Floor Statements

Madam President, I want the Record to reflect that any of my remarks where I disagree with the bill before the Senate in no way reflects upon the chairman of the committee. I have known Jay Rockefeller for several decades, and I have not known a better public servant than Jay. Jay Rockefeller got into Government for the right reasons. We know that the Rockefeller name is magic, that he could have led a life of leisure, doing many different things. But he chose public service. He went to West Virginia doing work as a VISTA volunteer. He fell in love with the people--the poor people--of West Virginia and has worked since then to improve the lives of the people of West Virginia. He has done a wonderful job there, serving as the secretary of state, Governor, and now as a long-time Senator.

There are certain things in this legislation that I disagree with. But I repeat, as a public servant, there is not one better--or I doubt that there ever has been anyone better than Jay Rockefeller. He has devoted his Senate life in service to the Intelligence Committee. He devotes night and day not only working in the Committee room where there is no exposure to the public--he gets no publicity for doing this. He does it because he believes it is the right thing for the country. Of course, I receive calls from him well after hours on concerns he has in dealing with foreign intelligence generally.

I already voted against it on the FISA legislation, and I will vote ``no'' on final passage of the bill.

The Senate's debate on FISA has made the Intelligence Committee's bill better--no question about that--by adding a number of protections from the Judiciary Committee's version.

The Senate adopted amendments offered by Senators Kennedy, Whitehouse, and Feingold to improve title I of the bill. This concerns the procedures we use to conduct this kind of surveillance in the future. That is an improvement. But the Senate rejected amendments to strike and modify various parts of title I, to improve title I, and rejected all amendments to strike or modify title II concerning immunity for telecommunications companies that may have broken the law by abiding the White House's requests for warrantless wiretaps on American citizens.

I believe the White House and any companies that broke the law must be held accountable.

In their unyielding effort to expand Presidential powers, President Bush and Vice President Cheney created a system to conduct wiretapping--including on American citizens--outside the bounds of longstanding Federal law.

As I have said before--and books have been written on it--the President, as soon as we passed the first PATRIOT Act, after he joined with us in celebrating it, he basically ignored it and did whatever he wanted to do because he was told by the White House staff he was above the law, he didn't have to follow the law we passed.

The President could have taken the simple step at any time of requesting new authority from Congress. All he would have had to do was come talk to us. We would have been willing to listen to him and, very likely, would have done anything he wanted to do. After all, Congress has repeatedly amended FISA because of new technology and legitimate needs in the intelligence community.

But whether out of convenience, incompetence, or outright disdain for the rule of law, the Bush-Cheney administration chose to ignore Congress and ignore the Constitution.

The White House should bear responsibility for this reckless disdain for the rule of law.

It also appears that many companies followed the administration's orders without regard to the law or privacy, or even basic common sense. I always will support giving our intelligence community the tools it needs to collect intelligence on terrorists and other foreign targets. We have to do that.

We always have and always will need to help in the private sector to protect our country. That is clear. When companies comply with legal and constitutional directives to support intelligence and law enforcement activities, they have no reason to fear. But the requirement and obligation they have for protecting the rights of American citizens and the Constitution and FISA are perfectly clear, very clear.

According to the press reports, at least one company--Qwest Communications Company--refused the White House request to participate in this program. The others had an opportunity to do the same. As far as we know, they chose not to. They didn't follow the example of Qwest.

If the Senate had voted today to reject amnesty, we would have sent a message that no one is above accountability and no one is above the law. If we had rejected amnesty, we would have sent a message that fighting terrorism doesn't require the sacrifice of basic fundamental rights.

I was disappointed that the Senate rejected amendments opposing immunity. Even though their efforts were unsuccessful, all Americans owe a debt of gratitude to two outstanding and principled Senators, Senators Feingold and Dodd. I don't mean in any way to suggest that people who disagree with them are not outstanding or are unprincipled. That isn't the case. There is a basic disagreement. I felt I needed to applaud and commend these two men for how hard they worked in making their point. I believe they stood up to the administration, which certainly needs standing up to. They stood up for accountability.

Despite today's votes, there is no doubt in my mind that history will prove they were right. Millions of Americans joined this effort. Win or lose, their voices were heard and their efforts made a difference.

If the Senate votes for final passage of FISA today, which I suspect will be the case, we must decide what comes next. The mere fact that we pass something today, and the House passed something previously, doesn't mean we have anything to send to the President.

