Robert Byrd

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. I ask unanimous consent that Senator Obama be added as a cosponsor.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that any other Senators on both sides of the aisle who wish to be added as cosponsors, that their names be added if they will let us know before the hour of 12 o'clock.

Mr. BYRD. If they will let the leaders know. I thank the Chair and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, will the distinguished manager of the bill yield?

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following Senators be added as cosponsors to the Martin Luther King, Jr. amendment: Senators Brownback, DeWine, and Levin.

Mr. BYRD. I thank the Chair and the distinguished Senator.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the Chair. Mr. President, I spoke on yesterday when I offered the amendment for the Senate's consideration. I will not speak further at this time except to say that my remarks of yesterday will be found on page S7420 of the Congressional Record. I am very pleased that my chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, the distinguished Senator from Mississippi--I say ``distinguished,'' the distinguished Senator, Mr. Cochran--I am delighted he is the chief cosponsor of the amendment. I appreciate his excellent remarks today. I also express my deep appreciation to the distinguished gentleman-- the distinguished ``gentleman''--the Senator from Virginia. And I say that with all the emphasis that word's meaning carries. He is a great Senator. He believes in the Constitution of the United States. He swore to support and defend it, and he has not forgotten his oath. He has not forgotten his oath. And he has stated it and restated it, holding his hand on the Bible and the other hand to God and all men. He has restated it several times, and he has lived up to it. I commend him. He has been in the forefront of the effort to honor Dr. Martin Luther King with a memorial on the Mall. He has been in that forefront over a period of several years. He cosponsored, as he has pointed out, the original authorization. I am so pleased he is cosponsoring this amendment. He stood as a spectator, he said, but he later became an active participant in the history that followed on to that moment in which he was a spectator watching from the streets. So he has become a part of history. And what I say with regard to the distinguished gentleman, the Senator from Virginia--the Virginian--I say also with equal heartfelt thanks to the distinguished Senator from Maryland, Mr. Sarbanes, who has announced he will not remain with us after next year, to my great sorrow and regret. But Senator Sarbanes has been a leader in the march toward justice for all men and women. I commend him, likewise. And I thank him for being a cosponsor of this amendment. While I have the floor, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following Senators be added as cosponsors to the amendment: Senator Feinstein, Senator Schumer, Senator Sarbanes, Senator Boxer, Senator Harkin, and Senator Corzine.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, our country is now involved in two wars--not one, two wars; one in Afghanistan and the other in Iraq. Each day we read in the newspapers about the human toll this nation is paying. As of today, 1,730 troops, men and women, have been killed in Iraq; 194 have been killed in Afghanistan and elsewhere. The toll of these wars is also borne by those men and women who carry the scars of battle. In Iraq, more than 13,000 troops have been wounded. In Afghanistan, 476 troops have shed their blood in service to our country. The American people thank these servicemembers for their sacrifice. However, late last week, Congress learned that the Department of Veterans Affairs has been shortchanged in its mission to provide medical care to these warriors and all of the other men and women who have served in time of war before them. Now, this is a shame. This is a sham. If our Nation owes just one thing to all of those men and women who have risked their lives in answer to our country's call, it surely must be, in the words of Abraham Lincoln, ``to care for him who shall have borne the battle.'' It is a shock that the administration has only now revealed it has not budgeted the funds to fulfill this mission. I offer an amendment this afternoon on behalf of Senator Patty Murray, myself, and Senator Feinstein to provide $1.42 billion in emergency funds to address the shortfall in health care funds for the Department of Veterans Affairs. Of this figure, $600 million would be used to reimburse VA construction accounts that have been raided to pay for health care costs. Another $400 million would be used to reimburse other accounts that have been raided for the same purpose. Finally, an additional $420 million is included to compensate each Veterans and Integrated Service Network, or VISN, for the additional expenses incurred because of the high caseload of wounded veterans. This $1.42 billion is urgently needed and the Senate must not delay in providing the funds that are required to allow our veterans to see their physicians at the Department of Veterans Affairs. Earlier this year, the Senate rejected on a nearly party-line vote an amendment to the Iraq supplemental appropriations bill to add funding to VA health care. The administration told Congress additional funds were not needed to care for our Nation's veterans. We now know this claim was wrong. According to the estimate provided to Congress by the Department of Veterans Affairs, VA funding is short $1 billion this year. Congress must act to care for our veterans. When it comes to our veterans health care, half a loaf is not good enough. Some may argue against this amendment by urging the Senate to wait for the administration's plan. However, according to VA testimony before the House of Representatives last week, the administration intends to respond to the shortfall on the cheap by robbing Peter to pay Paul. We have already waited too long for the administration to recognize the needs of our veterans. The Murray-Byrd-Feinstein amendment is the Senate's opportunity to end this year's shortchanging of veterans. I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside so that I may send to the desk this amendment offered by me on behalf of Mrs. Murray, for herself, myself, and Mrs. Feinstein.

