Robert Byrd

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 1992.

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

Mr. BYRD. I have indicated the purpose of the amendment and the intent of the amendment.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the very distinguished Senator from the great State of Alaska for his statement. I thank the very great Senator from the State of Alaska for his statement and his support. I also thank our colleague on this side of the aisle, the other manager of the bill, Senator Inouye, for his support. Incidentally, may I say I guess I am the only remaining person in Congress who voted for the entry of both Alaska and Hawaii into the Union. Praise God, I did that in each case. These are two fine Senators, two of the greatest.

Mr. BYRD. I thank my colleague.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts for his observations, for his loyalty to his country, for his service to his country, and for the costs to his human self. For that great service, I thank him. And I thank him for the statement he has just made.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, the Senate will vote within the next few minutes on a procedural motion relating to the amendment offered by Senator Warner and Senator Levin. This amendment proposes to add much of the Defense authorization bill to the Defense appropriations bill. The Defense authorization bill is most complex legislation. The bill deals with a broad array of policy matters, ranging from providing for increased pay and benefits for our troops to changing laws relating to nuclear nonproliferation programs to authorizing military construction projects and so on. The committee report that accompanies this bill is 494 pages in length. It is legislation that deserves close scrutiny, full and open debate, and an opportunity to freely amend. If this motion carries and the amendment is adopted, the Senate will only have a bobtailed debate of just a few hours on this very important bill. I am a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee as well as the Appropriations Committee. I attended a portion of the markup of the Defense authorization bill which lasted several full days. Senator Warner and Senator Levin conducted the markup in an exemplary bipartisan manner, and I commend them for their outstanding efforts. They are always fair and very considerate of others and always courteous to every other Senator. The bill was reported from the committee on May 12 of this year, and it was brought to the floor on July 20. For reasons which have been widely discussed, the Defense authorization bill was pulled from the floor on July 27, after only five votes on amendments to the bill. The Senate could have finished consideration of the Defense authorization bill within a matter of 2 or 3 days or perhaps a week, if necessary, if the leadership had not pulled it from the floor. This was a precipitous act, and because of this precipitous action most Senators have had no opportunity to offer amendments and no opportunity to receive votes on their amendments. That is not the way the Senate ought to operate. That is not the way the Senate used to operate. We used to have full and open debates on this floor, take a week perhaps or 2 weeks on a bill this size. As I have stated, here is the history of this important legislation. The matter before the Senate is whether to allow the Defense authorization bill to be added to the Defense appropriations bill as an amendment. What a way for the Senate to operate. What a way to conduct this important business of the people. This is not the way the Senate is supposed to conduct its business. This is a forum for free, open, and unlimited debate. This is how the Senate is so different from other upper bodies throughout the world today. This is why the Senate is such an incredibly powerful and important forum of free debate, open debate, unlimited debate, the full airing of legislation, time to ask questions, time to answer questions, time to explain, explore, deliberate, and time to offer amendments. What a travesty. The Senate is an institution sui generis, one of its kind in this country, a forum where there can be free, open, unlimited debate, freedom of debate, freedom of speech. So the Senate is an institution where freedom of speech, freedom of debate, and the freedom to amend reign. Attaching such a massive bill, the Defense authorization bill, to another important bill, the Defense appropriations bill, will mean that the Senate will never have an opportunity to focus its undivided attention on the important matters of the Defense authorization bill. This is a travesty on freedom of debate. It is a travesty that strikes at the heart of the Senate: freedom of speech, freedom of debate, and freedom to amend. Freedom of speech has its roots buried in antiquity. Henry the Fourth in 1407 said that the members of commons would have freedom of speech. They could say whatever was on their minds about the king, if necessary. Freedom of speech, there it was in the English Declaration of Rights, February 3, 1689. And there it was, in the English Bill of Rights, placed there on December 6, 1689: Freedom of speech. The freedom of commons to speak on any subject, not to be questioned elsewhere in the English House of Commons, and that freedom of speech is enshrined in the American Constitution. Here we are putting a limitation and we are self-imposing it--on ourselves. I am a member of both the Armed Services Committee and the Appropriations Committee, and I believe there is a great importance to allowing the Senate to consider the authorization bill and the appropriations bills separately. Debate about funding our military should take place on the appropriations bill and debate about defense policy should take place particularly on the authorization bill. They are both important bills, and they should be considered separately. The Defense authorization bill should be brought to the floor of the Senate for debate and amendment as a freestanding bill, not as a massive rider to another bill, the appropriations bill. There ought to be a debate about the important matters addressed by the Defense authorization bill. Let there be amendments and let there be votes about such important matters as health care benefits for National Guardsmen and about the war in Iraq. The immediate question before the Senate is procedural in nature, but the heart of the matter is whether the Senate will allow parliamentary maneuvers to conduct