM Griffon is· the missile deployed• in system, j~st coming . under construc­ nationwide ABM's, while conceding to tion. would ,be ex11anded' to every the Tallinn system, now known·· as. the the· CIA its contention that th'e Soviw major city, with 500 to 1,500 intercep­ · SA-5 surface-to-air. missile . NIE ets were not deploying .an effective. tors. Furthermore,. Pentagon analy:sts judgments on Griffonrs mission· wav.:. ABMsystem suspected, between 1964 and f966'. that elfed from year to yea~. The Tallinn SOVIBT MIRV'S the Ta111nn air-<;lefense system would. sitles were successors to a. system: the 'l'he prospect that the Sov.iets might Soviets began building around Lenin­ eventually serve as· a nationwid~ ABM, place multiple·-in In 1964, CIA conclud­ that were sufficiently accu~tate for. tlile to' be for defense agafust high-altttutle· edl that Griffon must'. be an antiailf.;. destruction of. hardened-that is, b(jmbers. At this point, analysts· at the craft missile, pllimarny· be~ use its·; l)el"· blast resistant.-targets such as the­ Defense Intelligence Agency <-DIA>~ fomnance·was so infei'ior t()' Galosh. newly developed; Minuteman. ICB·M and John· Foster, then the ·Dir-ector ot On the Qther hand, Soviet. ~ubU~ silo. At the time,. the:re. was ·no· evi­ t'fa­ Defense Research and Efugtneertn~ statements were attr.ibuting A'BM dence that an.y Soviet. MlR.V program speculated that the Tallinn could pabilities; to Gri:ffQn: Khrushcltev· said had even begun. Thus. the eaFliest date quickly be "upgraded" to a dual; pur­ it ~uld ' hit;. "a fly in outer space:·· 'Fhe for- Soviet. MIRV deploymen.t, inferred pose SAM/ ABM system·. Air Force, Army' and· the OIA were frQm the 1965 NIE, was 1969 .. Further ana:lysis. however, revealed' convinced that .the · CIA was· grossly fn 1966 and 1967,. Soviet spacEt shots that many of the TaHlnn sites were' lo..­ underestimating Griffon's ca;pabilities. demonstrated some of the technology cated in the wrong places f.or ICBM' in..., The·l965 NIE ttnnsequentry noted that necessary for MIR:Ving. As· .a J;esult tercepti0n,. and) that th~y la-cked the· the intended mission of the T~linn the Air For«e insisted that. the NLE nuclear-warhead storage space essen­ sites· was uncertain,. ·a judgment re­ contain a judgment that the: SOviets tial'for a workable ABM system. peated in 1966. . were in fact developing a.MIR.V.ss Why. was intelUge:nce: so keen on' Bureaucratically, Pentagon' fntellt­ · In August 1968, the· United'. States spotting an ABM system tnat1 never gence analysts had big stakes, invested observed the tirsti test of the SS.-9 trip­ did emerge? in a Soviet ABM. The .[_oint Chiefs of' let, the three-warhead ICBM ever Part of this misjudgment was foun'd~ Staff, whom PIA represented· within· which the argument about Sbviet" ed on an assessment of Soviet. strategic the intelligen-ce community, and the MIRV capability would soon ~nter. doctrine. The Soviets were greatly con­ Air Force needed the specter of . a The SS-9 was a very large missile. It cerned about strategic defense. They Soviet ABM as a rationale for develop­ was believed that such. a missile would ing MIRV's . The be-Ideally suited to the task of digging. "Paul H. Nitze, Comment on "articles by Albert Army needed a conclusion that s ·oviet Wohlstetter, Foreign Poli'CJI, Fal119'74, p. 82. ABM's were effective in order to over- •• See Freedman, op. cit., p. 116. February 7, 1980 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 2493 out Minuteman silos. However, even gram to design more sophisticated One reason is "mirror fmagtng."- the highest estimates of ultimate ss..:.9· MI.RV's ·for the next genere.tion of After 196~. the CIA expected that the · deployment-the Air Force's projec- ICBM's. The United States knew noth- Soviets would place MIRV's on their tion of 700-envisioned an insufficient ing about tbis next generation. Judg- I~BM's just as the United States hl}d number of SS-9's to destroy 1,000 Min- ing by the decision to stop with our done. This expectation led estimators uteman missiles . .Thus, an8.J.ysts who own third-generation Minuteman to project that the Soviets would thought the Soviets were going after ICBM, intelligence estimators might deploy .fewer ICBM's than they ended Minuteman reasoned that the Soviets not have though the Soviets would up deploying. The intelligence commu­ must be planning to place multiple .proceed past the SS-9. · nity based its estimates on the finding warheads on the SS-9. The triplet In any event, the 1970 NIE took. a within the U.S. Defense Department tests seemed to confirm this suspicion. wholly different approach to the issue that qualititive improvements to The issue then became whether the of when the Soviets would be able to ICBM's were far cheaper .ways to ·gain triplet was a MIRV or just an unso- deploy_a true MIRV. The estimators additional capability than quantitive phisticated MRV-that is, whether postulated two possible Soviet ap- increases ip the force itself. 'In re­ each of the three warheads -could be proaches-low force/low technology sponse to Wohlstetter's charge of un­ aimed at a separate target, or whether and high force/high technology. The derestimatioh, Lt. Gen. Daniel all three must be aimed at the same former assumed the Soviets would Graham, Director of the DIA, testified general area. Each warhead· of the.trip- deploy the triplet, not attaining a true ·in 1975: . MIRV until-1974. the latter assum.ed ·let was placed on a rail . in the nose- the Soviets ·would skip the trfplet and The continuing evidence of qualitative im­ /cone . of the SS-9. The rails· did not provement was a prime contributor to · our rotate to allow repositioning and retar- move'directly to a·MIRV for the SS-9. underestimation of ICBM deployment ... geting of the warheads. This feature It was believed that the Soviets, using.. · t seemed logical at the time that the Sovi­ convinced CIA analysts that the SS-9 the technology tested in the space ets would try to use their advantage in was simply an MRV .. Therefore, · the launches of 1966-67, might be able to throw-weight by equipping their ICBMs begin deploying MIRV's as early as with MIRVs which could ... overwhelm 1968 NIE did not expect a Soviet 1971.