Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar Item No. 31, S. 222.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Con. Res. 20, which was submitted earlier today by Senators Lott and Dodd.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 84, which was submitted earlier today by Senators Lott and Dodd.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H. Con. Res. 85, which is at the desk.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution and preamble be agreed to en bloc, that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and that any statements relating to this measure be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 86, which was submitted earlier today.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to this matter be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 87, introduced earlier today by Senator Nelson of Florida.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 88 which was submitted earlier today by Senator Hatch.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to this matter be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 89, which was introduced earlier today by Senators Dayton and Coleman.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the tributes to Dr. Lloyd Ogilvie, the retiring Senate Chaplain, be printed as a Senate document, with the understanding that Members have until 12 noon, Friday, March 21, to submit these tributes.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the Senate's adjournment, the Budget Committee have from 11 a.m. until noon on March 14 to report legislative matters.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following treaties on today's Executive Calendar: Nos. 2, 3, and 4.

I further ask unanimous consent that the treaties be considered as having passed through their various parliamentary stages up to and including the presentation of the resolutions of ratification; that any statements be inserted in the Record as if read; and that the Senate take one vote on the resolutions of ratification to be considered as separate votes; further, that when the resolutions of ratification are voted upon, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, the President be notified of the Senate's action, and that following the disposition of the treaties the Senate return to legislative session.

Mr. President, I ask for a division vote on the resolutions of ratification.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in adjournment until 1 p.m., Monday, March 17. I further ask that following the prayer and the pledge, the morning hour be deemed to have expired and the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate then begin a period of morning business until the hour of 2 p.m., with the time equally divided between the two leaders or their designee.

Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, on Monday the Senate will be in a period of morning business until 2 p.m. Under a previous agreement, at 2 p.m. the Senate will begin consideration of the budget resolution. I remind my colleagues that under the budget procedures, there will be up to 50 hours for debate on the resolution. Members, therefore, should anticipate late sessions and numerous rollcall votes next week.

As a reminder, another cloture motion was filed on the Estrada nomination today. That cloture vote will occur on Tuesday morning. As announced earlier, there will be no rollcall votes on Monday. The next rollcall vote will occur on Tuesday morning, and Senators will be notified of the time when that vote will occur.

Madam President, the Senate will be in a period for morning business until 10 a.m., with the time equally divided between the two leaders or their designees. Following morning business, the Senate will return to the Estrada nomination, with the time equally divided between the chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee or their designees. At 10:30, the Senate will vote on the motion to invoke cloture on this important nomination. If cloture is not invoked on the nomination, the Senate will resume consideration of the Moscow Treaty. Additional amendments are expected to the resolution of ratification. Therefore, Senators should anticipate votes throughout the day. The Senate will complete action on the Moscow Treaty this week.

order of procedure

I ask unanimous consent that the time allocated for morning business be equally divided between the majority leader and the minority leader or their designees.

That is my understanding.

Madam President, seeing no one else here and being prepared to yield as soon as someone comes with a desire to speak, I will take advantage of this opportunity to make a few comments with respect to the pending situation in Iraq.

Since I returned from last weekend in Utah, I have become increasingly aware of how anxious people are about Iraq and the possibility of war in Iraq. This anxiousness comes from those who are supporters of the President as well as those who are detractors of the President. Some who have faith in the President's judgment and in his instincts say, we will back him but we are very concerned about the possibility of going to war. Those who do not have faith in the President's political judgment are almost beside themselves with anger and anxiety that he would go ahead in the face of what they consider to be serious worldwide opposition to the war.

As I look out at the situation, as best I can I have tried to explain to them

what I see to help them understand that which the Washington Post editorial said last week; that is, the risks of not going to war in the present circumstances are probably greater than the risks of going to war. Those who are looking to the United States to exercise leadership in this part of the world--indeed, to free them from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein--are just as desperate that perhaps we might back down as are those who fear that war will come.

War is never an easy decision, and I assure all of my constituents that this President is not given to war simply as something to do. That which we hear in the press about this possibility is clearly wrong; that is, the suggestion that perhaps the President is going to war in order to secure more oil for America. I point out that if oil were our motivation, war would be our last option. We could simply turn to Saddam Hussein, remove the sanctions, make accommodations with him, and say, go ahead and produce all the oil you want and we will take advantage of that and the impact of that on the world oil market.