an end run around how important legislation should be considered on the floor of the Senate. If the Defense authorization bill is attached to the Defense Appropriations Committee bill, these important and controversial matters will not have a full hearing on the floor of the Senate. Instead, any changes that may be made to the Defense authorization bill will only occur behind closed doors in a large, unwieldy conference committee. That is not the right place for debate on these important issues. These issues should first be debated on the floor of the Senate as they were on the floor of the House many months ago, but even more so because this is the forum for free speech--freedom of debate. The Senate should not be cutting corners on the legislative process because what ends up being cut out is the freedom of speech, freedom of debate, and freedom to amend. It is also worth noting that the amendment now pending does not encompass all of the provisions of the Defense authorization bill. The sections of the bill that relate to military construction projects and nuclear weapons issues have been left out. Those are very important matters, considering the base closure round that occurred this year and the multitude of important matters relating to the thousands of nuclear weapons that the United States still possesses. What would happen to these provisions of the Defense authorization bill? Would they be left in limbo or would they be slipped into a conference report in the dark of night, never to receive any debate on the floor of the Senate? That is the wrong way to go. I have very great affection for Senator Warner and Senator Levin. I serve on their committee, the Committee on Armed Services. They are knowledgeable and able leaders of the Armed Services Committee. But I oppose this effort to attach the Defense authorization bill to the Defense Appropriations Committee bill. It is the wrong way to go, the wrong thing to do. It shortchanges debate. It shortchanges the American people, in that they will not be fully informed as to what is in each bill. Their representatives, their elected representatives in this Senate, will not have had an opportunity to fully debate, to answer questions, to ask questions, and to amend freely. What is happening to the Senate? What is happening to the Senate, I ask? What is happening to freedom of debate in the Senate? What is happening to an orderly process, the legislative process by which the elected representatives of the people in the Senate have a full opportunity to debate, to ask questions? Woodrow Wilson said the informing aspect was as important as the legislating aspect of the Senate, the informing aspect. And debate brings out information that the American people need and that they are entitled to. So what is happening to this Senate? I think all Senators should stop and think about this question. Those of us who have been here many years have seen the Senate when it was somewhat different than it is today. There was time to debate. We just weren't in session 3 days a week and then gone; in 3 days a week, out 4 days a week, and the 3 days a week often begin with a vote, which is kind of a bed-check vote at 6 o'clock in the evening on Tuesday. So you have, really, nothing on Tuesday but a bed-check vote anymore, and then Wednesday and Thursday. What a shame. What is happening to the Senate? What is happening to this forum, this forum of freedom of debate, freedom of speech, freedom to amend-- what is happening to this Senate, and why? I am sorry that the Senate is going in this direction. What is happening? This institution has built its distinguished reputation, its distinguished character on the principle of freedom to debate--freedom of debate, freedom of speech, freedom to amend. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may proceed for another 5 minutes?

Mr. BYRD. Yes, if I could have 3 more minutes.

Mr. BYRD. But the Senate has begun to fall short on those important constitutional principles. We have just a handful of votes each week and then the rush is on to get out that door, out that door, out this door here--get out. The rush is on to wrap up business on an artificial timetable. So what has happened to the Senate? The American people need to know. Why can't the Senate take the time for important debates on the important issues before our Nation. Our troops are at war in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are doing an outstanding service for our country. The Senate ought to give its undivided attention to each of the bills that relate to our troops. If the members of the National Guard are able to put their lives on hold to go fight for our country overseas, then the Senate ought to be able to surely spare whatever time it takes to debate the Defense appropriations bill and the Defense authorization bill as freestanding measures. America deserves that. Our troops deserve that. The Defense authorization bill ought to be brought up as a freestanding measure so that the Senate may work its will on that legislation. It should be open to debate and amendment. That is why I oppose the motion on the defense of germaneness for the Warner-Levin amendment. The Senate should not cut corners on the legislative process. Therefore, I shall vote no on the motion on the defense of germaneness, and I urge my colleagues to join me in voting no. Let's stand up for freedom of speech in this Senate, freedom of debate, freedom to offer amendments. Let's do right by the American people. I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my name be added as a cosponsor of the amendment offered by Senator Bayh.