Floor Statements

Madam President, if I could ask the Chair to direct the Senator's attention to the Senator from Nevada, it is my understanding we have a vote scheduled for 5:15. There are 15 minutes of debate prior to that time. The two leaders are trying to figure out what votes are going to come next. We have a series of amendments that have been offered today. I ask that my friend from Florida withhold until the two leaders have determined the time for the vote.

I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Bingaman), the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Daschle), the Senator from California (Mrs. Feinstein), the Senator from Florida (Mr. Graham), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. Harkin) the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Hollings), and the Senator from Arkansas (Mrs. Lincoln) are necessarily absent.

I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Arkansas (Mrs. Lincoln) would vote ``Aye''.

Reserving the right to object, Mr. President, if I could, through the Chair, direct a question to the majority leader, it is my understanding that the majority leader is contemplating two votes in the morning.

And once that consent is done, it is my understanding we would have a couple votes, is that right, at 9:15 or 9:30 in the morning. Following that, this debate would take place, and we would vote on this matter prior to the normal party caucuses; is that right?

I have no objection.

I have no objection.

I have no objection.

Mr. President, I ask my distinguished colleague, the senior Senator from Kentucky, I was not paying as much attention as I should have. Did the Senator announce how late we would be working today?

I am sure the Presiding Officer will be down and enlighten us further at some subsequent time.

I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

I ask for the yeas and nays on the underlying amendment.

I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) is necessarily absent.

I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) would vote ``no''.

Mr. President, if I could ask the Senator from West Virginia to yield.

It is my understanding that on this amendment the Senator from West Virginia would control 45 minutes and the Senator from Alaska 15 minutes.

May I ask the Senator to yield for a question?

The Senator is aware, I am sure, that one of the groups being affected by these vicious cuts is American veterans. I was on a cable TV show today with the Officers' Association and the Veterans of Foreign Wars. They talked about the tremendous needs of American veterans for health care and other benefits.

Is the Senator aware that what they have done already is a $693 million cut to American veterans' health care benefits?

Almost $700 million.

Is the Senator also aware that in the Washington Post and all over the country today there are stories that in addition to these cuts, the VA is going to cut veterans' access further? I think it is a disgrace to do to American veterans what this bill does, and I say to the Senator--I am sure he is aware but I ask this question: Isn't this exemplary of the vicious cuts that are taking place in this legislation?

I say to the Senator, the reason I mention this is it is descriptive, exemplary of what they are doing to the American people under the guise of fiscal conservatism. If this is ``compassionate conservatism,'' then I don't want any part of it.

Will the Senator from West Virginia yield me time?

Six minutes.

I very much appreciate our leadership laying out the problem. Yesterday, instead of the FBI losing the number of agents it is losing today, 1,175 agents, it was 800. Each day, more FBI agents are lost because of this ridiculous procedure we are going through.

For my friend, and he is my friend, the Senator from Alaska, who I care a great deal about--I have served with him all my time in the Senate on the Appropriations Committee--for him to say we are funding election reform out of this, is that not good? It is money they are stealing from other accounts. Next, are they going to take care of prescription drugs by cutting off domestic discretionary spending?

Anyone who votes against Senator Byrd today is voting against the FBI, literally; 1,175 FBI agents will be eliminated.

For a question?

Sure.

I say to my friend from Alaska, how he or anyone else can with a straight face say you can do an across-the-board cut--``across the board'' means across the board, equal in every account in domestic discretionary spending--without money being lost, and without people losing their jobs, that is what it is all about.

These budgets, most of them, most every budget we have in the Federal Government involves employee personnel.

Where do the figures come from? They come from our staffs. This comes from the staff of the Democratic leader.

We can dwell on things other than the FBI, but the FBI is being cut. Take our word for it. These across-the-board cuts are cutting into the very heart of these programs. He talks about food safety inspectors. Anyone voting against Senator Byrd is saying food safety is not too important; we can do without approximately 500 food inspectors. Anyone voting against Senator Byrd's amendment is saying there is going to be about half a billion cut with Housing and Urban Development, which will mean 79,000 fewer families receive housing assistance.

