Richard Shelby

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. I would be glad to.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``National Flood Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2003.'' This bill, which is cosponsored by the Ranking Democrat on the Banking Committee, Senator Sarbanes, as well as Senators Bond and Mikulski, the Chairman and Ranking Member, respectively, of the Subcommittee on VA, HUD and Independent Agencies Appropriations, will provide a one-year extension of the lapsed federal flood insurance program. The National Flood Insurance Program, ``NFIP'', expired on December 31, 2002. The expiration of the program has prevented homeowners and home buyers from obtaining or renewing flood insurance policies in the intervening time. Since anyone buying or refinancing a home in a flood plan must have flood insurance, NFIP's expiration will block the path to home ownership for many Americans, and have a disruptive effect on residential real estate and mortgage markets. I have a December 6, 2002 letter from Anthony S. Lowe, the Administrator of the Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, which goes into greater detail regarding the consequences of the expiration of the NFIP. As Director Low indicates in this letter the lapse of this authority could effect as many as 400,000 households in the month of January alone. I ask unanimous consent that this letter be printed in the Record. The bill that I am introducing today simply extends the NFIP through the end of this calender year, retroactive to January 1, 2003. As such, it's purpose is the same as S. 13, which the Senate passed last November 20th. The House passed companion legislation this week, and it is our hope to have a short term extension of the NFIP enacted into law as soon as possible. This will permit the two Houses of Congress to consider the larger issues confronting the NFIP in a deliberate manner, without creating hardship for homeowners and undue turmoil in our nation's real estate markets.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``National Flood Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2003.'' This bill, which is cosponsored by the Ranking Democrat on the Banking Committee, Senator Sarbanes, as well as Senators Bond and Mikulski, the Chairman and Ranking Member, respectively, of the Subcommittee on VA, HUD and Independent Agencies Appropriations, will provide a one-year extension of the lapsed federal flood insurance program. The National Flood Insurance Program, ``NFIP'', expired on December 31, 2002. The expiration of the program has prevented homeowners and home buyers from obtaining or renewing flood insurance policies in the intervening time. Since anyone buying or refinancing a home in a flood plan must have flood insurance, NFIP's expiration will block the path to home ownership for many Americans, and have a disruptive effect on residential real estate and mortgage markets. I have a December 6, 2002 letter from Anthony S. Lowe, the Administrator of the Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, which goes into greater detail regarding the consequences of the expiration of the NFIP. As Director Low indicates in this letter the lapse of this authority could effect as many as 400,000 households in the month of January alone. I ask unanimous consent that this letter be printed in the Record. The bill that I am introducing today simply extends the NFIP through the end of this calender year, retroactive to January 1, 2003. As such, it's purpose is the same as S. 13, which the Senate passed last November 20th. The House passed companion legislation this week, and it is our hope to have a short term extension of the NFIP enacted into law as soon as possible. This will permit the two Houses of Congress to consider the larger issues confronting the NFIP in a deliberate manner, without creating hardship for homeowners and undue turmoil in our nation's real estate markets.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Madam President, as the Ranking Member of the Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee, I strongly agree with the remarks made by my distinguished colleague from Alaska last week regarding the Coast Guard and its treatment in the Homeland Security legislation. I commend his leadership to preserve the traditional role of the Coast Guard as it becomes an agency of the Department of Homeland Security. The unique strength of the Coast Guard in its multi-mission operational capability--the ability to perform a variety of missions for the nation. It is one of several agencies to be subsumed into the new Department that has both on-homeland security and homeland security missions. It is critical to maintain all of the Coast Guard's missions and capabilities instead of allowing one mission area to eclipse any other. Section 888 takes a significant step forward in preventing that from happening by preventing assets, personnel, and budget resources from being diverted away from the Coast Guard's traditional missions, including rescuing mariners in distress. Madam President, I share the concerns expressed by the Senator from Alaska about the utmost importance of maintaining the Coast Guard's non-homeland security missions and capabilities. When I became Chairman of the Subcommittee in the next Congress, I shall look forward to working closely with him as the Full Appropriations Committee Chairman to ensure that Section 888 is implemented as Congress intends.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Madam President, as the Ranking Member of the Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee, I strongly agree with the remarks made by my distinguished colleague from Alaska last week regarding the Coast Guard and its treatment in the Homeland Security legislation. I commend his leadership to preserve the traditional role of the Coast Guard as it becomes an agency of the Department of Homeland Security. The unique strength of the Coast Guard in its multi-mission operational capability--the ability to perform a variety of missions for the nation. It is one of several agencies to be subsumed into the new Department that has both on-homeland security and homeland security missions. It is critical to maintain all of the Coast Guard's missions and capabilities instead of allowing one mission area to eclipse any other. Section 888 takes a significant step forward in preventing that from happening by preventing assets, personnel, and budget resources from being diverted away from the Coast Guard's traditional missions, including rescuing mariners in distress. Madam President, I share the concerns expressed by the Senator from Alaska about the utmost importance of maintaining the Coast Guard's non-homeland security missions and capabilities. When I became Chairman of the Subcommittee in the next Congress, I shall look forward to working closely with him as the Full Appropriations Committee Chairman to ensure that Section 888 is implemented as Congress intends.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to Texas Senator Phil Gramm, highly respected on both sides of the aisle for his tremendous intellect, deep convictions and relentless tenacity, he will long be remembered in the U.S. Senate. I have known Senator Gramm and his lovely wife Wendy for many years. I first served with Senator Gramm in the House of Representatives in 1978 where we both served on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. As conservative southern Democrats we had much in common and found ourselves on the same side of most issues, although not always on the same side as our party. Indeed, while we both came to Congress as Democrats, we later found our ideology and values best reflected in the beliefs of the Republican Party. Senator Gramm finding the light a little more quickly than I did. However, when I finally made my decision to switch from the Democrat to Republican Party, it was more than symbolic that I stood between two great men who represented the heart of the Republican Party in the U.S. Senate, Bob Dole and Phil Gramm. When I switched parties in 1994, Senator Gramm said of my ability to help deliver the message of the Republican party: ``There are no greater zealots than converts.'' This certainly applied to me at the time, and it still applies today. I think he spoke from what he knew to be true himself. As someone who values freedom above all else, his life has been a perfect model of what he preaches every day, and his lifetime achievements testify to that fact. Senator Gramm embodies what can be achieved in America through hard