John Warner

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Showing that the full committee of the Senate appropriations gave overwhelming support to this amendment.

Mr. WARNER. That is fine.

Mr. WARNER. It seems to me we are going to have 5\1/2\ hours tomorrow. We will discuss this together. I will listen to the Senator from Michigan's views. In order to get some certainty for the opening of this debate tomorrow, which will commence immediately after the Senate is formally opened and the prayer is given, Senator Roberts from Kansas would be given 15 minutes to be followed by Senator Lautenberg of New Jersey for 15 minutes. Then I will only make known that Senator Burns, of course-- he is the chairman of the subcommittee for MILCON--will undoubtedly require some time. I assure him now that that time will likewise be given to Senator Burns. So the purpose of my unanimous consent is to see that those two Senators be recognized in that order for a total of not to exceed 30 minutes equally divided, 15 minutes each. I ask unanimous consent that that be the order.

Mr. WARNER. Why don't we do 30?

Mr. WARNER. I could examine the record of your remarks.

Mr. WARNER. The President could file this report in March.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, will my distinguished colleague yield?

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank the Senator. We have got the attention of the Senate now. We have a debate that will last 10 hours, well into tonight and tomorrow.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, there is no need to yield. Following him, I think Senator Hutchison of Texas, and then the Senator and I will have a debate well into the evening, I expect.

Mr. WARNER. The request is that these Senators I have enumerated be given those specific times under my control.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I wish to pick up on that last sentence of the de facto decision.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I agree with my distinguished colleague from Michigan. We do have a very valued member of our committee in this distinguished Senator from Rhode Island. It is interesting that he joined Senator Chafee, while that great Senator, that tower of strength, was here, and he was always so deferential and respectful to Senator Chafee. In his own right, he proudly graduated from West Point and served his hitch in the U.S. Army. He reminds me of that when we get excessive naval funds through our committee. We thank the Senator. While I may not agree with his conclusion, his participation on this committee and this matter is of great importance to us.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, might I be acquainted--I am sorry, I just had to step off the floor for a minute. Will the Chair kindly repeat the unanimous consent request at the moment? I believe I am going to try to manage this.

Mr. WARNER. The Senator is correct.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I suggest to my colleague that he go ahead and initiate his remarks, if that is his desire. She is about to arrive. We can put in a short quorum call.

