Robert Byrd

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the Chair, Senator Kohl, who is also chairman of the agriculture appropriations subcommittee. I thank him for his good work on behalf of the people of his State, for his good work on behalf of the people of my State, and for his good work on behalf of the people of the Nation. He is an apt student of public service and of the legislative process. He is one of my favorites. When I speak in that term, I think of the legislative process and I think of this institution, the Senate. I also thank Senator Cochran, who is the ranking member of the subcommittee. I thank him for his service to the Nation and to his people and to my people--to our people. Senator Cochran likewise does good work for the Nation and for the committee. He is a very able member of the Appropriations Committee. This conference report includes $75.8 billion in total spending for fiscal year 2002. This amount is $3 million below the level passed by the Senate. Of the total amount provided, $16.0 billion is discretionary spending, and this amount is within the subcommittee's 302(b) allocation. This conference does not include one cent--not one copper penny--of emergency spending. This conference report supports programs related to agricultural research, conservation, rural development, promotion of international trade, and many other traditional programs for which the agriculture bill has become so well known. This conference report also supports domestic food programs such as Food Stamps and the Women, Infants, and Children, WIC, program, as well as the other food safety and public health programs of the Food and Drug Administration and other agencies. The programs supported by this conference report serve the most basic of needs of the American people in nearly every facet of their lives. On September 11--another day that will always live in history, a date that will not be a footnote in the annals of mankind--the American people were reminded of the importance of programs related to public health, food supply, and food safety. These programs have long been a part of the Agriculture Appropriations bill, and they are continued, and strengthened, by this bill. I am particularly pleased that the conference report contains a number of provisions related to the treatment of animals--those creatures that cannot speak for themselves, those creatures without which mankind would perish. We should think of them, and we do think of them. There are two principle underlying statutes that provide authority to agencies under the jurisdiction of this conference report on the subject of animal treatment. They are the Animal Welfare Act and the Humane Slaughter Act. The Animal Welfare Act was first authorized by Public Law 89-544, the Act of August 24, 1966, and is today carried out by USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). The primary purpose of this Act was to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to regulate the transportation, sale, and handling of dogs, cats, and certain other animals intended to be used for purposes of research or experimentation, and for other purposes. Think of the service that those animals render to mankind. And they don't do it without a sacrifice to themselves. Today, in addition, this act is used to regulate individual dog breeders and handlers and larger operations such as circuses and zoos around the nation. The Humane Slaughter Act was originally passed in 1958, and requires that animals be rendered insensitive to pain before they are killed in a slaughterhouse. This Act is today carried out by USDA's Food Safety Inspection Service, FSIS. For a number of years, the level of funding at APHIS for inspections and enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act had been held stagnant. More recently, this Congress has been able to provide significant increases for these activities, including $2.5 million provided through an amendment I offered in the supplemental appropriations bill that was signed into law on July 20, 2001. In this conference report, additional increases are provided for these purposes. In this conference report that we are debating today, I say, additional increases are provided for these purposes. This conference report includes an increase of $2.4 million above the President's request for animal welfare inspections and the conferees have directed the agency to hire additional inspectors and support staff to increase the overall number of inspections, and to conduct more repeat inspections of facilities found to be in noncompliance with the act. Let's go back and look at them again, if they are not complying with the act. This year's appropriation of $15,167,000--in addition to funds made available in the supplemental--represents an increase of 60 percent since fiscal year 1999. So, at last, we are paying more attention--and we ought to pay more attention--to these animals and to the enforcement of the law in regard to their slaughter. Increased inspections are logically followed by increased demand for investigations and enforcement. This conference report includes an increase of $1,852,000--that is in addition to funds made available in the supplemental--for APHIS investigation and enforcement activities. In addition, Statement of Managers language directs the agency to hire additional inspectors to service the backlog of animal care investigations. I would like to mention that the conference committee became aware of reported violations of the Animal Welfare Act regarding treatment of polar bears by a traveling circus, and Statement of Managers language is included directing the agency to investigate this matter, take appropriate action, and report to the Appropriations Committee. Earlier this year, news accounts described incidents in meat slaughterhouses which were atrocious--atrocious--violations of the Humane Slaughter Act. As part of the $2.5 million amendment that I sponsored in this year's supplemental, an enhanced program of oversight within the agency has been initiated to ensure better enforcement of this act. Last month, the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced that it had begun this new initiative--using both funds provided by the supplemental and other Departmental funds--and had placed additional FSIS personnel in field district offices to work closely with plant inspectors and veterinarians. These individuals, who will be officially known as ``Humane Handling Verification Experts and Liaisons''-- let me repeat, these individuals, who will be officially known as ``Humane Handling Verification Experts and Liaisons''--will work to tighten up enforcement and oversight of the Humane Slaughter Act. We are talking about animals. I am not one of those who claim that man is an animal. Man was created a little lower than the angels but above the beasts of the field. Read the Scriptures. Read Milton's ``Paradise Lost.'' Yes, the animals serve us every day in ways that we do not tend to remember. They serve us. But for the animals, mankind would not exist upon the Earth, in all likelihood. Oh, you say, he might become a vegetarian, but what about the beasts of burden? The righteous man looks to the welfare of his beast. So, I intend to watch this initiative. You can bet on it. I intend to watch this initiative with keen interest and will look forward to making sure that resources are continually provided to make it an effective tool to stop inhumane treatment of animals. I guess my little dog Billy has had a great deal to do with my attitude toward animals. He has a little sister named Bonnie. Billy Byrd is 15 years old. But if there is a creature on this Earth that is absolutely and forever unfailingly loyal and dedicated to me--and there is--it is my little dog Billy, that Maltese terrier. He is an animal, but he feels pain. He must understand affection and love because he gives it to me and he gives it to Erma; and I give it and she gives it in return. Yes, never does he let me leave the door for work that he does not follow me to the last step. That is an animal. We are talking about animals that are slaughtered for the food that graces the table of men and women and children around the world--animals that we should treat humanely. Mr. President, again I want to congratulate the chairman and the ranking member of the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee for a job well done. Well done, Senator Kohl. Well done, Senator Cochran. I also thank all members of the subcommittee for their contributions to this final product. I thank the members of the staff on both sides of the aisle, without whom, where would we find ourselves. I thank them. I support this conference report, and I hope that all Senators will do the same. Mr. President, I thank the Chair and I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the Chair. How much time do I have, Mr. President?