work, education and determination. He grew up in modest means in Georgia, helping to contribute to the families' finances by working delivering newspapers. The strong work ethic instilled in him by his upbringing led Senator Gramm to the University of Georgia where he received his PhD in Economics in 1967. Senator Gramm then moved to Texas, where he met and married his wife, Wendy Lee, who was also an economics PhD. Elected to serve in the House of Representatives from the 6th district of Texas in 1978, Senator Gramm quickly developed a reputation as a conservative Democrat who was committed to fiscal responsibility. Through his position on the Budget Committee, Senator Gramm helped to craft bipartisan legislation which laid the foundation for Ronald Reagan's 1981 tax cuts and defense buildup. In 1983, Phil Gramm displayed the courage of his convictions by resigning from the Democratic party to run as a Republican. His re-election was a success, making him not only the first Republican in the history of the 6th District of Texas, but the only member of Congress in the 20th Century to resign from Congress and successfully seek re-election as a member of another party. When John Tower announced his retirement from the Senate in 1984, Senator Gramm seized the opportunity, and won an overwhelming victory in the general election. Senator Gramm wasted no time becoming actively involved within the Senate. One of his first initiatives, the Gramm- Rudman-Hollings Deficit Control Act of 1985, required automatic budget cuts if the deficit was not reduced to specific levels. Together with a rapidly growing economy, this legislation was credited with producing the first balanced budget in twenty five years. Since then, Senator Gramm has established a long record of initiatives and achievements during his tenure in the Senate, which included negotiating the final package of budget cuts, spending caps and tax increases at the 1990 budget summit, pressing for balanced budget amendments, the exposure and elimination of budget gimmickry, electricity deregulation and improving the relationship and cooperation between the United States and Mexico. Senator Gramm took the gavel of the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee in January of 1999. It was from this post, that he worked to repeal the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act, which separated banks from investment banking and commercial firms. Through a lot of hard work, dogged tenacity and a little compromise, Senator Gramm shepherded the bill through the committee and out of the Senate. The result was that in 1999 financial services deregulation was passed and signed into law, which may have been the biggest legislative achievement of the 106th Congress. Senator Gramm has the ability to do something that not many people can do. He can take very complex issues and break them down into their most basic elements, so that just about anybody can understand them. The intricacies of the budget process, the solvency of Social Security, the implications of national health care, are all brought down to kitchen table common sense. This is an amazing gift, and a formidable one for anyone who stands on the other side of an issue from him. There is simply no rhetoric to hide behind in a debate with Senator Gramm. He is not afraid to fight or to lose, and so he rarely loses. Senator Gramm's absence from the U.S. Senate will truly leave a substantial void. I will certainly miss his expertise on the Senate Banking Committee and the broad policy experience that he brings to every debate. I would like to extend my sincere best wishes to Senator Gramm on his retirement from the Senate and wish him luck in his new career.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I rise today to pay special recognition to two young Alabamians who made the journey to Washington D.C. this summer to learn about and celebrate America's heritage. Erica Brasher, who is 15, and Samuel Brasher, who is 12, spent 2 weeks in Washington and Northern Virginia traveling to the many historical sites located throughout the area. Most importantly, they were chosen for the honor of raising the flag at Mount Vernon on the Fourth of July. For this distinction, they received special citations which commemorated the annual celebration. Erica and Samuel Brasher's trip also included visits to Williamsburg, Harper's Ferry, and the many museums and monuments located in Washington, D.C. Upon their return home, a terrific account of Erica and Samuel's trip was written in their local newspaper, the Shelby County Reporter. Erica and Samuel Brasher are both grandchildren of Howard and Pattie Brasher of Shelby County. Samuel is also the grandson of Tom and Chestine Cardin of Columbiana. Erica is also the granddaughter of Corinne Williams and the late Bob Williams of Shelby and the daughter of the late Martha Williams-Brasher. I had the chance to meet these two wonderful children when they visited, and I was proud to see young Alabamians so interested in American history.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson, a stalwart conservative with a long and colorful career in both the private and public sectors. Senator Thompson has always been a vocal and active proponent of reducing the role of the federal government, lowering the tax burden on Americans and allowing individuals the freedom to make their own choices. His remarkable rise to a position of influence among his fellow lawmakers is a testament to the passion of his beliefs. Senator Thompson has been a valuable member of the Senate, and his presence will be missed when he retires at the end of the 107th Congress. I would like to take this opportunity to commend my fellow Southern colleague for his dedicated work on behalf of the people of Tennessee and wish him the best of luck as he leaves the Senate. Born in my home state of Alabama, Senator Thompson grew up in Lawrenceburg, TN. He worked his way through undergraduate school at Memphis State University and then law school at Vanderbilt. Two years later, he was named an Assistant United States Attorney in Nashville, where his outstanding record brought him to the attention of then Senator Howard Baker, who tapped him to be the minority counsel to the Senate Watergate Committee. Following two years on the Committee, Senator Thompson continued his high profile law career when he was appointed by incoming Governor Lamar Alexander to investigate outgoing Governor Ray Blanton. Senator Thompson added to his growing reputation by uncovering a cash for clemency scheme that ultimately sent Governor Blanton to jail. Over the next several years, Senator Thompson continued to practice law in Nashville and in Washington. He also continued his work with Congress, working as Special Counsel to the Senate Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. With an open election looming to fill the last two years of former Sen. Al Gore's term in 1994, Senator Thompson decided to enter the race. He championed his Tennessee roots, conservative values and desire to reform the Federal Government. His message resonated with the voters, who overwhelmingly supported him in the general election in 1994. In 1996, Senator Thompson was elected to a full term in the Senate, receiving more votes than any previous candidate for any office in Tennessee history. Since joining the Senate, Senator Thompson has tirelessly worked to promote his conservative values. A fierce critic of federal bureaucracy, he has introduced legislation and held hearings aimed at producing a smaller, more efficient, and more accountable government. Through his work on the Finance Committee, he has focused his energy on reducing taxes, reforming the tax code and restoring Social Security and Medicare programs to long-term solvency. Admirably, he has always remained thoroughly independent and committed to his beliefs. I have truly enjoyed working with Senator Thompson here in the Senate. He is a tremendous asset to the people of Tennessee and valuable member of the Republican party. I thank him for his many years of service and wish him the best in all future endeavors.