•• the then-programme d u .s . ABM . .. an d MIRV until 1978-the end of the As it happened, 'the._ first Soviet ... permit multiple targeting ... . zo However, analysts outside the intelli- new, fourth-gen,eration ICBM in 1975. The Soviets, however, decided .to gefice community, most notably in the the Soviets never tried to build a truly build more ICBM's instead. Thus, the Pentagon's Directorate of Def~nse Re- MIRVed ss-9. But the· intelligence es- CIA did underestimate the number of search and Engineering, noted that timaies went through various phases. missile launchers that the Soviets the· timing of the warhead· releases First they overestimated-in 1965 the would construct-but it did not so mas­ from the SS-9 coUld cause the war- estimate was 1970, then underestimat- sively underestimate the offensive ca- · heads to fall in various-triangular pat- ed-in 1968 the prediction was ·1978. pabilities of the U.S.S.R. terns. They concluded from the pat- then overestimated again-bl 1969 the Second,-the CIA knewthat resources 'tern of releases· during test -flights in projection was 1971. the varying esti- in the · ·u.S.S.R were scarce· and . the Pacific that the Soviets were mates depended on the different .poUt- thought they ·were going elsewhere. indeed adapting these "triangles" to match the configura- tions and on a rather , vacuous argu- overestimated the number of ABM's tion of U.S. missile silos. A missile ment over which u.s. terminology the Soviets would produce. This, too. force of 400 to 700 SS-9's, each with was a more appropri- led the analysts to underestimate three warheads that coUld be aimed at ate deScription of the SS-9 triplet. Soviet ICBM production. In 1962, three silos, might be very effective EsriMAnNa soviET ICBM FoRcE sizE when small numbers of Soviet ICBM's against Minuteman after all. . In a series of articles in Fore.ign were predicted, the United States was The triplet issue thus took on politi- Policy in 1974 ••• the prominent strate- also anticipating deployment of some~ cal importance, all the more since the gic analyst, Albert Wohlstetter, · thing like 10,000 ABM. interceptors. Nixon administration was seeking con-· argued that the NIE's between 1962 Defense Secretary Robert S. McNa­ gressional approval of the Safeguard and 1969 consisteptly underestimated mara suggested in this '1964 posture AMB system designed to protect _Min- future Soviet strategic offensive capa- statement that ICBM programs would uteman against Soviet attack. If the bUities. Wohlstetter's motive was to tend to constrain "large and very ss..:.9 lacked MIRV capability, then eradicate the commonly accepted costly new programs such as an effec­ Minuteman needed no protection; if thesis that military intelligence invari- tive antiballistic missile defense the triangular ·pattern of the triplet ably overestimated Soviet capabilities system."al When the intelligence com­ coincided ·with the distance· between to justify its own costly defense pro- munity incorrectly concluded that the three U.S. Minuteman silos, however; grams. · _ . Soviets were about to deploy a massive then tlte· case for Minuteman vulner- Motives aside, Wohlstetter advanced ABM network, they logically re_asoned ability might still be valid. Further- the idea that these underestimates that the Soviets would not· build' a more, Kissinger y.ranted the ABM as a. represented a systematic bias inside very large ICBM force. Indeed, the bargaining chip in the SALT I negotia- the CIA and the intelligence communi- greatest ICBM underestimates, those. tions that were just getting underway. ty as a whol_e-a bias against recogniz- for 1965 and 1966,- coincide with the Consequently, Kissinger summoned · tng the grand scope ·of Soviet ambi- greatest ABM overestimates. the CIA estimators and the. Pentagon tions· for ICBM procurement. the in- Third, the general underestimation D.D.R. & E. analysts to the White telligence agencies did underestimate of Soviet ICBM's included a whopping House for a series of special meetings! the number of Soviet ICBM launchers overestimation of one system in par­ From ·these sessions, Kissinger con- in making projections of future Soviet ticular, the SS-9. In 1969, DIA project­ eluded ·that the triplet was indeed a capabilities; moreover, as the' Soviet ed 420 SS-9's; the Air: Force -expected primitive MIRV, and he instruct~d the buildup accelerated, intelligence pro- as many as 700. In fact, the SovietS CIA to rewrite the 1969 NIEto include jections did not improve and ~ in some never deployed more than 280, and de- more evidence supporting both sides cases even worsened. voted most of their resources to con- . of the controversy.n Why did this happen? structing nearly 1~000 smaller SS-11 In an important se~e. the whole ar- missiles.22 Had the Soviets gone ahead gument was artificial. In fact, the So- '"Melvin Laird. Defense Department. Fiscal Year with SS-9's, the same resources would viets had seyeral programs in parallel: 1971 Defense Program and Budget · 39. . "Albert Wohlstetter, "Is There a Strategic Arms MIRV f or. the Ss -9• b U t a ls 0 a pro- Race?" and "Rivals But No Race," Foreigri Policy, .. Hearings, Joint Economic Committee, AUoca­ Summer and Fall 1974. This sparked a debate, in-. . tion of Resources in the Soviet Union and China- 11 Ibid., pp. 137ff; Hearings, Senate l"orelgn Rela· volvtng articles and replies by Paw Nitze, 1975, Pt. 1, pp: 97-98. tlons Committee, Intelligence and the ABM, 1969, p. Alsop, Morton Halperin, Jeremy Stone,· Michael •• Robert McNamara, Defense Department, Pos­ 24; John Newhouse, Cold Dawn: The StoT'JI 0/ SAL7 Nacht and Johan Holst, in Foreign Poltey, Fall 1974 ture Statement /or FY 1964, (February 1963>, p. 22. , p. 161. and Summer 1975. a Freedman, OJ). cit., p.l46, 2494 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS February 7, 1980 the number of SS-:9's predicted by the the possibility· that MIRV deploy- adequate for an effective first-strike intelltgence community . Thus, in terms of a potential threat to the, Minuteman however, the deployment of Safeguard projecting actual offensive capabili­ force, and then suggested various solu- ABM to defend Minuteman sites had ties, U.S. inteltige:oce· was not s.o far tions to the problem. The Joint Chiefs already been authorized. · off the mark as Wohlstetter suggests. of Staff convinced Clifford to delete In 1973, early Soviet testing on a Still, the agencies did err in not fore­ the paragraph.85 . .fourth generation ICBM program (the seeing the new Soviet emphasis on The Nixon administration took Min- SS-17, SS-18 and SS-19) reopened the larger numbers of much ·smaller mis­ uteinan vulnerability more seriously. controversy over Minuteman vulner­ siles, which greatly enhanced Soviet lf the Soviets could deploy a force of ability. Initial press leaks suggested power to destroy American industrial 700 SS-9's, each with triplet war- that the first tests showed accuracies and population targets. heads-as U.S. intelligence was pro- for the new missiles to be little better Fourth, about 50 percent of the in­ jecting at the time, they could hypo- than the 0.5-nautical-mile CEP of the telligence community's underestima­ thetically a~m 2 warheads at each of older systems. Furthermore, since th,e .tions, for each year in the late 1960's, the 1,000 Mmuteman silos, thereby in- new missiles carried more warheads is accounted for by the Soviets' deci­ suring the destruction of nearly all of than the SS-9 and had similar or sion not to. retire about 200 obsolete them. . lighter throw-weight, the yields of ss... 7 and SS-8 ICMB's, contrary to ex~ The Office of the Secretary of De- each warhead would be less than the pectations of the U.S. intelligence. f~se believed a~ the ti~ that the So- SS-9's. In short, the warheads would Thus, when Wohlstetter's chart ind,i­ v1ets could ach1eve accura;cies of 0.25. not threaten the Minuteman silos. cates an underestimate of ~bout 400 nautical miles CEP. ~ressures to, bear on cent, a perception that . might have ICBM accuracy and explosive yield is the D1rector of Central Intelllgence to had significant policy implications~ today's critically important issue. It is delete or change any particular para- the combination of these two factors graph." However, Abbot Smith, then HOW GOOD IS FORECASTING? A SUMMARY NOTE that determines the vulnerability of the Chairman of the CIA's Board of In sum, U.S. intelligence_ has had ·a our fixed ICBM silos. 24 National Estimates does recall the epi­ rather mixed record of forecasting Throughout the 1960!s, there was sode as the only case of direct political future Soviet strategic capabilities. little official concern about Minute­ Of the eight critical developments interference with the NIE's that he we examined the intelligence commu­ man vulnerability. In 1968, Defense could remember in his 20 years with nity overestimated Soviet capabilities Secretary Clark Clifford wrote a the agency. 21 memorandum to President Johnson, In April 1971, TRW, Inc., completed on two occasions, Ul'lderestimated one paragraph_of which pointed out a study sponsored jointly by the CIA . them once, and both over--and under- and D.D.R. & E .. demonstrating that n Robert McNamara, Defense Department., FY 88 Michael Getler, "Russian Missile Faulted," 1967 Posture Statement. Soviet technology for the SS-9 could Washington Post, June 17. 1971. 14 An index of vulnuerability has been calculated not achieve accuracies better than the ae Freedman~ op. cit., p. 173; Hearings, Senate as Y% divided by CEP 1 , where Y=weapon yield in · 0.5 nautical-mile CEP estimated previ­ .t"oreign Helations Committee. Briefing on Counter­ megatons, and CEP=Circular Error Probable, or ously by the CIA-an error factor in- force Attacks, September 1974. the distance from the target within which a war­ 30 According to data released by Paul Nitze, the head will land 50 percent of the time. The gist is newest version of the 88-18 has a CEP of 0.17 nautical miles, as does the head's "kill probability" against a target, but. that ae Freedman, op. cit., p. 141. late5t SS-19 with six warheads. See Nitze'a testimo­ doubling accuracy will have the same effect as 8 ' See Church Committee, Final Report, Foreign ny, Hearings, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, boosting yield by eight times. . p, 459. /emive Missile& tngton Po8t, April 2'1, 1976. Yield," Washington Post, May 31, 1979. February · 7, 1980 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 2495 estimated on three. They were almost _ deployment and numbers of Soviet United States.. the U.S.S.R. would ·e­ exactly right once, and split between MIRV's and ABM's). The one time place old, obsolete missiles with new precision and underestimation once. when the prediction was nearly dead ones. Instead, the Soviets built up The one instance of unmitigated un­ their missile force in quantity ·and did derestimation (predicting the number right was a case of. fortuitous guess­ later. · estimates of other variables <~pecially work, based on.no hard data. THillD. J4ISJUDGMENT OF SOVIET STRATEGIC PRIORITIES The "bomber gap" and the umissile U.S. INTElliGENCE: FORECASTS VERSUS. REAlnV gap" were not the total intelligence fi- ascos they are reputed to be. The Sovi­ Actual J':;:~ ets did produce and deploy hundreds Right: o of bombers in the late 1950's and hun­ ------=-- dreds of missiles in the early 1960's~ Date of Soviet A-bomb ...... - ...... 1945 (GrCM!S) ...... :...... 1965 ...... 1949 .q...... - The mistake was in assuming that 1945 (scientists) ...... 1949 ...... +0 they would emphasize long-range stra- 1949 (intelligence) ...... 1952 ...... ; ...... Date of Soviet H-bomb ...... 1950 .: ...... 1954 ...... 1953...... o tegic weapons aimed at the United N1fmfler of Soviet long-range bolnbers by 1960 ("110ili68i gap"}...... - .... - · 1955 !Air Force) ...... 600-700...... 190...... + States. In fact, Soviet strategists decid- 1955 (HIE)·• .. : ...... - .. soo ...... :...... + ed that areas al th ' i h f Number ot Soviet I:BM's 11y 1961 ("MMssiie PP1-.. ------1957 (Air ~} ...... :... 1.000 ...... 10...... + ong e per P ery o 1957 (CIA) ...... 500 ...... ;...... :... + the U.S.S.R.-most notably in Western ~om:~~~·: : :: : : :: ::::: ::: :::: ::::::::: : ::: : ::::::::::::: ~~~ -~~ : ::: =:::::: : :::: ~~7~ :: :: : :: :: : : : : :: : ~75:: : : : : : : : :: :::: + Eurqpe-posed the greatest threat to 1968 ...... 197a...... ~ + thetn, and so they concentrated on 197G-...... 1971 or 1974...... + medium- and intermediate-range Number of S~Met ICBM'S: • weapons instead. This was, after all. By 1961 ...... , ...... 1964·...... 325- 525 ------570...... - the area from which the Russians had 1965 ...... 330-395 :...... By 1970...... _ ...... - ... - - 1965 ...... 410-700 ...... 1,299 ...... , been historically most threatened; and 1966-...... - ...... 505:-795 ...... - ...... - until the 1960's, this was where most By 1971 ...... 1967 ...... 805-1.080 ...... 1.Sll ...... - of the U.S. strategic strike force was 8y 1972 ...... ;...... 1968 ...... - .... 1.020-1,251 .... ;.... 1,527 ...... 1968 ...... :...... 1,158-1,276...... _ located. ICBM ac:auacy and yield; In the case ·or Soviet ICBM forces in ForSS-9accuracy...... 1969 ...... 0.25 CEP' ...... 0.5 CEP ...... + the 1960's, U.S .. analysts did not under- For new 111issife accuracr ...... 1973 ...... 0.5 CEP ...... 0.25 CEP ...... For SS-18/-19 yiri! ...... _ ____, __ 1978 ...... 1.5 Megat011s ...... soo Kitot~ ...... + estimate the magnitude of the Soviet ------'------7 ------defense effort as much as they mis­ 1 NatM!IntelligeAceestilllate. . judged Soviet priorities. They thought ~~ Ahrt Wohlsfetter, 1.egends of the Strategic Arms Race.~ USSI Rell!)Ct 75-1 (Washillgtoa, D.C.: U.S. Strategic Institute, 1975), p. 24. AN other nlllllllefs taken lrom.llolft of this paper. · . the Soviets would go for small num- s Circular error probable-llle number of nalltical miles 11om target wittria whicfl a warllead willan6 50 percent of the time. bers of heavy missiles, would put more resources into quality than quantity, and would emphasize defensive mis­ The record of estimates on Soviet tions-prejudices, excessive attention siles. Thus, the intelligence communi­ strategic forces bears out Albert Wohl­ paid to some things, not enoUgh atten­ ty projected a large number of SS-9's, stetter's conclusion: tion to others. These notions shape low numbers of ICBM's, early deploy­ Our officials sometimes overestimate, and the way we perceive things. ment of MIRV's, and thousands of sometimes underestim,a.te, and sometimes Occasionally, these conceptions limit ABM's. Instead, the Soviets developed even get it right. 