Two weeks ago, in the runup to the State of the Union Address--and we have heard it time and again--the President and Vice President and Senate Republicans believed it was urgent to pass the FISA bill, that it is critical to our national security. But then, Senate Republicans spent most of the time since then refusing to allow any votes on FISA amendments, slow-walking the bill as part of a strategy to jam the House. That is what happened. I have to suggest that they deserve a pin on their lapel because they set out and did what they wanted to do-- stall this as long as they could.

A week and a half ago, as the February 1 sunset to the Protect America Act approached, we passed a 15-day extension. This would have allowed 2 weeks to negotiate with the House, which would have been rushed, but we could have at least had meaningful meetings. Those will not take place.

Unfortunately, the White House has been convinced that if they dragged this process out long enough, there would not be enough time to negotiate a bill with the House. The White House is convinced they can force the House to pass exactly the bill they want. I believe it is wrong for the White House to do this, and I believe it is unfair to the House of Representatives.

Due to months of White House foot-dragging, the relevant House committees have only just gotten the documents relating to immunity. They need some time to review and analyze that.

We must not let this critical issue be resolved by the White House trying to force the House to do something they didn't want to do, such as happened last August.

I plan to ask, after this legislation passes today, unanimous consent for an extension in order to allow sufficient time for negotiation with the House. My friend, the distinguished Republican leader, has already said there will be no extensions given. I hope that is not the case, and with this extra time, the conference committee can make further improvements to this critical bill.

Why do we need to improve the bill?

Richard Clarke, a national security adviser to Presidents Reagan, Bush Sr., and President Clinton, said it well in an op-ed:

FISA has and still works as the most valuable mechanism for

monitoring our enemies.

In order to defeat the violent Islamic extremists who do

not believe in human rights, we need not give up the civil

liberties, constitutional rights and protections that

generations of Americans fought to achieve.

The Bush-Cheney White House continues to sell us a false choice between

security and liberty. I reject that choice.

This is America and we are Americans. We can and must have both liberty and security.

It is my understanding we are ready to vote on final passage.

Madam President, as I indicated I would earlier today, I will ask unanimous consent to extend the law that is now in effect. I wish to extend that 15 days to see if we can work out something more with the House.

So I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 571, S. 2615; the bill be read a third time and passed; and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, when I was elected to Congress in 1982, I had the opportunity to visit over the telephone on many occasions with a new Congressman named Tom Lantos. He was new from California. He was very interested in my election. He helped me

raise some money for that election, made many phone calls, and reached out to me as a friend. So when I came to Washington, I had the opportunity to meet him personally. That was the beginning of the development of a real friendship.

I have traveled with Tom Lantos overseas. He led delegations. When I was a new Senator, I traveled with him. Senator Daschle led a trip. One of the places we went was to Hungary, and we had the opportunity to have Tom Lantos show us around Budapest. Why was that important? It was important because the Nazis waited until toward the end of the war before they moved in to disperse the Jews out of Budapest and Hungary generally.

He was one of the Jews in Budapest they captured on many occasions. He escaped the Nazis on seven different occasions. They would capture him; he would get away. He said one reason he was able to escape as much as he did was that he had long blond hair, and the Nazis didn't figure he was Hungarian. He actually took us to places where he had been captured, arrested by the Nazis in Budapest. It was a wonderful time we spent with him for 2 days in Budapest.

This morning, our country grieves the loss of truly an American hero, Congressman Tom Lantos, chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the House of Representatives. He was born in Budapest, Hungary. When he was 16 years of age, Hitler and the Nazis occupied his country. He and his family, like so many other Hungarian Jews, were captured, rounded up, beaten, and taken away, sent to labor camps. As I have indicated, he was a hard one to stay captured; he got away.

It was through him I first learned about the struggles that people have on a personal, individual basis. He was a man who protected his girlfriend, his friend Annette at the time. They were both saved by the great Swedish diplomat after whom we have streets named in Washington, DC. He was able to escape many times but not his family. All of them were killed.

All alone, a teenager, with little cause for hope, after the war, he moved through displaced persons camps. Tom Lantos remained optimistic. He refused to give up. He spent a couple years wandering around Europe after the war.

He wrote an essay on President Franklin Roosevelt, and because of this essay, he earned an academic scholarship to study in the United States. He came on a converted World War II troop ship in 1947. He brought with him only one possession. It was a large Hungarian salami, but when he arrived, it was confiscated by Customs officials. So it is neither a cliche nor an exaggeration to say that Tom Lantos came to America with nothing.

