Robert Byrd

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Boxer, I call up amendment No. 1155, with a modification which I send to the desk.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, does the modification need unanimous consent?

Mr. BYRD. The amendment, as modified, prevents funds from being used for wasteful expenditures. I urge adoption of the amendment, as modified.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I move that the vote be reconsidered by which the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I call up my amendment numbered 1201.

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

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senators Boxer and Kerry have their names added to the Byrd transit amendment No. 1218.

Mr. BYRD. I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the Chair. Amendment No. 1218 Mr. President, the amendment that the minority leader offered on my behalf would provide an additional $1.33 billion above the underlying bill for security funding needed for our transit systems, intracity buses, intercity rail, and freight rail. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims of the London bombings. For all of us, the pictures were all too graphic reminders of how quickly disaster can strike and how deadly terrorist strikes can be. The horrific attacks in London a few days ago were eerily similar to the attacks in Madrid, Spain, in March 2004: targeted, coordinated, and timed bombings. Sadly, crowded subway systems and trains have become inviting targets for terrorists. We have witnessed the hysteria and the chaos that these events can trigger. Could it happen here? Of course. Are our systems more secure? I wonder. Last week, when asked if additional funding was needed to secure mass transit, Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff responded by saying: I wouldn't make a policy decision driven by a single event. Well, with all due respect to the Secretary, the alarm bells have been ringing for years. On July 8, the Washington Post printed a chart that provides a chronology of bombings with al-Qaida links. This chart shows that, starting in 1993 at the World Trade Center in New York City, there have been 16 bombings worldwide linked to al-Qaida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that this chart be printed in the Record.

Mr. BYRD. The alarms do not stop there, Mr. President. According to the RAND Corporation, between 1998 and 2003, there were 181 terrorist attacks on rail targets worldwide. The Congressional Research Service has reported that passenger rail systems in the United States carry about five times--five times--as many passengers each day as do the airlines. Yet the administration has continuously opposed funding to increase security on our trains, subways, and buses. Public transportation is used nearly 32 million times a day--think of that: 32 million times a day--which is 16 times more than travel on domestic airlines. According to the Government Accountability Office, nearly 6,000 agencies provide transit services by bus, subway, ferry, and light rail to about 14 million Americans each weekday. Amtrak carried an all-time record ridership of 25 million passengers in fiscal year 2004. Are these lives not worth protecting? How about it? What about the dangerous and hazardous materials that are transported by rail? We simply are not doing enough. Without proper security measures in place, these transports are vulnerable to attack or sabotage. Many of these shipments travel to or through major urban areas, such as Washington, DC, and, frankly, only minutes down the road from where we stand today. The Homeland Security Council released a report in July 2004 indicating that a chlorine tanker explosion in an urban area could kill up to 17,500 people. According to a New York Times editorial on June 20, 2005: One of the deadliest terrorist scenarios the Department of Homeland Security has come up with is an attack on a 90-ton rail tanker filled with chlorine. As many as 100,000 people could be killed or injured in less than 30 minutes. Yet only 2 out of every 100 transportation security dollars in this bill will be spent on rail and transit. What does this mean? This means that 98 percent of transportation security funding is going--for what?--going for aviation security. Since 9/11, I have offered amendments on seven different occasions-- seven different occasions--to add money for transit and rail security. However, every time the administration opposed my efforts. So I regret the Secretary's comments last week that policy should not be driven by a single event. I was astonished to learn that the $150 million that Congress approved for mass transit and rail security last October is still sitting--where?--sitting in the Treasury. Finally, on Tuesday, the Department notified Congress how they intend to allocate the funds. But an announcement does not make Americans safer. It takes time for transit and rail systems to actually put these security improvements in place, so there is no excuse for these bureaucratic delays in Washington. Within very limited allocations, Congress has taken the lead by providing $265 million between fiscal years 2003 and 2005 for transit security. Unfortunately, the administration has let the money sit in Washington far too long. It was all of 8 months before all of the 2003 funding was awarded, and 6 months before the 2004 funding went out the door. And here we are again, 9 months after the fiscal year 2005 transit funding was enacted, and what happens? Well, it is deja vu all over again. It is still sitting--where?--in Washington, right here in Washington. The administration must overcome the hurdles that have caused those delays. Clearly, the administration is not taking this threat seriously. It certainly would not appear to be. So we must press the administration to do more. The horrific events we witnessed just a few days ago ought to serve as a call to action by this Government to protect our citizens from future attack. For far too long, the administration has put its head in the sand where rail and mass transit security are concerned. We should be taking steps right now to improve deterrence in our transit and rail systems by investing in surveillance cameras, investing in locks, in gates, in canine teams, in sensors, and other tools. Last October, the Senate passed two bipartisan rail security authorization bills, S. 2273 and S. 2884, that authorized additional funding for securing mass transit and rail systems, but the bills did not make it to the White House. The bill that is before the Senate reduces funding from $150 million in fiscal year 2005 to $100 million. The amendment would increase the $100 million to $1.43 