32 our vision. President Truman, General only a few hundred SS-9's, and about This mixed record is obviously due Groves and certainly others thought it 1,000 smaller ss.:..u•s, took several in part to the inherent uncertainties would take many years for the Soviets years longer to field ~RV's. and involved in gazing into the future. Yet to build an A-bomb because they. saw halted their ABM program after only judging from the recordr there are the Russians as technological primi­ 64 were deployed. some patterns that can be woven from tives. On the ABM error, U.S. intelli­ FOURTJL POLITICAL AND BUREAUCRATIC these overestimates and UI)deresti­ gence had a .preconceived · notion of PRESS'URE mates, some common sources of error, what might be ca1Ied "extended ra­ ·Jntelligence is not practiced in a po­ some lessons to be learned. tionality." They knew the Soviets em­ litical vacuum. Direct political inter­ phasized defenses in their military ference in national intelligence esti­ EXPLAINING ERRoa·m STRATEGIC PORECASTI!I'G program-so, logically, they would As reconnaissarlce · technology has mates is rare; the reported Barody build a nationwide ABM. They saw case is the only one on record. Howev­ improved over the decades, U.S. intel­ that the Tallinn site, with its SA-5 ligence has become more proficient at er, intelligence estimates are often missile, was worthless for antibomber highly responsive to the 'political the science of collecting data. It has defenses; therefore, they figured-as­ more "hard" infonnation on what the needs ot the client and the moment, Soviets' have-in missile deployments, suming Soviet military planners to be regardless of the absence of a direct flawlessly logi<;al people-that it must guiding hand. The Air Force's need to production facilities, and so forth­ be an ABM system. and, therefore,. a firmer base from ~ustify its MIRV program was one which to make projections. SECOND. MIRROR-IMAGING factor in its projection that the Sovi­ However, few of the mistakes noted. In the absence of obvious facts to ets would build 10,000 ABM intercep­ in this look at the past have....-been due the contrary, U.S. intelligence often tors. Likewise, the _Nixon administra­ to errors in intelligence gathering; assumes that the Soviets think about tion's desire to deploy the Safeguard most have been· due to mishaPs in military problems in roughly the same ABM system was one reason for its ini­ the far trickier and less certain arts of way the United States does. This, too. tial early estimate of when the Soviets intelligence analysis. Here is where is a natural, understandable human would start MIRVing their ICBM's. judgment comes into play-and it trait. It, too, can be misleading, how­ The CIA's underestimation of Soviet seems that, in several Instances, mis­ ever. ICBM deployment coincided with De­ judgments have warped our vision of U.S. intelligence underestimated the fense Secretary Robert McNamara's the future. Sources of this misjudg­ number of Soviet ICBM's, for exam­ public testimony that the Soviets ment include: ple, because the analysts assumed that would not try to match the U.S. force the Soviets would be like the Ameri­ in number. This was his rationale for FIRST. PRECONCEIVED NOTIONS cans and -develop quality instead of It is human nature that people look resisting pressures to expand U.S. nu­ at the world with preconceived no- quantity in their strategic nuclear clear- forces-the level of which, forces-placing. MIRV's on their miS­ having been arbitrarily set at 1,000 •• Albert Wohlatetter, "Legends of the Anna _siles instead of butlding more miSsiles. ICBM's, was difficult to Justify con­ Race," p.lt. It was also assu~ed that. like the vincingly as opposed to some equally 2496 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS February 7, 1980 arbitr.ary higher-or, for that matter, the U .S.S.R: appear hostile toward the CARTER'S EXPENSIVE lower-level. McNamara did not have United States is a. "true" representa­ ELECTION-YEAR BUDG~ to call up CIA analysts for them to re­ tion. of Soviet intentions, while any flect his logic in their estimates. They less hostile statement is a planned de­ HON. JOHN H. ROUSSELOT read the newspapers as avidly as the ception. This rule is obviously unsatis­ rest of Washington. OF CALIFORNIA factory for intelligence analysis. IN THE HOUSE OF R_EPRESENTATIVES FIFTH. SPURIOUS LEARNING Perhaps the CIA has been insuffi­ Thursday, February 7, 1980 Bureaucracy has been defined as an ciently unwilling to take on the, com­ plexities of working with Soviet docu­ e Mr~ ROUSSELOT. Mr. . Speaker, organization that cannot learn fromr President Carter's election year its own mistakes.33 The intelligence· ments. However, there is no guarantee that correction of this deficiency wlll budget is the most expensive to date­ community's. record in s~rategic fore­ literally. Retail price of the five- casting bears this out. When -the com-. · m~ke intelligence analysis any ;more . volume set, entitled "The Budget of munity reacts to . previous errors, the accurate or unbiased. the· U.S. Government-Fiscal Year lessons it "learns" are often spurious; CONCLUSION 1981," is $28.50:--plus tax, when pur­ the community overcompensates for chased at your neighborhood book- its errors instead of revising the meth­ Lo-oking at the intelligence commu­ store. · ods that produced the error, Thus, nity. from the outside, 'the public tends Another election year first. The overestimates are followed by underes­ to see a machine spewing out facts. green and white volumes-coinciden­ timates, and vice versa. .ttarely does the public see that the in· tally the Carter campaign colors-con­ The underestimates· of ICBM de­ telligence community is really just tain a 117 -page section .entitled "Major ployments in the 1960's were, in part, people; it is essentially a bureaucracy Accomplishments." This entire section a response to the overestimates of the subject to the same pressures and pit­ is devoted exclusively to regaling QS late 1950's. CIA officials were deter­ falls as other bureaucracies. with the successes of the· Carter ad­ mined not to repeat the mistakes of 'ministration. the "missile gap." Similarly, the intel­ The problems faced in making accu­ It briefly occurred to me to question ligence community shifted back and rate forecasts are, of course, grounded · the propriety of including such a self­ forth in its estimate of when the Sovi­ first in the f~t that the Soviet Union congratulatory section in a. public doc­ ets would deploy MIRV's. First they is a closed society and does not grace~ ument during~ election year. Then I overestimated-in 1965, the expecta­ the wodd's libraries with volumes .of took a closer lOok at its contents. With tion was 1970, then underestim'ated­ public testimony -from its gfillerals chapters entitled "Improving the Effi­ in 1968, the projection was 1978, then about military plans.