Mr. WARNER. I can answer in the affirmative to the Senator's question.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, yesterday, the United States Senate took a procedural vote on Senator Daschle's amendment to S. 2521, the military construction appropriations bill. Senator Daschle lost this procedural vote by 42-54. I did not support the Daschle amendment at that time because it was a procedural amendment to an unrelated bill. This unrelated Daschle amendment kept the Senate away all day from the important business of the military construction appropriations bill. In addition, it appeared that the Daschle amendment might indefinitely delay consideration of this important bill. As chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, I have a responsibility to secure passage of the important military construction appropriations bill. This bill provides critically needed funding for military construction projects, improves the quality of life for the men and women who are serving our country in the armed forces, and sustains the readiness of our armed forces. These areas are traditionally underfunded, and this bill provides the necessary funds to help make up for this shortfall. For these reasons, I did not support the Daschle amendment when it came before me on a procedural vote on May 16, 2000. Subsequent to the procedural vote on the Daschle amendment on May 16, 2000, Senators Lott and Daschle reached an agreement to have two up or down votes--one on the aforementioned Daschle amendment and another on an amendment to be offered by Senator Lott. Under the agreement, debate on the amendments was limited by a time agreement. Once this leadership agreement was reached, it became apparent that the Daschle amendment would no longer indefinitely delay the military construction appropriations bill. Therefore, my previous objections to this amendment were no longer relevant. The Daschle amendment is a sense-of-the-Senate amendment. After stating a number of findings, the amendment states, among other things, that it is the sense of the Senate that ``Congress should immediately pass a conference report to accompany'' the juvenile justice bill that includes the Senate passed gun-related provisions. During the Senate's debate of the juvenile justice bill in May of 1999, I supported the Lautenberg amendment, and other amendments to close the gun show loophole in the Brady act. I also supported an amendment to require licensed firearm dealers to provide a secure gun storage or safety device when a handgun is sold, delivered or transferred. Unfortunately, the juvenile justice bill has been locked in a House and Senate conference committee. I remain firm in my stance on these issues. I certainly hope that House and Senate conferees can reach an agreement in conference on the juvenile justice bill. And I will continue to support the common sense gun provisions that passed the Senate during the juvenile justice debate. I believe the Senate passed gun-related amendments to the juvenile justice bill will help keep guns out of the hands of convicted felons and increase public safety without infringing on the rights of law-abiding citizens. Therefore, when it became clear that the Daschle amendment would not indefinitely delay consideration of the military construction appropriations bill, I supported this amendment.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I wonder if my distinguished colleague from Alabama will forbear. With regard to time on our side, there are a number of Senators who have indicated a desire to address the Senate tomorrow. Tonight I will put in place a UC to enable them to have a specific period of time. I point out, this is a bipartisan decision with which we are dealing in the Senate. We have our distinguished elder statesman, Mr. Byrd, leading it. We have another distinguished elder statesman, Mr. Hollings. I ask unanimous consent whereby, from the other side of the aisle, Senator Torricelli, Senator Cleland, and Senator Feingold each have 6 minutes apiece at their disposal. On our side, we will lead off tomorrow morning at 9 o'clock with Senator Roberts, and he desires 15 minutes; Senator Warner, myself, during the course of the morning, I reserve 20 minutes for myself; Senator Hutchison of Texas desires 7 minutes; Senator Inhofe desires 7 minutes; and Senator Snowe desires 7 minutes. I want to make those time commitments to guarantee that our colleagues who have indicated to me a desire to speak will have that time tomorrow. My understanding is there will be 5\1/2\ hours of debate tomorrow prior to the vote at 2:30 p.m. which is fixed by order. The leadership may, of course, in some way change that, take leadership time, and so forth. Basically, it is 5\1/2\ hours. Senator Byrd, under a previous order, still has an hour left of his time. So that should be recited. I ask that in the form of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. WARNER. General Clark, again, is a Rhodes scholar, a brilliant officer, but I do not agree with him about his perception of the Congress of the United States. I believe the next President, whoever that may be--Albert Gore or George W. Bush--will be able to assess this situation, come to the Congress, make the case, and the Congress will act responsibly. That can be done in an accelerated fashion. It does not have to wait until next July. Indeed, we tried in the amendment to give more time. So I close by saying to all those who want to join behind General Clark, I feel very strongly that that is a pretty severe indictment of the chain of events that are to be carefully undertaken, first, by President Clinton; second, by the next President of the United States, and then by the Congress. We must remember that we are a coequal branch. We repeat that and repeat that, but in Europe their parliamentary forms of government are quite different than ours. There is not the coequal stature with the constitution in place, with regard to their various forms of legislature, or general assemblies, whatever the case may be. They are quite different and they have to be respectful of how this situation works. I come back to Senator Byrd's statement, which is a brilliant statement, recounting World War I, World War II, and all the participation that this great Nation has given in this century towards peace and stability in Europe. Are they now to turn their back on that history? I say no. I say to my good friend from Michigan, and I say to General Clark, I believe they have gone just a step too far. I have more confidence in the next President and confidence that this President can make a strong case, and I have confidence in the institution of the Congress of the United States. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER. I can guarantee, if the facts of the case are so strong and the turbulence so great amongst our NATO allies, then I think this Chamber will act in a responsible way in the best interests of the United States and all those involved. Time and time again, I remind my colleagues in this debate, why are we so fearful that if the facts are there to justify the continuation of this mission this chamber will not vote in a majority to support the next President in his petition? That is underlying this whole debate.

Mr. WARNER. I can't guarantee that.

Mr. WARNER. First, the Byrd-Warner amendment is very carefully drawn so that the next President of the United States in following up with President Clinton's report with the next President's report. It is not required of him to wait until July as is now written. Indeed, Senator Byrd and I thought we would give it additional time. If the next President perceives that there is some turbulence and doubt in the minds of our allies, he can file the report. Then this Senator pledges under the bill within the 10 days to come forward with that resolution and have this body act. I will guarantee. I will draft somebody in the House to do the same thing.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I will be happy to have all of my questions on my time.

Mr. WARNER. The Senator is correct. But I am saying I commit to be the one Senator who requires the Congress to speak on it. So it will not be inaction. Congress will take action. The senior Senator from Virginia will be the one who will come to the floor under this provision and demand it.

John Warner

Speeches

Manage analytics