John Warner

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that this letter be printed in the Record.

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, this is a letter from Senator Levin, the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee, to the distinguished Chairman Domenici and the ranking member, Mr. Conrad, of the Budget Committee addressing the needs, as we see them, for defense in the years to come. I will read one paragraph which I think is really dispositive of what we are discussing. I quote Mr. Levin: In the near term, I believe there are some urgent needs for which a Fiscal Year 2001 supplemental is appropriate, including the shortfalls that experts in the Department of Defense have identified in the defense health care program, increased flying hour costs, and full funding for the higher housing allowances currently being paid to military personnel living off base. He continues: With respect to Fiscal Years 2002 through 2006, I agree with the Secretary of Defense that it is prudent for him to conclude his strategy review and present it to the President and the Congress for our consideration before we make final decisions on the shape and overall funding levels for our future defense program. I yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I associate myself with Senator Reid's remarks. Senator Jack Reed is a very valuable and well-informed member of the Armed Services Committee, as well as his colleagues, the principal sponsors of the amendment.

Mr. WARNER. That is all right. Go ahead.

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, on my time, if I could ask my distinguished colleague a question. I pride myself on being among those who are strong supporters of the concept of a limited missile defense. I have been on this floor much of the 23 years I have been privileged to be in this body arguing for the need for this country to provide for its defense against that threat. I listened to the very careful recitation of all the options in the outyears. I think some of those options require significant modification of the ABM Treaty. Do I glean from that the Senator could be in favor of modifications to the ABM Treaty, or maybe the abrogation of the treaty if we are unsuccessful in modifications?

Mr. WARNER. I doubt we could proceed to some of the naval systems, which would require modification. You certainly have to concur in that.

Mr. WARNER. It is a point of reference. I also add the historic act adopted by Congress in response to the bill by the distinguished Senator from Mississippi, Mr. Cochran, carefully spells out that we can only proceed as technologically feasible, and that would be the pacing item. I am not so sure we can prejudge here in this limited review that we will spend all this money on missile defense that my colleague suggests. It seems to me we will have to pace ourselves as technically feasible. I think to ask this Chamber at this time to accept as a premise that all of this money is going to develop in the hundreds-plus of billions of dollars at this early date is a little premature.

Mr. WARNER. I thank the chairman of the Budget Committee for his strong past support. Would the Chairman explain what provisions regarding Federal employee pay have been included in this budget resolution?

Mr. WARNER. I thank my colleague. I share his view.

Mr. WARNER. The letter is in the Record. I cannot take more of our time.

Mr. WARNER. I have read it.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the language is clear. I simply ask: Do you agree or disagree with his statement again, that we should receive the results of these studies ``before we, the Congress, make final decisions on the shape and overall funding levels for our future defense program?'' Our time has expired.

Mr. WARNER. Let me address again the letter to the budget chairman, ranking member, from Senator Levin, which is written in very clear, plain language: In the near term, I believe there are some urgent needs for which a Fiscal Year 2001 [as we have discussed] supplemental is appropriate, including the shortfalls that experts . . . have identified in the defense . . . We got that. With respect to Fiscal Year[s] 2002 [which we are talking about] . . . I agree with the Secretary of Defense that it is prudent for him to conclude his strategy review and present it to the President and the Congress for our consideration before [Senator] we make final decisions [which this amendment asks] on the shape and overall funding levels for our future defense program. Do you agree with him?

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I will yield my colleague a half a minute--a minute on my time to answer the following question.

Mr. WARNER. I am going to ask my colleague from Connecticut another question which I thought I would ask on my time but he can respond on his time. It would take him less than a minute, I am sure. He has it right on his fingertips.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, we thank our colleague.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, we thank our colleague.

Mr. WARNER. Yes.

