Floor Statements

Mr. President, on Wednesday, September 5, 2007, the State of Nevada and our Nation lost a true hero: Retired U.S. Army Air Corp LTC George Sherman., who served our Nation during World War II as a member of the famed Tuskegee Airmen.

Like so many African-American soldiers during that time, Colonel Sherman answered the call to fight for freedom and justice abroad, even when it was categorically denied at home. These men traveled and fought thousands of miles from their families--when every day, their mothers, fathers, sisters and brothers faced injustice at home.

While our Nation can never fully repay the debt to our veterans, in March of this year Congress officially thanked Colonel Sherman and his fellow Tuskegee Airmen for their service to our Nation. Colonel Sherman joined nearly 300 other Tuskegee Airmen in the Capitol Rotunda as thousands watched President Bush and leaders from the House and Senate award them the Congressional Gold Medal.

Colonel Sherman and the Tuskagee Airmen were in prestigious company in receiving the highest honor our Nation can bestow upon private citizens. Other honorees include individuals such President Harry Truman, Jackie Robinson, Reverend Billy Graham, Rosa Parks, and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

I was pleased to have the opportunity to watch Colonel Sherman and his fellow Tuskegee Airmen proudly take their place among all American heroes. Yet in addition to their accomplishments as Tuskegee Airmen, Colonel Sherman and many others continued to serve their country and local communities.

Colonel Sherman had a long record of service to Nevada. After 22 years of military service, he made his home in Las Vegas. Colonel Sherman was a tireless supporter of the Boy Scouts of America, where he earned the highest

honor of the Silver Beaver Award. He was active in the Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity, which supports achievement in every field of human endeavor. Colonel Sherman also served on the board of directors of the Nevada Black Chamber of Commerce. And he continued to inspire young people to pursue opportunities in aviation though numerous speaking engagements across southern Nevada.

Again, Mr. President, we have lost a true hero. Our thoughts are with his family and loved ones.

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.

Mr. President, this morning, following any time used by me or Senator McConnell, the Senate will resume debate on the Department of Defense authorization measure and then have a period of 1 hour to discuss the Specter-Leahy habeas corpus amendment prior to a vote to invoke cloture on that amendment. Members have until 10 o'clock this morning to file any germane second-degree amendments to this pending amendment.

Yesterday, there were discussions with respect to restructuring--I should not say restructuring, structuring the debate format for these Iraq amendments and the Defense authorization bill. Our staffs have been working. We hope something can be worked out.

Additionally, other Members have amendments on various topics dealing with the Defense authorization bill. We hope we can get a process going where we can move through these as rapidly as possible. I announced yesterday we would vote no later than 10:30 a.m. this Friday because of the Jewish holiday which begins at sundown, and some Members need that time to fly to their homes to be ready for Yom Kippur, which starts, as I indicated, at sundown. We also are going to have a vote at noon on Monday. Everyone should be aware of that. It is not going to be a judge's vote, it is going to be an important vote. I am well aware of the many scheduling issues facing Senators, but we have much work to do prior to the scheduled Columbus Day recess. We have to extend a number of bills because of the fiscal year ending, so I encourage Members to be mindful of the schedule and need for flexibility.

I ask unanimous consent the distinguished Senator from Oklahoma be allowed to speak for up to 7 minutes on an issue dealing with the war in Iraq, a fallen soldier, and that time not be taken away from the debate on the habeas corpus amendment.

These remarks are so important. I have had the duty--I feel it is my duty--to call home and speak to 55 mothers and fathers and husbands and wives and children of Nevadans who have died in the war. It is a difficult situation. I last week talked to a grandmother whose 19-year-old grandson committed suicide a week after he went back for his second tour of duty. He killed himself in Iraq. These are real difficult situations. I know how strongly Members feel. So I certainly appreciate the feeling of the Senator from Oklahoma.

I move to reconsider the vote.

