Patty Murray

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. I yield 10 minutes to the Senator from Illinois.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, how much time remains on both sides?

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I yield 10 minutes to the Senator from Rhode Island.

Mrs. MURRAY. I yield our remaining time to the Senator from Iowa.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, how much time is left on both sides?

Mrs. MURRAY. I thank the Chair. I yield 10 minutes to the Senator from Michigan.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for 2 additional minutes for the Senator from Iowa to finish his statement.

Mrs. MURRAY. How much time remains on both sides?

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from California.

Mrs. MURRAY. I yield the Senator 30 additional seconds.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, how much time remains on both sides?

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask whether the Senator from Idaho would be willing to allow us to use some of his time. We don't want to vote until 1:30. If I may, I will yield Senator Harkin 5 minutes.

Mrs. MURRAY. How much time would that give me for the remaining time on our side?

Mrs. MURRAY. I yield 15 minutes to the Senator from California to speak on the Daschle amendment that is before the body this morning.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I commend my colleague from California, Senator Feinstein, who has done a remarkable job in presenting this issue to the Senate on behalf of not only her constituents but on behalf of many of us across the country. I thank the Senator for her leadership. I yield myself 10 minutes. I rise today, as well, in support of the amendment before the Senate. I pose a question to the Members of this body, a question asked by 750,000 mothers, fathers, and children who gathered in our Nation's Capital for the Million Mom March this past weekend. It is a question being asked by tens of thousands of people who took part in rallies across 70 cities in this country this last weekend. It is a question being asked after every school shooting and after every other act of gun violence. I ask my colleagues: What will it take to get this Congress to pass commonsense gun legislation? Do we have to wait for more innocent people to lose their lives before this Congress will act? Currently, 12 children die every day from gunfire. Do we have to wait for our homes and places of worship to become crime scenes? Lord knows, we have seen enough of that. Do we have to wait for our schools, places where our children should feel safe and loved, to become war zones? We have already had school shootings in many cities: Littleton, Deming, Jonesboro, Flint, Conyers, Pearl, Fort Gibson, Springfield, and Moses Lake in my home State of Washington. Do we have to wait for a million people to rally here in D.C. and across the country to get this Congress to act? We just had that this past weekend. Do we have to wait for a shooting to take place right here in the Nation's Capitol Building to act? We have already had that. Do we have to wait until no place is safe for this Congress to pass commonsense legislation? We are getting closer to that every day. It is not getting any better. It seems the accidents are all the more common. It seems the shock and the pain and the loss keep growing, but this Congress has not acted. What is it going to take for this Congress to pass commonsense gun legislation? I want to give my colleagues a reason to act. I want to share with them a personal story about how gun violence is tearing our country apart. It is a story from a member of my own staff in Washington State. She is a wonderful woman named Mary Glen, who lost her son in a tragic robbery. It is something that has had a tremendous impact on her and on me. I know I cannot convey, or even imagine, the horror she has been through. But I also know that her voice must be heard by this Congress, so I want to read to you what she said in her own words at the Million Mom March in Seattle, WA, this past weekend. I truly commend her for her courage, telling her story so openly and allowing me to share it with you today. Mary Glen said: On Jan. 1st 1994 I awoke to a knock at the door, two police officers were standing there with the news that my 15-year- old son, Shaun was dead. Shot in the back, robbed of his money and his clothes. As Shaun left a convenience store after purchasing a pizza early New Year's morning of 1994, two young men took him by gun point, forced him into a car, drove him a couple blocks away, made him strip out of his clothes, took his money and then ordered him out of the car. They then shot him in the back! What a cowardly act. My world was torn apart that day but all I could think of is I can't let this happen to anyone else's child. As a mother, I had been a good parent, but that wasn't enough as I found out. It didn't matter how good of a parent I was, because when Shaun was out of my sight I couldn't protect him from what happened. Sixteen days later I was speaking to other Moms who had lost loved ones due to guns. In February of 1994, just 6 weeks after I buried Shaun, I spoke before the Washington State Legislature, telling my story and asking for stricter gun laws, telling them, if they had tears in their eyes after just hearing my story, which they did, imagine how I must feel having to survive it and go on without my son. This kind of violence is preventable. In April of 1994, Senator Feinstein invited me back to Washington, DC for a press conference on the assault weapons ban, part of the 1994 Crime Bill. . . . There, I met with others who had lost loved ones and together we spoke out about gun violence to anyone who would give us the time. The effects of gun violence are very brutal and personal for me. . . . This isn't about being pro or anti gun it's about saving our children who leave our houses and are not coming home. The devastating effects don't magically stop. It's an ongoing struggle. . . . If I could have one wish answered for Mother's Day this is what it would be: That every person who screams about their 2nd amendment rights and the need to own a gun without wanting to be held accountable for the responsibilities that go with it, feel the pain of losing a child to murder for one day--because then doing the right thing wouldn't even have to be argued. Those are the words of Mary Glen. She is a member of my staff in Washington State, and I could not agree with Mary more. She is a survivor. She is a strong and loving woman. I got to know her through her work with Mothers Against Violence in America. So, again, after sharing Mary's story with all of you I ask: What will it take for this Congress to pass commonsense gun laws? Last year, in the juvenile justice bill, the Senate passed commonsense gun restrictions. We closed the gun show loophole; we mandated trigger locks on all handgun sales; we enacted legislation to ensure that violent juveniles cannot buy weapons; and we banned the importation of high-capacity ammunition clips. Unfortunately, this Congress has failed to make that bill law. The juvenile justice bill has languished in the conference committee for nearly a year. Some opponents of commonsense laws say we are not doing enough to enforce the laws that are already on the books. This administration has done more to protect children from gun violence than any in our Nation's history. Gun prosecutions overall have increased nearly 30 percent in the Clinton-Gore administration. Of course, there is more we can do, and the President has proposed increasing the number of Federal gun prosecutors and helping States with their gun prosecutions and enforcement. But at the end of the day, all of the excuses and all the doubletalk from opponents will not save one life. Sensible gun laws will save lives. But first we have to get this Congress to act. Today, with this amendment, we are asking this Congress to act in a small and symbolic way. We are asking this Congress to commend those who took part in the Million Mom March. It is the least we can do for a group of people who have suffered losses many of us cannot even imagine. They have asked: What will it take for this Congress to pass commonsense gun legislation? Let's answer them by showing we are ready to protect Americans from gun violence. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I yield 10 minutes to the Senator from Massachusetts.