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize Scarlotte Deupree, Miss Alabama 2002. Ms. Deupree was recently named First Runner Up in the 2003 Miss America Pageant. The accomplishments of Ms. Deupree are many. She coordinated Alabama's first Women in Literacy Summit in July, 2001 and was awarded a National Daily Point of Light for her work to promote literacy. She is a Distinguished Partner of the Literacy Council of Central Alabama and has been a certified literacy tutor with the Laubach Literacy Council International. Ms. Deupree is also a former co-chair of the Sylacauga Adult Literacy Council and an instructor with the Adult Literacy Education Resource, ALERT. She is a graduate of the Sylacauga High School Honors Program and is an English major at Samford University in Birmingham, AL. Ms. Deupree is the daughter of James and Joy Deupree of Birmingham. Scarlotte Deupree is a remarkable young woman, and we are proud to have her serve as our Miss Alabama.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr President, I rise today in support of the resolution authorizing the use of military force against Iraq. I support this resolution because the threat posed by the brutal dictatorship of Saddam Hussein is real, immediate, and growing. The threat is real because Saddam possesses conventional, chemical, and biological weapons. He also is doing everything in his power to acquire the means to construct and field nuclear weapons. The threat is real because Saddam has used his conventional and chemical weapons to attack his neighbors and his own people. The threat is real because Saddam has openly defied the world and has made no secret of his enmity toward the United States and our allies. Saddam even attempted to assassinate a former American President. The threat is immediate and growing because Saddam has extensive and growing ties to terrorist organizations that have either attacked the United States or declared the United States to be a legitimate target of their twisted crusade that they call ``jihad.'' The threat is immediate and growing because Saddam has developed the ability to deliver his poisons and pestilence by unmanned aerial vehicles that can easily be smuggled into the United States. The threat is immediate and growing because Saddam has circumvented the sanctions regime to such an extent that he is virtually unrestrained by resources in his pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. Let me put this in a historical context. Following its bloody war with Iran, Hussein's Iraq was heavily in debt. While continuing to spend billions on weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles, Saddam, in 1990, invaded and plundered Kuwait in order to help pay his bills. With that act, he made it clear that his priority was to feed the war machine which kept him in power. In 1991, Kuwait was liberated and the Persian Gulf war ended when Saddam Hussein committed to abide by U.N. Security Council resolutions. Since then, he has broken those commitments. He ignored U.N. weapons prohibitions and ruthlessly crushed rebellions of the Shia and the Kurds. Today, he continues to violate U.N. resolutions, the very commitments he made to save his regime. His actions continue to impose terrible hardships on his own people. After a decade of sanctions, Saddams's unwillingness to relinquish his prohibited weapons programs continues to cost his country tens of billions of dollars. There are those who believe that a new U.N. Security Council resolution and renewed inspections are the answer. In reality, inspections will accomplish little, delay the inevitable and provide Saddam with yet more time to field additional weapons of mass destruction. U.N. Security Council Resolutions have required much of Saddam and produced very little. Starting in April 1991, Resolution 687 requires Iraq to declare destroy, remove, or render harmless under U.N. or International Atomic Energy Agency supervision and not to use, develop, construct, or acquire all chemical and biological weapons, all ballistic missiles with ranges greater than 150 kilometers, and all nuclear weapons-usable material, including related material, equipment, and facilities. What has happened? Saddam has refused to declare all parts of each WMD program, submitted several declarations as part of his aggressive efforts to deny and deceive inspectors, and ensured that certain elements of the program would remain concealed. The prohibition against developing delivery platforms with ranges greater than 150 km allowed Baghdad to research and develop shorter-range systems with applications for longer-range systems. Additionally, the prohibition did not affect Iraqi efforts to convert full-size aircraft into unmanned aerial vehicles for use as potential WMD delivery systems with ranges far beyond 150 km. Resolution 707 enacted in August 1991, requires Iraq to allow U.N. and International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, inspectors immediate and unrestricted access to any site they wish to inspect. it also demands that Iraq provide full, final, and complete disclosure of all aspects of its WMD programs; cease immediately any attempt to conceal, move, or destroy WMD-related material or equipment; allow UNSCOM and IAEA teams to use fixed-wing and helicopter flights throughout Iraq; and respond fully, completely, and promptly to any Special Commission questions or requests. What has happened? In 1996, Saddam negotiated with the UNSCOM Executive Chairman modalities that it used to delay inspections, to restrict to four the number of inspectors allowed into any site Baghdad declared as ``sensitive,'' and to prohibit them from visiting altogether sites regarded as sovereign. These modalities gave Iraq leverage over individual inspections. Iraq eventually allowed larger numbers of inspectors into such sites but only after time consuming negotiations at each site. Resolution 715 adopted in October 1991, requires Iraq to submit to long-term monitoring of Iraqi WMD programs by UNSCOM and IAEA; approved detailed plans called for in United Nations Security Council Resolutions 687 and 707 for long-term monitoring. In reality, Iraq generally accommodated U.N. monitors at declared sites but obstructed access and manipulated the monitoring process. Beginning in March 1996, Resolution 1051 established the Iraqi export and import monitoring system. This system requires U.N. members to provide IAEA and UNSCOM with information on materials exported to Iraq that may be applicable to WMD production, and requires Iraq to report imports of all dual-use items. In reality, Iraq is negotiating contracts for the procurement, outside of U.N. controls, of dual-use items with WMD applications. The U.N. lacks the staff needed to conduct thorough inspections of goods at Iraq's borders and to monitor imports inside Iraq. In June 1996 the following resolutions were adopted: Resolutions 1060, 1115, 1134, 1137, 1154, 1194, and 1205. These demand that Iraq cooperate with UNSCOM and allow inspection teams immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to facilities for inspection and access to Iraqi officials for interviews. U.N. Security Council Resolution 1137 condemns Saddam for his refusal to allow entry into Iraq of UNSCOM officials on the grounds of their nationality and for his threats to the safety of U.N. reconnaissance aircraft. Throughout the inspection process in Iraq, Saddam consistently sought to impede and limit UNSCOM by blocking access to numerous facilities, sanitizing sites before the arrival of inspectors and routinely attempting to deny inspectors access to requested sites and individuals. At times, Saddam would promise compliance to avoid consequences, only to renege later. Resolution 1154 enacted in March 1998, demands that Iraq comply with UNSCOM and IAEA inspections and endorses the Secretary General's memorandum of understanding with Iraq, providing for ``severest consequences'' if Iraq fails to comply. Resolution 1194 adopted in September 1998, condemns Iraq's decision to suspend cooperation with UNSCOM and the IAEA. Resolution 1205 adopted November 1998, condemns Iraq's decision to cease cooperation with UNSCOM. These resolutions were meaningless without Iraqi compliance. Baghdad refused to work with UNSCOM and instead negotiated with the Secretary General, whom it believed would be more sympathetic to Iraq's needs. Finally, in December 1999, Resolution 1284 established the United Nations Monitoring, Verification, and Inspection Commission, UNMOVIC, replacing UNSCOM. The resolution demanded that Iraq allow the commission's teams immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to any and all aspects of Iraq's WMD programs. Iraq repeatedly has rejected the unrestricted return of U.N. arms inspectors and claims that it has satisfied all U.N. resolutions relevant to disarmament. Compared with UNSCOM, Resolution 1284 gives the UNMOVIC chairman less authority, gives the Security Council a greater role in defining key disarmament tasks, and requires that inspectors be full-time U.N. employees. Saddam