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

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, the greatness of women and men is often best judged from an historical perspective. History gives us the detached perspective that allows us to better understand and appreciate the person, the cause, and the legacy. This happens because great individuals often have been leaders who challenged the status quo as they pushed the country into areas where it had feared to go. As a result, such leaders often arouse criticism and opposition. The Revered Dr. Martin Luther King certainly was a controversial figure in his own time. Black power advocates attacked him for moving too slowly, while more than one presidential administration attacked him for moving too swiftly. The NAACP criticized his take-to-the-streets tactics. Civil rights leaders broke with Dr. King because of his opposition to the Vietnam War. I certainly had my share of differences with Reverend King--a lot of them. We were both products of our times, and both of us were doing what we believed was right. But time and the march of history afford a better understanding of Dr. King and his contributions toward making the United States a better, stronger, and greater Nation. It is for this reason, I am proposing that $10 million in funding be made available for the memorial to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. This $10 million, which is available within the subcommittee's allocation, would supplement the approximately $42 million that has already been raised and stands as a solid foundation to help make this memorial a reality. I have come to appreciate how Martin Luther King, Jr., sought to help our Nation overcome racial barriers, bigotry, hatred, and injustice, and how he helped to inspire and guide a most important, most powerful, and most transforming social movement. Despite the hatred and the bigotry he encountered in his efforts, Dr. King never allowed his movement to be reduced to a simple racial conflict. He stressed on more than one occasion, that the struggle was not one between people of different colors. Rather, Dr. King believed that his fight was a fight ``between justice and injustice, between the forces of light and the forces of darkness.'' His vision and his movement included all Americans. I remind my colleagues, and all Americans, that when Martin Luther King stood on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial and proclaimed that he had ``a dream,'' he pointed out that he also looked forward to the time ``when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands.'' I remind my colleagues that Dr. King's efforts also focused on the economic rights of economically deprived people of all races and creeds, as well as on the civil rights of African Americans. In this quest, he proposed a Bill of Rights for the Disadvantaged. He advocated a guaranteed national income. At the time of his death, Dr. King was organizing a ``Poor Peoples March'' on Washington, an effort meant to focus national attention on poverty among not only African-Americans, but among the poor whites of Appalachia, as well. Dr. King's vision was not only about what America could be, but what America should be. With the passage of time, we have come to learn that his dream was the American dream, and few ever expressed it more eloquently. Dr. King touched the conscience of a Nation, and forced us, as a country, to confront our contradictions. How could the United States present itself as the leader of the free world, he asked, while denying equality and equal opportunity to a large segment of our own people? In his book, ``Where Do We Go from Here,'' Dr. King asked why 40 million Americans were living in poverty in ``a nation overflowing with unbelievable affluence.'' Writing of the destructive effects of militarism, he asked: ``Why [has] our nation placed itself in the position of being God's military agent on earth?'' ``Why have we substituted the arrogant undertaking of policing the whole world for the high task of putting our own ``house in order?'' With his works as well as his words, Dr. King left us a legacy that inspires and guides millions of Americans today. It is a legacy that demonstrates that human problems, no matter how big or complex, can be addressed--a legacy that proves that one determined person can help make a difference. Amid all his successes and triumphs, and all of his personal accomplishments, including receiving the Noble Peace Prize, Dr. King always kept his perspective. The night before he was assassinated, he explained: ``I just want to do God's will.'' What a powerful statement this was: ``I just wanted to do God's will.'' What an inspiration it should be to all of us: ``To do God's will.'' Criticized, denounced, and opposed in his own time, Martin Luther King has become not only an American icon, but also an international symbol of social justice, and one of recent history's most beloved champions of freedom. Mr. President, we have named a National Holiday in his honor. It is just and proper that we now place a memorial on The Mall of the Nation's Capital as a visible and tangible symbol of the thanks of a grateful nation. Martin Luther King taught us tolerance. How we need such teachings today. May his life, his legacy, and someday soon, his memorial ever remind us of his vision. I am about to offer an amendment, and Senator Cochran, the illustrious chairman of the Appropriations Committee in the Senate, is the principal cosponsor of the amendment that I will offer, so it is bipartisan. I thank Senator Cochran, and I hope that many other Senators will join us in this effort to honor Dr. King. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment or amendments be set aside.