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. I thank the junior Senator from New York for her support of my amendment. Yes, I do agree with the Senator that the various agencies which receive funding under my amendment should take notice of this colloquy and take all appropriate action to encourage applicants to work with the companies which the Senator from New York has described.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, reserving the right to object.

Mr. BYRD. I thank the distinguished whip.

Mr. BYRD. Yes. I am glad to yield.

Mr. BYRD. If anthrax can make the public jittery--and we have seen that it can and has made the public jittery--the prospect of smallpox, a contagious and vicious disease, could incite panic--panic! Funds in this bill, in my amendment, will be used to upgrade lab security at the National Institutes of Health and at the CDC, and to improve security at the U.S. Department of Agriculture labs, by hiring additional inspectors for import inspections, food supply monitoring, and lab equipment. There you are. Now, the next section of the chart I wish to point out is the section denominated ``Federal, State, and Local Antiterrorism Law Enforcement, $3 billion.'' Federal, State, and local law enforcement officials have been working around the clock since September 11. When it comes to law enforcement and homeland defense--remember what the preamble said, ``provide for the common defense''--this is where the rubber meets the road. My package includes $3 billion for Federal, State, and local antiterrorism law enforcement. Of that $3 billion, this package includes $1 billion for Federal law enforcement antiterrorism investments. This money would be used to improve communications among Federal agencies, for the Coast Guard to increase surveillance and improve communications with the Defense Department and other civilian terrorist/disaster response agencies, for the FAA to increase the number of safety inspectors and research on new safety technologies, and for the Drug Enforcement Agency, the U.S. Attorneys, the Judiciary, and the U.S. Marshals Service to improve security in courtrooms, for example, camera, x-ray machines and mylar on windows, and provide better facilities for police. The remaining $2 billion would be allocated for State and local law enforcement--again, State and local. Senators talk with your local mayors. Talk with your mayors in your home States. Talk with the police departments. See what they have to say. The remaining $2 billion would be allocated for State and local antiterrorism investments to improve the capacity of State and local police departments across the Nation to prevent and respond to terrorist attacks. Municipal officials need billions of dollars--call them on the phone; hear what they say--municipal officials need billions of dollars for their cities' hazardous materials response teams to fully equip their search and rescue teams and to outfit the law enforcement officials who likely will be first at the scene of a chemical or biological attack. Remember the day before yesterday? Who were the first people to go out to the scene of the plane crash? That wasn't a chemical or biological attack, but it was a sudden and terrible emergency. Who were the first? The policemen, the firemen, the paramedics. Here is a letter addressed to me by the National Governors Association, addressed to me and my counterpart on the Appropriations Committee, Senator Ted Stevens. In writing to us about an economic stimulus package, this letter from the National Governors Association says: Our recommendations also reflect the further deterioration of states' fiscal positions as detailed in the ``economy.com'' report sent to you earlier this week. With respect to our fiscal position,-- This is the National Governors Association talking now-- most states have made a series of spending cuts. Many are now implementing a second round, and in some cases a third. A number of states now have revenue shortfalls in excess of $1 billion and many are scheduling special legislative sessions to address mounting fiscal problems. And a Senator will soon make a point of order against this to say it is not an emergency, that this situation that prevails over this country and about which the National Governors Association is writing is not an emergency. Tell that to the National Governors Association! I read further from the letter: The cumulative states' current revenue shortfall is $10 billion and growing. Moreover, new and unprecedented state responsibilities for homeland security are exacerbating serious fiscal conditions. Let me read that sentence again for those who would say that this is not an emergency. Here is what the Governors say: New and unprecedented--what is an emergency? Something that is new, unanticipated? Moreover, new and unprecedented state responsibilities for homeland security are exacerbating serious fiscal conditions. Tell the Governors, tell the mayors, tell the chiefs of police of the departments throughout the land that this is not an emergency that we are dealing with and that a point of order should lie against this amendment because it is not an emergency?

