Kay Hutchison

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Nelson and I be able to offer our amendment following Senator Durbin and before Senator Lugar's amendment is considered.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague, Senator Nelson of Florida, to offer an amendment expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the critical nature of human spaceflight to America's national security. The day after the scheduled space shuttle launch was canceled last week, there were two news items that were largely overlooked by many who were focused on what might have caused the sensor failure which was the basis for stopping the countdown to launch. One of these was an announcement by the Chinese space agency that they planned to launch their second manned spaceflight in October aboard their Shenzhou spacecraft. The other was the announcement by the Russian space agency that they were initiating full-scale development of their clipper space vehicle, a small shuttle-like space vehicle capable of taking several people into orbit, a sort of winged supplement to their existing Soyuz launch vehicles. Whether these announcements were calculated to remind the world that the space shuttle and the United States do not represent the only avenue by which humans can fly to space is debatable. My purpose in mentioning them, however, is to remind my colleagues that space is not the exclusive province of the United States, that there is increasing interest among technically advanced nations of the world in developing and maintaining the ability to conduct human spaceflight missions. Not all of those nations share the same values and principles as our country, and they may not have the same motivations for advancing their independent capability for human spaceflight. Space represents the new modern definition of the high ground that has historically been a significant factor in defense strategy. Virtually all of our military actions in recent years have made dramatic use of space-based assets in conducting those important operations in the course of pursuing national security and foreign policy. Satellite targeting, surveillance and intelligence gathering, use of radio frequencies and communications all result from our ability to explore in space. In recent years, we have witnessed a growing entrepreneurial interest in developing access to space for humans and cargo. We recently passed out of the Commerce Committee a NASA reauthorization bill which will provide guidance for our space program at a critical time, a time when we have multiple demands on limited resources. During our consideration of this bill and during hearings, it became clear that we must think of manned spaceflight in terms of national security, as well as science and exploration. For these reasons, I believe it is important that in the context of this Defense authorization bill, we express the sense of the Senate that we recognize the important and vital role of human spaceflight in the furtherance of our national security interests, and that we reaffirm our commitment to retaining our Nation's leadership role in the growing international human spaceflight community of nations. Great nations discover and explore. Great nations cross oceans, settle frontiers, renew their heritage and spirits, and create greater freedom and opportunity for the world. Great nations must also remain on the front edge of technologically advanced programs to maintain their security edge. Today we recognize one such program. We have an international outpost in space. We are on a path to establish a permanent presence on the Moon. Let us stand united to recognize the inexorable link and importance of human spaceflight in our national security. I hope my colleagues will support this important statement that says keeping our dominance in space is a matter of national security for our country.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator from Florida. I am the Chair and he the ranking member on the Commerce Subcommittee on Space and Science. I so appreciate the opportunity to express this sense-of-the-Senate amendment. I hope my colleagues will support it because I do believe that human spaceflight is as much a part of our national security as anything we do. We see the preeminence we have in our military because of precision-guided missiles, because of the ability to execute surveillance and intelligence gathering to an extent we never have been able to before we explored space and were able to put satellites there. The idea that we would consider a hiatus in our opportunities to put humans in space is one that is unacceptable to me and to my ranking member. We hope the sense-of-the-Senate amendment will be adopted to acknowledge and assure that space exploration is shown to be a part of our national security interests. It is essential that we not, in any way, ever let our eye get off that ball, that we must have dominance in space if we are going to keep our preeminence in national defense. I thank the Chair.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Madam President, I think President Bush has hit a home run. Because I was with the Baylor Lady Bears this morning congratulating them on winning the national NCAA women's basketball championship, I would say he hit a three-pointer from midcourt. I think John Roberts is exactly what our country expects in quality and demeanor for a person to be elevated to the highest court in our land. The Supreme Court is such an important part of our Constitution, unique, really, in the world, that we have a judicial branch with such stature as the coequal branch of government along with the President and the Congress. For someone to be able to sit on the Supreme Court, you look for a John Roberts, someone who has integrity, temperament for the Court, and you have to have judicial temperament because you are an arbiter who is going to affect people's lives. Academic achievement. We want our Supreme Court Justices to have the finest legal mind possible, and John Roberts fits that description-- Harvard, summa cum laude graduate; Harvard Law School, graduated with honors, and respect of his peers. When you have someone such as Walter Dellinger, who served as Solicitor General under President Bill Clinton, who told the Judiciary Committee at one point, ``In my view, there is no better appellate advocate than John Roberts,'' I think that shows the range of support and respect from his peers John Roberts has. He has experience in a variety of legal fields including, of course, serving on the Circuit Court of Appeals, second only to the Supreme Court. But he is also young enough that he will be able to make a lasting impression on the Supreme Court. At the age of 50, we know he has many years to serve. Some people have asked me, well, didn't you want a woman? Well, yes, of course, I did. Of course, I think diversity is important on the Supreme Court. I would like to see another woman. I would like to see a Hispanic American on the Supreme Court. But I believe first and foremost what we want is the very best person, and for this time the President has chosen John Roberts. I think we should give him our full support. Yes, the Senate is going to do its due diligence. Yes, we are going to meet our responsibilities. We are going to ask questions. We are going to examine his background. Of course, we are going to look at his record as an attorney, as a judge. But we also are going to do it with integrity and with a respect for the process. I think Justice Ginsburg's confirmation process is an example. In fact, President Clinton's two nominees for the Court took an average of 58 days from nomination to confirmation. I think 2 months is an acceptable amount of time to be able to delve into someone's background and career, to be able to ask the questions you would expect from the Senate, and I thought that in President Clinton's nominations we gave him deference. As Senator Durbin said, just before me, President Bush is not going to appoint someone Dick Durbin would appoint. Well, certainly President Clinton isn't going to appoint someone that I would also nominate. But that wasn't