Robert Byrd

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I was hoping we would have a vote on the amendment which I had offered earlier, or in relation thereto, a rollcall vote.

Mr. BYRD. No.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, the Pentagon continues to have massive management problems. The GAO believes that billions of taxpayer dollars could be saved each year, if these problems can be straightened out. This modification to my amendment would require an expedited study on whether there should be a Deputy Secretary of Defense for Management to take charge of fixing the Pentagon's accounting problems. I thank the cosponsors of my modified amendment: Chairman Warner, Senator Ensign, Senator Akaka, and Senator Lautenberg. I am encouraged by Chairman Warner's intention to hold further hearings in the Armed Services Committee once these reports are submitted to Congress. Fixing the pervasive--I mean pervasive--accounting problems at the Department of Defense will require more hearings, more oversight, and more accountability. I took note of this some years ago when Secretary Rumsfeld first appeared before the Armed Services Committee. He admitted there was a problem, a very difficult problem. He indicated he was going to do something about it. I think he needs help. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the coming months to set the Pentagon on an accelerated track for reform.

Mr. BYRD. I thank the Senator from Virginia.

Mr. BYRD. I thank the distinguished senior Senator from Michigan.

Mr. BYRD. Yes, the modification is at the desk.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, the reconciliation bill would increase immigrant work visas by 350,000 per year, about one-third of the current level. It is a massive and destabilizing increase that does not belong on the reconciliation bill. My amendment would strike the increase in immigrant work visas and impose a $1,500 immigrant application fee on multinational corporations. With my amendment, the Judiciary Committee would exceed its reconciliation savings targets and do so without increasing immigrant work visas. We authorized over half a million H-1B visas in 2000. Last year, we authorized another $100,000 over 5 years. Do we really need another 150,000 visas on top of that? When is enough enough? My amendment has the support of the unions. It has the support of immigrant enforcement groups. It has the support of Republican and Democrat Senators. I urge agreement of the amendment.

Mr. BYRD. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, my amendment will suspend the time limitations on debate for reconciliation bills that increase the deficit. The Congress will never succeed in balancing the budget, cutting the deficit, as long as the reconciliation process can be used to shield controversial tax-and-spending decisions from debate and amendment. If Senators want to ensure offsets for deficit-increasing measures, then we must protect our rights to debate and amend within the budget process. The more tax cuts that can be forced through now without offsets, the tougher the budget decisions and the worse the pain in the coming months and years. The budget cuts that seem tough now will grow enormous, and they will be unbearable, if tax cuts continue without offsets. I urge adoption of the amendment. I ask unanimous consent that Senator Harkin be added as a cosponsor.

Mr. BYRD. I send the amendment to the desk.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I move to waive the act in connection with this amendment.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, it is with deep sadness that I learned of the death of Henry K. Giugni, who passed away this morning. He was a former Sergeant at Arms. In January 1987, it was my pleasure, as the Senate majority leader, to nominate Mr. Giugni to be the Sergeant at Arms of the Senate. When the Senate elected him to the position, Mr. Giugni became not only the thirtieth Sergeant at Arms of the Senate, he became the first Polynesian-American to serve in this capacity. Mr. Giugni brought a wealth of experience to this most important Senate position. Born in Hawaii in 1925, he enlisted in the U.S. Army during World War II. After the war, he joined the Honolulu Police Force. From 1963 to 1987, he had served as the administrative assistant in the office of my dear friend and colleague, my hero--Senator Daniel K. Inouye. As the second ranking officer in the United States Senate, Mr. Giugni performed the duties of the office of Sergeant at Arms of the Senate proudly and with distinction. In his 4 years as head of the largest office in the Senate, Mr. Giugni supervised a number of major changes and improvements. This included the purchase and installation of millions of dollars of new computer and telecommunications equipment for Senators and their offices. Mr. Giugni took special pride in having helped to make the U.S. Capitol accessible to the disabled by expanding the Special Services Office. Under his direction, the office implemented tours and other programs for the disabled, and published a braille version of Senate documents. Sergeant at Arms Giugni worked with the House Sergeant at Arms to improve the operation of the Capitol Police Force. And, his office instituted cost-effective measures of hiring civilian guards to perform duties which he did not believe required uniformed officers. Mr. Giugni left his work at the Senate in 1990 to become vice president of corporate development for Washington, DC, firm, Cassidy Associates. His presence in the Senate, and his devotion to it, were quickly and sorely missed. But I was pleased and proud of having nominated him to this most important position, and I was even more pleased and proud of the work he had performed while there. I close my remarks with a poem that I have always cherished. It is a poem that evokes the triumph of a life well lived over the sorrow of death. It is a poem that addresses the life and career of my good friend, Henry K. Giugni. Let fate do her worst, there are relics of joy, Bright dreams of the past, which she cannot destroy; that come, in the nighttime of sorrow and care, And bring back the features that joy used to wear. Long, long be my heart with such memories filled, Like the vase in which roses have once been distilled, You may break, you may shatter the vase, if you will, But the scent of the roses will hang around it still.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank my chairman for his sage remarks. Let me thank him also for the leadership that he demonstrates daily in the Senate and in committees. I have great respect for him. I serve on the Homeland Security Committee with him. He is a far-seeing, wise Senator. He acts in the service of his people and he too is concerned about the protection of our country and its security. I thank him from the bottom of my heart. I thank him for yielding.