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the Chair. Many times my colleagues have seen me reach into my shirt pocket and pull out the Constitution of the United States. The distinguished whip, the majority whip, also carries a copy of that Constitution, as do several other Senators on both sides of the aisle. I have supplied them with this shirt pocket copy. I will refer to it as the ``shirt pocket copy.'' Alexander the Great put foremost, among all books, among all histories and among all literature, ``The Iliad.'' Alexander the Great's copy of ``The Iliad'' was referred to as the ``casket copy.'' He slept with ``The Iliad'' under his pillow. I do not sleep with the Constitution under my pillow, but I carry it next to my heart, the Constitution of the United States. Now, let's read for a moment the preamble of the Constitution. Those who have shirt pocket copies, take out your Constitutions; and those of you who don't happen to have a shirt pocket copy, take the Constitution off the desk or the shelf, if it is nearby. The Preamble reads as follows: WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union-- Now, the President of the United States has said he wants to set a new tone in Washington: Do away with partisanship; do away with all the quibbling, the argumentation, as it were, to form a more perfect union. That is the way I would interpret what he said. I continue to read from the Preamble of the Constitution: . . . establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence-- Let me read that again: ``provide for the common defence.'' It doesn't say anything about defending ourselves in Afghanistan. It says ``provide for the common defence.'' It means to provide for the defense of our homeland, as well. ``Provide for the common defence.'' ``Common'' means common. It is everywhere. It is common to all. It doesn't single out any particular person, place, territory, or city. It provides for the common defence. I continue to read: . . . promote the general Welfare-- That doesn't say promote the welfare of the rich; it doesn't say promote the welfare of Sophia, WV, my little hometown which you can hardly see on a map. ``Provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare.'' The Preamble isn't talking about those people who are on welfare rolls. It says ``promote''--that means to push forward, to lift up, to advocate. To ``promote the general Welfare and secure the Blessings of Liberty.'' Aha, that word liberty!--``and secure the Blessings of Liberty''--to whom? ``. . . to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this CONSTITUTION for the United States of America.'' Who said this? It says ``do ordain and establish this CONSTITUTION. . . .'' In speaking of liberty to ourselves, who is doing the talking? Who is doing the talking? Let me tell you who is doing the talking. I will start with New Hampshire, Nicholas Gilman and John Langdon were the signatories for New Hampshire. Next we will take Massachusetts. Who were the signatories? Rufus King and Nathaniel Gorham. Then what is the next State? Connecticut. William Samuel Johnson and--who is that fellow who signed all those great documents from Connecticut? Who was he? Roger Sherman, Connecticut. What is the next State? New York. New York, Alexander Hamilton. Only had one signator, the great State of New York. And on down. Those were the men who signed this document. Immortal? This Constitution will live as long as the Earth stands. Immortal document, this is, indeed. These are the 39 signers. I have just read the preamble to the Constitution. I have done so because it adequately and perfectly fits as the preamble to what I am going to say and what I am going to advocate. I am going to talk about the homeland defense piece of this measure before the Senate. Defense; homeland defense. The preamble of the Constitution introduces the preamble, as it were, to that portion of the package which my staff and I, at the request of the distinguished majority leader, developed for this amendment. ``Homeland defense,'' that is the title of this amendment. ``Homeland'' defense. Not homeland infrastructure. Not homeland pork. But ``homeland defense.'' Mr. President, hear me now! Fear has gripped the American people. It threatens the U.S. economy. I don't call my portion of this package a stimulus package. I am not calling it a ``stimulus'' although it does help to stimulate the economy. Anything that puts confidence back into the hearts and minds and pocketbooks and bookkeeping ledgers of the American people is a stimulus to the economy. But to those who thought they would see Robert Byrd bring out a package with a lot of infrastructure in it are sorely dismayed and disappointed. It ``ain't'' here. Infrastructure is needed in this country to be sure. If you want something that is true stimulus, put $1 billion into highways and you will employ 43,000 people. Or put $1 billion into school construction and you will employ 24,000 people. But I am not doing that. I was asked at first by the majority leader to develop some options that would help to stimulate the economy. So my staff and I--I have excellent staff; they are not excelled by anybody anywhere in the world. That is what I think of them. My excellent staff and I were asked to prepare some options. We did that. We did a $10 billion option, a $5 billion option, a $20 billion option, a $30 billion option. So we have options all over the place. And in more than one of them I had infrastructure, something that would provide jobs. But then something happened. We know, because we have read chapter and verse of the recent history in which we saw the awesome, terrible, horrific picture of two airplanes sailing into the Twin Towers in New York City. We saw the showers of bricks and mortar falling upon people, upon firefighters, upon policemen, upon men and women and children. And then there came anthrax, a weapon that has been spread among us. I haven't been in my office in the Hart Building in weeks. The office is closed. My staff people are not in there. I haven't read the mail that has been sent to my office in the Hart Building in weeks. There are other Senators here who can say the same, on both sides of the aisle. Fear has gripped the American people, and it threatens the U.S. economy. You can see it. You can see it in the vacant streets of our major cities on the weekends. Walk the streets of Washington on the weekends. You can see it in the half-full airplanes taking off from our airports--half full. Some of them not half full. You can see it in the empty shopping malls less than 2 weeks before the start of the holiday shopping season--less than 2 weeks. Go to the shopping malls. Go to the national parks. Here is a headline: ``National Park Entrance Fees to be Waived.'' Aha, you can go for free. National Park entrance fees to be waived over Veterans Day weekend to inspire national unity, hope, and healing. So we see a repetition of the free passes, for example, that Metro issued here in the city, and in Northern Virginia, free passes that were issued by Metro so that people would ride, hopefully, into Washington, DC, and shop, spend money to stimulate the economy. There were the restaurants in Washington, DC, that offered a free glass of wine to the people who would come to those restaurants. Now I have just read that the national park entrance fees were to be waived over Veterans Day weekend, which has just passed--for what reason? To inspire national unity, national hope, and national healing. You can see it on Wall Street. Just watch Lou Dobbs. Watch him on television every day. You can see this fear spreading like oil, slowly, slowly--fear. You can see it on Wall Street. At one point, on Monday, November 12, the day after Armistice Day, Veterans Day, the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 198 points following the news of a possible terrorist attack on American Airlines flight 587. We saw the drop in the Dow Jones after the plane crashed in the streets of Queens, New York. Wall Street was already trying to recover from the troubling economic news of recent weeks. The Commerce Department reported on October 31 that the economy contracted by .4 percent between July and September of this year, the first quarter of negative growth since 1991--10 years. The Labor Department reported on November 2 that the economy shed 415,000 jobs in October, increasing the unemployment rate to 5.4 percent from 4.9 percent in September, the largest jump since 1980. Wall Street has been able to shrug off negative economic news in recent months, but traders seem less able to do so recently. The lingering anthrax scare has spread to victims beyond the news media and the Federal Government. The Attorney General has issued vague yet sobering warnings to the American people about anticipated terrorist attacks. National Guard troops can be seen patrolling the Golden Gate Bridge. The American people, facing the fears of a new era, are looking to their elected leaders--you, Mr. President, the Presiding Officer and you, Mr. President, at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue--and me and other Members of this body and