To think you can take money from across the board and take care of election reform and other programs without these programs being hurt is mystical.

There will be a cut in the Customs Service. Already they are to the bare bone. I visited the Customs Service in Las Vegas and I was astounded 5 years ago how few people worked in the Customs department in Las Vegas. In areas where they should have a lot of Customs agents, there will be cutbacks. It will be about 1,600 Customs inspectors being cut back. This new cut means fewer agents at borders than prior to September 11.

We worked very hard to ramp up the spending for NIH. Everyone should understand when they vote against Senator Byrd's amendment they are cutting the NIH by 44 percent, including in biodefense.

We estimate there will be about 2,800 children deprived of early childhood education. This new cut on top of the original cuts in the Bush budget leaves a total of 5,522 children without any services.

This $137 million cut in WIC will mean 225,000 women, infants, and children will be left without nutritional and health care services.

The VA is about $700 million, which will mean about 225,000 veterans without medical services.

I agree with Senator George Voinovich, my friend from the State of

Ohio, quoted as saying just a few days ago ``as far as the eye can see, I see red.'' That is what this is all about.

For my friend, my good friend, from the State of Alaska, to talk about this is a difficult job, that is an understatement. That is an understatement to try to come up with what they are doing. I heard my friend from Alaska promise one of my colleagues: we will take care of it in conference. The House is quoted as saying they will have the bill less than we have. It is magic that I don't think exists congressionally. It is magic that I don't think exists legislatively.

I say to the Senator from West Virginia, thank you very much. This is the vote of this bill. We are asking they do away with the across-the- board cuts. If they want to spend more money in these programs, get real money--not funny money--because they are stealing from the American people and trying to come up with a budget that is impossible and exists by magic.

I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) is necessarily absent.

I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) would vote ``Aye''.

I announce that the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Breaux), the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Edwards), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry), and the Senator from Maryland (Mr. Sarbanes) are necessarily absent.

I further announce that, if Present and voting, the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) would vote ``Aye''.

Mr. President, Peter Arapis, Jr. was born in Nevada at the Las Vegas Hospital Clinic on 8th Street. His father, Peter Arapis, Sr., was born in Greece and was heavily involved in the Las Vegas Greek community throughout his life. Peter Arapis, Sr. was the Head Chef at the Nevada Test Site for many years beginning in the early 1950s. Peter Arapis, Sr. was active in the election of Michael O'Callaghan as the Governor of Nevada in 1970. He always helped me whenever I ran for public office.

It was probably due to his father's involvement in politics that Peter Arapis, Jr. was quickly drawn in as well. As a student at Rancho High School, Peter volunteered to walk the neighborhoods, hanging campaign information on doors. All Peter's hard work paid off because O'Callaghan was elected as Governor, and I was elected as Lieutenant Governor. Little did I know that Peter would one day become an invaluable member of my senior staff and a trusted friend.

After graduating from Rancho High School in Las Vegas, NV, Peter worked as a car valet for a few years before attending college at UNLV. In 1985, he received a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science. This same year, Peter was the recipient of the L.B.J. Scholarship which afforded him the opportunity to come and work in my office in the House of Representatives as a congressional fellow. This is when Peter got his first taste of politics on Capitol Hill.

Thereafter, Peter returned to Las Vegas and worked as part of my campaign staff the first time I ran for the U.S. Senate. In 1986, I was fortunate to be elected to serve my first term in the Senate, and from that date until now, Peter has been an indispensable part of my team.

