Defense Scandal

The tremendous waste and inefficiency inherent in the nation’s selection and procurement of military hardware is a classic example of a relative few benefiting at the expense of virtually the entire nation.

A number of intelligent recommendations have been made to Congress to improve the process. Among them: Contractors’ rights and responsibilities should be clarified; terminations should be settled expeditiously to reduce cost; greater standardization of equipment and cooperation among the branches of the armed services is a must; congressional administrative accounting must be simplified, and the process must be open to greater scrutiny consistent with the needs for national security in sensitive areas.

Are these new ideas? The Times’ front-page inference (“Scandal’s Roots Traced To Reagan Goals,” July 4) is that this is somehow all the Reagan Administration’s fault. Ironically, most of today’s suggested improvements were already made--under the Kennedy Administration on Aug. 18, 1961. My father chaired the Military Procurement Advisory Committee in its report to Sen. George A. Smathers which included all of the above recommendations, among others. One final note: Their report to Congress was not printed at government expense.

NEIL HOKANSON

Olivenhain, Calif.