· Given the limits ciency of ·the Federal Government" overestimated again-in 1968, the pro­ on factual information that an intelli­ and "Solving our Nation's Energy jection was 1971. The actual date was gence system can draw out of any · Problem," Jimmy Carter will most 1975. 'closed society, the intelligence commu­ likely find the document more embar- :nity must rely heavily on analytica.l . rassing than the list of campaigiJ SIXTH. FAILURE TO USE SOVIET SOURCES capability. promises he published in 1976.e One 'charge filed against the CIA is that its estimators ignore clear state­ This. leaves the product of the intel­ ments of Soviet intentions and capa­ ligence community wide open to a host CONGRESSMAN MATTHEW F. bilities found often in public Soviet lit­ of ·human foibles-the preconceived McHUGH PROPOSES EFFECTIVE erature. 34 This is a difficult issue to notions, misjudgments, spurious USE OF EMBARGOED GRAIN IN deal with. On some occasions, reliance "learning" -and other. human bungles NEW YORK TIMES OP-ED PIECE on Soviet statements would have made discussed above. In fact, given the lim­ for more accurate intelligence. For ex­ ited data base from which the intelli­ HON. ROBERT F. DRINAN ample, in a public speech in July 1965, gence community must work, it would_ OF MASSACHUSETTS Brezhnev said that the United States not be unreasonable to expect far IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES was underestimating· the scope of­ greater errors than have been made in Thursday, February 7, 1980 Soviet ICBM progr~ms. This turned the past. out to be true. Likewise, if the CIA e Mr. DRINAN. Mr. Speaker, the ad­ had accepted the Soyiet official's With increasingly more comprehen- mininstration's decision to embargo statement that the new Soviet ICBM's sive SALT agreements, the intent­ grain shipments to the Soviet Union had demonstrated 0.27 nautical-mile gence community was finding its tasks has produced an unexpected opportu­ CEP by 1974, the CIA would not have hiade easier. The SALT agreements n,ity to examine a- plan authored by underestimated the · rate of improve• set concrete numerical ceilings on the gentleman from New York, MAT­ ment in SS-18 and SS-19 accuracy.· many c~tegories of measurement of THEW F. McHuGH, and cosponsored by Still, some of the Soviet statements militar~ power. The intelligence co~­ 96 Members of the House. The Food are clearly false-for example, Khru..: munity did not have to use a foggy Security Act of 1979 would establish a shchev's boas~ that the Soviets .ha~ ~ ··crystal ball in examinmg every realm Government-owned ·reserve of up to 4 missile that could hit a fly in outer of Soviet activity. Instead, the SALT million metric tons of wheat to be space. Thus, such statements niust be agreements narrowed their task; in, used to meet emergency food needs·of tested against ·available intelligence those areas covered by SALT, analysts developing nations. This would be an evidence. If th.e two do not match, need only cneck to make certain the effective and sound method of insur­ should one trust the U.s. estimates of· Soviets were adhering to their treaty ing domestic farm prices, encouraging the statements or a foreign govern.; pledges~ Resources heretofore devoted Third World countries to increase ag­ meht not reputed for addiction to the to predicting future miss_ile numbers ricultural production, and insuring truth? could be devoted to other areas not against future food emergencies. The New York Times~ on February covered.by S~T. Nobody has proijosed a consi~tent 6, 1980, printed an excellent defense of set of rules for determining which With the death of SALT II, analysts the Food Security Act of 1979 written Soviet statements are true and which _must dust off the foggy crystal ball ·by the gentleman frorrt New York, are false. Some analysts follow the again. Estimates of future Soviet activ­ MATTHEW F. McHUGH. I urge all Mem­ rule that any Soviet statement making ity are likely to be wider off the mark bers to read the article which ap­ ,than with SALT II simply because the peared on the op-ed page. The article s3 Michel crozier, The Burea,ucratic Phenomenon Jreferenc·e points provided by the follows: CUniv. of Chicago Press, 1964>. treaty have been removed. The human USING EMBARGOED GRAIN 34 See ~enate Sel~ct Coriunlttee on Intelligence, :.element is maximized. And with it the The Natlonal Intelltgence Estimates A-B Team Ept- . • • • . creases.e convened, it must come to grips with a February 7, 1980 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 2497 number of issues raised by President Car­ gram, and woUld effectively isolate from-do­ certainly a factor that has contributed ter's decision to embargo grain shipments to mestic markets wheat now being purchased to the current-squeeze on capital fund­ the Soviet Union in retaliation for the inva­ by the Carter Administration. ing. sion of Afghanlstan;.:. friCluding.what to' do -Establishment of such a reserve would not with surplus gr:aiz:I purc~ased - qy · ; th~ . Gov­ solve all the problems crea.ted by the embar­ Providing tax incentives for saving ernment. go. It could not, for example. be a means for would Increase the flow of money into _American fanners are rightly conce111ed storing surplus feed grain. It also does not those thrift institutions which provide that this grain could adversely influence the represent. a complete answer to world food funding for the housing industry. domestic market, exerting significant down­ problems. However. as the United Nations­ Such a flo\\i would lower rates of inter­ in ward pressure on prt'ces. Although a drop in sponsored World Food Conference Rome est and Increase the ~vailability of farm priceS could have a modest short-term pointed out in 1974, reserves can play a vital impact on inflation at home, lower prices role in helping to assure survival under mortgage money and consequently, could also force many farmers to throw in emergency conditions and in promoting make it possible for all -Americans to the towel. Thus, it Is Important to isolate some measure of political stability. own their own homes, not just the Government purchases from· domestic mar­ The President•s decision to embargo grain wealthy. Rising employment in con­ kets, a