May 26, 1976
Page 15671
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS AUTHORIZATION ACT,1977
AMENDMENT NO. 1665
Mr. HATHAWAY. Mr. President, I call up my printed amendment No. 1665.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated.
The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Maine (Mr. HATHAWAY) proposes an amendment numbered 1665.
Mr. HATHAWAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
On page 31, line 8, after "Treaty.", insert the following: "In carrying out such policy the Secretary of Defense shall not enter into any agreement with any other member or members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization for the acquisition of equipment manufactured outside the United States, in exchange for, or in connection with, any agreement by such member or members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to acquire other equipment manufactured in the United States unless full details of the nature and substance of such proposed agreement has been reported to the Congress at least 80 days prior to entering into such proposed agreement.".
On page 31, line 16, strike out the period and insert in lieu thereof a comma and the following: "except that the Secretary may not determine that the acquisition of equipment manufactured in the United States is inconsistent with the public interest if such equipment manufactured in the United States meets the equipment procurement objectives at an equal or lower cost than does such equipment manufactured outside the United States, and in no event may the Secretary, for purposes of this subsection, waive the provisions of section 2304 of title 10, United States Code.".
Mr. HATHAWAY. Mr. President, I sent to the desk an unprinted amendment in the nature of a substitute for No. 1665.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Maine (Mr. HATHAWAY) on behalf of himself and Mr. MUSKIE, Mr DURKIN, and Mr. MCINTYRE, proposes a substitute for Amendment No. 1665.
Mr. HATHAWAY. Mr. President, I askunanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
On page 31, after the period in line 8. insert the following:
"In any case in which equipment authorized to be procured under title I of this act is utilized for the purpose of carrying out the foregoing policy, the Secretary of Defense shall report to Congress the full details of the nature and substance of any and all agreements entered into by the United States with any other member or members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization providing for the acquisition of equipment manufactured outside the United States in exchange for, or as a part of, any other agreement by such member or members to acquire equipment manufactured in the United States. Such report shall be made by the Secretary within 30 days of the date of enactment of this Act."
Mr. HATHAWAY. Mr. President, I originally offered that amendment—
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair would inquire, is this the amendment to which 2 hours was assigned to the Senator?
Mr. HATHAWAY. I do not believe there is any time agreement entered into.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. One Hathaway amendment had a 2-hour assignment. Is this the one?
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, may I interject?
Mr. HATHAWAY. Certainly.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. There was an agreement on one amendment by Mr. HATHAWAY, the time being limited to 2 hours, equally divided.
This is that amendment, I assume?
I understand that the Senator will not require near that much time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair thanks the Senator from West Virginia.
The Senator from Maine.
Mr. HATHAWAY. Mr. President, I now offer this substitute, because of a concern which has arisen regarding the Army's recently announced tentative decision to purchase an armor machine gun, the Mag 58 from a Belgian manufacturer in preference to the domestically produced machine gun, the M-60E2, manufactured in Saco, Maine. There have been some suggestions in the press that the Army decision to consider the Belgian weapon resulted from an agreement between Secretary Schlesinger and the Belgian Defense Minister Van Boynants as part of an exchange, or "package deal" for the Belgian purchase of the F-16 fighter aircraft.
In offering this amendment I do not ask my colleagues to make any determination one way or the other regarding this matter. Rather, my amendment would require that the Secretary disclose to the Congress the full details of the nature and substance of any sort of "quid pro quo" agreement with NATO nations in connection with any equipment authorized for procurement in this bill.
In this way, there will be a clearly expressed congressional policy that it wants to be informed in such matters and thereby be better able to carry out its duty to vote with full knowledge on any authorizations and appropriations legislation which comes before it.
Further, there have also been suggestions from time to time that the procurement of the Belgian machine gun would advance the cause of standardization. I am concerned about that charge since my understanding of standardization and of this procurement suggest to me that the procurement has no direct bearing on standardization. I would like to inquire of the authors of the standardization provision and of the chairman of this committee whether from their understanding of the armor machine gun procurement and the standardization principle they see any direct connection between this procurement and the policy standardization of NATO.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, will my colleague yield to me?
Mr. HATHAWAY. I will certainly yield to my colleague from Maine.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Jim Case of the staff be granted privilege of the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. CULVER. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. HATHAWAY. I am happy to yield to the Senator.
Mr. CULVER. As the Senator from Maine is aware, a recent GAO report on the Army's selection of the Belgian gun concluded, and I quote:
The contribution either the Mag 58 or the M-60E2 would make to NATO standardization of equipment appears marginal.
I do believe however that selection of the Mag 58 would make a substantial indirect contribution to the longer term prospects for standardization by demonstrating U.S. willingness to move forward toward the development of a genuine "two-way street" on intra-NATO procurement. In my view expanded U.S. procurement of European weapon systems is an essential foundation of meaningful standardization in the long run. Thus while not substantially contributing to standardization of armaments within NATO the Army's decision to go for the Mag 58 represents an important commitment to a fundamental prerequisite of standardization.
