Military Justice Improvement Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Madam President, I rise to speak in full support of the McCaskill-Ayotte-Fischer proposal that is before us today. It will only strengthen the historic reforms that have already been passed by this body to combat sexual assault in the military.

I also rise to express concerns with the Gillibrand proposal to remove commanders from this process because I believe that is going to undermine credibility and accountability.

I am glad we are having this debate on the floor because every Member of this Senate agrees that this is a problem that needs to be addressed.

Over the past year the members of the Armed Services Committee have focused on this issue. It cuts across ideology, across gender, and across regions. It also cuts across party lines.

I was happy to work across the aisle with Senator Shaheen on improving the standards for personnel responsible for sexual assault prevention. I was pleased to join with Senator Blumenthal to ensure that victims' rights are protected under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

I would argue that our efforts to fight sexual assault show Congress at its best. It is how we are supposed to work. So although we may disagree, we do share the same goals.

Senator McCaskill and Senator Gillibrand have both been real leaders in the Senate Armed Services Committee, which held that landmark hearing with our top commanders to explore the problem of sexual violence in the ranks last June.

The committee received input from all sides, and we, along with our House colleagues, passed a series of very meaningful reforms when we passed the National Defense Authorization Act. Those are reforms of which we can all be proud.

We stripped commanders of the ability to overturn jury convictions. We made retaliation against victims a crime. We required dishonorable discharge or dismissal for those convicted of sexual assault.

Now we are trying to strengthen that. We are trying to strengthen those great reforms with the McCaskill-Ayotte-Fischer legislation. I believe our proposal will do more to strengthen the rights of victims, and it will enhance the tools to prosecute the criminals.

Specifically, our bill extends the current protections to service academies. That is so important. That is in our bill. It boosts the evaluation standards for commanders--also important. It allows the victims increased input--extremely important. So rather than revamping the entire military justice system, which I believe carries massive risk, our proposal improves and updates the current system.

Unfortunately, the Gillibrand proposal, I believe, takes radical steps, and it undermines the commander's responsibility for his or her troops. Under that proposal, almost all crimes--from forgery to sexual violence--are removed from a commander's purview. It does not bring that focus to the challenge we are facing. Our proposal does.

The other proposal detaches the commander from his or her unit, and it removes all responsibility. I do not want to remove the responsibility from a commander. We trust these people to watch our best and our brightest, our children and our grandchildren, as they go into battle. We need to trust them in this as well.

Senator McCaskill brings a wealth of experience to bear on this topic from her days as a prosecutor, and I believe we should all be listening to her. She mentioned in November that the other proposal was ``seductively simple.'' I agree. I agree that its simplicity cloaks a host of very complex policy problems. She has invested a lot of time on this issue. She has explained the technical problems, and I echo her concerns.

But I would like to underline one critical point to my colleagues. Many of our problems with the other proposal might appear to be minor procedural details. However, experience tells us that it is exactly these sorts of problems that can grind a justice system to a halt, and they can damage a legal system.

That was the case in 2007, when Congress, armed with the best of intentions, modified the rape statute. Those hasty changes disrupted the judicial process and compelled Congress to rewrite the language. Do you know what happened? It delayed justice.

So I urge my colleagues and anyone interested in completely revamping that military justice system, you need to be certain that all the questions are resolved and you need to be certain that the implementation will be bulletproof because anything less means delayed justice or no justice at all for the victims.

I can go on and talk about the commission that brought forth their recommendations that the justice remain with the commanders. They did not say take it away from the commanders. And the makeup of that commission? Mostly civilian and mostly female.

I hope my colleagues will remember these things, look at the facts, look at how we truly can address the needs of the victims, truly find them justice. Support the McCaskill-Ayotte-Fischer proposal, and I would ask that you not support the Gillibrand proposal.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source