Floor Statements

Mr. President, the Senate Appropriations Committee has adopted rules governing its procedures for the 109th Congress. Pursuant to Rule XXVI, paragraph 2, of the Standing Rules of the Senate, on behalf of myself and Senator Byrd, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the committee rules be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I am pleased to join the distinguished majority leader, Mr. Frist, as a cosponsor of his resolution honoring the memory of Howard Liebengood.

Howard was a good friend of mine and a very trustworthy officer of the U.S. Senate. I first go to know him when he worked as a member of the staff of the Senator from Tennessee, Mr. Baker.

He later served as Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper when Senator Baker was the Republican leader.

It was my pleasure to know Howard's family as well. His wife Deanna was a very important asset and an admired and respected member of the Senate family.

We will miss Howard's ready smile and his keen insight on the issues facing our country. He was truly a wonderful person and a loyal friend.

Mr. President, on December 22, 2004, The U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service published a final rule that will streamline the process used by the Forest Service in revising forest management plans.

I am pleased that the Department completed work on this important regulation. Ultimately, this rule will help local forest managers provide future generations with healthier forests, cleaner air, cleaner water and more abundant wildlife through more efficient management of our forests and grasslands. I am also pleased that this regulation builds upon one of the important lessons we learned during consideration of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act in the 108th Congress: emphasis on actual forest management rather than administrative paperwork. This will result in our forest managers being able to undertake important forest health projects rather than be overburdened with administrative processes.

Although the final planning rule is very comprehensive, I would like to point out several key components: It will for the first time incorporate implementation and outcome assessment into the forest planning process, which will ensure that the forest planning process is a dynamic one that can quickly adjust to changing conditions. As we learned with the Healthy Forest Restoration Act, a dynamic management system allows the Forest Service to address the most time-sensitive forest health issues such as wildfire, invasive species, or disease. It incorporates meaningful public participation throughout the planning process, and ensures that the best available scientific information will be used in decision making. It contains a process that will fairly and objectively allow us to see whether the Forest Service is getting the job done. This reporting process will rely on independent reviews of Forest Service land management, will measure actual results against intended outcomes, and will incorporate an audit process to produce publicly available results. Finally, and most importantly, this rule will streamline the planning process, which in turn will save the Forest Service both time and money. The current forest plan takes between 5 and 7 years; under the new regulation the anticipated timeframe is between 2 and 3 years. These

savings in both time and money will allow our land managers to more quickly complete on-the-ground projects to improve the health of our Nation's forests.

For too long our Nation's forests have been imperiled because of a planning process that is too cumbersome and takes too long, and usually results in forest plans that are out-of-date by the time they are finished. I applaud the efforts of the U.S. Forest Service to streamline our Nation's forest planning process to reduce red tape and paperwork. I am hopeful that this final rule will provide further tools for the U.S. Forest Service in appropriately managing our Nation's forests.

Mr. President, I am deeply saddened by the news of the death of former Secretary of the Senate Stan Kimmitt.

It was just a few weeks ago when I was with him on a trip to Montana and enjoyed swapping stories about his early days as a staff member in the Senate. He was a protege of Senator Mike Mansfield and served for 11 years as Secretary for the majority. Even though he was employed by the Democratic majority at the time, he enjoyed the friendship of Republican Senators, including this Senator.

Stan Kimmitt loved the Senate, and he respected its traditions and its role in our government. He was totally trustworthy.

I extend to his fine family my sincere condolences. His son Jay served for several years as a member of the staff of the Senate Appropriations Committee, and I enjoyed working with him in that capacity. It was also my good fortune to get to be with another son, Bob, when he was our Ambassador to Germany. His other son, Mark, was recently served as the spokesman for our Armed Forces in Iraq.

Stan was very proud of his family, and he had every right to be.

Stan Kimmitt was a wonderful person who reflected credit on the Senate by his dependable, conscientious devotion to his duties and his warm affection for those who served in this body.