has manipulated the U.N. before, and if permitted, he will do it again. Right now, Saddam is ``shuffling the deck'' to hide his prohibited items in anticipation of the return of inspectors. I believe that inspectors will not set foot in Iraq until Baghdad is ready for them. If they were to return, they would be starting from square one in a hostile and deceitful environment. In a June 11, 2000 article, Charles Duelfer, the former deputy executive chairman for UNSCOM, noted that, ``. . . the attempt to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction was doomed from the start. This failure repeats the same mismatch between disarmament goals and disarmament mechanisms that frustrated efforts to disarm Germany . . .'' after the First World War. In the Versailles Treaty of 1919, the victorious allies imposed disarmament obligations upon a defeated Germany. An international organization called the Inter-Allied Control Commission was created to implement those provisions. The Germans, however, were very adept at denial and deception. Consequently, Germany was able to preserve illicit armaments and weapons production. The Germans argued that the inspectors were too demanding and acted like spies. Does this rhetoric sound familiar? The lessons of appeasement are not intended solely for history classrooms. These lessons are to be learned and where relevant, applied. Saddam Hussein's priorities have not changed and I do not believe that they ever will, so we must act before his alliance with terror finds it way to our shores. Much has been said about how unprecedented it would be to engage in anticipatory self defense by taking military action against Iraq. In one respect, this is true: it is a step that our country has historically tended to shy away from taking. But ``unprecedented'' is not the same thing as illegal or improper. Scholars have debated the idea of anticipatory self-defense for many years, and while there is no consensus upon its exact meaning, the idea is clearly not foreign to international law. Under article 2 of the United Nations Charter, countries may not use the ``threat or use of force'' in a manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Article 51 of the charter also recognizes that countries have an inherent right of both individual and collective self-defense. Reading articles 2 and 51 together, it is clear to me that the right to self-defense can arise not only in response to the ``use'' of force but also in response to the threat of the use of force. That this must be the case should be clear to anyone familiar with the dangers of the modern world. At some point in the past, it might have been possible to wait until an attack actually occurs before striking back. Today, however, such a rule would clearly be unworkable, so dangerously unworkable as to imperil the inherent right of self- defense in the first place. Today, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction make it madness to wait until one is attacked first. These basic military realities compel us to understand the idea of self-defense in response to a threat in broader ways than before. To paraphrase U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, the law is not a suicide pact. The law does not require us to wait for a biological weapon such as smallpox or a genetically engineered anthrax strain to be used to kill potentially millions of Americans before we have the right to attack the would-be user. Especially in this age of modern transportation, biological weapons know no boundaries. From 1918 to 1919, the influenza pandemic killed between 20 and 40 million people worldwide. Today's biological weapons scientists have the capacity to cause even worse mayhem, not just to any single target country, but perhaps to everyone on the planet. We have long recognized such principles in our domestic law. A policeman, for instance, need not wait for a criminal to actually shoot at him before he can use lethal force in self-defense. The United States has been involved in Iraq for years in attempting to enforce the many Security Council resolutions violated by Iraq. Throughout this entire period, Iraq has continually fired upon our forces, and those of our allies, with conventional weapons. Iraq has a large and expanding biological and chemical weapons program. And he is doing everything in his power to add nuclear weapons and long-range ballistic missiles to his arsenal. The law does not require us to wait to be attached with the other weapons in Saddam's arsenal before completing the task the Security Council has set for ending the threat Iraq poses to international peace and security. The law does not require this, and our security, and that of other countries in the region, and around the world, does not permit it. I will close with these final thoughts. There are those at home and abroad who criticize U.S. intent to take action. I remind them that the United States did not pick this conflict. The United States doe not want this fight, Saddam Hussein forced our hand by not complying with his obligations under the 1991 cease fire. He forced our hand by not complying with U.N. resolutions. He forced our hand by building alliances with terrorists. We do not make this decision lightly, we are very aware of the potential costs of taking action, but we are much more aware of the costs of not taking action. As said by Edmond Burke, ``All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.'' I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to South Carolina Senator Strom Thurmond, an institution unto himself who has served with distinction in the U.S. Senate for almost a half-century. Senator Thurmond is the longest-serving member in the history of the Senate and the second Senator in history to cast 15,000 votes. During his tenure, Senator Thurmond has been a enduring witness to history, presiding over the chamber during a tremendous transformation of the American landscape. During this time, Senator Thurmond has steadfastly remained responsible to the voters of South Carolina, who have returned him to the chamber time and time again. Senator Thurmond's enduring legacy will continue on well beyond his retirement at the end of the 107th Congress. Senator Thurmond was born in 1902, in Edgefield, SC. His early years were spent as an Army reservist, teacher, superintendent and lawyer. Senator Thurmond won election to the South Carolina State Senate in 1933, representing his home district of Edgefield for the next five years. Senator Thurmond then became a Circuit Judge of South Carolina, just as the clouds of war descended over Europe. Never one to shy away from his duty to his country, Senator Thurmond sought and received an exemption to return to military duty. On June 6, 1944, he landed in Normandy on D-Day with the 82nd Airborne Division at the age of 42. For his service in World War II, Senator Thurmond earned eighteen decorations, medals and awards, including the Purple Heart, Legion of Merit with Oak Leaf Cluster and Bronze Star for Valor. He returned to South Carolina a war hero, and was elected Governor of the Palmetto State in 1946. In 1954, Senator Thurmond was elected to the United States Senate, becoming the first, and so far, the only politician elected to the Senate as a write-in candidate. Senator Thurmond has dedicated his life to preserving, defending and participating in our democracy. He attended the Democratic National Convention in 1932 and voted for Franklin D. Roosevelt. Sixty four years later, he attended the Republican Convention and voted for Bob Dole. In fact, Senator Thurmond was a Democrat for thirty two years and has been a Republican for the past thirty eight. Through it all, he has managed to remain relevant, active and a force on the national scene. Just two years ago, he played a critical role in helping to line up Republican support for George Bush in the South Carolina primary, helping to secure his nomination for President of the United States. Senator Thurmond's countless achievements and awards are a testament to his distinguished career in public service. He holds thirty four honorary degrees, is in the South Carolina Hall of Fame, and is a recipient of the Presidential Citizens Award, Presidential Freedom Award, as well as other major awards from American Legion, VFW, DAV, AMVETS, the National Guard, Army and Navy associations, farm groups, business groups, education groups and several foreign countries. It is with great admiration for Senator Thurmond's longevity and service that I commend him for his distinguished career in Congress. No one in the history of the Senate can say that they gave more of their life to this body, and while his presence may be gone after the 107th Congress, his spirit will forever remain a part of this chamber. I wish he and his family all the best in the future.