NEWSHOUR LINKS:
February 4, 1997:
Senators Chuck Robb (D-VA) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME)
discuss the Senate Armed Services hearing into sexual misconduct in the Army.
December 26, 1996:
Betty Ann Bowser reports on
the
ongoing investigation and talks to a group of female soldiers.
November 8, 1996:
Army
Secretary, Togo West, discusses the investigations of three U.S. Army officers accused of raping or sexually
harassing female recruits in Aberdeen, Md.
April 4, 1996:
A NewsHour discussion of Women in the Military.
Return to @the Capitol.
General information, schedules and past Freshmen Forums.
Scrutinize the work of several major Congressional committees in online forums with the chairs and ranking members.
Follow the first year in Congress of
Freshmen Reps. Kay Granger (R-TX)
and Jay Johnson (D-WI)
|
In the wake of last November's allegations of sexual misconduct at the Army's Aberdeen, MD training facility, the Senate Committee on Armed Services is reviewing military policies toward sexual harassment. A February 4 hearing on the subject took place amid reports that a member of the high-level Army panel conducting a special investigation of sexual harassment was himself involved in improper behavior toward a subordinate.
 Thirteen percent of the U.S. military are women. There is virtually universal agreement that women are a key part of the U.S. fighting force, and training and work are more integrated than ever before. Although there are signs that this integration is becoming smoother as time passes, some statistics are still disturbing. A 1995 Department of Defense survey on sexual harassment, the most comprehensive ever undertaken, found that 55 percent of women and 14 percent of men in the military reported receiving "uninvited or unwanted sexual attention" at work.
Though the military seems to take an aggressive stance against sexual harassment, the flood of calls to a special Army hotline set up after disclosure of the Aberdeen allegations suggests that many who feel they have experienced sexual harassment have been reluctant to report it. The Department of Defense promotes a policy of "zero tolerance" of sexual harassment at any level. But is that possible given the unique military way of life?
Our forum asks: How pervasive is
sexual harassment in the military? Should men and women train separately for
military combat? How much control should drill sergeants - trainers of military
recruits - have over their trainees' lives? Do female soldiers and officers
trust current military policies and chain-of-command structures to respond to
and investigate sexual harassment allegations? What is the ideal Senate role in shaping
them?
Our guests is a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA participated in the February 4th hearing.
|
A question from Brian Kessler of Post Oak, VA:
Training
Do you have any suggestions for how these situations can be prevented in the future? Should men and women be trained separately?
Senator Rick Santorum responds:
I have suggested to military chiefs that they take a look at separate
training of male and female recruits. This issue is complex because
we have to balance the military preparedness of our troops with
concern for their safety. I don't think we know at this point whether
female troops trained along with male troops are "better trained" than
female troops trained separately. However, some evidence has been
cited that incidences of improper conduct towards female troops are
less frequent when those troops train separately.
A question from Abbie Stoler of Lancaster, PA:
So much has been made of the situation at the base in Maryland. But my question is do you believe that the problem is more systemic or is it just several bad apples?
Senator Rick Santorum responds:
It would be naive to assume that the military is any less immune to
sexual harassment than other sectors of society. We expect -- and
should expect -- that the men and women who make up our armed services
would always maintain the highest standards, but we know that this
will not always be true. Because the military has only recently begun
to shed light on the extent of allegations of sexual harassment, it
is very difficult to say whether this is a systemic problem having to
do with the culture of military life, or whether we're just seeing the
same conduct existing in every day American culture.
I do believe, though, that there are some things we can do to improve
the situation. We should demand that members of the military maintain
high standards in conduct between male and female troops. Defense
Secretary Cohen's policy of "zero tolerance" embodies this demand and
obligates us to hold responsible those who violate policy. The Armed
Services have begun to make improvements in this area -- including
trying to weed out those "bad apples." I will continue to monitor
Defense Department policy in this area to determine if additional
changes in policy are warranted.
The bottom line is that any mistreatment of women in our military is
in excusable and should not be tolerated.
A question from Dennis Fahlstrom of Oxnard, CA:
Women in combat
What can you tell us (real facts) about the record of success of women in combat units? Shouldn't our Congress and administration be using this record (if one really exists) to make decisions about using women in combat roles rather than subject our country to serious risk, just to be "politically correct".
Senator Rick Santorum responds:
I am not aware of an authoritative study of the effectiveness of women
in combat roles. Since taking office in 1993, President Clinton began
implementing a three-phase initiative to expand the role of women in
the military. In April 1993, the Defense Department announced that
women would be eligible to serve as pilots in combat aircraft. In
November 1995, at the Administration's request, Congress repealed the
law excluding women from long-term assignments on combat naval
vessels. In January 1995, former Secretary of Defense Les Aspin
revised the rules used for determining combat risk in the assignment
of women. Based on this revision, the U.S. Army and Marine Corps
recommended that approximately 80,000 additional positions be made
available to women.
The latest phase of the Clinton Administration initiative which took
effect in October 1995, allows women to be assigned on a voluntary
basis to "combat support" positions that were previously reserved for
men. Current federal law forbids the assignment of women to ground
combat units, and neither the Armed Services nor the Clinton
Administration have indicated a willingness to place women in direct
combat.
The essential role of our military is to provide for the best defense
of this nation -- and this should be the overriding goal of all
military policy decisions. Concerns of "political correctness" should
not be a factor. As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee,
I support expanded opportunity for women in the military, however I
recognize the significance of current federal law on the question of
ground combat.
A question from Amy Jackson of Norfolk, VA:
I understand that you are holding hearings to look into the Army's investigation, but my question is: What is your role as members of the Congress in affecting the sexual harassment policy of the Armed Services? Could you write legislation that would force the sexes to be trained differently?
Senator Rick Santorum responds:
It is possible for the Congress to set policy in training our military
recruits, however, I am not sure that this is the wisest course. The
Congress should set standards for performance and conduct but should
be very careful not to micro-manage our armed forces. A level of
trust should exist between the Congress (as representatives of the
people) and the branches of our Armed Services that they will do
everything in their power to meet these standards. If the Armed
Services fail to meet these standards, despite clear direction from
the Congress, then the Congress would have an obligation to step in
and directly proscribe the implementation of policies that would meet
those standards.
In the case of sexual harassment in the military, the Senate Armed
Services Committee has received assurances from Secretary Cohen and
Armed Services Chiefs that they will do everything in their power to
ensure that these problems will be aggressively addressed. At this
time the best course of action for the Congress is to have patience
enough to determine if the policy changes implemented by the services
have a positive impact on our troops.