Madam President, there will come a time in the not-too- distant future when people will write about what we as a Senate did, what we as a Congress did regarding this intractable war in which we find ourselves in faraway Iraq.

I approach my comments today recognizing people are going to look back at what we do to make sure our country is safe and secure and that we have done everything we can to make sure not only is our country safe and secure but we do everything we can to allow the men and women in our military to be safe and secure.

The fight to end the war in Iraq and refocus our efforts against those who attacked us on 9/11 has now raged in this Chamber and throughout the country for months--no, not months, for years.

On one side, Democrats stand united to responsibly end the war, to begin to bring home our brave soldiers, marines, airmen, and sailors, and refocus our attention to Osama bin Laden, his al-Qaida operatives, and others around the world who seek to do us harm.

On the other side, most of our Republican colleagues, including some who have publicly questioned the current course, stand with the President and his failed policies. Seven Republicans have previously voted courageously for this amendment. The amendment is better than it was last time. Certainly they should vote that way again.

We on this side of the aisle are not going to stop waging the hard but necessary fight to responsibly end this war. Today we have the opportunity to take an important step in that direction by voting for an amendment upon which all of us, Democrat or Republican, can and should agree.

Regardless of where we stand on this war, we should stand as one in our commitment to keeping our military the strongest in the world. We can only sustain that strength if our men and women in uniform are given the respect they deserve and the opportunity

to reset, rebuild, and restore their capabilities. That is not a Democratic talking point or a Republican talking point. It is common sense, and in this debate it is long overdue.

On President Bush's watch, our military and their families have been stretched to the breaking point. This is not idle talk. Every single one of the Army's 38 available combat brigades is either deployed, just returning or scheduled to go to Iraq or Afghanistan, leaving no fresh troops to replace the five extra brigades sent to Iraq earlier this year. Most Army brigades have completed two or even three tours in Iraq or Afghanistan, with one, the 2nd Brigade of the 10th Mountain Division, having served four tours already.

The Army has been forced to rely on a so-called $20,000 ``quick- ship'' bonus to meet recruiting goals, paying soldiers $20,000 to stay in the military, in part to make up for last year's shortage of military officers. We are 3,000 officers short, and the number is only projected to rise.

Eighty percent of our National Guard and Reserves have been deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan and are serving an average of 18 months per deployment.

Those National Guard and Reserves remaining in the United States have 30 percent of the essential equipment they need because so much of it has been shipped overseas, destroyed, in need of repair, or now obsolete. Thirty percent is what they have in case of an emergency, and they have to help in this country. We have all heard of the heavy personal toll this overburdening of our military is taking. Let me give two examples.

First, the heartbreaking story of Army PFC Travis Virgadamo of Las Vegas. Travis was a boy who loved his country. What did he want to do? He wanted to go in the military, and he did that. He loved serving in the military. He saw it, as his family said, as his calling. Yet after months of serving in Iraq--and here is how he described it, ``being ordered into houses without knowing what was behind strangers' doors, walking along roadsides fearing the next step could trigger lethal explosives''--and he said other things, but that is enough--the horrors were more than this 19-year-old could take.

He sought therapy. He wanted to have somebody help him with his emotional status while he was overseas, but he got nothing. He came home, asked for help, and was given some medicine and forced to go back to Iraq. He felt as if he wasn't going to be able to do his job. His family knew it. They talked about it. As I said, he was given medicine and sent back for his second tour of duty. Travis was, I repeat, 19 years old when he committed suicide after going back to Iraq for just a matter of weeks.

The ordeal he went through was sadly far from unique. Is this fair? Is this fair to those other troops he was asked to serve with and who relied upon him? The answer is no.

Last year, the Veterans Affairs Department reported that more than 56,000 veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan had been diagnosed with mental illness--56,000. Many of them had been sent back into battle without receiving adequate care.

A second example. SGT Anthony J. Schober, a 23-year-old from northern Nevada, was killed in May in an ambush while serving his fourth tour of duty. I had the chance to speak with Anthony's family--his grandfather. Before returning to Iraq for the last time, Anthony told his grandfather and other family members he knew he wouldn't be coming home. He had survived too many explosions, in his words. Too many of his buddies were killed who were with him.