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to a dear friend, H. Pettus Randall III, of Tuscaloosa, AL. Pettus Randall died on Saturday, September 7, at the age of 57. Pettus was a native of Tuscaloosa, AL and attended the University of Alabama where he received bachelor's degrees in English and history. He attended New York University's Graduate School of Business and completed his law degree at the University of Alabama in 1971. Following the death of his father, Henry Pettus Randall Jr., in 1976, Pettus took over the publishing company that his father had started in 1934. Pettus grew Randall Publishing Company from a $1 million a year company into the $70 million a year nationwide operation it is today. Randall Publishing Company employs more than 600 workers in 20 States and is one of the largest publishers in construction and trucking. It is among the 20 largest privately held U.S. publishing companies and was rated the sixth-fastest-growing publishing companies in the United States. Under Pettus' management, Randall Publishing Company employees were among the first in the Nation to have 401(k) benefits and, as Randall Publishing Company grew, the growth of equity was shared with each employee. In the summer of 2000, I had the honor of introducing then-Governor George W. Bush to Pettus at an event at Randall Publishing Company. Pettus served as president of the West Alabama Chamber of Commerce and the Greater Tuscaloosa Kiwanis Club. He chaired State campaigns for the Cancer Society and Christ Episcopal Church in Tuscaloosa. He worked with United Way, Tuscaloosa Boys and Girls Clubs, March of Dimes and the Tuscaloosa Association of Retarded Citizens. Pettus and his wife, Catherine were recognized this year by the Alexis de Tocqueville Society for their contributions to the quality of life in west Alabama. In May, he received the west Alabama Chamber's lifetime achievement award and was named Tuscaloosa County's citizen of the year. Pettus also found time to raise a family. He and Catherine raised three exceptional children. Their daughter Jaynie Rogers attends an MBA program at Harvard. Their daughter Kate is a graduate of both Vanderbilt and Cambridge Universities, and is about to join an investment management firm in Los Angeles. Their son Pettus IV attends Princeton University. Pettus Randall was a good friend, a patriarch of the Tuscaloosa community, and a much-beloved family man. He will be greatly missed by many.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to a dear friend and mentor, Judge Thomas Seay Lawson of Montgomery, AL. Judge Lawson died on Monday, September 2, at the age of 96. Judge Lawson was a native of Greensboro, AL, and was only 32 when he was elected attorney general of the State of Alabama in 1938 after serving for 7 years as an assistant attorney general. He was elected to the first of five consecutive terms to the Alabama Supreme Court in 1942. Judge Lawson took a leave of absence from the Supreme Court to volunteer for military service during World War II and served as a U.S. Navy officer aboard the U.S.S. Massachusetts, which was involved in major battles in the Pacific theater including Okinawa and Iwo Jima. He also served for 38 years as a member of the University of Alabama board of trustees and was president pro tem of the board for 10 years. He was a member of the Alabama Academy of Honor. He was the grandson of Thomas Seay, who served as Governor of Alabama from 1886 to 1890. Judge Lawson earned his bachelor's degree from Davidson College and was a graduate of the University of Alabama Law School. The university conferred upon him a Doctor of Humane Letters degree and Davidson College awarded him its Alumni Citation for Accomplishments in the Field of Law. He was a member of the Alabama Academy of Honor, Omicron Delta Kappa, Sigma Alpha Epsilon, Phi Delta Phi, and a honorary member of Omicron Kappa Upsilon. He also served as a commissioner of the National Commission of Digestive Diseases of the National Institute of Health. He was the first president of the Alabama Law School Foundation. Judge Lawson is survived by his wife Kathleen, his son Thomas Seay Lawson, Jr., his daughter Jule, and many grandchildren and great- grandchildren. Judge Lawson was a good friend, a patriarch of his community, a great leader of the State of Alabama, and a much-beloved family man. He will be greatly missed by many.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to North Carolina Senator Jesse Helms, a dedicated public servant who has served with distinction for five terms in the United States Senate. During this time, Senator Helms has had a tremendous influence on the issues which have faced our country and his reasoned and determined beliefs on foreign policy have helped to shape the direction of America's relationships around the globe. In doing so, Senator Helms has always put the interests of the United States above all else, and his efforts were often rewarded with hard-fought concessions. Indeed, when others would hope to expedite and rush through legislation, it was often Senator Helms who called for deliberation and patience. Senator Helms truly understands the Senate's function as a deliberative body and takes to heart the great responsibility the Constitution has given the Senate in its role as a check to the powers of the Executive branch. I have had the pleasure to work with Senator Helms for the past 16 years and it is with great appreciation and respect that I commend him for all of his meaningful work as he retires at the end of the 107th Congress. Senator Helms was born in Monroe, NC in 1921. A product of the public schools of Monroe county, he took to heart the lessons he learned early in life. A firm believer in family, respect for one's elders, morality, patriotism and religious faith, Senator Helms has let these convictions be his guide throughout his life. After serving his country in the Navy during World War II, Senator Helms came back to his home State as a city editor of the Raleigh Times. It was not long before he received his first exposure to Senatorial duties working as an Administrative Assistant to U.S. Senator Willis Smith and later for Senator Alton Lennon. Politics seemed to agree with Senator Helms, for in 1952, he directed the radio-television division of the presidential campaign of Democratic Senator Richard B. Russell of Georgia. For the next 7 years, Senator Helms served as the Executive Director of the North Carolina Bankers Association and editor of the Tarheel Banker, which grew under his guidance into the largest banking publication in the United States. Following this remarkable success, Senator Helms in 1960 became the Vice-President, Vice-Chairman of the Board and assistant Chief Executive Officer of Capitol Broadcasting Company. It was from this post that Senator Helms became a familiar voice in politics, filing daily editorials for WRAL-TV and the Tobacco Radio Network. Over the next 12 years, Senator Helms became known as an articulate conservative across the nation, where his editorials were printed regularly in more than 200 newspapers throughout the United States and broadcast by more than 70 stations in North Carolina. Senator Helms capitalized on his familiarity and popularity with the voters of North Carolina in 1972, when he was elected to the U.S. Senate on his first attempt at state- wide elective office. His election marked the beginning of a long and distinguished career in the Senate, where Senator Helms has been an active and consistent presence dedicated to preserving American freedom and liberty. Senator Helms has had a tremendous influence on policy matters over the last 30 years. He has been an outspoken critic of ceding American power to international organizations and an ever-vigilant watch dog of any treaty or agreement which may not be in the best interests of the United States. He has been a reliable conservative voice on many social issues and a consistent critic of government bureaucracy. Of his many achievements, Senator Helms has been the most active through his position on the Foreign Relations Committee, which he took over as Chairman in 1994. He sponsored the Helms-Burton Act, which codified the U.S. trade embargo against Cuba and allowed lawsuits against foreign companies who benefitted from American property expropriated by Castro's Communist dictatorship. Senator Helms also achieved another remarkable feat, when in 1998, he worked across the aisle to achieve passage of historic legislation reorganizing the State Department. Senator Helms has also maintained flexibility in his thinking, working closely with other members of the Foreign Relations Committee to examine and solidify the relationship of the United States and the United Nations, examine trade relations with China and examine the policies surrounding U.S. foreign aid. Senator Helms has had a significant impact in his 30 years here in Washington. His absence from important policy decisions will truly be missed. Anyone who has dealt with Senator Helms knows that he is a man whose conviction to his beliefs will not be easily swayed. They will also tell you that there are few people who are more congenial and charming than Senator Helms. I wish he and his wife, Dorothy, and the rest of his family all the best. It is with great appreciation and admiration that I offer these words to commemorate his retirement.