Jeff Sessions

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of Mr. Harkin and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the amendments be agreed to, the committee amendment be agreed to, the bill be considered read a third time and passed, as amended, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the bill appear at this point in the Record.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I understand that Senator Coats has an amendment at the desk, and I ask for its consideration.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 203, S. 1189.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 156, a bill reported earlier today by the Indian Affairs Committee.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be deemed read a third time and passed; that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; and that any statements relating to the bill appear at the appropriate place in the Record.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to; that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; and that any statements relating to the resolution appear at the appropriate place in the Record.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read the third time, and passed, the motion to reconsider laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the bill appear at this point in the Record.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be deemed read a third time and passed; that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; and that any statements relating to the bill appear at the appropriate place in the Record.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I understand that H.R. 2513 is at the desk, and I now ask for its first reading.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed; that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; and that any statements relating to the bill appear at the appropriate place in the Record.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about our Nation's celebration of Veterans Day next Tuesday. In doing so, I would like to take a few minutes to tell a short story; a story that I think needs retelling from time to time lest we forget some of the history that makes our heritage so special. Please forgive my use of a little artistic license for the sake of narration. My story begins in the fall of 1947 in Birmingham, AL. Close to the drug store where this story begins is a memorial honoring the Confederate Army's 10th Alabama Regiment. The men of this incredibly fine unit made a now famous charge up the slope of Little Round Top at Gettysburg on a hot day in July 1864. Imagine, if you will, these brave souls charging, without hesitation, bravely up that wooded slope toward the Union's 20th and Maine, a unit known to many and commanded by Col. Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain. For many dressed in Blue and Gray, the last steps they would ever take were made that fateful day. This is not an unfamiliar story in war; men going away from their home and their families to place their lives on the line for their country; taking each breath in combat and wondering if it would be their last. Mr. Raymond Weeks, one of the heroes of this story, knew the horrors of war. He had just returned home from the Pacific theater. He knew as well the trials and tribulations of fighting in a war and he knew too of wearing the title of ``veteran.'' His circumstance, Mr. President, was similar to that of my father, now deceased, who had likewise just returned from the Pacific, to open a general store with a gristmill in the small community of Hybart, AL. On that fall day in 1947, Raymond had stopped in his local drug store where he bumped into some of his buddies who had also returned home from overseas. Talk at the drug store turned to the upcoming celebration of Armistice Day, started nationally just nine years before in 1938. You see, Mr. President, many Americans still remember when, on November 11 of each year, America and the world celebrated the signing of the Treaty of Versailles, the treaty commemorating the armistice that ended the First World War on the 11th hour, of the 11th day, of the 11th month of the year in 1918. Thus ended ``the war to end all wars.'' Yet, years later, World War II also stole the youth of many nations and many of Raymond's and my father's friends as well. Raymond Weeks suggested that the group should ``do something'' in town to honor the memory of those comrades who had fallen in battle. With that, this small group of men began planning a local celebration to honor not just the veterans of World War I and the Versailles Armistice, but of World War II, and American veterans of all wars. On Armistice Day, 1947 the very first Veterans Day parade was held in Birmingham, AL. The parade drew such a great turnout that it became a yearly event, even though there was no official national recognition of Veterans Day at that point. Over time Raymond Weeks formed a small committee and eventually traveled to Washington, DC, to approach then Army Chief of Staff, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower with their idea for a national holiday. History records that General Eisenhower expressed immediate approval and referred the idea to Congressman Edward Rees of Kansas. Subsequently, H.R. 7786 became Public Law 380, a law which changed the name of Armistice Day to Veterans Day. Passed by Congress, the bill was signed into law, ironically, by President Eisenhower on June 1, 1954. What Raymond Weeks did was remarkable; even extraordinary. The Veterans Day Raymond Weeks helped to create does more, Mr. President, than just honor those who served in America's Armed Forces. Veterans