Chuck Grassley: “as the force structure shrinks, the number of generals and admirals should be reduced. That was the logic used by the…”

“as the force structure shrinks, the number of generals and admirals should be reduced. That was the logic used by the House in 1990. That was the logic used by the Senate in 1990. That logic is embodied in current law. That has always been the logic since time began. Let us apply that logic to the Marine Corps' request for 12 more generals. If the Marine Corps needs more generals, then it must mean that the Marine Corps is getting bigger, that it is expanding. But all the data point in the opposite direction. All the data indicate that the military services, including the Marine Corps, are continuing to downsize. Why doesn't the 1990 logic apply anymore? Have Marine generals been inoculated to be immune from cuts? Why is the Marine Corps trying to top size while it is downsizing? As the force structure shrinks, we need fewer generals. That was the guiding principle used by the Armed Services Committee in 1990 when they put general officers on the down ramp. They put the generals on the down ramp even when the dark storm clouds were rising over the Persian Gulf. There was no talk about vacant war-fighting positions at that time. There was no talk, as we were given an excuse for this increase, about the joint bill requirements mandated in Goldwater-Nichols. There was just one driver. The force structure was shrinking so we needed fewer generals. In other words, it seems to me that they were expressing at that decisionmaking time in 1990 common sense.…”