Robert Byrd

Mr. BYRD

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BYRD. I thank the Chair and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BYRD. I take it that the hour of 6 p.m. has arrived?

Mr. BYRD. Will the Chair please have the clerk state the amendments that qualify on the morrow?

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, under the order, Senators, to be eligible to call up their amendments, had to offer those amendments by no later than 6 p.m. today; am I correct?

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Conrad, I offer an amendment authored by Mr. Conrad to be an amendment in the second degree to the amendment offered by Mr. Voinovich. I ask unanimous consent that after the clerk states the title of this amendment, that it and the amendment in the first degree be temporarily laid aside.

Mr. BYRD. Did the distinguished Senator from Ohio offer his amendment?

Mr. BYRD

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I am going to ask that the Senate recess awaiting the call of the Chair. I will be available, and Senator Stevens will be available anytime a Senator comes to the floor and wishes to offer an amendment or to make a statement on any matter. This will merely free the floor staff for a moment to have lunch, if necessary. Mr. President, seeing no Senator seeking recognition, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in recess awaiting the call of the Chair.

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I wish to request--I understand my colleague, Senator Stevens, has already done this with respect to his cloakroom--that our cloakrooms send out a call to various Senators and staffs who are in town to let Senator Stevens and me and the floor staffs know by 3 p.m. today if they have amendments which they expect to offer. If Senators expect to offer amendments and have not already informed Senator Stevens and myself and our floor staffs, they should do so by 3 p.m. today. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the quorum call be dispensed with.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, a few months ago, a lady by the name of Sara McBurnett accidentally tapped a sports utility vehicle from behind on a busy highway in California. The angry owner of the bumped vehicle, Mr. Andrew Burnett, stormed back to Ms. McBurnett's car and began yelling at her; and then reached through her open car window with both hands, grabbed her little white dog and hurled it onto the busy roadway. The lady sat helplessly watching in horror as her frightened little pet ran for its life, dodging speeding traffic to no avail. The traffic was too heavy and the traffic was too swift. Imagine her utter horror. Recently, Mr. Burnett was found guilty of animal cruelty by a jury in a California court, so my faith in the wisdom of juries was restored. Ever since I first heard about this monstrous, brutal, barbaric act, I have wondered what would drive any sane person to do such a thing. There are some people who have blamed this senseless and brutal incident on road rage. But it was not just road rage, it was bestial cruelty. It was and is an outrage. It was an act of sheer depravity to seize a fluffy, furry, innocent little dog, and toss it onto a roadway, and most certainly to be crushed under tons of onrushing steel, iron, glass, and rubber, while its terrified owner, and perhaps other people in other vehicles, watched. There is no minimizing such cruelty and resorting to the lame excuse that, ``after all, it was just a dog.'' The dog owner, Ms. McBurnett, puts the incident in perspective. Here is what she said: It wasn't just a dog to me. For me, it was my child. A majority of pet owners do believe their pets to be family members. That is the way I look at my little dog, my little dog Billy--Billy Byrd. I look at him as a family member. When he passes away, I will shed tears. I know that. He is a little white Maltese Terrier. As a pet owner and dog lover, I know exactly what that lady means, and so did millions of other dog lovers who could never even fathom such an act. For my wife and me, Billy Byrd is a key part of our lives at the Byrd House in McLean. He brings us great joy and wonderful companionship. As I said on this floor just a few months ago, if I ever saw in this world anything that was made by the Creator's hand that is more dedicated, more true, more faithful, more trusting, more undeviant than this little dog, I am at a loss to state what it is. Such are the feelings of many dog owners. Dogs have stolen our hearts and made a place in our homes for thousands of years. Dogs fill an emotional need in man and they have endured as our close companions. They serve as guards and sentries and watchdogs; they are hunting companions. Some, like Lassie and Rin Tin Tin, have become famous actors. But mostly, these sociable little creatures are valued especially as loyal comforters to their human masters. Petting a dog can make our blood pressure drop. Try it. Our heart rate slows down. Try it. Our sense of anxiety diminishes, just goes away. Researchers in Australia have found that dog owners have a lower risk of heart disease, lower blood pressure, and lower cholesterol levels than those people who do not own dogs. Researchers in England have demonstrated that dog owners have far fewer minor health complaints than those people without a dog. Our dogs are about the most devoted, steadfast companions that the Creator could have designed. They are said to be man's best friend and, indeed, who can dispute it? The affection that a dog provides is not only unlimited, it is unqualified, unconditional. A faithful dog does not judge its owner, it does not criticize him or her, it simply accepts him or her; it accepts us as we are, for who we are, no matter