Day, as hosted by Bill Voight and the National Veterans Day Committee and still celebrated annually in Birmingham, AL, extends its boundaries beyond those who fought in Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, and Desert Storm, it extends its reach to those who serve today in the ships conducting NEO operations off the coast of Africa, in the tanks manning outposts in Bosnia, to the sandy slopes of the Sinai, and to the cold ridges of the DMZ in Korea. There should be no doubt that Veterans Day is a special day that pays annual homage to the ongoing sacrifices of our men and women in uniform. While we were home, safe, these veterans were spread around the globe protecting our liberty and freedom and our security. To them a great debt is owed. Veterans Day, Mr. President, acknowledges the responsibilities and the special burden's that our Nation's men and women shouldered in the past. It acknowledges too the responsibilities and burdens of those in uniform today. And it calls on each of us to honor the legacy of veterans past and the dedication of today's military personnel, by renewing our responsibility to ensure that our Nation remains the strongest on earth, fully able to defend its just national interests whereever and whenever they are challenged. To all those great Alabamians and Americans who paid the ultimate sacrifice, to all those who survived, and to those who serve today, it is fitting that we pause with a humble and grateful heart and say thank you for their sacrifices which have kept us free. God bless the United States of America and may we be worthy of His blessing. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I rise this evening to speak about a dedication ceremony that will take place tomorrow afternoon in the city of Lineville in Clay County, AL. Mr. President, I would first like to take this opportunity to express my deep regret for not having been able to be in Lineville this afternoon with those who have gathered for the dedication of the Clay County Veterans Memorial Park. I would be remiss if I did not also take this opportunity to offer my sincerest thanks to Alabama State Senator Gerald Dial and the other members of the Veterans Memorial Board for working hard to make the Clay County Veterans Memorial Park a reality and for extending an invitation to me to participate in their dedication ceremony. Mr. President, I make these remarks tonight for one reason. Simply, It is about honor. Certainly, not personal honor. That is one variety we are all familiar with. No, the type of honor to which I am referring is the uncommon variety. It is the variety that we bestow as a tribute on special occasions for veterans and other heros in our society who made the supreme sacrifice. In less than 24 hours, my constituents will gather to honor all the men and women who, over the years, left their homes and loved ones, their jobs, friends and neighbors all over Clay County to answer a special calling. The veterans they honor might have grown up in Delta, in Ashland, in Cragford, in Hollins, in Millerville, in Barfield, in Lineville or anywhere in between, but even though they may have been separated by the miles and the years between them, a common thread ran through each of their lives. They were all connected by their love for this land and this country. We should take a moment to reflect on that for a minute--connected by a distinguishable act of love of country and a willingness to serve that country where ever it directed. Hence, Mr. President, I stand here tonight to join them in paying homage, to show our respect, and our sincerest appreciation for the sacrifices that these patriots made for our country. Sacrifices that ensured the freedom you and I enjoy today and our children's children will enjoy years from now. With the dedication of this memorial park they are simply saying thank you to all those who have gone before, those who believed enough in freedom to risk their lives. In commemorating the memory of these friends and loved ones, we are reflecting on a glorious past, but we are also pausing, I think, for a moment to look forward in time with a hopeful spirit and a pledge of unwavering support to the young men and women in communities all around this great Nation that we will unconditionally support them just as we supported those we honor today. The Clay County Veterans Memorial Park will be as much an emblem of the courageous spirit and bravery of patriots from yesteryear, as it will be a beacon of hope and source of strength for future generations. I pledge to do my part to make sure that we remain the strongest and greatest country in the world, and we defend our just national interest. Mr. President, ours is both an important and a unique moment in history. We no longer live in the bipolar world that shaped our lives and our political consciousness over the last half century. The monolithic presence of the Soviet Union has been replaced by new threats. We live in a rapidly changing world where our ability to adapt and our commitment to remain a world leader will be tested by both the cunning and the strong. The veterans being honored today defeated Nazi Fascism, brought Soviet Communism to its knees, were victorious against tyranny, and protected democracy and freedom around the world. They led our country through times of conflict and war to the edge of the 21st century. Had I been able to be with my constituents today, I would have reminded them that as our Nation moves forward we will face new national defense considerations. We must maintain a strong military, and I will give my full support to our men and women in uniform. The military must, I believe, be capable of protecting our