Lindsey Graham

Mr. GRAHAM

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, here is a closing thought. The President understands very well, and I know Senator Lieberman does, and I think we all understand we have some damage to repair. We have made mistakes in this war. Detainee operations are essential in every war. Part of war is to capture prisoners and how you dispose of them can help or hurt the war effort. There have been times in the past where detainee operations have hurt the war effort. We need to start over. That is why we need to look at a new system to replace the one we have regarding military commissions--but keep it in the military setting--and a way to start over with basic detainee operations in a comprehensive manner. But in repairing the damage of the past, you have to make sure you are not creating future damage. If you release these photos, you will not repair damage from the past, and you will not bring somebody to justice that is in these photos whom we already don't know about. There will not be a new person named. It is more of the same. So it doesn't contribute to repairing the damage of the past, but it sure does create damage for the future. The one fact I am very aware of is that the young men and women serving overseas today--soldiers, military members, and civilians--have done nothing wrong. They should not pay a price for the people who did something wrong in the past whom we already know about. If you release these photos, Americans are going to get killed for no good reason. That is why we need to pass this amendment--to help the President defeat this lawsuit that would lead to violence against Americans who are doing their job and have done nothing wrong. They should not be punished for something somebody has done in the past, which has already been addressed. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, I wished to thank Senator Lieberman for his leadership on this issue. We have been working together on what I think is a very big deal for the American people in the overall war effort. As many of you know, particularly our colleagues and the public at large, we have had a discussion in this Nation about whether we should release more photos showing detainee abuse in the past. The President of the United States has decided to stand for the proposition that releasing these photos would jeopardize the safety of our men and women serving overseas and Americans abroad, as well as civilians serving in the war zones. He has indicated the photos don't add anything to the past debate about detainee abuse. They are more of the same. No new person is implicated. These photos, again, were taken by our own folks, detailing abuse, and a lot of that has been dealt with already and prosecuted. The President, I think rightfully, has determined, after consulting with his combat commanders, that if we release these photos, it would not help us understand any more about detainee problems in the past than we already know. But it would be a tremendous benefit to the enemy. The enemy used these photos in the past to generate resentment against our troops. It has been a propaganda tool. The President is rightfully concerned that to release more photos would add nothing to the overall knowledge base we have regarding detainee abuse, and it is simply going to put American lives in jeopardy. I applaud the President, who stood for our troops and men and women and the civil servants overseas. There are a lot of mysteries in this world, but there is no mystery on what would happen if we release those photos. I can tell you, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that if these photos get into the public domain, they will inflame populations where our troops are serving overseas and increase violence against our troops. What we have done--Senator Lieberman and myself--is we came up with an amendment that addresses the lawsuit before our judicial system about the photos. This amendment says any detainee photos that are certified by the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with others, that would result in harm to our men and women serving overseas, jeopardize the war effort, and put our troops in harm's way, with Presidential approval, those photos cannot be released for a 5-year period of time. To me, that is a reasonable compromise. It doesn't change FOIA, in its basic construct, but it provides congressional support to the President's decision that we should not release these photos. Senator Lieberman and myself have been to the theater of operations many times. We have met with al-Qaida operatives who have switched sides, basically, and they have told us firsthand how at prison camps in Iraq, the Abu Ghraib photos were used in the past to recruit new members to al-Qaida and generate resentment against our troops. I applaud the President. This legislation will help the administration in court. I thank Senator Lieberman, who, above all else, puts his country and the security of our men and women ahead of any political calculation. For that, I very much appreciate his leadership and his friendship. I wish to recognize what he did.

Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, I will talk about the amendment, if I may.

Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, I call up the Lieberman-Graham amendment No. 1157.

Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, Senator Lieberman and I have already explained the need for this amendment. It will help the President win a lawsuit that is moving through our legal system regarding the release of photos of past detainee abuse. As I said, that will not help us to learn more, and it will only put American lives at risk, as the commanders have told the President. The Senate can avoid that by passing this targeted amendment. I hope we can get a large vote for this amendment. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, it is my understanding that there is an agreement we can bring up the amendment at this time. Therefore, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment and call up amendment No. 1157 on behalf of Senator Lieberman, myself, and Senator McCain.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, I appreciate what the Senator from Texas has been saying. This issue of what to do with the Guantanamo Bay detainees is a central issue for the Nation and the overall war on terror, because the President is looking for partners. He keeps saying that. I stand ready to be a partner. The best-run jail in the world where they are now is Guantanamo Bay. I have been there many times. The men and women who are working in that prison are doing an outstanding job. They follow the rules. It is a model military prison. It is tough duty. What they go through every day you probably don't realize, and we can't tell you at all, but it is tough duty. Anyone serving down there is doing the country a great service. Having said that, I understand the need to change the image of the country. I have been one of the Republicans--a military lawyer for 25 years--who understands the way we conduct this war determines whether we will win it. The high ground in military operations is usually a physical location. When you are in a battle or a war, you try to get the high ground, because that is the best place to fight the enemy from. In this war, it is an ideological struggle, so the high ground is the moral high ground. It does matter what we do. My goal for America is to be the best we can be. Our enemies--al- Qaida and other groups--are some of the most barbaric people in the history of the world. But here is what it comes down to. When we capture one of them, it becomes about us. They will cut people's heads off in the most brutal fashion, abuse and humiliate people. They don't give trials. They are not reasoned. They are barbarians. The fact that we choose a different way is not a weakness, it is a strength. Trust me, if we are going to lead the world to a better way, we need to show the world a better way. And there is a better way. In World War II, we had thousands--350,000, I think--of German and Japanese prisoners housed in the United States, Nazis and Japanese prisoners committed to our destruction. We held them here under our value system, under the Geneva Conventions, in communities all over America. The Nazis and the Japanese were a tough crowd. When those prisoners were released, those who were released, they went back to their country with a view of America that helped us form the modern Japan and Germany. Some of the people we are talking about at Guantanamo Bay are subject to war crimes trials. So I am urging the President to leave on the table the military commission option. We can reform it, but let's not criminalize this war. They are not accused of robbing a liquor store. These are not common criminals. Under domestic criminal law, you cannot hold someone forever without a trial, nor should you. But under the law of armed conflict, if you catch a member of the enemy force, you can keep them off the battlefield as long as they present a danger. That has been military law forever. I believe we would be better off if we look at the people who are members of al-Qaida at Guantanamo Bay as enemy combatants, part of an unorganized militia, military organization bent on our destruction, and they are a part of the enemy force, not some common criminal. We can keep them off the battlefield as long as necessary, but we have to do it within our value system. I am urging the President that if someone at Guantanamo Bay is subject to a war crimes trial, let's don't go to Federal court, as we did with the blind sheik trial in the nineties, which was a disaster. Let's put them in a military tribunal and give them justice through the military legal system of which I have been a part for 25 years. I can tell America one thing: The judges, the lawyers, and the jurors who wear the uniform of the United States are the best among us. These are the same people who administer justice to our own troops. It is a great place to conduct a trial because we can do things for national security in a military setting that we cannot do in Federal court. But I can assure you, justice will be rendered and people will be treated fairly. The courts-martial we have had, the commission trials we have had at Guantanamo Bay, we have seen sentences that make sense. I have been a part of the military all my adult life. The jurors take their responsibilities extremely seriously. They hold the Government to their burden of proof. And the judges