Robert Byrd

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, reserving the right to object--I do not intend to object--I need to complete my remarks by 4:35. I have about 20 minutes here.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I have waited many hours here many times. I never make a fuss about it. I will just leave the floor and----

Mr. BYRD. I have 61 pages, large type. But that will take about 20 minutes--15, I think.

Mr. BYRD. My problem is, I need to get through by 4:30 or 4:35.

Mr. BYRD. The Senator is more than generous and more than kind.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator from Vermont for his characteristic kindness and courtesy. I thank the distinguished Senator who has been alone in opposing this act in the beginning, at a time when I wish I had voted as he did. In June 2004, 10 peace activists outside of Halliburton, Inc., in Houston gathered to protest the company's war profiteering. They wore paper hats and were handing out peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, calling attention to Halliburton's overcharging on a food contract for American troops in Iraq. Unbeknownst to them, they were being watched. U.S. Army personnel at the top secret Counterintelligence Field Activity, or CIFA, saw the protest as a potential threat to national security. CIFA was created 3 years ago by the Defense Department. Its official role is forced protection; that is, tracking threat and terrorist plots against military installations and personnel inside the United States. In 2003, then Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz authorized a fact-gathering operation code named TALON, which stands for Threat and Local Observation Notice, which would collect raw information about suspicious incidents and feed it to CIFA. In the case of the ``peanut butter'' demonstration, the Army wrote a report on the activity and stored it where? In its files. Newsweek magazine has reported that some TALON reports may have contained information on U.S. citizens that has been retained in Pentagon files. A senior Pentagon official has admitted that the names of these U.S. citizens could number in the thousands. Is this where we are heading? Is this where we are heading in this land of the free? Are secret Government programs that spy on American citizens proliferating? The question is not, is Big Brother watching? The question is, how many big brothers have we? Ever since the New York Times revealed that President George W. Bush has personally authorized surveillance of American citizens without obtaining a warrant, I have become increasingly concerned about dangers to the people's liberty. I believe that both current law and the Constitution may have been violated, not just once, not twice, but many times, and in ways that the Congress and the American people may never know because of this White House and its penchant for control and secrecy. We cannot continue to claim we are a nation of laws and not of men if our laws, and indeed even the Constitution of the United States itself, may be summarily breached because of some determination of expediency or because the President says, ``Trust me.'' The Fourth Amendment reads clearly: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. The Congress has already granted the executive branch rather extraordinary authority with changes in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that allow the Government 72 hours after surveillance has begun to apply for a warrant. If this surveillance program is what the President says it is, a program to eavesdrop upon known terrorists in other countries who are conversing with Americans, then there should be no difficulty in obtaining a warrant within 72 hours. One might be tempted to suspect that the real reason the President authorized warrantless surveillance is because there is no need to have to bother with the inconveniences of probable cause. Without probable cause as a condition of spying on American citizens, the National Security Agency could, and can, under this President's direction, spy on anyone, and for any reason. How do you like that? How about that? We have only the President's word, his ``trust me,'' to protect the privacy of the law-abiding citizens of this country. One must be especially wary of an administration that seems to feel that what it judges to be a good end always justifies any means. It is, in fact, not only illegal under our system, but it is morally reprehensible to spy on citizens without probable cause of wrongdoing. When such practices are sanctioned by our own President, what is the message we are sending to other countries that the United States is trying to convince to adopt our system? It must be painfully obvious that a President who can spy on any citizen is very unlike the model of democracy the administration is trying to sell abroad. In the name of ``fighting terror,'' are we to sacrifice every freedom to a President's demand? How far are we to go? Can a President order warrantless, house-to-house searches of a neighborhood where he suspects a terrorist may be hiding? Can he impose new restrictions on what can be printed, what can be broadcast, what can be uttered privately because of some perceived threat--perceived by him--to national security? Laughable thoughts? I think not. This administration has so traumatized the people of this Nation, and many in the Congress, that some will swallow whole whatever rubbish that is spewed from this White House, as long as it is in some tenuous way connected to the so-called war on terror. And the phrase ``war on terror,'' while catchy, certainly is a misnomer. Terror is a tactic used by all manner of violent organizations to achieve their goal. This has been around since time began and will likely be with us until the last day of planet Earth. We were attacked by bin Laden and by his organization, al-Qaida. If anything, what we are engaged in should more properly be called a war on the al-Qaida network. But that is too limiting for an administration that loves power as much as this one. A war on the al-Qaida network might conceivably be over someday. A war on the al-Qaida network might have achievable, measurable objectives, and it would be less able to be used as a rationale for almost any Government action. It would be harder to periodically traumatize the U.S. public, thereby justifying a reason for