Saxby Chambliss

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I rise to honor a giant in the world of journalism, Furman Bisher. Last Saturday, after nearly 60 years of elegant observation of the sports world for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, my friend Furman Bisher pecked out his last and final column before retirement on the thinning keys of his trusty, old Royal typewriter. His choice of instrument to convey his thoughts in this age of instantaneous, inane chatter says a lot about why newspaper readers, after all these years, have continued to seek out his column on the AJC's sports page. It all comes down to this: Furman's graceful prose, courtly voice, and sharp observations are unfailingly backed up by his old-fashioned shoe-leather reporting. He gloried in doing his homework, making that extra call, interviewing one more player or assistant coach or trainer in order to breathe even more life into the game or the race or the fight for his readers. It is also why Furman has become a Georgian--and American-- institution. Simply put, Furman Bisher loved sports and he loved journalism. At age 90, he was still driving out on summer nights to cover minor league baseball games. In his career, Furman scored many journalistic knockouts, including a 1949 interview with Shoeless Joe Jackson, the only one Jackson ever gave regarding his involvement in the 1919 Black Sox scandal. He got stock tips from Ty Cobb and watched every Masters, including Jack Nicklaus's 1986 Masters victory, which he gloried in. He sat in the press box at countless Falcons games at Atlanta-Fulton County Stadium and the Georgia Dome and covered the Olympics, both winter and summer. He wrote 11 books, including coauthoring two editions of a Hank Aaron autobiography. At the Masters Tournament in Augusta every April, Furman reigned among the azaleas and oaks as the dean of the sports press corps. In a testament to his longevity in a tough business, Furman has covered every Kentucky Derby since 1950 and every Super Bowl but the first one. Furman even branched out into TV. Although I did not grow up in Atlanta, I have heard from many people that preachers across the city would cut a sermon short so that their congregations could be home for Furman's kickoff on ``Football Review.'' Along the way, he earned the respect of his colleagues and the loyalty of his readers, garnering writing awards too numerous to mention. Red Smith is acknowledged as probably the dean of all journalists from a sports perspective, and Furman Bisher has often been referred to as the ``Red Smith of the South.'' He served as president of the National Sportscasters and Sportswriters Association from 1974 to 1976, and of the Football Writers Association of America from 1959 to 1960. His features have appeared in The Saturday Evening Post, Golf Digest, and Sports Illustrated, to name but a few. In 1961, Time magazine named him one of the five best columnists in the Nation. I would argue that even today, that honor still fits. No less than the great Jack Nicklaus said of Furman's retirement: He might be turning in his last column for the newspaper, but Furman will never stop writing or giving his opinion. I guess you could say that when it comes to the last writings of Furman Bisher, I will believe it when I don't see it. Furman would close every column with a single valediction--the word ``selah,'' a Hebrew word that ends many Psalms and that exhorts the reader to reflect. It is appropriate then to reflect on Furman's long, fruitful career, one that began in Atlanta as the Korean war was starting, when Joe Louis was still boxing, when the Minneapolis Lakers were the NBA champs, before Willie Mays had joined the Major Leagues, and before Sports Illustrated even existed. Ever since, with wit and style, Furman Bisher has chronicled the triumphs and the travails of the sports world and its often all too human heroes. Furman is leaving the AJC at almost 91 years old, and he is still going strong. While we may not be seeing his column on a regular basis, I am quite sure we have not heard the last of Furman Bisher. As Furman would say, selah. I am thankful for Furman Bisher. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, it is with great pride and yet much regret that I stand here today to recognize a dear friend and longtime servant of American agriculture who is retiring from public service. Through nearly 25 years of serving in various capacities on the House and Senate Agriculture Committees, Vernie Hubert has exemplified tremendous character, an infectious personality, and an astute knowledge of the law, for which I admiringly respect and thank him. I would like to issue a special thanks to his wife Kathleen and daughter Mary Phillips for allowing us to have him in Washington for the past 3 years while they have lived in Texas. I am eternally grateful for his dedication to agriculture. His encyclopedic knowledge and valuable input will certainly be missed. What began as an internship in the House Agriculture Committee for Vernie in 1982 has since blossomed into a distinguished agricultural law career. Before entering law school, he earned a bachelor's degree in biomedical science at Texas A&M University and even served as a first lieutenant in the U.S. Army Reserve Medical Service Corps after graduation. Upon graduation from St. Mary's University School of Law in 1985, Vernie returned to his beloved South Texas for a brief stint as an assistant prosecutor in Brazos County. Though his heart has always remained in Texas, Vernie returned to the House Agriculture Committee