Date: 1987-06-02
Speaker: DONALD E. LUKENS (republican)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I thank the gentleman for yielding this time to me. First of all. I think this is a matter of policy. and I am not sure the question regarding policy has been answered by anyone. However. I would like to draw the attention of the Members to the Presidents statement on May 29 at 1:46 p.m. when he said: Mark this point well. The use of vital sea lanes in the Persian Gulf with the Arab goal will not be dictated by the Iranians. These lanes will not be allowed to come under the control of the Soviet Union. It is very obvious that the thrust of our policy. although we may not have enunciated a strategyand I am not sure we have a strategyis not clear. Certainly the Foreign Affairs Committee had a lengthy debate this morning. and in that debate no one came up with an alternative strategy to one that we may have or may not have in place. The real question is not the policy. We know the policy is to restrict and minimize the presence of the Soviets in that area. First of all. the Foreign Affairs Committee. after lengthy debate. saw fit to table this resolution. I really wish that we were on the floor today debating it because I think we need additional reflection and additional time to determine exactly what this does. if we pass this resolution. to the Congress. No. 2. if we pass this. does this put. the fingerprints and the handprints of the Congress on that policy? I think. whether we like it or not. those who may oppose the policy or oppose the decision which the administration is going to come to. which is their constitutional obligation and right to do. will ask. once they come to that strategy. if we pass this resolution. are now part of it? Does that mean that this body is coresponsible for any future debts. any future misjudgments. or any future errors that may occur in that goal? I appreciate the thoughts and the voices expressed here today regarding real fear. No one knows what can happen in that crazy part of the world. Right now it is temporarily insane. We know that. We have a hot war there. But I do not think the Congress knows exactly what it is doing today. We want more information. But is this the proper method by which to obtain that information? Is this the only way we can do it? I would much prefer to see conferences by the leadership of this House. both the majority and the minority. with the executive branch and let that judgment rest in their minds. because we cannot have 535 Secretaries of Defense any more than we can have 535 Secretaries of State. This is hasty. We are basing this move on a lack of solid information. If there is an error. Mr. Speaker. we are compounding that error. The Constitution says we are divided legislatively and executively. I am concerned about whether or not we belong in the area of policy formulation. Absolutely we should be sharing information. This is not an effort to support this administration on my part. even though I am a strong supporter of the administration in an election year and basically remain a strong supporter of the administration. I supported the Johnson administration in the tough 1968 years. and I think I was right then to support the President of the United States. Mr. Speaker. once again we find Congress attempting to impose its will and micromanage the executive branchs conduct of our foreign policy and national defense. I submit that the greatest threat to the lives of American service men and women in the Middle East is not the administrations efforts to keep the sea lanes in the Persian Gulf open nor the threat of Iranian or Iraqi missiles. The greater threat to the lives of American service men and women could be the U.S. Congress and this particular piece of legislation. It is bad enough that Congress had continuously attempted to second guess President Reagan in the conduct of foreign policy and arms negotiations. We are now playing Secretary of Defense. Five hundred and thirtyfive Secretaries of Defense. This is not good security practice. This resolution requires a report in appropriate classified or unclassified form. Why bother? As soon as the report is submitted. some Members of Congress will be running for the makeup and klieg lights for 30second shot on the national news. Some Members couldnt keep it a secret that we were going to bomb Libya after a secret White House briefing. how do you expect 535 Members of Congress to keep this report secret. What do the 535 Secretaries of Defense want in this report? A plan which discusses in detail the security needs of our forces. in conjunction with the forces of our friends and allies in the Persian Gulf region including: First. An assessment of the threats in the areaI guess this is so our enemies in the area will be able to determine what we know or dont know about them. Second. The rules of engagementso our enemies will know how we will react in advance of a situation. Third. And any cooperative arrangements enteredthis so that our enemies will know what each of our allies will do in advance. This report will endanger every American service man and womari as well as the troops of our allies in this area. Handing over this report to the Congress 535 Secretaries of Defense will be like turning over a football teams playbook to its opponents only this is not a game of football. this is armed conflict. I do not believe a body which has shown itself incapable of keeping secrets in the past should be entrusted with this life threatening information. I would be satisfied with. and trust the leadership on both sides of the aisle in the House and the Senate. to confer with the President and Secretary of Defense on this matter. The leadership would then report back to the Congress. This would preserve the proper balance of power between the executive and legislative branches but most importantly would not open up our plan of operation to worldwide scrutiny.