stamping ``secret'' on far too many Government programs and activities. Why hasn't Congress been thoroughly briefed on the President's secret eavesdropping program, or on other secret domestic monitoring programs run by the Pentagon or other Government entities? Is it because keeping official secrets prevents annoying congressional oversight? Revealing this program in its entirety to too many Members of Congress could certainly have unmasked its probable illegality at a much earlier date, and may have allowed Members of Congress to pry information out of the White House that the Senate Judiciary Committee could not pry out of Attorney General Gonzales, who seemed generally confused about for whom he works--the public or his old boss, the President. Attorney General Gonzales refused to divulge whether purely domestic communications have also been caught up in this warrantless surveillance, and he refused to assure the Senate Judiciary Committee and the American public that the administration has not deliberately tapped Americans' telephone calls and computers or searched their homes without warrants. Nor would he reveal whether even a single arrest has resulted from the program. What about the first amendment? What about the chilling effect that warrantless eavesdropping is already having on those law-abiding American citizens who may not support the war in Iraq, or who may simply communicate with friends or relatives overseas? Eventually, the feeling that no conversation is private will cause perfectly innocent people to think carefully before they candidly express opinions or even say something in jest. Already we have heard suggestions that freedom of the press should be subject to new restrictions. Who among us can feel comfortable knowing that the National Security Agency has been operating with an expansive view of its role since 2001, forwarding wholesale information from foreign intelligence communication intercepts involving American citizens, including the names of individuals to the FBI, in a departure from past practices, and tapping some of the country's main telecommunication arteries in order to trace and analyze information? The administration could have come to Congress to address any aspects of the FISA law in the revised PATRIOT Act which the administration proposed, but they did not, probably because they wished the completely unfettered power to do whatever they pleased, the laws and the Constitution be damned. I plead with the American public to tune in to what is happening in this country. Please forget the political party with which you may usually be associated and, instead, think about the right of due process, the presumption of innocence, and the right to a private life. Forget the now tired political spin that if one does not support warrantless spying, then one may be less than patriotic. Focus on what is happening to truth in this country and then read President Bush's statement to a Buffalo, NY, audience on April 24, 2004: Any time you hear the United States Government talking about wiretap, it requires--a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we are talking about chasing down terrorists, we are talking about getting a court order before we do so. That statement is false, and the President knew it was false when he made it because he had authorized the Government to wiretap without a court order shortly after the 2001 attacks. This President, in my judgment, may have broken the law and most certainly has violated the spirit of the Constitution and the public trust. Yet I hear strange comments coming from some Members of Congress to the effect that, well, if the President has broken the law, let's just change the law. That is tantamount to saying that whatever the President does is legal, and the last time we heard that claim was from the White House of Richard M. Nixon. Congress must rise to the occasion and demand answers to the serious questions surrounding warrantless spying. And Congress must stop being spooked by false charges that unless it goes along in blind obedience with every outrageous violation of the separation of powers, it is soft on terrorism. Perhaps we can take courage from the American Bar Association which, on Monday, February 13, denounced President Bush's warrantless surveillance and expressed the view that he had exceeded his constitutional powers. There is a need for a thorough investigation of all of our domestic spying programs. We have to know what is being done by whom and to whom. We need to know if the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act has been breached and if the Constitutional rights of thousands of Americans have been violated without cause. The question is: Can the Congress, under control of the President's political party, conduct the type of thorough, far-ranging investigation which is necessary. It is absolutely essential that Congress try because it is vital to at least attempt the proper restoration of the checks and balances. Unfortunately, in a Congressional election year, the effort will most likely be seriously hampered by politics. In fact, today's Washington Post reports that an all-out White House lobbying campaign has dramatically slowed the congressional probe of NSA spying and may kill it. I want to know how many Americans have been spied upon. Yes, I want to know how it is determined which individuals are monitored and who makes such determinations. Yes, I want to know if the telecommunications industry is involved in a massive screening of the domestic telephone calls of ordinary Americans like you and me. I want to know if the U.S. Post Office is involved. I want to know, and the American people deserve to know, if the law has been broken and the Constitution has been breached. Historian Lord Acton once observed that: Everything secret degenerates, even the administration of justice; nothing is safe that does not show how it can bear discussion and publicity. The culture of secrecy, which has deepened since the attacks on September 11, has presented this Nation with an awful dilemma. In order to protect this open society, are we to believe that measures must be taken that in insidious and unconstitutional ways close it down? I believe that the answer must be an emphatic ``no.'' I yield the floor. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. BYRD. Would the Senator yield and let me make a few remarks?