billion. That is the amendment that I offer. Let me say it again. The amendment would increase the $100 million to $1.43 billion. The $1.43 billion includes $1.166 billion for transit security and $265 million for rail security. So we are taking care of both transit security and rail security. That seems to meet both needs, at least part way. Our security efforts cannot be delayed, Mr. President, and must not be underfunded. The lives of the American people depend on strengthened security. And whose life is it? It may be your own. It may be your relative's. It may be your friend's. The time for hand wringing is over. It is time to act. So I urge all Senators to support the amendment. I ask unanimous consent, Mr. President, that the following Senators have their names added as cosponsors to the amendment: Mr. Inouye, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Reed of Rhode Island, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Kennedy, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Dayton, and Mr. Corzine.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, this amendment would require that States and localities spend their first responder funds pursuant to approved State plans within 2 years of the end of the fiscal year that they received the funds. I urge adoption of the amendment.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, it is commonly said that a man is known by his work. For half of a century, Mr. Gene May of McLean, VA, was known by the fine homes he built in the Washington area. Mr. May, who died recently of lung cancer, was a builder and a developer, who made an important and lasting impact on this busy, ever- growing, and highly transient region. He was a good man, who touched people with his hard work, his dedication to his profession, and the extra care that he put into the structures that he built. Gene May did not merely build houses; he built homes, and he built more than a thousand of them starting with his first, in 1947. He put a part of himself into each of his endeavors, into each of the homes he built; and as a result, the homes he built reflect his values. Years after he retired, according to the Washington Post, people were still writing to him, praising him for the sturdiness of the homes he had built for them, and thanking him for his superb work. Yet, according to his daughter, his work was not the most important thing in his life. It wasn't even second. His daughter explained that ``the most important thing in his life was his family, followed by his church. And he viewed his work as a way to serve both.'' What a wonderful way to regard one's work. What a contribution all of us could make to our families, our society, and ourselves with such an outlook on life, that our work is a way to serve our family and our Creator. Gene May's philosophy served as an underpinning for a rewarding life. He put family first, and what a wonderful family he had. He was married to his loving wife, Barbara May, for 58 years. They had two children and five grandchildren. Gene May faithfully served his church. I knew Gene May. He built the house in which I now live. He was a charter member, treasurer, and one of the first deacons of the Church of Christ of Falls church. He supervised the building of two of the church's facilities, and actively participated in the church's mission. In addition, he helped to establish, then served as president of, a christian youth summer camp in Virginia's blue ridge mountains. Gene May's community involvement extended well beyond his church activities. For example, he was a member of the school board, a board member of the Arlington Trust Bank, and a founder of the Northeastern Junior College in Villanova, PA. When Mr. May learned that he had terminal cancer a little more than a year ago, he reacted to the news with the calmness and level-headedness that had characterized his life. He taught his wife how to handle the family finances, even budgeting the money for his funeral expenses. He then signed up for hospice care, so that he would not be a burden to his family; and, he began to prepare himself for the afterlife. How about that? He began to prepare himself for the afterlife. Gene May succumbed to the dreaded disease on May 4 of this year. This good man, this good neighbor, this good citizen will be missed by his family, his community, and his legion of friends. But through the homes he built for more than a thousand people, the memories of his life and work will live for years and years to come. He was a builder. Gene May was a builder in the best and truest meaning of the word. I saw them tearing a building down, A group of men in a busy town. With a ``ho, heave, ho'' and a lusty yell They swung a beam and the sidewall fell. I said to the foreman, ``Are these men skilled? The type you would hire if you had to build?'' He laughed, and then he said, ``no indeed, Just common labor is all I need; I can easily wreck in a day or two, That which takes builders years to do. I said to myself as I walked away, ``Which of these roles am I trying to play? Am I a builder who works with care, Building my life by the rule and square? Am I shaping my deeds by a well-laid plan, Patiently building the best I can? Or am I a fellow who walks the town, Content with the labor of tearing down?'' My wife Erma, and I extend our deepest condolences to Mr. May's wife, Barbara, and their children, and grandchildren. May his ashes rest in peace.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the clerk. I ask unanimous consent that the following Senators be added as cosponsors: Messrs. Kennedy, DeWine, Corzine, and Dodd. That is it. That completes the list.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about a very important group of men and women and to offer an amendment on their behalf. All across this land, there are men and women who put their lives on the line every day fighting fires, over a million firefighters, and over three-fourths of them are volunteers. So when one reads a list of the responsibilities firefighters bear each day, it reads like a litany of good public service: fire suppression, wild land firefighting, hazardous materials response, code enforcement, fire prevention, education, explosives response, investigation, industrial fire prevention and safety, and counterterrorism. So in this high-technology, post-9/11 world, it is not our father's fire service. Firefighters require the latest equipment and training to cope with changing threats. When our Nation fell under attack on September 11, 2001, firefighters raced into buildings, buildings engulfed in flames, to save people. Today, over 8,000 firefighters are battling wildfires in eight States that threaten our environment and property. When a house is on