Ted Stevens

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, October 15, at 2:30 p.m. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on S. 943, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to enter into one or more contracts with the city of Cheyenne, Wyoming, for the storage of water in the Kendrick project; S. 1027 and H.R. 2040, bills to amend the Irrigation Project Contract Extension Act of 1998 to extend certain contracts between the Bureau of Reclamation and certain irrigation water contractors in the States of Wyoming and Nebraska; S. 1058, a bill to provide a cost-sharing requirement for the construction of the Arkansas Valley Conduit in the State of Colorado; S. 1071, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior, through the Bureau of Reclamation, to conduct a feasibility study on a water conservation project within the Arch Hurley Conservancy District in the State of New Mexico, and for other purposes; S. 1307, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation, to assist in the implementation of fish passage and screening facilities at non Federal water projects, and for other purposes; S. 1308, a bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to pursue and complete actions related to the implementation of a U.S. District of a U.S. district court consent decree; S. 1355, a bill to authorize the Bureau of Reclamation to participate in the rehabilitation of the Wallowa Lake Dam in Oregon, and for other purposes; S. 1577, a bill to extend the deadline for commencement of construction of a hydroelectric project in the State of Wyoming; H.R. 1284, a bill to amend the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 to increase the Federal share of the costs of the San Gabriel Basin Demonstration Project; and S. Res. 183, a resolution commemorating 50 years of adjudication under the McCarran amendment of rights to the use of water.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I would so move and ask unanimous consent it be in order at this time to order the yeas and nays.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I would like 2 minutes on each side.

Mr. STEVENS. No other motions in order, and up or down on the amendment. But I would like 2 minutes for the Senator from New Mexico and for myself, and the vote to occur after the already scheduled vote. I ask that it be in order to ask for the yeas and nays now.

Mr. STEVENS. I do request the yeas and nays.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry. I understand the Senate will stand in recess at 12:30.

Mr. STEVENS. I yield the floor.

Mr. STEVENS. But not Afghanistan. So the best advice I can give the Senate is this: If the Senator from New Mexico wishes a vote, I certainly will not oppose that and will join in requesting a vote. However, I will say no matter what happens here, whether the Senate approves or disapproves, the subject matter will have to be dealt with in conference because it is a matter that has been raised, and it is of great significance. I talk too much about my own service in World War II, which was sort of insignificant, but I got a CBI medal--China, Burma, India--but I spent only a day or two in India and an hour or two in Burma. We all thought we should have had a China medal, but the powers that be gave us a China-Burma-India medal. The powers that be right now are the Joint Chiefs of Staff. This is not a political issue is what I am trying to tell the Senate. This is an issue that arose out of an initiative from the Joint Chiefs of Staff themselves, is what I understand. They decided this current situation is so global in nature that people are moved from one area to the other in terms of expertise and need, that there ought to be a medal for the period we are in right now which is really a global war on terrorism, and as such I am inclined to support that concept. I will vote against the Bingaman amendment. But I have a feeling it will pass because I think everyone would like to be on record now of recognizing the need for medals. That would be my last comment to the Senate. The Senator from Hawaii is not here, but I do remember on two occasions when I have been with him when he has raised the question with the members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: Where are the medals? People, as they come home from a combat such as we are involved in now, may or may not be eligible for the Purple Heart. The concept of these other medals, however, has not settled down yet. I think as our men and women in the Armed Services start coming home, they should be recognized for their service with something of distinction, such as the medal of the type we are talking about, either the Global War on Terrorism Medal or the Expeditionary Medal, or the Service Medal, whatever it is. As a matter of fact, if they have been there, I would give them all three. Redundancy is not a crime in terms of medals for service in uniform in combat, as far as I am concerned. But I do think it has to be sorted out. The people who already have the Global War on Terrorism Medal, who fought in Iraq, may want the Iraqi medal. On the other hand, people who fought in Afghanistan may very much want the Global War on Terrorism Medal. It is something I think really requires pretty cautious thought in the Department of Defense and the Senate. I intend to join in asking for a vote on the amendment at the proper time and hope we can vote on it right after the vote that is set at 2:30 today, and then move on with further business of the Senate.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote and I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. This is a very serious amendment. Parliamentary inquiry. There are 2 minutes on each side on the Bingaman amendment?