policy the carter Administration has is an appropriate response to Soviet aggres­ struction and related industries would said that it will pursue but that depends sion. Beyond demonstrating American re­ also follow. easing the growth of our solely on administrative descretion. solve, however, the embargo provides the Nation's rate of unemployment. If grain -purchases are isolated from do­ President and Congress with a fresh oppor­ mestic markets, what should be done with tunity to establish a permanent .foOd re­ In addition to insuring the availabil­ the grain? One view that enjoys substantial serve. It is an opportunity that should not ity of the capital necessary to increase public support is that the su.i'plu.s should be be missed.e productivity, the provision of tax in­ disposed of abroad in the developing na­ centiv.es to encourage personal savings tions. At first blush, such a course may look would help reduce the pressures attractive. It would allow us to continue GIVING THE SMALL SAVER A brought on through the psychology of putting pressure on the Soviet Union, help T~BREAK inflation. That psychology is_predicat­ maintain crop prices at home, reduce Feder­ al budgetary pressures, and could be jusM­ ed on the belief that the best time to fied as another geSture to help starving and HON. E. THOMAS COLEMAN purchase products is now• . since infla­ malnourished people. 01' IIISSOURI tion will make those products more ex­ At a time when per-capita food production IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES pensive tomorrow than today. This in Africa ha.S dropped to a level 10 percent Thursday, Februa.,..Y 7, 1980 excess spending by consumers is an below what it was a decade ago, and when important factor contributing to the one out of e\'ery three children on- that con­ • Mr~ COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker. in . rate of inflation. A decrease in spend­ tinent will die before the age of five, an recent months it has become obvious ing because of an increase in Sa.vings appeal to our conscience may well be in that the present high rate of inflation would greatly ease inflationary pres- order. Indeed. same of the surplus grain can has built into our economic system a . sures. be disposed of to meet emergency needs in bias favoring consumption at the ex­ coU)'ltries such as Cambodia. East Timor. So­ In ~nclusion, if we allow the flight malia and Pakistan. pense of personal savings. The current from personal savings to advance un­ On the other hand, any systematic effort low rates of savings indicate the time checked, we insure that the instability to dispose of surplus grain abroad could has· come for a change . in American which has come to cha.racteri,ze our have devastating long-term consequences economic policy. Our economic system system will continue. If we act now to for the developing nations. must be altered to provide Incentives. Those nations' food deficits will increase stem that flight, if we work to encour­ rather than disincentives, for personal age, rather · than discourage savings, dramatically in the next two decades unless savings. they substantially improve their own agri­ not only will we restore stability to our cultural productivity. The United Nations Current figures in

CXXVI--158-Part 2 2498 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS February 7, 1980 1 hope that you will join with me in No assertion of moral relativism· can That demand could only be met by im­ supporting this worthy proposal.e excuse · these evils-not U you ·are talking Porting more and more oil from the about a common morality shared by the Middle East. whi~ was tantamount to vast majority of mankind. ·· correlating dependence and, there.fore. COMMONSENSE FROM JIM To a great degree our national interests are determined by moral values. Our pri­ .correlating vulnerability. COURTER mary interest, of course, is our national se­ ~n 1973 and 1974 our country experi­ curity. To guarantee it we need unimpeded enced its first energy shock. For the HON. ROBERT H. MICHEL access to raw materials, energy supplies, sea first time. Arab oil producers embar­ lanes and, when necessary, foreign military goed the United States and reduced OF ILLINOIS bases. To secure such access we need friend­ overall output to a critical ~evel. OPEC IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ly governments in as many countries as pos­ countries stopped negotiating price sible. Thursday, February 7. 1980 The likelihood that a country will be with our oil companies and, instead, friendly depends greatly upon ·how much it simply slapped-on a pri~ tag of their e Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, there own and offered it on a take-it-or-. has been much written and said about shares common values with us. Those coun­ tries which respect human rights.. and the leave-it basis. Due to our dependence the Soviet invasion of Afgha.fiistan. illdependence of other nations tenq to be on oil, we took it at a price roughly But one of the most incisive commen­ friendly. Those whos.e rulers flagrantly vio­ eight times higher than 5 years before. taries I have read about that event late human rights and enslave other nations Ye't today, as we embark on our was written by our colleague~ JIM tend to see us as a threat to their journey into the 1980's even. after the CouRTER of New Jersey. He gets to the legitimacy. second oil shock that accompanied the heart of the matter when he says: From this persJ)ective, one can see that the moral values of nations tend to coincide revolution in Iran and the major price "The likelUlood that a country will be hikes by the OPEC cartel on the aver­ friendly depends greatly upon how with their security interests. It is here, then, that moral conflict becomes to a large age of once every few months, the much it shares common values with degree political and strategic conflict. cause and actual iinplications of the us." · When Afghanistan ceases to be independ­ energy crisis have yet to be taken as That emphasis on commonly shared ent and becomes a Soviet satellite, not only seriously as they should be here in the values is one that has been forgotten has another nation lost its human rights, United States. or ignored in recent years. You can but the Free World has lo8t another· member. Soviet forces move closer to the · Substantial, sudden increases in oil talk about human rights violations all prices are inflicting serious blows to you want. but if you don't have a com­ Persian Gulf and Pakistan where they can continue their longstanding efforts to our ec_onomy,. exacerbating inflation, monly accepted standard by which foment and bring dowri another straining the international monetary such violations can be measured, your basically pro-Western government. system and reducing