Document text
Machine-read from the scan, so expect some errors. Lines that couldn’t be read are left out.
Page 1
John Glenn News ReleaseImmediate Release: Contact: Jack Sparks (202) 224-5635 December 1, 1994 Leonard miss (202) 224-4751 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHN GLENN HUMZW SUBJECT RADIATION EXPERIMENTS: PROGRESS ON RECORDS SEARCH AND ETHICAL EVALUATION CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON GO-AL AFFAIRS Good morning and welcome. Governmental Affairs will consider the plans and progress of the executive branch in its ongoing investigation and evaluation of humn subject radiation experiments. Today the Committee on Over the course of the last 20 years, more and more disturbing information has come to light on government-funded experiments that deliberately exposed human subjects or populations to ionising radiation. It is by now apparent that some of these exposures occurred under circumstances which were, at best, ethically suspect. In late 1993, a combination of Secretary O'Leary's openness initiative and new revelations about so-called planned releases, which came about as a result of this Committee's and GAO's investigations, thrust these issues onto the nation's political agenda. The time had come for a full exploration and accounting of these experimental exposures. Previous administrations have been virtually silent on the I want to commend issues raised by Cold War radiation studies. Secretary O'Leary and the Clinton administration for stepping up to the challenge these experiments pose and for full investigation and ethical evaluation. Some might ask why we must dredge up painful or ugly elements of our national history. Wouldn't it be easier (and less costly) to simply write off these experiments as an unpleasant aspect of the Cold War? To these people I say: we have a responsibility and an obligation to understand exactly what happened, to whom and with what effect. alternative. There is no moral Other critics of this effort ask why the focus on radiation? In the majority of these experiments the doses received by participants were apparently very low -- well below background levels, so it is ucceedingly difficult to detormine speaific harr. And what about othor .xarplos o f the government oxporimenting hproporly on humans? Why should radiation be treated as uniquely dangerous?
Page 2
I would respond that the radiation experiments deserve special attention because of the unique role that nuclear experiments have played in our recent history. single scientific development so revolutionized conflict between nations as did the development of nuclear weapons. Never before had a nation faced so many unknowns about the possible effects of a weapon on whole populations of people. Rarely in the history of this country have secrecy, urgency, and ignorance conspired to create an environment so heavy with the potential for the abuse of the rights of our citizens. this chapter of our history in a unified, coherent manner so that we may offer appropriate aid to those who may have been harmed, and just as importantly, so that we can take whatever steps may be necessary to prevent these kind of events from recurring. Never has any It is our duty to investigate It has been eight months since President Clinton established the Interagency Working Group on Human Radiation Experiments and the Human Radiation Experiments Advisory Committee to conduct a full investigation of past human radiation experiments. It has been six months since the Advisory Committee's first meeting, and the Committee released its interim report a little over one month ago. The issues raised by the interim report will be the focus of today's hearing. Now is a good time to review the progress of the past six months, consider the Advisory Committee's plans for the remainder of its tenure and discuss the ramifications of the Committee's dissolution for the ongoing It is clear from the interim report that the search for the facts on human radiation experiments and environmental releases will continue long after the tenure of the Advisory Committee has expired. I want to take a look at what the search and review process will become in the absence of the Advisory Committee. pear or two from now, if a citizen believes that they were part of some Government experiment, where will they be able to turn to When these experiments came to the public's attention last year, one of my chief concerns was whether sufficient controls were in place to prevent any similar experiments from happening today. I was pleased that the President issued a notice to all Federal agencies on this issue. proposed charter of the National Biomedical Advisory Committee includos in its undato the examination of the protection of the rights and welfare of research subjects. I strongly support the creation of this body and hope that it will be up and running in the very near future. I would also note that the One thome that I intend to return to today is credibility. I know that tho Advisory Committoo and DOE havo takon the lead to croato on open environment that has done much to onhance erodibility, and I look forward to disoussing with our witnesses
Page 3
today the steps that we need to take to broaden the public credibility of this process. As difficult and extensive as these investigations are, a full accounting is only the first step. Congress and the administration to consider appropriate compensation for those who have suffered harm from unethical moral obligation to treat and compensate anyone who has been harmed by an unethical experiment sponsored by the federal government. More difficult will be those experiments in which demonstrable harm did not occur or cannot be shown, but in which the participant8 were unwilling or unknowing. It will then fall to the I think w e can all agree that the nation is under a Before w e start I would like to make an observation. By and large, I supported our country's actions during the Cold War. There was a very real threat that we could go to war with the Boviet Union. But I am still profoundly shocked by the extent to which many in our Government were apparently willing to go to sacrifice other citisens' personal freedoms and civil liberties in the name of national security. The full scope of these radiation experiments is only now becoming known because of the declassification efforts being made under the Administration's leadership and the hard work of the Advisory Committee. However it is becoming increasingly clear that all too often the over-riding reason for the classification of many of the radiation experiments records was not national security, but inrrtead fear of lawsuits and personal culpability. This is a sad and unfortunate fact. However we can not accept this kind of abuse or secrecy now or in the future. I would like to welcome our first witness, Vic Resendes of the General Accounting Office.