interests and the lives of our soldiers in places like Bosnia, Korea, and the Middle East when asked to do so. We must therefore provide our service men and women with the best training, the best equipment, the best information, and the best overall opportunity for success under any circumstance, so that when they are called to perform, they will emerge victorious. We have approached a time of major historical significance in the area of foreign policy and international cooperation. We have new and exciting opportunities to promote peace and prosperity throughout the world that many of us may never have thought possible. The winds of democracy and economic prosperity now blow in Eastern Europe precisely because of the sacrifices of those being honored today. Mr. President, patriots from Clay County, AL fought and died to make this prosperity possible. The overwhelming desire on the part of counties around the world to emulate us--to be like America is a testament to our proud past and an example of fairness that is the hallmark of our society. We are, I truly believe, standing on the brink of a change of historic proportions. It represents a step forward for peace and cooperation that will surely carry us well into the 21st century. We must always remember those who made this possible. I am reminded of a quote by Gen. Douglas MacArthur on April 19, 1951, as he spoke before Congress. He said that, ``Old soldiers never die, they just fade away.'' Tomorrow will be a great day for Clay County. Memorial Park is for the veterans, living and dead, who fought so that freedom, our freedom, would never perish. It also represents that community's commitment to a memory of sacrifices made, and promises kept. Mr. President, I thank the citizens of Clay County for their individual sacrifices, and hope that they will find solace in this place they gather to dedicate today. It is also my hope that they will find solace in the knowledge that their sacrifices are honorable too, and as lasting and worthy as the sacrifices of those who have gone on before them. I thank the Chair.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Thank you, Mr. President. First, I would like to say how much I appreciate the excellent comments of the Senator from Iowa, Senator Grassley. He believes deeply in improving the life and health of children, as you do, Mr. President, and have worked toward that end. I salute the work that has been done. It is a major step forward in improving foster care and the ability to adopt children in America, which is something this Congress, I think, will be able to take real pride in.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to have 5 minutes off Senator Specter's time.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, lately, a discussion has been undertaken about the question of civil rights. Some think civil rights means preferences, quotas, and set-asides; others say it principally means equality in the law. That has been a major bone of contention as we have considered the nomination of Bill Lann Lee, an able attorney, for the position of chief of the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. We have had a lot of discussions about this question in recent years, and it is an important issue as this Senate considers that nomination. But there are other matters that come before the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice. It is a great division; it has played a tremendous role in the changing of race relations in America and has helped break down legal and de facto desegregation throughout this country. It has a great staff of 250 lawyers. But I think it is also a matter of significance and importance that the chief of the Civil Rights Division maintain clear and firm control and supervision over that Department. In recent years, as the situation in our Nation has changed, legal barriers to equality have been broken down, and actions by that Department have raised questions about the validity of their actions and whether or not the positions they are taking on a number of cases are worthwhile. I have heard complaints about that. As a U.S. attorney for 12 years, I saw this division operate. Sometimes the actions taken by the Department were valid, however in many cases their actions can fairly be characterized as questionable. As the attorney general for the State of Alabama, I have seen a number of instances that trouble me about the role and the legal position of the Department of Justice. Just this week, there was a major decision by the U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. That opinion rendered an important decision. One newspaper article, described this opinion as a ``stinging rebuke" to the U.S. Department of Justice. The Federal court ordered the Department of Justice to pay $63,000 in attorney's fees to a Dallas County commission in Alabama over an election dispute that dragged on for 4 years. Let me read you some of the comments from that article. I think it points out the need to make sure that the person we have as chief of the Civil Rights Division is balanced and fair and treats everyone with the justice that the Department contends that they do. Calling this case ``very troubling,'' the appeals court blasted the Department of Justice for its continued refusal to pay legal fees and for its insistence that the white leadership on the Dallas County commission helped a candidate win an election contest. This is what the court said: A properly conducted investigation would have quickly revealed there was no basis for the claim of purposeful discrimination against black voters. The opinion also pointed out that the actual placement of Dallas County voters within districts