the Promotion of Rifle Practice. However, the program was limited only to the military-only to the Army, the Navy, the Marine Corps, and the National Guard. The Armed Forces were the beneficiaries of this program.

Somewhere along the line, that purpose was lost. Somewhere in the 70-year period the military was forgotten, the original purpose of the program was forgotten, but the program did not die.

As the chairman, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. MAHON) pointed out in committee, old programs just never die, they just never fade away. They go on and they go on and they go on. And this is one such program.

It is a program entirely for civilians. Oh, yes, military instructors are sent down, but it is entirely for civilians, now. It is now a boondoggle for the National Rifle Association.

The National Board for Rifle Practice is the stalking horse for the National Rifle Association. The National Rifle Association controls two programs.

Let me read to the Members from the authorizing legislation to which my friend, the gentleman from Florida, referred. It is section 4308 of title X, subsection 5, where the Secretary of the Army is authorized to sell-to whom— to the members of the National Rifle Association at cost, and not to anybody else but to members of the National Rifle Association, "and the issue to clubs organized for practice with rifled arms, under the direction of the National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice, of the arms, ammunition, targets, and other supplies and appliances necessary for target practice."

So the National Rifle Association has got a good thing going for it in this appropriation.

This program started out in 1962. It started out in 1962 with an appropriation of $500,000, and gradually, over the years, in 1963 it went up to $622,000. Then, it went down to $433,000 until in 1968, following the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy, the program went into hiding. There was no appropriation in that year for the National Board of Rifle Practice directly. It was tucked into an appropriation for the Army. And then again it began to move in fiscal year 1970, when an appropriation of $53,000 was made; again in 1971 an appropriation of $102,000 was made for the National Board; and in fiscal year 1976 it is up to $233,000 again.

But the most shocking thing in the program, as I say, is the fact that this is now for the National Rifle Association. No other group can get these rifles from the Government. As a matter of fact, until 1968 the Board even sold pistols to the National Rifle Association members, and only the members could buy pistols from the Army. And then at the time of the assassination, as I indicated of Dr. Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy the sale of pistols was eliminated. No longer does the Army sell pistols to outsiders.

Mr. Chairman, there is absolutely no need for this program at all. It is purely an appropriation for the development of civilian rifle teams.

My friend, the gentleman from Ohio, has talked about the fact that there is money in the bill for the Olympic rifle team. That is true. But there is no money in this bill, or any other bill that I know of, for the Olympic track team; there is no money in this bill for the Olympic basketball team; there is no money in this bill for any of the other Olympic teams.

Why should we provide in this bill for an Olympic rifle team and leave out all the other teams and require them to raise money from private sources?

This is something that is very "cushy" for the National Rifle Association. After 70 years this program should be halted. It is about time that we call an end to it. Mr. Chairman, I urge defeat of the amendment.

Mr. SIKES. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. YATES. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. SIKES. Mr. Chairman, I trust that my distinguished friend, the gentleman from Illinois, recalls that he has many times seen marksmanship medals being worn by members of the uniformed services on their uniforms. Those medals were awarded through the National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice. In addition to the civilian marksmanship teams there are military marksmanship practice programs as well as military clubs that are sponsored by the National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice.

The board makes a specialty of programs for junior rifle clubs using .22 rifles. These give civilian groups an opportunity to teach young boys the safe and proper handling of firearms.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. YATES) has expired.

(On request of Mr. SIKES and by unanimous consent, Mr. YATES was allowed to proceed for 2 additional minutes.)

Mr. SIKES. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield further?

Mr. YATES. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. SIKES. Mr. Chairman, it is through these junior rifle clubs that the National Board provides training in the proper use and safe handling of firearms.

The gentleman from Illinois has made quite a point concerning assassinations. Let me point out that none of the guns used in any of the assassinations he refers to were ever traced to those that were sold as surplus by the military through this program.

At this time, since 1967, only 300 long guns per year—no pistols—have been sold through this program. They were sold through the National Rifle Association, because that organization volunteered to screen recipients in order to be sure that they are law-abiding citizens and that the weapons would not fall into improper hands.

