Robert Byrd

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. I have no objection.

Mr. BYRD. By unanimous consent--may I say with great respect to the Senate--by unanimous consent you can avoid the recapitulation, if you want to do that.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, that has been done since the beginning of time. (Laughter.)

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, my objection is still standing but I withdraw it.

Mr. BYRD. Reserving the right to object.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. I have been listening to this colloquy. I agree with the Chairman, the Senator from Vermont as well as the distinguished Senator from Oklahoma.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, our worst fears have been realized. Months of patient negotiations, bolstered by repeated threats of air strikes, have failed. Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic has defied the will and the prayers of the world and has turned his back on the prospect of peace in Kosovo. Indeed, he is intensifying his relentless assault on the ethnic Albanian population of the Serbian province of Kosovo. It was made clear to me and to many of us at the White House this morning that the question is no longer ``whether'' NATO will launch air strikes against Yugoslavia but ``when''. It is entirely possible that by the time these words are uttered, the machinery to launch an air offensive against Yugoslavia will have been put into motion. This is a matter of immense importance and far-reaching consequence for the United States. Senior defense officials have warned that an air operation against Yugoslavia will be extremely dangerous for U.S. and allied forces. This is not Iraq. This is a rugged, mountainous region frequently shrouded in fog and protected by a sophisticated air defense system. If the United States sends aircraft into Yugoslav air space as part of a NATO strike force, we must understand--and accept--the risk of that operation. That risk includes the possibility of downed aircraft, American hostages, and American casualties. An operation of this magnitude and risk should not be undertaken without the express support of Congress and the backing of the American people. We saw in Vietnam what happens when the will of the people is not taken into consideration. Only the President can lead the way in this crisis. Only the President can rally the American people. Only the President can mobilize the troops. Only the President can unite our NATO allies. Only the President can explain to the American people the reasoning for his intended action and the risks attendant to it. I urged him last week to make his case to the people as well as to the Congress. Mr. President, I again urged the President at the White House this morning to seek the support of the Congress for air strikes against Yugoslavia. I asked him to make that request in writing to the Majority and Minority Leaders of the Senate. I am pleased that he has done so. I commend him for recognizing the need to seek the support of Congress when the use of force is contemplated. We do not know where this conflict will lead. The winds of war are blowing over Kosovo today. Who knows what fires those winds might fan. Bosnia. Montenegro. Macedonia. Albania. All are in danger of being drawn into a conflagration in the Balkans. With enough sparks, Greece and Turkey could be drawn into the inferno. Although the conflict in Kosovo is far from our doorstep today, it could spread quickly, as wildfires are wont to do. Today our credibility as a world leader is threatened. If the conflict in Kosovo spreads, much more than our credibility will be at stake. If we are to act at all, the time to act is now. All we know for certain is that Slobodan Milosevic is a ruthless and desperate leader. If anything, his defiance of NATO and his repression of the Kosovo Albanians are increasing as his options dwindle. Violence is mounting in Kosovo, and thousands of ethnic Albanian refugees have already fled their homes and villages. The bloodshed has begun. Let us pray to God that it will not turn into a bloodbath. The United States cannot stand idly by and watch the catastrophe unfolding in the Balkans. It is in our national interest to support stability in this volatile region, to prevent the downward spiral into violence and chaos, and to stem the humanitarian disaster spreading out of Kosovo like a contagion. Having raised the stakes so high, a failure to act decisively could have untold consequences. The President may have the primary responsibility in the formulation and execution of foreign policy, but the Congress has an equally weighty responsibility, which is to authorize or refuse to authorize military action. The resolution that we are currently considering, which was drafted by a bipartisan group of Senators, endorses air strikes, and only air strikes, against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The goal of this resolution is twofold: to stop the violence in Kosovo before it escalates into all-out carnage, and to convince President Milosevic in the only terms he understands--brute force--to abandon his campaign of terror against the Kosovars. Mr. President, my thoughts and prayers today are with the brave men and women of the United States military who are willing to put their lives on the line in order to save the lives of countless strangers in a strange land. And my thoughts and prayers are with their families, the parents, spouses, and children who will wait at home, fearing the outcome of every air strike, until this madman Milosevic can be brought to his senses. These are the people to whom we have a duty to show courage in the execution of our responsibility. My prayers are also with the President. His is a heavy burden of responsibility. The decisions he makes in the coming days will affect the lives of many Americans. He is embarked on a somber, sober, and serious undertaking, and I pray that he will find the strength and guidance to bear the burdens of office that will weigh heavily on his shoulders as he faces this crisis.