and the lawyers are outstanding. There will be a group of people who will not be subject to war crimes trials because of the nature of the evidence, because of the unique relationship we may have between the evidence and an ally, that we are not going to subject that evidence to a beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard, but we know with certainty, beyond a preponderance of the evidence, that this person is a member of a terrorist organization and is engaged in dangerous activities and likely to do that in the future. What I am arguing to the administration, proposing to them, is those people we think are too dangerous to let go, let's create a national security court made up of Federal judges, somebody out of the military, who will look over the military shoulder and see if the evidence warrants an enemy combatant designation. That way, we will have an independent judiciary validating the fact that the person in custody is part of an enemy force, a danger to this country, and then have a periodic review of that person's status so they are not left in legal limbo. They will have a chance every year to make their case anew. We have to realize that we have released more people from Guantanamo Bay than we have in detention and we have put people in Guantanamo Bay who were there by mistake. That is a fact. We threw the net too large. That happened. Let me tell you what else has happened. Mr. President, 1 in 10 we let go has gone back to the fight. The No. 2 al-Qaida operative in Somalia was a detainee at Guantanamo Bay. We had a suicide bomber in Iraq blow himself up who was at Guantanamo Bay. We are going to make mistakes, but I want a process to limit those mistakes as much as possible. I end with this thought. How we do this is important. We can close Guantanamo Bay and repair our image, but we have to have a legal system that has robust due process, that is transparent, that is independent, but recognizes we are at war. And that takes us to the Uyghurs. There is a group of people in our custody whom we caught in Afghanistan who are part of a separatist movement in China. They are Muslims. They were training in Afghanistan to go back to China to take on the Chinese Government. They have been determined to no longer be enemy combatants in terms of a threat from the al-Qaida perspective, but what to do with the Uyghurs. One thing I suggest to the President is that you cannot change immigration law. Our laws prevent a known terrorist from being released in our country. These people have engaged in terrorist activities. Their goal was to go back to China, not to come here. But there are press reports that one of the Uyghurs was allowed to look at TV and saw a woman not properly clothed and destroyed the television. We have to make sure that, one, we follow our own laws, and the fact they were going to go back to China does not mean they are safe to release here because they have been radicalized. We have to make some hard decisions as a nation. I stand ready with the President and my Democratic colleagues to close Guantanamo Bay, but we do need a plan. We need a legal system of which we can be proud that will protect us. The final comment is that the idea of releasing more photos showing detainee abuse is not in our national interest. We have men and women serving overseas. It will inflame the populations. It will be used by our enemies. I urge the administration to take that case all the way to the Supreme Court and protect our troops in the field. I understand the President's dilemma and challenge. Harsh interrogation techniques have hurt this country more than they have helped. We can be a nation that abides by the Geneva Conventions, rule of law--we have been that way for a long time--and still defend ourselves. I agree with the President there. But I do believe we need a detainee policy that understands that the people we are talking about are not run-of-the-mill criminals. They are committed terrorists, and I don't say that lightly. The only way that label should stick under the system I am proposing is if an independent judiciary validates that decision. That is the best we can do. This decision we are going to make as a nation is important. I tried to speak my mind and be balanced. There is a way for us to work together to get this right. I look forward to working with the administration to make some of the most difficult decisions in American history. I am confident we can do it if we work together. I yield the floor.