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I have often spoken of the importance of the Senate staff and the Senate's various support services for the effective workings of this great institution. These are the people and the offices that are rarely mentioned in the newspapers or the history books but who are essential to the effective workings of this institution. They are the people and the offices who make the jobs of the 100 Members of this Chamber more pleasant and more productive. I cannot even imagine how this institution could function without the Senate Disbursing Office. In addition to serving as the finance office of the Senate, this office maintains our retirement, health insurance, life insurance, and other human resource programs. For the past 7 years, this most important Senate office has been headed by the Senate's highly capable Financial Officer, Mr. Tim Wineman. Unfortunately, Mr. Wineman will soon be leaving us. He is retiring on October 14. Therefore, I want to take a few minutes of the Senate's time to thank Mr. Wineman for his service, to express my appreciation for his outstanding work, and to say that we will miss him. Mr. Wineman was born and raised in the Washington, DC, metropolitan area, graduating from Bethesda-Chevy Chase High School. On October 19, 1970, he started work as a payroll clerk in the Senate Disbursing Office; he remained in this office for the next 35 years. In September, 1976, Mr. Wineman was promoted to payroll supervisor. Four years later, in August, 1980, he was promoted to the position of assistant financial clerk. On May 1, 1998, he became the Financial Clerk of the U.S. Senate Disbursing Office, that is, the Senate's Financial Officer. His has been an extraordinary career, during which he has earned the praise of those who work under and with him in the Disbursing Office, and the respect of other Senate staffers and Members of this Chamber. During his service in Senate financial leadership positions for the past two decades, Mr. Wineman has overseen the technological renovation of the Senate's financial affairs and has had a hand both in the Senate budget process and the Senate appropriation's process. And he proved himself to be an invaluable resource to Senate leadership on both sides of the aisle. He will be missed and will be very difficult to replace. I want to congratulate and thank Mr. Wineman for his extraordinary dedication to the work and traditions of the Senate. And I want extend to him and Pat, his wife of 36 years, my fondest wishes, and ask the Lord's blessings as they embark upon this new phase of their lives. I understand that after relaxing and enjoying a stress-free environment for the next 6 months, Tim plans to spend his retirement playing golf and traveling. I urge him to do it. He deserves it. He has earned it. ``It Makes No Difference'' It makes no difference who sang the song, If only the song was sung; It makes no difference who did the deed, Be they old in years or young; If the song was sweet and helped a soul, What matters the singer's name? The worth was in the song itself, And not in the world's acclaim. The song and the deed are one, If each be done for love; Love of the work, not love of self, And the ``score'' is kept above. It makes no difference who did the deed, Be they old in years or young; If the song was sweet and helped a soul, What matters the singer's name? The worth was in the song itself, And not in the world's acclaim. The song and the deed are one, If each be done for love; Love of the work, not love of self, And the ``score'' is kept above. --Author Unknown.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, on July 30 and 31, the First Christian Church of Weirton, WV celebrated its 175th anniversary. I wish to take a few minutes of the Senate's time to extend to this house of worship, which came into existence in 1830, 33 years before West Virginia was even a State, my be1ated but sincere and heartfelt congratulations. For 175 years, the First Christian Church of Weirton has served our Lord and ministered to the needs of the region by providing comfort and support to those in need. It has provided aid and assistance to unemployed steel workers, to flood victims, and to those in need. It has provided a place of faith and hope for all. I regret that I was not able to participate in what I am sure was a most glorious celebration, but I do want to recognize and thank the First Christian Church of Weirton for its wonderful service to our Lord, and to our beloved State.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, last month, COL Clarence Lee Turnipseed, Jr., passed away. He was the father of my good friend, and one of the Senate's best and most indispensable workers, Mrs. Dot Svendson, who works in the Office of the Secretary of the Senate. With the death of Colonel Turnipseed, the State of Alabama has lost an outstanding citizen and our Nation has lost a true patriot. Born September 18, 1914, in Union Springs, AL, Clarence Turnipseed graduated from Auburn University in 1935. That same year he was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the U.S. Army and began a remarkable and important military career. During World War II, he served as a battery commander and battalion staff officer of the 42nd Field Artillery Battalion of the Fourth Infantry. On June 6, 1944, Captain Turnipseed participated in the momentous D-Day landing on Utah Beach in Normandy. A few months later, he participated in the Battle of the Bulge. He was eventually promoted to the rank of colonel, served as commander of the 87th Maneuver Area Detachment in Birmingham, AL, and was an instructor at the Command and General Staff College in Fort Leavenworth, KS. A grateful Nation recognized Colonel Turnipseed's long and productive military career by presenting him with a number of awards and honors. Those included the Bronze Star, the Army Commendation Medal, the American Defense Service Medal, the American Campaign Medal, and the European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal. Colonel Turnipseed also had an important and productive civilian career in banking and business. He worked in a number of banks and financial institutions in Alabama. In 1968, he became president and chief executive officer of the First National Bank in Brewton. He eventually held a number of offices in the Alabama and American Bankers Associations, including president of the Alabama Bankers Association and vice president of the American Bankers Association. In 1973, he became director of the Birmingham Branch of the Federal Reserve Bank in Atlanta, and 3 years later was named Alabama's Small Business Advocate. I extend Erma's and my most heartfelt condolences to Mrs. Svendson and to her brother, Clarence Lee, and to her sisters, Rebecca and Margaret.