THE POLYGRAPH: A HINDRANCE TO FULL EMPLOYMENT

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP86B00338R000300350018-4
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: December 21, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 24, 2008
• Sequence Number: 18
• Publication Date: April 5, 1983
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP86B00338R000300350018-4
4
E-1386
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - Extensions of Remarks April 5, 1983
use as our guide in public life. He was
a deeply committed man and his digni-
ty and courage in the face of his terri-
ble illness only gives evidence to the
strength and determination of his Will
We shall miss him.* IxQ O
THE POLYGRAPH: A HINDRANCE
TO FULL EMPLOYMENT
HON. STEWART B. McKINNEY
OF CONNECTICUT
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, April 5, 1983
? Mr. McKINNEY. Mr. Speaker,
today, I am introducing legislation to
prohibit the use of ploygraph-"lie de-
tector"-tests in connection with ap-
plications for employment or as a con-
dition of continued employment in pri-
vate industry. Interest in the issue of
ploygraph testing has been revived as
a result of President Reagan's recent
directive ordering the increased use of
polygrapy tests on tens of thousands
of Government employees. Although
my billdoes not directly address the
use of ploygraphs in Federal employ-
ment, it would correct a practice
which threatens the employment
future of hundreds of thousands of
Americans each year.
With unemployment, currently at a
still unacceptable rate of 10.3 percent,
it is unthinkable that individuals ap-
plying for jobs in private industry
often find it necessary to submit to
the intrusion and intimidation of a
polygraph test in order to return to
the work force. Furt$ermore, the
practice of requesting current employ-
ees to undergo periodic lie detector
tests can create ill will and embarrass-
ment, irretrievably damaging the em-
ployer-employee relationship. While
employers often claim that participa-
tion is entirely voluntary, there can be
nothing voluntary about a decision to
undergo a polygraph in order to
obtain or maintain employment in
today's tight job market. Employees
who have taken the test frequently
admit to feelings of fear, intimidation,
and worthlessness after the experi-
ence. I do not believe an individual
should have to surrender his constitu-
tional right to privacy in order to
pursue employment in this country.
My bill would protect Americans from
such gross violations of personal priva-
cy.
Mr. Speaker, half of the States in
the United States currently place
some type of restriction on the use of
polygraphs in conjunction with em-
ployment. Sixteen States, including
Connecticut, ban the test entirely as a
condition of employment, as does the
District of Columbia. And the trend is
growing-four new antipolygraph laws
have been passed in the last 3 years
alone. In other States, polygraph ex-
aminers are restricted from asking cer-
tain specific questions-typically those
pertaining to sex, religion, race, creed,
or union activity-when administering
a polygraph. While I endorse the steps
these restricting laws represent, they
implicitly endorse the technique by al-
lowing polygraphs to remain at all.
Rather, I believe we must insist upon
an outright ban of this intrusive.
method of job screening in private in-
dustry. It is time Congress listened to
the wisdom of those 16 States, and
passed such a law.
The Polygraph Control and Privacy
Protection Act of 1983 would prescribe
fines and imprisonment for those em-
ployers who request or require that
their employees or applicants for em-
ployment take a polygraph test as a
condition of employment. A willful
violation could be punished by up to a
year in prison or a $1,000 fine or both.
The bill also establishes civil penalties
of up to $10,000 to be payable to the
Federal Treasury. Finally, a private
remedy is provided to allow a person
who has been the victim of a violation
of the act to recover damages from the
employer for losses resulting from the
violation. While the bill covers em-
ployers in the private sector, Federal
organizations, especially those within
the intelligence community, are in-
tended to be exempt at this time.
Renewed consideration of the poly-
graph issue is clearly timely. In New
York State, the number of complaints
received by the Civil Rights Bureau
concerning polygraphs doubled within
a recent 6-month period. In addition,
on March 25 a Connecticut jury
awarded damages of $219,000 to 22 em-
ployees of the Lehigh Oil Co., ruling
that they had been illegally fired for
refusing to take, or falling to pass, re-
quired polygraph tests. The subject of
polygraph testing has not even es-
caped treatment on television, where
viewers watch individuals, some of
them accused criminals, answer ques-
tions while the lie detector machine
presumably determines their truthful-
ness, hence their innocence or guilt.