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I read a remarkable article this week in the Hill newspaper concerning the distinguished Senator from Georgia, Mr. Cleland. The article recounted events that occurred 31 years ago in Vietnam when then-Captain Cleland was gravely injured in a grenade explosion. The injuries that he received in that horrible accident cost him his right arm and both of his legs, and very nearly cost him his life. He was 25 years old at the time, and just 1 month shy--just 1 month shy--of completing his tour of duty in Vietnam. Now, think of that. Just a month to go. For more than three decades, Max Cleland lived with the crushing belief that his own carelessness had caused the accident, that the hand grenade that shattered his body and shattered his life had somehow fallen from his own web belt when he jumped from the helicopter. Most people in Max Cleland's situation would have been consumed with self- pity, even if they had had the grit to live. Think of that. The young Captain Cleland certainly battled it. But as he has handled so many of the challenges that have marked his life since that terrible day in Vietnam, Max Cleland triumphed over the lure of self-pity. He triumphed over his injuries. He triumphed over self-doubt. He triumphed over bitterness. Max Cleland could have given up after that accident in Vietnam. Most of us would have. But he did not. He turned his misfortune into the service of others. Three years after returning home from Vietnam, he was elected to the Georgia State Senate, becoming the youngest member and the only Vietnam veteran in that body. In 1977, he became the youngest administrator of the U.S. Veterans' Administration and the first Vietnam veteran to head that Agency. He returned to Georgia where, in 1982, he was elected Secretary of State. And, in 1996, he was elected to the U.S. Senate from Georgia. Now, that is a remarkable record, a remarkable feat. It is remarkable for anyone to reach the Senate of the United States. Out of all the millions of people that are in America, there are 100 Senators--the same number that were in the original Roman Senate when Romulus founded that city on the banks of the Tiber. He created the Senate, made up of 100 of the wisest men, and he chose old men for that Senate. So here is a man with the disadvantages that Max Cleland had to overcome, the struggle that he had to undergo daily and nightly, every hour of the day, even to live, and he made it to the U.S. Senate. In all of that time, he quietly blamed himself for the accident that so radically altered his life. But last week, according to the report in the Hill, Senator Cleland was stunned to learn from an eyewitness that the grenade that injured him was not one of his own, but had been lost by another soldier. My wife and I are reading the Psalms. Every Sunday, we read it. Actually, we have completed the Psalms, and now we are in Ecclesiastes. Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity. In our reading of the Bible, we have already read the New Testament and we have read the Old Testament. We have come all the way down, as I say, to the Book of Ecclesiastes. From the 85th Psalm, I will quote two lines: Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other. Through his indomitable spirit, Max Cleland overcame the injuries he received as a young Army captain in Vietnam and conquered the temptation to succumb to self-pity. He is an inspiration to us all, and I hope that he finds a measure of peace and solace in the long-lost truth that was revealed to him this past week. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the article from the March 17 issue of the Hill, titled, ``For Senator Cleland, a Searing Revelation After 31 Years,'' be printed in its entirety at this point in the Record.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may be permitted to proceed for my full 10 minutes, if necessary.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. The Senator is correct.

Mr. BYRD. The Senator is correct. The Emergency Steel Loan program is designed to provide immediate access to necessary working capital and to allow companies to refinance long-term debt obligations on reasonable terms and conditions, which will improve their immediate cash flow positions so they can stay in business until this crisis passes. We do not want to have companies be deprived of on economic life-line when they are drowning and need a helping hand.

Mr. BYRD. That was not the intent of the Committee and we would expect the Board to afford substantial deference to such a determination by a United States bankruptcy court and we will further clarify that if required.

Mr. BYRD. The Senator is correct, and if necessary we will clarify that further.