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, here we go again, yes, here we go again. The fiscal year ends tomorrow at midnight. Only two of the annual appropriations bills required to fund the Federal Government have been sent to the President. This is deja vu all over again. As a result, the Congress is rushing through the stopgap money measure called a continuing resolution in order to prevent a massive shutdown of the departments and agencies of the Federal Government. Is this the way to run a government? This is no way to run a government. The appropriations process is a very simple process, in reality. The President sends his recommendations to the Congress in the form of a budget, usually in early February. Subsequently, the House formulates reports, debates and passes 11 annual appropriations bills. To its credit, the House has done exactly that. It has done its job. What is wrong with the Senate? I commend the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Mr. Cochran. Yes, I commend him. With his steady leadership, the Senate Appropriations Committee has formulated and reported all of the annual appropriations bills. Eight of those appropriations bills have been passed by the Senate. Four appropriations bills are now pending in the Senate. This includes the Defense appropriations bill, the Transportation-Treasury appropriations bill, Labor-Health and Human Services-Education appropriations bill, and the District of Columbia appropriations bill, which is likely to be added to the Transportation appropriations bill in order to conform to the House version. That is where we stand today. What is the problem? Regrettably, the Senate Leadership has not seen fit to bring three of our appropriations bills to the floor. This is not the fault of the chairman of the Appropriations Committee. He has called upon the leadership, as did I, to give the appropriations bills high priority in the scheduling of floor time. The Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill, the Transportation- Treasury appropriations bill, and the District of Columbia appropriations bill were approved by our Appropriations Committee over 2 months ago. I simply do not understand why the leadership is dragging its feet! Why not debate legislation that will fund critical investments in our schools, in our healthcare systems, and for our Nation's transportation infrastructure? Are Senators not going to have the opportunity to debate bills that provide over $211 billion? We need to debate each of these funding bills individually. We need to conference them individually with our House counterparts--not just consider them as sub-parts of a large omnibus package. That is what I believe the chairman of the Appropriations Committee wants, and that is what I, too, would like to see happen. I urge my colleagues to work toward that goal. It is unfortunate that most of the regular programs of the departments and agencies of Government will limp into the new fiscal year, which begins--when? this Saturday, the day after tomorrow, under the terms and conditions of a very restrictive continuing resolution. Here we are in the midst of one of the largest natural disasters to hit the United States, and only two regular appropriations bills have been enacted. One would think that the Congress would want to enact all of the annual appropriations bills before the beginning of the fiscal year so that the Federal agencies can hit the road running on October 1st and deal with the problems confronting the American people. Instead, we are enacting a very restrictive stop-gap measure that merely prevents the Government from shutting down. What a shame. It is very unfortunate that the House majority refused to fix the problem created by the continuing resolution for the Community Services Block Grant program, which provides critical healthcare and nutrition services to the neediest Americans. It is very unfortunate that, as we approach winter with fuel prices expected to grow dramatically, this continuing resolution reduces funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program. In conclusion, I am disappointed that the appropriations bills have not been enacted on a timely basis. Having said that, I urge my colleagues to support the continuing resolution. We have no other choice. I urge the leadership to call up the remaining appropriations bills, debate them, and send them to conference with the House. We have an obligation to the American people to get our work done. Debate and deliberation is what the Senate is supposed to be about--debate and deliberation and amending. The American people expect us to debate these bills and to protect the power of the purse and, thereby, protect their hard-earned tax dollars. These matters should not be swept under a carpet somewhere. More, not less, transparency is needed in debating appropriations bills. The Congress should have completed action on all the appropriations bills--not just two--on all the appropriations bills before the end of the fiscal year tomorrow night. Failing that, we should enact eleven individual, fiscally responsible annual appropriations bills before the termination of this continuing resolution on November 18th. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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, Winston Churchill said, ``when you are on a great horse, you have the best seat you will ever have.'' Indeed, throughout the ages, the horse has carried mankind across continents, helped forge civilizations, and has been that beloved beast of burden that has borne the human race on its back. In America, the horse was the primary source of transportation of our founding fathers, the vehicle of our Revolutionary soldiers, and a symbol of the majestic strength and character that this great country was based upon. Our fledgling urban centers rose with the help of the horse's brawn. Our American frontier expanded farther and farther west, with families traveling by horse-drawn wagons across mountains and valleys, the plains and prairies. The American cowboy, an indelible image of the fierce and undying determination of the American spirit, was never without his trusty four-legged companion. But each year, 65,000 horses are slaughtered in this country for human consumption in Europe and Asia, where horsemeat is considered a delicacy. Another 30,000 horses are shipped every year to Canada and Mexico to be slaughtered. These horses often suffer unnecessarily while in transit to slaughterhouses. Horses can be shipped for more than 24 hours without food, water, or rest. They can be transported with broken legs, missing eyes, or while heavily pregnant. The horses are kept in cramped conditions, in trucks with ceilings so low that they prevent the horses from holding their heads in a normal, upright position. The cramped nature of their transport often results in trampling, with some horses arriving at the slaughterhouses seriously injured or dead. Even more cruel than the suffering these animals endure while in transit is their often injurious end. Improper use of stunning equipment