to work with then-chairman Kika de la Garza and ranking member Charlie Stenholm, where he served for almost 20 years in various roles--as associate counsel, staff director, and legislative director. In 2004, I was fortunate in luring Vernie to the Senate, where he has served as chief counsel on the Senate Agriculture Committee for me since then. We were successful in passing a farm bill last year, and a big reason for that success is due to the tireless, diligent efforts of Vernie Hubert. Seeing that the 2008 farm bill was the fifth farm bill that saw passage during Vernie's tenure, it goes without saying that his experience in negotiating agriculture policy is not going to be easily replaced. In fact, it is impossible to replace a person like Vernie Hubert, not only for his wealth of knowledge but also for the richness of his character. In the years I have known and worked with him, he has remained a loyal confidant and has always kept American agriculture's best interests at heart. Vernie, you will sincerely be missed by everyone who has had the pleasure of working with you, and I wish you nothing but the best in all your future endeavors. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. If the majority leader wants to go----

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Lastly, if I may ask one more question through the Chair, as we reform health care--and 100 percent of the Members of this Senate agree that we need to reform health care. We have the best delivery system in the world, but it can get better. We can have a better delivery system. We have the best insurance system in the world, but it needs reforming. It can be made better. Does the Senator from New Hampshire, who I know is familiar with the details of the plan that came out of the Finance Committee, know of any provision in that bill that is designed to reduce the costs of health care delivery in this country, which will help make that system better, which will help make the insurance system better by making premiums for insurance more affordable for folks who cannot afford it today?

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I appreciate the comments of the Senator from New Hampshire, who has certainly been in the forefront trying to make sure, No. 1, that the budget of this country is in a very positive situation as we move forward and that we do not leave our children and grandchildren burdened with a debt they simply cannot pay. As he has said, they are the ones who, at the end of the day, along with senior citizens and the small business community, are going to wind up paying for this bill if it comes out crafted the way it is presented in the Finance Committee and the way it appears it is going to come out of the Finance Committee to the floor of the Senate. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 5 minutes on another subject.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. If the Chair will allow me, I wish to ask another question about Medicaid. The proposal coming out of the Finance Committee to the floor of the Senate has a huge effect on my State, and I am sure it has a similar effect on Senator Gregg's State, and that is this: The eligibility for Medicaid will move from 100 percent of poverty level to 133 percent of poverty level, which will add a significant number of additional individuals all across America to the Medicaid rolls. In my State, where the Federal Government will pick up the tab for the first 3 years, there is going to be an additional cost of $1.2 billion for those additional Medicaid-eligible individuals in Georgia. Beginning in the fourth year, the State of Georgia is going to have to pick up that $1.2 billion. The Senator from New Hampshire is a former Governor, and I assume New Hampshire probably has a balanced budget requirement, as we do. We are furloughing teachers today. We are furloughing State employees. Schools are operating 4 days a week instead of 5 days a week. We are doing everything we can to decrease spending at the State level and even below that to try to make sure we achieve that balanced budget. If we as Georgians are asked to come up with another $1.2 billion to fund a health care program, we simply do not have the money to do it. I ask the Senator if he has a similar situation in New Hampshire.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, the Senator mentioned a little bit earlier about the previous attempt to slow the growth of Medicare. I remember during my House days--it has probably been a decade or more ago--when the Senator from New Hampshire was on the Budget Committee on the Senate side. We were looking at a rapid growth of Medicare, somewhere in the 7 to 8, 9 percent rate. What the Senator from New Hampshire is talking about is that in order to try to achieve a balanced budget and to make reforms in Medicare, instead of it growing at that rate, we were going to reduce the rate of growth, not reduce the amount of money, just reduce the rate of growth to about 5 percent per year to help achieve a balanced budget and at the same time continue to provide the services under Medicare that we did then. I ask the Senator what he thinks is going to happen if we are not reducing the rate of growth, but in this plan coming out of the Finance Committee that will be on the floor and the one that came out of the HELP Committee that will be melded with that bill, there is going to be a reduction in Medicare spending by about $500 billion over 10 years. Will we be able to provide the same services under Medicare that we do now if we reduce the amount of money spent on Medicare?