fire, firefighters arrive quickly on the scene to rescue people and their pets. They rush into burning buildings to pull people from the mayhem. When vehicles spill hazardous, even toxic materials, firefighters clean up the spill, thereby protecting nearby populations. They do all of this often without proper equipment, often without enough training, often without sufficient staffing but--but, but--they do it anyway. Yes, they do it anyway, and we are all better off for their bravery. One could go on and on about these heroes, but words are meaningless without action. That is why I am offering an amendment that will restore funding for the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program, a program that provides equipment and training for these courageous public servants. So I say, restore funding for the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program because the bill that is before the Senate reduces funding for firefighter grants by $100 million in comparison with last year. There is no justification for this cut. Applications for fiscal year 2005 totaled $2.7 billion. With the funding that Congress approved, the Department of Homeland Security funded less than one-quarter of the eligible applications. Instead of responding to this significant demand for firefighter equipment and training, the administration proposed to cut firefighting grants for fiscal year 2006 from $715 million to $500 million, a reduction of 30 percent. Our leader, Homeland Security Subcommittee Chairman Gregg, has done all that he can to address the greatest needs in this Homeland Security appropriations bill for fiscal year 2006. But our bank account--ah, now, there is where the problem is--our bank account was pilfered by a budget proposal from the White House. The White House proposed that the Appropriations Committee raise $1.68 billion in fees by raising airline passenger fees. The problem is, the Appropriations Committee does not have authority to increase such fees. So what happened? This left the committee with a deep hole to fill, and as a result, our firefighters are $100 million short. I received a letter on June 10 of this year from Chief Robert DiPoli, retired, president of the International Association of Fire Chiefs. I shall make this letter a part of the Record shortly but not at this moment. In the letter, Chief DiPoli tells me that the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program and the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response Firefighters, or SAFER, Program are the highest priorities of the members of the association. He goes on to state that although the fire departments are locally funded and operated, they do provide a national service in times of crisis, whether natural or man made. Chief DiPoli has said that the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program is the greatest program ever to hit the streets because fire departments cannot fund all of their needs through bean suppers and bingo games. I have to agree. I agree. According to a recent study by the U.S. Fire Administration entitled ``A Needs Assessment of the U.S. Fire Service,'' only 13 percent of the fire departments have the equipment and training to handle an incident involving chemical or biological agents, and half of all fire engines are at least 15 years old. Ten percent of fire departments in cities with at least one building over four stories high or higher do not have adequate ladders or aerial apparatus. Overall, fire departments in the United States do not have enough portable radios to equip half of the responders on a shift, and the percentage is even higher in small communities. So who would want to be a firefighter? I would not want to be, with all of that shortage of equipment. One-third of firefighters per shift are not equipped with self- contained breathing apparatus. How about that? This equipment is not cheap. A portable radio costs $950. A chemical agent detector costs $8,585. An air pack costs $4,424. A defibrillator costs $1,695. Night vision goggles cost $3,210. Uniforms and other basic gear cost $1,000. So it is no surprise to me that the demand for this program has grown from $2.1 billion for fiscal year 2003 to $2.3 billion in fiscal year 2004 to $2.7 billion for this year. What does surprise me, what disappoints me, is that in the face of documented needs--now these are not just ``suspicion'' needs or ``maybe'' needs or ``perhaps'' needs. What does surprise me, what disappoints me, is that in the face of documented needs for better equipment and growing demand for this program, the bill cuts the funding for equipping and training our firefighters. I am pleased that the bill provides an increase for the SAFER firefighter hiring program. I commend my chairman, Senator Gregg, for his support for the program. Overall, firefighter grants are cut by $100 million. Firefighters in both big cities and small towns across this land face new challenges every day, while maintaining their traditional missions. They should not rely on bean suppers and bingo games to raise the funds to pay for their needs on the job. Individually and collectively, we are safer with properly equipped and trained firefighters. As a Nation, we rely on their capabilities. Therefore, Federal dollars are wisely invested in the effort. That brings me to the present moment. I offer this amendment to provide $100 million to the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program. By approving this amendment, the Senate will be answering the call, will be saying, We hear you, we hear what you are saying, will be answering the call from our firefighters. This is a modest amendment. It simply restores firefighter grants funding to the fiscal year 2005 level of $715 million. Even if this amendment is adopted, the firefighting program will be almost $300 million below the level authorized by Congress. I wish we could do more, but this is the least we can do. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to adopt the amendment. I ask unanimous consent that the letter to which I earlier referred from Chief Robert A. DiPoli be printed in the Record.

Mr. BYRD. I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD. Would the able chairman yield for a comment? I urge the chairman not to raise the budget point of order at this time. I wonder if perhaps I might implore the chairman to work with Chairman Cochran to approve using a portion of the fiscal year 2005 allocation for our firefighters so that this amendment would not be subject to a point of order. Would the very able chairman be willing to give some consideration to my request in this light?

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside and that amendment No. 1200 be stated by the clerk.