at the slaughterhouse can result in the animal having to endure repeated blows to head, meaning that horses sometime remain conscious throughout the slaughter process. The market for horsemeat is not an American market. Horsemeat is shipped abroad. The three slaughterhouses in the U.S. are foreign- owned. Thus, American horses are sold to a foreign company, killed for consumption in a foreign market, and foreign-owned companies profit from the export of horse meat. Many Americans would be shocked to learn that our animals suffer such a fate, all in order to satisfy the tastes of those living in Europe and Asia. Indeed, many individuals who sell horses to slaughterhouses do so unwittingly. Slaughterhouses often send third parties, called ``killer buyers,'' to auction to buy horses. Senator Ensign and I have offered an amendment to stop the slaughter of horses for human consumption by preventing taxpayer dollars from being used to inspect the horses intended for slaughter. Without these inspections, which are paid for by the American taxpayer, it would be impossible for these companies to slaughter horses in the U.S., or to transport horses abroad for slaughter. I ask my colleagues to support the Ensign-Byrd amendment to end the slaughter of one of the most precious American symbols.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, chapter 3, verses 1 through 8, of the Book of Ecclesiastes in the Holy Bible begins: To everything there is a season and a time for every purpose under heaven. Let's read that again: To everything there is a season and a time for every purpose under heaven. It is time for a national debate, and its purpose is our country's future. Sometimes it takes a catastrophe to put events into perspective, to shake us and to sharpen our clarity of vision. The wrath of Katrina, tragic and devastating for thousands, must certainly has caused many thinking Americans to consider anew the proper priorities for our country. Who among us has not wondered if the efforts to rescue and evacuate Gulf Coast residents suffered because too many National Guardsmen have been detailed and detained in Iraq? What thinking American has not pondered why we had such a painfully slow response to a behemoth storm which we knew for days would likely turn New Orleans into a caldron of despair? Is there anyone in our great country--anyone--who did not feel the painful outrage of the citizens of New Orleans and Louisiana and Mississippi, as they waited for days without food, without water, without knowledge about loved ones? Who among us did not shrink in dread from the specter of our fellow citizens' bodies floating in the murky flood waters or stacked in hospital stairwells for want of anyone anywhere else to house them? Could this be happening in a major American city? Can you believe it? Could we be so inept at dealing with this tragedy? The events of the past several days seem to have reduced our much touted American know-how and technology to little more than children's toys, strangely impotent in a real crisis. I know many Americans cringed, as I did, at the vision of the callous neglect of our poorest and most vulnerable citizens which flashed around the world, making the United States appear to be a nation unmindful of its own, a nation unable to handle a disaster about which it had ample notice, a country loudly touting our form of government to the world while failing to provide even the most basic protections to our own citizens. What a shame. If Katrina has any redeeming impact, it must be to cause us to see ourselves as others must surely see us. I regret to say that the picture cannot be a pretty one. That image is certainly not one that reflects the humanitarian goodness and morality of the vast majority of the American people. The perception of the United States in these troubled times should be a cause of major concern for everyone who holds public office--did you hear me?--for everyone who holds public office, regardless of political party. It is time to look at where we are and where we are going. Few would now argue that the war in Iraq has improved the world's view of the United States. Again, what a shame. What a terrible shame. What a terrible mistake. It was an unnecessary and ill-conceived conflict which distracted us from our proper course of bombing the terrorist training grounds of Afghanistan. I have never bought the absurd claim by some that we are fighting terrorists in Iraq so we will not have to fight them here at home. Who believes that? That claim is a nonsequitur at best and, at worst, a patent distortion of what has happened in Iraq. The war in Iraq created a hot bed of terrorism where none existed before, and it ensured Osama bin Laden an endless supply of recruits, now even more fanatic in their hatred after scandals at Abu Ghraib and the destruction of so many innocent lives in Iraq as a result of our unprovoked invasion. I said it then. It was a mistake. We were being misled. I said it then, that Hussein did not pose a threat to our national security. I didn't believe the stories that were told. And as it turned out, the stories were wrong. For everything there is a season, saith the Bible. The season has come for Americans to look homeward instead of continuing to spend billions of dollars in Iraq. Let us husband our hard-earned tax dollars and spend them here at home. Look homeward. The Iraqi people must slowly find their own way now. Further, U.S. dictated deadlines are counterproductive. We cannot force-feed democracy in Iraq. To keep large numbers of American soldiers in Iraq much longer only earns the United States more enmity, reinforcing our unfortunate global image as conqueror, not liberator. Haven't we learned that? The Iraqi people must begin to take it from here. In fact, there is no longer a war in Iraq. The President says we are a nation at war. We are not a nation at war. The U.S. military is at war. The Nation pays little attention to it. The newspapers seldom mention it. The administration is deaf, dumb, and mute on the war. A national war? Guardsmen know about it. They know there is a war, and their families know there is a war. We started that conflict. We started that conflict, and we met the goals established at its outset. Now there is a slow, festering, internal political struggle pitting Shiite against Sunni against Kurd which will play itself out perhaps for decades until it either devolves into outright civil war or resolves into some sort of compromise which suits those who