Judd Gregg

Mr. GREGG

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I wish to speak briefly. I understand the Senator from North Dakota is also going to speak. I want to talk on this piece of legislation but, more importantly, on the overall approach we take toward fighting terrorism as a nation. First off, as to this bill, which is obviously an extraordinarily expensive bill--over $80 billion, much of which goes to support our forces in Iraq, which is absolutely critical, and some of which goes to assisting in the rebuilding of Iraq--many of my colleagues and others have questioned the dollars going to the rebuilding of Iraq and whether that is an appropriate way to spend American tax dollars. I think, however, we have to look at this issue not from the standpoint of whether it is benefiting Iraq but whether it is benefiting us, the American people. I don't think there is any question but that it benefits the American people. Our purpose here is to defeat terrorism. Our purpose here is to undermine the capacity of those people who would use violence against Americans and against our system and against our Nation. We learned from 9/11, regrettably, that there are, unfortunately, groups out there who subscribe to what is known as Muslim fundamentalism, who are willing to pervert the Muslim faith, and who wish to pursue actions of violence against us as a nation, and against Americans as people, simply because we exist. For whatever reasons, they see us as their enemies, and there are a variety of reasons, which I will not go into. They obviously have the capacity and have shown their willingness to do us damage and harm. We have to respond to that. Fortunately, we have a President who understands this--understands it in a way that I think many of us don't fully appreciate. I happen to, however, greatly admire it. The fact is, in President Bush we have someone who is very focused on the issue of protecting the United States and all Americans, defeating the threat of terrorism, and finding terrorists and bringing them to justice before they can do us harm. As part of that effort, there is a philosophy that I think is very appropriate that we are pursuing as a nation, which is that we will go out and find the terrorists before they can find us. We will kick over the rocks under which they hide and bring them to justice in whatever manner is appropriate--before they can get out from underneath the rocks under which they hide and plan to attack us. The basic theory is to cause the terrorists to worry about where they are going to sleep tonight rather than to be thinking about whom they are going to attack tomorrow. It requires an aggressive international policy, but it is a policy directed at protecting us, Americans, across our Nation, giving us a better opportunity of avoid another 9/11, another attack on our country on our soil. As part of that effort, we have replaced a dictatorial, repressive, genocidal, maniacal regime in Iraq, a regime which clearly represented a threat to its neighbors and was a breeding ground for terrorists and a potential, if not real, supporter of those who would do us harm in the United States. The strategy of the war was brilliantly executed by our military, our men and women. We have to admire their courage, their expertise, and the manner in which they comported themselves in Iraq. Their success militarily is in large part due to the fact that we are willing to spend our national treasury to support them, and we must continue to do that. That is what this supplemental is about. So supporting our troops with the dollars they need and the equipment they require is a given. There is no one in this body who would question that. The second part is the rebuilding of Iraq. Why is that important to us as a nation? Well, if we are going to undermine the fundamentalist Muslim terrorist threat, we must undermine their breeding ground, where they are able to recruit, and their philosophy for recruitment. We have been extremely successful as a nation so far, I believe, in pursuing a tactical war against terrorists, and we can continue this tactical war and we will probably have to continue it for years to come. By that I mean finding the terrorists, following the dollars, tracking them down, using our expertise, our intelligence capability, and our military to neutralize their ability to attack us--whether it is in Afghanistan, Iraq, Buffalo, or Seattle--finding them before they can do us harm, eliminating their resources and sources of resources, and working an international coalition of law enforcement agencies and military forces that is capable of doing them physical harm before they can do us physical harm. That is a tactical approach. It is one that is being pursued with great aggressiveness at all sorts of different levels--internationally, of course, and obviously in Iraq and Iran, but across the globe, such as in the Philippines and India and Pakistan, and domestically with the creation of the Homeland Security Department and the restructuring of our own domestic law enforcement community. But that is tactical. That means you find the individual or the cell, you find the group of fundamentalist terrorists who are gathered together, you get the information on where they are, you disrupt them and, if you can bring them to justice, you do. That is tactical. That is not going to resolve the problem for us because, regrettably, no matter how you look at this, if you are honest about it, there is a cultural and a religious issue involved. There are a billion people in this world who subscribe to the Muslim faith. It is a strong and good faith with an incredible history. But if only 1 percent of those billion people are attracted to the perversion of that faith and follow a Muslim fundamentalist view of the world-- terrorist view of the world--that is 10 million people. That is potentially 10 million people who want to do us physical harm. Hopefully, it