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I shall quote Alexander Pope in saying to my distinguished friend, Senator Specter: Thou art my guide, philosopher, and friend. I thank the distinguished Senator. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to proceed for not to exceed 3 minutes as in morning business for the purpose of submitting a resolution.

Mr. BYRD. I thank the Chair. (The remarks of Mr. Byrd pertaining to the submission of S. Res. 370 are located in today's Record under ``Submission of Concurrent and Senate Resolutions.'')

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, today, together with Senator Rockefeller and the West Virginia delegation in the House, I have submitted a resolution honoring the 16 coal miners who perished this year in the State of West Virginia. They are: Tom Anderson, Alva Bennett, Jim Bennett, Jerry Groves, George Hamner, Jr., Terry Helms, Jesse Jones, David Lewis, Martin Toler, Jr., Fred Ware, Jackie Weaver, and Marshall Winans who perished in the Sago Mine in Upshur County, WV. They are Don Bragg and Ellery Hatfield who perished in the Aracoma Alma Mine in Logan County, WV. They are Paul Moss and Edmund Vance who perished in separate mines in Boone County, WV. While the names of these coal miners have become known to many of us, we must not forget that there are many more coal miners whose tragic deaths are not chronicled in the national media. They die quietly in their homes of black lung disease. They die anonymously in mine accidents across the Nation. Their families mourn, their families grieve their loss without national attention. I pay tribute to all of those who have fallen in our Nation's mines and to their families who must bear their loss. A grateful Nation owes its eternal thanks.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, it has been 36 days since 12 coal miners perished at the Sago Mine in Upshur County, WV. One died from the explosion that ripped through the underground mine. The other 11 succumbed to carbon monoxide poisoning. It has been 18 days since two coal miners perished in an underground fire at the Aracoma Alma in Logan County, WV. It has been 5 days since two miners perished in separate mine accidents in Boone County, WV. Sixteen coal miners dead, in four separate accidents, in only 36 days. These deaths have shaken communities across the State of West Virginia and alarmed a nation. Three additional coal mine fatalities in the States of Utah and Kentucky in the last 28 days confirm that this series of accidents is national in scope and demands swift action. Mr. President, after years of delay, the Coal Mine Safety and Health Administration at last acknowledges the need to reassess some technology and regulations but cannot give any definite timetable about when the action will be taken. I, for one, do not want to see more delay. This Federal Government, which is empowered by our Constitution to ``promote the general welfare''--and that applies to our Nation's coalfields as well as anywhere else--must not wait. The West Virginia congressional delegation has introduced legislation outlining a series of actions that can be taken immediately to make America's coal mines safer. We know, for example, that technology exists right now to improve mine rescue communications. We know that additional emergency breathing devices can be stored in the mines. We can do these things today, right now. The Senate could pass the West Virginia delegation bill today to implement these requirements in the mines. I have asked the Republican and Democratic leadership to schedule immediate action on this matter. The Democratic leadership has pledged to do everything it can, and the Republican leadership has been very positive in its response. A bipartisan and growing coalition of Senators from mining and nonmining States has asked to be added as cosponsors to our legislation. They recognize its importance and the need for its immediate passage. I have spoken with the chairman and with the ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and they fully understand the urgency driving this legislation. They not only organized a committee trip to Sago Mine in January, but they also committed to reviewing the West Virginia delegation bill within hours of its introduction. These Senators are on our side. I am confident they will do all they can do to ensure quick action. I am happy to work with all Members of the Senate to expedite passage of this bill. With quick work, I see no reason why this Senate cannot move expeditiously. We should and, in fact, we must. Every day we delay increases the risk for coal miners in the field. While four deadly accidents in the past 36 days occurred in West Virginia, any State in the Union with coal mines could be next. Today it is my State of West Virginia and the States of Kentucky and Utah that mourn the tragic loss of life in our coal mines. Tomorrow it could be Pennsylvania, Alabama, Indiana, Virginia, Ohio, or Illinois. Who knows. I was at the memorial service for the miners who died in the Sago mine disaster. I saw their families. I saw their grief. I saw their pain. I have no desire to see more. The longer we wait to approve this legislation, the more likely it is that additional miners will die. If more miners die, more mines could be closed and for longer periods of time in order to ensure safety. Mine closures not only will put families out of work but will also disrupt coal and energy production, with the economic effects rippling across the national economy. We must never forget that a coal miner has the legal right to walk out of an unsafe coal mine. A miner cannot be forced to work if he or she feels their life is threatened. Today when coal provides such an important part of this Nation's energy supply and our Nation is dangerously dependent upon foreign oil, we must keep our coal mines open and operating, but first we must make them safe. For the sake of America's coal miners, for the sake of their families and their communities, and for the sake of the energy security of our Nation, I urge that this much-needed legislation be approved as soon as possible. There is a moral imperative to act, and we must not delay. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senators Specter, Kerry, and Clinton be added as cosponsors of S. 2231, the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 2006.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the Senate, and I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts, Mr. Kennedy. He is always sensitive to the problems that occur in West Virginia. He is always mindful of the coal miners and their problems, their sorrows. I thank him for being such a steadfast partner with the two West Virginia Senators and such a steadfast friend throughout the years to our fellow West Virginians. I thank the Senator.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Madam President, I thank my distinguished friend. He can go ahead with whatever remarks he has. I would love to wait 2 or 3 more minutes.

