John McCain

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 209, S. 877; provided further that the committee amendment be agreed to and be considered original text for the purpose of further amendment. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague from Michigan, Senator Levin, in sponsoring the Auditor Independence and Tax Shelters Act. While the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and Securities and Exchange Commission rules rightly prohibit accounting firms from providing certain non- auditing services to the publicly traded companies they audit, auditors are not prohibited from providing tax shelter services to their audit clients. The Auditor Independence and Tax Shelters Act is intended to address this gap in the law by prohibiting audit firms from providing such services to their audit clients. It would thereby significantly strengthen auditor independence and eliminate a fundamental conflict of interest that is adverse to the best interest of investors. Although I believe that any firm that serves as an auditor of a company should generally be prohibited from providing any non-audit service to that company, I strongly support this bill because it is a significant step toward achieving true auditor independence. I urge my colleagues to support this important bill to further protect investor confidence in our capital markets.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, on October 15, citizens of Azerbaijan went to the polls to elect their next president. The months and days leading up to the election were characterized by extremely biased media attention for the pro-presidential Yeni Azerbaijan Party, YAP, and government-sponsored intimidation and harassment of the opposition parties. The U.S. Government and the OSCE expressed serious concern about the preelection environment to the highest levels of Azerbaijan's Government. Our advice went largely unheeded, and grave levels of government interference and intimidation continued through election day. I traveled to Azerbaijan just before the election to meet with Azerbaijani political leaders to discuss these concerns. I told then- Prime Minister Ilham Aliyev in the clearest possible terms that the international community was carefully watching his actions and expected a democratic outcome. I also met with a range of opposition leaders and assured them that we shared their concerns and were working to encourage the government to hold elections consistent with internationally recognized standards. On election day, the OSCE and U.S. government brought in over 600 international election observers and deployed them nationwide. Although a number of areas were peaceful and orderly, observers noted many violations of the new Unified Election Code, UEC. Violations included ballot stuffing, multiple voting, harassment at the polling station by authorities, incomplete voter lists, and a lack of regard for the procedural process of ballot tabulation. The undemocratic and blatant disregard for the UEC in both the preelection period and on election day led to civil unrest in Baku as the final ballot counts were being made public. The night of the election and the following days showed citizens coming together in protest in large numbers in response to the election's failure to meet international standards. Reports continue to come in of severe and sometimes fatal violence against journalists and political activists. Not only has the government has not met its obligation to uphold law and order, but the government's security forces are largely responsible for the violence. This presidential election was a chance for Azerbaijan to demonstrate its commitment to the democratic process. Despite the new election code, the ruling party chose to retain power at all costs and to ensure that its candidate received nothing short of an overwhelming victory. The United States will have to review its interest in deepening strategic relations with an Azerbaijani regime that does not enjoy the full legitimacy a free and fair election confers. We should step up American assistance to the democratic opposition in Azerbaijan and continue to work to deepen civil society as a bulwark against the state. The government in Baku must know that the United States values our relations with the people of Azerbaijan but cannot turn a blind eye to an election that demonstrated such shortcomings, including state-directed violence against political opponents. Improved U.S.-Azerbaijan relations require a new commitment to political pluralism, and a rejection of political violence, on the part of a government that has failed this important test of democratic legitimacy.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. I thank you, Mr. President. Amendment No. 1885, As Modified Mr. President, I want to speak on the Brownback amendment. It will be the last signal that we send before final passage. My colleagues should know that it diverts $450 million out of Iraq into what are largely unspecified projects. It ignores the fact that the reconstruction of Iraq is as vital as is the defense of Iraq and the military portion of it. Basically, the sponsor of the amendment has decided what is necessary and what is not necessary to be allocated to Iraq, whether it be housing or other programs that have been deemed necessary by the administration, and decided that $450 million would go to Afghanistan and to Liberia. So the fact is, this is another micromanagement amendment, point No. 1. No. 2, it ignores the fact that the reconstruction of Iraq is equally as vital as the military side of it. There are some provisions that I do not particularly agree with, but the fact is, these have been scrutinized, and I believe it would be a terrible mistake to divert this money from the projects for which they are intended. The Appropriations Committee had hearings and discussion with the administration and with Ambassador Bremer. This amendment is not very much different from the Byrd-Biden amendment which the Senate decided not to accept some time ago. I urge a ``no'' vote on the part of my colleagues on this amendment.

