Sexual Assault in the Military

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. COLLINS. First, I wish to commend the senior Senator from Maryland, the dean of the women Senators, for organizing this debate today on an issue that concerns each of us; that is, the growing crisis of sexual assault in the military.

I first raised my concern over the military's inadequate response to the growing crisis of sexual assault nearly 10 years ago. I remember it well. It was a hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee in 2004, at which I expressed my growing alarm about the number of sexual assaults in the military and the inadequate response by the leaders of the military to provide adequate care for the survivors and to ensure appropriate punishment for the perpetrators of these reprehensible crimes.

In an exchange I had with GEN George Casey, I stated the military needs to be much more responsive to reports of sexual assault, particularly in the field, and to separate these women and, in some cases, the male victims, from their alleged attackers. The Department must also vigorously prosecute offenders and hold commanders accountable for establishing zero tolerance policies.

To say that General Casey's response was disappointing would be an understatement. I am convinced that if the military had heeded the concerns that I and others such as Senator Mikulski raised a decade ago, this terrible problem would have been addressed much sooner, saving many individuals from the trauma, the pain, and the injustice they endured.

Back then, sadly, the attitude of the high-ranking officials who were testifying at that 2004 hearing was dismissive, even though these crimes never should have occurred in the first place, traumatized the survivors, and eroded the trust and discipline that are fundamental to every military unit. Thankfully, the attitude I perceive amongst senior military officers today is markedly different from the one I encountered 9 years ago. The work of translating the military's stated policy of zero tolerance into reality, however, remains unfinished business. Fostering a culture of zero tolerance so that the number of assaults is greatly diminished remains a goal, not reality. Ensuring that survivors do not think twice about reporting an assault for fear of retaliation or damage to their careers is still not part of the military culture.

In 2011, I joined our former colleague John Kerry in coauthoring the Defense STRONG Act as an initial step to address this crisis. Provisions of that bill were signed into law as part of the fiscal year 2012 National Defense Authorization Act. They provide survivors of sexual assault the assistance of advocates with genuine confidentiality. They provide guaranteed access to an attorney and expedited consideration to be transferred far away from their assailant.

Earlier this year I introduced the Coast Guard STRONG Act to extend these protections to Coast Guard members. I thank Chairman Levin, Ranking Member Inhofe, and Senator McCaskill for their work to include these provisions in this year's NDAA.

More than anything, survivors need to have the confidence that the legal system in which they report a crime will produce a just and fair result. Based upon data from the Department of Defense's most recent sexual assault prevention and response survey, that view is not held by enough servicemembers or survivors.

As a result, I have supported and introduced legislation with Senators Gillibrand and McCaskill aimed at reducing the barriers to justice that many survivors of sexual assault currently face in the military.

I commend both Senator Gillibrand and Senator McCaskill for their extraordinary leadership and dedication to resolving this unacceptable problem.

Let me also thank Chairman Levin and Ranking Member Inhofe for incorporating significant provisions from both bills into the NDAA.

In fact, there are more than 26 provisions specifically targeting sexual assault in the military in the bill that we are debating today. For example--and there are many, but I wish to highlight one because it was part of a bill Senator McCaskill and I introduced--the legislation mandates a dishonorable discharge or dismissal for any servicemember convicted of sexual assault. This came from a bipartisan, bicameral bill, the BE SAFE Act, that I introduced with Senator McCaskill, Congresswoman Niki Tsongas, and Congressman Mike Turner earlier this year.

In addition, the NDAA eliminates the ability of a convening authority to overturn a conviction by a jury post-trial for major offenses.

It permits a commander to relocate an alleged perpetrator of a sexual assault crime rather than relocating the survivor following an attack.

It eliminates certain factors, such as the alleged character of the accused, that a commander can consider in deciding how to dispose of an offense so that these decisions are based on evidence and the law.

Finally, the bill includes a provision I support that requires the military to provide an attorney dedicated to the interests of survivors of sexual assaults who can provide legal advice and assistance when survivors need such assistance the most.

There are many other important provisions that are included in this bill. Our work will not be complete until the Pentagon has demonstrated that it is fully enforcing its stated policy of zero tolerance for sexual assault.

There are strong views in the Pentagon and in Congress on how best to address this issue beyond the 26 provisions in the bill before us. There is much debate on what it means for the military's unique legal system.

One of the criticisms I have heard is that we should wait a few more months for the results of still more studies or perhaps even wait a few more years to see if recently enacted provisions have made a difference. I strongly disagree. How many more victims are required to suffer before we take additional action? How many more lives must be ruined before we act? Rather than waiting for the results of yet more studies, we must debate proposals to increase the confidence of survivors and increase prevention efforts now until we have proved that the military has, indeed, fostered a culture of zero tolerance in which survivors are no longer concerned about retaliation from their peers or even their commanders.

This is why I have decided to support Senator Gillibrand's amendment to this bill. This was not an easy decision, as there are valid arguments on both sides. Senator Gillibrand's amendment takes aim squarely at the problem of victims failing to report sexual assault. In my judgment, her amendment will encourage more victims to report sexual assaults, and that is absolutely critical.

There can be no question about the Senate's commitment to reducing the instances of sexual assault in the military and to providing appropriate care for survivors. As we debate various proposals, we are united by the need for the serious reforms that are included already in this bill and that will enhance the military's response to sexual assault.

I wish to thank all of those on the Armed Services Committee, particularly the two leaders, Senator McCaskill and Senator Gillibrand, for their excellent work.

I am certain our work on the NDAA will make a real difference in reducing unnecessary suffering, injury, and injustice.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source