members of other legislative bodies, looking to their Government for reassurance. Parents want to hear that their children will be safe in their own neighborhoods. Families want assurances that it is safe to take that vacation they had planned earlier this year. The American people want assurances that they can open letters free from worries about biological weapons. They are looking to their elected leaders for security. If a son asks his father for bread, will the father give the son a stone? If the son asks for a fish, will the father give him a serpent? If the son asks for an egg, will the father give the son a scorpion? Go back to the Gospel of Luke. The people are asking for ``bread,'' in the form of Security. What do we, as elected representatives, give to our people when they ask for bread? Do we give them a stone when they ask for safety? What do we give them? A tax cut? The people are looking to their elected leaders for security. What do we give them? Do we reject this package which I shall explain momentarily? Do we reject it when the people ask for security against anthrax, when they ask for security against possible smallpox epidemics? What do we give them? Do we give them a stone? When the people ask that the loopholes be closed along the northern border and the southern border, when they ask for security from terrorists who would come across those borders when they are not patrolled; when the people ask for security against terrorists who would slink across the borders, do we give them a stone? Do we give them a scorpion? Do we give them a serpent? Do we respond to their cries when they want safety? What do we give them? We can start to alleviate the concerns of the American people right here--today--by addressing those vulnerabilities the terrorists are seeking to exploit. My staff and I have crafted a $15 billion package which would be a first step in giving back to the American people a small part of the sense of security that was blasted away on September 11. A point of order will be made against the package that contains this ``bread.'' Our people ask for bread. That is a good metaphor when one thinks of the security for which people are asking us. A point of order will be made claiming that there is no emergency. The point of order will be made based on the claim that this $15 billion package is not an ``emergency.'' Hear me now! Keep in mind that a point of order is being lodged against this homeland defense measure. And, keep in mind the preamble of the Constitution of the United States--that phrase which says ``provide for the common defense''. The first bit of this graph that I point to is that section--that piece of the overall pie chart--which reads ``Bioterrorism Prevention and Response.'' See it? ``Bioterrorism Prevention and Response--Food Safety, $4 billion.'' Ask the one physician in this body, the one surgeon. Ask Dr. Frist, Senator Frist from Tennessee, if he thinks that we need $4 billion for bioterrorism prevention and response and food safety. Ask him. He is a renowned physician. I know he is a politician, too. So was Jesus a great physician. He was a politician also. Ask Senator Frist if this is ``pork.'' Ask him if it is ``pork'' to provide $4 billion for bioterrorism prevention and response and food safety. We must reassure the American people whether their elected leaders are doing all they can to prepare against a biological or chemical attack. Anthrax, smallpox, and the plague are no longer the stuff of fiction but are deadly realities. My proposal includes $4 billion for bioterrorism prevention and response and food safety. This is money that would primarily be used for upgrading State and local lab capacities--get this now--State and local health departments, for example, in Raleigh County in southern West Virginia, and Sophia, WVA, my little town of 1,180 souls. Ask the Governors of the States, Republicans and Democrats, whether they need that money to upgrade State and local Lab capacities. Ask the mayors throughout the country if they need this. These funds would help local health departments to train emergency health responders in recognizing the symptoms of an incidence of bioterrorism, and would enhance the ability to diagnose and to treat such illnesses as anthrax and smallpox. My proposal will also allow State and local governments to plan for a variety of emergencies and to upgrade State and local information sharing systems. Preparation and prevention are critical to waging the war against terrorism that is currently being fought. Where? On our home soil. That is getting pretty close to home, isn't it, on our own soil. We would do well to remember that it was a doctor in Florida who had just received training from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, CDC, who thought to test for anthrax when treating the first victims of that unusual disease. It is an unusual disease. But it is an old disease. Read about it. Read about the 10 plagues of Egypt. Read about the murrain on the cattle, and the boils on human beings. Go to a dictionary and look up the word ``murrain.'' It means, for example, anthrax among the cattle, the camels, and other livestock. Look at how old it is. It has been around a long time--thousands of years. Here is a headline in today's paper. I will read it. State Department Fears-- There is that word ``fear'' again State Department Fears Another Anthrax-Tainted Letter. What does this say? Well, Cassius was nearsighted. I am not nearsighted, but I do need glasses to read. So here we go. I quote from this. The title of the article in today's paper of Wednesday, November 14, 2001, is: ``State Department fears another anthrax-tainted letter.'' I will just read a few excerpts from this news story in the Washington Times. The State Department said yesterday it is searching worldwide for another anthrax-tainted letter. At least one letter like the one sent to Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle is packed in with State Department mail that was halted last month, said the department's top spokesman, Richard Boucher. Meanwhile, the last of the Washington-area survivors of inhalation anthrax left the hospital yesterday after a 25-day stay. The high concentration of spores on a single sorter indicates ``that there is a letter like the one sent to Sen. Daschle that has moved through our mail system,'' Mr. Boucher said. ``We are now proceeding to go look at all the mail that we have held up, frozen, sealed off, in mailrooms in this building, annexes and around the world.'' There it is. So these funds--$4 billion--would also be used to expand the Federal pharmaceutical stockpile by contracting for the development of 300 million doses of smallpox vaccine to be delivered by the end of 2002 to prepare for a potential outbreak of that dreaded disease. No American has been vaccinated for smallpox since 1972, and the medical community is debating whether those who were vaccinated may still possess any degree of immunity. Now, I was one of those children in the public schools of West Virginia many decades ago who were vaccinated for smallpox. That is where I received my vaccination. The scar is still there on my left arm. Let's see what this headline says in the Washington Post of Wednesday, November 7, 2001. Here it is: ``HHS''--that is Health and Human Services--``Set to Order Smallpox Vaccine for All Americans.'' And it ain't free. It is not free. Let me just read excerpts from this story: Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy G. Thompson said yesterday that he expects to sign a contract this weekend to purchase enough smallpox vaccine for every American but that he has warned the White House-- Hear him. Hear Tommy Thompson down there at the White House. Hear him. . . .he has warned the White House the cost could be quadruple the $509 million he originally estimated--or equivalent to the department's entire $1.9 billion bioterrorism budget. . . . The previously announced administration effort to vaccinate all Americans against smallpox, a deadly disease that was eradicated in the 1970s, took on a renewed sense of urgency as one of the leading smallpox authorities warned it was conceivable that former Soviet scientists were helping to ``weaponize'' the smallpox virus for nations such as Iran, Iraq, Libya, and North Korea. These are referred to as ``rogue states.'' ``Many [Russian] scientists are really quite desperate for money''-- Cicero said: ``There is no fortress that money cannot buy.'' And here we read a warning by Donald A. Henderson, director of the new Office of Public Health Preparedness. U.S. intelligence indicates that several have been recruited by ``rogue states'' and were in a position to smuggle out a vial of the virus . . . .'' That's a very great worry.'' He said: ``Many [Russian] scientists are really quite desperate for money.'' In addition, Henderson said, there is evidence that the former Soviet Union succeeded in weaponizing the virus and manufacturing up to 100 tons annually at a plant outside Moscow. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have both of these newspaper articles printed in the Record following my remarks.