Mr. McCAIN. I thank the Senator.

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, is there 2 minutes?

Mr. McCAIN. I am glad to yield.

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the amendment. I don't want to take too much time. The hour grows late and all of my colleagues would like to finish up with this legislation. Everybody knows there are two phases to the Iraqi conflict. One is the military phase, which for all intents and purposes expired, finished, and was completed some months ago. Now we face the most difficult challenge; that is, the rebuilding and reconstruction of this country which was damaged not only in the conflict--and, by the way, surprisingly little given the brevity of the conflict and the enormous success our military enjoyed--but mostly because of the cruel and criminal neglect of the infrastructure and on the people of Iraq inflicted by Saddam Hussein. There were several mis-estimations concerning the conflict. But perhaps the greatest mis-estimation was our failure to understand the degree of deterioration of the goods, fundamental services, and infrastructure of Iraq. We all know, whether we support or oppose our effort in Iraq, that a vital ingredient is the reconstruction. Without the people of Iraq being provided with the fundamental services they need to conduct a normal life, sooner or later the people of Iraq will turn against us. They will fall prey to the propaganda of our enemies who say the United States invaded, will not help you rebuild your country, and wants to take your oil--one of the unfortunate aspects of the vote last night. I don't know if every single item the administration asked for is most necessary. I had a chance to review most of these projects. More importantly, the Appropriations Committee, in its deliberations and hearings, did also. We had hearings in the Armed Services Committee, of which I am a member. This was a subject raised. I note in the amendment of the Senator from West Virginia that no funds could be used to build maximum security prisons, as one example. I am sure the Senator from West Virginia knows that one of the most terrible aspects of the postcombat phase is the tragic deaths of young American soldiers. What if we have no place to put these people we capture who are killing American soldiers? If we agree to the amendment of the Senator from West Virginia, no maximum security prisons can be built. No communications network: One of the greatest difficulties for the Iraqi police force--that we are trying to rebuild and actually build-- is their ability to communicate with one another. These are security projects: Traffic police buildings, fleet, and equipment. It seems to me that one of the fundamentals and first priorities would be to build a capable police force. That is Ambassador Bremer's priority. That is an Iraqi ruling council priority. Yet we couldn't spend any money if the amendment of the Senator from West Virginia were approved to help traffic police buildings, fleet, and equipment. I will not go through every one of these items on which the Senator would like to prohibit us from spending any money. Some of them are legitimate questions. But we have hearings. That is why we have congressional scrutiny. That is why there will be, when this bill is passed, a conference with the other body whose changes will be considered as well. Again, legitimate debate will go on for years and years. Historians will judge, of the 77 Senators who voted in favor of authorizing the President of the United States to go to Iraq and the 23 who voted against it, which ones were right. History will make that judgment. But there is no one who believes that once we are there in Iraq that we don't have an obligation, an absolute obligation, to do what we can to help them rebuild their country, which is a fundamental if we expect democracy to take root in a place in the world which has never known it. I travel a fair amount. I believe it is part of my duties as a member of the Armed Services Committee. Frankly, I enjoy it because I find it to be the most informative way for me to be able to understand our national security, our foreign policy, and many other issues. I went to the city of Basra. I wish the Senator from West Virginia could have been with me. Since 1991, Saddam Hussein allowed that city, the second largest city in Iraq, to deteriorate to the point where it is a total disaster. It is a giant slum. Stagnant water is sitting around everywhere. There is filth, disease, the threat of cholera. I notice that the Senator from West Virginia wants to remove a Basra water pipeline and treatment plant. I say to the Senator from West Virginia, if he doesn't want to travel there, I would be glad to show him pictures of the absolute criticality of taking care of the sewage and waste that abound throughout that city, if only from a humanitarian standpoint, to save the children who are dying every day there because of the lack of basic sanitation.

