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. ____________________