Mr. CHAMBLISS. The Senator from New Hampshire has been here a lot longer than I have, both in the House and his service in the Senate. Mr. President, has the Senator from New Hampshire ever seen a mandatory spending program that has been created by the Federal Government reduce its spending?

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, will the Senator respond to a question?

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize two of my constituents, Earl and Wanda Barrs from Cochran, GA. Last Wednesday, the American Tree Farm System named Earl and Wanda as its 2009 National Outstanding Tree Farmers of the Year. This award is presented by the American Forest Foundation through its ATFS program and recognizes outstanding sustainable forest management on family-owned woodlands. I have known Earl and Wanda since my early days in the House and have always valued their advice and friendship. They have been involved in forestry for over 30 years and have owned and operated Gully Branch Farm since 1987 when they purchased the initial acreage. This land is very special to the Barrs and they have a long family history connected to it. Earl's great-grandfather and grandfather sharecropped the land for years and, as a teenager, he spent countless hours hunting and fishing there. Wanda has used her background in education to create an outdoor environmental classroom at the farm. Students, teachers, and forestry professionals from all over Georgia visit their farm to learn about the benefits and science of sustainable forestry. They are then able to take that knowledge back to their respective communities and teach others about the importance of forest stewardship. Every April, the Bleckley County Schools bring thousands of students to Gulley Branch farm to have fun and participate in educational activities. Students enjoy wagon rides and learn about the different aspects of sustainable forest management. This is not the first time Earl and Wanda have been recognized for their achievements in forestry. They were named the 2008 Georgia Tree Farmers of the Year and the 2009 Southern Regional Tree Farmers of the Year. In 2006, they received the Outstanding Achievements in Sustainable Forestry Award, and Wanda has been named the Georgia Project Learning Tree Educator of the Year in both 1990 and 1995, as well as the National Outstanding Educator of the Year in 1996. I am proud to see the National Tree Farm of the Year award brought to Georgia and look forward to continuing to work with Earl and Wanda to develop policies that will promote sustainable forestry management for generations to come. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. CHAMBLISS. I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I rise today to congratulate a constituent from my home State of Georgia who is familiar to many of my colleagues, and that is radio talk show host Neal Boortz. Next month, in November, after 40 years of airing his unique and often colorful opinions, skewering lawmakers and pending best-selling books, Neal Boortz will be inducted into the National Radio Hall of Fame. Neal has been an Atlanta institution since his first foray into talk radio in 1969 on WRNG Radio. Since 1993, he has been holding forth on the airways of WSB-AM 750, a member of the Cox Broadcasting Group. His ratings show that he strikes a chord with listeners. For 47 straight ratings periods, his show has finished in first place. He has also struck a chord with Americans across the country, counting among the audience for his nationally syndicated show listeners from Maine to California. Neal is a confirmed libertarian, dishing out his brand of, as he calls it, ``the painful truth'' to Republicans and Democrats alike. And I should know; he frequently dishes it out to me, too. But Neal is more than a radio talker. In his life, he has been a military brat, whose dad was a marine pilot, an attorney, a department store clerk, an insurance salesman, a carpet buyer, a postal worker, a gubernatorial speechwriter, as well as a motel bookkeeper. These experiences form more than an eclectic background. It is the foundation that gives Neal the ability to connect with a wide variety of listeners from all walks of life, and to voice what is on their minds. As Neal puts it: ``Somebody's got to say it.'' His Hall of Fame honor is the latest in a string of national successes, including writing the best-selling books, ``The Fair