Mr. BYRD. That I may offer this amendment on behalf of myself and Senator Cochran. I send the amendment to the desk.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the Chair. I thank the clerk, and I thank our distinguished chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Senator Cochran. Now I ask unanimous consent that Senator Kerry be added as a cosponsor on the veterans amendment.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I thank all Senators. Amendments Nos. 1054, 1055, 1056, 1057, and 1058, en bloc

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, for too long, we as a body, and we as a Nation, have fallen short in our efforts to address some of the most profound and far reaching challenges of our time--global climate change and energy security. For too long, we have skirted the issues and have shirked our responsibilities. We have convinced ourselves that we are doing something but, in reality, we continue to take no real action. Rather than lead, we have stood by, paralyzed, undermining any efforts to forge an effective response. It is time to pull ourselves out of that quicksand and confront the tasks at hand. First, we must establish practical and comprehensive steps to reduce U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases and to reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources. Second, we must work in a partnership with developing nations to deploy clean energy technologies that can meet their urgent development needs while reducing their own contribution to global climate change and their growing energy dependency. Third, we must commit ourselves to the fundamental task of forging an effective and sound international agreement to guide a truly global effort to confront this most daunting problem, global climate change. In 1997, during the 105th Congress, the Senate passed S. Res. 98, by a vote of 95 to 0. As the primary author, along with Senator Hagel, of S. Res. 98, I sought at that time to express the sense of the Senate regarding the provisions of any future binding, international agreement that would be acceptable to the Senate. However, almost from the day of that vote, those on both sides of the issue have misrepresented and misconstrued its intent. What was meant as a guide for action has instead been invoked, time and again, as an excuse for inaction. Yet no one has misrepresented and misconstrued S. Res. 98 more so than this present administration. Rather than employing it as a tool to positively influence the international negotiations, the administration used it as cover to simply walk away from the negotiating table. For the U.S., the issue should no longer be about the Kyoto Protocol. Certainly, everyone in this Chamber knows that the United States will not join the Kyoto Protocol. The rest of the world has come to accept that fact as well. So let us exorcize the specter of the Kyoto Protocol from this debate. The real question is what comes next. How do we arrive at a credible, workable strategy, one compatible with the best interests of the United States and of the other major emitting industrial and developing countries? That must be the question now before us. We must send a clear signal that we recognize our responsibilities, and we must be prepared to work toward a fair and effective framework for action. We must be bold leaders. We owe this to ourselves; we owe it to the other nations of the world; and we owe it most of all to our children and to future generations. Technology is a critical component to resolving the climate change challenges in the U.S. and around the world. But let me be clear. Even as the administration has touted technology as the solution, it continues to woefully underfund these very programs. Technology policies by themselves cannot be the silver bullet. Technology policies must be paired with commonsense, market-based solutions to create incentives for innovation and adoption of new and improved technologies that will provide a signal to reduce emissions. There must be a broader approach. I want to commend Senators McCain and Lieberman for their diligence and hard work to find a middle ground. I want to commend Senator Bingaman on his efforts as well. Like them, I believe that we face a problem, and it requires that we craft an economically and environmentally sound solution. The McCain-Lieberman amendment did not pass in its current form. While I did not vote for their amendment, I want to make it very clear to the administration and to others who just want to say ``no'' that I will work with Senator McCain, Senator Lieberman, and Senator Bingaman, and other Republican and Democratic Senators who want to craft a constructive solution. I have long said that global warming and our energy security are major challenges in the U.S. and around the world. Troubling things are happening in our atmosphere, and we should wake up. I am not alone in this belief. The U.S. cannot bury its head in the sand and hope that these problems will simply go away. I have insisted on a rational and cost-effective approach for dealing with climate change, both domestically and internationally. I have no doubt that the far right and the far left will oppose any moderate approach on this issue, but it is time to get the right architecture and solid funding in place to make a first step a reality. I am concerned that the McCain-Lieberman approach, in its present form, will negatively impact my State, but that does not mean that we will not be able to find some common ground in the future. I hope that my friends in the energy industry will decide to work with them as well. Mr. President, we cannot just stand still. I know Senator McCain. He is tenacious, and Senators Lieberman and Bingaman are equally tenacious. If 14 Senators in the middle can come together to diffuse the Nuclear Option, then I am certain that a solid center of Senators can find a new path forward to address global climate change and our Nation's energy security needs. I would certainly not support actions that would harm the economy or the people of my State of West Virginia or the United States in general. Yet, I repeat, I believe that there is a middle path forward, and I stand ready to work with those who share that view.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I have nothing further right now.