Nor does it have anything to do, as some have suggested in the press, with the desire on the part of this President to somehow redeem the pledge that was made by his father. All of this rewrites history. George W. Bush--or George Bush, the first, if I might use that term-- was operating under a series of resolutions from the United Nations that did not authorize him to invade Iraq or go into Baghdad to remove Saddam Hussein. The decision was made, after examining the circumstances on the battlefield, that the mandate laid down by both the Congress and the U.N. had been fulfilled when the first George W. Bush had succeeded in liberating Kuwait.

We can look back through the lens of history and say that was a mistake in terms of what happened in the area, but by no means was it a circumstance where we could say that the present President Bush feels a need to somehow revenge his father or atone for his father. At the time, the decision was made on the basis of the legal situation and the best information available from the battlefield. In hindsight, we might say it was the wrong decision, but under no circumstances can we say that the first President Bush should be criticized for having made it.

No, the reason we are going forward in Iraq has to do with much more of the American spirit and the American tradition. America is not an imperial power, in spite of the statements by some of the people in the European press. America does not seek Roman-type domination over other nations. When America moves forward in war, it is for one purpose only, and that is to advance the cause of freedom. Usually, it is to advance the cause of freedom in America; that is, to preserve our citizens from attack. That is an aspect of the current situation.

Those who say, no, Iraq has never attacked us are being blind to the interconnections throughout the world of the Middle East with respect to terror. They say, we do not have a smoking gun to prove absolutely that al-Qaida, when they attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, was receiving aid from Iraq. Those who are waiting for that kind of absolute certainty before they move ahead are not cognizant of the intelligence information that is available not only to those who have attended classified briefings but, frankly, to the whole world based on the presentations made by Secretary Powell at the U.N. and in other circumstances.

There can be no doubt that America has been attacked, has been attacked by those who have received sanctuary in Iraq, and has been attacked by those who will, if not stopped, come back at us again and again and again. It is their clear desire to drive the Americans out of the Middle East through military--if necessary, terrorist--tactics, to see to it that we leave. When we leave, what will be the legacy of that decision? If we back out of our military threat against Iraq, what will we leave behind? Will we leave stability? Will we leave freedom? Will we leave prosperity? No. If we back out of the region now, we will leave behind us continued warfare, continued death, continued poverty, and continued torture. That is not the American tradition, to turn our back on those circumstances and walk away when there is an opportunity to advance freedom, liberty, prosperity, and peace.

I do not envy the President the challenge of the decision he must make, but I recognize America has traditionally, when aroused, stood on the side of moving ahead to protect liberty wherever we can. If we do go ahead with military action in Iraq in the face of Saddam Hussein's continuing refusal to disarm, what, then, will be the legacy we will leave behind when the entire operation is finished? We can only look at other American circumstances to try to find the parallel. When we moved into imperial Japan at the end of the second world war, defeated the Japanese military, what did we find? A feudal system where women were not only not allowed to vote but in many cases were treated like property and chattel, where slavery existed throughout the empire, where property rights were not available to any except those who had been born to them--a feudal society firmly mired in circumstances of centuries before.

What did we leave behind when we departed? A free nation that had women's suffrage, where slavery was abolished, where property rights were available to all, where the rule of law existed in a democratic society. We saw the Japanese rise to a level of prosperity thereafter that made them the second strongest economy in the world. That was the legacy we left behind when we achieved military victory.

When we won the Second World War, we not only liberated those people who considered themselves under the yoke of foreign domination--the Dutch, the French, the Belgians, et cetera--we also liberated the Germans, who were our enemies, and the Japanese, who were our enemies. After the Second World War, those who had been our adversaries had a greater degree of freedom, a greater degree of prosperity, and a peace and calm in their circumstances they did not have under their previous regimes. They did not live under American domination or American legions left there as the Romans would do. They lived there in freedom and peace and were protected by American military might from those who would have attacked that peace.

It is that history in America that gives me confidence that President Bush will do the right thing in Iraq. If war becomes necessary because of Saddam Hussein's continued refusal to disarm and his continued refusal to step down and turn his country to freedom, if war becomes necessary, the American tradition says the legacy we will leave behind will be one that our children can be proud of and in which Iraqi children can rejoice.

Let us not shrink from our responsibility to be the protectors of freedom and liberty throughout the world. And let us not shrink from our responsibility to protect America from those who would attack us if we do not move ahead.

I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.