Mr. BYRD. The Senator is correct that the bill was written so that ``security,'' as defined in the bill, would cover such a situation, however if further clarification is required we will work to address that and similar issues so that such companies are not excluded from the assistance provided in this emergency loan program.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, as the Congress works to provide billions of dollars to address a crisis affecting our neighbors abroad who have had their lives disrupted overnight by raging waters, I have become more and more concerned about another water-related crisis occurring every day in this nation. That crisis is the lack of a safe, reliable supply of drinking water for millions of rural American families. Since 1995, federal data outlining the sorry details of the safe drinking water crisis have been available and, yet, year after year, adequate funding for water and wastewater projects that would solve this crisis is not provided. Last night, my distinguished colleagues joined Senator Stevens and me in sending a message to rural Americans that their crisis is not forgotten. Yesterday evening, the Senate adopted an amendment offered by myself and Senator Stevens to the supplemental appropriations bill that would provide $30 million in additional funds for rural water and wastewater systems. This money would benefit the neediest of rural communities that are affected by extreme conditions that increase the cost of constructing water and wastewater systems, that have a high incidence of health problems related to water supply and poor sanitary conditions, or whose residents are suffering from a high rate of poverty. Within the $30 million in budget authority provided in this amendment, $5 million would be allocated for loans and $25 million for grants. The result would be a total program level of $55,303,000. The reality of this funding is that this year, an additional 25 or more communities throughout the United States would get some relief from the fear of an inadequate, unsafe supply of drinking water. Safe, reliable drinking water is not an amenity. Safe drinking water is essential to the health and well-being of every American. All life as we know it depends on the necessary element of water. Most Americans take safe drinking water for granted. Most Americans just assume that when they turn on the faucet, clean water will automatically flow out of the faucet. They assume that there will always be easy access to an unlimited supply of clean, safe drinking water. The terrible truth is that, in the United States of America, the health of millions of men, women, and children is made vulnerable by their reliance on a possibly contaminated water supply. According to statistics from 1998, approximately 2.2 million rural Americans live with critical quality and accessibility problems related to their drinking water, including an estimated 730,000 American citizens who have no running water in their homes. Let me repeat that-- an estimated 730,000 people have no running water in their homes. An additional five million rural Americans are affected by grave, although less critical, water problems, such as water sources that are over- taxed or poorly protected, and by antiquated distribution systems. The very young and the elderly are placed at particular risk of illnesses caused by unsafe, unclean, drinking water, and many towns without a reliable supply of water cannot even protect residents from the threat of fire. This funding provided in our amendment is desperately needed to address conditions in West Virginia and much of Appalachia, the Mississippi Delta, in rural and native Alaskan villages, the Colonias, and in Indian Reservations. Senator Stevens has been working hard to get the necessary funds for an authorized program for rural development in several Alaskan Native villages. I understand that while the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is trying to help, funding simply is not there for the water and wastewater systems that are the backbone of any development proposal. Our amendment specifically directs funds through the national reserve in an effort to serve the deserving families in Alaska in a timely manner. In my own state of West Virginia, families in towns such as Pageton, Belington, and Crum must deal with the normal family worries of providing food, shelter, and a sound education to their children. Can you imagine the frustration that these families face every day in having to further protect their children from a foul or unreliable source of water! I am not talking about water that smells bad or tastes funny. I am talking about water that must be boiled before consumption, or that flows--when it flows--like opaque brown sludge from their taps. This is water not fit to wash a car, let alone to cook with or to mix with baby formula. That simply should not be, in a nation as rich in resources as we are. A good part of the supplemental provides assistance for disaster recovery in other nations. This amendment reaches out to Americans in crisis. It gives hope to rural America that a brighter future lies ahead, a future flowing as bright and clear as the water out of their tap.