This letter is in response to your request for certain items to complete the record of the February 3, 1976, Joint Committee on Defense Production hearings on standards of conduct at which I testified, and the additional questions asked in your letter of February 18, 1976. During my testimony I received the names of Department of Recently, Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, emphasized the importance of the Standards of Conduct to the Department and outlined our policy in this area for the future. A copy of his statement of April 8, 1976, is attached at Tab A. Thank you again for the opportunity to testify before your Committee on this important matter. The items submitted for the record are attached at Tab B and respons to additional questions forwarded by your letter of February 18, 1976, are attached at Tab C. Sincerely, M.P. Cher Clement Attachments The For some months there has been a series of disclosures alleging various improper activities stretching over the past 15 years. allegations have involved a number of Department of Defense employeespast and present-military and civilian. Actions taken by this Department in the recent past have included: Events of the early 1970's have, of course, led the Government, the public, and the press to focus more fully on the need for adherence to strict standards. With the swearing-in of President Ford on August 9, 1974, there should have been little doubt that the highest standards of conduct were expected of all persons employed by the Government or dealing with the Government. To the extent there remained any doubt in the Department of Defense, the Defense memorandum of January 15, 1975, made clear that there should be no relationship with Defense contractors which violates or appears to violate the prohibitions of our Directives. Since November 20, 1975, when I assumed this post, I have repeatedly emphasized my views to officials of the Department, both as to their conduct and to their leadership responsibilities with respect to standards of conduct throughout the Defense establishment. On November 24, 1975, two exceptions were removed from the 1967 Defense Directive, which had permitted customary exchanges of social amenities between friends and relatives and transactions between and among relatives which were personal and consistent with that relationship. In applying standards of conduct, I recognize that we are dealing with human beings who have rendered, and continue to render, dedicated and valuable service to this Department and to the country. I also recognize that public officials are not error-proof, that the rules, directives, and regulations can be complex, and that from time to time the norms of our society shift somewhat. However, understandably, public officials are held to a higher standard and must strive to live up to it. The test of an "arms-length" relationship is not easy. To do their jobs, those in Government must deal with those outside Government on a daily basis. Indeed, such a relationship is necessary to assure that Government is serving the nation well. The task--and it is not an easy onc - is to see that interaction between those in Government and those with whom they must work, are extensive enough to assure the necessary exchange of information, but at the same time to see that they are not so intimate that they improperly affect the decision of Government. Indeed, improper appearances, alone, however innocent, can, in the present environment, so adversely affect public trust in Government that the effectiveness of Government is diminished. - We must seek to balance these factors so that we do not so unduly complicate or inhibit the process of Government that good men and women refuse to participate either in government or as contractors for the Government --out of fear that their reputations will be damaged by allegations involving an appearance of impropriety where none existed. I am determined that the conduct of military and civilian employees of this Department be consistent with requirements of law and regulations, just as I am convinced that Government must be able to attract the most talented of our nation both as employees and as contractors. Our responsibilities to our national security and the people we erve require no less. A range of sanctions is available for military and civilian personnel, ranging from oral or written administrative admonishments or reprimands through suspensions with or without pay, to formal court-martial proceedings or prosecution by the Department of Justice. Determination as to the appropriate action must be on a case-by-case basis. A list of management actions taken by the Department prior to November 20, 1975, is available. Other actions have been taken since I became Secretary. Additional steps are now being taken to further emphasize Department standards and unambiguously inform military and civilian personnel, and individuals and firms doing business with the Department, as to those standards. They include the following: 1. We have embarked on an effort to publicize the strictness of the Standards of Conduct Directive through in-house and Service publications and media, including briefings on the standards of conduct as part of the training at various Service schools and courses. We are revising and further tightening the rules with regard to attendance of Department personnel at trade and industry association meetings, especially those of a duration more than a single luncheon or dinner meeting. 2. We are continuing to refer to the Department of Justice allegations which may constitute a violation of law, as was done in connection with the allegations of improper cash payments to military personnel in Europe some 12 or 13 years ago. We are expanding the information required on the annual statements of financial interest and clarifying the extent of information required from individuals being considered for appointment in this Department, both at and below the Presidential appointment level. 3. As a result of what we learn as we proceed with our current inquiries, we will likely be further amending and clarifying directives, regulations and requirements for reporting financial interests. In dealing with individual cases under the criteria outlined, we will proceed in an orderly manner, with the General Counsel having principal reponsibility. Notification to the press, the Congress and the public of actions with regard to particular cases will be handled with consideration both to the interests of the individuals involved and to our obligations to inform the public of the activities of this Department and its personnel. With regard to the recently published lists of names involving Rockwell International and Raytheon Corporation, my office and the Military Services are ascertaining the extent of each named individual's involvement in the acceptance of gratuities from defense contractors. As the facts are verified, the Services will take such administrative or disciplinary action, if any, as is deemed appropriate, based upon the facts of each individual case. I will require that reports of action taken in each case be forwarded to the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and with the assistance of the General Counsel, will monitor enforcement by the Services of compliance with the Standards of Conduct Directive. Our policy is clear, I expect military and civilian personnel of the Department, contractors, and others doing business or secking to do business with this Department, to understand Department policy, adhere to it, and cooperate in achieving adherence to that policy to the fullest. To do less would be a failure to discharge our obligations to the American people. |