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

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

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, we have almost completed the First Session of the 109th Congress and, incredibly, no serious debate about our immigration policies has occurred. Not a word. No serious debate. The number of aliens residing illegally in the United States stands between 8 and 12 million. Let me say that again. The number of aliens residing illegally in the United States stands between 8 and 12 million--an alarming figure given the terrorism threat that confronts our country. The level of legal and illegal immigration combined has surpassed historic records, causing increasing concern about the ability of our Nation to absorb the influx. Our roads, our schools, and our health care systems are overwhelmed and underfunded. Go to any hospital in the area or in the surrounding area. Take a look at what is going on. The waiting rooms, the emergency rooms are overcrowded. Our infrastructure is just not ready for these influxes. We are being overwhelmed. Go to the emergency rooms at the hospitals. Go over to Fairfax Hospital, for example, one of the finest hospitals in the country. There they are on cots in the aisles. I know because I have been there. Our schools--how can we teach children when the schoolrooms are so overcrowded? What about our poor teachers? Our infrastructure is just not prepared for this influx. Our roads are not prepared. And that infrastructure is being further worn away with the budget cuts included in this reconciliation bill. Right here. Immigration is an issue that demands the attention of the Congress. Regretfully, we have been told that tougher enforcement actions will have to wait until next year. So imagine the surprise of Senators to find provisions buried deep, deep, deep in this budget bill that would authorize the Government to issue more than 350,000 additional immigrant visas each year to foreign labor seeking to live and work permanently in the United States. This is baffling. Baffling. Baffling. It is baffling, I say. If we don't have the time to address the illegal immigration that threatens our national security, then how do we explain to the American people out there that we somehow found the time to raise the level of imported labor each year? How do we do that? How do we do that? On pages 810 through 815, separate from the deficit reduction measures related to immigration fees, are provisions in the reconciliation bill that would raise the annual cap on employment-based visas and exempt the spouses and children of employment-based immigrants from that cap. In addition, those pages include provisions to increase temporary H-1B visas for high-tech workers by 30,000 each year. These are massive and destabilizing immigration increases, and they are hitching a free ride--hitching a free ride--on this reconciliation bill; a free ride on this reconciliation bill. Hitch on it to get a free ride. It is bad enough that so many American jobs are moving overseas and wages and benefits here at home are being curtailed to compete with Third World labor and unfair trade practices. Now these provisions would make it more likely that working Americans will find themselves in competition with foreign labor for work in their own country and-- and--is being done through this reconciliation process right here where the immigration increase is clouded by budget provisions and where debate and amendments are severely limited. We are told that an immigration reform debate will take place early next year. Senators are casting themselves as tough--tough, man. Senators are casting themselves as tough on enforcement and wanting to protect American jobs. Well, that pronouncementstands in stark, stark contrast to this effort under the cover of procedural protections and the guise of deficit reduction to increase the number of immigrants authorized to work in the United States by an astonishing 350,000 visas per year. These immigration provisions are not necessary for the Judiciary Committee to comply with its reconciliation instruction, nor are they necessary to achieve the spending cuts embraced by the congressional budget. The House Judiciary Committee reported legislation to assess a $1,500 fee on L-1 visas for executives and managers of multinational corporations and that savings provision more than satisfies the budget's reconciliation instruction. So I hope that Senators will join me in striking these unrelated immigration increases and limiting the judiciary portion of this bill solely to an increase in the L-1 visa fee. So the amendment that I will send to the desk is identical to the House language, excluding the provisions related to new judgeships, and would raise the L-1 visa fee to $1,500 per application. Again, this amendment simply strikes the unrelated immigration provisions and would still allow the Senate bill to meet its reconciliation targets. My amendment has the support of the professional employee unions of the AFL-CIO, as well as immigration enforcement groups like Numbers USA and the Federation for American Immigration Reform. Amendment No. 2367 I send that amendment to the desk and I ask Senators for their support.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. BYRD. I see my friend, my bosom friend from Alabama, on the floor. I am told that he is going to speak at this point. I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I want to thank the distinguished Senator from Alabama for his strong statement and for his support of the amendment. His statement is very convincing, persuasive, and timely. I am very grateful for his coming to the floor and his joining in the support of this amendment. I hope all Senators will read his statement and learn therefrom and support the amendment. I reserve any time that I may have remaining, and I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, several of the unions are very supportive of the amendment I have just offered. Among these unions, it should be mentioned that the American Federation of Government Employees is very supportive; the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees; the American Federation of Teachers; the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists; the American Guild of Musical Artists; the American Federation of Musicians; the American Federation of School Administrators; the Communications Workers of America, including the Newspaper Guild, the National Association of Broadcast Employees and Technicians, the International Union of Electrical Workers; the Federation of Professional Athletes; the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers; the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees; the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers; the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers; the Office and Professional Employees International Union; Plate Printers, Die Stampers and Engravers Union of North America; the Screen Actors Guild; the Seafarers International Union; the United Steelworkers; the Writers Guild of America, East. These unions are trying to protect the health benefits and the wages of working Americans, and they say that American workers are available to fill these jobs. The Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO, has a letter addressed to all Senators endorsing the amendment. Just to quote a few words from the letter: The 22 national unions represented by our organization strongly support the Byrd amendment and urge your vote for it. Continuing, I speak again of the letter and call attention to these excerpts: There is absolutely no economic justification for expanding the H-1B program. Unemployment among professionals in H-1B occupations remains high . . . Finally, it is worth pointing out that industry apologists for off-shore outsourcing of American jobs have long proclaimed that one of the benefits of globalization would be the creation of high end, high skilled technical and professional jobs for workers in the United States. These same industries now seek to contract the number of these very same high end job opportunities that should otherwise be available to highly skilled American workers by once again expanding the H-1B visa program. On behalf of the 4 million professional and technical workers that are members of our unions, we urge you to oppose any action that would have the effect of making it more difficult for unemployed U.S. professionals to find work. Mr. President, Senators will please take note of these words on behalf of these unions and the workers in the industries with which they are concerned. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, how much time remains?

