LRSC Grunt
17 December 2000, 00:33
I know this topic is getting kinda old but anyhow....
Congressman tells Shinseki to explain his beret choice
By Sean D. Naylor
Army Chief of Staff Gen. Eric Shinseki’s decision to make the black beret standard headgear for all soldiers is attracting congressional scrutiny, and some veterans groups are pushing for hearings on Capitol Hill on the issue.
Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, recently sent an angry letter to Shinseki complaining that the Army’s failure to answer many of the committee’s questions on the beret issue “is unsatisfactory.”
According to the Nov. 9 letter, a copy of which was obtained by Army Times, Burton’s committee staff tried for several weeks to get the Army to answer their questions, with mixed results. Among the committee’s questions were how much the beret initiative would cost and how the Army intended to pay for it.
The answers provided by the Army did not come close to satisfying Burton and his staff. “For example, on November 7, 2000, Committee Senior Counsel Andre Hollis received a letter from Colonel Charles Martin that provided some information but failed to answer many questions,” Burton wrote. “This failure to respond to the Committee’s inquiry is unsatisfactory.”
Burton listed six detailed questions he wanted Shinseki to answer. Among them:
** Which commands did Shinseki contact regarding the “propriety” of issuing the berets, were they offered an opportunity to comment, and if so, what were those comments?
** “Identify and quantify in detail the basis for the belief that will improve morale among current Army personnel.”
The beret initiative is particularly controversial because of Shinseki’s choice of black as the headgear’s color. Rangers presently are authorized to wear a black beret.
Shinseki’s Oct. 17 announcement prompted an outpouring of opposition from retired and former Rangers. Many active-duty Rangers also criticized the move until U.S. Army Special Operations Command issued a gag order instructing them not to talk to the media on the issue.
Burton is not alone in seeking answers on the beret issue. Since announcing the beret initiative, Shinseki has not spoken publicly about why he picked black as the color for the universal beret, nor has he given any response to the protest his color choice has provoked in the Ranger community.
It has been a total stonewall,” said Bob Black, of Carlisle, Pa., who is trying to rally five Ranger veterans groups in support of hearings. “We are done talking to him. We have no alternative but to seek a redress from Congress.”
In his announcement, Shinseki said the black beret “will be symbolic of our commitment to transform this magnificent Army into a new force…”
He said the black beret is intended to encourage the entire Army to accept the high standards and discipline synonymous with special operations and airborne units.
“It will become a symbol of unity, a symbol of Army excellence, a symbol of our values,” he said.
Shinseki said he came up with the idea after attending a ceremony at Fort Bragg, N.C., earlier this year attended by smartly dressed and disciplined Rangers.
Not all veterans organizations are seeking congressional hearings. Some worry that pressing the issue too far might create problems for their active-duty brethren. But the issue is under debate, spokesmen for the groups said.
“If we could have kept this in the confines of the unit, then we would have done that,” said Minor Kelso, president of the Ranger Infantry Companies (Airborne), an organization representing Rangers from the Korean War. “We’ll have to go beyond the Army.”
Shinseki’s spokesman, Lt. Col. Lew Boone, said the chief of staff had received Burton’s letter. “Gen. Shinseki is currently traveling but is preparing a response to the congressman,” said Boone, speaking four weeks after the letter was sent. “We will attempt to satisfy the questions posed by Congressman Burton.” h
Congressman tells Shinseki to explain his beret choice
By Sean D. Naylor
Army Chief of Staff Gen. Eric Shinseki’s decision to make the black beret standard headgear for all soldiers is attracting congressional scrutiny, and some veterans groups are pushing for hearings on Capitol Hill on the issue.
Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, recently sent an angry letter to Shinseki complaining that the Army’s failure to answer many of the committee’s questions on the beret issue “is unsatisfactory.”
According to the Nov. 9 letter, a copy of which was obtained by Army Times, Burton’s committee staff tried for several weeks to get the Army to answer their questions, with mixed results. Among the committee’s questions were how much the beret initiative would cost and how the Army intended to pay for it.
The answers provided by the Army did not come close to satisfying Burton and his staff. “For example, on November 7, 2000, Committee Senior Counsel Andre Hollis received a letter from Colonel Charles Martin that provided some information but failed to answer many questions,” Burton wrote. “This failure to respond to the Committee’s inquiry is unsatisfactory.”
Burton listed six detailed questions he wanted Shinseki to answer. Among them:
** Which commands did Shinseki contact regarding the “propriety” of issuing the berets, were they offered an opportunity to comment, and if so, what were those comments?
** “Identify and quantify in detail the basis for the belief that will improve morale among current Army personnel.”
The beret initiative is particularly controversial because of Shinseki’s choice of black as the headgear’s color. Rangers presently are authorized to wear a black beret.
Shinseki’s Oct. 17 announcement prompted an outpouring of opposition from retired and former Rangers. Many active-duty Rangers also criticized the move until U.S. Army Special Operations Command issued a gag order instructing them not to talk to the media on the issue.
Burton is not alone in seeking answers on the beret issue. Since announcing the beret initiative, Shinseki has not spoken publicly about why he picked black as the color for the universal beret, nor has he given any response to the protest his color choice has provoked in the Ranger community.
It has been a total stonewall,” said Bob Black, of Carlisle, Pa., who is trying to rally five Ranger veterans groups in support of hearings. “We are done talking to him. We have no alternative but to seek a redress from Congress.”
In his announcement, Shinseki said the black beret “will be symbolic of our commitment to transform this magnificent Army into a new force…”
He said the black beret is intended to encourage the entire Army to accept the high standards and discipline synonymous with special operations and airborne units.
“It will become a symbol of unity, a symbol of Army excellence, a symbol of our values,” he said.
Shinseki said he came up with the idea after attending a ceremony at Fort Bragg, N.C., earlier this year attended by smartly dressed and disciplined Rangers.
Not all veterans organizations are seeking congressional hearings. Some worry that pressing the issue too far might create problems for their active-duty brethren. But the issue is under debate, spokesmen for the groups said.
“If we could have kept this in the confines of the unit, then we would have done that,” said Minor Kelso, president of the Ranger Infantry Companies (Airborne), an organization representing Rangers from the Korean War. “We’ll have to go beyond the Army.”
Shinseki’s spokesman, Lt. Col. Lew Boone, said the chief of staff had received Burton’s letter. “Gen. Shinseki is currently traveling but is preparing a response to the congressman,” said Boone, speaking four weeks after the letter was sent. “We will attempt to satisfy the questions posed by Congressman Burton.” h