Floor Statements

Mr. President, we are ready to proceed, but other Members are not here. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I associate myself with the remarks of the Senator from Alaska, our chairman.

I appreciate the efforts of my colleagues, Senator Stevens, Senator DeMint, and Senator Ben Nelson, in working to build consensus on the pending amendment, which will improve our Nation's ability to transmit critical emergency information to the public in times of crisis. As we consider this amendment, however, I believe it is important for us to clarify that provisions in this act do not affect or in any way limit or impair the Federal Communications Commission's existing authority under the Communications Act to promote public safety. As my colleagues well know, one of the most fundamental and significant statutory mandates of the FCC is the promotion of safety of life and property through the use of wire and radio communication.

As a result, while section 103(f) of the amendment makes clear that no new regulatory authority is granted to the FCC, other than to regulate compliance with its provisions and as specified in subsection 103(d) and (e), I would ask my colleague, Senator DeMint, to confirm my understanding that the amendment will have no impact on the FCC's existing regulatory authority under the Communications Act to promote public safety through the use of communications technologies.

Mr. President, I wish to associate myself with the remarks of Mr. Stevens.

Mr. President, the record should show that there are significant amounts of money allocated in this bill to several agencies. But to go beyond that and discuss in greater detail would be, as the chairman indicated, a violation of the rules of classification. I will cease at this point.

I concur with the Senator from Alaska in regards to the committee's intended purpose of funds provided for Army reset programs.

Yes, thank you.

Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the Port Security Improvement Act of 2006. It reflects a bipartisan compromise between the three committees that have jurisdiction over the security of our Nation's ports, international intermodal supply chain and the administration of the Department of Homeland Security.

This bill strikes the right balance between security and facilitating the trade that is so important to our economy.

Our national economy depends on port security, yet amazingly, the administration has not made it the priority that it needs to be. It has consistently submitted inadequate funding requests and has routinely missed critical security deadlines that were required by law. It was not until the Dubai Ports World controversy hit the front pages of local newspapers that many members of the Congress began to take port security seriously.

I hope that Members of this body will give this important piece of legislation the consideration it deserves. Lastly, we all know that you cannot have a successful security policy without adequate funding. Today is a good first step, but the administration and this Congress must take the next step after we pass this legislation and fund these initiatives as proposed here.

There are more than 360 ports in our Nation that serve as a gatekeeper for our Nation's trade and commerce, bringing into the country most of the merchandise and raw materials our businesses rely upon. If an incident forced the shutdown of ports across the Nation, the impact on our national economy would be devastating and have long- term consequences.

The Coast Guard, through the National Maritime Transportation Act, has taken important steps to create a plan to guarantee trade resumes quickly after an attack. However, more needs to be done to enhance the Coast Guard's plan and ensure effective implementation. Our economic health depends on it.

Given the role our ports play in the economy, we cannot underestimate the importance of ensuring that the containerized cargo that comes into our country is safe and that the ships entering our borders do not carry enemies of our Nation. Yet less than 6 percent of the cargo coming into this country is inspected, a level that is unacceptable if we are to take security seriously.

Making the current situation worse is the fact that current State inspection and radiation scanning technologies are woefully inadequate.

The measure before us today addresses the shortfalls of the past 5 years. First, it enhances the examination of cargo domestically and before it reaches our shores. Second, the bill improves interagency cooperation. Third, it improves the sharing of intelligence information with the creation of interagency port security command centers. Fourth, it provides an additional director within to improve communication and cooperation between the public and private sectors to quickly resume trade should an incident occur. And fifth, the bill offers assistance and technical training to our partners in the war on terror. These are all simple fixes but fixes that have significant consequence in our efforts to protect our ports.

As we consider this piece of legislation, we must not forget the security needs of our other transportation systems. Amendments will be offered to this bill that relate to securing other modes of transportation and it is my intent to support those amendments as well so that we have a comprehensive approach to securing our infrastructure.

I am hopeful that the Senate will pass this bill as soon as possible. Our approach has broad bipartisan support. The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee has focused on the issues of transportation security long before the events of September 11, 2001.

We have dedicated substantial time and resources to oversee and investigate the security and safety of our Nation's systems of transportation and this bill will mark the fourth landmark transportation security related bill that has been brought before the Senate. The time is right to pass these needed security improvements, and I am hopeful that we can make it happen.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, in behalf of the managers of the bill, we have no objection.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the vote occur at 4 o'clock.