was made by the predominantly black board of registrars. An attorney, John Kelly, who litigated the case for the county commission, said, ``This is the toughest Federal court decision I have ever read.'' Indeed, I would have to agree with that. It is remarkable. The decision means that the Federal Government will have to pay to the county commission, out of taxpayers' money, your money and my money, $62,872.49 into their fund, to pay for the attorneys, which the court found were having to defend a case that was unjustified. The opinion was written by a U.S. district judge from California who was sitting by designation on the eleventh circuit panel. Although the repayment of the attorneys fees is partial compensation to those aggrieved by the Department's actions, as this judge stated, ``Unfortunately, we cannot restore the reputation of the persons wrongfully branded by the Justice Department as the public officials who deliberately deprived their fellow citizens of their voting rights. We also lack the power to remedy the damage done to race relations in Dallas County by the unfounded accusations of purposeful discrimination made by the Department of Justice.'' The three-judge panel suggested to the Justice Department that it be ``more sensitive'' in the future ``to the impact on racial harmony that can result from the filing of a claim of purposeful discrimination.'' The court said it found the Justice Department's actions, ``without a proper investigation of the truth, unconscionable.'' ``Hopefully,'' the court goes on to say, ``we will not again be faced with reviewing a case as carelessly investigated as this one.'' Now, Mr. President, I think that the Department of Justice has an important role in this country to ensure equal rights, to make sure everyone has the right to vote, to make sure that there is equal justice under the law. But they also have a responsibility to be fair, to carry on their cases effectively, to be nonpartisan, to be objective, and to be careful in the cases they bring. This case went on for 4 years, when in fact, it could have been disposed of in short order with an effective investigation. So, whoever is chosen to head the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice will have an important task. I asked Mr. Lee when I interviewed him, if he would take control of this Department? Would he make sure that the attorneys in that Department are obeying the law and are actually doing justice and not injustice? Would he make sure that they would not engage in civil wrongs when focusing on civil rights?'' Yes, this article will tell you that the Department of Justice can do civil wrongs and, in fact, they have done so. As attorney general of the State of Alabama I had occasion to witness this, as the following story illustrates. There was a question about whether or not the voting rights section of the Department of Justice had the power and the duty and the obligation to preclear--that is, approve--a law change in Alabama in which the judges on a panel went from five members to seven members who would be elected at large. They said that they did have a right to object to that, that that law could not take effect until they had approved it--read it, studied and approved it. We did not believe that was so. There was legal authority present, including a decision made by the U.S. Supreme Court, that clearly indicated to me as attorney general of Alabama that they had no authority to preclear that decision. So I said we were going to proceed with it, and they maintained their objection. Now, there is an interesting thing about this that you may not know. If you object to a ruling of the Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, in Washington, DC, and you live in Alabama, you can't file a lawsuit in Federal court in Alabama to get a conclusion of the matter. Under the law, you have to file the lawsuit in Washington, DC, in Federal court, which is a very expensive process. I submit, Mr. President, they didn't think we would do it. They didn't think we cared enough about that principle to do so. But we told them they were wrong and they were going to lose this opinion, and we would file the suit. They called our bluff and refused to preclear or agree that they did not have control over this position. So we filed a suit, and the case proceeded for a short time. The U.S. Department of Justice then confessed--admitted--that they had no basis for their case, and conceded our point. I say to you, Mr. President, that you can say that was a mistake and some might say so. In my opinion, it was a heavyhanded application of the law. Those were good attorneys. They knew they didn't have to have a good legal basis for the position they took, and they tried to bluff the State of Alabama and force the State of Alabama to capitulate anyway. So this is the kind of thing that is important. All of us care about justice in America. Also, we care about the law being enforced, and we believe that civil rights attorneys can also make errors; civil rights attorneys can actually do civil wrongs. We believe that they have to obey the law, also. So I would just say that this points out another reason, as we debate who should be the head of the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, that we select a person who is balanced, who is fair, who is objective, and who will follow the law, including the Constitution of the United States, the laws passed by this Congress, and the case authority of the courts of the United States. Mr. President, that concludes my remarks. I yield the floor. Mr. AKAKA addressed the Chair.

Mr. SESSIONS. I ask unanimous consent to proceed not to exceed 3 minutes as in morning business.

