John Warner

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. It is my understanding of the parliamentary situation that an amendment by the distinguished Senator from West Virginia and the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Mr. Cochran, is the pending matter. Is that correct?

Mr. WARNER. I ask unanimous consent that I be made a cosponsor with them. I spoke to the sponsors earlier this morning.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I commend these two Senators for taking the initiative to add an incremental part of the cost of the Martin Luther King Memorial, and I would like to take a minute to go back and recite the history of the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial. During the 104th Congress, while Chairman of the Rules Committee, I joined my colleague from Maryland, Senator Sarbanes, to authorize a project for construction on the national mall. Our bill, as I read from the Committee Report for S. 426 from December 19, 1995, authorized the Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, the oldest Black fraternity in the United States, to establish without cost to the Federal Government, a memorial in the District of Columbia and its environs to the late Dr. Martin Luther King. Similar bills were introduced in the 100th, 101st, 102d, and 103d Congresses, reported favorably by the Committee on Rules and Administration in the 100th Congress, and in the 102d Congress the bill passed the Senate. Again, that reference, for those who want to go back and read this report, is Calendar No. 284, December 19, 1995. I was privileged to work with Senator Sarbanes on this legislation, and we did secure the authorization for this group and others to proceed with this memorial. If I might say, Mr. President--and I say this with a great sense of humility--I have always had a deep admiration for Dr. King. It started at the time that he went to the Lincoln Memorial and addressed, indeed, the world, much less the United States, the Nation. I came down not as a participant but as a spectator, as a young man. I was drawn to the location, as were many others, and simply stood quietly on the side of the street as the marchers went by and then was able to get close enough to hear in some way some parts of the speech as it was so eloquently delivered that day. Then in later years I was privileged to be a member of the Chapter of the Washington National Cathedral, the Chapter being the governing body of the Cathedral at that time, and the subject of his addressing the Nation from the pulpit came up. I always expressed support for that, and actually my term expired before the historic day when he was invited to take the pulpit at the Washington Cathedral and give his last sermon. He met his tragic and untimely death shortly after that. So it is against that background that I joined with my dear and valued friend, Senator Sarbanes, to introduce the original authorizing legislation. Construction was required to begin by November 2003. However, because of the difficulty in choosing a site, finalizing a design, and raising the $100 million that would be necessary, the project was still in need of funds. In 2003 I again joined my colleague from Maryland to extend the authorization so the Martin Luther King, Jr. National Memorial Project Foundation would have additional time to raise the funds necessary to erect a fitting tribute to Dr. King. We were able to pass another piece of legislation, S. 470, to extend the deadline to November of 2006. Since that time, I am pleased to say that the Foundation has raised approximately $40 million toward the total cost of the Memorial. Today I join my dear friends Senators Byrd, Cochran, and Sarbanes to provide an additional $10 million for the construction. I simply add that, as noted in the December 1995 Committee Report, the first paragraph I read, about the public funding, at that time it was the hope and expectation that private funds could achieve the goals in their entirety. Although arduous and wonderful efforts have been put together by many people to raise the funding, I think it is appropriate that this increment of public funding be added. And I say that because I was--many of us--a part of the effort to establish the World War II Memorial. And there, again, it was, I think, 95 percent private funding largely through the efforts of our beloved colleagues, Bob Dole and Fred Smith, a citizen of national and international recognition and accomplishment, and together their large team of people did raise about $100 million. But at the very end there were expenses to be incurred that were not foreseen to enable a massive audience to come from all over the United States for the dedication. And at that time, as a Member of the Armed Services Committee, I was able to secure some modest amount of funds, several million dollars, to enable that ceremony to be completed. So I think precedent is established there for the use of public funds for memorials of enormous significance historically and otherwise to our Nation. Dr. King serves as a reminder that change can be brought about most powerfully when it is done by non-violent means. Visitors will come to the Memorial from every part of this country and indeed the world, to be inspired anew by Dr. King's words and deeds, and the extraordinary story of his life. It will be of particular inspiration to the many school children who will visit for years to come. Dr. King's dream is the fulfillment, in part, of the revolutionary words of great American patriots such as Thomas Jefferson and it is fitting that the two monuments will rest across from each other. I have worked with my friend and colleague from Maryland, Senator Sarbanes, from the beginning of the efforts in Congress to secure a site and build a memorial on the national mall. I am proud of our humble contributions to this project and look forward--with great expectation to the day that we can visit Dr. King's Memorial in its rightful place--among the giants of American history and liberty. Mr. President, I again commend the sponsors and yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished colleague from Maryland, a dear, dear friend. We have worked on so many things together, and continue to do so. But I recall very vividly going down on the day we dedicated the site. It was a bitterly cold day. There was a small tent in which there was a heater going, and we emerged from the tent. I, for some reason, remember one line, not spoken by either of us but by several others who spoke at the occasion: The site was chosen so the sunrise cast its first rays on the memorial; and then, as the sun set, the final resting rays of the day would drape the memorial. I remember that phrase to this day. I thank my friend for his kind remarks. I yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Reserving the right to object, I would like to get into the queue. I am here to accept the manager's request. My amendment is filed. The Senator from Tennessee is my cosponsor. Could we follow the Senator?

Mr. WARNER. I want to help the managers keep this bill moving. We would not require more than 30 minutes, equally divided.

Mr. WARNER. That is correct. This is offshore drilling.

Mr. WARNER. If the distinguished manager would interpret what ``wait a while'' means.

Mr. WARNER. I am here to accommodate.

Mr. WARNER. If the distinguished manager would indicate, we could go tonight. I would be willing to wait all night.

Mr. WARNER. Reserving the right to object, I want to be totally cooperative with the leadership, and they have been open and candid with me regarding the very strong opposition to the Warner amendment. I would advise my colleagues, whether we could get that parliamentary ruling is still not clear. So I will consider the following as a substitute to the provisions relating to the Senator from Virginia; that is, that I be recognized to bring the amendment up, that at least one or two colleagues who are in opposition would then express their opposition and, following that, I will commit, as long as there are one or two who will speak in opposition, to state the case, then I will ask to withdraw the amendment.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, would the Chair recite the request now as it relates to the section pertinent to the Senator from Virginia? I say to my colleagues, if you would be willing to each speak 5 minutes, I will take 5, 5 minutes each for the Senators from Florida and New Jersey in opposition, then I will move to strike the amendment.

Mr. WARNER. All Senators will speak no more than 5 minutes on this matter.

Mr. WARNER. All right. That is sufficient.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I would also like 5 minutes for the distinguished Senator from Tennessee in favor of the amendment.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, how much time does the Senator from Tennessee have?

Mr. WARNER. Reserving the right to object. I think you would need 3 minutes for this.

Mr. WARNER. At least 3 minutes.

Mr. WARNER. I ask the Chair to advise the Chamber as to the pending business.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, it is my understanding that there was a unanimous consent put into order that following the votes, the Senator from Virginia would be recognized for a period of time, together with the Senator from Tennessee, the Senator from Florida, and the Senator from New Jersey, for the purpose of an amendment, which I understood was in order.

Mr. WARNER. Is that under the unanimous consent, or is it that I just got the floor?

Mr. WARNER. It is my understanding that the Presiding Officer stated incorrectly with regard to the Senator from New York; is that correct?

Mr. WARNER. All right. I further inquire, is it appropriate for the Senator from Virginia to ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside so that I can proceed.

Mr. WARNER. I thank the Chair. This is somewhat unusual. We will proceed as directed by the Chair. Mr. President, I first ask that the amendment at the desk be modified.