how we dress, no matter how much money we have or don't have, and no matter what our social standing might be or might not be. No matter what happens, one's dog is still one's friend. A long, frustrating day at work melts into insignificance--gone--with the healing salve of warm, excited greetings from one's ever faithful, eternally loyal dog. President Truman was supposed to have remarked: If you want a friend in Washington, buy a dog. I often think about Mr. Truman's words. No wonder so many political leaders have chosen the dog as a faithful companion and canine confidante. Former Senate Republican leader, Robert Dole, was constantly bringing his dog, ``Leader''--every day--to work with him. President Bush has ``Barney'' and ``Spot.'' President Truman had an Irish setter named ``Mike.'' President Ford had a golden retriever named ``Lucky.'' The first President Bush had Millie. Of course, there was President Franklin Roosevelt and his dog, ``Fala.'' They had such a close relationship that his political opponents once attempted to attack him by attacking his dog. Eleanor Roosevelt recalled that for months after the death of her husband, every time someone approached the door of her house, Fala would run to it in excitement, hoping that it was President Roosevelt coming home. The only time I remember President Nixon becoming emotional, except when he was resigning the Presidency, perhaps more so in the first instance, was in reference to his dog ``Checkers.'' At the turn of the century, George G. Vest delivered a deeply touching summation before the jury in the trial involving the killing of a dog, Old Drum. This occurred, I think, in 1869. There were two brothers-in-law, both of whom had fought in the Union Army. They lived in Johnson County, MO. One was named Leonidas Hornsby. The other was named Charles Burden. Burden owned a dog, and he was named ``Old Drum.'' He was a great hunting dog. Any time that dog barked one could know for sure that it was on the scent of a raccoon or other animal. Leonidas Hornsby was a farmer who raised livestock and some of his calves and lambs were being killed by animals. He, therefore, swore to shoot any animal, any dog that appeared on his property. One day there appeared on his property a hound. Someone said: ``There's a dog out there in the yard.'' Hornsby said: ``Shoot him.'' The dog was killed. Charles Burden, the owner of the dog, was not the kind of man to take something like this lightly. He went to court. He won his case and was awarded $25. Hornsby appealed, and, if I recall, on the appeal there was a reversal, whereupon the owner of the dog decided to employ the best lawyer that he could find in the area. He employed a lawyer by the name of George Graham Vest. This lawyer gave a summation to the jury. Here is what he said: The best friend that a man has in this world may turn against him and become his enemy. His son or daughter whom he has reared with loving care may prove ungrateful. Those who are nearest and dearest to us, those whom we trust with our happiness and our good name may become traitors to their faith. The money that a man has, he may lose. It flies away from him perhaps when he needs it most. A man may sacrifice his reputation in a moment of ill-considered action. The people who are prone to fall on their knees and do us honor when success is with us may be the first to throw the stone of malice when failure settles its cloud upon our heads. The one absolutely unselfish friend that a man can have in this selfish world, the one that never deserts him, the one that never proves ungrateful or treacherous, is the dog. Gentlemen of the jury, a man's dog stands by him in prosperity and in poverty, in health and in sickness. He will sleep on the cold ground when the wintry winds blow, and the snow drives fiercely, if only he can be near his master's side. He will kiss the hand that has no food to offer, he will lick the wounds and sores that come in encounter with the roughness of the world. He guards the sleep of his pauper master as if he were a prince. When all other friends desert, he remains. When riches take wings and reputation falls to pieces, he is as constant in his love as the Sun in its journey through the heavens. If fortune drives the master forth and outcast into the world, friendless and homeless, the faithful dog asks no higher privilege than that of accompanying him, to guard him against danger, to fight against his enemies. And when the last scene of all comes, death takes the master in its embrace and his body is laid in the cold ground, no matter if all other friends desert him and pursue their way, there by his graveside will the noble dog be found, his head between his paws and his eyes sad but open in alert watchfulness, faithful and true, even unto death. Well, of course, George Vest won the case. It was 1869 or 1870. In 1879 he ran for the U.S. Senate and was elected and served in the Senate for 24 years. The citizens in Warrensburg, MO, decided to build a statue to Old Drum, and that statue stands today in the courtyard at Warrensburg. Harry Truman contributed $250 to the building of the statue. I generally ask new Senators from Missouri have they heard about Old Drum. I asked that of Kit Bond one day and he remembered, so upon his first occasion to visit Warrensburg, MO, after that, he brought me a picture of the statue of Old Drum. So, just a little pat, a little treat, a little attention for the dog is all that a pet asks. How many members of the human species can love so completely? How does man return that kind of affection? I remember a recent news program that told of a man who was going around killing dogs and selling the meat from them. A couple of years ago, NBC News reported that American companies were importing and selling toys made