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask my fellow colleagues to join me in honoring the memory of a dedicated servant and leader, Milford June ``Dolly'' Cooper. After a lifetime of unprecedented service to his State and Nation as a World War II veteran and a member of the South Carolina House of Representatives, Mr. Cooper passed away in Greenville, SC, on April 26, 2009, at the age of 88. While he will be remembered by most as a man who loved to help people and demonstrated an unwavering dedication to the community, I will remember him as a spirited, commanding, honest giant of a man. Affectionately referred to as ``Dolly'' by all who knew him, he was a World War II veteran who prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of our freedom. He served in the 30th Infantry Division and saw 11 months of combat in Europe, at Normandy, at the Battle of the Bulge, and at the Rhine River. He was also involved with the capture of the last large German city, Madgeburg, which was 45 miles from Berlin. For his service he was awarded the Purple Heart, Bronze Star, American Defense Silver Medal, the Combat Infantry Badge, and the Belgian Forragere Award. Perhaps one of my greatest honors was to see that Mr. Cooper was in person at the dedication of the National D-day Memorial on June 6, 2001. This memorial is a tribute to Mr. Cooper's valor, fidelity, and sacrifice, and those who served along side him during the allied invasion of Western Europe. Born and raised in upstate South Carolina, Mr. Cooper attended Piedmont High School in 1937 and joined the South Carolina National Guard in Easley. After his service in the military, Mr. Cooper opened the Piedmont Economy Store, which he solely owned and operated from 1955 to 1999. In 1974 he was elected to the South Carolina House of Representatives on a platform of bringing health care services to rural South Carolina. Mr. Cooper served House District 10 for 16 years. In addition to his time in politics, Mr. Cooper was active in the Pelzer Lions Club for 55 years. He was member of the Medical University of South Carolina Board of Trustees from 1989 to 1996. Mr. Cooper also served as a board member for the Pelzer Rescue Squad, the Appalachian Health Council, and the Baptist Hospital Boards for Easley and Columbia. After decades of serving South Carolina, Mr. Cooper was awarded the Order of the Palmetto from Governor Carroll Campbell in 1989. Mr. Cooper is survived by his wife of 61 years, Melba Blackmon Cooper, by his four children, six grandchildren, and three great- grandchildren. I ask that the U.S. Senate join me in commemorating Mr. Cooper's lifelong dedication to service to our country and to the State of South Carolina.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I wish today to recognize and pay tribute to MG Daniel V. Wright, the Deputy Judge Advocate General of the Army, for his many years of exceptionally meritorious service to our country. General Wright will retire from the Army on May 29, 2009, having completed a distinguished 36-year military career. We owe him a debt of gratitude for his many contributions to our Nation and the legal profession, particularly during operations in support of the global war on terror. Born on the Fourth of July in 1951, in Birmingham, AL, this great patriot grew up in Miami, FL. He graduated in 1973 from the United States Military Academy and was commissioned as an infantry officer. His initial assignment was to the 25th Infantry Division, Schofield Barracks, Hawaii, where he served as an infantry officer until 1977. He was then selected by the Army to attend law school through the Funded Legal Education Program and completed his legal studies at the University of Miami. His career as a Judge Advocate spanned the globe and included the most challenging assignments. He quickly distinguished himself as an expert in operational law when he served as the first Regimental Judge Advocate for the 75th Ranger Regiment, America's premier rapid-reaction assault force. He later served as the legal adviser for the Joint Special Operations Command at Fort Bragg, NC, where he participated in operations in Somalia and Haiti. As the Staff Judge Advocate for the U.S. Army Southern European Task Force, SETAF, in Vicenza, Italy, he twice deployed to central Africa as the Joint Task Force legal adviser in support of regional stabilization, refugee return, and noncombatant evacuation operations. From 1999 to 2001 he served as the Staff Judge Advocate for XVIII Airborne Corps and Fort Bragg, where he advised the operational commander of over 85,000 soldiers worldwide. Upon selection and promotion as a general officer in 2001, he assumed responsibilities as the Commander, U.S. Army Legal Services Agency, and Chief Judge, U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals. His service included supervision of the Army's considerable litigation program, government and defense appellate programs, and Chief Judge of the Army's criminal appellate court. In 2003, he was appointed the Assistant Judge Advocate General for Military Law and Operations, where he forged a cohesive team of experts who delivered legal advice across a wide range of disciplines including the establishment of the Office of Military Commissions, the evolving role of the law in judicial reconstruction and stability operations, and the significant growth of contractors as force multipliers. General Wright was appointed Deputy Judge Advocate General on October 1, 2005, and promoted to the rank of major general. In this position he served as the principal assistant for the largest legal services corps within the Department of Defense, with more than 9,000 uniformed and civilian attorneys, paralegal NCOs, and civilian support staff across 651 offices in 19 countries. General Wright routinely advised the Judge Advocate General, the Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, and other senior military leaders