Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
366552190
label
Tower, John, 1989
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
366552190
contentType
document
title
Tower, John, 1989
citationUrl
identifierLocal
85039-009
collections
Brent Scowcroft Papers
Brent Scowcroft Administrative Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
366552190
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
64eb8abf949fa356
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
2009-0275-S
2009-0275-S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Scowcroft, Brent, Collection
Series:
Administrative Files
Subseries:
OA/ID Number:
85039
Folder ID Number:
85039-009
Folder Title:
Tower, John, 1989
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
V
0
O
O
O
2/15/89
THE white HOUSE
washington
Tower
1. Budget cuts
Z , Intelligence prog cuts
3, Wolfaristz
4. NSR's
COLONEL ZANE E. FINKELSTEIN
245 GLENDALE street
tower
CARLISLE, PENNSYLVANIA 17013
24 February 1989
FEB 28 1989
LTG. Brent Scowcroft
Assistant to the President for
National Security Affairs
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20500
Dear General:
It is with the utmost reluctance that I not only interrupt
your day, but also involve myself in matters way above my
pay grade. I do so with full knowledge both of what
decision-makers rightly think of officious intermeddlers
and what risk is involved. Nonetheless, I feel that I owe
General George Brown at least this much and the Country a
lot more.
General Brown, just prior to his death, was visibly
distraught with Secretary Rumsfield and the attack on
military professionals he represented. Every issue was
politicalized - nothing was professional or objective.
General Brown suggested that the kind of loyalty Mr.
Rumsfield demanded approached the infamous "Hitler Oath"
required of the German Officer Corps. General Brown
stated that when Mr. Rumsfield said to Secretary
Weinberger, "I hope you can control these people (The
JCS), I never could," he made the CJCS' job almost
impossible.
I urge that you or the President discuss this issue with
the then JCS (Gen Meyer? Adm. Halladay? Gen. Jones?
Broughes?) prior to replacing Senator Tower with him if,
as the Press indicates, the President is considering.
I wish you and those you serve the very best.
Very respectfully,
Zau
941 PATA Y
25USA
24FEB
1989
LTG. Brent Scowcroft
Assistant to the President for
National Security Affairs
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20500
COLONEL ZANE E.
245 GLENDALE STREET
CARLISLE, PENNSYLVANIA 17013
CENTER FOR PEACE AND FREEDOM
214 Massachusetts Avenue NE, Suite 360, Washington, D.C. 20002
FEE 14 lew
February 13, 1989
Dear General Scowcroft,
Just wanted to let you know
that we continue to support John
Tower for Secretary of Defense.
Best regards,
John Kwapisz Karapisz
John Kwapisz
Executive Director
G
Brait
& could not
UNIVERSITY OF
Fulbright Institute of International Relations
ARKANSAS wellow
722 Fayetteville, West Maple Arkansas this 72701 one. the
(501) 575-2006 Peen don t oright
Senior WILLIAM Fellow E. to JACKSON, save JR. his capital
asena
February 6, 1989
RE: The Nomination of John Tower
to be Secretary of Defense
"What's a Confirmation Between Friends?"
by
William E. Jackson, Jr.
Senior Fellow
Fulbright Institute
of
International Relations
@ 1989
Phones:
(501) 575-2006
(501) 442-5434
Just as there must be no "sacred cows" in the defense
budget, there must be no golden passports or "sacred
nominees" to the highest appointive offices in the land. It
is imperative that a confirmation hearing not be -- or
perceived to be -- an "old boy" rite of passage.
Some philosophers have asserted that democracy
presupposes the perfectibility of man. But the Founding
Fathers had a different view: "If men were angels" said the
50th Federalist, "no government would be necessary." One
might amend that to read: if men were angels, there would be
no need for a Senate check on the nominees of Presidents.
As Gouverneur Morris, one of the architects of the
Constitution's "advice and consent" clause put it in 1787:
"As the President was to nominate, there would be
responsibility, and as the Senate was to concur, there would
be security."
The Constitution Between Friends
There is a great temptation, however, to ask in a
"honeymoon" period with a new President: "What's the
Constitution between friends?" This question from an
anecdote about President Grover Cleveland provides in
capsule form the recurring conflict between constitutional
principles and responsibilities, such as approving or
disapproving presidential nominees, and short-run political
objectives, such as rushing to help a new President get his
team aboard.