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Yes, if the distinguished majority leader would. I am glad he has spoken as he has. I don't know how much the American people know about, really, what we face. And I am not sure I know, by any means. I am sure that Congress has certain constitutional responsibilities and that when it comes to sending American men and women into war, into conflict, into danger, Congress also bears part of the responsibility. I am fearful that in recent years especially, American Presidents in both parties have not recognized that fact, and they have, sent men and women into areas of peril without taking the Congress along with them. I think we learned in Vietnam that unless the American people are behind an effort such as that, it cannot succeed. I believe that Congress ought to fulfill its duties. But I also believe that Congress has to take a stand and demand that its constitutional prerogatives be recognized. No President can carry on a war without the support of Congress or without the support of the American people. I am sure the distinguished majority leader feels the same way about it. We are on the edge of a great precipice here of national danger. And what is happening in the Balkans is something that should be of great concern to all of us and to the people of the world. It was from that area, may I say to my friend, that the Roman legions procured their fiercest fighters. There has been turmoil and fighting in that area of the world for hundreds and hundreds of years. We are seeing there today an individual, Mr. Milosevic, who has a strong will and who is absolutely ruthless in his determination to subjugate and to massacre and to exterminate other peoples. The President needs to get out front and tell the American people why it is, if we are going to send our men and women into conflict there. If we are going to send planes in there, some of those planes may be shot down. Americans may be held hostage. Americans may be killed. The American people need to know what we are about to do and why and what the end game is and what the exit strategy is, what the motivations are, what the costs are going to be, before we get out there on a limb and have a lot of people killed. I hope the President will take the lead. Sandy Berger or the Secretary of State or even the Vice President cannot speak for the one man in the country who is the President of the United States, whether he is a Democrat or Republican. The President has the responsibility to get out front, tell the American people what we face and if we are about to send men and women into war, and when this will end, if we ever go there, ever begin bombing. We need to know this. The President needs the Congress behind him. He can't do this alone. He needs the Congress behind him. He needs Republicans and Democrats. We can only be behind him if we understand what we are being asked to do. We don't really understand. I compliment the majority leader and the minority leader for requesting--they should not have to request this--this hearing in the presence of the President of the United States. That is the man we need to hear from. He is the man who has to put his name on the line. He has to get out front. He has to tell the American people the truth, and he has to tell Congress. He has to keep Congress informed. He must not get out too far in front of Congress, because, otherwise, he will look behind him and wonder where the troops are one day, meaning the congressional battalions. I thank the distinguished majority leader.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield, I don't know about eloquence, but I can say that the Senator from Mississippi always carries a warm smile. I have not been noted for smiling. I once read a story by Nathaniel Hawthorne entitled, ``The Great Stone Face.'' And so I usually think of myself, in the context of that story, as the great stone face. But the distinguished Senator from Mississippi is always bubbling with energy, always on the move, always wearing a smile, always with twinkling eyes. He brings a lift to the spirits of all of us. I congratulate him. I know that grandchild of his is always going to carry the picture in his little mind of that grandfather with that sparkling, radiant smile.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, there is an old adage--and I have heard it many times, and so have you and our other colleagues--that, ``March comes in like a lion and leaves like a lamb.'' That adage was certainly turned on its ear this year. March tiptoed in on little lamb's hooves, as soft and warm as a curly fleece, giving us all hope of an early, mild spring. Aha. The smiles that have lighted up the faces here in the pages and the officers of the Senate and the employees of the Senate who sit before me here when I mentioned that word ``spring.'' In West Virginia, the center of the world--half the world on one side, half the world on the other--West Virginia, early daffodils pushed through great rafts of dried leaves washed up against old stone farmhouse foundations that jut like rocky reefs out of sunny hillsides. Oh, the iridescent sunsets and the viridescent hills that are West Virginia's. Bluebirds decorated telephone line perches while forsythia blossoms announced the awakening of the Earth. Then the March lion roared with a vengeance, sending successive storm waves across the Nation. Snow buried the daffodils under a crystalline blanket of sparkling white. West Virginia was hit hard by these late storms, as were many other States. What was a boon for skiers and schoolchildren has been a real hardship for commerce and commuters. But now, as the vernal equinox and the official first day of spring approaches, we can all look forward to the lion at last lying down with the lamb. It is time, as the poet Algernon Charles Swinburne (1837- 1909), wrote in ``Atlanta in Calydon'': For winter's rains and ruins are over, And all the season of snows and sins; The days dividing lover and lover, The light that loses, the night that wins; And time remembered is grief forgotten, And frosts are slain and flowers begotten, And green underwood and cover Blossom by blossom the spring begins. Once again, the warm sun encourages us to consider folding away our scarves, our gloves, and our overcoats, retiring the snow shovel to the shed, and pulling out instead the trowel and the seed packets. How many of us have enjoyed looking at those seed packets and fancying ourselves as young farmers, how we would grow these cucumbers, or these tomatoes, or this lettuce, or these onions, or the potatoes? What promise is contained in seed packets! What a joy. Reading garden catalogs during cold, dark winter days inspires small-scale gardeners like myself with dreams of grandeur. Ah, fancy myself growing these beautiful vegetables. Ah. I am sure that others have shared that pleasantry with me many times. A few tomato plants are all that I really have the time for, but for me those humble plants with