Daniel Inouye: “briefly, it displeases me to be standing here speaking in opposition to my distinguished friend from Washington. But I…”

“briefly, it displeases me to be standing here speaking in opposition to my distinguished friend from Washington. But I think it should be remembered by all of us that under current law, the law that is in place, the Secretary of the Navy is authorized to donate any stricken vessel to any organization which can demonstrate its financial means to support it. The Navy is not required to hold a competition nor is it required to select a winning proposal. However, as my friend from Washington noted, when it became apparent that there were several cities vying for the Missouri, such as San Francisco, Bremerton, and Pearl Harbor, the Secretary determined that he would very carefully examine how he would dispose of the ship. In a lengthy competition, the Navy kept all participants equally informed. Nowhere in the GAO report does it say that any city got favorable treatment. They were equally informed of how it would judge the applicants. It determined that in the unique situation at hand it should ensure that this historic ship should be located where it would best serve the Navy and the Nation. Those were the two additional criteria. I think that even without stating that, that should be the first criteria: How best can the interests of this Nation be served? How will the Navy's interests be served? The Secretary issued these new requirements to all of the applicants. According to the GAO, no one received favorable or preferential treatment.”