Every Senator has a duty not just to make a personal
2
judgment about presidential nominees but he or she also has
a responsibility to make an institutional judgment. So it
is not desirable or acceptable to leave an impression with
the public that sitting Senators are saying to former
Senators nominated to Cabinet office: "What's a nomination
between friends?"
Constitutional restrictions are erected to keep the
actions of the executive and legislative branches within
certain boundaries -- not only of legality but of propriety
as well, when it comes to nominations to high office. The
lifestyle of a nominee becomes relevant to confirmation if,
and only if, there is a pattern of behavior or a set of
habits that cast doubt on his or her ability to carry out
the responsibilities of the job.
Responsibilities of the Secretary of Defense
The Secretary of Defense together with the Secretary of
State, the National Security Advisor, the CIA Director, and
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have the heaviest responsibility
for advising the President on matters relating to the
national security of the United States. In contrast to the
Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense commands an
organization so thoroughly interwoven into the fabric of
American social, political, and economic life that his
recommendations regarding national security carry influence
on not only the foreign environment but the domestic one as
well.
The Secretary of Defense is responsible for preparing
3
the annual report to Congress on the biennial fiscal year
budget and the five-year projection of defense programs. He
is charged with overseeing a $300 billion-plus budget with
over 3 million military and civilian personnel under his
direct jurisdiction -- not to mention the nuclear and
conventional arsenals of the Army, Navy, Air Force and
Marines. The Secretary of Defense alone shares with the
President, in the national military command authority, the
"keys" for the initiation of the use of nuclear weapons.
The Secretary of Defense is privy to the most sensitive
secrets of the government, including intelligence sources
and methods, and has under his direction and control the
National Security Agency (NSA) and the National
Reconnaissance Office (NRO). Indeed, the Department of
Defense is the largest executive agency in the intelligence
business, consuming some three-quarters of the federal
intelligence budget.
To briefly list these awesome responsibilities is
sufficient reminder that the Senate, in voting on a
Secretary of Defense nominee, is not just passing on another
Cabinet officer (or picking an interesting politician and
defense intellectual with whom to have lunch). Knowledge of
the issues and the weapons may not be as important as
management skills. Certainly they are not as important as
character, judgment, credibility, and discretion.
4
Detachment in the Job
Secretaries of Defense since 1961 -- McNamara,
Clifford, Laird, Schlesinger, Rumsfeld, Brown, Weinberger,
Carlucci -- all have brought different skills and
experiences to the job. There is one notable common thread
in their backgrounds: every single one of them represented a
greater detachment from the "defense culture" or a more
independent perspective than the current nominee.
Former Senator Tower has critically referred to the
"culture of the building" (Pentagon) and stated that it has
to be changed. The Senate should beware of conversions on
the confirmation road to Damascus. His entire record over
three decades indicates that he is part of the problem, and
not the solution. I refer to his membership on the SASC
(Senate Armed Services Committee), representing one of the
largest defense contractor constituencies (Texas). It is
not too much of an exaggeration to say he seldom, if ever,
met a weapon system he didn't like. While chairman of the
committee, he stonewalled in 1983-1984, the attempt to
reorganize the Pentagon that later led to the Goldwater-
Nichols legislation; he was identified with parochial
service interests, especially the NAVY. It is a joke to
describe him as a champion of weapon procurement reform in
those years. In 1985-1986, he chaired our strategic arms
delegation (START) in Geneva - - dealing with the "Trinity"
from "air and land and sea" (to borrow from that great
hymn, "Eternal Father, strong to Save"); and then turned
5
around in 1986-1988 to advise defense contractors on the
possible impact of arms control agreements on their
business!
Misleading Testimony
It has been well documented that Tower lobbied -- for
fees in the range of $1 million -- for several major defense
contractors: LTV Aerospace; Martin Marietta; Rockwell
International; Textron. Several times during the hearing,
however, he denied advocating defense programs before the
Executive Branch and even though he had inquired about
the status of certain weapon systems in conversations with
well-placed government officials -- he insisted to Senator
Warner (the ranking Republican) that he had not "solicited"
sensitive classified information. He was not a Senator, nor
was he an arms control negotiator, but a private consultant
when he sought information. We have to be realistic about
this "realist." "
Within weeks after leaving as START chairman, in 1986
Tower had signed on with Rockwell International; and Martin
Marietta later employed him in 1987. Tower told the Armed
Services Committee that he or his staff analyzed for the
"senior management" of Martin Marietta the implications of
START talks for "future product development" (such as SDI,
MX, and Midgetman). For Rockwell, he provided "senior
management" with his views on the future of the B-1
strategic bomber, and his staff analyzed the implications of
arms negotiation on the future of SDI and Midgetman.