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, we have before us the Intelligence Authorization bill for fiscal year 2003. This is a bill which we have debated extensively in the Select Committee on Intelligence, and which we reported out in May. Especially during the global war against terrorism in which our nation is currently engaged, it is important that we give the U.S. intelligence community the support and encouragement it needs to do its vital job--and that we hold it properly accountable for its activities through the oversight process. This bill provides healthy measures of support, encouragement, and accountability, and I urge my colleagues to support it. While we cannot discuss actual budget figures in an unclassified setting, I can assure my colleagues that this bill provides a significant increase in funding to the U.S. intelligence community, money that it needs and will continue to need as we demand more and better work from it than ever before. Even the world's sole remaining superpower with unchallenged military supremacy cannot be everywhere, and the war on terrorism taxes our capabilities in new and often unprecedented ways. More than anything else, this current conflict is an intelligence-dependent war. We need to do everything we can to ensure that our polilcymakers and our military commanders get the best possible intelligence support. This bill will help ensure that they do. In addition, our bill also increases the Intelligence Community's accountability to the elected representatives of the American people whose job it is to ensure proper oversight of our intelligence bureaucracy. I would like to mention just a few examples of this. First, our bill clarifies, rationalizes, and codifies the series of reporting requirements that form such an important part of the process by which Congress obtains information and analyses of intelligence community activities. The bill also ensures that the intelligence community will be able to continue to fulfill its reporting requirements to the intelligence oversight committees of Congress in the wake of the changes to information-sharing laws contained in the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001. Our bill also requires that the National Foreign Intelligence Program budget provide specific breakdowns for annual budget aggregates relating to counterterrorism, counterproliferation, counternarcotics, and counterintelligence. This greater specificity, we hope, will enable Congress better to assess intelligence community resourcing decisions and ensure that the right priorities receive our support in years ahead. The two sides of our committee have not agreed on every detail of the classified appendix that accompanies our report on this bill, but on balance we feel that this is a piece of legislation that will provide much-needed support for--and improve the accountability of--the United States intelligence community. I urge the Senate to pass this bill promptly. The committee amendments were withdrawn. The amendment (No. 4752), in the nature of a substitute, was agreed to. (The text of the amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of Amendments.'') The bill (H.R. 4628), as amended, was read the third time and passed. The Presiding Officer (Mr. Dayton) appointed Mr. Graham, Mr. Levin, Mr. Rockefeller, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Bayh, Mr. Edwards, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Shelby, Mr. Kyl, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Roberts, Mr. DeWine, Mr. Thompson, and Mr. Lugar conferees on the part of the Senate.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, 3 months ago I would not have been on the floor supporting the establishment of a commission to look into our Government's failure to detect and prevent the attacks on September 11. Three months ago I believed very strongly that the Intelligence Committees of the House and Senate were not only capable of examining our Government's failures and vulnerabilities but were obligated to do so. I believed then that if we dedicated the necessary time and resources, we would be able to conduct a thorough and comprehensive inquiry. And I think we have made a lot of progress. Now that we are rapidly approaching the end of the year and the end of this Congress, I am increasingly concerned that the joint effort of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees will not be able to complete such an inquiry. Our scope is not broad enough. It is confined to the intelligence aspects--not to FAA, and not to immigration and other aspects. We now know that our inability to detect and prevent the September 11 attacks was not only an intelligence failure of unprecedented magnitude, it was a failure of our entire Government to protect and defend the American people. I am now convinced that an accounting on behalf of the victims, the families left behind, and the American people must include a comprehensive examination of how every relevant agency of our Government performed or failed to perform prior to the attacks. The House and Senate Intelligence Committees have been at work for approximately 6 months. We are making progress, but we are far from done. Our Committee began with high aspirations, but we soon stumbled. We had some early staffing difficulties along with some false starts on our hearing schedule. Early on, our inquiry turned up only information that provided to us. Our separate joint staff was dependent upon the information provided by our intelligence agencies, which were reluctant to cooperate fully. While our joint staff was working in the agencies, they were often isolated in rooms constantly monitored by agency staff. Agencies refused to circulate the joint staff's contact information and forbade them from meeting with anyone without agency supervision. While our staff was allowed to view large quantities of documents, they were not allowed to make copies of all of them. Therefore, the process of documenting certain events became very onerous and time consuming. Other agencies refused to allow the joint staff to interview key individuals. They were told that they could speak to supervisors and more senior personnel who often knew few, if any, details. Many of these problems were ultimately worked out, but that took precious time, time we did not have. Some of the problems persist today. For example, we are often arguing with agencies about who may or may not appear before our committees as late as the day before they are scheduled to appear. Witnesses are requested, refused, requested again, granted and then, at the last minute, refused again. There also remains a body of documents that the Director of Central Intelligence refuses to allow the committees to retain. Much of the information that we gather is classified. The process of declassification has taken an inordinate amount of time. Often we are still in the process of determining what we can discuss publicly moments before a hearing. It is this type of interaction that cannot be completely characterized as uncooperative but is, nonetheless, extremely counterproductive and has slowed the progress of this investigation. We are, however, making progress. The staff has reviewed many thousands of documents, but they have many thousands yet to review. They have interviewed many people, but there are many yet to interview. In fact, it is still very difficult even to determine how far we have come, and almost impossible to tell how far we have yet to go. I have been a part of many investigations in my career but none has been as important as