is not that high. So if we are to pursue a lasting resolution of this issue, a tactical approach will keep us, hopefully, safer, but it will not resolve the underlying problem. We need much more of a strategic approach, something that looks at the forces which create the threat and undermines those forces. That is where the issue of addressing the reconstruction of Iraq comes in. There are a variety of ways we can address people who are members of the Muslim faith, especially in the Middle East and show them that we, as a nation, are not a threat to them but are actually an avenue of opportunity. But today those options don't really exist in the Middle East. If we can prove to people who subscribe to the Muslim faith and might be attracted to a fundamentalist terrorist approach that democracy works and is a great option for them, the market-oriented approach works and there is great opportunity for them, that education that encompasses the expansion of the mind relative to not only Western values, but Eastern values, and the issues of especially science and its potentials is of great value, then we will have created an opportunity for people to take a different look at what we stand for as a nation and say: Maybe rather than being a threat, you are an avenue of opportunity. That is where Iraq comes in. If we are able to settle Iraq over the next 3 to 5 years in a way which allows it to grow as a democracy, in a way which allows it to grow as a market economy, in a way which allows its people, especially its children, to attend schools which teach a variety of values and especially the opportunities which come from quality education, if we are able to produce such an Iraq, it will be a shining light in the middle of the Middle East. It will be a place that people can look to and say, My goodness, democracy does work; market economies do mean more prosperity for my family and me; balanced education is a good thing. We will have set up a natural magnet to attract a positive view of these forces which have done so much for us as a nation and for the West, specifically democracy, market economies, and education. Today that does not exist really in the Middle East, but this is our opportunity, an unintended consequence possibly of this war in Iraq, but clearly a potential consequence of significant and positive opportunity to create an Iraq, one of the larger nations in the Middle East and one of the wealthier nations in the Middle East, a nation with exceptional history and with a people who have historically been extraordinarily productive, to create a nation which realizes the dreams of freedom, opportunity, economic well-being, and education, which most people in the world subscribe to and desire, and that is why stabilizing Iraq is so important. If we accomplish that, we will fundamentally undermine the philosophy of the Muslim fundamentalists and their message to the Middle Eastern population, which is that America is a threat, an enemy, and that Americans must be destroyed and our culture must be attacked. It will benefit us Americans in our country; it will benefit us in New Hampshire; it will benefit us in New York; it will benefit us in Pennsylvania; it will benefit us in California to have a nation in the Middle East which is a viable option to the threat and the message of fundamental Islam that goes to this whole strategic issue. As we pursue our fight against terrorism, we have to have a two-track approach, in my mind. One is tactical, which I outlined. That is what we are doing in Afghanistan, obviously, and in Iraq with our military. It is what we are doing in working to break up the money in the European countries and to find the cells in the United States, and what we have to continue to pursue aggressively through the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, and the CIA. At the same time, we need to have a strategic track. It has to go beyond just reconstructing an Iraq and making it a democratic nation. It has to go to messaging. It has to go to communication. It has to go to education. We need to spend significant thought on planning and probably treasury on the issue of a strategic approach to set up different initiatives which will have the effect of undermining the capacity of the Muslim fundamentalists to recruit and to make their case against America by communicating more effectively throughout the Middle East and also across other Muslim nations in the southeast, such as the Philippines and Indonesia, and Pakistan, by creating initiatives which encourage market-oriented approaches, which encourage leaders who subscribe to democracy, which encourage leaders who subscribe to education. It has to be more than just a haphazard exercise. It actually has to be a structured exercise. It is much more difficult, much less tangible than a tactical approach, but it needs the same type of attention and energy. We are not doing that right now as a nation. We are certainly not doing that as a government, in my opinion, and we as a Congress should be thinking about how we can do this. As we move down this road, I believe this is something to which we have to pay significant attention, but clearly, one step in this exercise of a strategic approach is to assist in the creation of a democratic, market-oriented nation in the middle of the Middle East, specifically Iraq, which subscribes to the teaching of its young a value system which is consistent with the beliefs of freedom and democracy and market forces. That is why it is so imperative that we make this investment in Iraq. It is not about protecting them. It is not about rebuilding Iraq, although that is certainly an outcome of it. It is about creating an opportunity to undermine the sources which breed the fundamentalist Islamic movement and, thus, lessening the threat against Americans and our culture. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. GREGG

Mr. GREGG. I thank the Chair.