the spicy scent, their soft leaves and glossy fruits--Better Boy, Big Boy, Beefsteak, Early Girl--a few tomato plants are all that I really have the time for, but for me, those humble plants with their spicy scent, their soft leaves and glossy fruits, serve each year to reconnect me with cycles of nature. In my few tomato plants, I share with farmers throughout the Nation worries about cold spells, early frosts, drought, excessive rainfall, fungus, and insect infestation. But, like those farmers throughout the Nation, I glory in the success of my efforts, and my family and neighbors--mostly my family--share in the bounties of those tomato plants. How can one even dare to believe that there is no God, no Creator? Why do I put those tomato plants in the ground? Why? I have confidence that the Creator of man and the universe is going to make those tomato plants bear some fruit. And this year I will delight in introducing the newest member of my family, too--I say to our distinguished leader, a new member of my family--a dainty great-granddaughter, Caroline Byrd Fatemi; wait until I introduce her to my garden. She was born just 2 weeks ago yesterday. So small and precious now, she will grow strong and happy in the sunshine. And perhaps someday she too will grow some tomatoes. I do love the promise of the spring. William Jennings Bryan spoke of the Father, the Creator: If the Father deigns to touch with divine power the cold and pulseless heart of the buried acorn and to make it burst forth from its prison walls, will He leave neglected in the Earth the soul of man made in the image of his Creator? If He stoops to give to the rosebush whose withered blossoms float upon the autumn breeze, the sweet assurance of another springtime, will He refuse the words of hope to the sons of men when the frosts of winter come? I do love the promise of the spring. Every place is better for springtime's artistry. There exists no imposing monument of granite or marble that is not improved by a softening verdigris of springtime green, highlighted by bright blooms. Washington is at its best in April and May, under bright skies and tossing cherry blossoms, with all of its governmental mass leavened by leaves. Spring travels a little slower to the hillsides of West Virginia, but it is, perhaps, all the more cherished for blooming later. There, in the deep shadows of the hills where rhododendron thickets outline quiet chapels among the cathedral of the trees, greening springtime coincides in harmony with God's Easter promise of resurrection. I encourage my colleagues, and everyone else, too, to shake off the last of the winter blahs and go outside. Go early in the morning when the birds sing in grand chorus, or in the blinding brightness of noon, or in the lilac serenity of evening, but go outside. Go outside and breathe in the scent of hyacinths and fresh-turned earth. Plant a garden. Plant a single tomato seedling and join in the great community of gardeners and farmers and lovers of the earth. But do enjoy the springtime. It resurrects the spirit. I asked the Robin as he sprang From branch to branch and sweetly sang What made his breast so round and red ``Twas looking at the sun,'' he said. And I asked the violets sweet and blue, Sparkling in the morning dew, Whence came their colors, then so shy, They answered, ``Looking to the sky.'' I saw the roses one by one Unfold their petals to the sun. I asked them what made their tints so bright, And they answered, ``Looking toward the light.'' I asked the thrush whose silvery note Came like a song from angel's throat, Why he sang in the twilight dim. He answered, ``Looking up at Him.'' Mr. President, I yield the floor. Mr. CLELAND addressed the Chair.

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, today we celebrate the life of the patron saint of Ireland known popularly as Saint Patrick. Saint Patrick's given name was actually Maewyn and he was born in Wales about 385 A.D. Many of us, whether we have a drop of bonafide Irish blood or not, will have donned something green today, in honor of the great spirit and rich traditions of the Irish people, and of their substantial contributions in all walks of life to this, their adopted homeland. Right here in the Senate we can see the brilliant legacy of the Irish gene pool personified in the physical presence of some of our most outstanding Members. I note that one of these sons of Ireland celebrated his 72nd birthday on yesterday--merely a young lad in my eyes. That illustrious son of Ireland is none other than the Honorable Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Although I am honored to wish this amazing gentleman the happiest of birthdays, my heart hangs heavy with the knowledge that all too soon this incredible man will be leaving this body. He has announced his retirement from the United States Senate, commencing with the end of this Congress. In this coming year, we will celebrate his life and his achievements, but I cannot emphasize enough what a loss this body will have suffered when the senior Senator from New York, Mr. Moynihan, no longer graces this Chamber. He is, quite literally, irreplaceable. Pat Moynihan is, in every sense of the word, a giant. He has written more books than most of us have read. Often his observations have been astoundingly prophetic. From his towering intellect, to his wry wit, to the breadth of his experience in governing, to his contributions to his country, and to the world, Senator Moynihan is almost without parallel in our times. He is that rare commodity to which superlatives may be applied without hesitation, and in complete honesty. Time will only enhance his legacy and his reputation. When my own time comes to leave this august body or even to leave this beautiful blue sphere we call the great, good earth, I will count among my proudest, most important and enjoyable experiences, that of having served with the gentleman from New York. So today, on St. Patrick's Day, I thank his ancestral nation for sending this phenomenal gentleman to us, and I congratulate Daniel Patrick Moynihan for a life of excellence. What