live in the country of Iraq. We cannot resolve Iraq's internal issues. It is time for the United States to begin to bring our troops home. What are we waiting on? There are those who say if we were to leave, we would not be honoring those who gave their lives in vain. That is an argument that is eternal. We continue to feed lives into the slaughterhouse. The invasion of Iraq was never supposed to be an open-ended peacekeeping mission with our troops mired amid the chaos of continuing urban warfare, the most dangerous place in the world. How would you like for your son to go? How would you like for your daughter to go? How would you like for your grandson to go? For what? We need to bring them home with a hearty ``job well done''--a hearty ``job well done.'' We should begin with the National Guard. Praise God, the National Guard. Obviously, they are needed here. They were needed in New Orleans. They were needed in Mississippi. They were needed in Alabama. They are an integral part of our first responder team in the event of a terrorist attack, God forbid, or if another national disaster were to strike. It is time to come home--come home, America--time to come home; time to come home, America; time to look within our own borders and within our own souls. There are many questions to be answered and many missions to accomplish right here on our own soil. We have neglected too much for too long in our own backyard. Come on, wake up, wake up, America. To everything there is a season--a time to break down and a time to build up. If we had spent the money a few years back to rebuild those levees on the Gulf Coast, thousands would be alive today. Perhaps we can finally see the value of that budgetary stepchild called public works. All across this country, there are years of neglect of the basic infrastructure of the United States that cry out for attention. Years of neglect--years of neglect--of the basic infrastructure of the United States that have been crying out for attention, cry out today for attention, and we have delayed for decades, and the needs are only growing. There are antiquated sewer and water systems built a century ago in our major cities. Take a look here in Washington, DC, right here in the Nation's Capital. Washington, DC, has water not always safe to drink. There are rural communities in America that live with black mud coming out of their faucets. There are unsafe bridges. There are aging reservoirs. There are schools without adequate heat or modern learning tools all around our land. Homeland security needs are underfunded. I have time and again, time and again offered amendments to more appropriately fund homeland security. My amendments were defeated because the White House and the leadership of the party that controls this House and the other House oppose those amendments. Yet we continue to commit billions of dollars to rebuild Iraq while our own needs go begging. Can't we see? How long, how long, how long will we close our eyes to these needs? Is it not now painfully evident to everyone that we must make basic investment in our own country a national and urgent priority? Imagine a terrorist attack on the heels of a catastrophe such as Katrina. Can you imagine the horror, the chaos, the utter confusion? I have to believe that Osama or one of his henchmen is taking notes as we struggle with the devastation left in Katrina's wake. Our economic resources are stretched dangerously, dangerously thin, and so is our military might--you better believe that--so is our military might. We have taken on too much. We have turned our backs on cooperation with the international community, decided to go it alone, and pursue some grandiose scheme of remaking the world in our own image. How silly. By now it should be clear to all that grand experiments are very costly. It is time for a national epiphany. The sound of Katrina's bugle must be heeded. We cannot continue to commit billions of dollars in Iraq when our own people are so much in need--not only now in New Orleans, but all across America--for everything from education to health care to homeland security to securing our own borders. We need to stop making excuses, stop spinning the facts, and come to grips with the unpleasant truth. The Government of the United States is failing the American people. Failing. That is the catastrophe. Where is the national debate about our priorities which Katrina should prompt? What does it take to wake us up? Hey, listen, hear me: It is a debate that must begin, if not on this Senate floor, then in the barber shops and in the grocery stores of America and in the print and broadcast media of this great Nation. It is past time for that debate and high time for all of us to realize that there is nothing more patriotic than taking a good, hard, honest look at our national priorities. We, the people--we, the people--always have that right. A strong republic depends upon just that kind of periodic soul-searching. Does our moral sense of ourselves translate into Government policies? I believe that. Presently, it does not. We have a disconnect in Government policy in everything from a tarnished U.S. image abroad to a failure to address gasoline shortages and skyrocketing prices that will certainly slow our economic engine and take their toll on working people. Instead of asking the public not to buy more gas than needed, I wish somebody would ask the giant oil companies to pass up some profits and help hold down gas prices as a patriotic gesture for our country. Would that be so outrageous? What do you think? Why have we not had the vision to invest in alternative energy sources on a grand scale to free us from the addiction to foreign oil? For too long--for too long--our great land has been allowed to drift toward balkanization, a separation between the haves and the have-nots, with the lower end of the income scale at risk from a tattered safety net and a neglected infrastructure, lacking the jobs and housing they need, the health care to stay well, the insurance to cover hospital stays, or the educational opportunities to prepare for the future. I remember, yes, I remember an America that used to feel more like one country--one country, an America that shared the sacrifice of war and tightened its belt so we could pay for it now. But now we borrow to go to war, and we cut taxes to spare those in the high brackets from sacrifice. Where is the sense of shared destiny? It has taken nature's own weapon of mass destruction, a category 4 hurricane, to remind us