Madam President, if my time expires, I will use my leader time.

Travis and Anthony died as heroes. Our troops are all heroes, but Anthony and Travis weren't machines, they were people, one 19 years old, one 23 years old. They sacrificed so much--all our troops have-- and asked for so little in return. We want to give them something in return. That is what this amendment is all about.

With gratitude for their service and recognition that our national security demands no less, I rise to once again support the amendment offered by Jim Webb, representing the Commonwealth of Virginia. They sent to Washington to represent them in the Senate a brave man. It is more than his ability to talk and say the right thing courageously. Here is a man who is qualified to talk about this. He has been in combat. The author of this amendment is a Naval Academy graduate, a Marine Corps commander, received a Silver Star award for heroism, the Navy Cross, the Bronze Star for heroism, a couple of Purple Hearts, and was a Secretary of the Navy. His amendment, his readiness amendment, begins the critical and long overdue process of rebuilding our badly overburdened military.

It is simple, his amendment. It states:

If a member of the active military is deployed to Iraq or

Afghanistan, they are entitled to the same length of time

back home before they can be redeployed.

It also states:

Members of the Reserves may not be redeployed within 3

years of their original deployment--which will not only give

them time to recover from deployment, but will also restore

our reserve forces ability and availability to respond to

emergencies here at home.

Some have tried to confuse this issue by calling it an infringement of Presidential authority. That argument was debunked the first time anyone ever suggested it. The Constitution of the United States, article I, section 8, says Congress is empowered:

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land

and naval forces.

This argument is undercut even further by the fact the amendment provides ample authority for the President to waive these requirements in case of an emergency that threatens our national security. The Webb amendment establishes a new policy, but it doesn't tie the President or Congress's hands to respond to any emergency.

If we are committed to building a military that is fully equipped and prepared to address the challenges we face throughout the world--and I know we are--then we must support this amendment. If we are committed to repaying in some small measure the sacrifices our brave troops are making every day--and I know we are--then we must support this amendment.

The decision by Republican leadership to thwart the will of the majority in this body from adopting this troop readiness amendment back in July was discouraging, to say the least. And after 3 more months of keeping our troops enmeshed in a civil war, their continued effort to undermine this legislation today is simply inexplicable to me. If Republicans oppose troop readiness, they are entitled to vote against this. If Republicans don't believe our courageous men and women in uniform deserve more rest and mental health, they can vote ``no'' on this amendment. If they do not agree constant redeployments and recruitment shortages are straining our armed forces, they can vote ``no'' on this amendment. If they believe it is in our national security interest to push our brave troops and their families beyond their breaking point, then let them vote ``no'' on this amendment. But to stop the majority of this body from acting shows yet again that most of my Republican colleagues are much more concerned about protecting the President than protecting our troops.

Some in the administration have argued that this amendment would be too complicated for the Defense Department to enact. We, our military, can develop and deploy the best technology on Earth, and we have done that. Our stealth fighters can enter undetected into enemy territory. We can launch terrain-hugging missiles from thousands of miles away and hit a single target the size of a small window in a building. We can pay, clothe, feed, train, and manage a military force of over 2 million, plus their families. Yet we are supposed to believe that the Department of Defense can't follow one simple rule, that each and every soldier, sailor, airman, and marine must receive rest equal to their time of deployment.

Senators, please don't fall victim to the White House talking points. This amendment is for Travis Virgadamo and his family, for Anthony Schober and his family, and for the 50 other Nevadans who have given the ultimate sacrifice, and the approximately 2,800 other Americans who have died.

Because some in the minority are choosing obstruction doesn't mean all Republicans must follow in lockstep. We almost overcame Republican obstructionism on this amendment in

July. We can finally do the right thing here today. So I say to my friends, my Republican friends, this is Bush's war. Don't make it also the Republican Senators' war.