In fact, the reliability of polygraph
tests is extremely suspect. Studies
show it to be accurate only about one-
third of the time. The polygraph con-
cept presumes that an identifiable
physical reaction can be attributed to
a specific emotional stimulus. The fact
is, however, that no two human minds
are alike. The Department of Justice
recognized this liability when it recom-
mended against the use of polygraph
.evidence in criminal trials. In explain-
ing its position to the House Govern-
ment Operations Committee in 1976,
the Department pointed out that
there is no specific physiological reac-
tion indicative of deception and that
even the same person may have incon-
sistent physiological reactions associ-
ated with deceptive responses. The
Justice Department also maintained
that a person's reactions may be af-
fected by a number of factors, includ-
ing his moral attitude toward lying,
his mental condition, the influence of
depressant drugs, and the physical cir-
cumstances incidental to the examina-
tion. Add to this the fact that only a
few States require polygraph examin-
ers to be certified, and the potential
for a false reading or poorly adminis-
tered test is magnified.
Finally, the invasion of privacy that
the polygraph represents is completely
unacceptable. Although the polygraph
is a machine of questionable accuracy,
the tests are used 200,000 to 400,000
times per year in the United States by.
such major businesses as Montgomery
Ward, 7-Eleven, and Coors brewery, in
addition to countless smaller compa-
nies. In July 1977 the President's Pri-
vacy Protection Study Commission
concluded that this polygraph use is
"an unreasonable invasion of personal
privacy that should be proscribed."'
Similar conclusions have been reached
independently by two congressional
committees. ,
To illustrate the nature of this pri-
vacy violation, let me describe briefly
an average polygraph test. After being
advised that the polygraph is nearly
infallible, the subject is led into a
sparsely decorated room where he is
seated. A rubber tube is placed around
his chest, cuffs are attached to the
upper arms, and electrodes are clipped
to the hands. The test is taken with
the machine, but generally not the ex-
aminer, in sight. The subject is left, in
essence , talking to the machine. The
examiner asks a series of questions,
some material, some immaterial, in
order to register differences in breath-
ing pattern, blood pressure, pulse rate,
and skin resistance to external cur-
rents. In order to test a subject's con-
trol response, examiners are free to
question their subjects on any aspect
of their past lives. Job applicants have
been questioned on highly personal
topics ranging from sexual conduct to
religious beliefs to emotional well-"
being. Convinced that the lie detector
is infallible, subjects have confessed
aspects of their personal lives which
they might not have revealed other-
wise except to a close friend or a
clergyman. On the basis of this type of
information, clearly unrelated to job
performance, individuals can be failed
and blackballed in the job market.
It was reported in 1977 that approxi-
mately 90 percent of job applicants re-
jected after having taken a preemploy-
ment polygraph examination were re-
jected on the basis of their own admis-
sions, not on the basis of the results
obtained from the polygraph test
itself. In cases such as these, the poly-
graph no longer serves to detect truth
of falsehood. Rather, it serves as a
means of intimidation which gives the
polygraph examiner the ability to
elicit personal and intimate informa-
tion from the subject and to report
that information to the employer.
That, Mr. Speaker, is & ,Violation of a
constitutional right. As long as we
allow this practice to continue, we are
condoning that violation. Documented
examples of this type of polygraph
abuse are far too numerous to mention
here.
Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP86B00338R000300350018-4
 Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP86B00338R000300350018-4
April 5, 1988 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - Extensions of Remarks
anniversary on April 16, 1983. Incorpo-
rated in 1908, this southern California
city has flourished for 75 years to
become the second largest city in the
lush Imperial Valley. Located on the
California-Mexico border, Calexico
has accordingly been named "The
Gateway to Mexico."
Calexico, founded in 1900 when sur-
veyors working on the project for di-
verting water from the Colorado River
to thirsty southern California located
a working camp there, got its name
from Mr. L. H. Holt. Mr. Holt com-
bined the words California and Mexico
to produce Calexico on the U.S. side of
the border and Mexicali, Calexico's re-
cently proclaimed sister city in
Mexico.
Today Calexico has grown to a com-
munity of more than 14,000 people
and it promises to continue to grow.
Indeed, industrial development will
spur that growth; Calexico has begun
the development of a 66-acre industri-
al park. This park's location offers
access to all major western markets
from the Calexico International Air-
port, railroads, as well as major State
and interstate highways.