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

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I would like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude today for the cooperation of my colleagues, and in particular my good friend and home State colleague, Senator Richard Shelby, as well as colleagues from Florida and Georgia and the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Orrin Hatch, and the chairman of the Constitution Subcommittee, Senator John Ashcroft, for their expedited consideration of the Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa and Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River basin compacts that passed the Senate today. Our citizens in Alabama and the Southeast region have many benefits from an outstanding environment and a generous water supply. But population increases have made water resources extremely valuable. The water compacts passed today by the Senate are the first step in allowing the three States of Alabama, Georgia, and Florida to enter into legal, acceptable agreements which will ensure the water resources of the region are divided in a responsible and equitable way, which protects the environment and ensures a reliable supply of water for drinking, agriculture, and recreation. Passage of these water compacts is the result of nearly 20 years of work between the States of Alabama, Florida, and Georgia. Today's action represents only the initial step in a challenging process which must ultimately be carried through by these States. The water compacts themselves do not contain the formula for actually dividing the water resources, but serve only to grant permission to the States to create a formula themselves. Without the water compacts, it is likely my home State of Alabama, along with Georgia and Florida, would be forced into Federal court for protracted litigation to determine an equitable way to divide these resources. The action taken today will allow our States to enter into thoughtful negotiations rather than wasteful litigation to determine a permanent solution to our region's water resource problems. Mr. President, no remarks on this action by me today would be complete without my mentioning the work of Alabama Gov. Fob James and State Representative Richard Laird, who have worked tirelessly toward this end. Governor James has personally given his attention to the matter, and negotiations have been ongoing, as I have noted, for many years. Representative Laird has been very active in this entire process and has been the main spokesman for Alabama's effort for over 3 years. As a former attorney general in the State of Alabama and one who was involved in these activities, I know firsthand the personal commitment that Representative Laird has given to this effort. I also want to take this opportunity to recognize Mr. Craig Kneisel, the chief of the environmental section of the Alabama Attorney General's office. Craig Kneisel has been the chief of that environmental office since its founding around 20 years ago. He has given leadership and legal advice to this effort that has reached a good conclusion today. So we have made a major step toward making an equitable resolution of the water problems of these States, but we have to keep on going. There is no doubt that, as our population increases, as our economy grows, there will be greater and greater stress on these wonderful environmental resources. We must protect them and at the same time must make sure that economic growth is facilitated by having a healthy environmental resource such as these two river basins. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask that I may proceed as in morning business.

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

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I rise today so that this great body may momentarily reflect upon the importance of the bill we are about to vote on this afternoon. It is a bill whose beginnings extend back to early Spring, a bill that has been through many hurdles since then to include a major compromise impacting competition at depots around the country. I intend to vote yes for this bill and I encourage my fellow Senators to do the same. There have literally been thousands of differences between the House and Senate versions of this bill. However, what is important for Members of this body to understand is that on both sides of the aisle, in both Houses of Congress, we have fundamental support for maintaining the strongest national defense possible for America. This is not an easy task. We share differences in solutions to defense that range from management styles, to leadership, to modernization and procurement, to the vexing uncertainty of the funding levels required to sustain our forces in the field. The conference agreement was unanimously supported by the committee under the able leadership of Chairman Thurmond. On the major issues of Bosnia, the B-2, cooperative threat reduction and other issues, the bill is much closer to the Senate position than the House position. Equally important to me, the bill is consistent with the targets of the bipartisan budget agreement. The depot issue was certainly the most controversial provision in this year's bill. There are strong feelings on both sides of the aisle. As the committee noted recently, ``many jobs are at stake, and neither side wants to lose them.'' Certainly, I didn't want to lose any at our great depot in Anniston, AL. Nonetheless, I feel strongly that Chairman Thurmond's objective all along was to ensure fair competition and a level playing field. I feel he and the other members of the committee achieved just that. We have a fair compromise. We have an honest compromise. We have a product that the Department of Defense can work with. I think it's time to put our disagreements behind us and move forward in unity to support the men and women in uniform for whom this bill is designed. I plan to vote for this bill and I trust my colleagues will join me in making this vote an overwhelming one.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, as I understand the proposed BAT language then, the committee is only eliminating basic BAT procurement for fiscal year 1998 and the committee intends for the basic BAT program, as well as the advanced sensor, to continue development through fiscal year 1998 at which time the committee will have an opportunity to evaluate the program's progress this time next year. Again, would the Senator conclude that my understanding is correct?