I know every single one of my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, would agree that America's Armed Forces are the envy of the world and must continue to be. This amendment puts that commitment into action and honors our troops and prepares our Armed Forces for the serious challenges that lie ahead--and they do lie ahead.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, this morning, following any time used by Senator McConnell and me, the Senate will be in a period of morning business for an hour, with Republicans controlling the first half and the majority controlling the second half.

After this period of morning business, the Senate will proceed to H.R. 1124, the DC College Access bill. The bill will be considered under a very short time agreement. Members should expect a rollcall vote around noon or maybe even before that. Upon disposition of the DC College Access bill, the Senate will recess for the regular party meetings.

This afternoon, when the Senate resumes at 2:15, there will be 15 minutes of debate prior to a vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the underlying bill, the DC Voting Rights bill. Of course, if cloture is invoked, the Senate will remain on the motion. If cloture fails, the Senate will resume consideration of the Department of Defense authorization measure.

Mr. President, I would also say with respect to the schedule we have this week, we have a lot of work to do, but the most religious, the most important holiday of the year for those of the Jewish faith, begins this Friday at sundown. Yom Kippur is the holiest of days for Jews all around the world, and there are a number of the Jewish faith who need to be on the west coast by sundown on Friday. Therefore, we will probably not have any votes after about 10:30 or quarter to 11 on Friday. We have a lot of work to do, but this is something that is important and necessary that we do.

Mr. President, Senator Byrd is necessarily absent from the Senate today until approximately 6 p.m. because he is accepting an honorary degree for his late wife Erma at Wheeling Jesuit University in Wheeling, WV.

Mr. President, let me also say this about the remarks I am about to give. This has no negative reflection on my distinguished colleague, the Senator from Kentucky. He and I disagree on a number of issues. We have had longstanding debates here on the Senate floor about how he feels about campaign finance reform. He approaches this on an intellectual basis. I think I am right; he thinks he is right. But it doesn't take away from my respect for his having the right to have an opinion here in the Senate about the issue of campaign finance. The same, I think, on the issue of flag burning, for example. He will disagree with me on the DC Voting Rights bill. That is his privilege. He does it on an intellectual basis, a conclusion that he has reached. So my remarks have nothing to do, in any way, with an intention to denigrate my friend's feelings about this bill.

Yesterday we celebrated the 220th anniversary of the signing of our Constitution, and I talked about it yesterday. In its preamble, our Founders laid out the values to which our Nation has aspired: justice, domestic tranquility, common defense, general welfare, the blessings of liberty. The Government which has endured, our Government, and served us so well, recognized these goals could only be secured by equal representation. That means the right to vote, the right to elect individuals who will protect and promote our personal rights as well as the national interest.

The universal right to vote was established a long time ago with the 15th amendment, which barred discrimination based on race, with the 19th amendment, which guaranteed the right for women to vote, and with the Voting Rights Act, which ensured enforcement of these laws for people no matter their color.

In 1873, Susan B. Anthony faced trial for voting illegally, a woman who voted. In her defense she said:

In the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence

is an assertion of the natural right of all to the ballot;

for how can ``the consent of the governed'' be given, if the

right to vote be denied?

Today the right to equal representation is still denied to residents of the District of Columbia. These nearly 600,000 Americans pay Federal taxes, sit on juries, serve in our Armed Forces. Yet they are given only a delegate in the Congress, not a real voting Member. This is nothing more than shadow representation. This injustice has stood for far too long. We haven't voted on this matter for some 50 years. It is time we did that again. Shadow representation is shadow citizenship.

This afternoon we will move to vote on a bill that honors the residents of the District who responsibly meet every single expectation of American citizenship but are denied this basic civil right in return. I commend Senator Lieberman, who has taken the leadership on this issue for no reason or agenda other than he thinks it is the right thing to do.

I urge all my colleagues to vote for cloture so we can guarantee the full rights of citizenship for District residents.