So there are many reasons why the program should be continued. It has made significant contributions through the years, and I am confident it will continue to do so.

Mr. Chairman, the reason that it is necessary that the rifle team in the Olympics be financed in this way is because the Olympic Association does not fund certain sports. This is one of them. If we do not fund the participation of the rifle team, we will not be represented at the Olympics in Montreal in the forthcoming competition.

Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, let me just comment upon what my friend, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. SIKES) has said. The implication is given by his statement that this is a program that is necessary in order to provide an ability in marksmanship to civilians in the event they move into the military program. This is one of the rationales that has been given to this program through the years.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. YATES) has expired.

(By unanimous consent, Mr. YATES was allowed to proceed for 1 additional minute.)

Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, Arthur Little & Co., at the request of the Department of Defense, about 8 or 9 years ago, made a study of the effectiveness of this program in terms of providing marksmen and people trained in marksmanship as members of the Armed Forces. This was done at a time when our young men were being drafted into the military service, drafted from all over the country. The report by Arthur Little & Co. stated that less than 3 percent of those drafted into the military had ever participated in any of the programs of the National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice-less than 3 percent.

Mr. Chairman, I think this is a program that has lost its utility. It is a boondoggle for the National Rifle Association. I submit that it ought to be cut off right now.

The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. SIKES).

The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. YATES) there were ayes 29, noes 34.

Mr. LATTA. Mr Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

A recorded vote was refused.

So the amendment was rejected.

The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY

For construction, procuremnet, production, modification, and modernization of missiles, equipment, including ordnance, ground handling equipment, spare parts, and accessories therefor; specialize equipment and training devices; expansion of public and private plants, including the land necessary therefor, without regard to section 4774, title 10, United States Code, for the foregoing purposes, and such lands and interests therein, may be acquired, and construction prosecuted thereon prior to approval of title as required by section 355. Revised Statutes, as amended; and procurement and installation of equipment, appliances, and machine tools in public and private plants; reserve plant and Government and contractor-owned equipment layaway; and other expenses necessary for

the foregoing purposes; $385,100,000, to remain available for obligation until September 30, 1978.

Mr. SIKES. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. [Mr. SIKES asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.] Mr. SIKES. Mr. Chairman, the proposed reductions to the E-3A, AWACS, program below the budget level reflect a misunderstanding of U.S. force requirements. Unfortunately, this comes on the heels of large reductions made in prior years and during the fiscal year 1976 authorizations proceedings.

I feel that the Air Force has made a better case for the AWACS program than the committee has seen fit to admit. The Chief of Staff of the Air Force is thoroughly aware of the problem and the potential of the AWACS. He has called the AWACS the single most important program in the entire general purpose force area. The program has also been publicly supported by the Secretary of Defense and senior officials of the Army and the Navy.

The appropriations bill now before you proposes to reduce the number of be procured based on the argument that 10 AWACS aircraft are sufficient to meet worldwide tactical commitment. The Air Force is strongly convinced that the number is completely inadequate and their arguments are impressive.

The Air Force states that, even with the minimum initial force of 15 aircraft, it would be forced into serious either/or choices. We could support U.S. forces in Central Europe, or two tactical orbits elsewhere or provide a limited defense capability for our own country-but to cover one of these requirements involves all 15 aircraft. The other two areas would be completely uncovered.

No one would argue that we should not plan on defending our own country if we were involved in a major conflict overseas. The availability of AWACS for air defense the most critical element to our air defense forces-allows the Air Force to phase out the costly SAGE system and nearly 50 military radars with an annual savings of over $100 million. The new supersonic Soviet bomber, the Backfire, is now deployed in the Soviet long-range-air arm. We should not ignore that threat. We should do something about it.