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, the National Research Council has estimated that the net fiscal cost of immigration ranges from $11 billion to $22 billion per year, with most government expenditures on immigrants coming from State and local coffers. Mr. President, how much is enough? How much is enough? In 2000, the Congress increased H-1B visas to 195,000 per year for 3 years, authorizing over half a million new visas. Last year, the Congress authorized 20,000 new H-1B visas each year, every year. The Immigration Act authorizes more than 140,000 employment-based visas each year. How much is enough? How much is enough? I say enough is enough. I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, the American people enter this fall season with apprehension, trepidation, and a somber sense of foreboding. Gasoline prices, which peaked above $3 per gallon in September, now seem stuck at levels once thought absurd. Gas prices in West Virginia hover around $2.57 per gallon and can vary significantly in some areas, rising precipitously at times. Heating costs are projected to soar this winter, with many households expected to pay an additional $350 to heat their homes with natural gas and heating oil. It makes one shiver, thinking of winter in those mountains of Appalachia. People are already struggling with inadequate wages, are being forced to curtail everyday expenses simply to buy gasoline, to fill up their tanks. Senior citizens on fixed incomes are already forced to choose between prescription drugs and food. That is a tough choice. They must now confront life-threatening heating costs. This winter is coming. I can feel it in the air. This winter, with energy costs rising, the Federal safety net will be needed to provide essential support for countless Americans. Many are watching with incredulity the fraying of that safety net. On the farms and in the cities, in rural and urban neighborhoods, Americans have been shaken by the Government's inability to respond effectively to Hurricane Katrina while the Government focused on tax cuts for the wealthy and massive spending requests to rebuild Iraq-- what a shame; we should never have gone there, no; it was no threat to our national security, and I said so at the time--massive spending requests to rebuild Iraq. Our Nation's infrastructure was weakening from neglect at home while all this was happening. Katrina highlighted that erosion, focused our attention on that erosion and the high cost of forgoing critical infrastructure repairs. Just a few days ago, that erosion was further highlighted as Americans watched the wooden 173-year-old Whittenton Dam threaten to give way in Taunton, MA, forcing the evacuation of yet another American city. This winter, the country must confront the threat of an avian flu pandemic as public health officials warn that our Nation's health infrastructure remains woefully inadequate. Remember the influenza? Remember the flu of 1917 and 1918? I don't remember it exactly, but I had it. My mother died in that pandemic. I was less than a year old. She said to my father: Give ``the baby'' to the Byrds. One of my father's sisters had married a Byrd, Titus Dalton Byrd. They did not have any children. They had a child prior to my birth, but their child had died--his name was Robert Madison--so they had no children left. My mother's wish that my father give me, the ``baby,'' to Mr. and Mrs. Titus Dalton Byrd, the ``Mrs.'' being my father's sister. Yes, that is why I am here today. It was their wish that my father give me, the baby--there were three older brothers and a sister--give them all to somebody, but give the baby to the Byrds. They took me in, changed my name, and brought me to West Virginia, away from North Carolina. And here I am. Earlier this week, Hurricane Wilma pummeled southern Florida, causing heavy flooding and power outages. The cleanup costs could be enormous. Rather than addressing these weaknesses and providing the American people with some reassurance, the Congress incredibly and inconceivably is looking for ways to further siphon funds away from our safety net and domestic investments. It is as if we have learned nothing-- absolutely nothing--from Hurricane Katrina. A hope and belief seem to exist, and fingers are crossed all across this town, that no one will connect how the budget cuts being considered will affect those hurting from high energy prices. Eight Senate committees--eight Senate committees--have drafted