I also urge my colleagues to support reauthorization of the DC College Access Act, which we will vote on this morning. This provides to District students who would otherwise be unfairly disadvantaged by the lack of in-State universities. It provides scholarships to make up the difference between in-State and out-of-State public universities. It doesn't allow any student to get in who is not qualified. It does allow a differential in the method of paying. The DC College Access Act levels the playing field and unlocks the doors to education and all the opportunity it affords to thousands of American students right here in the District of Columbia.

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. President, 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 have had conversations with the two managers, Senator McCain and Senator Levin. I would hope people who feel strongly about the amendment that is pending; that is, the habeas corpus amendment, would come and speak on this amendment. The floor is open for debate on that issue. It is an extremely important amendment. No matter how you feel about it, it is important--whether you are for it or against it. I would hope Senators would come and talk about that amendment.

I have also spoken with Senator Levin and Senator McCain about how we proceed from this point forward. We have been somewhat tepid in moving forward because we did not know how the vote would turn out on the DC voting rights. We know that now, so we are moving ahead as quickly as we can on the Defense authorization bill because that matter is out of the way procedurally.

What I have spoken to the two managers about is that we would have the Defense authorization bill, and as a sidetrack, we would have Iraq amendments--a finite number from the Democrats, a finite number from the Republicans. We would work on time agreements for those amendments. Our floor staff is trying to draw something up and submit that to the Republican leader. I have not today--even though I have spoken to him in the past about that--spoken to him about that, although we have spoken to Senator Kyl, Senator McCain, Senator Lott, and others. The distinguished Republican leader was simply off the floor at the time. So our two staffs are coming up with something in writing to see if there is a way we can move forward on that; otherwise, we will offer them as part of the Defense authorization bill.

On this matter, I have the greatest comfort level with Senator Levin's ability to manage this bill. He has, in years past, done such a remarkably good job. For many years, it has been Senator Warner working with him. Now, because of the change in the ranking membership of that committee, it is Senator McCain, who also is very experienced. So we should be able to move this legislation along, I hope, quickly.

There is a lot to do on this bill, and I would hope Members on this side would listen to what Senator Levin has to say and come when it is to their interest, and maybe even sometimes when it is not to their interest, but at least in an effort to dispose of this legislation.

I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 93, S. 558.

Mr. President, Passage of the Mental Health Parity Act of 2007 is an important victory for individuals who are affected by mental illnesses. Over a decade has passed since we enacted the landmark 1996 mental health parity law that was championed by my good friend, the late Senator Paul Wellstone, and Senator Domenici. Before his untimely death, Paul Wellstone was a tireless and eloquent advocate for legislation that would strengthen the 1996 law and achieve full parity in coverage between mental and physical illnesses.

The Mental Health Parity Act of 2007 is the culmination of many years of work to build on and strengthen the 1996 Mental Health Parity Act. It is a good compromise that will ensure that plans covering mental health services cannot provide different financial requirements or treatment limitations than they would for medical or surgical benefits. This legislation is long overdue and I will continue to work to ensure it is enacted as soon as possible.

I ask unanimous consent that the amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to; the committee-reported amendment, as amended, be agreed to; the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, en bloc; the bill, as amended, be read three times and passed; the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; and that any statements be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I congratulate Senators Kennedy, Enzi, and others who worked on this legislation for such a long time. They are to be commended. Senator Wellstone, I am sure, is smiling on us today.

I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 9:30 a.m. tomorrow; that on September 19, following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, and, following the time utilized by the two leaders, the Senate then resume consideration of H.R. 1585, the Defense Department authorization bill, and we proceed to 60 minutes of debate prior to a vote on the motion to invoke cloture on amendment No. 2022, with the time to be equally divided and controlled between the leaders or their designees; that upon the conclusion of the debate, the Senate proceed to vote on the motion to invoke cloture; that Members have until 10 a.m. to file any germane second-degree amendments to amendment No. 2022.

If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand adjourned under the previous order.