Mr. BYRD. I thank the Senator.

Mr. BYRD. I thank the very distinguished occupant of the chair, who presides over this august Chamber with a dignity that is so rare as a day in June and a loveliness that permeates the Chamber. I thank the Chair. Mine Safety Madam President, yesterday, two more coal miners died in West Virginia--two more, two more coal miners died yesterday in West Virginia--one at Long Branch Energy's No. 18 tunnel mine in Boone County and the other at the Black Castle Surface Mine, which is also in Boone County, WV. That is a total of 16 coal miner deaths this year, and the year is only 33 days old. This situation is deplorable--ghastly deplorable. The Governor of West Virginia, the Honorable Joseph Manchin, announced last night that he has asked the coal operators of West Virginia to cease production immediately and to go into a mine safety standdown. He has asked that miners be removed from mines in order to review safety procedures and asked that each new shift also review safety procedures before entering the mine. The Governor has called for expedited inspections of the State's mines, and he has asked that the U.S. Labor Department send additional Federal inspectors and personnel to the State. The Mine Safety and Health Administration of the U.S. Department of Labor announced last night that it would expand the mine safety standdown to mines across the Nation on Monday, February 6. This is a very noble action on the part of our Governor, Joe Manchin. I have talked with Governor Manchin, and I compliment him. I have to say that shutting down the mines for 1 hour is not a serious solution. It may be a timeout for safety, but it is not time enough for meaningful safety. Mine safety officials are displaying increasing concern about this rash of mining fatalities. Those who consider the tragedies at the Sago and Alma mines to be random occurrences are now taking a second look. They are asking this morning: When will these mine tragedies stop? When? The answer to that question is unsettling, isn't it? It is possible that these accidents are not going to stop. God only knows. Life and death are in God's hands. It is possible that mine safety protections have eroded so much in recent years that these actions are going to continue. Who would have thought that these mine deaths would occur as they have and in one State? It is possible that these accidents are going to continue to happen again and again unless new action--dramatic action--is taken by the Federal Government to curb these mining hazards. The danger to our coal miners is real--very real. Yes, very, very real. The dangers to our miners is very real. There are too many needs, from emergency communications and breathing equipment to a rapid notification and response system to penalizing the reckless disregard of Federal safety standards. Real. Too many needs, I say, are not being addressed by the Labor Department and the Mine Safety and Health Administration and require swift action by the Congress. The longer we wait to act in Congress, the more likely another fatality and then another fatality and then another may occur. The longer we wait to act, the greater the threat to our energy infrastructure. If these tragedies continue, mines could be closed and coal and energy production could falter. The consequences could ripple throughout the national economy. We cannot delay. We cannot delay in responding. I spoke with the distinguished majority leader yesterday. Of course, I have already spoken with our distinguished minority leader, who has joined in supporting the need for action on the bill that I have introduced, along with Senator Rockefeller and along with the delegation in the House, a bipartisan delegation. I spoke with the majority leader yesterday, and I have asked mine safety legislation be considered quickly, and I publicly renew that request. I have come to the Senate floor hoping to see the majority leader again this morning, but he is