Mr. BYRD. Yes. I thank the Chair for remembering that. The names of those cosponsors I send to the desk.

Mr. BYRD. Senators Lincoln, Rockefeller, Harkin, and Pryor--I ask unanimous consent that they be added as cosponsors.

Mr. BYRD. I thank the Chair and yield the floor. I am ready to vote.

Mr. BYRD. Madam President, I thank all Senators. I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was adopted. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. BYRD. Madam President, I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I will shortly offer an amendment to the Energy bill to provide relief for rural workers, some relief for rural workers from high gas prices. Before I do that, I thank Senators Grassley and Baucus for their time and their efforts concerning my amendment. Always courteous, always candid, always gentlemen--each embodies the spirit and the harmonious character of a U.S. Senator. I am talking about Senator Grassley and Senator Baucus. I will shortly send to the desk a modified version of my amendment which I have discussed with the chairman and ranking member of the Finance Committee and their staffs. I will also ask Senators Lincoln, Rockefeller, Harkin, and Pryor be added as cosponsors, but I am not asking that right at this moment. We debate the Energy bill today in the context of skyrocketing life- altering gasoline prices. The people out there watching the Senate through those electronic lenses, many of them know what I am talking about. The American public is reminded, day after day after day--as they drive to work, as they drive their children to school, as they drive to the local market, they are reminded of the outrageous cost of gasoline and how it squeezes their pocketbooks--how it squeezes your pocketbooks. That fact alone is probably the single most important catalyst for this Energy bill. Yet Senators candidly acknowledge, as has the President, that no energy policy can immediately deliver lower prices at the fuel pump. I don't say that to criticize the efforts of the managers of the bill. They rightly are looking to the future with the hope of weaning-- weaning--America from its dependence on foreign oil. I have been talking about this for years. They are setting admirable goals and I hope that we move quickly to meet them. But--that conjunction ``but''--in the meantime, while we wait for countless production incentives and numerous Federal programs to take effect, American workers--American workers--suffer, suffer daily at the fuel pump. The impact of high gas prices is burdensome in many cases and devastating in others. I addressed the Senate recently about this issue, as I have addressed it many times, highlighting the impact that high gas prices have had on rural areas in this country. You talk about rural areas; look at Maine. Look at West Virginia. Look at that map. I will talk about it in a moment. Residents of rural areas must drive longer distances to work and from work, inflicting burdensome costs on workers. Rural areas have less access to public transportation. This means subways and buses are not usually available to rural workers. Look at my State, a mountain State. Senators ought to know what it is like to wind around those mountains, up and down; steep going up and going down sometimes is worse. In Appalachia--that is what we are talking about, what I am talking about right now is Appalachia. Rural roads--come on over, Senators, and try some of those rural roads. Your head will be dizzy and you will be holding on with your fingertips and your fingernails will be white. It is tough. In Appalachia, rural roads, twisting and winding and bending around the hills and mountains, exacerbate the financial pain. When gas prices spike, rural workers often have no extra income to absorb the increase, forcing painful cuts in essential expenditures. High gas prices hurt local businesses as workers are forced to scale back leisure activities and everyday comforts. Economic activity slows, communities are impacted, and savings shrink. These communities are crying out for action. They have no alternative means of transportation available to them to avoid driving, no subways. Go over to the Alleghany Mountains, you will not find subways. Those mountains are beautiful. I tell you, there is nothing like them, the Alleghanys. Appalachia, no subways. No mass transit. They are unlikely to benefit much from the energy conservation incentives designed for their urban counterparts. These rural workers--hear me, hear me--these rural workers seek immediate relief. They want some help. They grow increasingly frustrated with the hemming and the hawing of their representatives in Congress--not only in Congress but in the White House. They do not want equivocations about economic theories. They are all well and good, those theories. These workers do not want tutorials about tax policy. What do they want? They want relief. And today, I am going to submit an amendment that would be a partial answer. We have to start giving some attention to this problem and to these people. This amendment would create a new transportation fringe benefit for eligible rural workers. Employers could offer these workers compensation for their costly gasoline purchases. Those expenditures for gasoline, up to $50 per month, by rural workers who can carpool, would be excluded from their taxable wages, providing immediate relief. The amendment would cost $123 million over 5 years. It is my understanding, based on discussions with the Finance Committee, that an offset would be provided later in the day. This amendment is the result of a compromise. Legislation is compromise. There are different opinions