John Warner

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, if I could address the Senate----

Mr. WARNER. This amendment is in the nature of a substitute. However, in fairness to my colleagues, last night the distinguished ranking member and I made an agreement that we would vote once again because there could be colleagues who wish to now join in supporting this amendment. The yeas and nays have been ordered. Am I correct?

Mr. WARNER. Perhaps we could have a 10-minute vote.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I wish to endorse the amendment because it has a very sound predicate, a very sound philosophy; namely, that we should do everything possible to channel all of our scientific efforts toward not using a nuclear weapon, and this does just that.

Mr. WARNER. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, we thank our colleague from West Virginia. He has shown us the usual senatorial courtesy to allow the managers to move timely amendments. The distinguished Senator from West Virginia is recognized now for a period of 20 minutes. I thank him very much.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, could I just say, I appreciate the expression of those remarks by our senior colleague. Senator Levin and I are in our 25th year--that is a quarter of a century--in the Senate. Throughout that period of time, the Senator from West Virginia has been a tutor, and we have learned much. To the extent we may have progressed in our learnings, it is owing in part to his teachings. I thank the distinguished Senator from West Virginia.

Mr. WARNER. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I share the sentiments of my distinguished colleague, but I do observe that the delay on this vote, while it was the last vote on this side, there was a vote on the Democratic side not more than 5 minutes before. We share equally the burdens of the need to move forward on both sides of the aisle.

Mr. WARNER. Right.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I will speak with my distinguished leader and ask if he will give me that unfortunate authority to exercise. If he does, I will exercise it appropriately.

Mr. WARNER. I thank our distinguished leader. May I propound the UC first on the time? Then we will recognize the Senator from Maine for not to exceed 5 minutes. Then the distinguished Senator from North Dakota can proceed under the time agreement; is that agreeable?

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be 90 minutes equally divided for the debate in relation to the Dorgan low- level yield amendment prior to a vote in relation to the amendment, and that no amendments be in order to that amendment prior to the vote.

Mr. WARNER. The Senator is correct. There is a misstatement in the written text handed to the manager. I apologize. I read it. The Senator is correct. It is the other subject. I ask that the UC be amended accordingly to the statement by the Senator.

Mr. WARNER. I think it is a fair issue to be raised. I was unaware there were additional speakers. If the Senator will give me a moment.

Mr. WARNER. Ten minutes allocated? I ask the distinguished Senator from North Dakota. Mr. President, I will make a deal, I will yield 10 minutes of my time under this UC request to take that up. How about that?

Mr. WARNER. I thank the Senator.

Mr. WARNER. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. WARNER. Under the order, my understanding is now we go to the amendment of the Senator from North Dakota, with 90 minutes equally divided. Amendment No. 750

Mr. WARNER. Will the Senator yield for a question on my time?

Mr. WARNER. I listened very carefully to your statements. You say let's see if we can't stop taking the first step. Am I correct in that?

Mr. WARNER. Am I not correct, last year the Congress of the United States spoke to that issue and took that first step and initiated that program? The first step has been taken.

Mr. WARNER. Last year the Congress in the military authorization bill took the first step on this program, and put money in the bill. The research has already commenced. I think the point of reference, to be accurate, I would say to my good friend--you are not taking the first step. In other words, this program is ongoing. In this bill are simply the funds to continue what the Congress authorized last year after debate and vote.

Mr. WARNER. The distinguished chairman of the subcommittee is here. I asked him to address the strategic implications and the necessity. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs just yesterday, when I was consulting with him, said there is now a proliferation of effort by nations which have interests antithetical to ours, going deep into the ground to establish facilities to manufacture poison weapons, biological weapons, gas weapons, and possibly nuclear weapons. I think it is prudent that our arsenal of defense deterrence have in it weapons, if I may finish, both nuclear and conventional. Mind you, there is an ongoing effort parallel to this one to determine whether or not we can achieve the same strategic goals of destruction of deep underground facilities with conventional weapons, which would certainly be used prior to the use of any nuclear weapon. So it is a parallel program of conventional and nuclear. But I respect my colleague whose views are different than mine. His amendment bans forever this type of weapon--research, development, everything. It stops it cold.

Mr. WARNER. That is correct.