Congressional Record: August 2, 2001 (Senate)
Page S8695


               DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE COUNTERDRUG SUPPORT

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, I rise to express my deep concern
about the apparent lack of emphasis by the Department of Defense on the
counterdrug mission. This has been a year of continual discussion of
increased DoD funding for various military missions. However, all the
indications I am hearing point to a decreased DoD interest in this
mission, as well as decreased funding levels. I believe this would be a
poor policy decision, and a poor indication of the nation's priorities.
  In May 2001 testimony, before the Senate Caucus on International
Narcotics Control, on which I served as Chairman, the heads of the Drug
Enforcement Administration, the U.S. Customs Service, and the U.S.
Coast Guard all testified that DoD reductions would be detrimental to
their agencies' counterdrug efforts. The Office of National Drug
Control Policy summarized that (quote) DoD's command and control system
provides the communications connectivity and information system
backbone . . . while the military services detection and monitoring
assets provide a much need intelligence cueing capability (end quote).
  The Commandant of the Coast Guard testified at length about DoD
counterdrug support, stating (quote) [w]e would go downhill very
quickly (end quote) without DoD contributions. The Commandant also
stated that 43 percent of Coast Guard seizures last year were from U.S.
Navy vessels, using onboard Coast Guard law enforcement detachments.
The Coast Guard concluded that (quote) [s]hould there be any radical
reduction of the assets provided through the Department of Defense . .
. it would peril the potential for all the other agencies to make their
contributions as productive . . . mainly because of the synergy that is
generated by the enormous capability that the 800-pound gorilla brings
to the table . . . They are very, very good at what they do. They are
the best in the world . . . and when they share those capabilities . .
. in terms of intelligence fusion and command and control, we do much
better than we would ever otherwise have a chance to do (end quote). I
understand that an internal review of DoD's drug role contemplated
severe reductions as a working assumption. After years of decline in
DoD's role in this area, I believe this sends the wrong signal and
flies in the face of DoD's statutory authority.
  I have consistently supported an integrated national counterdrug
strategy. If we reduce the DoD role, we risk lessening the
effectiveness of other agencies as well. We need to make these
decisions carefully, and with full Congressional involvement. I urge
the Department of Defense to keep in mind DoD's important role in, and
necessary contribution to, a serious national drug control strategy.

                          ____________________