Mrs. MURRAY. I yield the Senator from New Jersey 2 additional minutes to finish his statement.

Mrs. MURRAY. I yield the Senator from New Jersey 3 additional minutes.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Mark Borreson, a fellow from my office, be allowed floor privileges during the remainder of the military construction debate.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. I object.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I am pleased to be on the floor today to offer the fiscal year 2001 military construction appropriations bill. I thank Senator Burns, the chairman of our committee, and his staff, for being so good in a great bipartisan manner, in being able to work this bill through again this year. I publicly thank him for his work with me in a really solid manner. I appreciate the way he has done that. Before I address this bill, I want to address some comments that were made about me on this floor by the majority leader just a short time ago. While I was taking part in a hearing of the Senate Commerce Committee as part of my work to improve pipeline safety in this country, I understand the majority leader suggested that my schedule was a reason why a debate on commonsense gun control was not going to take place today. Given the work that I have done over the years to protect young people from gun violence, and my strong support of this weekend's Million Mom March, I was rather surprised by that suggestion. I assure my colleagues that this debate is too important to be delayed any longer. While I support the majority leader's concern about a family obligation I have; namely, my son is going to be married, there is no excuse for not debating this legislation--especially the absence of any one Member. If this had been a concern of the majority leader, perhaps he could have spoken to me personally before incorrectly citing me as the reason why the Senate would not be debating gun violence today. I would like to remind the majority leader that, on November 4, I came to the floor, in the wake of a fatal shooting in my home State, and urged the Members of the Senate to work with me on commonsense solutions to gun violence. Since that time, it has been the congressional majority that has prevented this much needed debate from taking place, and it is the congressional majority today that, again, refuses to address this vital issue. I would like to remind my colleagues that, on average, 12 children die every day from gunfire. We cannot wait any longer. Mr. President, I will now turn to the issue before us. I again am pleased to be here with my chairman, Senator Burns, in recommending the fiscal year 2001 military construction appropriations bill to the Senate for its approval. This is an unusual bill this year because it contains emergency supplemental funding for a number of defense items not related to military construction, including U.S. participation in the Kosovo peacekeeping operation and in the Colombia counternarcotics initiative. I will defer to my ranking member on the full committee, Senator Byrd, and others, to address the items in the supplemental portion of this bill, and I will confine my remarks to the military construction portion of the bill. This bill provides a total of $8.634 billion in new spending authority for military construction for fiscal year 2001. This level of funding exceeds the President's budget request for military construction by $600 million, and provides nearly $300 million above the amount appropriated for fiscal year 2000. Nevertheless, as usual, this bill comes up short of what the services need to meet their infrastructure requirements. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I once again urge the administration to increase the budget for military construction. This is a bricks-and-mortar bill. There is nothing glamorous or ``gee-whiz'' about aircraft hangars or barracks or armories. But this is an essential bill, and the projects that it funds are vital to our men and women in uniform. As many of my colleagues have pointed out to me in the course of developing this bill, the President's budget barely scratches the surface or infrastructure needs. The requests that Senator Burns and I have received this year address compelling needs throughout the services, and I wish that we had the resources to fund more of them. Senator Burns and his staff deserve a great deal of credit for their dedicated and thoughtful approach in drafting this bill. As always, they have worked very hard to produce a balanced, bipartisan product that takes into account both the concerns of the Senate and the needs of the military. In particular, they have done a superb job of continuing to shine the spotlight on the quality of life projects that are so important to our men and women in uniform, and to their families. At a time when military enlistment and retention are declining--and the services are unable to match the financial incentives of the private sector--quality of life issues are amplified in importance. Quality