Mr. McCAIN. I thank the Senator from Virginia who I know made a trip to Iraq as well. Again, I am sure Ambassador Bremer will kill me, but I urge all of my colleagues. The Chair and I took a trip together. You cannot appreciate the degree of devastation to that country inflicted by Saddam Hussein--not by the U.S. military--until you see it. Yes, any student of history knows that democracy cannot take hold where there are no fundamental services that allow people to deal with issues other than their own survival. And unless this democracy moves forward, then the forces in opposition grow and the risk to American lives is obvious. Parts of Iraq are still up for grabs; we are still trying to win the hearts and minds of the people in the Sunni triangle, and to say we will not help them build their infrastructure, in my view, would be a serious error. As the Senator from Virginia said, it could increase the casualties and risks to the American men and women fighting there. I am sure that that is not the intent of the Senator from West Virginia. So I hope we can dispense with this amendment rapidly. I do believe that in the upcoming weeks and months we will be examining our programs and progress. There are numerous amendments that require auditing by the GAO. They require reporting as to how money is expended. There are numerous requirements included in this legislation, both in its original form and through amendments. The Senator from Delaware and I have added an amendment, that was accepted, that requires GAO auditing of this money and how it is spent, regular reporting to the Congress. I believe this money will be as heavily scrutinized as any appropriation that the Congress has allocated in history, and that is justified because this is a huge amount of money. So I hope we will understand that taking these items out of our aid to reconstruct the country of Iraq would be a serious mistake.

Mr. McCAIN. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. McCAIN. I noticed the Senator was talking about how the money would be spent in the amendment. It includes $200 million available for relief in Liberia, and $50 million should be made available for Sudan. What in Sudan would this money go for, I wonder.

Mr. McCAIN. While you are at it, if I may continue my question, not to exceed $50 million to support the Government of Afghanistan. Of course, not surprisingly, there is specific money for Fort Monroe, VA.

Mr. McCAIN. My question is, Why is $50 million made available for Sudan and $50 million to support the Government of Afghanistan, which was not requested by the administration in any way, not scrutinized? Congratulations; hello, Sudan; here is $50 million. I ask my colleague, if he is concerned about how some of the money is being spent, should he not justify how the amendment would like to have that money spent?

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I want to be extremely brief. We spent a long time on this amendment. There are other amendments pending. I in no way criticize or take exception to the rights of the Senator from Delaware, nor the Senator from West Virginia. In fact, I wish more would exercise scrutiny in the work of the Appropriations Committee. But I think we ought to know what this amendment is about. It is taking $1.65 billion from the reconstruction of Iraq and putting it to work in Fort Monroe, VA, the Sudan, Liberia--places that are worthy and deserving, perhaps. The purpose of this legislation is to provide money for the military and reconstruction of Iraq plus Afghanistan. Tough choices have to be made on other issues. I share the concern of the Senator from Delaware about the situation in Afghanistan. But I don't share his open-ended desire to send money just to the Sudan, just to Liberia, and another open-ended $75 million for foreign military financing programs. I think we need to stick to what we have. It has already been examined by the Appropriations Committee. It has been examined by all Members. I hope the motion to table will be agreed to.

Mr. McCAIN. I think the Sudan is important. I don't think it is as important right now, to be honest with you, as the projects the Senator from West Virginia cuts out: Iraqi national community network, maximum security prisons, traffic police, water pipelines, treatment plants, on and on. These are cut out so we can send money to the Sudan. We have taken a long time here. Our colleagues are getting restless in their offices all over the Capitol. I don't want to continue this. We have a difference of opinion as to this amendment and to how the money should be spent. But to take money from Iraq and send it to Fort Monroe, VA, which is a worthy cause, is not appropriate for the way this bill was designed.

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I share Senator Mikulski's commitment to the U.S. Naval Academy, and I greatly appreciate her outstanding leadership in addressing all matters that concern the health and welfare of midshipmen, especially in this matter of the serious damage which occurred at the Academy. I join her in seeking assurances from the Appropriations Committee and the Department of Defense that the funding provided by Chairman Warner's Amendment will include funding to fully meet the needs of the Naval Academy to recover from Hurricane Isabel. Admiral Rempt, the Superintendent of the Naval Academy, and Mullen, the Vice Chief of Naval Operations, are still determining the extent of the damage and its total costs caused by the hurricane. According to ADMs Rempt and Mullen, there may be additional resources that may be required to relocate the Chiller Plant which provides critical heating and air conditioning and was seriously damaged by the floods from Hurricane Isabel. I thank Senator Mikulski for her leadership in this matter.