around here. Senators represent different areas with different problems. Sometimes we cannot have it all the way we would like. Not everything is the way we want. We have to compromise. Legislation means compromise. We have to have a bill. You do not go for the kill on every bill, but you do what you can. Sometimes you have to not do as much as you would like to do, but you do something, and later you do something more. This amendment is the result of a compromise with the Finance Committee. I have been in Congress now 53 years. How about that--53 years in the House and Senate. I started out in the House. But you have to compromise. You have to do that in the House, compromise. You cannot have everything like you want it, but you get something for the people you represent. You help them a little here and a little there and then a little more here and a little more there. That is the way it is done. This amendment is the result of a compromise with the Finance Committee. It represents an acknowledgment by the Senate that rural workers can be affected more directly and harshly by high gas prices and that the Senate is beginning to respond to that reality. This amendment can help to provide immediate relief to rural workers. It cannot do everything, but we are doing something. It can help to provide relief to working mothers, to fathers, both of whom are searching for ways to stretch their paychecks just a little bit further. You can only stretch that paycheck so far. It will not stretch any further. It will benefit residents from the northern most areas of Maine. We can see Maine looking at the chart, right up there at the top, way up there, way up there. It will benefit the northern most areas of Maine, down the east coast, down the east coast, into the Appalachia region-- there is home sweet home to me, Appalachia--Kentucky, Tennessee, and into the Southern States of Mississippi and Alabama. It will benefit residents throughout the rural heartland of America. The dark areas are being pointed out by this fine young man. These dark areas are what we are talking about. These are the rural areas. Look at them on this map. The urban areas are the yellow areas. Look how big the map is when it comes to the rural areas. That is where a lot of real people live. You talk about the grassroots of America. Go back to the rural areas. Those people in the rural areas have to drive to work. They do not have mass transit in most of these areas. We are talking about the heartland of America: Iowa, Nebraska, the Dakotas, westward. Turn westward young man, westward. West through Montana and Idaho, and along the west coast. Rural areas in California. California has rural areas, too. Oregon, Washington--rural areas along the west coast into Washington, Oregon, and California. As the chart beside me shows, and I hope the camera is focusing on these rural areas, rural workers in every State--name the State--rural workers in that State would benefit from this amendment, workers who reside in the rural areas, the green areas. I will point out Appalachia again. If you have not been there, you ought to go and see what those people have to contend with. See what workers in Appalachia have to contend with. It is not just Appalachia; it is all over the country, throughout the country, every State. There are many in these rural--the green--areas who are forced to drive to work due to a lack of public transit. They do not have Metro. We have the Metro in the District of Columbia. They do not have it over there. They would be eligible to benefit from this amendment. The Finance Committee has offered a tax package to this bill providing $18 billion in energy supply and efficiency incentives, many of which I support. The Finance Committee package will yield long-term benefits for the American people. As I have said, the chairman and the ranking member have been very gracious in considering my views regarding these matters. But the House of Representatives passed $8 billion of very different tax incentives, much of them going to big oil, which today is reaping an enormous windfall. I say to the distinguished Senator from New York, there are a lot of people up there in rural areas in New York--Chuck Schumer, yes. He and Senator Clinton--man, they look out after their people. May the Lord bless them. Much of the benefits are going to big oil, which today is reaping an enormous windfall from the high price of gasoline. Let me say that again: The House of Representatives passed $8 billion. How much is that? That is $8 for every minute since Jesus Christ was born. Now you can get an idea of what we are talking about. Eight billion, $8 for every minute since Jesus Christ was born. These different tax incentives, $8 billion of very different tax incentives, much of them going to big oil, which today is reaping an enormous windfall from the high price of gasoline. These tax breaks are in addition to the billions of dollars in taxpayer revenues dedicated annually to these companies. This is an opportunity to vote for an amendment that will provide some relief--not enough but some. The Senate is, finally, about to recognize this problem. This is an opportunity to vote for an amendment that will provide relief directly and immediately. To whom? The little guy. The little guy. Man, you talk about me now, the little guy. The Presiding Officer is for the little guy. That is what this amendment is about. This is an opportunity to help working men and women today. Not enough, not enough, but it is a good start. We do not have to wait and hope gas prices will decrease. We can take some action now. I urge adoption of this amendment which I now send to the desk.