pride we have in him as one of our own, what pride, indeed. I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, S. 544, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations and Rescissions Bill for Fiscal Year 1999, as reported by the committee, recommends appropriations which total some $1.9 billion, of which approximately $1.6 billion is designated as emergency spending pursuant to Section 251(b)(2)(A) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended. Very importantly, in Title I of the bill, the Committee unanimously approved provisions that I included to establish the Emergency Steel Loan Guarantee Program. This initiative is designed to respond to record levels of foreign steel imports that have been illegally dumped in U.S. markets. As a result of these imports, more than 10,000 American jobs have been lost, and the United Steelworkers of America estimates that another 100,000 jobs are in peril nationwide. In my home state of West Virginia, nearly 800 men and women have been laid off from Weirton Steel. Three domestic producers have already filed for bankruptcy, and others are in dire financial straits. If the U.S. steel industry goes under, not only will there be lost jobs, but there will also be lost communities; the domestic industrial base that underpins our security will be irreparably weakened; and the nation's defense readiness will be diminished. This initiative, cosponsored in Committee by Senators Specter, Durbin, Shelby, and Hollings, would create a revolving fund to give domestic steelmakers a sorely needed infusion of capital. The program, which is fully compliant with international trade laws, would give cash-strapped companies access to the funding they may need to keep their furnaces burning and keep workers on the job until proper trade mechanisms can be implemented to end this crisis. The loan guarantees would help to bolster the financial security of a threatened industry that is critical to this nation's economic base and domestic security. Specifically, the guaranteed loan program would provide qualified U.S. steel producers with access to a two-year, $1 billion revolving guaranteed loan fund. The minimum loan that would be guaranteed for a single company at any one time would be $25 million, and the aggregate amount of loans that would be guaranteed for a single company over the duration of the program would be $250 million. A board, to be chaired by the Secretary of Commerce, would oversee the program and would have flexibility to determine the specific requirements for awarding the guaranteed loans. The Act protects taxpayers by requiring that a reasonable assurance for the repayment of the loans exists, and that the loans would bear market interest rates. Finally, in Title I, the committee increased FEMA's emergency disaster assistance funding by $313.6 million, while at the same time reducing a like amount from HUD's Community Development Block Grant emergency funding. The VA/HUD Subcommittee was concerned over HUD's failure to implement an effective emergency disaster relief program. The committee felt that FEMA could more appropriately respond to unmet disaster needs throughout the nation. Title II of the bill contains a number of appropriations for regular supplemental budget requests of the administration, including: NOAA operations research and facilities activities, $3,900,000; Salaries and Expenses of the Supreme Court, $921,000; Bureau of Indian Affairs, $1,136,000; Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians, $6,800,000; Corporation for Public Broadcasting, $18,000,000; and Military Construction for the Army National Guard, $11,300,000. For each of these regular supplementals, offsets have been included in the bill. Title II also provides non-emergency supplemental appropriations of $210 million for the Department of Defense to reimburse the DOD for its assistance in Central America, as well as $80 million in non-emergency appropriations for the salaries and expenses of the Immigration and Naturalization Service to cover increased costs of handling the large influx of aliens from Central American countries. Both of these items have been requested by the administration as emergency spending, but the Defense and Commerce/Justice/State Subcommittees chose to fully offset these appropriations and to include them in Title II as non- emergency spending. I note that Title II also contains a number of general provisions, one of which, Section 2008, extends the Airport Improvement Program which under present law, would expire on March 31, 1999. Additionally, section 2011, is a general provision which prohibits the Federal Government from recouping any of the savings to the Medicaid program achieved by the States as a result of their tobacco settlements. Title III of the bill contains rescissions sufficient to offset all of the emergency appropriations contained in the bill. It is my personal view that emergency spending for natural disasters and for unanticipated military spending, such as the operations in Desert Fox and Kosovo, as well as the military's assistance to the disaster victims in Central America need not be offset. In fact, I participated in the creation of the provisions in the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act, which allow emergency spending to be provided in order to respond to natural disasters and other types of emergencies without having to come up with offsets to pay for those unpredictable events. The emergency designation was negotiated as part of the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990, in large part because the discretionary budget caps established there, and which have remained in place each year since, are very tight. I have never felt that the American people should be required to pay for spending which appropriately qualifies as emergency relief under that Budget Enforcement Act. If that is to be the case, we need not have gone to the trouble of adopting the emergency provisions I have just described. Regarding the specific rescissions proposed in Title III of the bill now before the Senate, I know that