Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 21, 2016
Document Release Date: 
October 24, 2008
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
April 5, 1983
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP86B00338R000300350018-4.pdf639.85 KB
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