that we are all American and that our Government has a moral obligation to serve and protect us all. This country is on the wrong track, and the course needs correcting. Continued denial serves no good purpose. Further loss of American life in Iraq may permanently sour the American people on future military action and damage the recruitment for our all-voluntary force. To everything there is a season--a time to kill and a time to heal. We have seen the fallacy of sending too many members of the National Guard to the Middle East. What folly. As I speak, we have lost 1,886 sons and daughters in Iraq. And for what? And there seems to be no end in sight, no plan. We have 137,000 troops still serving in Iraq with 2,000 more scheduled to go in October. We are building at least--now get this--we are building at least four semipermanent bases in Iraq structured to hold 18,000 troops each. Why? That does not sound like ``staying not one day longer than needed'' to me. In truth, most Americans no longer support a massive deployment in Iraq. Nor do they understand the mission of that continued deployment. Despite repeated directives by the Congress, the ``powers that be'' refuse to actually budget for Iraq, so that a total picture of our fiscal situation and the cost of the war is deliberately obscured. We are driving our country ever deeper into debt and stretching every resource that we possess to the breaking point. How much longer can it last? Prudence demands that we reassess our posture. Our inept and pathetic, pitiful response to Katrina has underlined our vulnerabilities and writ them large before the world. The American people deserve better than this. I call upon the leaders of this country to come together and to work together to repair our storm-ravaged Gulf Coast and help salvage the lives of its victims. But more than that, I call upon the Congress to inventory our homeland with an eye to the future. Let us look around, America, and target our deficiencies. Let us work with State and local communities to shore up our weaknesses. We must react in a crisis, of course, but for God's sake, let us finally understand that we must also anticipate the future and be unafraid to commit the resources to make us strong at home. The lesson of Katrina most surely is that an ounce of prevention is worth several tons of cure. We need to also learn that we cannot long remain a world power if we continue to let America crumble from within. The alarm bells are sounding--listen. The alarm bells are sounding and we must answer the call. This is no time to play for partisan advantage. This is certainly not the season to circle the wagons and hunker down. We need not stretch our brains to write new talking points or invent new excuses. And please, oh, please, please, let us not resort to the trusty bureaucratic ruse of simply reorganizing Government agencies once again. It is time for real leadership. It is the season for true humility. The Bible says: Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall. For years we have been getting it wrong here in Washington. But if we have the will, we can begin to get it right. The American people deserve leaders with the honesty to take responsibility for failures-- quit making excuses, quit spinning the facts--and the wisdom to change when change is obviously and so urgently needed. And may God, may almighty God, grant us the grace. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

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

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, today I will vote against S.J. Res. 20, the joint resolution of disapproval concerning the mercury emissions rules that were promulgated by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, on March 15, 2005. At the same time, I have some significant reservations about the sometimes questionable decisions that the administration made to revise the regulations and achieve the final result. In short, I cannot condone this rule making process; I remain very concerned about the possible impacts these new regulations could have on eastern coal; and I urge the administration to increase its commitment to funding important mercury control technology programs. On one hand, coal, electric utility, and other industry interests are concerned that returning to the more stringent mercury control standards proposed by the Clinton administration would lead to negative economic impacts, including fuel switching to natural gas. They believe that the intent of S.J. Res. 20 would be to force the EPA to require a 90 percent reduction in mercury emissions from each coal-fired powerplant, and this would also directly impact West Virginia's chemical, agricultural, and industrial uses of natural gas. I am therefore concerned that a vote for S.J. Res. 20 would support regulations that are more draconian and costly than could be borne by the economy at this time. However, like the United Mine Workers, I remain concerned about the potential impacts that the clean air mercury rule could have on eastern coal. Time and again, eastern coals have sustained the brunt of the clean air regulations at the expense of western coals. Since the passage of the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments, western coal production has continued to climb at a steady pace while eastern and interior basin coal production, and important union mining jobs, have suffered significantly. I am troubled by evidence that, in making changes to these regulations, the Bush EPA was swayed by and, in some cases, simply copied recommendations by western coal industry interests. Furthermore, it is important to bring to light several important reviews of these regulations by the Government Accountability Office, GAO, and the EPA inspector general. The GAO as well as the EPA inspector general criticized the EPA for ignoring critical information. Based on these reviews, the administration did a very poor job of analyzing the mercury emissions data, the economic analysis, and other critical health-based factors. It appears that the administration already had reached a predetermined answer and then worked backwards to achieve that end. Finally, I have been very concerned about this administration's commitment to funding fossil energy research. The industry argues that there is not a sufficient, reliable suite of technologies to meet these mercury emissions standards for some years to come. Because I believe that there are negative health impacts to pregnant mothers and young children from exposure to mercury, we should take economically and environmentally sound actions to achieve these reductions. However, this administration has not increased the critical funding required to find the mercury control technologies that would enable the U.S. to meet these emission reductions sooner. The administration could do a lot more to get these technologies in place by increasing funding for these important programs.