this one. Almost 3,000 Americans have been murdered, and perhaps thousands more innocent lives hang in the balance every day. Our joint investigation must be thorough, comprehensive and complete. I want it to be a success. To be a success, however, an inquiry needs time and resources. If you limit either one, your chances of success diminish significantly. Unfortunately, we have a short supply of both and I am afraid that we are beginning to reap the results. From the outset, I argued strongly that our committees should avoid setting arbitrary deadlines. Deadlines are an invitation to stonewalling and foot-dragging, and we have seen some of both in our effort. I have also said many times that agencies under the congressional microscope are generally not motivated to cooperate. To be thorough, we must be able to identify and locate relevant information, retrieve it, and then analyze it in the context of all of other information we have gathered. This is inevitably a difficult and time-consuming undertaking. Because we have only one to three staffers actually focusing on any particular agency at any one time--and because so much of our joint inquiry staff resources are tied up in producing hearings--it has become exceedingly difficult to be as thorough and probing as we need to be. At this point, I do not believe we will be able to complete the job the American people expect us to do. However, I expect us to do a credible job and to lay the predicate for future investigations. While I continue to work on the joint effort, I believe ours must be a prelude to a more comprehensive inquiry. Therefore, I intend to support the creation of a commission, and I urge my colleagues to do the same this afternoon.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Madam President, one year ago, America awoke to a tragic and devastating incarnation of hatred and evil. Incomprehensible to most citizens only a day before, the terrorist attacks of September 11 dramatically changed our people, our country, and the entire world. Insulated for over 50 years from foreign attacks on our soil, Americans in an instant grasped the magnitude of the threat we face from terrorism. In the days after the attacks, the dangerous world in which we live never seemed more precarious. The immediate aftermath brought a tremendous outpouring of grief and sorrow. Our Nation mourned as the realities of the events of September 11 penetrated our collective psyche. Candles were lit in remembrance and flags were flown in patriotic displays of unity. Stories of bravery and courage emerged in the wake of the attacks which helped to inspire and remind us of all that is great about the American spirit. This foundation of strength which was built in the days after the attacks prepared us for the challenges ahead, and helped harden our national resolve to deliver our enemies to justice. We live in a far different world than the one we occupied just 12 months ago. With a clear sense of purpose our country has engaged the war on terrorism on every conceivable front. The vision outlined by President Bush in his September 20 address to the nation has been undertaken with extraordinary success. We have been vigilant in our fight to hunt down those responsible for the attacks, as well as those who might do us harm in the future. We have fortified our defenses and reorganized our government. Americans everywhere are more aware of their surroundings and remain defiant of those wishing to do us harm. We as a nation have grown stronger and more united than ever. We have been blessed with enormous freedoms and prosperity in this country. Over the course of our history, many Americans have made the ultimate sacrifice by giving their lives to protect our freedoms. Although we have enjoyed many years of peace, the events of September 11 showed us that this fight is far from over. We must continue to build on the successes of the past year, and never become complacent with our victories. The burden cast upon our great Nation was one we neither asked for nor deserved, but we carry it on our shoulders consoled by the memories of those who went before us who sacrificed in the name of freedom. I yield the remainder of my time.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with Senator Bayh in offering an amendment to the homeland security bill. It is a straighforward amendment designed to improve and strengthen the protection of our Department of Defense installations which contain the storage and destruction facilities for our Nation's chemical agent and munitions stockpile. Prior to September 11, no temporary flight restrictions existed for any of our Nation's chemical weapons stockpile sites. Secretary Rumsfeld took quick action after September 11 to establish temporary flight restrictions at each of these sites, but numerous violations of these flight restrictions have occurred. In the case of the Anniston Chemical Destruction Facility and storage site, 22 violations have occurred since flight restrictions were implemented by the Department of Defense. The latest was just today when a Lear-type jet flew over the incineration facility at less than 1000 feet. Another violation that caused great concern was a night time over-flight which included 3 passes by an unidentified aircraft. These incursions are serious matters. Current law provides for stiff penalties to be levied against those who violate restricted air space. In the case of our chemical weapons storage sites and weapons destruction facilities, we must be ever vigilant. That is what this amendment seeks to do by: First, requiring the Secretary of Defense to review the current temporary flight restrictions to determine if they are sufficient to provide maximum protection to these facilities from potential airborne threats and to report his findings to Congress. Second, the amendment would require the FAA to issue a report on each violation of the temporary flight restrictions which apply to these sites. Mr. President, as I have stated, very serious penalties already exist for those who violate these restrictions. Given the tremendous danger to the workers and local citizens associated with any unintentional crash or intentional act at any one of these storage sites, I believe this amendment is both reasonable and prudent in requiring the FAA to report on actions taken in response to a confirmed and properly investigated restricted airspace violation. Lastly, in the amendment we ask the Secretary of Defense to assess the use of periodic air patrols and military flight training exercises in terms of their effectiveness as a deterrent to airspace violations or other potential airborne threats to these facilities. While little, if anything, could be done to stop someone intent on attacking one of these storage sites from the air, we should take every step to make sure that these flight restrictions are respected and violators are punished. This amendment is about safety, enforcement of the law, and, ultimately, protection of our citizens who live in close proximity to these chemical weapons facilities.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, as the chairman knows the FY 2003 budget request contained $60.3 million for carrier modifications but only $14.9 million of that total was allocated for M113 ``A3'' upgrades. I am supportive of transformation and understand the need to reallocate resources for that purpose. In this instance, however, I believe the Army's decision not to upgrade the remaining forward deployed 112 M113A2s of the 2nd Infantry Division in the Republic of Korea and the 352 M113A2s in Europe belonging to the 1st Infantry Divisions, will at a minimum, leave the soldiers in these front line units vulnerable in a potentially unstable and high threat environment. Because of these concerns, I believe serious consideration should be given to using all the funds provided in this bill for M113 Carrier A3 upgrades and ask that you work with me on this issue during conference.

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, as the Senator knows, one of the most versatile and successful programs in the history of the Army is the development and fielding of the M113 Family of Vehicles. The Army has been in the process of up-grading these vehicles so that they can keep pace on the modern battlefield, improve survivability and drastically increase reliability. Not withstanding the need to transform the Army, the fact remains that in 2016, at the time the Army intends to field the Objectives Force, there will be nearly 10,000 M113s remaining operational including 1,900 in the Counter Attack Corps.