Mr. President, in the meantime, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise to speak in opposition.

I have spent many hours in discussions on this program with supporters of this program. I have listened to their arguments. And, believe me, I have put in much thought about this matter.

I have concluded that this is not the time to begin development of a conventional Trident missile. Instead, the chairman and I agree--and the Appropriations Committee concurred--that before proceeding to develop this or any alternative program, the Congress needs to have a truly independent study.

As such, the bill includes $5 million for the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a study to examine the conventional Trident and other alternatives.

I think most Americans are not aware of what we are speaking of when we say a Trident submarine or Trident missile. A Trident submarine is a nuclear-powered submarine that carries 24 tubes. Each tube can have a nuclear-tipped missile, an intercontinental ballistic missile. All of the military is well aware of this. The Russians know about this. The North Koreans know about this. The Koreans, the Japanese, the Chinese-- it is no secret to them. And the proposal is to have four of these missiles conventional, not nuclear.

That sounds reasonable. The argument is that the Russians know that if we fire one, it is not intended to be an attack because if we were to attack a nation, we would have hundreds flying.

But let's turn this around a bit. What if one of those Russian missiles--and they have nuclear-powered submarines that can shoot out from their tubes intercontinental ballistic missiles--let's say they fired one toward Canada, and because of the curvature of the Earth, it has to fly over Washington, DC, or New York City, and the Russians told us: No; we are not firing at you. We are firing at Canada. What do you think our reaction would be? Would we say, go right ahead? The least we will do is put our country on full alert. What is full alert? It is the finger is right over the button, and sometimes a mistake can be made and sometimes the finger gets a bit too heavy.

No. 1, we don't need the conventional warhead.

No. 2, the risk is too great.

How would the North Koreans take it if they saw a missile flying in their direction? How would the Chinese take it? There is no transparency. Today, yes, we can call up on all the nations and say we are going to test a Trident missile, and it is going to fly out of here and it is going to land there, and they can all watch and monitor. But if we were out to demolish something, the question is, Will we notify the world? The answer is obvious. If you want a surprise to get Osama bin Laden, are we going to tell the whole world, ``Yes, we are going to fire into that mountain because we want to get Osama bin Laden''? Guess how long he will stick around.

The committee did the right thing by setting aside $5 million for an independent agency to make the study, not some agency connected to the Department of Defense. I hope my colleagues will vote against this amendment.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Amendments Nos. 4767, 4867, as Modified, 4757, and 4868, En Bloc

I concur with the chairman. The Senators have my commitment that I will work with them on

this important funding during conference negotiations.

KC-135 Tanker Replacement Program

Yes.

Mr. President, I rise in support of the Henry Kuualoha Giugni Kupuna Memorial Archives Bill.

Henry Giugni was my dear friend. He was an important part of my life for nearly half a century. He tirelessly and proudly served the people of Hawaii as my chief of staff. After leaving my office, he eagerly and enthusiastically dedicated himself to serving the Senate and the citizens of the United States as the Senate's 30th Sergeant-at-Arms.

In the days following his passing on November 3, 2005, I was deeply touched by the hundreds of people who reached out to me, and shared, through conversations and letters, their memories of Henry. The stories were poignant. They were filled with love and affection for a bear of a man who--while he could be gruff and outrageous at times--could never camouflage his gentle soul and his willingness to help others, especially those who were less fortunate or who were just beginning their careers. The shared memories of Henry revealed that he enriched lives, served as an inspiration, and gave hope.

Similarly, this bill, which bears Henry's name, will not only honor him, but more importantly will serve the people of Hawaii, especially the descendants of the islands' first settlers. It will also help Hawaii's unique native traditions and culture to flourish. By establishing a digital memorial archive at the University of Hawaii's Academy for Creative Media, this bill will enrich the lives of the people of Hawaii and those who live beyond Hawaii's shores. The digital archive will be a 21st-century way of inspiring and giving hope by preserving the invaluable lessons and insights from the collective memory and history of Native Hawaiians.