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, Hurricane Katrina dealt this country an unspeakable blow. Tens of thousands of homes have been destroyed. Families have lost everything. Entire cities have been washed away. And, most tragically, hundreds, perhaps thousands of lives have been lost. Our Gulf States are in crisis. People have been scattered to cities and homes across the country, as the Army Corps of Engineers continues to pump the water out of the flood zones. It will take weeks, if not months, for the waters to recede. The Congress has responded. Last week, the Congress approved $10.5 billion in emergency supplemental funding. And now we are poised to provide another $51.8 billion. This funding is likely just a down payment. The bill that is before the Senate provides $50 billion for FEMA Disaster Relief. This funding will provide food, water, housing and cash assistance to the victims of Hurricane Katrina. It also will be used to reimburse the many Federal agencies that are in the region providing health care, rebuilding roads, providing security and removing debris. The bill also includes $1.4 billion for the Department of Defense for the deployment of military personnel to provide relief supplies, health care, and security, and for repairing facilities. Finally, the bill includes $400 million for the Corps of Engineers for emergency repairs to levees and pump stations, and for draining flooded areas. The White House expects that there will be a need for more funding in early October. Congress responded to the President's first supplemental request in one day because FEMA was about to run out of disaster relief funds. Congress approved the President's $10.5 billion request without amendment. Yesterday afternoon, we received the President's second supplemental request, for $51.8 billion, once again because FEMA is expected to need more money. Today, because of the urgency, we are approving his second request. I understand that the President intends to send a third request, which will be more comprehensive. Yet, the administration has not made any commitment to send that request to the Congress quickly. The White House should not, once again, send that request one day before FEMA runs out of money and expect the Congress to rubber stamp the request. I hope the majority leader will work with the White House to make sure that the request is sent quickly so that Congress can debate the matter. As Senator Reid, Senator Landrieu, and others have pointed out, there are many issues about the Federal response to Hurricane Katrina that should be examined. As we move forward, we must ask serious questions about the Government's failure to help the people of the Gulf States on a timely basis. We want answers--we all want answers--as to why it took so long for rescue teams to get on the ground. There is no excuse for the days of delay and the inexplicable lack of coordination in the response effort. The anger and frustration in our country are justified. Was the slow response because our resources were committed overseas? Were lives lost because the Government took its eyes away from the danger? Or because it failed to recognize a danger at all? That's one of the issues that most concerns me. We all watched the weather radar and saw this storm. Its footprint covered the entire Gulf of Mexico. We knew the storm was coming. We knew the danger was coming. Yet, the Government failed to respond. Lives were lost because the Government failed to do its job. What would have happened if this had been a terrorist attack that we did not see coming? What if a surprise attack breached the levees around Lake Pontchartrain? How slow would our response have been then, to a danger that the Government did not see coming? The Government clearly was not ready to evacuate large numbers of low-income, disabled and elderly people. Not all people in this country have jets, helicopters and fleets of SUVs to move them around. If there were a terrorist attack, would our Government, once again, leave behind the many people in this Nation who do not have the resources to be mobile? It's time that we put America first. It's time that we refocus our energies and our resources into protecting this Nation here at home. Reinforce our critical infrastructure. Train and coordinate response and rescue efforts. Close the gaps. Fix the problems. The Government's actions in the days following the tragedy were slow and misguided at best, and inept at worst. The Federal response effort was unacceptable, and the Government must do better. Let us pray that this funding will help to save lives and ease the suffering. I urge Senators to support this supplemental appropriations bill. Hurricane Katrina is a national disaster. It is a national tragedy. And it will take a national effort to help our fellow citizens rebuild their homes, their cities, and their lives. I thank my distinguished colleague, chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Mr. Cochran, for his contribution. May I say to him, I have personally been concerned about him, his people in Mississippi, his people and Senator Lott's people. I called him and told him that I wanted to be of assistance, if I could be, and that any appropriations bill that we might appropriate, might send from our committee would have my support. We did this promptly. We are going to continue to do what we can. I commiserate with him as to the tragedy which has befallen his State, his people, our country, our people. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD

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

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I have some remarks to make, about 10 minutes of remarks. I want to commend Senator Burns and Senator Dorgan for their work on the Interior appropriations bill. When might I make those remarks?

Mr. BYRD. Very well. Will the Senator yield further?

Mr. BYRD. May I make a further inquiry? Then, I am correct in understanding the Chair to say that I will have 5 minutes prior to the vote?

Mr. BYRD. That vote will be on what?