Mr. President, the decision of the distinguished Senator from Oklahoma, Mr. Nickles, to retire from the Senate will deprive this body of one of our most trusted and insightful leaders. I will miss very much the pleasure of serving with such an honest, forthright, and diligent colleague.

He brought to the Senate the valuable experience of running a family business which was translated through the use of his legislative skills into public policies that strengthened our economy by improving our tax and labor relations laws.

As chairman of the Budget Committee he was successful in his efforts to curb unnecessary spending. He was fairminded in his dealings with Senators on both sides of the aisle.

He was a true friend to me in the Senate and a great help as a coach on the golf course. I wish him and his wife, Linda, much happiness and success in the years ahead.

Mr. President, I am pleased to recommend approval by the Senate of the fiscal year 2005 Military Construction appropriations conference report, which contains emergency supplemental appropriations needed by States seeking Federal funding from the disaster relief fund administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

On September 8, the President signed into law $2 billion in supplemental appropriations for FEMA. Since then, the President has made 3 more requests for funding for various departments within the Government. Today we are responding to those requests and including $6.5 billion in emergency funding which will return the balance of the disaster relief fund to a healthy level. This is in addition to the $2 billion supplemental the Congress provided immediately following the devastation caused by Hurricane Charley. Additional appropriations for FEMA's disaster relief fund cannot wait because the balance of this important program has again been depleted to a dangerously low level following three additional hurricanes and other natural disasters.

This funding will not only be needed by the victims of recent hurricanes in the southeast but will also be used for the several hundred repair projects and mitigation activities across the country resulting from every other federally declared disaster of the past few years. I have been assured by the Department of Homeland Security that these funds are sufficient to cover the current needs of our Nation's disaster victims and I support this funding.

Mr. President, I am pleased to present for the Senate's approval today the conference report on H.R. 4567, the fiscal year 2005 Homeland Security Appropriations Act.

The conference agreement provides total new budget authority for the Department of $33.1 billion. Of the amount provided for fiscal year 2004, $32 billion is for discretionary programs.

To further strengthen the capacity of the Nation's first responders to prepare for and respond to possible terrorist threats and other emergencies, this conference report provides a total of $3.9 billion for the Office for State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness, including: $1.1 billion for the State and local formula- based grant program; $400 million for law enforcement terrorism prevention grants; $885 million for high-threat, high-density, urban area grants; $150 million for port security grants; $150 million for rail and transit security grants; and $715 million for the firefighter assistance grant program, of which $65 million is set-aside to begin implementing the SAFER Act. The conference report also includes a separate appropriation of $180 million for emergency management performance grants.

The conference report includes a total of $5.1 billion for the Transportation Security Administration, furthering our commitment to secure all modes of transportation. The conference committee made air cargo security a priority and provides $115 million for air cargo security, an increase of $30 million from the President's request. This funding will allow the Department to enhance its efforts to target and prohibit the transportation of high-risk cargo on passenger aircraft; as well as to advance efforts to research, develop, and procure the most effective and efficient air cargo inspection and screening systems. In addition, there is a statutory requirement for the tripling of cargo inspections on passenger aircraft.

Additionally, $8.8 billion is provided to secure our Nation's borders; $5.5 billion is provided for emergency preparedness and response; $7.37 billion for the Coast Guard; and $2 billion for research, analysis, and infrastructure protection. To increase rail security the conference report provides $172 million for rail compliance inspectors; canine explosive detection teams; rail, freight, and transit security grants; vulnerability assessments; and research and development of technologies to prevent suicide bombers. A total of $662 million is provided for the Federal Air Marshals, $50 million more than the requested amount.

A matter of concern to some of my colleagues are the items funded through the offset provided by the extension of the customs user fees. The largest single item that was funded through this mechanism was speeding up the development and deployment of permanent airwings across our northern border. Unfortunately, once the customs user fee extension was dropped from this bill, we lost the offset available to enhance funding for these important items and not exceed the fiscal constraints placed on our subcommittee.