the question. The people of America elected President Clinton, just as they elected President Bush. So we now need to look at their nominee, knowing that perhaps the philosophy may not be the same on the other side of the aisle as it is going to be for President Bush's nominee. But I want the same deference given to John Roberts I gave to Ruth Bader Ginsburg. I looked at her record of integrity, I listened to the people who were for her and against her, and I determined that for President Clinton this was a nominee who should be supported. She would not meet my litmus test of issues, but she is an academically qualified person of integrity with judicial temperament. I hope Judge Roberts receives the same level of support and respect that has been given to Justice Ginsburg by this Senate. President Bush and the White House staff have demonstrated an unprecedented level of consultation with Senators. I don't think any President and his staff have consulted with as many Senators as President Bush has on this, his first nominee. I was very pleased to be called and to be able to give names. I admit that John Roberts was one of the names I mentioned in my consultation call as the example of the very great legal mind and opportunity he would bring to the Court. He is the kind of person we expect to be appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Everything I have heard so far, both from Democrats and Republicans-- Republicans being supportive, Democrats being wait and see, let's look at the record, but not negative--is a good thing. John Roberts is going to meet every test. He showed when he was at his Senate confirmation hearing for his circuit court of appeals appointment that he is really good. He had tough questions. You could see the intelligence coming through. I know he is a family man. He was with his wife and two precious children at the hearing he had a couple of years ago and then again last night. He is a family man who will be a role model for children, for our country, and a patriot, a person who wants to be a public servant, someone who believes in our country and the role of the Supreme Court in our country. This is a man who is going to be confirmed very easily. I hope that is the case. I hope the Senate will show how the Senate ought to operate with due diligence and, yes, asking questions in a respectful way for this very esteemed judge who is being proposed for the Supreme Court by our President. I am proud of our President. He has done a terrific job of looking at all of the options and saying he wants one of his legacies to be the selection of a great Supreme Court Justice who will serve for a long time. He has made the right choice. I support this nomination. I support the right of the Senate to do our responsibility under the Constitution for advice and consent. That is going to happen from the early indications I have seen, in the talk shows, in the questioning by the media, and also in the Senate. I look forward to the next 2 months and seeing this institution do what we ought to be doing in the right way. I am very proud today to support the nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court of the United States. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on Reporters' Privilege Legislation: Issues and Implications'' on Wednesday, July 20, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. in Dirksen Senate Office Building Room 226. Panel I: The Honorable James Comey, Deputy Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC. Panel II: Matthew Cooper, White House Correspondent, Time Magazine Inc., Washington, DC. Norman Pearlstine, Editor-in-Chief, Time Inc., New York City, NY. William Safire, Political Columnist, New York Times Company, New York City, NY. Floyd Abrams, Partner, Cahill Gordon and Reindel LLP, New York City, NY. Lee Levine, Esq., Levine, Sullivan, Koch & Schulz, LLP, Washington, DC. Professor Geoffrey Stone, Harry Kalven, J. Distinguished Service Professor of Law, University of Chicago Law School, Chicago, IL.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Commmittee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on July 20, 2005 at 2:30 p.m. to hold a briefing.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Special Commmittee on Aging be authorized to meet Wednesday, July 20, 2005 at 2:30 p.m.-5 p.m. in Dirksen 106 for the purpose of conducting a hearing.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Global Climate Change and Impacts be authorized to meet on Wednesday, July 20, 2005 at 10 a.m. on A Review of United States Climate Policy and the $5 Billion Budget Request for Climate Related Science and Technology in fiscal year 2006.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 20, 2005 at 2 p.m. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on S. 703, to provide for the conveyance of certain Bureau of Land Management land in the State of Nevada to the Las Vegas Motor Speedway, and for other purposes; S. 997, to direct the Secretary of Agriculture to convey certain land in the Beaverhead-Deerlodge Forest, MT, to Jefferson County, MT, for use as a cemetery; S. 1131, to authorize the exchange of certain Federal land within the State of Idaho, and for other purposes; S. 1170, to establish the Fort Stanton-Snowy River National Cave Conservation area; S. 1238, to amend the Public Lands Corps Act of 1993 to provide for the conduct of projects that protect forests, and other purposes; and H.R. 1101, to revoke a public land order with respect to certain lands erroneously included in the Cibola National Wildlife Refuge, CA.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry be authorized to conduct a hearing during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 20, 2005 at 10 a.m. in SR-328A, Russell Senate office building. The purpose of this hearing will be to review bio-security preparedness and efforts to address agroterrorism threats.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I would like to ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet to hold a Business Meeting on July 20, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. on the following agenda: Resolutions: To authorize GSA's fiscal year 06 Capital Investment and Leasing Program; to authorize a lease prospectus for the General Services Administration headquarters; committee resolution on the Delaware River and its Tributaries, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania; committee resolution on the Beneficial Use of Dredged Material on the Delaware River, Delaware, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania; committee resolution on the South Fork of the South Branch of the Chicago River, IL; and committee resolution on the Grand and Tiger Passes and Baptiste Collette Bayou, LA. Nominations: Marcus A. Peacock, of Minnesota, to be Deputy Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency; and Granta Y. Nakayama, of Virginia, to be Assistant Administrator, Office of Enforcement & Compliance Assurance, Environmental Protection Agency. Legislation: H.R. 1428 National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Reauthorization Act of 2005; S. 1250 Great Apes Bill; S. 1409 Alaska Native Villages reauthorization; S. 1265 Diesel Emissions Reduction Act of 2005; S. 1339 Duck Stamp bill; S. 1340 Pittman-Robertson extension; S. 158 Long Island Sound; S. 1410 Neotropical Birds reauthorization; S. 1415 Lacey Act technical correction; and S. 1400 Water Infrastructure Bill.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session on Wednesday, July 20, 2005, at 10 a.m., in 215 Dirksen Senate Office Building, to consider the nominations of Robert M. Kimmitt, to be Deputy Secretary of the Treasury, U.S. Department of the Treasury; Randal Quarles, to be Under Secretary of the Treasury, Domestic Finance, U.S. Department of the Treasury; Sandra L. Pack, to be Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, Management, U.S. Department of the Treasury; Kevin I. Fromer, to be Deputy Under Secretary of the Treasury, Legislative Affairs, U.S. Department of the Treasury. THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. committee on foreign relations