Calexico can also boast of its growth
in the educational field; the Imperial
Valley campus of San Diego State Uni-
versity provides a strong liberal arts
curriculum in addition to several pro-
fessional programs, including adminis-
tration, law enforcement, teaching,
and human services.
Mr. Speaker, I am glad to have this
opportunity to pay tribute to Calexico
and all of its citizens. Mr. Holt prob-
ably could not have foreseen what
Calexico has become, but thanks to
the community's far-sightedness and
hard work, we should all be able to
project continued growth and prosper-
ity for "The Gateway to Mexico."*
HON. GARY L. ACKERMAN
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, April 5, 1983
? Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Speaker, last
week I heard an interesting ditty,
By CBS's Charles Osgood of New
York City.
It really made a lot of sense,
It had to do with nuclear defense.
His proposal is preposterous at best,
But no more so than all the rest.
So for my colleagues who like arms
absurdity,
I am entering it in the RECORD for all
posterity.
CHARLES OSGOOD. Newsbreak. Defense Sec-
retary Weinberger said an interesting thing
yesterday. He said it would be an enormous
step for mankind if the Soviet Union were
to develop a space-age nuclear defense
system like the one President Reagan wants
us to develop for the United States.
CASPAR WEINBERGER. I would hope and
assume that the Soviets with all the work
they have done and are doing in this field
would develop, about the same time we did,
the same kind of effective defense.
OSGOOD. Now, bear in mind that the idea
of the American system would be to render
Russian missiles useless for attacking the
United States. So what you just heard the
Secretary of Defense say, in effect, is that
he hopes the Russians will develop a system
that will make our American missiles useless
for attacking them. Poetic justice, some
might say. I don't know about the justice,
but we'll go for the poetry in just a minute.
OscooD. If we do have a system, in the sweet
by and by,
That would knock an attacker right out of
the sky
So that- incoming missiles just wouldn't
come in,
There'd be no sense for such an attack to
begin.
It may not be such an impossible dream,
Some laser perhaps or some particle beam
Might put up an invisible shield don't you
know
Like those toothpaste commercials from
long, long ago?
No nuclear weapons, whatever its yield
Could get through the Guard-all invisible
shield.
That's what President Reagan hopes we can
do,
And we're hoping the Russians will do the
same, too.
The Russian, Guardalski, the Kremlin then
uses
Would protect them from all of our Persh-
ings and cruiser.
And there never could be any nuclear fuss
For we couldn't hurt them and they
couldn't hurt us.
So with nuclear missiles quite useless in
war,
There'd be simply no reason to build any
more,
And then we might find, or so some people
teach,
True disarmament somewhat more easy to
reach.
Although folks who make weapons, what-
ever the store of,
Do not like to stop but to keep making more
of
Whatever it is and wherever they're hidden,
Ad infinitum or ad Armageddon.
But now comes a perceptive and very smart
chap,
Defense leader Weinberger, whose friends
call him "Cap,"
And if what Mr. Weinberger says is quite
true,
If he does want the Russians to do what we
do
And develop a system a whole lot like ours
To make use both mutually self-cancelling
powers,
Then think of the saving and building ex-
pense
If we build the thing jointly, doesn't that
make sense?
Though the reasons for working together
are strong,
It does not seem too likely that they'd go
along;
And if Russia should somehow comply with
our wishes,
Then some people here would get very sus-
picious.
But we could pool our funds for such proj-
ects as these
And farm out the job to the good Japanese.
In the Kremlin and Pentagon they might go
berserk,
But the Guard-all might stand at least some
chance to work.
Or like projects America's done in the past,
Like the A-bomb we thought of and brought
along fast
Or the time that we landed those men on
the moon,
E 1385
We might make this Guard-all thing come
alive soon.
The Russians wouldn't love it, in my bones I
just feel it.
If only we worked it out so the, could steal
it:
We could let the most secret parts leak out
somehow
With security sort of like what we have now
And the Soviet leaders, with their Byzan-
tine flair,
Would love thinking they'd stolen the thing
fair and square.
And we'll both live and romp in Elysian
Fields
Safe and secure 'neath invisible shields.?
HON. STENY H. HOYER
OF MARYLAND
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, April 5, 1983
? Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to
report the sorrowful passing of a very
dear friend of mine and an outstand-
ing citizen of Maryland, Senator
Edward P. Thomas. Senator Thomas
was the minority leader of Maryland's
Republican Party.