Mr. GREGG. What is the regular order?

Mr. GREGG

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, this year we celebrated the 50 year anniversary of the now fabled discovery by Watson and Crick of the double helix. And this year the scientists at the NIH Human Genome Project completed the sequencing of human DNA. These are major historical developments that will permanently change the course of biological science. The color of our eyes and the treatment of disease are now understood through the lens of genetics. As the science has progressed, so too have reservations with what we will do with this new information we are uncovering. Unlocking our genetic code unleashes new power. And power produces new responsibilities in protecting the privacy of our genetic information and protecting it from misuse. Scientific advances in field of genetics hold great promise for medical prevention of new treatments and therapies. However, because our public policies lag behind the science, the promise of the Human Genome Project is going unfulfilled. Individuals are afraid to get genetic tests or seek genetic counseling out of fear that they will lose their health insurance or face discrimination in their employment. After 6 years, numerous hearings, and hours of deliberation, I am pleased the Senate is finally taking up this important legislation, which was unanimously reported out of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee on May 21, 2003. I am also pleased that the first civil rights legislation adopted under my chairmanship deals with an issue of truly 21st century concerns. This is the first civil rights act of the 21st century. Genetic discrimination is an issue that affect all Americans. Everyone has genes. Everyone has hereditary medical traits. It's a non- partisan issue. This is reflected in the fact that this legislation is truly a bipartisan product. For more than a year, the HELP Committee has worked hard to marry together two major pieces of legislation--one sponsored by Senators Snowe/Frist/Jeffords and the other sponsored Senators Daschle and Kennedy. This legislation established in Federal law basic legal protections that prohibit discrimination in health insurance or employment based on genetic information. A key component of the legislation is its privacy provisions. Although current law already contains medical privacy rules covering genetic information, this legislation addresses some additional concerns and closes loopholes that are unique to genetics. For instance, it protects the privacy of genetic information at work and prohibits the use of genetic information in health insurance underwriting. This bill prohibits an employer from making employment decisions-- hiring, firing, etc.--based on genetic information, or even that fact than an individual or family member requested or received genetic services. This bill prohibits health insurance plans from denying eligibility or enrollment in the health plan based on genetic information. And it prohibits health insurance plans from charging higher premiums based on an individual's--or his or her family member's--genetic information. Most importantly, the legislation recognizes that all individuals, whether they are healthy or sick, and all medical information, whether genetic or otherwise, should be afforded the same protections under law. While genetic discrimination may not be widespread at this point in time, this legislation ensures that discriminatory practices will never become common practice. From the past we have learned that employees, employers, insurers and others all work best together when the rules are clear and opportunities for personal achievement and health are available. This legislation tells everyone what is expected of them and avoids the trip wires and uncertainty of some of our existing laws. Any concerns about new regulations on employers or health plans are far outweighed by the benefits of scientific advances that will further revolutionize the medical field. With no silver bullet solution in sight to cure what ails our expensive and troubled health care system, I believe all stakeholders will welcome reasonable legislation that fosters medical advances that can lead to prevention and cure disease. It is my hope that the bipartisan spirit that brought the parties together to craft this historic legislation will continue as we seek to realize the full potential of the human genome project.

Mr. GREGG

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and the Committee on Indian Affairs be authorized to meet jointly during the session of the Senate on September 30, 2003, at 10 a.m. The purpose of this hearing is to examine S. 437, the Arizona water settlements acts, which is a bill to provide for adjustments to the Central Arizona Project in Arizona, to authorize the Gila River Indian Community Water Rights Settlement, to reauthorize and amend the Southern Arizona Water Rights Settlement Act of 1982, and for other purposes.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, Subcommittee on Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services be authorized to meet for a hearing on Underage Drinking: Research and Recommendations during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, September 30, 2003, at 10 a.m.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on ``Visa Issuance: Our First Line of Defense for Homeland Security'' on Tuesday, September 30, 2003, at 2 p.m. in SD226. Witness List: The Honorable Asa Hutchinson, Undersecretary for Border and Transportation Security Directorate, Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC. The Honorable Marua Harty, Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State, Washington, DC.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Consumer Affairs and Product Liability be authorized to meet on Tuesday, September 30, 2003, at 2:30 p.m., on the Obesity War: Are our Dietary Guidelines Losing?