Mr. BYRD. The Senator may take whatever time he wants.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I remove my reservation.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I withdraw my suggestion.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BYRD. Yes.

Mr. BYRD. Is the Senator asking unanimous consent that the yeas and nays be ordered?

Mr. BYRD. I object to the request. As I understand it, the Senator is asking the yeas and nays be ordered by unanimous consent. I am opposed to that.

Mr. BYRD. Yes, that is exactly what they are going to say. I say to all Senators, a point of order is going to be made against this package because those who offer the point of order say it is not an emergency and, therefore, it should be stricken from the bill. Not an emergency? Let them tell that to the Governors of the country. I continue to read the letter from the National Governors Association: Similarly, absent any changes in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) or new federal funding for HIPAA implementation in state-administered programs, states will have little choice but to divert scarce funds to comply with this federal mandate. This means that significantly less state funds will be available for education, critical state services, capital investment, infrastructure improvement, and additional efforts to respond to bioterrorism and other threats to homeland security. Luke said, if the son asks his father for bread, will the father give him a stone? Here are the cities of this land asking their elected officials for ``bread'' as it were. Those who make the point of order will say: Give them a stone. Let them eat stones. Let them have a stone for security. Let them have a stone to protect them against a smallpox epidemic; give them a stone! I hope that Senators, when they vote on this point of order, will understand that the people back home are going to remember all of us, how we vote when the people, when the mayors, when the Governors, when the law enforcement officers of this country ask for ``bread,'' when they ask for security, when they ask for money to provide security to those little towns and hamlets and cities all across this land, I hope that those who vote for this iniquitous point of order, will be remembered by the people of this country come the next election. Let's talk now about the FEMA firefighters program. This package contains $600 million in grants to State and local communities to expand and improve firefighting programs through FEMA firefighting grants. Over 50 percent of that funding goes to volunteer fire departments in rural communities in the countryside, and the volunteer fire department is the first and only entity available to deal with the crisis. Last year Congress took action to begin to address this serious deficiency by creating a Federal program to provide direct assistance to fire departments. Administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program received an initial appropriation of $100 million. This funding was quickly depleted by tremendous demand. The Agency received more than 31,000 applications, totaling nearly $3 billion in requested funds, almost 30 times the amount appropriated. To those who would say that this package is wasteful spending, to those who would say it is porkbarrel spending, I say that one-half, a full 50 percent, would be allocated for bioterrorism prevention and antiterrorism law enforcement; Federal, State, and local antiterrorism law enforcement, $3 billion. Now as to transportation vulnerabilities, much has been done in the weeks following the September 11 attacks to improve our transportation security. I am not talking about building highways at the moment--to anyone whose skin might quiver at my use of the word ``transportation.'' This is transportation security. But each step we have taken to plug the holes in our transportation security has revealed another hole that must be filled. This package includes $2.2 billion to address simultaneously these vulnerabilities. Municipal officials need funds to protect their mass transit system. Of that $2.2 billion, this package provides $1.2 billion for enhanced surveillance of transit stations and improved emergency response systems. Amtrak requires funding to address the critical safety vulnerabilities of its facilities, including tunnels. Have you ever gone through a tunnel on a train? Go to West Virginia. You will travel through several tunnels on Amtrak. But this money that we are talking about includes tunnels in and around New York City. It must improve its station surveillance. Out of that $2.2 billion, this package provides $760 million for that purpose. The purpose is this: Amtrak requires funding to address the critical safety vulnerabilities of its facilities, including tunnels in and around New York. Another $150 million would be used to improve the security at our Nation's ports, ferries, and freight rail. This is a recommendation by Senator Fritz Hollings. I have been surprised to find that only 2 percent of the cargo that comes by sea to our Nation's ports is inspected and only one-third of the cargo that crosses over the boundaries by truck is inspected. This package finds moneys for addressing these border and these port security needs. Airport security. Airports have to respond to the substantial costs of the FAA's new, rigorous security directives issued since September 11. Airports need funds to increase the visibility of law enforcement personnel for deterring, identifying, and responding to potential security threats. Additional staff is needed to conduct security and employee identification checks throughout airports. Airports with tighter budgets, particularly smaller airports in rural areas, are unable to absorb these new costs. This package provides $1.2 billion to hire law enforcement personnel to improve protection of secure areas at airports. We have read recently a great deal about postal security. The distinguished Senator from North Dakota, Mr. Dorgan, just a few days ago--last week, as a matter of fact--as chairman of the Treasury Postal appropriations subcommittee, conducted hearings and had the Postal Service people up before the subcommittee to testify. It was a great hearing. The Senator from North Dakota rendered a tremendous service to the American people in holding this hearing. Today, the American public and Postal Service employees find themselves the victims of terrorism by mail. The people are afraid to open letters. I used to reach into the mailbox when I was hardly tall enough to reach it; I would reach into the mailbox with glee and pull out a letter. I remember the first letter that was written to me when I was elected to the House. After I was sworn in as a Member of the House of Representatives in 1953, the first letter that was written to me-- and I would have been 35 years old, so that was quite a long time back--came from my two daughters, and it carried on it three 1-cent stamps. We didn't have any fear of anthrax in those days. We used to open the mail with our hearts beating in our chests, with thankfulness, with expectation--but not expectation concerning a death-dealing letter. People today are afraid to open letters from