The conference committee met on Thursday, October 7, 2004, and the conference report was filed on Saturday, October 9, 2004. It was adopted by the House of Representatives later that day by a vote of 368 yeas to zero nays. Senate passage of this conference report today will send this fiscal year 2005 appropriations bill to the President for signature into law.

In closing, I thank the ranking member of the subcommittee, my colleague from West Virginia, Senator Byrd; the chairman of the House subcommittee, Mr. Rogers; and the ranking member of the House subcommittee, Mr. Sabo, for their substantial contributions to this bill throughout the year. It has taken many hours of hard work by these Members and their staff members to bring this bill to a successful conclusion. I would also like to thank the chairmen ranking members of the House and Senate full Appropriations Committees and their staff members for the assistance and guidance they have provided to us throughout the process.

I recommend the adoption of the conference report.

Mr. President, I commend the Senator from Pennsylvania for highlighting the importance of community-based organizations, including faith-based organizations, in disaster assistance efforts. I also concur that religious organizations should not be excluded when they are victims of disasters. I concur with the Senator that FEMA should continue to see that faith-based organizations are treated fairly in accordance with the President's policy and for the benefit of those in need in times of crisis.

I do not want to interfere with the chairman's right to the floor.

Mr. President, if the Senator will yield, I want to point out the fact that this was a bill that was taken up in our committee back in June, and approved unanimously by the Committee on Appropriations, to fund the Department of Homeland Security. I want to lend my support and encouragement to the Senate to go along with the chairman of the full committee. It no longer contains any language to which there had been some objection posed by other Senators. So I hope the chairman of the full committee will be respected by the Senate and that his unanimous consent request can be agreed to.

Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

In fact, I can answer that question partially. I looked at the legislative notice that was published back in September when we had the bill on the Senate floor. We are increasing by 9.2 percent the spending

that goes to the Department of Homeland Security overall. So by withholding this funding--we are into the new fiscal year as the Senator points out--we are allowing individual programs administered by the Department of Homeland Security to suffer. We are requiring them to give up, in effect, the increases that have already been approved by this Senate and in the conference report on the Homeland Security appropriations bill.

Some of the programs, for example, that have been increased substantially are Project Bioshield, the Transportation Security Administration activities, the U.S. Coast Guard. Those are fully funded at the administration's requested level, which were substantially increased over the last fiscal year.

So this is causing real harm, and the Senator makes that point.

I point out specifically how it is causing the harmful results: new technologies to enhance security of our country by identifying people coming into the country who are using visas. We have new technologies now that can be used to screen and to make sure people are who the visa says they are. This is something that is not going to be utilized for this period of time in the new fiscal year because the increases in funding are not being made available. So this is really serious. We need to pass this Homeland Security appropriations conference report as soon as possible. We need to do it today. We needed to do it when it was ripe for consideration yesterday.

It does not contain any provision that is being opposed by the other side.

There is no objection that I have heard from any Senator. There is a disaster provision that was included in this bill. It has now been taken off the Homeland Security appropriations bill. It has been added to the Military Construction appropriations bill. This bill is clean of any provision that any Senator had opposed, to my knowledge.

Yes. For producer payments, such transfers for these crops will be taken into account as they are for the other tobaccos. The payments will be based on the actual amount available on the farm after those transfers.

Mr. President, I oppose the amendment offered by the Senator from Arizona. The Senator's amendment would have the effect of harming the Senate's oversight capabilities and making it ineffective.

The Senator from Arizona argues that if we don't combine intelligence oversight and appropriations into a single committee we are wasting our time with reform efforts. I disagree. The resolution authored by the Senators from Kentucky and Nevada accomplishes all of the goals outlined by the 9/11 Commission and it does it in a way that maintains an established system of checks and balances we have had in the Senate since the Appropriations Committee was established in 1867. The appropriations and authorizing committees serve important but distinct and separate roles, and it would be unwise to combine them.

Currently, intelligence funding is shared by five appropriations subcommittees, and intelligence oversight is divided among three committees. Supporters of the Senator's amendment say that if you combine intelligence appropriations and authorization into a single committee, you will centralize and have more powerful oversight.