Tax-- The Truth'' and ``Somebody's Gotta Say It,'' both of which are New York Times bestsellers. I am pleased to have joined Neal over the years in his fair-tax efforts. When he is not holding forth on the issues of the day or speaking to groups, Neal can be found in the skies or on a golf course. He is an avid pilot and, I might add, a very safe pilot, having had some experiences with Neal. Neal has been a very good friend of mine for many years. Like most of us, he married way over his head. His lovely wife Donna is his rock. Neal's selection to the National Radio Hall of Fame is overdue, and I am very happy that this honor has now come to him. With his induction into the National Radio Hall of Fame, Neal joins luminaries such as Bob Hope, Paul Harvey, and Dick Clark. This honor is well deserved. Congratulations, Neal. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. I yield the floor.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. JSTARS has proven itself to be a critical asset to our military since deploying to Iraq in 1991. It is one of the most highly tasked systems in our fleet today. Our commanders in the field are constantly asking for JSTARS so they can access its tremendous ISR capability to give them a long-range view of the battlefield and detect moving targets in all weather conditions. There is no other current or programmed aircraft or weapons system that can provide the detailed, broad-area ground-moving target indicator and airborne battle management support for the warfighter than JSTARS provides. The Chief of Staff of the Air Force, GEN Norton Schwartz, has stated that the Air Force is ``all-in'' for the joint fight. JSTARS is truly a joint platform. Flown by a mixed active-duty Air Force/Air Guard unit, it operates with an Army and Air Force mission crew and, in Afghanistan, also with a Marine. It also supports missions of all the military services. With over 55,000 combat hours and 900 sorties flown by only a handful of airplanes over Iraq and Afghanistan, JSTARS has directly contributed to the discovery of hundreds of IEDs. Having flown with the 116th Air Control Wing out of Robins Air Force Base in Warner Robins, GA, I have seen firsthand the remarkable capability that JSTARS can bring to the battlefield in support of our warfighters. Although developed and built to fight the Cold War for tracking Soviet troop movements, JSTARS is an integral part of today's battlefield and will be even more relevant in the near future. JSTARS needs to be modified with new engines to keep this critical asset available to better support our soldiers. Air Force studies show the airframe is sound and will be useful well beyond 2050. JSTARS faces limitations in operational restrictions because the engines are the original 1960s-era engines. They have never been replaced. They are old and expensive to operate and maintain. Replacing them is a safety issue as well as an operational necessity. What this sense-of-the-Senate resolution does is to emphasize the importance of funding the re-engining of the JSTARS weapons system. And it is my hope that in conference, the chairman and the ranking member will do what they can to make sure this funding is available. I have talked with Senator Inouye as well as Senator Cochran about this. They are well aware of the value of this weapons system. It has been funded in the House appropriations bill. By adopting this sense-of-the- Senate amendment, it sends a strong message for the conferees to do everything possible to make sure the appropriate funding will be available when this conference report returns to the Senate. Exhibit 1 The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, Washington, DC, September 30, 2009.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, I ask the pending amendment be set aside and that my amendment No. 2621, as modified, at the desk, be called up, please.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. At the appropriate time, I will ask for a voice vote.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, I would first like to commend the Senator from Louisiana for her great work on this issue of adoption. She has been very diligent over the years in promoting the issue of adoption of needy children across America, and I am very pleased to be a part of that caucus and commend her and thank her for her great work there. Madam President, what is the status of the business before the Senate?

