Ted Stevens

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. I yield to the Senator without losing my right to the floor.

Mr. STEVENS. I have taken 7 minutes.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, may I inquire of the minority, are they willing to set a firm time for the vote on this amendment?

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment has more than a whiff of politics in it. If I had the power to do so, I would close the room and turn on some fans. This is the most outrageous amendment I have heard in my time in the Senate in 35 years. As a practical matter, it is also wrong. Contracts were bid. Brown and Root contracts were bid. The December contracts were entered into for Bosnia, Kosovo, by the last administration. The Vice President stated what the Senator from New Jersey said in part. He did not say fully what the Vice President said. Let me say what the Vice President said on September 14: I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven't had now for over three years. And as Vice President, I have absolutely no influence of, involvement of, knowledge of in any way, shape or form, of contracts let by the Corps of Engineers or anybody else in the federal government . . . The Vice President has a deferred compensation obligation from his former employer. He has no financial interest in Halliburton. The Senator's amendment cleverly works through a connection to the Vice President because he does have a deferred compensation concept. He has a right to receive money that was owed to him by Halliburton before he left that company for work he did before he left that company. The deferred compensation is money the Vice President earned as part of his monthly salary while he was at Halliburton but elected not to receive until he left the firm. This is done in many cases. It is a fixed amount that is being paid out over a period of time. The amount is not tied to the success or failure of Halliburton in any way. It is money owed by Halliburton to the Vice President for the time he was employed by the company before he left the company. While employed by Halliburton, the Vice President routinely deferred a portion of his salary. That was his right to do. And each year he had the option of electing to receive a deferred salary in a lump sum payment when he left the firm or in a stream of payments over a period of time. In December of 1998, long before he contemplated returning to public life, Vice President Cheney elected to defer a portion of his 1999 compensation and receive it over a period of years following his departure from the company. Once he made that election in 1998, it was irrevocable. When the Vice President left Halliburton some 2 years later, he was not able to change this election, and Halliburton was required to distribute the 1999 compensation in five annual payments. To avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest, the Vice President voluntary complied with the practice then required by the Office of Government Ethics and purchased an insurance policy to ensure that he had no financial interest in the future of Halliburton. The Vice President purchased this policy out of his own pocket. He paid the premium himself. The insurance policy guarantees the Vice President will receive the deferred compensation owed to him, whether Halliburton is successful or goes bankrupt. The insurance policy ensures the Vice President has no financial interest in the success or failure of this company. The Vice President eliminated any potential conflict of interest related to his deferred compensation arrangement and he resolved any financial interest he had in Halliburton. The Vice President reported the deferred compensation arrangement in his 2001 and 2002 public financial disclosure forms. On January 18, 2001, the Vice President signed an irrevocable agreement donating to charity the after-tax proceeds from the exercise of his Halliburton stock options. Again, this is something the Senator from New Jersey could have found very easily. Under the agreement, the Vice President divested himself of all economic benefits of the options and gave them to charity. The three charities named in the agreement are the Capital Partners for Education, the George Washington University Medical Faculty Associates, and the University of Wyoming. The Vice President has no control over the remaining stock options. This agreement gave the administrative agent the power to exercise the stock options and pay the proceeds to the charities. The administrative agent has total discretion to decide when to exercise the options without consultation with Mr. Cheney. Under the agreement, the Vice President will owe not a penny more or a penny less in taxes. The Vice President reported his gift arrangement on his 2001 and 2002 public financial disclosure forms. If you read this amendment, it covers every official of the executive branch on a senior level. Beyond that, it covers assistants to the President, the director of national drug policy. I wonder why the Senator didn't include every Senator in the United States. I have never had the honor to own 1,000 shares of stock in anything. Some Senators do. I just wonder what is going on here in terms of this concept. We already accepted an amendment that requires any contract entered into using the funds in this bill to be full and open competition. But this contract was full and open. It is competed approximately every 5 years. It is a Brown and Root company to which Halliburton is related. This is a slur against the Vice President of the United States. I have known him now since he was over in the House of Representatives as assistant to former President Ford. I have known this man for years and years and years. I know no more honorable man who has served in government than Dick Cheney. That is why I am here. I heard about this amendment. I am sad to say that I am here to respond to it. I never expected this from the Senator from New Jersey. It would unfairly and unwisely punish those who have been successful in the private sector and then voluntarily enter into the service of the United States in the executive branch. It doesn't touch the legislative branch or the judicial branch, only executive, and it does so very unfairly. I move to table the amendment, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. STEVENS. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I have been very patient. It is not a question. It is a request to make a statement.

Mr. STEVENS. I wonder if the Senator realizes he has just yielded the floor.

Mr. STEVENS. The Senator asked me a question. But I will not argue.

Mr. STEVENS. A gentlemen's agreement was entered into that we would not raise a point of order under rule XVI for germane amendments. But for those that are not germane, we made no such agreement. This is not germane to this bill. Therefore, I hope the Senator will not offer it. As a matter of fact, I hope he will take into account another answer which I will give to him about the question of germaneness. This matter is now in the counterintelligence section of the Department of Justice. That section has decades of experience and has really enormous experience in working on matters of this type. It is my judgment, and I ask the Senator this question: Does he realize that this sense-of-the-Senate resolution has a connotation of lack of confidence--no confidence--in the work of the counterintelligence section, a group that has very distinguished career people, and that the legislative liaison for the CIA has indicated to me through my staff that they are following the standard procedures of a series of administrations in handling this matter, and both the CIA and the counterintelligence section believe there is no need for a special counsel at this time? Does the Senator realize that this is not something which is sought by those professionals experienced in the area?