As the Baltimore Sun so eloquently
stated in an editorial at Senator
Thomas' death, "he was one of the
quiet men of Annapolis. He believed
that actions, not rhetoric, mattered.
For his dedication to government and
party, and for his basic decency and
love of people, Eddie Thomas was a be-
loved figure in Annapolis."
He, with his wife, Lois, his son, and
three daughters, represented what is
best in America-a dedicated, spirited
family, working together in good times
and bad, and contributing to the soci-
ety which nurtured them. He brought
his family to Frederick, Md. after a 10-
year career in Virginia as a sportscast-
er. In Frederick, he bought a bowling
alley and office complex, and, by 1970,
he won a seat in the Maryland Senate
representing Frederick and Carroll
Counties. In 1972 he was the Republi-
can State party chairman. He re-
mained a counselor, fundraiser, and
general adviser to the State party
until his death.
In 1979 Ed found out he had cancer,
and he approached the news in the
same way he did everything-in his
quiet manner he set about to defeat
the enemy. In 1981 he thought he had
won, and indominable in spirit, he told
a Sun reporter, "You just don't know.
But I'm riot losing any sleep over it, I
can tell you that. I consider myself
just damn lucky to be alive."
Despite the strength of his will, his
body did not respond, and earlier this
month he succumbed.
Mr. Speaker, Ed Thomas was a much
beloved man and his presence in our.
midst is sorely missed. I know my col-
leagues would want to join me in send-
ing heartfelt condolences to his
family. For Ed has certainly left an
outstanding legacy of public service
and good will, one which we could all
Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP86B00338R000300350018-4
 Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP86B00338R000300350018-4
April 5, 198.E CONGRES.,TONAL RECORD - Extensions of Rem,. , . E 1387
Mr. Speaker, the polygraph could been unprecedented increases in the tribution of assets and those not hold-
soon symbolize the threat which the number of straight bankruptcy filings, ing receipts to share in second tier dis-
abuse of technology poses to the tradi- and a dramatic decrease in the number tribution. These and other provisions
tions of our Constitution. Employers of debtors willing to reaffirm their would provide needed help to farmers
have used the machine, inaccurate as debt obligations. Moreover, there have caught up in the throes of grain eleva-
it is, to save the time required to make also been truly substantial abuses, tor proceedings. I urge my colleagues
a conventional investigation of poten- such as the stacking of exemptions in to give these and all provisions of HR.
tial employees. Personnel managers order to retain personal estates intact 1800 both speedy and favorable consid-
have used the machine to make sweep- and loading up expensive consumable eration.?
ing investigations whenever something goods in anticipation of bankruptcy.
has been found missing from an office Mr. Speaker, there can be no doubt
or warehouse. Fortunately, however, about the need for reform of our con- TRIBUTE TO COL. JOHN
the fight against the polygraph has fi- Sumer bankruptcy laws. Some experts DAVIDSON
Bandon it now.? $6 billion annually scheduled in bank- HON. ROBERT T. MATSUI
IN E
of
CON
~.."z` a?aavw
---'~ -
AMENDMENTS ACT OF ,o eca'`se ?" `ow
RUPTCY
1983 consumer debtors are aware of the Tuesday, April 5, 1983
availability of the loan rearrangement ? Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I would
HON. BILL McCOLLUM the National Bchapter ankruptcy According this afternoon like to honor Air Force
or noRmn many consumer debtors are unaware CoL John Davidson, who is about to be
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES of the chapter 13 alternative, and, as a transferred from the Air Logistics
consequence, needbe sly jeopardize Center in Sacramento to become the
Tuesday, April 5, 1983 their future ability to obtain credit by commander of the Air Force Guidance
? Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, on filing in chapter 7. Under the provi- and Metrology Center in Newark,
Wednesday, March 2, I was pleased to sions of H.R. 1800, however, bankrupt- Ohio.