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

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, if the distinguished Senator would allow me further just to say that I thank the chairman for his consideration that he is giving to my request. I might add, firefighters and the communities they protect ought not to be penalized by inside-the- beltway procedures. We are in this tough position because the White House proposed that the Appropriations Committee raise $1.68 billion by increasing airline passenger fees. I have gone over this already, but I have to say again, as I said earlier, that the Appropriations Committee does not have authority to increase these fees. Therefore, we have been left with a gaping hole in resources, and this means that our firefighters are going to suffer a funding cut of $100 million below the fiscal year 2005 level. Some Senators might be surprised to know that the United States has one of the highest fire death rates in the industrialized world at 13.5 deaths per million population. Fires kill more Americans than all natural disasters combined. In 2003, 3,925 civilians lost their lives as a result of fire, and 111 firefighters were killed in duty-related incidents. In that same year, 18,125 civilians suffered injuries that occurred as a result of fire. So there is a real need for this funding. Communities need the money to buy essential equipment. This is not a case of throwing dollars at fire departments so they can buy extravagant items. This is a very modest amendment. Even with adoption of the amendment, the program will still be $300 million below the level authorized by Congress. Last year, the Department of Homeland Security was unable to approve over $2 billion in eligible applications for equipping and training our firefighters because of lack of funding. We ought to do everything we can to meet this demand for equipment and training for our firefighters. The Appropriations Committee currently has $1.058 billion in budget authority available under the 302(b) allocation for fiscal year 2005. So the reason I have asked my beloved chairman, Senator Gregg, to consider discussing this with Chairman Cochran is that if Chairman Cochran made just $100 million of this unused allocation available to homeland security, this amendment would not be subject to a Budget Act point of order. I again thank my friend, the chairman, for at least saying that he will withhold the point of order, and that he will give this matter some further consideration. Before I yield the floor, I ask unanimous consent to add Senators Lieberman and Mikulski as cosponsors to my amendment. I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I have listened intently to the remarks of the very distinguished Senator as the chairman of this appropriations subcommittee, and I have been very impressed by his remarks. But prior to that, over a long period of time I have been very impressed with his dedication to the service of the people he represents here and his dedication to the Nation. He is an extremely able chairman. He has experience in the executive field, as he has alluded to, and he has experience in the committee system. He is preeminently fair in his work on the subcommittee, very fair, always willing to listen, and most charitable, may I say, toward me. I am the ranking member on the subcommittee and on the full committee. But I could never wish for anyone to be more fair, more knowledgeable, or anyone whom I would respect more than this man from the mountains of his great State, and I have a tremendous admiration for him and a great deal of fondness for him. He is a chairman sui generis and a gentleman along with it. I like that part, too, especially. Now, Mr. President, the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee has outlined the threat, and he has done so very well. I can't tell you how much I have admired the way he has striven to put together this bill and utilized the limited amount of moneys that are available to us and do it in a way that will reach those areas that are in most need of funding. I am immensely pleased with the work he has done. His work is the foremost work, of course. As the ranking member, I try to help. I do have a very able staff that works with the staff of the distinguished chairman, and it is through this staff that I am able to keep abreast of things and also to make my feelings known as well. Mr. President, the Senate, then, has before it this bill for fiscal year 2006 Homeland Security appropriations. I cannot commend too much the distinguished chairman, as I have already indicated, and his staff, for their work on this legislation. I also commend the thousands of men and women who are on the front lines of America's homeland security. They serve the Nation every hour of every day. I welcome Chairman Gregg to his new duties as chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee. He comes to it, needless to say, very well prepared. He has a wealth of experience, a wealth of expertise. The chairman targets limited resources--and I emphasize the word ``limited''--on future threats, not simply the threats posed by the attacks of September 11. For the most part, the chairman has attempted to allocate resources to those threats that represent the greatest risk to the American people. In doing so he has, with my support, included a number of improvements to the President's budget particularly with regard to border security, air cargo security, funds for States to implement the driver's license provisions of the REAL ID Act, as well as funding to protect the ``all-hazards'' Emergency Management Performance Grant Program. The committee bill builds on the bipartisan border security initiative that I offered along with Senator Craig to the 2005 emergency supplemental. Between the emergency supplemental enacted in May and this bill Congress will have increased the number of Border Patrol agents by 1,500, provided funds to train and house these agents, increased the number of immigration investigators, the number of agents and detention officers by 817, and increased the number of detention beds by 4,190. The chairman has to be commended for this, and I am profuse in my admiration and my support for what he has done. In addition, the bill contains an important protection for the privacy rights of Americans. We need always to keep these rights in mind. I thank Chairman Gregg for his support of language that I recommended concerning secure flight, the Department's proposed new airline passenger profiling system. The language would prohibit the use of commercial databases for confirming the identity of airline passengers. Such commercial databases are unreliable and potentially invade people's privacy. The bill before the Senate provides $30.8 billion for discretionary programs, an increase of 4.6 percent. This is a very lean bill. The committee was put in a difficult position as a result of the administration's proposal to have the Appropriations Committee increase the fees paid by airline passengers, a proposal that would have raised $1.68 billion. The Appropriations Committee does not have jurisdiction over airline fees and therefore could not approve the proposal. As a result, the committee was forced to reduce spending below the President's request by $389 million. So the low subcommittee