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside and that I be allowed to call up amendment No. 2608.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, very quickly, this amendment restores the amount of money for the training of the Afghan security police and military back to the level that was requested both by the President in his budget submitted to this body, as well as restores the number that was approved in the Defense authorization bill that has previously been voted on by this body and is now in conference with the House. The fiscal year 2010 Defense appropriations bill takes $900 million from the President's request for Afghan security forces at a point in time when our troops are in the trenches fighting and defending us, defending the Afghan people from both the Taliban and al-Qaida, and there is no more critical issue out there right now than training both the Afghan military as well as the Afghan security police. We have just received General McChrystal's assessment, and let me quote a portion of that assessment where he states as follows: Failure to provide adequate resources also risks a longer conflict, greater casualties, higher overall cost, and ultimately a critical loss of political support. Any of these risks, in turn, are likely to result in mission failure. General McChrystal's No. 1 issue is the training of the Afghan military and the Afghan security police because of the fact, if we are ever going to achieve success over there, we have to know that once we root out the bad guys, once we take out the Taliban and al-Qaida, that we can turn that country over to the Afghans, as we are doing in Iraq today, and we can remove our troops with the confidence that the Afghan military and the Afghan security police will be able to maintain security within that country as well as to protect the Afghan people from external sources. But the only way we will be able to do that is to train the military as well as to train the security police. The President's budget that came over for this particular issue requested $7.5 billion. That is a lot of money--a lot of money for any issue--but certainly a lot of money for training. But it is obviously absolutely necessary if we are going to complete the job. We are at a very critical crossroads in Afghanistan right now. The President has under consideration the issue of whether to call for additional troops to be sent into Afghanistan. He is obviously weighing that very heavily. While he should, I would hope he is going to make a very quick decision on that particular issue. But whatever the decision is, and whenever he makes it, we know for a fact that the Afghan military and the Afghan security police have to continue to receive the training our troops are providing for them today. Let me just quote a couple of other statements from other very high- profile individuals who are very knowledgeable and very thorough in their assessment of the situation with respect to the Afghan military and the Afghan security police. First of all, Admiral Mullen, during testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee on September 15, said the following in response to Chairman Levin: I share your view that larger and more capable Afghan national security forces remain vital to that nation's viability. We must rapidly build the Afghan army and police. Senator Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, at that same hearing stated: We basically need a much larger Afghan army, much quicker. That is the bottom line. That is the winning strategy. Senator Lieberman said in July that the commitment to the expansion of Afghan forces ``is a decision that we have avoided making for far too long. Every day we continue to drag our feet and fail to commit to the indigenous security forces hinders the fight against the extremists and delays the pullout of U.S. troops in Afghanistan.'' Lastly, the outgoing Supreme Allied Commander for Europe--the SACEUR--GEN John Craddock, said during his testimony this summer: I don't think the intent there is to ever occupy and stay. The key, as has been pointed out, is the enabling of development of the Afghan national security forces. As the SACEUR for the last 2\1/2\ years, I repeatedly told NATO nations the very first thing we need are more trainers for the army and the police, particularly the police. Madam President, what this amendment does is add $900 million basically back to the top line. The reason we can do that is that under the appropriations bill, as has been passed, and as compared to the President's budget and the budget passed here, this bill is about $3.5 billion under the budget. So there is room to add this $900 million back in to make sure we are giving the Afghan people the ability to protect themselves from external forces as well as the ability to protect themselves from dangers within their own country. Last, let me say the President has been very critical of the reduction of this $900 million. In the statement of administration policy, or the SAP that was put out on the 25th of September, here is what the President said: The administration opposes the reduction of $900 million for ANSF sustainment. Accelerating the growth in size and capability of the Afghanistan National Security Forces is a key component of the U.S. strategy in Afghanistan. The President's full request reflects his commanders' plan for Afghan forces to assume a greater share of responsibility for security as quickly as possible. Simply stated, it is critically important that this training proceed at a very rapid pace. In order to do that, we have to resource the training that our troops are doing today and we will need to continue to do over the next fiscal year. I ask this amendment be called up at the appropriate time for a vote by this body and that our colleagues will support the amendment.

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

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Senators Bill Nelson, Inhofe, Dodd, Isakson, and Lieberman be added as cosponsors.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, this amendment is a sense-of-the- Senate amendment on a weapons system that is critical to the U.S. Air Force from an intelligence gathering standpoint. It has to do with the re-engining of the Joint STARS weapons system. Real-time intelligence is critical to our warfighters in fighting the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, just as in all other military conflicts. Secretary Gates and our military leadership have consistently highlighted to us the importance of collecting and disseminating critical intelligence and battlefield information to our troops on the ground and theaters of conflict, such as Iraq and Afghanistan. One of the most effective ISR assets operating today is the Air Force's E-8C Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System, also known as Joint STARS, or more succinctly, JSTARS. I ask unanimous consent a memorandum signed yesterday from Ashton Carter, Under Secretary of Defense, addressing JSTARS be printed in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks. The PRESIDING officer. Without objection, it is so ordered. (See Exhibit 1.)