join my Judiciary Committee col- cy counseling would be made available At McClellan Air Force Base in Sac-
leagues. Misr SYNAR, HAL SIWYIR, to consumer debtors so that an in. ramento, he has been the director of
and BARNEY FRANK and Congressmen formed decision could be made regard- Plans and programs. It has been a
TRENT LOTT, Giu xs LONG, BUTLER DER- ing the chapter 7 and chapter 13 pro- challenging assignment, McClellan is
RIca, Dica GssarmT, BILL SrzRSON, visions. Moreover, a bankruptcy judge the largest industrial complex in
HAL DAUB, Bn.L GRAY, and Vic FAzzo is permitted, on his own motion and northern ' California with more than
in introducing H.R. 1800, the Consum- only his own motion, to abstain from 14,000 Civilian and 3,500 military per-
er Debtor Bftnkr4aptey Amendments or dismiss a straight bankruptcy pro- sonnel. It is a facility with major needs
Act of 1983. This badly needed legisla- ceeding where to do otherwise would for modernisation and growth. Colonel
tion would go a long way toward curb- constitute an abuse as the Bankruptcy Davidson has worked hard and suc-
ing the increasing number of unneces- Code. In this manner, unnecessary cesefully to see that those needs have
sary chapter 7, straight bankruptcy chapter 7 filings would be discouraged been met and that McClellan is
filings and toward guaranteeing the without in any way infringing upon equipped to do the beat possible job of
continued availability of unsecured the rights of consumer debtors. maintaining critical military aircraft.
credit to the average American con- Mr. Speaker, in addition to HR. I am most famQiar with John, how-
sumer. 1800, at least two other consumer ever, because of a separate responsibil-
Mr. Speaker, the new Bankruptcy bankruptcy reform bills will likely be ity; one which may be a sidetrack for
Code, enacted in 1878, made a number considered in the Mouse Judiciary him, but which has been vitally hnpor-
of important changes designed to aid Committee during this Congress. H.R. tart to me. He has been the one to
consumer debtors and to inure their 1169, introduced by Congresswoman educate me, and especially my staff,
ability to obtain a fresh start if and MARILYN Lunn Bouauesa, and R-R. about the base and its problems. Logis-
when they fan into unintended finan- 1147, introduced by Judiciary Commit- tics is a complex and wry technical
cial difficulty. But those laudable tee Chairman Fun W. Roamo. Both field, but John has been excellent in
goals will be endangered If the con- are good bills that take different ap- making those details dome to life and
sumer credit industry continues to proaches to resolving the problems of have meaning for us and to fit the role
face the large numbers of unwarrant- our consumer bankruptcy system. I be. of McClellan into our framework of
ed straight bankruptcies with which lieve that H.R. 1500 represents a understanding the Air Force and its
they must now contend. In our zeal to middle ground between these bills, one operations. His liaison with me and my
protect the Consumer debtor, we must that would curb the abuses of our office has always shown evidence of
not forget the good-faith lender who bankruptcy system while firmly pro- extra effort and no lack of candor. We
since 1978 is increasingly confronted tecting the rights of consumer debtors will miss him in the Sacramento com-
with chapter 7 petitioners who need to a fresh start. munity.
not seek that chapter's protections. Finally, Mr. Speaker, HR. 1800 also Colonel Davidson graduated from
Unless we act quickly to encourage addresses the problems faced by farm- West Point in 1960 and got a master's
debtors who can pay their debts to do ers during grain elevator bankruptcy degree from MIT. His previous assign-
so, lenders will more and more be proceedings. In essence, the legislation ments have included missile programs
forced to limit the availability of unse- would attempt to remedy the prob- and the Space Shuttle programs, var-
cured credit, a fact that would most se- lems caused by the courts' inability to sous logistics and engineering posi-
verely hurt low-income borrowers who distribute crops quickly to farmers tions, and tours of duty in Germany,
may not have the collateral necessary who have merely stored their product Japan, and Thailand. Among his deco-
to secure a consumer loan. in a grain elevator without transfer- rations are the Bronze Star, the De-
During lengthy and informative ring title to the grain elevator opera- fense and USAF Meritorious Service
hearings held last year by the Judici- tor. Among other things, H.R. 1800 Medals, and the Air Force Commenda-
ary Committee's Subcommittee on would impose a 120-day time limit on a tion Medal.
Monopolies and Commercial Law, tes- bankruptcy judge to determine grain As commander of the Air Force
timony confirmed the urgent need for ownership and require those courts to Guidance and Metrology Center, he
reform of our bankruptcy system to accept valid warehouse receipts and will be responsible for calibration of
restore needed balance between debtor scale tickets as proof of ownership. Air Force test equipment, the target-
and creditor rights. In the years since The bill also permits holden of valid ing components of missile systems,
the new code was enacted, there have warehouse receipts to shame in the dis- and depot level maintenance of Air
Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP86B00338R000300350018-4
 Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP86B00338R000300350018-4
E 1388
JNGRESSIONAL RECORD - Extensruns of Remarks April 5, 1983
Force and Defense Department guid-
ance and meteorological equipment.