allocation and the fee proposal resulted in cuts in firefighter grants, first responder grants, rail and mass transit security grants, Coast Guard operations, and in the number of Transportation Security Administration screeners. These cuts are very unfortunate. It is regrettable that the administration's apparent lack of understanding of the legislative process will have such a direct impact on programs that are so important, that are important elements of our homeland security strategy. As the Senate considers this bill, I hope the Senators will look favorably on amendments to restore the cuts in firefighter grants, first responder grants, and mass transit and rail security grants. The utterly tragic events in London last week remind all of us of the imminent threat--the imminent threat, may I say--to the American people that is posed by terrorist attacks here at home--here at home. We have heard it said it is better to fight these terrorists in Iraq than it is to fight them in New York City or in Washington. Of course that is true. Nobody doubts that. But don't let anybody be fooled. Don't let anybody be fooled. Fighting them in Iraq is not going to make us secure from having to fight them here at home in Washington, New York, Tampa, FL--wherever. Don't fall for that malarkey. That is pure bunk. Of course we know what that is all about. But it has happened in London. It happened before that in Madrid, and before that in Japan, and it can happen here. No amount of argument, debate, or plain old malarkey should convince anyone that it can't happen here. In my judgment, it will. It is coming. These people take their time. They are patient. They are not in a big hurry. And it is coming here. It is coming here. The thing about it is these people know when and where and how the attack will be made. We do not. So they have the advantages. Let's just put that bunk to the side; forget it for now. There is nothing to it. We are in jeopardy. The American people are in jeopardy and we ought to understand that. Last Thursday, when asked if additional funding was needed to secure our mass transit system, Secretary Chertoff said, ``I would not make a policy decision driven by a single event.'' I have a great deal of respect for the Secretary. He was down in my office just this morning, outlining something with respect to the surveys which he has been making and on which he intends to report publicly, and also outlining his plans for the agency. I must say he has a real grasp, a real feel of the full scope of the problems. I have to compliment him for that. But with all due respect for the Secretary, the alarm bells just didn't start ringing last week. The alarm bells have been ringing for years. There have been 16 bombings worldwide linked to al-Qaida. The Senate should not be reducing our commitment to firefighters and first responders, or to securing our mass transit and rail system. I am pleased that the chairman has included my recommendation to direct the Department to expedite its grantmaking process. All too often--I made mention of this in a meeting with Secretary Chertoff in my office earlier today--all too often, funds that were approved by Congress last October will not be given to Federal, State, and local agencies until this September, nearly a full year later. Americans are not made safer by having funding for border security, port security, rail security, and for hiring firefighters sit--where? In the U.S. Treasury. On June 13, almost a month ago, I wrote a letter to Secretary Chertoff, calling on him to focus on this problem as part of his review of agency operations. I will not ask now, but I will later, that that letter be made part of the Record. Unfortunately, the Secretary has not seen fit to respond to my letter. That is not worthy of a great deal of comment, but it is worthy of some comment. I hope the Secretary's delay in responding is not indicative of the administration's intent to continue leaving homeland security dollars gathering dust in the Treasury in Washington, DC. I said this to the Secretary this morning. I am particularly appalled that the $150 million that Congress approved last October for mass transit and rail security is still sitting in the Treasury. What in the world? Why in the world hasn't this money gone out? What is it doing sitting here in the Treasury? What in the world is wrong? I said it in just about that fashion--perhaps not quite that loudly this morning in my office, but I said it, nevertheless. I am appalled by this. What in the world are we waiting on? The Department did not even announce until April how rail and transit systems could apply for the funds, wasting a full 6 months that the rail and transit systems could have used to prepare for or to prevent a future attack. Time and time again, the administration has talked a good game on homeland security. Man, I will tell you, you just listen to the game they talk and you feel, ``I can sleep better tonight. I will go home now. I will watch the information about who is ahead in this game or that game--I will just forget about all this other stuff.'' But it has not followed through. The administration has not followed through with a sustained commitment of resources and ideas. So I fear the administration believes that it fulfills its commitment to securing the homeland by creating the Department of Homeland Security. I voted against that, to start with, because I foresaw this. I don't claim to have great powers along these lines. But with all my experience--and I have had some. I have been around here quite a while, longer than anybody else on this Hill--anybody: Anybody sitting in the gallery, anybody out there in the offices, anybody downtown, or anybody else. I have been around here longer in this Government, yes, indeed. Well, so much for that. But that is some experience. I have had time to see some things and to lament some things. And I have been critical of both parties, both administrations, Democratic and Republican, over the years. So I think I have some basis for saying the things I am saying. Mr. President, America is not made safer by simply reorganizing boxes on an organizational chart. Repeatedly, the energy, the initiative, the resources, and the leadership for homeland security efforts have come from--where? Guess where. From Congress, the people's branch. In December of 2004, Congress authorized the hiring of 2,000 new Border Patrol agents per year for 5 years; the hiring of an additional 800 Immigration investigators per year for 5 years to enforce our immigration laws, and the funding of 8,000 new detention beds for the holding of illegal aliens. But despite statements by Secretary of State Rice and statements by former Homeland Security Deputy Secretary Loy that al-Qaida is a threat on our porous borders, there was virtually nothing in the President's budget to provide these additional resources for border security--virtually nothing. The bill that is before the Senate today commits real resources to securing our border with regard to transit and rail security. When terrorists blew up trains last year in Madrid, Spain, the administration had no plan for securing transit and rail systems. The horrific bombings last week in London have raised the same questions that we raised last year. Could it happen here? Are we prepared? According to the RAND