Mr. WARNER. We thank our colleague for his remarks.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, if I may add to what my distinguished colleague said, we shall work together to see whether or not an appropriate portion of Fort Pickett--he just loved that base--can appropriately bear his name. It would mean a great deal to the men and women of the armed forces. We will do that.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I am joined by my colleague, Senator Allen. We would like to address the Senate for a period not to exceed 10 minutes. Mr. President, today, just hours ago, Senator Allen and I were informed of the loss of one of our Members of Congress from the State of Virginia, Norman Sisisky. It has been my privilege to have served with him in Congress throughout his career. Our particular responsibilities related to the men and women of the Armed Forces--I serving on the Senate Committee on Armed Forces and he on the House National Security Committee. Our Nation has lost a great patriot in this wonderful man who started his public service career in 1945 as a young sailor in the U.S. Navy. In total, he served some 30 years, including his Naval service, service in the Virginia General Assembly, and in the service of the Congress of the United States. The men and women of the Armed Forces owe this patriot a great deal, for he carried forth his earliest training in the Navy until the last breath he drew this morning. They were always, next to his family, foremost in his mind. Throughout his legislative career in the Congress, many pieces of legislation bear his imprint and his wisdom on behalf of the men and women in the Armed Forces. Mr. President, it is a great loss to the Commonwealth of Virginia, this distinguished public servant. It is a great loss to me of a beloved friend, a dear friend. My heart and my prayers go to his widow--a marriage of some 50 years--and to his family. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, for the Committee on Armed Services, I report favorably nomination lists which were printed in the Records of the dates indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, as chairman of the Rules Committee during the 105th Congress, I presided over numerous hearings on campaign finance reform and I filed two comprehensive bills on this subject. And, just like my colleagues over the years in the course of my four Senate races, I have gained a firsthand familiarity with campaign finance issues. The Senate can take pride in this debate, while issues regarding the first amendment have been center stage, it seems to me there is another fundamental issue we should consider. One of our aims during this great debate should be to encourage greater citizen participation in elections. Citizens are the backbone of our democracy and should be given encouragement to participate in every way in the elective process. What are the means by which we can encourage a greater role for the average citizen? I believe one method is a $100 tax credit for contributions made to House and Senate candidates. I propose this tax credit be available only to single persons with an adjusted gross income at or below $50,000. For married couples, in order to avoid exacting a ``marriage penalty,'' a married couple filing jointly could claim a total of $200 in tax credits. For various reasons, the wealthy are already involved in politics, but there has been a declining interest in campaigns for those at the other end of the spectrum. This credit would encourage broader participation by moderate and lower income voters to balance the greater ability of special interests to participate in the process. There is precedent for such a tax credit. Until 1986, there was a $50 tax credit for contributions to political campaigns. According to IRS data, when Congress repealed the political contributions tax credit, ``a significant percentage of persons claiming the credit have sufficiently high incomes to make contributions in after tax dollars, without the benefit of the tax credit.'' My proposal would contrast with the previous tax credit because it would cap the eligible income levels to ensure it is not exclusively the wealthy who take advantage of it. I think this is an issue that should be addressed in this campaign finance bill. However, because of the constitutional prerogatives of the House of Representatives, I merely bring this issue to your attention now, with the expectation I will raise it again in the context of a reconciliation bill that may be forthcoming.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished leader. I should like to offer it, and I shall withdraw it. I will require no more than 10 minutes of time at the most convenient point this evening before we complete our work on this bill.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, today in our Nation's Capital funeral services were held for Rowland Evans, a lifetime journalist of international acclaim. This magnificently conducted service, attend by an extraordinary gathering of family, friends, and peers, preserved forever the man's extraordinary love of family, journalism, and service to country in the uniform of the U.S. Marines in combat operations in the Pacific during World War II. The Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Jones, officiated in presenting the American Flag to the family to conclude this deeply moving service. Rowland Evans was an astute observer of the values of our federal system of government, but his great fascination was with the political arena--the centerpiece being those who competed for and won or lost elective offices. His partner--his close friend--for over a quarter of a century, Robert Novak, rose to the challenge of chronicling with sensitivity, humor and insight his many lifetime achievements. Senator Kennedy, Senator Snowe, and I were privileged to be in attendance at the services at Christ's Church, Georgetown. We join in asking unanimous consent to have printed in today's Record the proceedings of the U.S. Senate, a complex institution, which Rowland Evans keenly understood, the eulogy by Robert Novak.