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 20, 2005, at 10:15 a.m. to hold a hearing on Accelerating Economic Progress in Iraq.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to meet in executive session during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 20, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. in SD-430.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meeting during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, July 12 at 10 a.m. The purpose of the hearing is to consider the nomination of Jill L. Sigal to be Assistant Secretary of Energy for Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs; David R. Hill to be General Counsel of the Department of Energy; and James A. Rispoli to be Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, and International Security be authorized to meet on Tuesday, July 12, 2005, at 2 p.m. for a hearing regarding ``Improper Payments: Where are Truth and Transparency in Federal Financial Reporting?''. THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Subcommittee on Intellectual Property

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Intellectual Property be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on ``Music Licensing Reform'' on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 at 2:30 p.m. in Dirksen 226. Witness List: Panel I: Marybeth Peters, U.S. Register of Copyrights, Washington, DC. Panel II: Rob Glaser, Chairman and CEO, RealNetworks, Inc., Seattle, WA; Rick Carnes, President, Songwriters Guild of America, Nashville, TN; Glen Barros, Pres and CEO, Comcord Records, Beverly Hills, CA; Marilyn Bergman, President and Chairman, American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, New York, NY; and Ish Cuebas, Director of Merchandising Operations, Trans World Entertainment, and Co-Chairman of the Media on Demand Task Force Corporate Circle, National Association of Recording Merchandisers, Albany, NY.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Tuesday, July 12, 2005, at 2:30 p.m. in Digital Television Transmission.

Mrs. HUTCHISON

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Is there a time limit?

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I commend Senator Murray, Senator Akaka, and all Members who have worked together with Senator Feinstein and myself on this veterans issue. I spent last Thursday with Veterans' Administration Secretary Nicholson. I am very pleased Secretary Nicholson has done so much to address this issue once he determined from an audit of the agency that we were not going to get through 2005 for the Veterans' Administration without taking from maintenance funds and other funds to cover our operating expenditures. The Secretary could have tried to put this Band-Aid on, but he did not. Secretary Nicholson came right out and said we do not have enough for 2005. We have models that show us what the growth rate for service in the Veterans' Administration would be. The models show about 2.3 percent. That has been the norm throughout the last number of years. But in fact the growth rate is 5 percent. So Secretary Nicholson, Josh Bolton, at the Office of Management and Budget, and the President himself said we are not going to put a Band- Aid on the Veterans' Administration. Senator Murray saw this coming early on. She did believe there were more veterans coming into the system from what she was hearing in the field, and the Veterans' Administration at that time did not see the model that was not working. But when they did, they stepped up to the plate. They have now come back with numbers that are higher than the $975 million that has been put in an emergency appropriation on the House side just for 2005. Now, our $1.5 billion that I intend to support is to be spent this year or going into next year if necessary. I am going to support this amendment and, in fact, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be added as a cosponsor of the Murray amendment.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I would be happy to yield the remainder of our time to Senator Murray.

Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, have the yeas and nays been ordered?

Mrs. HUTCHISON. I ask for the yeas and nays.