Corporation, between 1998 and 2003, there were approximately--I don't know why we say approximately 181, but there were 181 terrorist attacks on rail targets worldwide. Get that: According to the Congressional Research Service, rail systems in the United States carry about five times--now, get that. According to the Congressional Research Service, passenger rail systems such as Amtrak in the United States carry about five times as many passengers each day as do airlines. Since 2001 I have offered seven different amendments to fund rail and transit security and all of them, all seven, were opposed by the administration and defeated: seven times. Remember Robert Bruce? He was lying up there in the loft of that barn and he had lost six times. He was about to give up until he saw that spider try to swing his web from this corner to that corner. He watched it six times and it failed. On the seventh time, lo and behold, that spider made it. So Robert Bruce decided he would try it one more time; seven times he tried it, he made it. That number reminds me of that number seven again. Jacob liked Rachel and he spoke to the old man--I refer to her father as the old man-- about that beautiful daughter. The old man decided he would drive a bargain. He said, You can have her, but you work 7 years for her. So Jacob worked 7 years. At the end of the seventh year he went to say to the prospective father-in-law, How about it? Now I have worked my 7 years, I have carried out my part of the bargain, how about this nice girl you have? I have come to get her. The old man said, No, not yet. You work 7 more. I will give you Leah, Rachel's sister. You can't have Rachel. The Bible says that Leah was weak eyed. So all to his disgust, consternation, and sorrow, old Jacob had to work 7 more years for Rachel. Here we are talking about seven times. Since 2001 I have offered seven different amendments to fund rail and transit security and all seven, all of them, were opposed by the administration and defeated. Despite opposition from the administration, it was the Congress that created the Rail and Transit Security Grant Program that was first funded in fiscal year 2005, and that is funded in this bill today. I call on the administration to explain to the American people why the $150 million that Congress appropriated last year has not been given to rail and transit agencies to invest in more cameras, more locks, more canine teams, more training. I ask the Senate to approve additional funding for such grants for fiscal year 2006. The $100 million included in the bill is $50 million below last year. It is $1.6 billion below the level authorized for 2006 in bills that passed the Senate last year. While this administration has been focussing on the last attack carried out by hijackers, not one of whom was from Iraq, very little attention has been given to other vulnerabilities in aviation security. While the Transportation Security Administration examines 100 percent of checked baggage, most of the cargo that is stored in the same passenger aircraft and on cargo planes is not inspected. The threat of a bomb on an aircraft is not new. In 1988, 259 passengers aboard a Pan Am flight over Lockerbie, Scotland, perished when a terrorist-placed bomb exploded while the aircraft was 31,000 feet in the sky. Three and a half years ago, Richard Reid, the so-called shoe bomber, tried to blow up an aircraft in flight over the ocean with explosives he carried onto the aircraft. Yet, for 3 straight fiscal years, it has been Congress, this body and the other body across the other end of the Capitol, that committed resources to address this problem. Since fiscal year 2004, Congress has added $85 million above the President's request to hire air cargo inspectors and to advance research of innovative technologies to detect explosives in air cargo. What has the administration done with that funding? It has let $106 million sit in the Treasury. Six months after this fiscal year began, less than 12 percent of the funding appropriated for air cargo has been spent. I said this to the Secretary this morning. He will do better, he says. It is taking him a while to get his arms around this. I believe he will do better. Six months after this fiscal year began, less than 12 percent of the funding appropriated for air cargo has been spent. To make matters worse, the President's budget request for air cargo research and development in fiscal year 2006 was slashed in half. The bill before the Senate continues the commitment to increasing the inspection of air cargo. I commend Chairman Gregg for that decision. Let me say it again: The bill before the Senate today, in this year of our Lord, this bill continues the commitment to increasing the inspection of air cargo. I commend Chairman Gregg for that decision. When it comes to securing the Nation's chemical plant's--and I have lots of them down in the Kanawha Valley and Kanawha County, southern West Virginia when it comes to securing the Nation's chemical plants--I imagine we probably have maybe the second largest, if not the largest, concentration of chemical plants in the Northern Hemisphere right in Kanawha County or in West Virginia. When it comes to securing the Nation's chemical plants, the administration has been stuck in quicksand. We know the threat is real. The FBI has warned us about the threat. We know an attack at a chemical plant could cost millions of lives. The Environmental Protection Agency has reported that 123 chemical facilities, if attacked, could threaten the lives of millions of people. My staff person says it would threaten the lives of over 1 million people. That is a lot of people. For years, the administration has dragged its feet on securing our chemical facilities. For years, many in the Senate have pressed the administration to do more, to show leadership. In response to my request, the Government Accountability Office, the GAO--I don't much like that second most recent name, the Government Accountability Office--the old GAO recently released a report concluding that of the 15,000 chemical facilities in the country, only 1,100 have complied with voluntary security standards. It has been more than 2 years since the GAO urged the EPA and DHS to develop a comprehensive strategy for the protection of our chemical plants. Last month, the administration finally changed direction on the need to provide security standards to the chemical industry. However, the administration has not yet proposed a specific plan or identified resources to implement such standards. This bill before the Senate includes two important directives related to the protection of our chemical facilities. First, it requires the Department to provide the committee the estimates of the resources needed to implement mandatory security requirements for the Nation's chemical sector. Second, it directs the Department to begin vulnerability assessments of the Nation's highest risk chemical facilities. I look forward to the administration following through with a specific plan. The bill before the Senate today includes $200 million for port security grants, $50 million above the amount provided in fiscal year 2005. Once again, the administration's request was woefully inadequate. It is the Congress that has taken the lead, the people's branch. With the $200 million included in this bill, Congress