During the years that Henry was a young boy attending school, the history of Native Hawaiians and Hawaii was rarely--if ever--taught in Hawaii. It was only relatively recently that Hawaiian history became an essential part of the curriculum of Hawaii's schools. Henry was proud that he was part-Hawaiian, and he was proud that someone like him, from humble beginnings, could find success in Washington, in an environment vastly different from his roots in Hawaii. While he became an acquaintance of presidents and kings, his heart was always with the native people of Hawaii, who are still struggling for their moment in the sun.

In addition to creating a digital archive and preserving the traditions and culture of Native Hawaiians, this legislation will support initiatives to develop Web-based media projects from the archive to create educational materials that can be used to enhance the education of indigenous students. It also can serve to inspire higher educational achievement by indigenous students by sharing with them the stories and histories of accomplished individuals with indigenous backgrounds, such as Henry.

So although Henry is no longer with us, his mentoring and sharing spirit will live on through the digital archive created by this bill. Through the archive, Henry will always be the embodiment of the kupuna--the respected elder who has much wisdom and insight to share.

My colleagues, please join me in supporting the Henry Kuualoha Giugni Kupuna Memorial Archives Bill.

Mr. President, we have checked the amendment, and we find that it is worthy of consideration. We approve of it.

Amendment No. 4762

Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. President, I wish to join my colleague from Connecticut in commending our leader from Rhode Island for the role he has played in bringing this to our attention. The men and women of the Army and the Marines are fortunate to have the Senator looking after their interests. I thank him very much.

Will the Senator yield?

I commend my colleague from Connecticut. I concur fully with my friend that when we are prepared to send men and women into combat and in harm's way, the least we can do is provide them with appropriate equipment to carry out the mission and to return home safely.

We have no objection.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that amendment No. 4802 to H.R. 5631 be the pending business after the conclusion of the Sessions amendment.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

amendments nos. 4778; 4773; 4760, as modified; 4796, and 4771

No objection.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Yes.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

No objection.

We have no objection.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

No objection.

No objection.

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Michael Wiest, a Navy fellow in the office of Senator Mikulski, be granted the privileges of the floor for the duration of consideration of H.R. 5631.

Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Kennedy I ask unanimous consent that his Navy detailee, Tom Crowley, and his State Department Fellow, Richard Driscoll, be granted full floor privileges during consideration of the Defense appropriations bill.

Yes.

Tribute to Phillip Baucus

Mr. President, I wish to join my leader in expressing my condolences and my sadness. It is ironic that at this moment we are considering a measure which is something that is very important to him.

Mr. President, I rise to express my strong support for the measure pending before us. The measure includes some $453.5 billion for the Department of Defense. As the chairman stated, it includes $50 billion to help offset the cost of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for the first several months of fiscal year 2007.

This is a very good bill, and all of my colleagues should thank Chairman Stevens for his efforts. And believe me, it wasn't easy. Everyone in the Senate knows how difficult it is to write a Defense bill, but this year's challenge was particularly great because the committee's 302 allocation required the Defense Subcommittee to cut $9 billion from the requested amounts. As a result, this bill is $13 billion below the amount the Senate has already approved for Defense authorization this year.

However, it is also true that if supplemental funds are excluded from comparison, the recommended funding is still $15 billion more than was provided in fiscal year 2006.

This is a tough bill but an exceedingly fair one. It provides for the essential requirements of the Department of Defense while holding down the growth in the budget. The committee did a tough review of the real needs of the Defense budget. Funding for programs that were delayed or in which substantial increases were requested was curtailed.

The chairman also made a courageous decision to cut back on the nondefense medical research funding in this bill. In recent years, Senators have been seeking funding for more and more medical programs that have very little direct relations to defense matters. Because of the need of sharply reducing funding, the chairman had to decide to deny funds for many of these programs.

To my colleagues on the Democratic side, Mr. President, I say this is a good bill. It was fashioned in a bipartisan manner and it funds our critical defense needs. I fully support the bill that was unanimously reported out by the committee and recommended to the Senate.

I urge my colleagues to support this measure.

Before I close, I commend the chairman for his courage, for his foresight, and I commend the staff: Ms. Sid Ashworth and Charlie Houy. Without these two people, I don't think we would be where we are at this moment.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

If the Senator will yield, that is my understanding, Mr. President.

Mr. President, this measure has been cleared by both sides. I have studied the measure, and I approve it. I support it.