on the most sensitive matters of policy, personnel, ethics, operational law, and military justice. His advice has been invaluable because it was built on decades of perspective, experience, and study, and was delivered with clarity and candor. General Wright's awards include the Defense Superior Service Medal, the Legion of Merit, Army Meritorious Service Medal, Joint Service Commendation Medal, Army Commendation Medal, Army Achievement Medal, Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, and Humanitarian Service Medal. He has earned the Expert Infantryman's Badge, the Master Parachutist Badge, and the Ranger Tab. I know all my colleagues join me in saluting MG Daniel V. Wright and his wife, Jan, his daughter Melissa, also an Army veteran, his daughter Katie, and his son Brian and his son Jeff, for the family's many years of truly outstanding service and support to the Judge Advocate General's Corps, the U.S. Army, and our great Nation.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. I thank the Chair. I rise today to speak about the budget and the debate we are having in the Senate about the budget. Quite frankly, if you asked me to give a scenario that would best explain what a politician thinks about life and politics, I would say: Let them write a budget. When you give a political leader the opportunity to sit down and spend money coming from the taxpayer, it tells you a lot about their priorities, it tells you a lot about how they view the role of Government. And I am here to say that this budget is not good news for the American taxpayer. Today marks the anniversary of the President's first 100 days, and I think the biggest accomplishment in the first 100 is a budget that is transformational in terms of how it transforms the country in a way that I don't think is healthy. The one thing we have had going for us as Americans, from one generation to the next, is the hope and belief that the ones to follow--our kids and grandkids--would have a chance to do better; that we would do what is right and what is necessary on our watch so they would have a chance to do better. If this budget passes, you are going to have a hard time looking the next generation of Americans in the eye and saying: You are going to have a chance to do better than people alive here today. What this budget does is it doubles the national debt. President Obama's proposal, a 10-year budget--I will give him credit for making it a 10-year window--triples the national debt. This budget creates more debt for America in the first 100 days of the Obama administration than every President since George Washington combined. We have spent, in the first 100 days, $12 billion a day. We are running up the deficit and the debt at an alarming rate, and we are growing the size of the Government in a way that future generations are going to have to pay for. The question for the country, if this budget passes, is this: Are we creating a government that is sustainable by the next generation? Can the next generation, with this budget in place, have a chance of doing better than we have? I don't think so. I really don't. And I never thought I would hear myself say that. As we look down the road, we see how the budget explodes the national debt and the deficit--67 percent of the debt held by the public as a percentage of GDP. That is what happens under the Obama budget in 2014. This is a 5-year budget, and we have ignored some of the things we know we are going to do to make the numbers look better because the President's budget was so large and so unnerving in terms of long-term indebtedness. The worst that Bush did--and we did not do a good job on our watch as Republicans--was to have a $500 billion deficit. The best this budget does, 10 years from now, is about $600 billion, and we sustain trillion-dollar deficits for several years. But the percentage of publicly held debt relative to GDP, gross domestic product, is going to be 67 percent down the road. That is Third World nation status. The budget is a 5-year budget. The numbers look better, but we have not done anything to fix the doctor reimbursement problem, the last 2 years of the AMT fix are not included, and we are expanding the Make Work Pay tax credit. What we have done is mask the real cost of what we know is going to be there after 5 years. The budget that was proposed by the President triples the national debt and increases taxes by $1 trillion on people who make over $250,000 a year. That may sound good because I don't make $250,00 a year. Maybe 2 or 3 years of my entire life I have. I am the first person in my family to go to college. My dad and mom owned a liquor store. We had a middle-class lifestyle at best, but we were happy. I never looked across the street at the person who owned the big business in town and had the nice house as my enemy. They are not. In a recession and a global economy that is on its knees, if we start raising taxes on American business people, they are going to look to take their business somewhere else. To go from 35 percent to 39.5 percent on people who earn over $250,000 is in theory more money for the Government, but it is less money for the people who have taken a huge risk to create a