Mr. MUSKIE. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. HATHAWAY. I am happy to yield to my colleague.
Mr. MUSKIE. I thank my good friend from Iowa for his statement. I appreciate his cooperation in clarifying the remaining uncertainties in this dispute.
If I understand the Senator correctly, purchase of the Belgian Mag 58 would, at most, contribute indirectly by showing a willingness to move in the direction of standardization of armaments among NATO nations.
Is it correct to say that these new provisions in section 802(a) (2) which make explicit the authority to waive the Buy America Act would not apply to this procurement?
Mr. CULVER. Let me say to the Senator from Maine that it is not my intention that this section apply retrospectively to the particular issue of the machine gun decision, since that decision predated this amendment, and since, of course, this amendment is not yet law. This provision does not, in my view diminish the existing authority of the Secretary of Defense to waive the Buy America Act in the public interest.
But, neither the desirability of standardization, nor its legitimacy as grounds for waiving the Buy America Act is at issue here. It is my understanding that the Army's principal consideration in choosing the Mag 58 over the M-60E2 was reliability and not standardization.
Mr. MUSKIE. I thank the Senator.
I ask the distinguished Senator from Georgia, who is also actively interested in this policy of the bill, if he would agree with the distinguished Senator from Iowa that it does not apply retroactively to the procurement of the machine gun which is in question?
Mr. NUNN. The Senator from Georgia does agree with the Senator from Iowa that this particular section is not intended to apply retroactively in terms of law.
Mr. MUSKIE. I thank my good friends from Georgia and Iowa and my colleague from Maine for introducing this amendment. I appreciate their support and assistance in this matter.
I do have remaining concerns, however, about the Army's procurement decision here which relates not to the standardization issue, but to the question of whether the Secretary of Defense may have entered an agreement with the Belgian Defense Minister in June of 1975 under which the United States would agree to purchase the Belgian manufactured Mag 58 as part of a tradeoff for the Belgian agreement to purchase the F-16. Newspaper accounts reporting such an agreement back in June of 1975 first drew my attention to this matter and my suspicions about such a tradeoff have never been completely put to rest. The reporting requirement in Senator HATHAWAY's amendment, together with the understanding and assurances we have gained from the discussion here today, help alleviate many remaining concerns and I hope that we can proceed with affirmative action to require the reporting of any such agreements so that American workers and American industry will know precisely what agreements the Secretary of Defense has negotiated and be able to publicly evaluate the fairness and propriety of the arrangements. I hope that my colleagues from the committee will recognize the importance of these reporting requirements to American industry and American workers and will support the provision.
Mr. HATHAWAY. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Maine and the distinguished Senators from Iowa and Georgia. I simply wish to address the chairman of the committee and ask him if this colloquy is consistent with his understanding of the situation?
Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, I have understood this matter now principally from the viewpoint of the committee. The Senator from Georgia and the Senator from Iowa have gone into this matter thoroughly and have spoken for the committee. From my understanding of their representations here, it does comply with the situation, yes.
Mr. HATHAWAY. I thank the chairman very much.
Mr. STENNIS. That is the way I understand it.
Mr. HATHAWAY. Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of my time.
Mr. NUNN. Mr. President, may I ask one question? I understood there is a pending amendment at the desk.
Mr. HATHAWAY. The Senator is correct.
Mr. NUNN. Is the Senator pursuing his amendment that would require notice by the Secretary of Defense?
Mr. HATHAWAY. The Senator is pursuing the substitute for the original amendment, which was a printed amendment No. 1665. The substitute is an unprinted amendment, a copy of which I believe the Senator has. That is what the Senator is pursuing.
Mr. NUNN. The Senator from Georgia does have a copy of that amendment. It might be helpful, though, as in this colloquy there has been no reference made to the amendment, if the Senator would give us a brief explanation of the amendment itself. The colloquy relating to the provisions in the bill did not relate to this amendment. I think it might be helpful to have a brief explanation of the amendment.
Mr. HATHAWAY. As far as any equipment authorized to be procured under the terms of this bill, if the Secretary enters into any agreements with members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization he is required to report such agreements to the Senate within 30 days, or within 30 days of the enactment of this law if he has entered into any in the past.
Mr. NUNN. So this is really a reporting amendment. It does not in any way preclude the Secretary of Defense from making that kind of an agreement?
Mr. HATHAWAY. It in no way precludes the Secretary.
Mr. NUNN. It is to make sure that Congress is informed if there is any kind of an agreement by the Secretary of Defense to purchase a NATO-produced weapon in exchange for NATO purchasing U.S. equipment.
Mr. HATHAWAY. The Senator is correct.
Mr. NUNN. I thank the Senator.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment was agreed to.