6
While insisting to the Armed Services Committee that "I
gave value" to corporate clients, Tower denied to Senator
Levin giving "enlightened" advice on probable outcomes of
the arms control negotiations -- arguing that he was
providing no more than "academic speculation" and what his
clients could have read in the newspapers!
The chairman, Senator Nunn, asked: "Would it be
appropriate to advise that a system was about to be
eliminated in START?" This question drew attention to the
fact that a ban on all mobile ICBMs became part of the
American position at START, in November 1985, when Tower
chaired the delegation; indeed, he personally presented that
part of the negotiating package to Victor Karpov, his Soviet
counterpart. Such a ban would have aborted not only new
Soviet mobile ICBMs but the American multiple-warhead MX and
the single-warhead Midgetman.
Martin Marietta in the early 1980s had a principal role
in the development of the MX ICBM; it has a continuing role
in the production of components of "Peackeeper" (MX).
Rockwell International -- which was the prime contractor for
the B-1 -- has a development contract for the "rail
garrison" MX. Rockwell provided the guidance system for the
Minuteman III ICBM; and was one of three contractors for the
Poseidon SLBM. Both Martin Marietta and Rockwell are
contractors working on ballistic missile defense (SDI)
programs.
To sum up, John Tower as the immediate past head of the
7
START delegation -- where he had bargained with the Russians
over the strategic "triad" -- was in a unique position to
provide enlightened, time-sensitive, advice to his corporate
clients on highly secret negotiations involving the nation's
strategic arsenal. Major cuts in the overall aggregate of
bombers and missiles were being discussed in Geneva, in
addition to a ban on mobile ICBMs. Did he advise as to
whether the no-mobiles proposal was just a negotiating ploy;
or whether the U.S. had a fall-back position to allow one
exception to the ban -- permitting a single-warhead mobile
ICBM (Midgetman)? What actions did the contractors take, in
regard to trying to change the negotiating position of this
country back in Washington, or in regard to adjusting their
future plans to focus on weapon systems likely to survive
the cut in Geneva?
It defies credibility to argue that former Senator
Tower did not provide enlightened advice bearing upon
management decisions.
Conclusion
Senators Nunn and Warner have stated that nominees to
the Defense Department must be of unquestionable integrity.
Public confidence in them is absolutely essential: "It is
imperative that nominees should have and should be seen to
have the public interest as their only goal. Actions which
call into question this commitment are unacceptable."
John Tower is not anywhere near the best man for the
job of Secretary of Defense at this time in our history.
8
"Nixon went to China" as an answer to the concerns raised is
not persuasive. A Texan rediscovers oil might be a better
analogy! This in a time of budget crunch and contracting
scandals.
Senator stuart Symington warned us years ago that
national security lies not just in a strong defense, but
also in a sound dollar and in the confidence of the American
people. I do not see the need for someone associated with a
"fire hose" approach to the defense budget and someone who
is mired in the "revolving door" culture. I fail to see how
he will inspire reform confidence or why he will give due
consideration to fiscal constraints on the national budget.
In the final analysis, the Senate will vote as a body
of 100 on the Tower nomination. What example is being
rewarded if he is confirmed? To be an interesting character
is not sufficient reason to be Secretary of Defense.
(William E. Jackson, Jr., served as Executive Director
of the U.S. General Advisory Committee on Arms Control 1978-
80, and as a legislative assistant in the U.S. Senate, 1974-
77. This article is adapted from his testimony on the
nomination of John Tower to be Secretary of Defense before
the Senate Armed Services Committee, Washington, D.C.,
January 31, 1989.)
FROM
EVENT
DATE
1. Western Regional
Meet w/20 CEOs during
Wed, Mar 15
Council (Bruce G.
Council's Washington Forum
(morning)
Willison, COB)
(previously met with Clark
& Carlucci)
Yes
No
Prefer
Western Regional Council
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
January 30, 1989
Bruce G. Willison
Chairman of the Board
Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer
General Brent Scowcroft
First Interstate Bank of Oregon
Assistant to the President for
Gordon Parker
Vice Chairman of the Board
National Security Affairs
Chairman, President and
Room G-WW
Chief Executive Officer
The White House
Newmont Mining Corporation
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
A. Gary Ames
President-Operations
Washington, D.C. 20500
us WEST Communications
Cordell W. Hull
Executive Vice President
and Director
Dear General Scowcroft:
Bechtel Group, Inc.