in China that were decorated with the fur from dogs that were raised and then slaughtered just for that purpose. And now we have this monster--I do not hesitate to overrate him--who, because of cruelty and rage, decided that he had the right to grab a harmless little dog and hurl it to its certain death. It makes one ponder the question, doesn't it, Which was the animal? Burnett, or Leo, the little dog? Of course we know the answer. The point is this: We have a responsibility to roundly condemn such abject cruelty. Apathy regarding incidents such as this will only lead to more deviant behavior. And respect for life, all life, and for humane treatment of all creatures is something that must never be lost. The Scriptures say in the Book of Proverbs, ``A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast, but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.'' Mr. President, I am concerned that cruelty toward our faithful friend, the dog, may be reflective of an overall trend toward animal cruelty. Recent news accounts have been saturated with accounts of such brutal behavior. A year or two ago, it was revealed that macabre videos showing small animals, including hamsters, kittens, and monkeys, being crushed to death were selling for as much as $300 each. And just a few day ago, there were local news accounts of incidents in Maryland involving decapitated geese being left on the doorsteps of several homes in a Montgomery County community. Our inhumane treatment of livestock is becoming widespread and more and more barbaric. Six-hundred-pound hogs--they were pigs at one time-- raised in 2-foot-wide metal cages called gestation crates, in which the poor beasts are unable to turn around or lie down in natural positions, and this way they live for months at a time. On profit-driven factory farms, veal calves are confined to dark wooden crates so small that they are prevented from lying down or scratching themselves. These creatures feel; they know pain. They suffer pain just as we humans suffer pain. Egg-laying hens are confined to battery cages. Unable to spread their wings, they are reduced to nothing more than an egg-laying machine. Last April, the Washington Post detailed the inhumane treatment of livestock in our Nation's slaughterhouses. A 23-year-old Federal law requires that cattle and hogs to be slaughtered must first be stunned, thereby rendered insensitive to pain, but mounting evidence indicates that this is not always being done, that these animals are sometimes cut, skinned, and scalded while still able to feel pain. A Texas beef company, with 22 citations for cruelty to animals, was found chopping the hooves off live cattle. In another Texas plant with about two dozen violations, Federal officials found nine live cattle dangling from an overhead chain. Secret videos from an Iowa pork plant show hogs squealing and kicking as they are being lowered into the boiling water that will soften their hides, soften the bristles on the hogs and make them easier to skin. I used to kill hogs. I used to help lower them into the barrels of scalding water, so that the bristles could be removed easily. But those hogs were dead when we lowered them into the barrels. The law clearly requires that these poor creatures be stunned and rendered insensitive to pain before this process begins. Federal law is being ignored. Animal cruelty abounds. It is sickening. It is infuriating. Barbaric treatment of helpless, defenseless creatures must not be tolerated even if these animals are being raised for food--and even more so, more so. Such insensitivity is insidious and can spread and is dangerous. Life must be respected and dealt with humanely in a civilized society. So for this reason I have added language in the supplemental appropriations bill that directs the Secretary of Agriculture to report on cases of inhumane animal treatment in regard to livestock production, and to document the response of USDA regulatory agencies. The U.S. Department of Agriculture agencies have the authority and the capability to take action to reduce the disgusting cruelty about which I have spoken. Oh, these are animals, yes. But they, too, feel pain. These agencies can do a better job, and with this provision they will know that the U.S. Congress expects them to do better in their inspections, to do better in their enforcement of the law, and in their research for new, humane technologies. Additionally, those who perpetuate such barbaric practices will be put on notice that they are being watched. I realize that this provision will not stop all the animal life in the United States from being mistreated. It will not even stop all beef, cattle, hogs and other livestock from being tortured. But it can serve as an important step toward alleviating cruelty and unnecessary suffering by these creatures. Let me read from the Book of Genesis. First chapter, versus 24-26 reads: And God said-- Who said? God said. And God said, Let the Earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the Earth after his kind: and it was so. And God made-- Who made? And God made the beasts of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God said-- Who said? God said. Who said? And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the Earth. Thus, Mr. President, God gave man dominion over the Earth. We are only the stewards of this planet. We are only the stewards of His planet. Let us not fail in our Divine mission. Let us strive to be good stewards and not defile God's creatures or ourselves by tolerating unnecessary, abhorrent, and repulsive cruelty. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, seeing no other Senator who seeks recognition at this time, I shall speak on another matter notwithstanding the fact that the Pastore rule has not run its course.