This is not the case. Not since the early 19th and 20th centuries did congressional committees originate both authorizing and appropriations bills. Programs back then were often authorized permanently. Oversight and appropriations functions were separated because it was determined that having joint authorizing and appropriations committees lead to greater spending and less accountability. We don't need to repeat that mistake of the past.

Another reason for opposing this amendment is a matter of practicality. The Intelligence Committee meets several times a week. I have heard from my colleagues on the committee that it is the most demanding committee assignment they have. Under the resolution their workload and responsibility will significantly increase. We would be asking the Intelligence Committee to take on even more work by adding appropriations responsibility. It would make their workload enormous.

For those who believe the Appropriations Committee divides responsibility for intelligence between too many subcommittees, this resolution addresses that complaint. The resolution would combine all intelligence appropriations into a new Intelligence Appropriations Subcommittee. While I would prefer we leave it to the Appropriations Committee to make the determination on whether this consolidation is warranted, I will support the resolution before us.

We have passed already this year, and the President has signed into law, the Defense Appropriations bill. This bill contains most of funding this year for the intelligence agencies of our government. We have not, however, been able to approve this year an Intelligence Authorization bill for the next fiscal year. I do not believe the Senator's amendment serves us well if intelligence funding would now be held hostage to policy disputes in the Intelligence Committee that are holding up passage of an authorization bill.

The resolution Senator McConnell and Reid have laid before the Senate is totally consistent with the 9/11 Commission's recommendations and we should approve it.

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, my dear friend, and neighbor for many years, Donald M. Dockery III, died on September 7. As a World War II veteran, he was pleased that he lived to watch on television the dedication of the memorial on the Mall here in Washington honoring those who served in that great conflict.

He served in Europe as a pilot in the U.S. Army Air Corps. After the war, he remained in the Reserves and retired as a Lieutenant Colonel in the U.S. Air Force.

Donald Dockery was a special friend. He and his family were our closest neighbors when I was growing up in the Byram community, 7 miles south of Jackson, MS. His wife, Stella, and their children, Donna, Kay, and Billy were also very close friends of mine, and my family.

Donald's death was like having a death in our own family. He and Stella watched after me as I grew up in the neighborhood. Donald was the personification of a good citizen, the kind who enriches our country with a strong spirit of community.

He was active in the boosters club at our school, helping children who needed money for lunch room tickets or a band uniform. He was a very successful businessman. He owned a store and was in the pulp wood and cattle business. He also got into the bottled water business; and, with his father-in-law and his son, he developed their company into a very impressive enterprise.

When my father's health began declining several years ago, Donald would visit him every day. Their friendship was steadfast and enduring for over 50 years.

It is impossible to measure the influence another person can have on one's life, but I am sure Donald Dockery helped shape my views of the role a good citizen should play in his community and the importance of being a loyal and caring friend.

My family and I will miss him very much.

Madam President, I thank the distinguished Senator from Texas for yielding briefly to me.

I take this opportunity to thank the staff members who worked so hard on the appropriations subcommittee for homeland defense for helping ensure the passage of the bill and handling the bill in such a professionally competent way. They all reflected credit on the Senate by their professional way of handling their duties. It was because of their hard work that we successfully completed action on the bill last night. I commend them all.

On our side of the aisle, Rebecca Davies is the chief clerk of that subcommittee. She is assisted ably by Carol Cribbs, Les Spivey, James Hayes, Kimberly Nelson, and Avery Forbes. The staff members who served on the minority side were equally professional and helpful in carrying out their duties.

I commend Senator Byrd for his cooperation with our efforts to complete action on the bill. I especially thank Senator Reid, the assistant leader, who was actively involved on the floor helping to ensure the orderly flow of amendments. I am very grateful for his assistance as well.

My good friend Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska was here when he was needed during the handling of that bill, and without his guidance and good judgment on several occasions, we would not have successfully completed action on the bill last evening.

But for all Senators who cooperated with us on time agreements and the like, I express my deepest appreciation and thank them.

I yield the floor.

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