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet on Tuesday, September 30, 2003, at 10 a.m., for a hearing entitled ``Privacy & Piracy: The Paradox of Illegal File Sharing on Peer-to-Peer Networks and the Impact of Technology on the Entertainment Industry.''

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, September 30, 2003, at 4 p.m., for a markup on pending legislation. The meeting will be held in room 418 of the Russell Senate Office Building. Agenda 1. S. 1131, a bill to increase, effective as of December 1, 2003, the rates of compensation for veterans with service-connected disabilities and the rates of dependency and indemnity compensation for the survivors of certain disabled veterans. 2. Committee Print of S. 1132, a bill to improve and enhance certain benefits for survivors of veterans, and for other purposes, as amended, to incorporate, in addition, original provisions and provisions derived from S. 257, S. 517, S. 1133, S. 1156, S. 1188, S. 1213, S. 1239, S. 1281, and S. 1360. 3. Committee Print of S. 1156, a bill to improve and enhance the provision of long-term health care for veterans, to enhance and improve authorities relating to the administration of personnel of the Department of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes, as amended, to incorporate, in addition, original provisions and provisions derived from S. 548, S. 615, S. 1144, S. 1213, S. 1283, S. 1289, S. 1341, and S. 1572. 4. Committee Print of S. 1136, a bill to restate, clarify and revise. The Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act of 1940, as amended. 5. H.R. 1516. a bill to provide for the establishment by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs of five additional cemeteries of the National Cemetery System, as amended.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, September 30, 2003, at 9:30 a.m. to hold a hearing on nominations.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Tuesday, September 30, 2003, at 9:30 a.m. on Do-Not-Call.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 30, 2003, at 10 a.m. to conduct a hearing on ``The State of the Securities Industry.''

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, September 30, 2003, at 2:30 p.m., in open session, to receive testimony regarding investigations into allegations of sexual assault at the United States Air Force Academy.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Indian Affairs be authorized to meet on Tuesday, September 30, 2003, at 10 a.m. in room 366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to conduct a joint hearing with the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Subcommittee on Water and Power, on S. 437, the Arizona Water Settlement Act.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet on Tuesday, September 30, 2003, at 9 a.m. for a hearing to consider the nominations of Dale Cabaniss to be Chairman, Federal Labor Relations Authority; Craig S. Iscoe to be Associate Judge, Superior Court of the District of Columbia; and Brian F. Holeman to be Associate Judge, Superior Court of the District of Columbia.

Mr. GREGG

Mr. GREGG. If the Senator will further yield for a question, I note the Senator from Connecticut is on the floor, as is the Senator from Nevada. It might be appropriate at this time, if the Senator from Ohio is so inclined, to propound a unanimous consent that we complete this bill, having spent 5 days on it, with no amendments pending and no amendments filed.

Mr. GREGG. I object.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, we are ready to proceed. If we can have the clock run equally against both sides, I ask unanimous consent that that occur until the minority's time has run out, and then we will make a motion, unless the minority wishes to yield back.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, what time remains?

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, the Senator from Illinois said he would respond to a question on my time. And I will ask him a question and yield him 30 seconds to respond. It should not even take that long. But since the Senator from Illinois wandered during his presentation on to ground other than the actual amendment before us, specifically the issue of education, I was wondering when the Senator from Illinois intends to offer his motion to deny the children of Washington the opportunity to get a fair and reasonable education--something that is supported by the Mayor of this city, something that is supported by the president of the school council in the city, something that is supported by 7,500 children who are on a waiting list to get a decent education. When does the Senator from Illinois intend to offer his motion to strike the capacity of those children to get a decent education? I yield to the Senator, oh, 10 seconds to answer that question.

Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I was wondering if the Senator would yield for a question.

Mr. GREGG. I will yield the Senator 30 seconds.

Mr. GREGG. It seems to me in light of that history and in light of the present status of the pending amendments, of which there are none-- and there are none filed--it would certainly be appropriate to go to third reading or in some other way bring closure to this bill so we could make sure the city of Washington has the money they need to operate and has the money the Mayor has asked for to do some creative and imaginative things to improve the school system in the city.

Mr. GREGG. It is almost incomprehensible that we have been on a bill for 5 days, that there are no amendments filed, there are no amendments pending, and we cannot complete the bill. Why would the other side not want to complete the bill since they are not filing amendments and there are no amendments pending?