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Is it true that we had a 97-to-0 vote on the Byrd amendment, as I recall?

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I say to my good friend he fails to mention that I served under the distinguished Senator from Virginia when he held the position of Secretary of the Navy. I might say I served way under. Given the chain of command, there were probably at least seven or eight individuals who separated the two of us, but I certainly appreciate the honor and pleasure of having served under then-Secretary of the Navy Warner. I have appreciated the relationship we have enjoyed in the intervening 30 years.

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, this has been a very important debate. I congratulate all who took part. This is obviously a very important and critical vote. This vote is a message to our constituents about how we feel about foreign aid. It is a message to the Iraqis about what we expect from them and what they can expect from us. It is a message to our allies about their obligations to peace in the Middle East and our willingness to meet our own. Ultimately, this vote speaks to who we are as a nation and as a people. We won the peace. Let's win the reconstruction and democracy and freedom for the Iraqi people. I ask you to vote no on this amendment.

Mr. McCAIN. Could I mention to my friend from Virginia, too, as chairman of the Armed Services Committee, perhaps we should look at whether individual medals should be given for operations in Iraq, and perhaps individual decorations should be given for the conflict in Afghanistan, as two prime examples. Perhaps it is not sufficient to just have an expeditionary medal and a service medal. I had hoped that if we had acted in order to separate those two conflicts from others, we would get input from the Secretary of Defense, that there would be proper consultation and hearing and scrutiny before the Senate Armed Services Committee before we acted. I think the Senator from Virginia pointed out that if we only gave an Iraqi freedom medal, what about those in Afghanistan? Is there an Afghanistan freedom medal, too? No, that was not part of the proposal yesterday. That is why these things with noble motivation have to be thought through. I hope that with this sense-of-the-Senate resolution, which we will all vote on, we will send a message that we are all in support of the incredible importance of recognizing the service and sacrifice of the young men and women of our Armed Forces today.

Mr. McCAIN. I yield to my friend from Virginia.

Mr. McCAIN. Again, I thank the Senator from New Mexico for his desire and motivation to honor these brave young people. I say to my friend, President Bush signed this Executive order on March 12. The way I count, that is 7 months ago. I am deeply disturbed that the Secretary of Defense has not acted to implement these regulations. I would like to tell my friend from Virginia that I still have people who work over in the Pentagon, who provide me from time to time with information--usually anonymously, for obvious reasons--but I have been told that these regulations have been on Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz's desk for 3\1/2\ weeks. That is not right. I know the Deputy Secretary of Defense is busy and I know the Secretary of Defense is busy, but I think we have every right to expect immediate action on this so that these men and women can go about receiving this recognition because they cannot until these papers are signed.

Mr. McCAIN. Again, I know the Senator from Virginia shares my admiration and appreciation for the Senator from New Mexico who proposed this amendment. In a good-faith effort, he wanted to recognize the service and sacrifice of those who had served. I appreciate that. But I would also caution my colleagues that it is probably best to explore what has been done and also what should be done by the committees of jurisdiction. Otherwise, we should not have committees of jurisdiction; we should all just come to the floor with our ideas as to how best to address issues. I think the Armed Services Committee has a reputation, as one of the oldest committees in the Senate, of never shirking in its duty to address issues, including ones such as these.

Mr. McCAIN. Could I also point out to my colleague, this was also an argument, I think he would agree with me, to allow the executive branch to act in what has been, frankly, the executive branch's area of responsibility, and that is the designation of service medals, expeditionary medals, et cetera, including, by the way, higher awards which would be bestowed for acts of heroism and courage no matter where they fall. This is not the only medal of recognition available for a lot of these young men. But when we get into a bill which is legislation that is for the reconstruction of Iraq, and all of a sudden we come up with a great idea to designate a medal, we have to think these things through. The Senator from Virginia is the distinguished chairman of the Armed Services Committee. Was this issue ever raised in the Armed Services Committee?

Mr. McCAIN

Mr. McCAIN. Will the Senator yield for a question?