reconciliation legislation to cut domestic investments in order to prefund $70 billion in additional tax cuts, many of which will not take effect for several years. They are backloaded. Now, get that: tax cuts. Oh, it is so easy. Ah, how I love to vote for tax cuts. That is easy. It does not take any courage to do that. Tax cuts. I have been in politics now 60 years next year, in various and sundry legislative branches, and the easiest vote I ever cast was for tax cuts. Some of these spending cuts are coming from the very same programs that are providing essential disaster relief to the victims of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, such as those used to provide temporary health services. They comprise much of the safety net for our Nation's most vulnerable, as well as for Americans afflicted by disaster. The reconciliation process has been touted as a means to contain the budgetary costs of Katrina, but that is a specious, spurious argument. The reconciliation process would worsen--worsen now; not improve--our fiscal position. With $70 billion in new tax cuts and an estimated $39 billion in spending cuts, the result is a deficit that increases by $31 billion--$31 for every minute since Jesus Christ was born; $31 for every minute--oh, the clock is ticking; that clock is ticking--$31 for every minute since Our Lord Jesus Christ was born. Under the process being considered, Katrina costs would continue to mount, without offsets, while the safety net is further worn away. The argument for reconciliation makes even less sense when you consider that Katrina costs are one-time, unforeseen emergency expenditures. Meanwhile, no action, none, no action has been taken to pay for trillions of dollars--trillions. How long would it take to count a trillion dollars at the rate of $1 per second? How long would it take to count a trillion dollars at the rate of $1 per second? Man, can you imagine that? How long would it take? Thirty-two thousand years? These young pages who have quick minds can figure that out. Thirty-two thousand, I am not sure about that figure. If it is not 32,000, it is 34,000 or 36,000. Thirty-two thousand years--I will stick with that figure for now--at a minimum, at the rate of a dollar per second. Can you believe it? There are trillions of dollars of tax cuts. No action has been taken to pay for those trillions of dollars of tax cuts or the hundreds of billions of dollars of costs for Iraq--a war that we should have never been in. We should never have gone. And they are still struggling to find a reason why we went. Too late now. I said then I don't believe there are weapons of mass destruction. I think there have been in some years gone by but not now. And have they been found? No. And I and 22 others--yes, 22 others; one Republican among the 23; one Senator who is now dead and gone; he died in a plane crash--23 souls, including my own, said: No. No, we won't go. We are not going to vote to give this power to declare war to this President or any President. We are not going to do it. Twenty-three of us. But there we are. We are there. So with the hundreds of billions of dollars of costs for Iraq, no action has been taken to pay for that, even though these costs are as plain and obvious as any in the Federal budget. I simply cannot fathom why the administration believes that reconstructing Baghdad does not have to be paid for, while reconstructing Mississippi and Louisiana and Alabama requires offsets. Can you imagine that? Reconstructing Baghdad does not have to be paid for, while reconstructing Mississippi and Louisiana and Alabama requires offsets. It does not make sense. It does not make good sense. It does not make common sense. Nor has any action been taken to find savings elsewhere in the bloated--bloated--Federal budget. The Defense Department's budget comprises one-sixth of the Federal budget and surpasses the total discretionary budgets of every other agency and office of the Federal Government combined. The Pentagon is not even able to pass a standard audit. How about that. The Pentagon is not even able to pass a standard audit, and it has not been able to for some years. I will say that again. The Pentagon is not even able to pass a standard audit or to conduct effective oversight of military expenditures in Iraq. May God help us. Government auditors have found substantial sums of defense contractor waste and fraud. Astonishingly, the Department of Defense pulled its inspector general out of Iraq last