a number of Senators have concerns about one or the other of those rescissions. I am certain that the concerns of those Senators will be expressed as the Senate progresses with this bill. I urge my colleagues to help the managers of the bill, the distinguished chairman, Senator Stevens, and myself, in expediting completion of Senate action in time to meet with the other body and complete conference action on the bill prior to the upcoming Easter recess. I especially commend the work of the distinguished chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Mr. Stevens. For many years, I have worked with the Senator from Alaska. I have always found him to be evenhanded, courteous, congenial, cooperative, and very able in handling the difficult legislation on the floor, in committee and in conference. He is my friend, has been my friend through the years, and will always be my friend. I consider it a great privilege and a honor, indeed, to be able to stand by his side and express support for this legislation. I count it a privilege to work with him. He is one of the finest Senators with whom I have ever had the pleasure of serving. I have served with almost 300 Senators in my time here. I say that without any reservations. I salute him, believe in him, trust him, and can count him not only as my friend but as a very fine Senator. The people of Alaska are to be commended for sending him here and sending him back repeatedly. The assistance provided in this bill to the people of this country, as well as those in Central America, is desperately needed. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may speak out of order for 5 minutes.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, the security of this nation in an increasingly insecure world remains the highest priority of the United States government. To that end, we support and finance the most powerful military in the world. Our troops have the most advanced weapons available. We have gifted and dedicated military strategists at the helm. And yet we remain vulnerable, in some ways perhaps more so today than we were at the height of the Cold War. The increased sophistication, radicalization, and financial acumen of terrorist organizations have escalated the threat of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil. The increased interdependence and complexity of computer networks has intensified the threat of potentially devastating cyber attacks on critical defense and domestic communications systems. And despite the end of the Cold War, the proliferation of nuclear weapons technology, particularly among rogue states, has brought with it a renewed threat of nuclear attack on our homeland. North Korea, Iraq, and Iran are all working furiously to produce nuclear weapons systems that could threaten the sovereign territory of the United States. To our dismay, we have discovered that North Korea, one of the most belligerent outlaw nations in the world, is much further along than previously thought in its efforts to produce a nuclear warhead capable of reaching our shores. The threat from North Korea is sooner rather than later; here rather than there. China, with whom our relations are increasingly strained, has boasted of its possession of a ballistic missile that could reach Los Angeles. Russia, with an arsenal of thousands of nuclear weapons left over from the Cold War, is faced with a crumbling military infrastructure and increasingly empty assurances regarding the security of its nuclear stockpile. In short, we are living in dangerous times. The Administration has taken a number of steps in recent months to accelerate its efforts to protect the U.S. mainland from attack. As part of that effort, the President has budgeted an additional $6.6 billion dollars to develop a National Missile Defense, or NMD. The legislation that we are considering today, S. 257, the National Missile Defense Act of 1999, puts the United States Senate firmly on record as endorsing the urgency of that program. As a result of several carefully crafted amendments that have been overwhelmingly adopted, this bill has gained strong bipartisan support. Senators Cochran, Levin, Landrieu, and the many others who have worked to reach consensus on this bill are to be commended. I support the National Missile Defense Act of 1999 as amended. But, from the vantage point of many years of experience, I also offer a few words of caution. Let us not allow the determination to press for a ballistic missile shield to blind us to other, perhaps greater, threats of sabotage. The technology exists, and is available to those same rogue nations, to develop and deploy chemical and biological weapons without the need for a ballistic missile delivery system. A few vials of anthrax, a test tube full of the smallpox virus, some innocuous canisters of sarin gas, could wreak chaos of unimaginable proportion in the United States. These threats are as real as the threat of a ballistic missile attack, and, if anything, more urgent. A second cautionary note: let us not allow our eagerness to develop a missile defense system blind us to the cost of developing such a system. In our zeal to erect a national missile shield, the danger exists of committing such a vast array of resources--money, people, research priorities--that we could shortchange other necessary initiatives to protect our national security. We need a balanced national security program, of which a missile defense is but one element. We have gone down the road of throwing money at this threat before, with the ABM system in the 1970's and SDI in the 1980's. Both efforts cost us billions of dollars, oceans of ink, years of wasted effort. Neither, in the end, made one iota of difference to our national security. Technological feasibility should be the starting point, not the defining element, of a missile defense system. Let us learn from the past. Invest wisely. Test carefully. Assess constantly. This is not the arena in which to allow partisan politics or political one- upmanship to hold sway. This is a matter of far too great consequence to this and future generations. The