Secretary JOHNSON. We understand that. Most often their larger family takes care of the children. On the other hand, it would be incorrect to say that an officer couldn't serve. We have to be careful to allow them to serve their country while serving their family also. Senator BEN NELSON. I understand. We are trying to narrow it down to a combat zone, as opposed to service. Secretary ROCHE. Again, I would have to support the Secretary of the Navy. We would not want to say that a condition of officership or enlistmentship is affected by result of your majority. Support groups are maintained. I do not know of any cases where we would have a married couple where we would have a same flight over a same combat zone at the same time. Senator BEN NELSON. Do you have any screening system that would identify firefighters, police officers, medical personnel, and other first responders to determine whether they may be needed more in their local community because of the interest in hometown security and the homeland security effort? Secretary ROCHE. I love this one, sir. We, in fact, look for those specific specialties because we are in such short demand of them, and we are in such short demand because we are protecting so many bases here plus new bases overseas that, thanks to my colleague, Secretary White, we are renting close to 8,000 Army guardsmen to protect Air Force bases because we do not have the force. We have exhausted the Reserve Force to be able to have the force protection at the bases here and overseas at the same time. The specialties you brought up we are very much in need of and, yes, every now and then it's a shock to realize how many members of police departments and fire departments of small American towns are now on active duty, but they have been part of our Reserve and we sure needed it. Secretary WHITE. I would agree and say the same thing. If you look at Military Police (MP) units, most of them are in law enforcement in their private communities and we have activated just about every MP unit in the stretcher right now: both Guard and Reserve. The Reserve side of this is that in States where units have been activated that have specific capabilities that the State would like to use under State control for emergency purposes, the Adjutants General (AG) of the States have contact with the surrounding States and they swap out capabilities to cover when a unit is mobilized, but that doesn't get exactly what you asked. Senator BEN NELSON. Over the years, they have had relationships with employment groups. They work closely with employers and we have a good partnership. Local units look at the things we are talking about, but yet as the other two Secretaries have mentioned, we go after some of the people that are also needed in our great Nation at home. That's reminiscent changing the words to the song "Over There." So I would hope that you might take a look at that. I understand the importance of having the reservists and the Guard serve and be available and be deployed. Also, I think we all are aware of the importance of what effect it has over here when they go over there. My final question is: what systems do you have in place to make sure that your mobilization is fair? For example, that some individuals are not ordered to active duty for a second time unless abso lutely necessary or kept on active duty longer than they have been led to believe they would be on active duty, while others are not activated? I understand that there are different skills or different service requirements and therefore that will mitigate, but is there a system in place to apply fairness where possible? Secretary WHITE. We work this very carefully. In conjunction, on the Guard side with the State adjutant general obviously, there have been cases, and we have not had to mobilize anyone for more than a 1-year period. That's one of the reasons we are helping out the Air Force on-base security is they would have had to go into a second year of mobilization. But even having said that, 18 months into the global war on terrorism, we are so short of MPs that we have had to remobilize a small group of people who in fact were mobilized September 11, 2001 to September 11, 2002. After the current situation we have remobilized, but we worked very hard in the Guard and Reserve oversight process to make sure it's fair and the burden is kept as reasonable as we can. Secretary JOHNSON. We work on the burden, but you would be proud of the number of volunteers who come forward and want to serve. I would be hard pressed to give a percent, but I suspect it's a majority. Senator BEN NELSON. I wouldn't in any way want to suggest that you wouldn't have the loyalty of these men and women. It's a matter of certain hardships and/or equity that plays a role and you never want to under sell the importance of those who volunteer because their particular circumstances may permit them to do that. Secretary ROCHE. Same thing. As of today, we have over 1,700 volunteers. Easier for us depending on how the airlines are going. We mobilize by experiences, and I think quite frankly we mobilize for our needs in combat and expect that the Air National Guard and Reserves will try to handle this particular need of the individual. The Air National Guard has been in this business for a long time. They have been in Operation Northern Watch, Operation Southern Watch, and Operation Enduring Freedom. They have been part and parcel. You cannot tell that this is a guard craft or active craft unless you look at the tail number. They have a personnel system that gets what we need on the spot. We do not try to figure it out. It just works. Senator BEN NELSON. My time is up. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Senator WARNER. Senator Clinton. Senator CLINTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you and Senator Allard for raising the issues of discipline and behavior at the Academies. I appreciate the addressing of this very crucial issue that concerns many of us, not only those of us here on the dais, but people around the country. Chairman WARNER. Senator, you have spoken to me on several occasions about your concerns on this case. Senator CLINTON. I know in the great scheme of things where we have 200,000 of our men and women on the knife's edge going into harm's way, some may wonder why we are raising this, but indeed I think it demonstrates the strength of our system and the commitment to our overriding values. I am very proud that it has been raised and followed through in such a professional manner. I also want to express my appreciation to the Secretaries for their response to the question that the chairman asked toward the beginning of the hearing concerning General Shinseki's testimony before us a week or so ago. I understand completely that we are talking unpredictable, in