John Warner

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, time is short. We are about to go to our respective caucuses, but I say to my colleagues that I wish to express my profound appreciation first and foremost to my distinguished friend and colleague of 27 years; we have been together in this Chamber, working toward the passage of authorization bills in each and every one of those 27 years. I thank my friend. I thank the distinguished members of our staff, and I do use the word ``distinguished'': Charlie Abell, who left the Department of Defense at our request to come over to be our chief of staff, replacing a very fine person, Judy Ansley, who went on up to the National Security Council, and our Democratic staff director, Rick DeBobes, who has been with us many years. Together they have led a dedicated professional staff, all of whom deserve credit and recognition in helping Members reach agreements and to prepare all types of information needed by the Members, and I may say to give good, sound advice. I have always encouraged that of our staff. They are not just to be there to be ``yessayers'' or naysayers. They are to give us their best advice, and that they do. Accordingly, I ask unanimous consent that the names of both the majority and minority staff be printed in the Record.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, as we stand in this great Chamber, I marvel at the work conducted by the Armed Services Committee since the beginning of the 109th Congress. The committee has conducted 46 hearings and received numerous policy and operational briefings on the President's budget request for 2006 and related defense issues. Since the committee reported out this important legislation on May 12, the Senate has debated many important provisions contained in this legislation. Along the way, there have been many contentious issues to resolve, such as detainee policy, missile defense, BRAC, and many others. After a total of 12 days of debate on the Senate floor, we have now resolved them. I am proud we have achieved our goal of passing this important bill. This marks the 46th year the Senate has passed a national defense authorization bill. I thank particularly my ranking member and my colleagues for their support.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, we won't make any predictions. We will get started and do our best. I thank my good friend and look forward to working with him again next year. We have truly formed a unique partnership, the two of us together. I thank so many Senators who recognize that he and I have a trusting partnership and resolved a lot of problems that otherwise could prove contentious and maybe not had a resolution. So to the next year. I must say, I have consulted with the Senator from Michigan. Both of us have great concern about the IED problem. We are going to have one more hearing, in all probability a closed hearing, on this subject, listening to some viewpoints in the private sector. We regularly meet with those in the Department of Defense who have the primary jurisdiction over this problem. This is one issue on which I am gravely concerned and over which I lose sleep at night, as I am sure all of us do, about the frightful weaponry the insurgents are employing and how best we can put the entire country to work to resolve this problem. I thank my good friend.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank my good friend; again, a partnership effort to achieve that.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, we will now go to the standing order.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, on behalf of the distinguished majority leader, I ask unanimous consent that at 2:30 p.m. today, the Senate proceed to the consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 2862, the Science-State-Justice appropriations bill. I further ask that there be 75 minutes of debate, with 22\1/2\ minutes under the control of Senator Shelby, 37\1/2\ minutes under the control of the Democratic leader or his designee, and 15 minutes under the control of Senator Coburn. I further ask that following the use or yielding back of time and at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the Democratic leader, the Senate proceed to a vote on the adoption of the conference report, with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on November 15, 2005, at 10 a.m. to conduct a hearing on the nomination of Mr. Ben S. Bernanke, of New Jersey, to be a member and chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on National Parks of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, November 15 at 2:30 p.m. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on the following Bills: S. 431, a Bill to establish a program to award grants to improve and maintain sites honoring Presidents of the United States, S. 505, a bill to amend the Yuma Crossing National Heritage ARA Act of 2000 to adjust the boundary of the Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area, S. 1288, a Bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to enter into cooperative agreements to protect natural resources of units of the National Park System through collaborative efforts on land inside and outside of units of the National Park System, S. 1544, a Bill to establish the Northern Plains National Heritage Area in the State of North Dakota, and for other purposes, S. Con. Res. 60, a concurrent resolution designating the Negro Leagues Baseball Museum in Kansas City, Missouri, as America's National Negro Leagues Baseball Museum, S. 748 and H.R. 1084, Bills to authorize the establishment at Antietam National Battlefield of a memorial to the officers and enlisted men of the Fifth, Sixth, and Ninth New Hampshire Volunteer Infantry Regiments and the First New Hampshire Light Artillery Battery who fought in the Battle of Antietam on September 17, 1862, and for other purposes, and H.R. 2107, to amend Public Law 104-329 to modify authorities for the use of the Notational Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Maintenance Fund, and for other purposes.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I would only say let us not leave the impression that this side of the aisle is rushing to judgment. This framework of votes and amendments were carefully worked out on Thursday evening. The Senate has been in session since 2 today. There has been quite a bit of activity and opportunity for Senators to speak. I repeat, we are going to continue on shortly after our two colleagues finish.