distant kin. Suddenly postal workers are confronting attacks from something much more frightening than the vicious dogs that have long haunted the mail routes. A letter from an unknown source today is reason to call 911. America cannot function like this. America cannot go on functioning like this. Remember that phrase in the preamble of the Constitution about the ``general welfare''? America should not have to function like this. This package contains $1.1 billion for this. How much did the administration request? The Administration requested $175 million. That is a drop in the bucket. This package contains $1.1 billion to begin to make the security changes necessary to keep the mail moving and allow the Postal Service to respond to this and future terrorist attacks. Now, about the security of our borders, to which I alluded a little while ago, for border security there is allotted $1.1 billion. Our border security is dangerously underfunded. We want America to remain always the land of the free, but we want it also to be protected. Our borders must be secure. Our borders leak like a sieve. Try holding water in a sieve. Our borders leak like a sieve, and the leaking should cause us severe alarm. The Immigration and Naturalization Service conducts some 500 million inspections at our ports of entry each year--500 million inspections. Hundreds of millions of visitors enter the country without visas through the visa waiver program, or other legal exemptions. Yet how many inspectors are there to process these hundreds of millions of visitors? There are only 4,775 INS inspectors. Yes, you heard me. There are only 4,775 INS inspectors to process these hundreds of millions of visitors. That is 1 inspector--just 1--for every 104,712 foreign nationals who cross our borders. Just to make it easy, call it 100,000, rounding it. So you have one inspector--just one--for every 100,000 foreign nationals who cross our borders. And, some Senators would make a point of order against this package to say that it is not an emergency? When our borders leak like a sieve, they say that this is not an emergency? The U.S. Customs Service currently has the resources to inspect only 2 percent of the cargo arriving by sea. It inspects only about one- third of the truck cargo crossing the southern border. Almost nothing is more urgent than to quickly move to close these hideous gaps in our ability to monitor the goods and people who move across our borders. This package provides $1.1 billion for additional Border Patrol agents and screening facilities, primarily on the northern border, and to fully implement database improvement projects. It is not enough that we authorize these additional expenditures in the antiterrorism bill. It is an empty promise if we fail to provide the resources to back up that authorization. We must provide the funds, and we must do so quickly. The next item on my chart is designated as Federal computer modernization, $1 billion. There are more than 40 Federal agencies and tens of thousands of Federal workers who are working together to fight terrorism, but many of these agencies cannot pass along to each other information on suspected terrorists. They cannot pass that information along. Their computer systems simply do not work together. Their computer systems do not talk to one another. This package provides $1 billion for Federal computer system improvements so that Federal agencies that participate in our counterterrorism program can communicate with each other and provide more comprehensive information about threats and those who would carry them out. And, there are those who would say a point of order will lie against this because we do not have an emergency! Computer compatibility is critical to our ability to rapidly assess threats and to respond to them throughout the Nation. How about those nuclear powerplants? How about those electric power projects? How about those national landmarks such as the Washington Monument, the Lincoln Memorial, the Statue of Liberty that beckons to peoples from across the sea? We need only to look across the Potomac to comprehend the threat to our Federal facilities and national landmarks in this war on terror. I will never forget that day standing in my Capitol office. I was one of those slow movers. I will not be slow the next time. The next time those police tell me to get out of this building, I am going, and I will get out of there ahead of the police. But that day I was slow moving. ``Why should I go, I said?'' ``I will not be any safer out there than I am in here,'' so I was slow to move. I looked out the window on the morning of September 11 and watched the smoke rise from the direction of the Pentagon. Any Federal building or national landmark in this country could be the next target. This Capitol could be the next target. In October, the CIA received a warning from an intelligence service in Western Europe about the possibility of a terrorist attack on the Three Mile Island nuclear facility in Pennsylvania. While the threat later proved not to be credible, it underscored the breadth of the danger to our homeland--to our homeland, America the beautiful. The State police and the National Guard have stepped up patrols of these plants, and the Coast Guard is enforcing new rules barring boats from the waters near any nuclear plant. Likewise, utilities around the country have stepped up security at their plants since the September 11 terrorist attacks, but utility officials admit that the Nation's power grid is just too large to be fully protected from wanton attacks. My proposal includes $900 million to increase security at Federal facilities throughout the country, at nuclear plants, at our national treasures, such as the Washington Monument. Some of that funding would be directed toward enhancing security at State Department facilities. These security precautions are essential. These are investments that will have to be made in the future if we are to cope with the continuing threat of terrorism. Mr. President, over 6 weeks ago, on October 2, an agreement was reached with the administration so that the Congress could act expeditiously on the fiscal year 2002 appropriations bill. That agreement to limit spending in the 13 appropriations bills to $686 billion is being fully implemented. The Senate has passed this fiscal year appropriations bills on a bipartisan basis by an average vote of 91 to 7. That is bipartisan, is it not, an average vote of 91 for and 7 against on all of the appropriations bills that have thus been passed? We lack only one of the 13 bills, one that has not been passed by the Senate. We have lived up to our agreement. The Senate has lived up to its agreement. Republicans and Democrats on both sides of the aisle have lived up to this agreement. However, there was no agreement to limit our response to the September 11 attacks in the $40 billion appropriations supplemental passed on September 14. Who could have foreseen those two planes plowing head on into the brick and mortar, the cement, the steel of those Twin Towers? Is this an emergency? Who could have foreseen that? Who could have foreseen how the world would change? Who could have foreseen the emergency responses