bipartisan negotiations and the spirit of compromise that have marked the Senate debate over this bill give me cause to hope that this time, we will do it right. Let us continue to work together toward an effective, realistic, and prudent national defense system. Finally, let us not for a moment forget the importance of working actively and diligently to reduce the number of existing nuclear warheads and curb the proliferation of nuclear weapons. A national missile defense system that precipitates a global arms race is in no one's best interest. We cannot safely assume that today's geopolitical alliances will be the same tomorrow. A weak and politically chaotic Russia may be not seen as much of a threat to our security today--at least not intentionally--but as it has done before, the situation in Russia could change in the blink of an eye. We have at hand the means and the will and the opportunity to work with Russia to reduce nuclear warheads. Yes, we must take all necessary precautions to protect our security, but we must not be so shortsighted as to let this opportunity for meaningful arms control be muscled aside through misguided belligerence. With care and planning, we can make progress in both arms control and missile defense. How well we will succeed on both fronts remains to be seen, but S. 257 as amended is a good first step.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I am honored today to join my colleagues in saluting one of our own, Senator Bob Kerrey of Nebraska, for the courage and heroism that he displayed as a U.S. Navy SEAL 30 years ago, and for the courage and determination that he continues to inspire today. The United States Senate is no stranger to heroes. Through the centuries, this Chamber has embraced the souls of some of the greatest heroes of our nation. It still does. We are privileged to work among heroes every day, individuals like Bob Kerrey, Strom Thurmond, Danny Inouye, John McCain, and Max Cleland. I hope we never take the courage of these individuals for granted, or lose sight of the great legacy of their predecessors. Certainly, among the history of heroism in the Senate, Bob Kerrey's story is one of inspiration. Horribly injured by a grenade, he nevertheless carried on an attack against the Viet Cong and led his men to victory. His bravery won for him the highest honor that the United States government can bestow upon an individual for valor: the Congressional Medal of Honor. But his act of courage also took a great toll. It cost him his leg, challenged his spirit, and threatened to taint his life with bitterness. Bob Kerrey overcame those crises. He turned adversity to success. He recovered from the grievous wounds to his body and soul. He became a successful businessman, went on to become governor of the state of Nebraska, and in 1988 was elected to the United States Senate. As I said before, Mr. President, the United States Senate is no stranger to heroes. But the Congressional Medal of Honor is something special. Only six Senators in our history have been awarded that honor. All of them, with the exception of Bob Kerrey, fought in the Civil War. As I listen today to the account of Bob Kerrey's heroism, hear of the bravery that he displayed at the youthful age of 25, I am reminded of another account of bravery, this one told by the poet William E. Henley who, as a young man, lost his leg as a result of tuberculosis of the bone. He wrote these words from his hospital bed. Out of the night that covers me, Black as the Pit from pole to pole, I thank whatever gods may be For my unconquerable soul. In the fell clutch of circumstance I have not winced nor cried aloud. Under the bludgeonings of chance My head is bloody, but unbowed. Beyond this place of wrath and tears Looms but the Horror of the shade, And yet the menace of the years Finds, and shall find, me unafraid. It matters not how strait the gate, How charged with punishments the scroll, I am the master of my fate: I am the captain of my soul. The year was 1875. The poem was ``Invictus.'' The words belong to William Henley, but the spirit behind them belongs just as surely to Senator Bob Kerrey. I salute him.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I have no doubt that S. Con. Res. 5 is a well-intentioned effort by the members of this body to express their opposition to any unilateral declaration of statehood by the Palestinians. I support that position--such a reckless action on the part of the Palestinians would be disastrous to the Middle East peace process-- but I cannot support this resolution. It is, in my opinion, ill-timed and unnecessary. The Administration has made clear its opposition to any unilateral action that would preempt the negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. But the Palestinians are not the only players in this drama. The Israelis are also partners in the peace process, and have an equal stake in refraining from provocative and destabilizing actions. This resolution, however, does not address the responsibilities of the Israelis. If Yasser Arafat has not yet gotten the message that the United States is opposed to a unilateral declaration of statehood, this non- binding resolution is not sufficient to drive the point home. But it contains the kind of rhetoric that could be used by those who wish to further disrupt the peace process. Given the tensions inherent in the efforts to negotiate a peaceful settlement between the Israelis and the Palestinians, the Congress should not take up what amounts to little more than a self-serving resolution that may do more harm than good. If the United States Congress wishes to make a meaningful contribution to the Middle East peace process, we should, first, keep pressure on both sides to negotiate in good faith and to avoid provocative words or actions, and second, we should act promptly when the Administration sends to Congress its request for supplemental appropriations to implement the Wye River peace agreement. In this way, we can demonstrate our commitment to peace in the Middle East without adding fuel to an already incendiary situation.