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Madam President, over the course of the last 6 months, the longstanding, systemic fraudulent activities of numerous corporations have been exposed in America and around the world. This fraud has cost American investors massive amounts, perhaps hundreds of billions of dollars, perhaps more. Beyond the tangible losses, investor confidence in the integrity of our capital markets has also taken a tremendous hit, as the Presiding Officer knows. As we move forward to address the shortcomings in the oversight of our financial markets, we must carefully consider the true impact of what has occurred. Thousands of people have lost billions of dollars. Thousands of people have lost jobs. Millions of people have lost or are losing faith in our capital markets every day. The fact is, none of this is made any easier because of the manner in which this has happened. Americans don't feel better because the mugging took place in the boardroom rather than the back alley. In many ways, what has happened is even worse. Because of the sheer size and number of participants in our markets, the corporate scams have been much more efficient and much more effective than the average boiler room fraud. The bottom line is this: Real people are facing tremendous losses, and confidence in our system is eroding. I believe we must address this situation with concrete measures. Fraud, even if committed by white-collar individuals--indeed, especially if committed by white-collar individuals--needs to be severely punished with criminal sanctions. I commend the efforts to create new, tough penalties for people who commit fraud through our securities markets. I supported that, as most of the people in the Senate did. Additionally, I believe there is more that we can do to stop or slow down the kinds of conduct that lead to situations where investing Americans are swindled out of hundreds of billions of dollars. The fact is, in one key area, the appropriate disincentives for participating in securities fraud are just not in place today. Since 1994, after the Supreme Court ruling in the Central Bank case, there has been no liability for secondary actors who aid and abet securities fraud in America. Think about that. Since 1994, there has been no liability for secondary actors who aid and abet securities fraud. In effect, the decision in the Central Bank case led to legions of accountants, lawyers, and other security specialists who play a vital yet behind-the-scenes role in securities transactions, off the hook for down-the-line fraud in the sale of securities. Think of it like this: The guys who procure the getaway car before the robbery, tune it up, fill it up with gas, put air in the tires, and sometimes even drive it away, face no financial liability for their involvement. Does that make any sense? Not to me. I believe not to the majority of the Senate, if we could get a vote on the Shelby-Durbin amendment. And we will someday because this is not an issue that is going to go away. When attorneys, accounting firms, and other securities professionals know that assisting securities fraud is nothing to worry about, as it is today, there is no wonder there has been a proliferation of audit failures, restatements, Enrons, Global Crossings, WorldComs, and many more to come. Civil and criminal penalties are important and necessary, but they are not sufficient. They serve a separate but important purpose of punishing fraudulent behavior. But they do nothing to ensure that investors, the victims, have an opportunity to seek financial redress. Civil liability supplements criminal and civil penalties and acts as a further disincentive to engage in or assist fraudulent activities. Here are a couple of basic questions we all need to answer. Why shouldn't investors--that is, so many million in America--be able to recover losses from aiders and abettors of securities fraud? What public interest do we serve by inoculating aiders and abettors of securities fraud from civil liability? Why should this type of tort, this fraud, not give rise to a civil claim, particularly when the loss to the investor and impact on the markets is so great, as it is today? Investors are intentionally being defrauded. Yet they have no remedy at the moment to seek monetary redress from those who aid and abet these crimes. Why? The answer is, aiders and abettors play a vital role in allowing primary actors to commit fraud. They should, accordingly, be held proportionately liable for their participation in these fraudulent schemes. I believe for our capital markets to function properly, it is not sufficient that financial information is accurate. The public must also have full faith and confidence that it is honest, that we have integrity there. Accountants, lawyers, and other securities professionals perform, by design, a gatekeeping function within our securities markets. It is unacceptable, I believe, that those upon whom so many rely--all of us-- those whose activities can literally move markets, are not held to the highest standards. Something is wrong. Forty years ago, at a time when securities transactions were considerably less sophisticated than they are today, Judge Henry Friendly, a distinguished jurist remarked: In our complex society, the accountant's certificate and the lawyer's opinion can be instruments for pecuniary lost more potent than the chisel or the crowbar. Today's staggering shareholder losses demonstrate that over time legal and accounting gimmicks have only grown more potent. I believe we must create greater disincentives for those who would assist securities fraud. Restoring liability for aiders and abettors of securities fraud should make securities professionals think once, twice, even three times before they put their seal of approval on information sent to the marketplace. Such carefulness will serve investors and our markets well in the future. Our economy has provided the best material standard of living in the world because our capital markets have traditionally favored clarity over complexity, disclosure over dissembling, and fairness over favoritism. For the sake of future economic growth and prosperity, I believe we must put those principles back into practice. Senator Durbin and I are going to continue to pursue our amendment. As I said earlier, this is not going to go away because there are going to be more scheduled. I wish we could have done it on this bill. I yield the floor.

Mr. SHELBY

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

Mr. SHELBY

Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, today I pay tribute to James B. Grimmer, a business pioneer in Birmingham, AL, and a dedicated community leader and family man. He was responsible for developing over thirty shopping centers throughout the Southeast, which helped to spur business and economic development in the region. Mr. Grimmer died in Birmingham on March 12 at the age of 81. I would like to take a few moments to reflect on the life of a man who brought opportunity to many in the Southeast and lived a life committed to family, friends and community. James Grimmer was born on March 23, 1920 and raised in East Lake, AL. He attended Ramsay High School and graduated from Woodlawn High in Birmingham. Upon finishing high school and unable to join the armed forces due to age restrictions, James joined the Royal Canadian Air Force in 1937 before he turned eighteen. However, with America's imminent entrance into World War II, James dutifully returned to the United States to serve in the U.S. Army Air Corps. He eventually retired from the military as a Lt. Colonel in the U.S. Air Force. After the war, James embarked on a long and stellar career in real estate development. In 1955, he joined the firm of Moulton, Allen & Williams. It was with this firm that he developed the Eastwood Mall, which was the Southeast's first enclosed mall. It had such a positive impact on the community that other developers soon followed James' lead and established numerous shopping centers in the Birmingham area. This led to new jobs, economic growth and was instrumental in Birmingham's expansion during the fifties and sixties. In 1962, James decided to build on his success and founded the Grimmer Realty Company. With his new independence, James went on to develop numerous other malls, including: the Western Hills Mall, the Montgomery Mall, Quintard Mall in Oxford, AL, and Jackson Mall in Jackson, MS. In fact, James Grimmer developed over eight and a half million square feet of retail space throughout the Southeast. James was also closely involved with the Birmingham community and had close ties to real estate developers around the nation. He enjoyed scouting, golfing and fishing with family and friends, and was a member of the Independent Presbyterian Church. He was a member of the International Council of Shopping Centers, The Club, Summit Club; Vestavia Country Club and the New York Real Estate Board. It is with sincere respect that I pay tribute to James Grimmer. He will be remembered as a pioneering businessman not only in the Birmingham community but the entire Southeastern region. He will be missed by the community as well as by his many close friends and relatives. My thoughts and prayers extend to his wife, Rose, children, Park and Susan, grandchildren, Leslie, Shelly and Jamie, and his sister, Evelyn Williams.