that would be required? In the weeks since, the reality of our post-September 11 world has taken hold, has seized the American psyche. We are now faced with security threats that were not foreseen last month, that were not foreseen the month before last, that were not foreseen and still seem unimaginable, the stuff of nightmares. Anthrax appeared like a vampire in the night, sapping us of our customary optimism. The threat of smallpox may face us for the first time in more than 20 years. Since October 2, the Attorney General has issued another warning about an eminent terrorist attack. That is since October 2. That is since the letter referring to the agreement concerning the top line of $686 billion. We have received information about a possible terrorist attack on the Three Mile Island nuclear facility in Pennsylvania since October 2, that letter of agreement among the executive and legislative branches that the top line would be $686 billion. The National Guard troops have been dispatched to protect the Golden Gate Bridge since October 2. The President has given the American people a pep talk. God bless him. He is a nice fellow. I like him. The President has given the American people a pep talk telling them they are now living in a different world and urging them to answer a call to war in our own land. And yet, there are those who would say this is not an emergency? Yet, we have war, not just in Afghanistan but also in our own land. Tell that to the farmer sitting by that cold stove on the plains. Tell that to the coal miner as he emerges from the dark bowels of the earth after a hard day's work. Tell that to the mother who has children she takes to school in her own automobile. Tell all of these that there is no emergency. Tell them that there is no war going on. A few days ago, President Bush asked the House and Senate leadership and the Appropriations Committee chairmen and ranking members to come to the White House; let us reason together. He wanted us to come to the White House to discuss the completion of the appropriations bills. I went. While the meeting was intended to be a discussion as a need to provide additional funding in response to the attacks of September 11, the President used the meeting as an opportunity to tell us that he would veto the Defense appropriations bill if Congress included additional spending beyond the $686 billion top line for the 13 appropriations bills and the $40 billion level approved by Congress on September 14 in response to the September 11 attacks. I assure the Senate that we are not breaking the $686 billion top line agreement on spending in the fiscal year 2002 bill. We have worked hard in the Senate to produce bipartisan bills that conform to that October 2 agreement. We took a handshake, and it was an old-time handshake. We are keeping our word. So far, the Senate has passed 12 of the 13 bills by an average vote of 91 to 7. Each of those bills has been consistent with the $686 billion top line. After the House takes up the defense bill, the Senate will take up a $317 billion defense bill that would also conform with the $686 billion deal. However, $40 billion approved by Congress on September 14 is clearly not enough to respond to the September 11 attacks. Why is $40 billion not enough? The President has proposed that $21 billion of the $40 billion go to DOD, and that $1.5 billion go to foreign aid programs. The President has proposed less than $9 billion for New York. Hear me, Governor Pataki, hear me! The President has proposed less than $9 billion for New York City despite our promise of $20 billion to New York City. That leaves less than $9 billion for homeland defense, and that is simply not enough. One cannot make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. One cannot make a violin out of a cigar box. That leaves us with a choice of not meeting our commitment to New York or not providing for a strong homeland defense. That is a choice I do not want to make. That is a choice I will not make. That simply is not acceptable. That is not living up to our word. That is not keeping our commitment. That is breaking our word. The world has changed. The world has changed since Congress approved the $40 billion supplemental on September 14. The threat of terrorism is no longer theoretical. It is real. When Congress approved the $40 billion package, we were only beginning to learn of the extent of the damage and the anthrax attacks that had occurred. The President's proposal does not provide sufficient resources for responding to the threat of bioterrorism or threats to the American food supply. Nor does it include sufficient resources to protect our Nation's transportation system for our airports, mass transit, river ports, seaports, or Amtrak. Nor does it provide sufficient resources to improve security at our borders or to improve security at nuclear powerplants and labs, or at our Nation's dams and reservoirs. That is why I have included $15 billion for homeland defense in this bill. On November 7, several press reports indicated the White House is weary that any additional spending approved now will be built upon in coming years, and I shall quote an AP story. What it had to say is this: Possibly forces President Bush to confront an endless stream of budget deficits just as he prepares for reelection in 2004. Watch out now. In order to respond to the White House anxiety about this spending, I intend to offer an amendment, if I have the opportunity to do so. Let me offer this amendment. I intend to offer an amendment to direct the Congressional Budget Office and the Office of Management and Budget to not include the funds contained in the homeland defense title of this bill in any calculations of so-called baseline spending for fiscal year 2003 and future years. So I say to the White House, go to sleep, sleep quietly. Sleep soundly, White House. Let me offer this amendment. This amendment will wipe away those fears. Under this amendment, these homeland defense funds would not be used to inflate the amount of spending necessary to maintain current services in future years. I remind my colleagues, without this amendment the Congressional Budget Office and the Office of Management and Budget would be expected to add over $177 billion--it would start with $15 billion--to add over $177 billion over the next 10 years. That is not my intent. That is why I have an amendment ready. Let me say to all Senators, this Senator has no hidden agenda in offering this package, no hidden agenda. I assure Senators and assure the Senate that the $15 billion in spending contained in this bill is not intended to result in a permanent increase in spending. This spending is intended to address the clear inadequacy of Federal, State, and local capabilities to respond to a clear and present danger to our homeland defense. I am not interested in playing the game of baseline bingo. The amendment I offer would make it clear that it is a one-time $15 billion expenditure. I hope a point of order will not be made. We must have a recrudescence of confidence in the determination of our elected officials to recognize terrorist attacks before they happen and take every possible step to minimize them if they