business. The day we start punishing people and rewarding the Government for the risks they take is the day America gets off track. Raising the capital gains rates, as this budget does, from 15 to 20 percent, will make it less likely that people will engage in entrepreneurial activity. But one thing John Kennedy understood is, low tax rates generate business activities that actually generate more money for the Government. So what we are doing is raising taxes, and we are playing class warfare. The defense spending in President Obama's budget over a 10-year period went to 3 percent of gross domestic product. It is about 4.5 or 4.6 percent now. That would put us on the low end, in the Nation's history, for defense spending. So liberals raise taxes, and they cut defense at a time when I think we can't afford to do either. The world, to me, in the next 10 years is not going to be safer unless we act. Iran and North Korea are pursuing nuclear programs that could jeopardize our lives as we know it. The one thing I can tell you about Iraq and Afghanistan, we made plenty of mistakes, but we have the best trained, best equipped military in the world, and that really does matter. We are going to win in Iraq if we continue the course we are on, and we are going to turn Afghanistan around, but it is going to take blood and treasure. The one thing I am not looking for from an American perspective is a fair fight. When we go to war--and sometimes that is required to protect the national interest--we need to go to win, and we need to overwhelm the enemy. We need to have technology they do not. We need to have more troops than they do. We need to have equipment that can destroy their equipment without destroying our people. That requires investment. The whole world is reducing their defense budgets. Our NATO allies spend less on defense combined than we do. Like it or not, we are the arsenal of democracy, and now is not the time to reduce the arsenal and to be cheap on defense and grow the domestic side of Government. We need butter and we need guns, but let me tell you right now we need a lot of guns in the world we are about to inherit in the next 10 years. Finally, the increase in domestic spending puts the country on an unsustainable path, and the next generation is going to have to pay for this big government. To pay for it we are going to have to raise their taxes. To make it all work we are cutting defense. There is a better way. Let's keep taxes competitive and as low as possible, realizing we have a government to run. Let's spend wisely. Let's reform health care so the Government doesn't become the one group in the country that decides what doctor we can see and what the doctor makes and what kind of treatment we get. This climate change issue is real, in my opinion. I think manmade emissions, CO2 emissions, are heating up the planet. In the President's budget he was going to put a $646 billion cap-and-trade tax on industry and American consumers--$3,100 per family--at a time when we could ill afford it. That was taken out of the budget. That is good news. But what I am trying to say to my Democratic colleagues is, this is your Government now. You run this place. The problems in the past, the mistakes made by Republicans are real. You don't fix those mistakes by spending more money than we did. You don't fix the problems that America faces for the next generation by growing the Government at a pace and a level you can't pay for down the road unless you have to give up some of your hopes and dreams. There is a role for Government. There is a role for us in health care. There is a role for us to play in the economy of our times: to help business and to be a safety net for those who have lost their jobs. But we are about to pass a budget that will increase the national debt, double what we have today. There will be a day in 2014 when we will spend more money paying the interest on the national debt than the entire Defense Department budget. That is not healthy for this country. We have done nothing to reform Medicare or Social Security. We are talking about $1 trillion more in spending on health care when we spend more than any nation in the world. We are going to pass this budget. It is my hope the American people will weigh in. The stimulus package was $787 billion of spending--a lot of growth in Government and very few jobs created. You need to speak out. You need to get involved. You need to tell us all, Republicans and Democrats: I expect you to collect taxes from me. I expect you to offer services to me and my family. But I do not expect you to make it so that my children and my grandchildren cannot have the life I have had. I expect you to do what I am doing, tighten your belt and set priorities. This is your Government at the end of the day. It is fashionable and appropriate to criticize political leadership. But in a democracy, when you look in the mirror, that is ``we the people.'' So for America to change it is going to require Americans to demand it from both of us, Republicans and Democrats. I believe in you. Your Government is dysfunctional. It will be made better if you want it to be. There are people here listening. Speak out before it is too late.