national income. words are in vain. .Thus, the Soviet The Soviets are encouraged to believe tha~ Tnese escalating oil prices dip into the rulers believe it is t!leir Marxist-Lenin­ aggression is a riskless activity which they pocket of every citizen. And .there is ist right to invade or deal with dissent­ can contJ11ue to pursue with Impunity. And no end in sight to such price rises. ers as they do. When we argue that neighboring countries learn that. since they have no reliable support from fellow free Algeria, Venezuela, , and this violates humail rights standards Indonesia all announced crude oil they refuse to admit it. nations, it is worth their while ·to appease the U.S.S.R. rather than risk its hostility. price increases this week on top of the JIM COURTER'S article appeared 3 The result is "Finlandization," whereby any other countries which stated during weeks ago in the Washlfigton Star, but policy of the neighboring country is eUec­ the last meeting of the OPEC cartel in nothing that has happened in the in­ tively subject to Soviet veto. December 1979 that they would not terval challenges his central ~~t. Such consequences coincide with neither support a ceUJng on the price of crude You cannot say that about many arti- our national interests nor 0\11' lllOral values. and would demand whatever the If we are to avoid them, we must penalize cles these days. · market could bear. A case· in point is At this point I wish insert in the the Soviets for their aggression. ' to President Carter's recent moves are not Algeria; which raised its price this RECORD, "Soviet Goals and American eno\lgh. The Soviets. .sensing the new mood week b-y $3 a ba.~Tel to a ·total of $34 Interests," by ·Representative JIM In the United states, could not have dec(ided per barrel, · while the other countries COURTER, January 22, 1980: to invade without reconciling themselves to followed suit with across-the-board SoVIET GoALS AlfD AliEaiCAN INTEREsTS some acceptable costs. · price hikes. Iran has also raised its · The administration has· imposed Just. Representatlv~ JIM price to above the average of OPEC (By COURTER) those .costs. The point of American policy.. Recently President Carter admitted that however, should be to impose costs that are prices. thereby adding even further-fi- · it took him three years to figure out one ele­ unacceptable enough so as to deter such nancial burden to its. European con­ ment of Soviet foreign policy: its goals. Soviet cost-benefit calculations. SUch ac­ sumers. With this knowledge he ure of their undertakmg. taken ·a tum for the better, although responded to -- tpe Soviet invasion of The dispatch of military equipment in undoubtedly only temporarily. Stocks Afghanistan. -meaningful quantities to the Afghan nation­ of crude oil stood at 345.3 million bar­ Unfortunately, the response revehls that alists is·the only reasonable action that can rels on January 25, 1980, which is' 1.2 the president's quick education has not been prevent a Soviet success. If we refrain, we thorough enough. Hls administration ap­ will only risk more trouble for ourselves, our percent higher than on the prece4fng pears to understand neither the complex­ values and our allies.e Friday and 13. 'l percent high~r than ities of Soviet forelgn.policy nor the nature on the comparable Friday a year ago. of the American Interests-and how they Distillate stocks stood at 217.6 million can be secured. · ENERGY: NEMESIS OF THE 1980'S '.>arrels last Friday, down 0.8 percent American interests in Afghanistan are a from the stock level the previous matter of morality and national security. Friday but 19.5 percent .,above the The fact is, there exists moral conflict in HON. BENJAMIN A. GILMAN OF NEW YORK stock level of a year ago. Residual fuel the world This is because not everybody is · oil stocks stood at 93.5 million barrels as friendly and accommodating as our presi­ IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES last Friday, which is- 12.2 percent dent thought. Thursday, F.ebr.uary 7. 1980 Some people like power and privilege and above the level of residual fuel stocks are even willing to lie, stea:l, klll, dispatch • Mr. Gl;LMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to a year ago. armies and deny entire peoples their human draw to the attention of my colleagues . Imports of crude oil and petroleum rights to get what they want. Some coun­ the pressing issue of this day and products together averaged 8.4 million tries have Gulq Archipelagos, lobotomize age-the energy c~. barl'"els a day for the 4 weeks ending dissidents in "phychiatric clinics," build · During the 1970's, some 100-odd January 25. 1980, down 4.5 percent Berlin Walls, and deny religious freedoin. years after the creation of the Ameri­ from the average year ago. Refined Other countries do not. Some countries sat­ a elllze independent natiol\8 and subJect them. can oil industry, domestic production products imported averaged 2 million to purges, starvation and genocide. while peaked and then began Its rapid de­ barrels a day for the same 4-week others do not. Boat ·people nee some eoun­ cline. Yet the demand for oU contin­ period, down 8.3 percent from the tries·and not othen. ues to rise at an· ever-alarmblg rate. average for the conu>arable period last February 7, 1980 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 2499 year. For. a complete breakdown of to my remarks a chart that outlines les for the express purpose of export­ U.S. refinery production on a monthly the years 1977· to 1980, ~P untU Janu- ing g$Soline and other refined prod~ and yearly basis, I would like to annex ary 25. ucts to this country. Although this would provide our country with the U.S. REFINERY PRODUCTION possibility of obtainin~ refined petro­ [MiHions Of barrels a day] leum· products during a possible short­ age, it would also give our small refin­ Monthly eries in the United States a great deal Jan. Feb. Mar. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct . Nov. Dec. of competition. To encourage small re­ •• finers to stay in their business, the De­ 1977: Motor gasoline... : ...... 6.9 6.8 6.9 7.0 6.9 7.1 7.2 7.2- 7.1 6.9 7.1 7.1 partment of Ene.rgy designed an enti­ Jet fuel ...... 9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 tlement .Program in 1977 which essen­ Kerosene ...... 3 .3 .2 .1 .1 .1 .2 .1 .1 .2 .2 .2 tially set an import quota on foreign Distillate fuel ...... 3.4- 3.7 3.2 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.3 Residual fuel ...... ui 2.0 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.8 refined oil. This explains the dilemma 1978: which confronted our Nation wherein Motor gasoline ...... 6.9 6.6 6.8 6.7 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.5 7.4 7.2 7.6 7.8 Exxon and Shell had to operate their Jet fuel ...... 