One of Peter's first lessons in Nevada politics came shortly after my first Senatorial campaign. He was hiking in Nevada, east of Ely in White Pine County, and planning to camp up on top of Mt. Moriah. Mt. Moriah had a wilderness area at the top whose preservation had been an issue during the campaign. While hiking, Peter was confronted by ranchers who were trying to keep people off the mountain. They made it quite clear to him that no one was welcome on the mountain. Unbeknown to Peter, the ranchers were the very same ranchers that had been extremely cooperative with respect to the wilderness issue during the campaign. Reason being, the ranchers were mountain lion hunting guides, and they had surrounded the entire mountain. The only way to get to the roads to gain access to the wilderness area up on top was to cross over their private property. By surrounding the mountain they had in essence turned the wilderness area into their own private property to help their guide service flourish. Peter later made the connection.

After working on the 1986 election, Peter earned a master's degree in Political Science from UNLV in 1987 where he also served as a teaching assistant.

Over the years, Peter has held nearly every position in my office. He worked for 4 years, 1987 to 1991, in my Las Vegas office as a state representative. In 1992, he decided that he wanted to return to Washington, DC, and he came to work as a Legislative Assistant responsible for Appropriations for Energy and Water, Interior and Related Agencies, Commerce-Justice-State, and Military Construction. Shortly thereafter, he served as a Deputy Legislative Director.

Peter returned to Nevada to work as a deputy campaign manager in my 1998 Senate race. He was a vital part of my team in a very close re- election. Realizing that he had caught the ``Potomac Fever,'' and having met Lynn Breaux at her restaurant, the famous Tunni Cliffs Tavern, Peter once again returned to Washington, DC.

From 1999 to today, Peter has diligently worked for me as my floor manager and senior policy adviser, aiding me daily in my capacity as Democratic whip. I am thankful to have had such a loyal and dedicated employee, but more importantly, I am thankful that I can call him my friend.

I say to Peter: Good luck, I will miss you, but always remember you are a Nevadan.

Will the Senator yield for a question?

I have listened to this debate, and it appears, with the remarks from the distinguished Senator from New Hampshire, that these amounts in this amendment which the Senator from West Virginia has filed were just brought out of the sky someplace. The fact is, agencies of the executive department requested these matters initially; is that true?

Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. President, I have heard various accounts of how much the war in Iraq will cost. The accounts range from $60 billion to $250 billion, a quarter of a trillion dollars. That is the wide range of the cost of a war in Iraq. A resolution passed here saying the President could go to Iraq when he believed it appropriate.

It seems to me that if we can spend up to a quarter of a trillion dollars to go into the Middle East, we can spend a paltry $5 billion to make sure that my people in Nevada have some semblance of protection.

Would the leader agree that if we can spend hundreds of billions of dollars going to Iraq, we can afford, we should spend, $5 billion to take care of the people in South Dakota, West Virginia, Montana, Nevada, Alaska, Kentucky--the States of the Senators I see on the floor here now?

Will the Chair indicate at what time the vote will occur as a result of Senator Daschle having spoken?

I thank the Chair.

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

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

Mr. President, I understand the time of the Senator from West Virginia has expired.

I have spoken to the majority whip, and he has allowed me to read a letter Senator Byrd has asked me to read into the Record.

This letter is from the American Public Health Association, addressed to the Honorable Robert Byrd.

Dear Senator Byrd: On behalf of the American Public Health

Association (APHA), the largest and oldest organization of

public health professionals in the nation, representing more

than 50,000 members from

over 50 public health occupations, I write in strong support

of your amendment that would provide an additional $850

million to assist state and local governments with

implementing the Administration's smallpox vaccination plan.

States and localities are preparing to vaccinate more than

500,000 public health and hospital response teams. Should the

risk be elevated to merit the need for a broader smallpox

vaccination program, significant new resources will be

required. Beyond vaccinating workers, funding will be needed

to educate volunteers, monitor adverse events, treat

complications and train personnel.

APHA believes this additional funding is essential to

provide local health departments with the resources they will

need to implement the Administration's plan without having to

divert scarce funds and staff away from other important

bioterrorism preparedness and public health programs. At a

time when many states are facing large budget deficits, it is

essential that the federal government assist state and local

governments in undertaking this expensive and labor intensive

task.