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

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Madam President, on Sunday, June 19, the Nation will honor fathers with the celebration of Father's Day. Fathers certainly deserve a day to relax and to put aside for a time the heavy burden of work and worries that they carry. Most fathers are, I believe, great worriers. They feel the pressure to perform. They feel the pressure daily to go forth and to battle in conditions over which they have little control. Yet they feel that they must present to their families a facade of mastery. That is, after all, part of the ``dad mystique''--the desire of fathers everywhere to be seen as the unvanquished protector of the family, the benevolent provider of all good things, the safe harbor against all harm and all fears. Today's economic conditions worry most fathers, no matter what their current earning prowess. If they are looking for work or to find a better job, recently reported economic indicators keep them awake at night. Housing prices continue to climb. Hiring is weak. Outsourcing and the offshore movement of jobs create heartburn. News that Chinese automobiles may soon be competing for sales in the United States will create a few ulcers, too, I am sure, as hard-working fathers wonder how they can compete against Chinese workers making only $2 an hour. Fathers at the upper end of the pay scale are not immune from such nightmares either. They must still worry about corporate scandals that could rob them overnight of their pensions, stock options, and the rising cost of college education. All fathers feel a sense of growing unease about the spiraling deficits, the uncertain future of Social Security, the weakening of America's global competitiveness to the high price of international conflict. What kind of future are they leaving to their children? On a very personal level, fathers also share common fears. Where are their children? Are they behaving? Are they growing up to be good people? Will the world be good to them in return? I know that fathers, with sons and daughters in the military, carry particularly heavy burdens of worry these days, as well as fathers who are in uniform themselves with families waiting, waiting, waiting and praying for them at home. I hope these fathers know that the prayers of the Nation are with them. Fathers want the best for their children, which is why they push their children to do their best. To be sure, some fathers have taken this perhaps to unseemly, even dangerous, extremes, as the stories of some ``sports dads'' attest. But most fathers want their children to develop a healthy sense of competition, coupled with fairness, to learn to win and to learn to lose graciously, to foster a sense of perseverance that will stand their children in good stead no matter what field of endeavor they play upon. Fathers want to encourage a good work ethic. They want to encourage good study habits. They want to encourage the character traits of reliability--according to an old Greek ideal, character is destiny--and dependability, thoughtfulness, and generosity of spirit, traits that will make good students, respected leaders, able employees and, some day, good fathers and mothers. The best fathers, of course, practice what they preach. Parents are the best teachers, sometimes without ever giving a word of instruction. They teach by the example of their own lives. My own dad was such a man, the greatest man I ever knew, my dad. He was not my father. He was the man who raised me. But he was the greatest man I ever knew. I have met kings and shahs and Presidents, princes, Governors, Senators. Just that old coal miner dad was the greatest man I ever knew--hard working, God-fearing, generous with the little that he had. He took me in when my mother died, and he raised me as his own. ``It is not flesh and blood but the heart which makes us fathers and sons,'' wrote Johann Schiller. He is right. Titus Dalton Byrd was not my biological father, but he was my dad, pap. He is looking down from heaven right now. He is looking down. And