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in opposition to Attorney General Holder's decision to reexamine the judgment by career prosecutors at the Department of Justice and initiate a preliminary review to determine whether criminal charges should be filed against CIA officers who conducted interrogations against hardened al-Qaida terrorists. At the outset, let me remind everyone that President Obama promised the American people he would look forward rather than backward and would not seek a criminal investigation for individuals involved in the CIA's interrogation and detention program. Notwithstanding this promise, he has allowed the Attorney General, a member of his Cabinet who answers to him, to rehash old ground despite the fact that career prosecutors already have examined the same information and declined to prosecute the same individuals for the same actions. By allowing this decision to stand, President Obama is failing to exercise his duty as Chief Executive and enforcer of the law. Given that there are no new facts to justify this action by the Attorney General, the President should demand that the legal conclusions previously reached by career prosecutors be upheld. Just last week, seven former CIA Directors--encompassing all living former CIA Directors from both political parties except the two presently serving in the Obama administration, current Director Panetta and Secretary of Defense Gates--wrote in a letter to President Obama that the decision to reexamine these cases ``creates an atmosphere of continuous jeopardy for those whose cases the Department of Justice had previously declined to prosecute.'' No facts have changed since then, no new facts have arisen, and in light of the previous refusal of the Department of Justice to prosecute all but one CIA employee, the CIA has already taken administrative action against some of these individuals. Where is the justice for these government employees who have been on the front lines in the war on terror since the 9/11 attacks and who acted under the legal guidance given to them if they are to face potential punishment more than once for their actions? What is the message we are sending to our intelligence community? Reopening these cases is exactly the type of action which creates risk- averse intelligence agencies and officers. If an intelligence officer involved in a clandestine operation today worries that he may be prosecuted for it tomorrow, he is not going to think twice about conducting the operation. He simply will not do it. Worse yet, if an intelligence officer involved in a clandestine operation today worries that he may be prosecuted for it tomorrow because of random policy changes, it will evoke an even greater subjective risk-adverse environment. Creating such an environment where intelligence activities today are held hostage to the political decisions of tomorrow is a recipe for failure for our intelligence collection efforts. As a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, I understand the important role that intelligence plays in our military, law enforcement, and intelligence operations. I see firsthand the bravery and professionalism exhibited by our intelligence community cadre. Partisanship plays no role in their daily operations. They are guided not by which political party may obtain their vote on a particular day in November but by an overwhelming sense of duty to their country. They understand they do not make policy. Yet they are out there risking their lives to gather the intelligence necessary for policymakers to make an informed decision. Similarly, partisanship should play no role in the decisions of the administration or Congress when it comes to intelligence gathering. I do not want our intelligence community professionals to have to think twice about whether to gather certain information that will inform me of foreign policy developments because they fear potential prosecution at a later date for doing so. These men and women need to know they have the freedom to do their jobs within the guidance that is given to them at the time, even though that guidance or policy may change down the road. They need to know the country they are serving has their back. Sadly, that is not the message we are sending. Never before has a change in policy brought the threat of potential prosecution for past sanctioned actions. Some may ask why the Attorney General's decision is so harmful to our national security. The answer is simple. Without calculated risk taking on the part of our intelligence community, we will lose the fight against not only our state adversaries but against terrorists as well. This is not a tradeoff I am willing to take. It is not a tradeoff the President should be willing to make either, particularly as we continue the fight in Afghanistan. We need to look no further than the events of the past week, the arrests on American soil of three individuals with admitted ties to al- Qaida who may have been planning attacks against the U.S. homeland, to understand that the threats to our country are real and that this tradeoff which the administration has sanctioned is a lot closer to hitting home. Finally, I would point out that the same report--the CIA inspector general's report entitled ``Counterterrorism Detention and Interrogation Activities (September 2001-October 2003)''--that Attorney General Holder claims was his reason for reopening this investigation was the same report that prompted the CIA to self-report to the Department of Justice in the first place. Long before the IG even started his review, the CIA informed the Department of Justice that they had recommended an IG investigation related to the interrogation program. Once the report was completed, the Department of Justice received it and carefully