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

Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, could you inform me when 10 minutes has expired?

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, our hearts go out to the people of North Myrtle Beach, SC, today. As you may know, North Myrtle Beach firefighters, along with firefighters from around South Carolina, are battling the worst wildfire to hit that area since 1976. While the cause of the fire is unknown at this point, high winds have fanned the flames resulting in a total damage of nearly 15,000 acres-- 23 square miles. My understanding is that officials on the scene estimate that the wildfire is about 75 to 80 percent contained at this point which is good news. Ninety firefighters from eight different departments from across South Carolina are currently battling this blaze. It is at times like these when you really appreciate the hard work that our firefighters do on our behalf. You also appreciate the dangers. I understand that last night, two of our South Carolina firefighters had to deploy their emergency fire shelters when they became surrounded by flames. Both, I am told, are unhurt. At this point, no injuries or fatalities have been reported and we should be very thankful for that. However, many have lost their homes. Seventy homes have been destroyed with another 29 severely damaged. I expect that that number, unfortunately, will likely go up. Anyone who has ever lost a home to a fire understands the sense of terrible loss-- the loss of the house they grew up in and the loss of irreplaceable family heirlooms. I want to thank North Myrtle Beach Mayor Marilyn Hatley, the Governor, his emergency management team, the Forestry Commission, the State Fire Marshall, the State national guard, the officials of Horry County, the South Carolina Red Cross, and the others who are pitching in right now to put out this fire. My understanding is that the Red Cross has shelters open in North Myrtle Beach and is housing several hundred people tonight. I want to applaud our firefighters for always standing ready to answer the call to action. I pray that they accomplish their mission soon and come home safely to their families. And I pray for the families who have suffered devastating losses.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, today I pay tribute to an outstanding military leader, public servant, true patriot, and citizen of Charleston, SC: MG Thomas L. Carter. General Carter is currently the Mobilization Assistant to the Secretary of the Air Force, and on May 1, after nearly 35 years of distinguished and honorable service, General Carter will retire from the U.S. Air Force Reserve. General Carter began his active duty service in 1975 after graduating from the ROTC program at Memphis State University. As an Air Force C- 141 pilot he flew over 4,000 hours performing missions in support of the U.S. Special Forces. He also had the distinction of serving as the Air Force Aide to President Ronald Reagan from 1984 to 1986, where he spent countless hours with the President ``carrying the football'' at the height of the Cold War. Following his active duty career, he served 23 years in the U.S. Air Force Reserve. General Carter's public service also extends to the Senate. From 1986 to 1989 he served as Assistant to the Republican Leader for National Security Affairs in the Office of Senator Robert Dole. His keen understanding of the Senate made him the leader's chief adviser on defense, foreign policy and veterans' affairs matters, and also resulted in his selection as a key member of Senator Dole's 1996 Presidential campaign. General Carter's legislative prowess was so respected, that he left the Senate to assume the role of Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Senate Affairs in 1989. In that capacity, he counseled the Department of Defense leadership and individual service executives on issues before Congress. For 13 years, General Carter also served in the Secretary of Air Force's Office of Legislative Liaison, advising numerous Secretaries on government affairs matters. He also trained countless Air Force officers in the ways of Washington, DC. His trademark was his commitment to providing each new assignee to the office with his ``Hill 101'' where military officers, and many times new congressional staff, would be given the secrets to success for navigating the legislative branch. Many of those he mentored have gone on to tremendous success in the public and private sector, due in large part to General Carter's tutelage. In 2003, General Carter was named Assistant to the Chairman for Government Affairs during the Columbia Accident Investigation Board. He also served as a civilian in the Department of Defense as a member of the Senior Executive Service while Senior Counselor to the Coalition Provisional Authority--CPA--from 2003-2004. In that capacity, he led numerous congressional delegations through areas of ongoing combat operations including visits to Baghdad, Mosul, Tikrit and Fallujah. The Nation will miss General Carter's congressional expertise, tireless advocacy for the Air Force, and unwavering commitment to public service. However, I know he will continue to serve his Nation wherever he goes. Tom is the proud father of Kathryn, 28, Will, 26, and Mary-Lee, 15. I am proud to speak on behalf of a grateful Nation in saying thank you to General Carter for his years of service and sacrifice. I hope my colleagues will join me in wishing him well in all his future endeavors and hope that those who follow in his footsteps will continue his legacy of selfless dedication to our great Nation. Good luck and Godspeed.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, since I am not a squish like Senator Coburn, I am going to go ahead. My amendment is straightforward. This amendment creates a budget point of order on legislation that increases the cost of energy for middle-class families. Why are we doing this? The climate change proposal that was in the President's budget would create a massive tax increase on anybody who uses energy, and that would be every American middle-class family, which already has a tough time getting by. This would be a point of order against any bill that would raise the cost of energy on our middle-class families who are struggling to get by. I ask the Senate to rally around this concept. We can deal with climate change without passing a $3,000-per-household energy tax on the families of America who are having a hard time paying their bills.

Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, if it is all right with the bill managers, I would ask for 7 minutes to speak in support of the McCain amendment.

Mr. GRAHAM. Yes. I am sorry. I thought we had done that. Everything I said still goes.

Mr. GRAHAM. Five minutes. OK, thank you, Madam President. I stand today in support of an alternative budget that is being proposed by Senator McCain and others. This country is trying to write a budget for the American people. That should not be unknown to the American people. They are doing it every day. Every business is writing a budget. Every family is trying to plan a budget. The one thing families and businesses are doing is they are tightening their belts. Well, we are not. We are buying a bigger belt. We are buying a bigger suit. We are trying to mask the fact that we are grossly overburdened. The budget before us is better than President Obama's budget. But Peter Orszag of OMB says it is 98 percent the same. So we are tying to find a different path. You can evaluate the people running your country as to how they want to spend your money and how much. What we are proposing in this budget is to basically freeze domestic spending, except for defense and veterans--to do what you are doing, basically; that is, control your spending, to get by on the same amount of money, with allowing some growth in some needed areas, but to rein in what will be a dramatic increase over time of domestic spending. I think we can do that. We are spending trillions of dollars. We have trillions of dollars available to us. I know we could get by for another year or two on that same amount of money, allowing growth in certain key areas if we wanted to. But we don't have to. It is a choice we make. You don't have that choice. You can't go and print money. If you write a bad check, you go to jail; we call it good government. So you have choices. You have to make choices. We seem not to be bound by any choices. If you are going to build a budget from a Federal level, what is the most important thing? At home and in your business, you build a budget around the essentials of what your family needs and what your business needs. I think we should be building a budget around securing the Nation. Under the budget of President Obama, defense spending goes from 4.7 percent of GDP--we are in Iraq and Afghanistan; there are all kinds of threats from Iran, North Korea, you name it; the world is a very dangerous place--and over 10 years, his defense budget takes spending down to 3 percent of GDP. I don't know what he is listening to in terms of intelligence reports, but I don't think this world is safe right now, and now is not the time to cut defense. The budget I am supporting, Senator McCain's alternative, does away with tax increases on the job creators. If you make over $250,000 a year, your taxes are going to go up by about 25 percent. At a time when we are trying to get people to expand their business--and I can tell my colleagues one thing, and John Kennedy understood this--if you raise taxes, people do less business. If you raise the capital gains rates from 15 to 20, people do less capital gains transactions because there is a penalty to engage in business activity. So now is not the time to raise taxes on anyone. We have to compete with China and India. When you pass on the cost of doing business--and that is what will happen--the American consumer suffers and the American business community is going to suffer because they are competing with people in a global economy who do not have all these tax burdens. The biggest problem this country faces in terms of long-term debt is Social Security and Medicare. These are entitlement programs. When you get retirement eligible under Social Security, you get a check based on your contributions. Nobody wants to allow that system to go bankrupt, but it is headed toward bankruptcy. Why? Because the amount of money coming in and the amount of money obligated do not match. When I was born in 1955, there were 15 workers for every retiree. Today there are three and in 20 years there will be two. People will not be able--two workers will not be able to meet the obligations that are owed through the Social Security system unless we act now. This budget puts aside a reserve program to deal with saving Social Security. Medicare and Social Security and Medicaid are a very large part of our budget, and they are on autopilot. I commend the President for wanting to do something in health care, but in his budget, he adds $1.6 trillion as a downpayment on health care reform. We already spend more money than any country in the world on health care. Rather than adding another $1 trillion into the system, let's see if we can better manage the money we have today. This budget puts a new earmark system in place so Senators and Congressmen cannot, in the middle of the night----

Mr. GRAHAM. No.

Mr. GRAHAM. I will. Amendments Nos. 892 and 893

Mr. GRAHAM. This is an alternative that makes sense. This is an alternative that has to make the same choices you are making in the private sector. I hope the Congress will adopt this proposal.

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

Mr. GRAHAM. I call up amendment No. 910.