Mr. STEVENS. Does the Senator wish to speak first?

Mr. STEVENS. I will yield our time to Senator Warner, chairman of the Armed Services Committee.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, there is substantial interest in this amendment. I don't know if the Senator wishes to have any more time.

Mr. STEVENS. Reserving the right to object, I will object because--I do object.

Mr. STEVENS. Parliamentary inquiry: What are we voting on now, Mr. President?

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry: What is the procedure now? Vote on Amendment No. 1830, Division II

Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, I yield the Senator 5 minutes of my time.

Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, do I have 10 minutes remaining?

Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, the Senator from Michigan has been talking about veterans health care and school construction. We are talking about Iraq and how to get our people home. We get them back by assisting the Iraqis in taking over the management of their own country. We do that by providing an infusion of capital to help restore that government to operation so it can take over and provide the security services, provide for the economic management services, and provide the army. It takes money to do that. As I pointed out before we went on recess, the President has chosen a unique approach. We could have gone in with the military and occupied that country for 4 to 5 years, as we did in Germany and as we just did in Kosovo. We are still bringing people out of Bosnia and Kosovo because we did not do that. This time we are going in to try to help them get in the position to take care of themselves and bring our people back. This is at the request of the other side of the aisle. The President has sent us a unique supplemental. The Democratic Party commanded that the President give us a budget for 2004 for Iraq. This is it. No President has done this in history. President Clinton did not do it. In fact, President Roosevelt did not do it. President Eisenhower did not do it. President Johnson did not do it. This President budgeted ahead of time for war, for a concept of finishing what we started. Part of what we started was to put in place a government in Iraq that would not be the despotic regime of Saddam Hussein. Argue all you want about the need for money. I agree, there is certainly a need for more money for veterans health care. I disagree about the statement concerning the need for new public school facilities. I am informed that in 2002 alone, school districts completed $11.7 billion of new construction. The recent study of the General Accounting Office and the National Center for Education Statistics indicates that schools are in better condition than they have been in the past; 81 percent of the schools reported their buildings were in adequate or better condition, 84 percent reported them to be in adequate or better condition. It is a minority of schools that are not in adequate shape. One place where there are no schools without our assistance is Iraq. How will our men and women come home unless the schools are functioning, unless the police are functioning, unless the army is functioning, unless the economy is functioning? That is the way to get them home. If we do not provide this $20.3 billion, we can increase the money for the occupation and occupy that enormous country for 4 to 5 years. We know what it is costing. Look at the budget we have: $66 billion for defense, $20.3 billion for assisting Iraq to become a nation. The $66 billion will go on and on and on, a demand for more and more money for the military in Iraq unless we take the action the President has requested and provide the $20.3 billion necessary. The amendment of the Senator will take over $5 billion out of that. It will cripple that program. We will have to send more and more people in uniform to do for Iraqis what they could do for themselves if they had the money to start their economy, start their security systems, start their military systems, start their whole governmental systems and make them work. That is what we should do. Some people call it nation building; I call it nation reconstructing. But in any event, it is an absolute necessity at this time to put the Iraqis back in control of their own affairs. It will not happen if the Stabenow amendment is adopted. I yield back the remainder of my time. I move to table the amendment of the Senator, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. STEVENS. Let me yield to the Senator to offer amendments. And may I ask Senator Corzine to hold off until we get an agreement concerning these two amendments we are going to consider?

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, as I understand it, we have announced there will be no more votes tonight. Senator Corzine will offer his amendment first, and then Senator Reed will offer his amendment. We will vote on those amendments tomorrow. I am informed there probably will be a morning hour after our convening at about 9:30. We will announce that schedule later. That means the first vote will take place sometime around 10:40.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on October 14, 2003, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on the nominations of the Honorable Roger W. Ferguson, Jr., of Massachusetts, to be Vice Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System; the Honorable Ben S. Bernanke, of New Jersey, to be a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System; and the Honorable Paul S. Atkins, of Virginia, to be a member of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, October 14, 2003 at 9:30 a.m. to hold a hearing on the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (T. Doc. 103-39).

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Special Committee on Aging be authorized to meet on Tuesday, October 14, 2003 from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. in Dirksen 628 for the purpose of conducting a hearing.