will have funded $843 million for port security grants since September 11. How much has the administration requested over that time? Hear me, hear me now. How much money has the administration requested over that time? A measly little $46 million. Can you believe it? With the $200 million included in this bill, Congress will have funded $843 million for port security grants since September 11. How much has the administration requested over that time, I ask again? A measly $46 million. To make matters worse, the fiscal year 2006 request by the White House included a proposal to have ports compete against other nonaviation modes of transportation by lumping them together in a limited pot of funding. More than 9 million cargo containers enter U.S. ports annually but only 18 percent are inspected. All it takes is a dirty bomb stuffed into one of those 9 million containers to cripple our economy. The $150 million Congress approved last October is still sitting in the Treasury. Why this administration continues to ignore the threat facing our seaports is mind-boggling. We cannot afford to wait for the next attack. For each of the threats I have discussed today, the bill that is before the Senate continues congressional initiatives to secure our homeland. Again and again, and I don't get tired of saying it, I commend Senator Cochran, the first chairman of the Subcommittee on Homeland Security, for his leadership in 2003 and 2004. I again commend our new committee chairman, Senator Judd Gregg, for giving clear direction to the Department in the bill before the Senate. With the resources that have been made available to the committee, Chairman Gregg has produced a good bill. Regrettably, as a result of the President's proposal to increase airline passenger fees which the Appropriations Committee lacks the authority to approve, this bill does not have all of the resources it needs to meet known vulnerabilities. It is essential that the Department of Homeland Security be responsive, not bureaucratic, while the threat we face is massive, and it is clear our response to dealing with it is tepid and unfocused. It will take a commitment of energy, imagination, and, yes, more funding, to better secure our homeland. Again, I thank my chairman and the members of the staff on both sides for their excellent work and long hours, weekends, they have spent. Mr. President, I referred to a letter which I had written to the Honorable Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, on June 13 of this year. I ask unanimous consent that letter be printed in the Record.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I will not object to the chairman's amendment. We need additional funds for the SAFER Firefighter Hiring Program. But this amendment leaves the program to equip and train firefighters $150 million below fiscal year 2005. Last year the Department received $2.76 billion of eligible applications and could only approve 25 percent of the applications. In response to this incredible demand for firefighting funds, the bill will cut firefighter equipment and training grants from $650 million to $500 million. So while I don't oppose the chairman's amendment, I put the Senate on notice that I will offer an amendment to restore the cuts in equipment and training for our firefighters. I hope the Senate will agree to the pending amendment.

Mr. BYRD. No objection.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. I ask unanimous consent Sean MacKenzie, a Coast Guard detailee to the Subcommittee on Homeland Security, be given floor privileges during consideration of H.R. 2360.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, many Americans will soon enjoy a long 3-day weekend, courtesy of the Fourth of July, which this year falls on a Monday. The Fourth of July is a wonderful time. Summer's heat has not yet worn us down. School has not been out so long that the days have begun to drag for the younger set--or for their parents. We are not tired of the season or of each other. The growth of the grass has slowed, so that weekends are not spent on mowing and yard work, but leaves some time for picnics and pools. Gardens are beginning to pour forth their bounty, but not yet in such abundance that we have become desperate to unload mounds of zucchini and tomatoes. Wild blackberries. I remember when I was a boy, reaching around the shed and picking off a few wild blackberries and having the color of the blackberries stain my lips. Wild blackberries are ripening along the edges of fields and the heavy perfume of honeysuckle vines makes rural walks a feast--a feast-- for the senses. The Fourth of July is a perfect time to glory in the gentle bounty of our Nation and of our Nation's families. Independence Day, together with Thanksgiving and Christmas, remains a uniquely family-oriented celebration. When Americans reflect on our freedom, our security, our liberties, our many blessings, we like to do it among our closest friends and family. Fourth of July parades--oh man, man, man, they will bring out the crowds along community main streets, big towns, little towns, middle- size towns. Small hands--I can just see them, can't you?--small hands, little hands will clutch miniature flags as firetrucks roll past in all of their shining glory. Floats made by church groups, scout troops, and 4-H clubs will compete, each hoping to demonstrate the greatest patriotism. After the parades, there will be family picnics and barbecues that host their own friendly competition as family cooks show off their talents at the grill or on tables laden with traditional favorites such as creamy macaroni and potato salad, slow-cooked baked beans--oh, how good they taste--deviled eggs, and chocolate cake. The menu is not as important, however, as the feeling of family solidarity as everyone settles in after a splendid meal to watch the cascading displays of fireworks set off in the growing dusk. With the exception of some small children and family pets, such as my little dog, Trouble, that howl at the thunderous booms and high-pitched squeals of some fireworks, the general response to the evening's finale is usually a unanimous ``oooh'' after each bloom of sparks. Even the earliest Independence Day celebrations were marked by similar displays of patriotism, often including the discharge of cannons, one for each State in the Union, and toasts, also one for each State in the Union. On July 3, 1776, John Adams wrote to his wife Abigail and said: Yesterday the greatest question was decided which ever was debated in America; and a greater perhaps never was, nor will be, decided among men. A resolution was passed without one dissenting colony, that those United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States. That resolution was on separation from England. It was not until July 4 that the Declaration of Independence--the Declaration of Independence, there it is with my wife Erma's name on the front of the leather cover. It contains the Constitution, the Articles of Confederation, yes, and the Declaration of Independence, and some other historic documents. The Declaration of Independence was voted upon by the Continental Congress. Adams felt that the July 2 date was the one that would be marked by celebration, but the physical presence of the declaration document, along with its stirring rhetoric, allowed