the words of Secretary Rumsfeld, unknowable factors perhaps. But I think that the manner in which you responded to that question and referred to General Shinseki's personal service with a comparable set of circumstances was very welcomed. I, for one, appreciate it and I think that the range that we are attempting to understand Senator Levin has consistently questioned every witness about is an important one for us to continue to probe. I thank you for the way you have responded to that inquiry. I have a series of questions. I will submit them to the record. With respect to a question, Secretary Johnson, about Coast Guard deployments, I will be submitting to the record, committing to the record a letter that I'm sending to you with respect to more information about the call up of Coast Guard ships. [The information referred to follows:] March 6, 2003 The Honorable Hansford T. Johnson Acting Secretary United States Navy The Pentagon Washington, D.C. 20350 Dear Mr. Secretary: I am writing to seek further information about the call up of United States Coast Guard ships for deployment overseas and its impact on homeland security. In late January, the Pentagon announced that it was sending eight U.S. Coast Guard patrol boats and several port security units to the Persian Gulf. At a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing last week, Admiral Vernon Clark, Chief of Naval Operations informed me that Coast Guard cutters have been periodically deployed with Navy carrier groups to ensure their readiness to work with Navy ships in times of crisis. However, newspaper reports have indicated that this is the first deployment of Coast Guard patrol boats, which are used to patrol shallow water, since the Vietnam War. Indeed, one news report indicates that the Coast Guard has sent one-fourth of its patrol boat fleet from the mid-Atlantic and New England to the Gulf. As you know, in New York and other coastal states, we count on the Coast Guard to guard our ports against terrorist threats, and to provide assistance and leadership in responding to emergencies. During the recent barge explosion at a Staten Island fuel depot, the Coast Guard was the first responders on the scene. I would appreciate information on how many current Coast Guard cutters, including patrol boats, are currently deployed with the U.S. Navy. In addition, I would also appreciate responses to the following questions: What criteria did you use to determine that it was necessary to deploy the Coast Guard cutters and other Coast Guard vessels? How long do you expect the Coast Guard cutters to be deployed overseas? What missions did these cutters perform for the Coast Guard and what provisions will be made to replace their functions? I look forward to hearing from you soon. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely yours, Hillary Rodham Clinton Hillary Rodham Clinton Last week, Admiral Clark informed me that the Coast Guard cutters have been periodically deployed with Navy carrier groups to ensure their readiness to work with Navy ships in times of crisis. However, according to a Coast Guard spokesman, this is the first time that Coast Guard combatant ships have been deployed in support of a national contingency in 30 years. Indeed, one news report indicates that the Coast Guard has sent one fourth of its fleet to the Gulf. We, in New York and other coastal states, particularly along the east coast, count on the Coast Guard to be part of our homeland security to guard our ports against potential terrorist threats, as well as to provide assistance and leadership in responding to emergencies such as the recent barge explosion on Staten Island, where the Coast Guard was the first responder on the scene and helped to contain that accident. So I will be asking for additional information for how many additional Coast Guard cutters, including patrol boats, are currently deployed, the criteria that are used to determine deployment, how long we expect to see them deployed overseas, the missions that they are currently performing, and any provisions or planning with respect to replacing their necessary functions into the future. Obviously as we are looking at the multiple challenges that we are confronting, it's imperative that we think ahead, and I do not know that deploying Coast Guard cutters in times of heightened alert will always be a very good idea. It may be necessary now, but we may have to look for alternatives, so I will look forward to receiving those answers to those questions. Secretary Roche, I'm deeply interested in the work that is done at the Air Force research lab in Rome. Have you had a chance to visit the lab? I would love to, however, be there with you when and if you do? Secretary ROCHE. I'd be delighted. That's the sort of stuff if you know my past that turns me on. [Laughter.] Senator CLINTON. I wasn't inviting you to be turned on. I'm only kidding. I couldn't resist. [Laughter.] Secretary ROCHE. I'm an electronics and research man. Secretary ROCHE. It's a very interesting place, and it does great work. Senator CLINTON. It would be a great pleasure. Obviously, the work being done to develop cyber security technologies are one of the most important investments we need to be making with respect to our cyber infrastructure and the protective technology that is required, so I hope that we will have a chance to do that sooner instead of later. Finally, I would just echo the questions and concerns of my colleague, Senator Ben Nelson, about first responders. This is another one of those issues that has to be taken into account as we plan for the future. I know Secretary Rumsfeld has apparently expressed concern about having reliance that our forces have on reservists and guardsmen for the kind of deployment that we are now experiencing. Of course in many communities in our country, we are deeply dependent upon them, our firehouses, police stations, and emergency rooms. So I think we are going to have to consider how to better deal with demands on both ends of our security spectrum, both here at home and overseas, when we look at the Reserve components. Mr. Chairman, the Secretaries have been very helpful in responding to concerns many of us have about the questions that Senator Nelson raised, possibly married couples with children both serving in the same combat area. If there is any kind of formal statement or policy that has been adopted on this, we might want to get that just so that we all know if there are individual service policies, we need them; but if there is something that is being developed across the board, it would be very useful because many of us are receiving a lot of questions from not only constituents but from mayors, county executives, and others who have been facing these tremendous fiscal crises that they are currently undergoing |