Organizing for National Security: Hearings ... 86-2 to 87-1 ... Feb 23, 1960-Aug 24, 19611961 - 1338 pages |
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
administration affairs agencies Appropriations Committee believe BELL Budget Bureau budget process budgetary process Cabinet officers Chairman cold war command Congress consideration coordination cost Dean PRICE decisions Defense Department Department of Defense Director discussion economic effective executive branch Executive Office expenditures fiscal foreign policy functions funds going Government HITCH important interest issues Joint Chiefs legislative major matter McGeorge Bundy MCNEIL meet ment military missiles national policy National Security Council national security policy Navy operating organization particular personnel planning POLICY MACHINERY political present President President's problem procedures program element program package projection proposals question recommendations requirements responsibility role Secretary MCNAMARA Secretary of Defense Secretary RUSK seems Senator BUSH Senator JACKSON Senator JAVITS Senator MUNDT Senator MUSKIE specific staff STANS statement subcommittee things tion TUFTS U.S. SENATE understand White House
Popular passages
Page 1147 - Chairman; the Chief of Staff of the Army; the Chief of Naval Operations; the Chief of Staff of the Air Force; and the Commandant of the Marine Corps.
Page 1024 - Second, it is a combination of civilian leadership and public control that makes the decisions about the application of available technology. Decisions about every major procurement are subject to intense reviews by the Secretary of Defense, by the President, and by the Congress. In these reviews, we are deeply concerned about the possible consequences of using new technology. We do clearly separate the issues of whether-to-R.
Page 1161 - In 1962 when a reorganization plan established the Office of Science and Technology within the Executive Office of the President , through transfer of authorities formerly vested in the National Science Foundation.
Page 1134 - ... the decision in principle to resume atmospheric tests were discussed in the National Security Council. Recommendations on particular tests have been handled in various ways. In the case of the Dominic series of atmospheric tests in the Pacific last year, a committee including the Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, the Special Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, representatives of the Atomic Energy Commission and the Department of Defense examined...
Page 1060 - This does not mean that every effort should not be made to examinethese things carefully, but we should not expect the impossible.
Page 1010 - ... capability to the point where it is ready for introduction into operational use. Such costs include not only the equipment (prototypes, test vehicles, etc.) required in a development program, but also the related facilities, supply, and personnel costs, where applicable.
Page 1334 - This distinction, real enough at the extremes of the daily cable traffic and long-range assessment of future possibilities, breaks down in most of the business of decision and action. This is especially true at the level of Presidential action. Thus it seems to us best that the NSC staff, which is essentially a Presidential instrument, should be composed of men who can serve equally well in the process of planning and in that of operational followup. Already it has been made plain, in a number of...
Page 1006 - ... combinations of Army, Navy, and Air Force which are functional in nature, such as the atomic retaliatory forces, overseas deployments, continental air defense forces, limited war expeditionary forces, and the like. But the point is that we do not keep our budget in these terms. Hence it is not an exaggeration to say that we do not know what kind and how much defense we are buying with any specific budget.
Page 1000 - COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas, Chairman HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota SAM J. ERVIN, JR., North Carolina CARL T. CURTIS, Nebraska HUBERT H. HUMPHREY, Minnesota JACOB K. JAVITS, New York ERNEST QRUENINO, Alaska EDMUND S.
Page 1096 - I believe so strongly that a budget based for one year should start at a point significantly less in total than the previous year, and that items proposed for addition to that base should be evaluated in relative importance and need, whether old or new. Only by this means will less important going programs ever be retired or reduced. This leads to a question, raised in one of this committee's early reports, of whether there might be advance preparation of alternate budgets for major national security...