it to easily usurp the separation vote tally as the turning point in history. Eighty copies of the original declaration were printed that same night, July 4, for distribution among the rebelling colonies. At the very first Independence Day celebrations, those spontaneous ones that followed in the days and weeks after the Declaration of Independence was adopted and distributed, the Declaration of Independence was itself a central part of the festivity, read aloud to the crowds gathered at capitols, courthouses, and public places around the newly declared nation. In New York, the Declaration of Independence was read at the head of each brigade of the Continental Army posted around the city, to loud hurrahs--loud hurrahs. Today, as proud inhabitants of a powerful and wealthy nation, it can be difficult to recall that in 1776, the celebrations of independence must be seen as acts of incredible bravado. In 1776, the population of the United States was estimated to be between 2.2 million and 2.9 million people dispersed over an enormous swath of lightly populated country. Some 70,000 British loyalists had fled the new United States after independence was declared. The remaining tiny population was taking on the British empire at the height of her power--a colossus five times larger in terms of population that was the greatest and richest in history since the fall of Rome and the recent victor of wars against France and Spain that left her in sole possession of much of the North American Continent. To wave flags and shoot off fireworks in celebration of the Declaration of Independence from such a behemoth was tantamount to a junior varsity football team taking on the entire National Football League for the Super Bowl and thumbing their noses to boot. In point of fact, it took everything the new Nation had to eke out a victory. There were many points during the Revolution at which the outcome was far from certain. Even in the aftermath of victory, the future of the new Nation was fragile. Burdened by war debt, exhausted, struggling to form a workable government out of 13 highly independent new States, the new Nation limped along without even an established capital. It was not until the Constitution was drafted in 1787 and the new Capital established in Washington, DC, that the new Nation took on a sense of stability and permanence. On July 4, 1801, President Thomas Jefferson, the principal drafter of the Declaration of Independence, opened the White House to guests while the Marine Band played patriotic music on the lawn and militia units conducted military drills with fixed bayonets. Independence Day celebrations were conducted far from Washington as well. Two hundred years ago, July 4, 1805, found the Lewis and Clark expedition traveling along the upper Missouri River in Montana. LT William Clark noted in his journal that the group honored the day with as much of a feast as they could muster, drank the last of their brandy, and pulled out the fiddle for dancing and merriment until ``a late hour.'' I am especially pleased to note that fiddle playing was part of the day's celebration. In my younger days, family gatherings always included some fiddle playing, a little singing, and maybe a little dancing. It is a tradition as old as the Fourth of July. I hope, Mr. President, that on this Independence Day, many Americans may enjoy a little fiddle music--it keeps you down to Earth--a healthy dollop of patriotism, and the pleasure of family. As we celebrate the day with friends and families at home or out amid our Nation's beautiful wild spaces, I hope all of our citizens will spare a moment or two to read the Declaration of Independence. Let us remember that each person who signed that Declaration of Independence virtually was signing his own death warrant. After all, they could have been charged with treason against the King and hanged. Think of it. The colonists rebelled against a government that was arbitrary, unjust, high handed, and unwilling to even hear the concerns of those it governed. They rebelled against a tyrant who made the military independent of and superior to civil authority, who imposed taxes without their consent, deprived them of the benefits of trial by jury, cut off their trade, abolished their laws, and fundamentally altered the form of government, suspended their legislatures, captured their people at sea, and forced them to bear arms against the colonists, and ignored their pleas for justice, these things among many other grievances. On the Fourth of July, Americans celebrate and honor the tremendous vision of our Founding Fathers, their incredible courage, and their willingness to take on a fight that must have seemed a desperate gamble. We celebrate a document that laid out for all the world to see just what kind of a nation we aim to be and just what kind of a government we would never stand for--we should never stand for. The Declaration of Independence is more than a piece of paper. The Declaration of Independence is more than a piece of history. It is a vow for the future, a call to battle, and the cornerstone of a new nation. As we watch the flags snap and pop in the breeze as the parade swings past, recall the words of the Declaration that put troops on the march to take on the King's armies. Each citizen, each family, has much to be grateful for as a result of that document. And so, Mr. President, let me read briefly from that beautiful Declaration: When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. On this Fourth of July, let us honor and let us recall the generations of brave Americans who have fought on and off the battlefield to preserve our freedom, and then let us remember the words of Henry Van Dyke's poem ``America For Me.'' Tis fine to see the old world, and travel up and down Among the famous palaces and cities of renown, To admire the crumbly castles and the statues of the kings; But now I think I've had enough of antiquated things. So it's home again, and home again, America for me! My heart is turning home again, and there I long to be, In the land of youth and freedom beyond the ocean bars, Where the air is full of sunlight and the flag is full of stars. Oh, London is a man's town, there's power in the air; And Paris is a woman's town, with flowers in her hair; And it's sweet to dream in Venice, and it's great to study in Rome But when it comes to living there is just no place like home. I like the German firwoods, in green battalions drilled; I like the gardens of Versailles with flashing fountains filled; But, oh, to take your hand, my dear, and ramble for a day in the friendly [West Virginia hills] where nature has her way! I know that Europe's wonderful, yet something seems to lack: The past is too much with her, and the people looking back. But the glory of the present is to make the future free; We love our land for what she is and what she is to be. Oh, it's home again, and home again, America for me! I want a ship that's westward bound to plough the rolling sea, To the blessed land of room enough beyond the ocean bars, Where the air is full of sunlight and the flag is full of stars. --Henry Van Dyke. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD. I thank the Senator. (The remarks of Mr. Bennett pertaining to the introduction of S. 1379 are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')