Mr. BYRD

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

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, while Senators are working out their amendments, I think there ought to be an Independence Day speech. I assume we are going home for the Fourth of July. So if there is no objection, I have a speech in hand. (Laughter.)

Mr. BYRD. Well, now, in the face of that extraordinary compliment, I would say it is just half as long as it would have been otherwise. (Laughter.)

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, the Senate will shortly recess, hopefully, for the Independence Day holiday. Many Members will return home to meet with their constituents. Some will perform a time-honored ritual and take part in bunting-swagged Independence Day parades, sweating and waving from the backs of convertibles somewhere in the line-up between the pretty festival queens, brightly polished antique cars, flashing fire engines, and, hopefully, ahead of the prancing equestrian groups. It is an American tradition as familiar and as comforting as the fried chicken and the apple pie that everyone will enjoy. Families and friends will gather to watch the fireworks light the evening sky. This first Independence Day of the new millennium calls to mind an earlier year two centuries ago. The year was 1801. Of course, then, as now, there had been a hotly contested election. Control of government passed from one party to another. It took a vote in the electoral college to decide the Presidency, and the House of Representatives put Thomas Jefferson into the White House instead of Aaron Burr. Passions ran high and many strong words were uttered. Grudges were nursed, and we feel those same passions today, and with the recent change of party control in the Senate, some angry feelings have been fanned anew. It is, perhaps, a good time as we celebrate the 225th anniversary of our country's independence as a new nation, a new government created under God in as thoughtful and inspired a manner as man can devise, to recall these words from President Jefferson's inaugural address: During the contest of opinion through which we have passed the animation of discussions and of exertions has sometimes worn an aspect which might impose on strangers unused to think freely and to speak and write what they think; but this being now decided by the voice of the Nation, announced according to the rules of the Constitution, all will, of course, arrange themselves under the will of the law, and unite in common efforts for the common good. All too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possesses their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression. Let us, then, fellow-citizens, unite with one heart and one mind. Let us restore to social intercourse that harmony and affection without which liberty and even life itself are but dreary things. The language that came from Jefferson's inaugural speech may be archaic, but the message rings true through the ages and is contemporary still. It reminds us of the great luxury of our liberty-- the freedom to say what we think and the ability to stand up for what we believe. It also reminds us of the need, then as now, to remember, protect, and preserve our liberty as our greatest common good. For that, we must stand together as a people united in, as Jefferson says later in his speech, ``. . . The preservation of the general government in its whole constitutional vigor, as the sheet anchor of our peace at home and safety abroad . . . .'' Americans are fortune's children. We are the lucky citizens of a great and novel experiment in government, the golden children of a 225- year-old alchemy that blended the best of all governmental forms into a wholly new metal, a grand representative government that has endured the trials of centuries. We enjoy power coupled with restraint; wealth with generosity; individual opportunity with concern for the less fortunate. Though at times it seems that we are consumed by petty squabbles or diverse interests that threaten to fragment us as a people, each year on the glorious Fourth of July we are given a chance to come together proudly as one American people, to honor, in Jefferson's words, ``[T]he wisdom of our sages and the blood of our heros . . .'' that have been devoted to the principles embodied in our Constitution and our government. This next Wednesday evening, as fireworks thunder over the Jefferson Memorial in Washington and are mirrored in the reflecting pond around it, patriotic strains will fill the air. Similar scenes will play out around the country. Whether in Washington or in small towns or medium- sized cities around the Nation, or in large cities, we may all be proud to