THE ARMY CIVILIAN MARKSMANSHIP PROGRAM

Statutes passed in the early 1900's directed the Secretary of the Army to support private shooting clubs; sell rifles, shotguns, handguns, and ammunition at cost to members of the National Rifle Association (NRA); and hold annual shooting matches open to both military personnel and civilians.' This support rose from the $2,500 appropriated for trophies in 1903 to almost $5 million in the middle 1960's. The "Civilian Marksmanship Program," as its elements are nomi

1 These statutes now provide in relevant part:

Civilian Rifle Ranges (10 U.S.C. § 4308). "The Secretary of the Army shall provide for (1) the maintenance, and operation of indoor and outdoor rifle ranges; (2) the instruction of able-bodied citizens of the United States in marksmanship, ... (3). the maintenance . . . of matches. . . in the use of those arms, and the issue of arms. ammunition, targets and other supplies... (5) the sale to the members of the National Rifle Association at cost, and the issue to clubs organized for practice with rifled armes, of the arms, ammunition, targets, and other supplies and appliances necessary for target practice.

Rifle Instruction (10 U.S.C. § 4310).

"(a) The President may detail regular or reserve officers and noncommissioned officers of the Army to duty as instructors at rifle ranges for training civilians in the use of military

arms.

(b) The Secretary of the Army may detail enlisted members of the Army as temporary instructors in the use of the rifle to organized rifle clubs requesting that instruction." Issue of Rifles and Ammunition (10 U.S.C. § 4311). "The Secretary of the Army may provide for the issue of a reasonable number of standard military rifles, and such quantities of ammunition as are available, for use in conducting rifle practice at rifle ranges.

National Rifle and Pistol Matches (10 U.S.C. § 4312). "An annual competition called the National Matches and consisting of rifle and pistol matches shall be held as prescribed by the Secretary of the Army. The National Matches are open to members of the armed forces.. and to civilians.

232 Stat. 941 (1903).

3 "Fact Sheet" on Civilian Marksmanship Program, undated, announcing actions taken on June 21, 1968, by the Secretary of the Army; testimony of David McGiffert, Under Secre tary of the Army, Hearings on the Federal Firearms Act before the Senate Subcommittee To Investigate Juvenile Delinquency, 90th Cong., 1st sess., pp. 737, 738 (1967).

nated, has currently been cut to a minimal level, as it was during World War II.5

I. LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND

At the beginning of the century, the Army was of the view that all infantrymen need not be trained to shoot accurately but only to deliver an even volume of fire over an entire area; trained riflemen were apparently expected to concentrate fire on obvious targets, leaving the rest of an opposing force unharassed." A contrary view seems to have been held by Congress, which began support of accurate shooting by authorizing the expenditure in 1903 of $2,500 for trophies and medals for military rifle matches that year.'

The support of marksmanship was extended further in 1905 when the Secretary of War was directed to sell to the states, at cost, Army weapons and ammunition for use by rifle clubs. In 1911, civilians were authorized to compete for the national match trophies. In 1914, sale of Army weapons at cost was streamlined by allowing direct sale to members of rifle clubs.10

13

14

By 1916 the possibility that the United States might need a large Army encouraged preparation for mobilization. In keeping with European practice, the National Defense Act of 1916" envisioned an Army composed basically of untrained troops from civilian life stiffened by a cadre of Regular Army personnel. In addition, support of civilian rifle clubs under the Civilian Marksmanship Program was authorized.1 A Director of Civilian Marksmanship (DCM) was appointed,' rifle ranges were built, and personnel were assigned to instruct on the ranges.1 The shortage of rifle instructors and untrained riflemen during the mobilization for World War I reinforced the postwar position of the members of Congress interested in appropriating funds for the national matches, the sales program, and support of the rifle clubs.15 The Army, which by then supported accurate marksmanship for all its personnel and had surplus ammunition, offered no opposition. In 1924, however, opponents of such expenditures managed to strike from the appropriation bill the language supporting the marksmanship program by successfully arguing that such language was in fact substantive legislation unsuited to an appropriation bill." Congress thereupon enacted legislation restating in permanent form the recurring language from the appropriation bills and added an unexplained change whereby the sale of Army weapons to members of rifle clubs was authorized only to NRA members.19

A final statutory change appeared in 1928, after the Army announced that the national matches would be held only in alternate years in order to free support units for field training during the summer.19 However, shooting interests persuaded Congress to require the Army to hold the matches annually and to submit annual reports to the Congress.20

II. GROWTH OF THE PROGRAM

These annual reports and the testimony during appropriation hearings provide some information on the scope of the program for the past 40 years.

