Kay Bailey Hutchison: “Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, our debate this afternoon should not be construed as an assault on the U.S.…”

“Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, our debate this afternoon should not be construed as an assault on the U.S. military, on the Navy, or on any individual in the armed services. Instead, I believe this is a debate involving two very different approaches to a common objective. I am convinced that all parties to this discussion are intent on pursuing improvement in the reputation and the record of the U.S. Navy. Last week, I outlined my concerns over this nomination at the Armed Services Committee hearing. Some have said I am trying to hold Admiral Kelso accountable for what happened at Tailhook in 1991. That is not the case. I spent hours reading all of the reports on the Tailhook investigation. That study led me to conclude that there are three areas of concern. I believe Admiral Kelso is responsible for two of those. Area one: Before the convention. It is clear that abuses of alcohol and degradation of women were part of the regular activity at the Tailhook convention, and there was no secret about that. In fact, many of these actions had reached ritual or traditional status. For the Secretary of the Navy and the Chief of Naval Operations to attend and lend their stature to such activity was clearly wrong. Area two: During the convention. There has been a dispute about whether Admiral Kelso actually saw any of the debauchery or unseemly behavior. He says he did not. I believe him. I do not hold him accountable for actual knowledge of the events there.”