9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 .9 1.0· 1.0 .9 1.0 1.0 Kerosene ...... 2 .2 .2 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 ' .1 .2 .2 .2 refineries located. in the Netherland Distillate fuel ...... ,.... .-...... · 3.1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.3 3.1 3.1 3.3 3.2 3.3 3.4' 3.4 Antilles at only 60-percent capacity, Residual fuel ...... :: ...... l9 1.8 1.8 1.5 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.6 '1.6 1.6 1.7 . 1.8 while here in the United States, the 1979: Motor gasoline ...... 7.3 6.9 6.7 6.8 6.8 7.0 7.0 6.9 6.6 6.5 6.7 supplies were dwindling because of our Jet fuel ...... 1.0 J.O 1.1' 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 lack of an adequate refining capacity Kerosene ...... 2 .3 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2 :2 ·.2 .2 .2 and its ultiml!,te production of gas Distillate fuel ...... 3.0 2.9 3.0 2.9 3.1 3.1 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.2 lines stretching across the country. Residual fuel ...... ~ ... 1.9 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.6 '1.6 1.6 1.7 Obviously, there is something wrong with a statute or program that- re­ 4-week-ending average stricts the importing of foreign refined 1979-80 10/5 10/12 10/19 .10/26 11/2 11/9 - 11/16 11i23 li/30 petroleum products during a time of crisis. If there is a shortage of gas and Motor gasoline ...... 6.7 6.7 6.6 6.5 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.8 home heating fuel, w.e should not re­ Jet fuel ...... :...... 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Kerosene ...... 3 .2 .2 .2 .3 .2 .3 .2 .2 strict the level of iinported refined Distillate fuel ...... :. 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.2 prod~cts, rather, we should see · t9 it Residual fuel ...... 1.7 1.6 1.6 ~ 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 that -there are more incentives pro­ 12/7. 1U14 12/21 12/28 1/4 1/ll 1/18 1/25 vided for the increased production: of Motor gasoline ...... 6.8 . 6.8 6.9 6.9 7.1 7.2 7.2 7.2 our own refining capacity while at the Jet fuel ...... · u 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 same time affording a market for for­ Kerosene ...... ,...... 2 .2 .3 .2 .3 .2 .2 . .2 eign products. Distillate fuel ...... 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.1 3.0 Residual fuel ...... 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.0 2.0 1.9 In sum, we as a nation must be con­ cerned with securing an adequate supply of oil at a reasonable price, In addition to the ·problem of price made more profits last year than any. while at the same time developing· al­ and supply, we are confronted with ex- other American industrial · concern. ternative sources of energy in Qrder to cessive profiteering that is so strongly Several other oil companies also re­ reduce our dependency upon foreign P.Vident among our American oil com- corded sharp increases in their 1979 o.il and· to limit our political vulner-_ ·panies, who have demonstrated more e~rnings, following this pattern. I ability. · of an interest in raising revenues than would also like to annex to the RECORD One way of achieving that goal of in having our Nation become-less vul- a chart which illustrates the 1978 and energy independence . is through the nerable to foreign oil dependency. A 1979 net earnings for the 10 major oil windfall profit tax legislation present­ case in point is.the Exxon Corp. which companies. . ly pending in Congress. It would not only set aside funds from the high QUARTERLY OIL COMPANY PROFITS 1 profits of our oil companies, but would distribute that money into the re­ [In millions of dollars J search and development programs so 1978 .1979 Percent changes in profits a desperately needed to wean us from our dependency on foreign oil. Having 1st 2d 3d 4th 1st 2d 3d 4th 1st . 2d 3d 4th passed both Houses,:the windfall prof­ Exxon ...... 695 690 525 850 955 830 1,145 1,365 .37 20 118 61 it ·bifl is· stlil bogged down in confer- · Mobil ...... 241 293 258 315 437 -· 404 595 514 81 38 131 72 Texaco ...... 170 ' 157 197 328 307 365 612 . 534 81 132 211 63 ence committee with.major diffe·rerices . Standard (Cal~ . ) ...... 243 256 274 316 347 412 . 576 524 43 61 110 66 still to be ironed o1:1t. The conferees Gulf ...... 155 176 211 237 249 291 416 366- 61 65 97 . 54 have agreed on a final target figure of Standard (Ind.) ...... 274 294 292 217 349 401 434 369 28 36 49 70 Atlantic-Richfield ...... ;...... 150 211 221 223 242 260 320 343 61 24 45 54 $227.3 billion but have not determined Shell...... 193 179 249 192 224 277 293 331 16 . 55 18 72 how to split the tax burden among the Continental ...... 37 154 106 155 162 216 247 191 . 343 40 133 23 different types of oil and among the . Ten~ ...... 110 118 103 131 125 154 132 164 14 . 31 28 25 Sun ...... 84 101 109 108 120 159 174 223 43 57 64 107 . major and independent oil companies~ Phillips ... ,...... :...... 171 149 119 280 177 215 193 306 4 44 62 10 A suitable windfall profit tax is ur­ Occidental ...... 32 (68) 19 88' 113 186 .....: ...... 174 ...... 864 gently needed. I have long advocated a Union ...... 79 87 93 124 114 128 106 . 152 44 47 14 23 Ashland ...... 16 44 62 ...... '27 395 53 ...... 75 798 (15) windfall profit tax, having introduced Amerada-Hess ...... ;...... 32 35 31 '116 115 119 ...... 258 234 290 a similar ·measure several years ago· Cities Service ...... 55 40 53 30 79 77 86 106 42 93 62 253 when it was not popular to speak of· Marathon ...... :...... :.... 50 51 50 74 81 85 80 54 61 67 60 (27) Standard (Ohio) ...... 42 118 126 165 168 201 366 451 303 70 190 113 such matters. I am hopeful that the Getty ...... 76 56 96 102 108 140 174 183 42 150 81 80 conferees will be able to expeditiously come to a compromise so that both 1 Net income figures for the year may be derived by adding the totals for the 4 quarters together. Figures are provid.ed by the companies and may be slightly revised from earlier estimates. · · Houses can go about desiftning the var­ 2 The percent change figures compare quarterly -net income for 1979 against quarterly. net income for the same quarter in 1978. ious research programs awaiting to be funded by such a tax. Mr. Speaker, I ~rge my colleagues to A new phenemon trailing not too far crude oil has the potential of becom­ give top priority to ·resolving our Na­ behind these problems is the problem ing a double threat to tfie·interests of tion's energy problems. A sound na­ of refining and distribution. The ex- the United States. OPEC, as well as tional energy policy will enhance our pansion of the OPEC cartel into refin- North African countries, have dis~ . economy and will strengthen our. na­ ing as well as production and sale of played an interest in building refiner- tional security.e