This ``American by choice,'' as he was fond of calling himself, earned a BA and a master's degree from the University of Washington- Seattle and a Ph.D. from the University of California. Soon after he arrived here, he married his childhood sweetheart, Annette Lantos.

For the next three decades, he and Annette lived in the San Francisco area. Tom worked as a professor in economics, an international affairs analyst, and an economist in many different areas, testifying in cases, consulting generally. In less than three decades after becoming a U.S. citizen, Tom Lantos became a Congressman. He brought to Washington remarkable depth of knowledge and intellect and stood out as a powerhouse from the day he arrived in Washington.

As I indicated, I had the honor of serving with him in Congress, but I also served with him on the House Foreign Affairs Committee as it was then called, and, as everyone else, I found him blessed with the mind of a scholar and grace of a gentleman. Tom Lantos could deliver a speech. He still had the Hungarian accent, but he could bring an audience to its feet. He was a great speaker.

I can recall no one in Congress who did not admire this fine man. He and Annette were always there to talk about their lives together as kids, teenagers. They had been together 60, 70 years. Raoul Wallenberg was the Swedish diplomat. Because of Tom Lantos, there is a street named after him in Washington, DC, right by the Holocaust Memorial.

I can recall no one, Democrat or Republican, who didn't relish the opportunity to work with him. Once Tom Lantos said:

I like to work hard to make this a better country, to

provide a just government for our people and make sure we

have learned from the past.

Tom Lantos did just that--leaving an indelible mark on issue after issue from health care, Social Security, to the environment, the budget, foreign affairs, of course, but also was his love of animals. He had a caucus in the Congress he worked on dealing only with animals. He loved animals and wanted to make sure they were treated appropriately.

He cochaired the congressional human rights caucus where he fiercely advocated the spread of liberty throughout the world. His convictions were so deeply rooted that he and four other Members of Congress were arrested in 2006 for protesting the genocide in Darfur at the Sudanese Embassy.

After years in the minority, Congressman Lantos finally achieved his dream of chairing the House Foreign Affairs Committee, but it lasted only one year. He was diagnosed being sick right before Christmas, the first knowledge he had esophageal cancer, and he passed away within the last 24 hours.

We were all deeply saddened to hear he was sick. I was stunned when I learned he was so sick he would retire to fight cancer. The fight did not last long.

I talked today with Howard Berman, who will replace him as chair of that committee. He told me he visited Tom in Washington at his house. He said he handled his oncoming death the way he handled so many things: with great dignity and understanding.

Tom leaves behind a great family. He has two daughters, Annette, the same name as his wife, and Katrina. These are two beautiful women, as beautiful on the inside as they are on the outside. These 2 daughters gave Tom and Annette 17 grandchildren and two great grandchildren. He doted on those grandchildren. A number of us here had him contact us for things dealing with his grandchildren, making sure they got in the school they were supposed to, jobs he wanted them to get. He cared about every one of those 17 grandchildren.

Landra and I have 16 grandchildren, but we have 5 children. He had 2 daughters with 17 grandchildren.

The Lantos family is truly in our hearts today. Tom said once:

It is only in the United States that a penniless survivor

of the Holocaust and a fighter in the anti-Nazi underground

could have received an education, raised a family, and had

the privilege of serving the last three decades of his life

as a Member of Congress. I will never be able to express

fully my profoundly felt gratitude to this country.

That is what Tom Lantos said and he meant every word of it. He benefited from the limitless opportunity America affords, but America benefited far more from the service of Congressman Tom Lantos.

So today we pause to express our profound affection and appreciation and gratitude for this wonderful man. Congressman Tom Lantos was a great American. His spirit will be sorely missed and his legacy never forgotten.

Mr. President, after my remarks and that of the distinguished Republican leader, we will resume consideration of S. 2248, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Senators will debate the remaining amendments to the legislation this afternoon. There will be no rollcall votes today. However, Senators should expect to begin voting on remaining amendments tomorrow morning at about 10 a.m. Everyone should know that under the order that is now before the Senate, all debate will have to be completed today.

Mr. President, I have one small item of business. It is my understanding there are four bills due for second readings.

Mr. President, I object to further proceedings with respect to these bills en bloc.