"Fact Sheet," supra, footnote 3.

See, e.g., Hearings on Military Establishment Appropriations before a subcommittee of House Committee on Appropriations, 78th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 503-05 (1944).

Hearings

See S. Rept. 1291. accompanying H.R. 13446, 70th Cong., 1st sess. (1928) before Senate Committee on Military Affairs, 70th Cong., 1st sess., pp. 3-4, 11-20 (1928). 732 Stat. 941 (1903).

833 Stat. 986-87 (1905).

36 Stat. 1058 (1911).

10 38 Stat. 370 (1914).

11 39 Stat. 166 (1916); see Hearings before the House Committee on Military Affairs on H.R. 12766, 64th Cong., 1st sess., pp. 15-16 (1916).

12 39 Stat. 166, 211 (1916).

13 39 Stat. 648 (1916).

14 Ibid.

1a See, e.g., Hearings on War Department appropriations before a Subcommittee of House Committee on Appropriations, 68th Cong., 1st sess., pp. 864-90 (1924); Report, supra, footnote 6.

18 See hearings, supra, footnote 15, p. 881; Report, supra, footnote 6.

17 See Cong. Rec., Mar. 27, 1924, pp. 5264-65, 5341-46; May 12, 1924, p. 8599.

18 43 Stat. 510 (1924).

19 See hearings, supra, footnote 6.

20 45 Stat. 786 (1928).

In 1929 the National Board's appropriation was $744,750. The major share, $500,000, was to pay the expenses of 4,455 military and civilian participants in the national matches at Camp Perry, Ohio. The pay and subsistence of 1,868 Army personnel who conducted the matches were provided through ordinary Army appropriations." Support for the matches was suspended or greatly reduced from 1931 to 1935. Beginning in 1952, the matches grew to a peak in the mid1960's, when they cost an estimated $3 million annually." However, Army support was suspended in 1967, due to the Vietnam war and a shortage of funds." In the last 40 years, the sale of military firearms to NRA members expanded even more, although this, too, was suspended during World War II. In 1929, 14,797 rifles and 408 handguns and 4.8 million rounds of ammunition were sold to NRA members. Weapon sales escalated with the end of World War II, when surplus stocks were enlarged. A witness at the fiscal 1960 appropriation hearings reported sales of approximately 95,000 rifles in the previous year." The peak year appears to have been 1963, however, when approximately 126,000 rifles and 20,000 handguns were sold to NRA members at cost." Since the beginning of the program, approximately 1 million military firearms have been sold to NRA members. The exact figure is unknown because the Army has not maintained records for all years. A tabulation of sales for the years for which information is available is shown in Table H-1.

TABLE H-1.-MILITARY FIREARMS SOLD BY ARMY TO NRA MEMBERS!

1 Staff report, "Firearms and Violence in American Life;" Newton and Zimring. The Army has advised the task force that regulations between 1941 and 1957 did not require keeping of these record s

21 Annual Reports for Fiscal 1929 from the National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice and the Director of Civilian Marksmanship to the Secretary of War: Hearings on War Department appropriation bill before the Subcommittee of the House Committee on Appropriations, 70th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 967-998 (1928).

22 Hearings on War Department appropriation bill before a Subcommittee of the House Committee on Appropriations, 74th Cong., 1st sess., pp. 449, 513-522, 656-660 (1935).

Hearings on Military Establishment appropriation bill before a Subcommittee of the House Committee on Appropriations, 80th Cong.. 1st sess., p. 1262 (1947): 81st Cong., 2d sess., p. 1197 (1950); 82d Cong., 2d sess., pp. 1440-1443 (1952).

24 "Fact Sheet," supra, footnote 3.

25 Ibid.

26 Hearings on National Military Establishment appropriation bill before a Subcommittee of the House Committee on Appropriations, 81st Cong., 1st sess., p. 852 (1949).

27 Memorandum from the Director of Civilian Marksmanship to the Army General Counsel. dated July 24, 1968.