of life issues do not diminish the importance of readiness projects, but we must not dismiss their role in recruiting and retaining our military personnel. Within the budget constraints that we are all forced to operate this year, this bill attempts to meet the most urgent and timely military construction needs with very limited resources. All of the major construction projects that we have funded have been authorized. In addition, we have ensured adequate funding for family housing and barracks construction. However, I remain concerned that the nation's overall investment in military infrastructure continues to lag, and I hope we will see a more robust effort in future budgets. This is an extremely important bill for our nation and our military forces. I again commend Senator Burns, and I thank the staff of the Appropriations Committee, including Sid Ashworth, Christina Evans, and Sonia King, as well as Mark Borreson, a fellow on my staff, for their excellent work in producing the bill. Mr. President, I look forward to completing action on this important piece of legislation. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the long and exemplary service of Washington State University (WSU) President Samuel H. Smith and his wife Pat Smith. Samuel Smith has served as President of WSU since July of 1985, and he will be retiring at the end of the month. Under Dr. Smith's leadership, the University has prospered. During his tenure, he strengthened the undergraduate and graduate curricula and worked to increase opportunities for women and minorities. As a result of President Smith's work, many programs at WSU have received national and worldwide recognition. President Smith deserves special honor for expanding the number of people who benefit from the University's educational system and for bringing education at WSU into the Information Age. Dr. Smith established branch campuses of WSU in Vancouver, the Tri- Cities, and in Spokane, opening the doors of higher education to an even greater number of Washingtonians. These branch campuses serve transition communities, helping people build the skills and training they need to succeed in today's workplace. Their lives are improving thanks to Dr. Smith's vision. Dr. Smith was also instrumental in expanding educational opportunities to remote areas through WSU's innovative distance- learning programs. One of the clearest examples of the way WSU has grown during Dr. Smith's tenure is the fact that more than one-third of all WSU graduates in the University's history were granted degrees by President Smith. Dr. Smith has also been a member of and a leader in many national educational organizations. He is the Chair of the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges Board of Directors for 2000. He is also a member of the Kellogg Commission on the Future of State and Land-Grant Universities. He is a member of the Board of Trustees of the Western Governors University. He has also served as Chair of the Executive Committee of the National Collegiate Athletic Association. For his exemplary service, Dr. Smith has received many honors and awards for his work in these organizations. President Smith is a native of Salinas, California, and holds bachelor's and doctoral degrees in plant pathology from the University of California at Berkeley and honorary doctoral degrees from Nihon University in Tokyo, Japan, and Far Eastern State University in Vladivostok, Russia. Mr. President, I also want my colleagues to know that Pat Smith has been an instrumental figure in the growth of Washington State University. From her position on the Washington State Arts Commission, she worked to expand the art collection and increase awareness of the WSU Museum of Art. She also serves on the boards of the Girl Scouts of the Inland Northwest and the United Way of Pullman, Washington. Mrs. Smith is also from Salinas, California, and is a graduate of Salinas Union High School. She studied at Hartnell College in Salinas, California. Mr. President, as a citizen of Washington state and as an alumna of Washington State University, I could not be more proud of the great job that President Smith and Pat Smith have done in expanding educational opportunities for the people of my state and nation and making my alma mater an even brighter beacon of learning and opportunity. Mr. President, in closing I would like to say--on behalf of the people of my state and the many graduates, faculty members and current students of Washington State University--thank you President and Mrs. Smith. Thank you for putting your compassion, energy and leadership to such good use at the helm of Washington State University. Your presence will be missed, but the many gifts you gave us serve as a constant reminder of your many years of generous service.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, how much time remains on both sides?

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

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I yield 15 seconds to Senator Harkin.