Mr. President, we have a very busy week ahead. We are going to finish, as I have indicated, the debate on FISA tonight. We will have a series of votes. We have about seven or eight votes we have to complete tomorrow. We have postcloture debate tomorrow. We need to finish this bill tomorrow, and we will finish it tomorrow. We will complete it.

We are going to take a run at the Indian health bill. I spoke with Senator Dorgan this morning. He said he has had a good working relationship with Jon Kyl and they are very close to being able to finish this bill.

We are going to bring up the conference report on intelligence authorization this week. The legislation contains an important provision that would ensure one standard of interrogation across the U.S. Government requiring the CIA to abide by the Army Field Manual dealing with interrogation techniques.

That matter has, it appears, a 60-vote point of order against it. We understand that. I hope we don't have to file

cloture on it. I recognize we have that one vote, and I am happy to arrange a convenient time for everyone to vote. We could move that very quickly, but it is important we do this work.

We have other things we are looking forward to. I am going to meet with the Republican leader as soon as we finish here to talk about other things we can do so we can be keyed up to work when we come back. We have 3 weeks when we come back after the Presidents Day recess. The last week of that work period we will be dealing with the budget. After that, we are out for the recess for Easter. Then we come back and have an 8-week work period. So we have a lot to do. We think we can do all that, plus more.

It is going to be a short but very issue-packed time this year. We have the Presidential elections that are winding down, at least the nomination process, and then we have all the senatorial elections around the country that also take a little extra time. Hopefully, we can join together and get some things done.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the conference report to accompany H.R. 2082, the Intelligence authorization conference report.

Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the mandatory quorum call be waived.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate resume consideration of S. 2248.

Mr. President, I just finished a conference with the distinguished Republican leader, and we both believe this is the best way to go. We will, at some time, finish the intelligence conference report one way or the other, and following that, we will likely move to the Indian health bill to try to complete that.

We have had a productive day. It is my understanding there are only two speakers left on the FISA legislation, and that is Senator Dodd and Senator Specter. If there are others, they should notify the cloakroom forthwith.

We have eight votes we are going to do tomorrow, and staff is working on a consent to get to those votes. If we finish them, regardless, it would be better if we do this by consent. We are going to start the votes early in the morning. There will be no morning business tomorrow. We have eight votes to do tomorrow and complete a lot of talk on this bill, and that way we can send it to the House very quickly and they will come back and tell us something, we hope, by the end of the week.

We all hope it is not necessary that we have an extension, but time will tell.

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 ask unanimous consent that when the Senate resumes S. 2248 on Tuesday morning, February 12, the sequence of votes on remaining amendments occur in the following order: Whitehouse 3920, subject to a 60-vote threshold; Feinstein 3910, subject to a 60-vote threshold; Feingold 3979; Dodd 3907; Feingold 3912; Bond-Rockefeller 3938, as modified; Specter-Whitehouse 3927; Feinstein 3919, with a 60- vote threshold; and that each leader control a total of 10 minutes of debate time to be used prior to any of the votes; that the provisions of the previous order governing debate limitations and vote limitations remain in effect.

We are going to do as many of these as we can before the weekly party conferences. With a little bit of luck, we can finish all of them.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, following my remarks today, the Senate will be back on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Under an order previously entered, all amendments must be debated with all time used today or Monday. There will be no rollcall votes today or Monday.

I wish to tell everyone there is a lot of time left on the FISA legislation--8 hours or so, according to how you add it up; some say 6. People are going to have to do it today or Monday or the time will be gone and we are going to complete voting on this on Tuesday. It could be a long Tuesday.

We will finish this work period with some other things we have to accomplish. Next week, we have a number of things we are going to try to accomplish and then we are out a week and then we are back for 3 weeks and then we are out for a couple weeks. And then we are here for 8 weeks. There is a lot to do both here and at home. I hope we have a productive day on Monday.

Mr. President, if people wish to come to speak today, they should alert the staff. We are not going to have the staff wait around all day for somebody who might not come. We have had a busy week. Staffs work very long hours. Senators--if they are going to come and talk--had better alert the staff or we are going to go out of session.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Madam President, I send a cloture motion to the desk pursuant to the order relative to S. 2248.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule XXII, the cloture vote occur upon disposition of the remaining amendments pursuant to the previous order and that the mandatory quorum be waived.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period for the transaction of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 432.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate, and that any statements relating to this matter be printed in the Record.