Being his own boss as a commander is
a promotion well deserved. It is a chal-
lenge I know he will carry out with
the same talent, thoroughness. and
dedication I have seen in him in Sacra-
mento.
My wife. Doris, and I wish John and
Kay Davidson and their sons, Joe and
Scott, the very best in their future.?
ACCOUNTABILITY AT THE
PENTAGON
HON. ROBERT GARCIA
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, April 5, 1983
? Mr. GARCIA. Mr. Speaker, voo-doo
economics and now 20th century Don
Quixote weapons systems. It seems the
President and the Pentagon are suffer-
ing from a credibility gap. Of course, it
is hard to determine whether the gap
initiates with the President or with
the Pentagon. At the Pentagon, where
the double-think of 1984 is, and has
been, standard operating procedure
for sometime, cutting costs can mean
adding 9.5 percent.
As the following article from Time
magazine so vividly illustrates, the
Pentagon's double think, double talk,
paranoia raises serious concerns rela-
tive to its ability to serve the best in-
terest of this country. Historically, the
Pentagon's slippery accounting out-
lined in the Time article continually
encourages the public to distrust the
space invaders war games they want to
play with our lives and our tax dollars.
We all want to save democracy from
communism, but accountability is a
web of many strands. There is no one
chain that will bind down those in
power. All must be strong. Together
they can preserve our liberty.
WHO SAYS NUMBERS NEVER LIE?
AT THE PENTAGON, CUTTING COSTS CAN MEAN
71DDING 9.5 PERCENT
Billion-dollar cost overruns? Massive prob-
lems in paying for weapons? When Penta-
gon Analyst Franklin Spinney (Time, March
7) raised these possibilities in explosive con-
gressional testimony, his superiors loftily re-
plied that these were merely "historical"
problems that Secretary of Defense Caspar
Weinberger's cost cutters have brought
under control. Moreover, they hinted that
they would shortly have proof in the form
of a new report on weapons costs. Spinney's
boss, David Chu, promised the Senate
Armed Services Committee "a pleasant sur-
prise." The Pentagon unveiled the docu-
ment last week, and the chief surprise
turned out to be how clumsy it had been in
practicing accounting sleight of hand.
The Selected Acquisition Report (S.A.R.)
proudly trumpeted a drop of $18.4 billion, or
4 percent, in the expected costs of 40 major
weapons systems between last Sept. 30 and
Dec. 31, the first such decline in a decade. It
resulted almost entirely from a lower esti-
mate of future inflation and reduction of
the numbers of weapons being bought
under some programs. Still, even without
these factors, expected costs rose only $7.5
billion, or 1.3 percent, the smallest increase
since 1975. That would be an impressive
achievement, if the figures could be be-
lieved.
But when reporters at a press briefing ex-
amined the data on individual programs, the
figures turned slippery. The Air Force, for
example, claimed a saving of $4.2 billion on
the purchase of air-launched cruise missiles
because of "quantity decrease." That
"saving" will disappear rapidly when the
service switches to a new and more expen-
sive type of missile. But its costs are secret.
The S.A.R. does show an expected cost of
$102.5 billion for 13 other new weapons sys-
tems. This is not included in the compari-
sons because a new program by definition
cannot rise in cost during the quarter in
which it begins. Fair enough if the systems
are really new, but might some of them be
old programs masquerading under new
names?
The figures listed for the Trident missile-
firing submarine raised suspicions. Accord-
ing to the S.A.R., the expected cost of the
Trident program dropped a stunning $11.3
billion last quarter because only eight sub-
marines, rather than 15, are now planned.
Astonished journalists asked if the Navy
had really slashed almost in half one of the
nation's most important nuclear-deterrent
programs. No, replied Deputy Assistant Sec-
retary of Defense Joseph Kammerer: the
seven missing submarines have been ren-
amed Trident Its and designated as a new
program.