No, Mr. President.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Ms. Lisa Raimondo, a legislative fellow assigned to my office, be afforded the privilege of the floor during the consideration of H. R. 5631, the Defense appropriations bill.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I ask that I be permitted to use 6 minutes of my party's time.

Mr. President, I rise to speak against the proposed constitutional amendment.

Since World War II, I have been involved directly or indirectly in 13 wars and conflicts: Korea, Vietnam, the Dominican Republic, Desert One, Grenada, Lebanon, Panama, the Persian Gulf war, Somalia, Haiti, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, and now Iraq.

In all these wars and conflicts, there are several things in common. First, American lives were lost and many young Americans were wounded and will bear scars for the rest of their lives, and we must not dishonor their memories by abandoning the freedoms for which they sacrificed.

Second, in every war, great speeches are made and delivered energizing our citizens to defend our unique American freedoms contained within the Bill of Rights. I can still hear some of those stirring words.

During the Second World War, very close friends of mine were lost. Much blood was shed to preserve every American's constitutional freedoms.

To be clear, I have no patience with those who defile our flag. It is unpatriotic and deeply offensive to those who serve or who have served in uniform. It angers me to see symbols of our country set on fire. This objectionable expression is obscene, it is painful, it is unpatriotic, but I believe Americans gave their lives in many wars to make certain that all Americans have a right to express themselves, even those who harbor hateful thoughts.

Our country is unique because our dissidents have a voice. Protecting this freedom of expression, even when it hurts the most, is a true test of our dedication to democracy.

As a commissioned military officer and as a U.S. Senator, I took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. As a Senator, I have become accustomed to being insulted and condemned by people who disagree with me. I have been castigated for having cast votes that some call unpatriotic or un-American. I believe that my actions were patriotic and American, but those who criticize me have a right to disagree and express their disagreement.

It is not always easy to serve the country with a Bill of Rights that defends the rights of those who would defile our national symbol. While I take offense at disrespect to the flag, I nonetheless believe it is my continued duty as a veteran, as an American citizen, and as a United States Senator to defend the constitutional right of protesters to use the flag in nonviolent speech.

For over 200 years, our Bill of Rights has endured. It proclaims the Government of the United States is limited in its powers, and this sacred document continues to instruct and inspire people throughout the world. And for the last 200 years, despite repeated efforts to tamper with this document, we have always found the strength necessary to live within these limits.

So today we must look inside ourselves once again and find the strength to affirm our commitment to the precious liberties enshrined in the Bill of Rights.

Mr. President, during most of our lives, we encounter an individual who lived a remarkably fine personal and professional life. Such is the case of BG James D. Hittle, USMCR, whose anniversary of his death, June 15, recently passed. General Hittle's death received very little press coverage at the time, and I would like to share with my colleagues what this man achieved in his life time in the words of a former Commandant of the Marine Corps, GEN P.X. Kelley, USMC (Ret.)

I ask that the eulogy given by General Kelley be printed in the Congressional Record.

The material follows.

A Tribute to BGen James D. Hittle, USMC (Ret)

(By Gen Paul X. Kelley, USMC (Ret))

BGen James Donald Hittle--devout Christian--great

American--Marine officer--gentleman and gentle man--loving

husband--caring father--always a friend indeed!

Commissioned a Marine second lieutenant in 1937, Don Hittle

was a ``plank owner'' when MajGen Holland Smith activated the

1st Marine Division for World War II--was G-4 for the 3d

Marine Division under MajGen Graves Erskine on Guam and at

Iwo Jima--and after the war commanded 2d Battalion, 7th

Marines in the occupation of North China.

After serving his Corps for 23 years, Don Hittle's future

life could easily qualify him as a quintessential

``Renaissance Man.''

He was Director of National Security and Foreign Affairs

for the Veterans of Foreign Wars, syndicated columnist for

Copley News Service, commentator for Mutual Broadcasting

System, Special Counsel for both the Senate and House Armed

Services Committees, a founder and Director of the DC

National Bank, Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Manpower

and Reserve Affairs, Senior Vice President for Pan American

Airways, consultant to the President of the Overseas Private

Investment Corporation, advisor to several Secretaries of the

Navy and Commandants of the Marine Corps--and the list goes

on and on and on.