needed elsewhere, and for good reason, at the moment. But I publicly renew that request, and upon his arrival I shall discuss this matter with him. I have discussed it already with the assistant leader, Mr. McConnell. I urge that this legislation be scheduled as soon as possible, that there be scheduled time as soon as possible on mine safety legislation. The bill the West Virginia delegation introduced yesterday will help to protect the lives of our miners. It will help to keep West Virginia mines open. It will help to keep the coal coming. It will help to keep the coal fueling the energy demands of our national economy. But we must act quickly. We must ensure the safety of our coal miners. Hear me. Listen. We must ensure the safety of our coal miners in order to ensure the security of the Nation. The security of the Nation depends on the safety of our coal miners. We have delayed too long already, and every additional day we wait puts another miner's life at risk. O Death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? Senators, listen: For whom does the bell toll? Who knows who will be next? I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD. Madam President, will the distinguished Senator from California yield?

Mr. BYRD. I ask so that I might thank her again for delaying her speech until I could make these few remarks. I thank her from the bottom of my heart. She is so considerate always, so courteous: ``And what is so rare as a day in June?'' The beauty of the Senator from California.

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

Mr. BYRD. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that I may yield to the distinguished Senator from Michigan such time as she may require and that I may be recognized at the close of her remarks.

Mr. BYRD. Madam President, if I might just take 1 minute, I deeply thank--as they say in the other body--the gentlelady from California, for her noble comments and for her support. The West Virginia delegation in the House and the Senate is pleased at her expressions of support. We are glad to have that support. West Virginia is proud of the California delegation, the delegation that stands with us in this hour of sorrow. I thank the Senator from California for yielding and for her support.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Let me thank my friend, the leader, our leader on this side of the aisle, who is a gold miner's son. There are not many of us in here who are gold miners' sons. I am proud that my leader is a gold miner's son. I am proud that he assured us, from his standpoint and within his power, that he will do everything possible--and I hope he will--to help bring this legislation to the floor. He understands that it is needed, and I will welcome his assistance in that regard. I am proud of him as a gold miner's son. I am glad he reminds us of this from time to time. I believe this legislation is badly needed. I implore my leader to do everything he can to see that this bill gets on the calendar and gets taken up by the Senate and acted upon promptly. I thank all Senators and yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, if I may be recognized.

Mr. BYRD. Let me thank my friend, the leader, our leader on this side of the aisle, who is a gold miner's son. There are not many of us in here who are gold miners' sons. I am proud that my leader is a gold miner's son. I am proud that he assured us, from his standpoint and within his power, that he will do everything possible--and I hope he will--to help bring this legislation to the floor. He understands that it is needed, and I will welcome his assistance in that regard. I am proud of him as a gold miner's son. I am glad he reminds us of this from time to time. I believe this legislation is badly needed. I implore my leader to do everything he can to see that this bill gets on the calendar and gets taken up by the Senate and acted upon promptly. I thank all Senators and yield the floor.