Mr. WARNER. Reserving the right to object, and I will not object, I wish to inform Senators that when we return to the bill, I know the distinguished colleague from Michigan and I are going to debate the two amendments that are pending relating to Iraq, one submitted by this side of the aisle and one by that side of the aisle, and then such discussions as the Senator from South Carolina and the Senator from Michigan may have on the habeas corpus issue, will that be dealt with at all tonight?

Mr. WARNER. We will continue to have a debate tonight on those amendments that are going to be voted on in the morning and such other matters as any Senator wishes to bring up relative to the bill.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I want to commend the Senator from South Carolina and my colleague from Michigan whom I have worked with these many years. If the Senator from South Carolina will retake his seat for a minute while the chairman speaks, I wish to say I thank my distinguished colleague because I look upon the work by Members of the Senate toward a resolution of these very difficult issues regarding prisoners taken in this series of conflicts, seeing what we have witnessed in terrorism, where there are no clear precedents, in many ways, in history for this nonstate-sponsored aggression. As we witnessed in the tragedy in Jordan, it is not restricted to Iraq and Afghanistan. As General Abizaid has briefed the Senate and, indeed, briefed the American public on television, this is a worldwide movement that goes all the way from Spain to Indonesia. And you do not know where they will hit next or whom they will hit or by what means they will hit. But I do believe as to the work initiated by our distinguished colleague from Arizona, Mr. McCain, which you and I worked with him on, this matter, which you and Senator Levin have worked on, and to a limited extent--I am supporting you--I have had a voice, this is--and I say this with great respect to the President and the administration--a coequal branch of Government, the Senate. The Congress has a very clear mandate in the Constitution that we shall take care of the men and women of the Armed Forces. And this is part of that. So I say to my good friends who have worked on this, well done. You are profiles in courage. Amendments Nos. 2518 and 2519 Now, Mr. President, as announced earlier, we will continue the remarks regarding the two amendments, one by my distinguished colleague from Michigan with his distinguished leader, the Senator from Nevada, and one by myself together with Senator Frist. Now, I wish to make an opening comment, and then I would like to yield the floor for such time as my distinguished colleague may speak, and then I will make some closing comments. But it is important in our bill, and particularly on the last day, to address the situation in Iraq. But, indeed, it is broader than Iraq. It is, as I said a moment ago, the militant Jihadists attacking from Spain to Indonesia, wherever they want to bring freedom and current government to a standstill. So we could have devised on this an entire amendment out of whole cloth, but it seemed to me--and I am going to take responsibility--it seemed to me that we could show the maximum bipartisanship if we took the amendment, as drawn by my distinguished colleague from Michigan, Senator Reid, and others, and made a minimal number of changes. That is exactly the posture of these proper amendments. That, to me, indicates how much we really agree upon, page after page, paragraph after paragraph. It is carefully drawn so, first, the Senate expresses the sense of the Senate, not binding on the executive branch, it is the sense of the Senate. Then the second portion is a reporting requirement. But those reporting requirements are looking forward. We are not going back to debate history. History will debate that fully. We are going forward because the next 120 days, with Iraq in particular in mind, with the election in December, the formation of a new government, this next 120 days we must maintain stability, a clarity of understanding among the American people and the Iraqi people, and we cannot adopt any language, be it sense of the Senate or reporting language, that in any way raises speculation. Everything we say about the implementation of our Armed Forces should be with complete clarity. The amendment by my good friend from Michigan left only the option, in the reporting to the President, of putting out unclassified information. That, to the maximum, the executive branch will do. But there are certain aspects--and every Member should be cognizant of this--of this very complicated war on terrorism that have to be given to the Congress in a classified version. So that is the sum and substance of our amendment. Take away any indication of timetable, give the President the option to do unclassified and classified and have a forward-looking approach as we go into these next 120 critical days. This document can be referred to, hopefully, as a bipartisan instrument. I yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, to help those following, you have now concluded that section entitled ``Sense of the Senate.'' Both amendments have it phrased such, not binding on the administration.