Col Don Hittle came into my life during the summer of 1956

when MajGen Jim Riseley dragged me kicking and screaming from

a cushy tour in what was then the Territory of Hawaii to the

labyrinthian corridors of Headquarters Marine Corps. As many

of those here today will recall, this was the long, hot

summer of Ribbon Creek, and Don Hittle was Legislative

Assistant to Randolph McCall Pate, our 21st Commandant. I was

a young eager, starry-eyed captain, very naive in the arcane

world at the Seat of Government--but I was soon to learn. My

first lesson was negative one--that

a junior officer should never ask the Legislative Assistant

to the Commandant for a description of his duties and

responsibilities. With that said, I did notice that every

time Col Hittle came charging into Gen Riseley's office he

closed the door behind him. While I readily admit to not

being a ``rocket scientist,'' I did surmise that there were

some ``big time'' discussions underway. But, as the saying

goes: ``Nothing succeeds quite like success.'' I was soon to

learn that by working closely with the Congress, where

Members and their staffs knew him, respected him, and trusted

him, Don Hittle had effectively minimized the repercussions

from Ribbon Creek. One senior Member from the House of

Representatives was heard to say: ``Don Hittle is the best

damned Legislative Assistant the Marine Corps has ever had.''

One could go on for hours, perhaps days, about Don's myriad

contributions to his country and his Corps. As an example, I

could tell you how he more than any other saved the Army Navy

Club from extinction. Senator John Warner, who is here with

us today, could tell you that when he was Secretary of the

Navy he never had a more imaginative and dedicated Assistant

Secretary. Joe Bartlett, the former House Reading Clerk and a

retired Marine Corps general, could tell you how Don Hittle

was responsible for the creation of the dynamic Congressional

Marine Club. Incidentally, Jim Lawrence, who is also with us

today, once said of this organization: ``Congress created the

Marine Corps--Congress has sustained the Marine Corps--

Congress had mandated the mission of the Marine Corps--

through this organization we are now bonded to each other

forever.''

In the end, however, all of his many other contributions to

his country and to his beloved Corps pale by comparison to

what he accomplished as a member of the renowned ``Chowder

Society,'' that elite group of brilliant Marine officers who,

in the aftermath of World War II when the very life of our

Corps was threatened, ensured that our existence, our roles,

and our missions were written into law. Don's critical role

in the survival of his Corps was best described by Gen

Merrill Twining when he inscribed his book ``No Bended

Knee.'' ``To: Don Hittle, Who saved our Corps.'' There can

be no doubt that the Corps we have today, with three

active divisions and wings written into law, owes an

enormous debt of gratitude to BGen James D. Hittle, USMC

(Ret).

Isn't it ironic to remember that 55 years ago certain

groups, whose objectives were inimical to the survival of our

Corps, were attempting to relegate us into insignificance.

Today, with a lion's share of the credit for making it

possible going to Don Hittle, we have just heard that Jim

Jones, our 32d Commandant, is soon to be the Supreme Allied

Commander in Europe. Our congratulations go to Jim--his Corps

is very proud--Don Hittle is very proud!

Several years after my retirement, Don asked me to join him

for lunch at his Army Navy Club. His purpose was to ask if I

would give his eulogy. I was honored beyond belief, but did

not look forward to the day when it would become a reality.

Before closing, let me share with you a story that Joe

Bartlett told me last week.

Jinny and Joe are members of a Bible class at their church.

As a gesture of their love and caring for those who are

terminally ill, the class prepares an audio tape for their

listening. On one side they include the patient's favorite

hymns, and, on the other, a medley of their favorite tunes.

During Don's last days with us--a time when he was under

heavy sedation--Joe swears that Don's body stiffened to

attention every time ``The Marine's Hymn'' was played.

In closing, let me remind you that Don lived by two simple

words--words which have given inspiration to our Corps for

over 200 years--Semper Fidelis--always faithful.

Don Hittle was always:

Semper Fidelis to his God.

Semper Fidelis to his country.

Semper Fidelis to his family.

Semper Fidelis to his Corps.

And, Semper Fidelis to his fellow man.

In Don's memory, then, let us share these meaningful words

with each other as we leave this holy place--and let us pray

that one day we can live in a world where all of its citizens

are Semper Fidelis to each other. Don Hittle would like

that.