In what way are they new? Rear Admiral
Frank Kelso, director of the Navy's Strate-
gic Submarine Division, was summoned to
explain. The Trident II will carry a more ad-
vanced missile, he said, but otherwise "it's
the same submarine." The expected cost of
building all 15 Tridents, far from declining
sharply, has risen $2.7 billion, to $31.1 bil-
lion, an increase of 9.5% in only three
months.
The new report obviously is not going to
cool the fiery debate about whether the
Pentagon is letting hardware costs run out
of control. The Reagon Defense Depart-
ment's main weapon in holding down these
costs is the "Carlucci initiatives," a set of 32
guidelines drawn up by Frank Carlucci, then
No. 2 to Weinberger, in 1981. They call for
more realistic cost estimates, more competi-
tion among contractors, stabler and more ef-
ficient production rates, and changes in the
way contracts are funded-principally heavi-
er initial financing and the signing of con-
tracts for several years rather than Just
one-in order to produce that stability and
efficiency.
There has been some resistance to these
reforms within the Pentagon. A vivid exam-
ple is a memo written last year by Assistant
Secretary of the Navy George Sawyer that
TIME has obtained. Sawyer urged the Navy
to put forth its "most optimistic estimate"
when drawing up its shipbuilding budget for
fiscal 1984. Among other things, he pro-
posed that the Navy "assume no (cost]
.growth beyond target" and eliminate all cal-
culations of how much changes in ship
specifications might increase the cost of
building vessels. Which of his recommena-
tions, if any, the Navy might have accepted
in preparing its request for $12.7 billion in
shipbuilding funds for fiscal 1984 is un-
known, but there are some clues that Navy
figures on the costs of building vessels may
be unrealistically low. The Navy assumes,
for example, that its next three Los Ange-
les-class nuclear-powered submarines will
take only 62 months to build, although the
previous three required and average of 97
months.
The Defense Department seems genuinely
committed to the Carlucci reforms, al-
though it concedes that it has not yet imple-
mented all of them. But some critics com-
plain that the initiatives were inadequate to
begin with. In a report written for the
Council on Economic Priorities, a liberal re-
search group in New York, Defense Special-
ist Gordon Adams contends that the initia-
tives fail to address some of the worst prob-
lems of weapons production, notably the
Pentagon's reliance on cost estimates from
contractors, estimates that it makes little
effort to check.
Adams argues that some of the Carlucci
reforms might make cost problems worse.
The initiatives aim at reducing the number
of reviews that top officers must conduct of
the decisions made by lower-ranking con-
tracting officials. The aim is to speed deci-
sions and cut paperwork. But the effect,
Adams says, might be to let contractors get
away with overruns that a high-level review
might spot.
Overall, the reforms, if fully implemented,
ought to help. But the Pentagon has a long
way to go in proving that it is really trying
to cut costs rather than merely playing the
kind of numbers games that it seemed to be
playing last week.-By George J. Church,
Reported by Bruce W. Nelan and Christo-
pher Redman/Washington.?
INTRODUCTION OF OLDER
AMERICANS MONTH RESOLU-
TION
HON. BILL McCOLLUM
OF FLORIDA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, April 5, 1983
? Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, since
1963 the President has proclaimed
May as the month to express this Na-
tion's gratitude to its senior Ameri-
cans. In keeping with this tradition,
Congress last year passed the Older
Americans Month resolution and so
joined in official and public recogni-
tion of the contributions our senior
citizens have made and continue to
make to this country.
I was proud to be the House sponsor
of Older Americans Month last year,
and I am proud to introduce this reso-
lution again today. It is important
that Congress join in this annual rec-
ognition of the contributions our
senior citizens have made. The United
States did not become the leader of
the free world overnight. It took the
lifetimes of today's senior Americans
to help build the foundation for the
standard of living and the democratic
institutions that make our Nation so
great.
Our older Americans represent a
wealth of knowledge and experience
that continues to contribute to this
Nation's growth and Congress would
be remiss not to express its recognition
of this wealth. I, therefore, ask for my
colleagues' support for this concurrent
resolution to declare May as Older
Americans Month.
A copy of the text of this proposed
resolution follows:
H. CON. RES. 318
Whereas older Americans have contribu-
ted many years of service to their families,
their communities, and the Nation;
Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP86B00338R000300350018-4
 Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP86B00338R000300350018-4
Iq
Next 12 Page(s) In Document Denied
STAT
Approved For Release 2008/10/24: CIA-RDP86B00338R000300350018-4