Mr. WARNER. As you carefully pointed out, but I would like to repeat, the entire section that you have referred to we have accepted--I accepted and recommended to my colleague--except for that one change of striking ``indefinitely'' and using ``any longer than required.'' And when I regain the floor, I will explain why I felt that modest one-word change was important. Other than that, we have accepted in its entirety that section entitled ``Sense of the Senate'' accept for a one-word change.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield, for those following, we covered first the sense of the Senate. The Senator has now covered very carefully all the other provisions. It seems to me that there has been no disagreement whatsoever between the two sides. You pointed out, yes, I asked for 90 days; you have 30. But I don't think that was particularly troublesome. And I pointed out that one little change in language, ``to the extent practicable,'' so that the President could include classified. So in essence there is absolutely no difference between the two amendments up to the point you are now addressing, which is the last paragraph; is that correct?

Mr. WARNER. No, I pointed that out.

Mr. WARNER. I was referring to now the statutory report language. There is no difference until you get to the last paragraph.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, again I commend my colleague. I think I have fairly clearly stated, and I believe there has been concurrence, the document prepared by the Senator and others is virtually accepted in our amendment. The changes that I put out, the one simple change in the sense of the Senate, you understood that. Then we get to the conditions, which is changing 120 days instead of 30. So I say to my colleague--and I think the Senator has been very fair and objective about it--the amendments are parallel in every respect except the last paragraph. I say to my good friend, I say to all Senators, the next 120 days are critical. If this is to become law, the President would have to start every 90 days addressing the estimated dates for the phased redeployment of United States Armed Forces from Iraq. No mention about the other coalition forces. I say that few words can be interpreted by all as being the timetable, and we do not in this 120 days, in my judgment, want to have any hint whatsoever of a timetable. It is so critical, with all the progress thus far by the Iraqi people--elections and a series of transitional governments, then acceptance of the constitution by referendum, then the election of a new legislative body, and then they have to stand up and begin to strengthen the ministries and take hold in such a way that it is clear to the Iraqi people and the world that that government is in control. To put any language such as this in there, to suggest any timetable by which we begin to withdraw forces, would undermine entirely and make highly risky the next 120 days. I yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Tomorrow the Senate will vote on final passage of the Defense authorization bill. Senators should note that we will have several votes starting at approximately 10:45. We have a lot to address this week and the majority leader reminds his colleagues to plan for many votes, late nights, and a longer than usual week.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent the Senate stand in adjournment under the previous order.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Then the distinguished Senator from South Carolina desires to enter into a colloquy with the distinguished Senator from Michigan relative to the amendments by the Senator from South Carolina. Am I not correct on that?

Mr. WARNER. That will immediately follow the remarks of Senator Dayton.

Mr. WARNER. We are in a period of morning business. The Senator is in no way restricted in what he wishes to address. We thought it was related to the bill, but whatever he desires.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, it is the understanding of the distinguished Senator from Michigan and myself that the Senator from Minnesota has a period of time to speak with regard to the bill. Is that our understanding?

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. We are facing similar problems at the Jefferson Laboratory in Virginia. As the chairman knows, the Jefferson Lab in Newport News, VA, is one of our basic research labs that would be negatively impacted by this funding level. Specifically, as a result of this cut the Jefferson Lab will have to reduce the physics output of this world-leading laboratory by 25 percent. Just last month the National Academy of Sciences issued a report titled ``Rising Above the Gathering Storm.'' That report underscored that the Nation's economic health is seriously at risk without a sustained investment in science. The report noted that in Germany, 36 percent of undergraduates receive their degrees in science and engineering. In China the figure is 59 percent, and in Japan 66 percent. In the United States the corresponding figure is 32 percent. It seems to me that this is a time when the Nation needs to invest in science, not cut science programs. At the Jefferson Lab we need to invest in the 12GeV upgrade necessary to sustain the pace of scientific discovery, not cut programs.