fall. Yet the Defense Department has not been asked to examine its $450 billion annual budget. All of the savings, all of the deficit reduction is supposed to come from the safety net for working families--people who work with their hands or at their desks--and from essential domestic investments that have been dangerously--dangerously, dangerously--foolishly neglected for too long. The sacrifice, too often, is being asked of working families, while others remain blissfully exempt. The budget reconciliation process at this point in the year and under these circumstances is ill-conceived. We are missing an opportunity to ferret out real waste in the Federal budget and to reform programs that could yield real budgetary savings. And worse, we are opening the door to a dangerous process. Yesterday, the House Ways and Means Committee--I believe it was yesterday--included in its reconciliation package language that would repeal the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act. This is a critically important law. It allows Customs to distribute to American companies and their workers the duties that it collects on unfairly traded, meaning ``dumped,'' imports. Yes. I am the daddy of that. Yes. I am the daddy of that child. It is called the Byrd Rule. There are several things that are called the Byrd Rule, but that is the one we are talking about. It allows Customs to distribute to American companies and their workers the duties that it collects on unfairly traded, meaning ``dumped,'' imports. The funds go only to those--now listen; the funds--I say the fines for these violations go only to those who have been injured by foreign producers who violate our trade laws. The funds go to crawfish producers in Louisiana. Hear me now. They go to shrimp producers throughout the Gulf States. Hear me. They go to our lumber industry. That is a big industry. They go to raspberry growers. They go to honey producers and beekeepers. They go to garlic growers in California, to makers of pasta, to makers of steel, to makers of steel bearings and other products manufactured all across our Nation. Companies in nearly every State of the Union receive funds under this law, and the funds are essential. They enable our industries to invest in their facilities and in their workers, to upgrade their equipment and technology. What could be wrong with that? That is a good law. The World Trade Organization doesn't like this law, but the WTO is wrong. The WTO doesn't like this law, but the WTO is wrong, wrong, wrong, I say to the four corners, the four winds of the Earth--wrong. The WTO ruling in this case was created out of whole cloth. Nothing in the WTO agreements prohibits us from reimbursing U.S. industry with duties collected--how and from what--on unfairly traded imports. If the trading partners didn't violate the law, they wouldn't have to pay these fines. They violate the law, yes. The administration was directed by Congress in both the fiscal year 2004 and 2005 Omnibus Appropriations Acts to negotiate a solution to this WTO dispute in ongoing trade talks. The Appropriations Acts explicitly--plainly, clearly--state that U.S. negotiations shall be conducted within the World Trade Organization to recognize the right of WTO members to distribute moneys collected from antidumping and countervailing duties as they deem appropriate. The WTO cannot infringe on the sovereign right of the Congress to legislate. They can't do that. The United States needs to keep this important trade law on the books. Keep it on the books. I have talked to the President. I have talked with the administration about that. I have talked with our Trade Representative. Keep it on the books. They first said they would fight for it. After Katrina, we send a terrible message by continuing with this flawed reconciliation process. You watch how it works. I helped to write that law. The reconciliation process was never intended by those of us on both sides of the aisle--we are about all gone now, who created that process--to be used as it is being used. We send a terrible message when the American people call for deficit reduction and instead we lead them erroneously into more debt. I hope the Congress will take the time to reconsider the flawed assumptions underlying this reconciliation process. It needs to do so before the process gets even further out of hand. I thank all Senators. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

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