On the recordApril 19, 1994
I am just hard put to understand it. I guess I cannot understand it because I participated in some of the conversations at the time we urged him not to step down. We urged him to continue what he was doing. I am one of those who urged this man to stay in office. And now he is going to be given worse treatment. As one Senator said before, how many people would have denied him his four-star rank if he had retired and taken on the full responsibility of Tailhook at the time the incident first came to light? How many people would have said, ``No, you cannot retire in the grade you have served this country in as Chief of Naval Operations"? I think the conclusion to be reached is somehow or another, it should be taken away from him because of what he did or did not do since then. If you know what he has done, as I know what he has done, in that period of time, he has downsized, he has led the country to a better Navy, a smaller Navy, a more affordable Navy, a more capable Navy. If for nothing else in his whole career, he deserves that rank for what he has done since Tailhook, but I think he deserves that rank for his total service to the country.
Said by
Ted Stevens
Source
govinfo.gov