APHA also believes that those who volunteer to receive and

administer the vaccine must be protected from liability and

compensated for vaccine-related injuries that result in

medical costs, lost wages and pain and suffering. We hope

that Congress will address these issues as soon as possible.

Thank you for your efforts to address this important issue

facing our nation's public health system.

The letter is signed by George C. Benjamin, Medical Doctor, Fellow of the American College of Physicians, who is executive director of the American Public Health Association.

I thank my friend from Kentucky.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

I announce that the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. Conrad), the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Edwards), and the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) are necessarily absent.

I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. Conrad), the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Edwards), and the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) would each vote ``Aye''.

I announce that the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Edwards) and the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) are necessarily absent.

I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Edwards) and the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) would each vote ``no''.

That wasn't the unanimous consent.

I was on the floor when the Senator from New Hampshire offered a unanimous consent agreement. I understood it would be 4 minutes evenly divided.

I apologize, Mr. President.

I announce that the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Edwards) and the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) are necessarily absent.

I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Edwards) and the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) would each vote ``aye''.

I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

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

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, it is my understanding that the Murray amendment will be accepted by voice vote.

With both leaders on the floor, it is my understanding there will be no more rollcall votes tonight.

I said to Senator Stevens that with both leaders on the floor, it is my understanding that if this agreement is accepted there will be no more rollcall votes tonight.

I ask unanimous consent that I be joined as a cosponsor on this amendment.

I know the Senator from Alaska, the manager of this bill, has been confined to quarters, so to speak, but I wanted to make sure everyone understood the snow is starting, and so maybe that will shorten some of the speeches.

While the majority leader is on the floor, as a matter of housekeeping, we have a number of Senators who wish to speak for at least a half an hour. I am wondering if it would be OK

with the majority leader if we gave actually 30 minutes on each side to speak as in morning business, to take us a little past the 10:30 hour. Does the majority leader see any problem with that?

I ask unanimous consent we do that.

I say to the majority leader, the Democratic leader even this morning indicated that he was extremely hopeful and confident we could work something out on an organizing resolution. Senator Stevens was here this morning. I know he wants to move forward on the appropriations, and we do, too. We hope we can complete the work the leader has outlined.

Mr. President, that is all I have for the majority leader. I thank him very much.

Senator Conrad is here and wishes to speak for 20 minutes. I ask Senator Thomas: Senator Conrad wishes to speak for 20 minutes. Do you wish to speak now?

If not, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Conrad be recognized for 20 minutes.

Will the Senator yield for a question?

I listened closely to the Senator's speech on civil rights. I ask the Senator if there appears to be a pattern developing from our friends on the other side of the aisle? You will recall last year there were efforts made, and I don't know if they have dropped those efforts but it was spread through all the papers in the country that they were going to change title IX. That is the ability for women to be involved in sports. We had tremendous difficulty last year and the year before trying to get up the hate crimes legislation. We were stopped from doing that.

There is no group that is hurt more than minorities with not funding education the way it should be funded. Here on the floor the last few days it has been brought out that 34 percent of African-American teenagers are without jobs. These are kids who want to work.

We passed voter reform. Who is affected more than anyone else by our not funding that? The President promised us he would fund it. It has not come yet. The minority communities throughout America are affected by that.

The minimum wage, who is affected more? Women and minorities.

And finally, judges. We know the Judiciary Committee turned down one judge they thought had a very bad civil rights record. We have him leading the pack of renominations that have come forward.

I ask the leader, does there appear to be a pattern here, with just the few things I mentioned while the Senator was speaking, I jotted those down. Does there appear to be a pattern here that this administration is not concerned about women and other minorities?

Mr. President, it is my understanding that morning business has expired.

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

Madam President, morning business expired at 2:30. Senator Domenici is in the Chamber, as well as Senator Murray, and there are two Republicans on the floor. Does Senator Domenici wish to be recognized speak?

For how long?

I ask unanimous consent that morning business be extended to allow Senator Domenici to speak for 10 minutes and Senator Murray for 10 minutes.

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