Robert J. O'Connor
As Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Western
Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer
Regional Council, I invite you to meet with twenty Chief
Idaho Power Company
Executive Officers during the Council's Washington Forum
Thomas H. O'Leary
on the morning of Wednesday, March 15, 1989.
Vice Chairman of the Board
Burlington Northern, Inc.
James W. Poirot
The Western Regional Council is a coalition of the chief
Chairman of the Board
executive officers of fifty corporations with significant
CH2M Hill
business activities in the West, including financial,
William D. Ruckelshaus
Chairman and
engineering, transportation, utility, forest products,
Chief Executive Officer
energy, manufacturing, mining and other enterprises.
Browning-Ferris Industries
Enclosed is a list of WRC member companies.
Austin W. Stedham
President and
Chief Executive Officer
During the two and one-half day WRC Washington Forum, we
Sierra Pacific Power Company
traditionally meet with Cabinet Secretaries, the Western
George H. Weyerhaeuser
President and
Coalition of Senators, Representatives and other
Chief Executive Officer
high-level federal government officials. We previously
Weyerhaeuser Company
met with William Clark when he served as National Security
Advisor to the President. On March 11, 1987, we met with
Frank Carlucci in the Roosevelt Room at the White House.
While the focus of our organization is mostly on domestic
policy issues, our CEO members are currently very
interested in and concerned about foreign policy issues
and their implications. They are also often asked their
individual views on such issues at meetings later in the
Forum with western Senators and Representatives. We would
be delighted to meet with you briefly to hear your views.
We look forward to hearing from you. Should you have any
questions, please contact Don Leonard at 801-363-7997.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Rynce GWillison
Bruce G. Willison
Chairman of the Board
:ck118L8
P.O. Box 8144, Salt Lake City, Utah 84108
Telephone (801) 363-7997
Western Regional Council
MEMBER COMPANIES
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
W. Paul Schmechel
Chairman of the Board
Chairman and
AMAX Inc.
Chief Executive Officer
Agri Beef Company
The Montana Power Company
American Continental Corporation
Thomas H. O'Leary
Vice Chairman of the Board
American Express Company
Vice Chairman of the Board
American Water Development, Inc.
Burlington Northern, Inc.
Amoco Production Company
A. Gary Ames
President-Public Policy
Apache Corporation
us WEST Communications
ARCO Coal Company
Harry M. Conger
Arthur Andersen & Co.
Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer
ASARCO Incorporated
Homestake Mining Company
Atlas Corporation
Cordell W. Hull
B. P. Minerals, Inc.
Executive Vice President
and Director
Bechtel Group, Inc.
Bechtel Group, Inc.
Bonneville Pacific Corporation
Robert J. O'Connor
Browning-Ferris Industries
Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer
Burlington Northern, Inc.
Idaho Power Company
CH2M Hill
Gordon R. Parker
Chevron Corporation
Chairman, President and
Chief Executive Officer
Colorado Interstate Gas Company
Newmont Mining Corporation
Colorado National Bankshares, Inc.
James W. Poirot
Entech, Inc.
Chairman of the Board
CH2M Hill
First Interstate Bank of Oregon, N.A.
Geneva Steel
Maurice Strong
Chairman and President
Hecla Mining Company
American Water Development, Inc.
Homestake Mining Company
Austin W. Stedham
President and
Idaho Power Company
Chief Executive Officer
IRECO Incorporated
Sierra Pacific Power Company
Meadows Resources, Inc.
Bruce G. Willison
MDU Resources
Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer
Montana Power Company, The
First Interstate Bank of Oregon
Morrison Knudsen Company, Inc.
NERCO, Inc.
Nevada Power Company
Newmont Mining Corporation
NUEXCO International Corporation
Pacific Power and Light Company
Peabody Holding Company, Inc.
Peat Marwick Main & Co.
Phelps Dodge Corporation
Public Service Company of Colorado
Public Service Company of New Mexico
Sierra Pacific Power Company
Southwest Gas Corporation
Union Pacific Resources Company
U S WEST Communications
Utah Power and Light Company
Valley National Corporation
Washington Water Power Company
Weyerhaeuser Company
1W
1/89
P.O. Box 8144, Salt Lake City, Utah 84108 Telephone (801) 363-7997