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, from my experience with this section--and I do not get involved with this section too often--it is a counterintelligence section of the Department of Justice. They have their own system of investigation. It has a very broad agenda in terms of portfolio. They have the scope of the whole intelligence network to work with. I share the Senator's umbrage about the leak. The question is, how to handle that leak. It is in the hands of the people who are trained and who have in the past discovered such leaks. Who will it be reported to? I am sure the criminal division of the Department of Justice, if and when they find who is responsible for the leak, because it is a violation of the criminal statute.

Mr. STEVENS. On what basis does the Senator say this is a unique case? In my experience, I have known several leaks and several individuals who were apprehended for leaks, some prosecuted, some not. Is it the Senator's impression this is a case of first impression?

Mr. STEVENS. I thank the Senator for yielding the floor. Now, I am sorry to say, I make a point of order under rule XVI that this legislation on an appropriations bill is not germane.

Mr. STEVENS. I don't know if that is debatable or not. I do not want to lose the floor.

Mr. STEVENS. If I still have the floor, I say to the Senator from New York, I have background being a U.S. attorney and being deeply involved in intelligence matters now for 35 years. I share his umbrage at the whole process. I will do everything I can to get to the bottom of this matter, but I do not think this is the time for a special counsel. There may come a time it will be required.

Mr. STEVENS. Yes.

Mr. STEVENS. No. Amendment No. 1873

Mr. STEVENS. Parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President it is my understanding this is an amendment pertaining to HIV/AIDS, and I support all activities concerning that, but it is not germane to this bill.

Mr. STEVENS. A point of order is not debatable.

Mr. STEVENS. That would be earmarking this money for a matter that is not germane for this bill. It is true that money could be used for that purpose, but I do not believe amendments are in order to start earmarking this money for items that are not germane to the bill. I am raising that it is legislation on the appropriations bill.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, the amendment is an amendment that will require Congress to enact another appropriations for the balance of the reconstruction money. It will cap the reconstruction funds at $5 billion. It puts another road block in the way of the reconstruction efforts. I referred earlier to yesterday's editorial in the Washington Post, which said: Paying to improve life for Iraqis will help create a safer environment for U.S. troops and will hasten the day they can leave. Rebuilding the electricity grid, fixing the water supply, getting the oil flowing, maintaining public safety-- all this is central to hopes for stability and representative government. I think the loss of momentum that will come from requiring another bill to be enacted before we get more money for reconstruction will destroy the whole concept of the plan that Ambassador Bremer is working on. I call to the attention of the Senate, I also put in a letter I received by fax from Ambassador Bremer just today reaffirming his plea to us to pass this bill as soon as possible. I do not think it is in the best interests of our troops. I do not think it is in the best interests of the Iraqi people. It certainly is not in the best interests of the person in charge of the whole effort, Ambassador Bremer, for the Byrd amendment to be approved. For that reason, I move to table the Byrd amendment and ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, will the Senator yield without losing his right to the floor? For the information of Senators, Senator Inouye is here. He is waiting. He has to make a statement. And Senator McConnell has the floor now for his amendment. I ask unanimous consent that following the disposition of the McConnell amendment, the Senator from Hawaii have 20 minutes.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I really can't tell how long it is going to be. We haven't put any time limit on amendments today. I won't do it on this side. They wouldn't take them on the other side. There will be no time limit on these amendments: Senator Hollings has an amendment, Senator Hutchison has an amendment, and Senator Warner has an amendment. I think there is an amendment on the list for Senator Nickles. There are a series of Senators on this side who still have amendments that could be raised. My understanding is that once we have measured about the same number of amendments presented by the other side so far today we would come back to our side of the aisle.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, that may be the alternative because I have tried all day to speed up that side in terms of consideration of amendments--all day long now. I started at 11 o'clock this morning. We have just finished handling five amendments on that side of the aisle. We haven't had one from this side of the aisle yet. I don't think it is beyond fair to say Senators who notified me they want to bring up their amendments that it is time for us to bring up amendments on this side. We couldn't get any agreement on time over there. I don't know of any reason why we should have time agreements over here. If the Senator wants to proceed with regular order, I am all for it. There are 16 amendments. We will be on those until midnight. Some of them may not be called up at all. But we can call them up, if the other side wants to do that. I believe, in balance and fairness, we have been compelled to be balanced on this side now for 5 hours. I think we are now going to be on this side for about 4 or 5 hours.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I remember my good friend from Nevada saying just let things work out this morning at 11 o'clock when I tried to get the time; let things work out. I don't know how long these amendments are going to take. I haven't seen them, either. I didn't see the ones either from that side this morning. You can't tell how long an amendment is going to take until you look at it and read it. As a practical matter, I am asking the Senator from Nevada to do on their side exactly what we had to this morning--take the assurance that we are going to move as quickly as we can and turn to some of the amendments on this side for a while.