do. The administration has responded to this by advocating additional money for bioterrorism prevention and additional National Guard troops at our Nation's airports. That is necessary, but it is not enough. We cannot expect the American people to take comfort in our efforts if we only address the threat of the day, whether it be anthrax or airline security. We cannot wait until there is an attack on a nuclear facility. We cannot wait until there is an attack on our mass transit system. We cannot wait until there is an attack on our food supply before we react. We have to take preventive steps now before an attack kills more of our innocent citizens. We must anticipate our vulnerability, not wait for them to be shown to us on CNN. The economy will continue to rise and fall, like the tides of the sea, but a sense of security for the American people is something that must not be allowed to wax and wane. The Congress has the opportunity before it adjourns for the year to show the American people that their elected officials have made every effort to prevent future terrorist attacks. We can take preemptive steps to combat terrorism on the homefront, with a health care system that can respond to bioterrorism, a safer food supplier, more secure airports and railroads, stringent border security, and State and local law enforcement that is trained and prepared to handle a terrorist attack. It is not enough that we make improvements to airport security or bioterrorism prevention. We cannot protect ourselves if we only focus on our vulnerabilities after they have been exploited by homicidal maniacs. We must be more prepared than that. A focus on every aspect of our homeland defense is essential in order to reveal and repair every weakness that we may find. These are basic safety precautions. These basic safety precautions must be implemented before the Congress adjourns for the year. We cannot wait for another year and another Congress to convene before we come to grips with the horrible reality of another disaster like the Twin Towers or the deadly attack on the Pentagon. Every man, woman, and child in America expects our utmost now. Let us act before it is too late. Mr. President, this is an emergency. On a monument to Benjamin Hill-- great Senator and great orator--to be seen in the city of Atlanta, GA, are these words: Who saves his country, saves all things, saves himself, and all things saved do bless him. Who lets his country die, lets all things die, dies himself ignobly and all things dying curse him! Mr. President, let us act to save our country. [From the Washington Times, Nov. 14, 2001] State Department Fears Another Anthrax-Tainted Letter (By Guy Taylor) The State Department said yesterday it is searching worldwide for another anthrax-tainted letter. At least one letter like the one sent to Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle is packed in with State Department mail that was halted last month, said the department's top spokesman, Richard Boucher. Meanwhile, the last of the Washington-area survivors of inhalation anthrax left the hospital yesterday after a 25-day stay. Leroy Richmond, 57, of Stafford County, Va., is believed to have contracted the disease when the Daschle letter went through the District's Brentwood Mail Processing Center. Another Brentwood postal worker left the hospital Friday, the same day an employee at a State Department mail-handling facility in Sterling, Va., went home. The State Department closed its mail system Oct. 24 when the Sterling employee came down with inhalation anthrax. It also notified posts worldwide to seal and shut down pouch mail. Mr. Boucher said eight out of 55 samples taken from the Sterling facility tested positive for anthrax. Two of the samples came from two separate mail sorters and six were found on a third sorter. The high concentration of spores on a single sorter indicates ``that there is a letter like the one sent to Sen. Daschle that has moved through our mail system,'' Mr. Boucher said. ``We are now proceeding to go look at all the mail that we have held up, frozen, sealed off, in mailrooms in this building, annexes and around the world.'' Officials have to assume that there is a contaminated letter of some kind in the system, and that it will eventually be found in a mailroom or pouch bag, he said. ``If there had been a letter that had gone beyond that into our system, we assume by now we would have seen it.'' As officials were looking for the real anthrax letter yesterday, the U.S. Capitol police were dealing with reports of a phony one found on the desk of one of their own officers. The officer has been suspended and accused of leaving a note and a powdery substance at his post in the Cannon House office building. The substance was not hazardous but the department was taking the situation very seriously, according to U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Dan Nichols. Federal officials during recent weeks have tried to get across the message to anthrax hoaxers that their pranks will be penalized harshly. In a radio address last week, President Bush said ``sending false alarms is a serious criminal offense.'' Lt. Nichols said a criminal investigation into the incident is under way and findings will be sent to the U.S. Attorney's Office and the police department's internal affairs division. The suspended officer was not identified. If convicted of a hoax, he faces up to five years in prison and as much as $3 million in fines. ``He's been accused of this, and he's suspended without pay, but he hasn't been charged with anything yet,'' said Jim Forbes, a spokesman for U.S. Rep. Bob Ney, Ohio Republican, who heads the committee that oversees U.S. Capitol Police. Mr. Forbes said there is no reason this officer would be exempt from charges similar to those faced by other anthrax hoaxers. ``He's not exempt from anything,'' Mr. Forbes said.

Mr. BYRD. Not an emergency.

Mr. BYRD. I ask unanimous consent to be recognized when the Senator from Montana yields the floor.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, reserving the right to object.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, on behalf of the majority leader, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until the hour of 10:30 a.m., Tuesday November 13; that following the prayer and the pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and that the Senate begin consideration of S.J. Res. 28; further, that the Senate recess from 12:30 p.m. to 2:15 p.m. for the weekly party conferences.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, before proceeding, I wish to express on behalf of the majority leader and myself our profound gratitude to the Presiding Officer for his patience and for his equanimity and for his good humor always, for the work he has done on behalf of his country today, sitting in the Chair for longer than he should.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H. Con. Res. 264 just received from the House.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to; that the preamble be agreed to; that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; and that any statements relating to the concurrent resolution be printed in the Record.