some day I will meet him again. He was my dad. He encouraged me in my studies. He didn't buy me a cowboy suit. He didn't buy me a cap buster. He bought me a watercolor set, a book, a drawing tablet, and some crayons. He took pride in my accomplishments. Benjamin West said that he was made a great painter because of his mother who, when he went to her with little drawings about birds and flowers and so on, she took him up on her knee and she kissed him on the cheek. She said: Some day you are going to grow up. You will grow up to be a great painter. And that made him a great painter. He did grow up to become a great painter, made so by a mother's kiss. So about my old coal miner dad. After a long day at work, he would spend time with me. He talked with me. He listened to me. He watched me recite. He watched me play the violin. He feared for me when I wanted to follow him into the coal mines. He shared his fear; he shared the love that was behind it. He gave me a whipping a time or two. He always told me before he whipped me that he loved me, and it hurt him probably more than it hurt me. That was my dad. He pushed me to do better, to reach higher, to work harder. He didn't want me to have to work in the mines as he did. He gave me pride in him. He never used crude language. I never heard him use God's name in vain in all the years that I knew him--ever. He never raised a fist in anger. He never treated anyone with anything but courtesy. He was a poor, humble, hard-working coal miner. He took life as it came. He didn't grumble at what was placed before him on the table. He never complained. He never said anything about mom's cooking. He never used bad language, as I said. He carried himself--a poor miner without two nickles at times to rub together-- with the quiet dignity of a true gentleman. There was a man. I am proud to share his name. I think that is one of the greatest compliments that any child can give to his or her father--that proud inflection in their voice when they say: This is my dad. Like fathers everywhere, I delight in their every triumph, from the first breath onward, just as I mourn their every setback and disappointment. In speaking from my own experience, no father ever ceases to worry about his children and the kind of world they are inheriting. That is why I suppose it is whatever hair fathers are allowed to keep turns white. So on this Father's Day, I remember the old coal miner dad that I had. I could see him coming from the mines. I watched him as he walked down the railroad tracks, and I ran to meet him. As I came near, he put down that dinner bucket he had carried into the bowels of the Earth there in the darkness--the darkness of the coal mine. He put down that dinner bucket and lifted the lid, and he took out a little cake that my mom had put into the dinner bucket, and he always saved the cake for me. He gave me that cake. Yes, he took the cake into the mine, but he didn't eat the cake. He always saved the cake for me. So on this Father's Day, I wish I could tell fathers across America to relax and enjoy the day, to sleep well, basking in the love and affection of their families. I wish I could, but I know they are still worried. That is what a father does. Madam President, I close with a bit of verse that I memorized as a little boy. Over the years, I have come to appreciate its lesson more and more. I am sure that old coal miner dad knew it, too, for he lived with simple wisdom. It is called ``The Little Chap Who Follows Me.'' A careful man I ought to be, A little fellow follows me, I do not dare to go astray For fear he'll go the selfsame way. I cannot once escape his eyes, Whate'er he sees me do, he tries; Like me, he says, he's going to be, The little chap who follows me. He thinks that I am good and fine, Believes in every word of mine. The base in me he must not see, The little chap that follows me. I must remember as I go, Through summer's sun and winter's snow, In building for the years to be The little chap who follows me. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. I thank the Senator from Arizona.