reviewed the facts and circumstances described within it. Only after doing so did the career attorneys decline to prosecute. Unfortunately, press reports from this past weekend indicate that the Attorney General never even bothered to read the declination memos prepared by these career public servants. In recent months, the administration has declassified and released to the public this IG report, as well as the legal guidance from the Department of Justice. The record is there for the American people to review for themselves. I have reviewed all of this information, and I am confident that anyone else who does so will reach the same conclusion I have; namely, that reopening an investigation is not merited. Further, it is worth noting that the IG report found that: The Agency's detention and interrogation of terrorists has provided intelligence that has enabled identification and apprehension of other terrorists and warned of terrorist plots planned for the United States and around the world. Where deviations from the approved procedures and guidance occurred, it was an anomaly and was either prosecuted or administratively punished by the CIA leadership. The issues at the heart of the Attorney General's decision have been examined thoroughly, and it is time for them to be laid to rest. President Obama and the Attorney General should put an end to their unjustified second-guessing of career prosecutors. I cannot imagine they would be willing to expose their own policy decisions and legal determinations to future politically motivated prosecutions. Yet by doing so with their actions against the CIA employees, they are setting a dangerous precedent which I believe will have a lasting, chilling effect on our intelligence community and our national security. With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I come to the floor with a heavy heart to express condolences to those in my home State of Georgia as well as others across the southern part of our country who have been affected by the recent devastating floods. It is hard to imagine that 1 year ago we in Georgia were in the fourth year of extensive drought. Yet today across the metro Atlanta area and throughout north Georgia, we have gone from a water crisis in the last couple of years to rising waters that have transformed neighborhoods into rivers, ballfields into lakes, and basements into dank pools. Rafts and kayaks have taken the place of cars in streets. In many areas, the only dry places are rooftops and treetops. For 4 days and 4 nights, beginning September 18, water poured from the sky in torrents, and rose from rivers, creeks, and the saturated ground to claim lives and livelihoods, worldly possessions, and treasured memories in flooded basements, attics, driveways, and fields. The Chattooga and Chattahoochee Rivers and Chickamauga Creek, swollen by days of rain, topped their banks, with deadly results. The Chattahoochee crested at 30 feet, some 15 feet above flood stage. Nearly 1,000 families have lost their homes to flooding they never expected to see in their lifetimes. Others found their businesses submerged. Because most are not in floodplains, they do not have flood insurance. Many have lost everything they own during already tough economic times. In addition to homes and businesses, the rising waters destroyed roadways, swept away bridges, tainted drinking water, and damaged sewer systems. It will take months, if not years, to repair the damage. Even more heart-wrenching is the fact that nine Georgians and one resident of Alabama, just across the State line, have perished in the rushing waters. When all was said and done, more than 20 inches of rain fell on Georgia, breaking a 130-year-old record at Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport. More than 30,000 people were without power in the metro Atlanta area. The Red Cross sheltered hundreds rendered homeless by the floods. However, the worst situations often bring out the best in people. Local first responders and emergency personnel worked tirelessly to protect lives and property and to rescue those trapped by the waters. Their bravery and sacrifice is exemplary. Also, the Georgia Emergency Management Agency worked around the clock to facilitate requests for assistance. The Federal Emergency Management Agency worked closely with the State to anticipate and respond to emergency needs, and countless volunteers gave time and energy to ensure that evacuees were sheltered, clothed, fed, and comforted. They all have Georgians' and my personal deepest, most heartfelt gratitude. I would like to express my sympathy to the families of those who have lost loved ones, homes, and livelihoods. To that end, Senator Isakson and I have submitted this resolution, S. Res. 286, expressing condolences to those affected and appreciation to emergency responders and others who helped them. I urge my colleagues to support the resolution tonight. On September 21, Gov. Sonny Perdue declared a state of emergency in 17 counties. I understand President Obama called Governor Perdue Tuesday night to discuss the needs of Georgians and assured the Governor that his request for Federal aid would receive prompt attention. To that end, today we received notification that 4 of the 17 affected counties have been declared disaster areas by President Obama, and I am certain the others, when the processing is completed, will likewise be declared disaster areas. Tomorrow, Vice President Biden will accompany Senator Isakson and myself to Georgia to take a firsthand look at what is going on. Mr. President, we are literally underwater. Georgia and other parts of the Southeast need the assistance of the Federal Government in this case, as well as the State government. To that end, we are seeing the response in a very appropriate way.