be Americans first and foremost. Whatever other allegiances we might have, to party, church, state, or community, we are Americans first. Let us celebrate that and let us not forget it. As you light your sparklers and fountains, as you hear the martial music of John Phillip Sousa, as you applaud the fireworks displays, as you eat the first sweet corn and tomatoes from the garden, look around you and feel proud. Be proud that 225 years ago, bold men risked their lives and their fortunes and their sacred honor to give us this wonderful system of States, this amazing governmental system, this land of the free, this home of the brave united as one nation under God and under the red, white, and blue flag of the United States of America. Feel glad that so many of your fellow citizens are standing at your shoulders watching the parade, or sitting nearby with their families looking up at the sky ablaze with man-made stars. In these crowds is our hope for a long future as a people united still under Old Glory, and under the Constitution of the United States. Mr. President, Thomas Jefferson spoke of our constitutional government as the ``sheet anchor'' of our peace and safety. He chose his nautical allusion fittingly. A sheet anchor, according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, is a noun that first appeared in the 15th Century. It is a large, strong anchor formerly carried in the waist of a ship and used as a spare in an emergency, but the phrase has also come to be used for something that constitutes a main support or dependence, especially in times of danger. Truly, then, the Constitution is not just the organizing construct of our government, but also, as Jefferson saw it, the tool by which our Nation would preserve our liberties. It is fitting, then, to close with the words of the poet Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, who wrote about the republic in ``The Building of the Ship.'' Thou, too, sail on, O Ship of State! Sail on, O Union, strong and great! Humanity with all its fears, With all the hopes of future years, Is hanging breathless on thy fate! We know what Master laid thy keel, What Workmen wrought thy ribs of steel, Who made each mast, and sail, and rope, What anvils rang, what hammers beat, In what a forge and what a heat Were shaped the anchors of thy hope! Fear not each sudden sound and shock, 'Tis but the wave and not the rock; 'Tis but the flapping of the sail, And not a rent made by the gale! In spite of rock and tempest's roar, In spite of false lights from the shore, Sail on, nor fear to breast the sea! Our hearts, our hopes, are all with thee, Our hearts, our hopes, ours prayers, our tears, Our faith triumphant o'er our fears, Are all with thee--are all with thee! Mr. President, I yield the floor. (Applause, Senators rising.)

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Madam President, may I first yield to the distinguished Senator from Oregon who has been waiting. Then I want to respond to the distinguished Senator from Alaska.

Mr. BYRD. Madam President, I yield to the distinguished majority leader.

Mr. BYRD. Madam President, I thank the distinguished Senator. Mr. DASCHLE addressed the Chair.

Mr. BYRD. I gladly yield.

Mr. BYRD. Madam President, I have asked for recognition at this time so that I might inquire of the joint leadership as to when we might expect to take up the supplemental appropriations bill. That bill was reported from the Appropriations Committee several days ago. It is on the calendar. We only have a little time left this week. The administration has asked for this bill. The amount in the bill is within the request of the President of the United States--not one cent, not one thin dime over the President's request. The bill has had the joint support of the distinguished Senator from Alaska, Mr. Stevens, and myself, and our respective sides. I will be able, at a later time, to compliment the members of the committee. Right now I want to inquire. This is a very serious matter. The administration says it wants this bill before we go out because of the need in the military for moneys for services, for training, and so forth. I do not want us to be out through this recess and have this bill hanging out there, and have it there when we get back. Now we are ready to go. I would suggest we try to get a time agreement that would be amenable to the feelings of the two leaders and our respective sides. I think we can do that. I have every confidence we can do that. I just take the floor now to inquire as to what the chances are for us to move this supplemental appropriations bill before we go home for the Independence Day recess.

Mr. BYRD. Madam President, could we have order in the Senate.