Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise to discuss an issue of considerable importance to the people of southern Colorado. For nearly 50 years, the people of

southern Colorado have lived with the knowledge that within a few miles of their homes, schools, and places of business lies one of the largest stockpiles of chemical munitions in the world. The Pueblo Chemical Depot was built during World War II and continues to this day to serve as an ammunition and material storage facility. Since the mid-1990s, the primary mission of the depot has been to protect the 780,000 chemical weapons being stored there.

As required by the Chemical Weapons Convention, the Department of Defense in 1997 launched an aggressive program to dismantle the U.S. chemical weapons stockpile. The program has since repeatedly stumbled and has not met the expectations of the international community, Congress and, most important, the people who live near these stockpiles. The costs of the program have risen from $15 billion in 1997 to $24 billion in 2001, an increase of $9 billion in 4 years. Some have estimated that the program will cost as much as $30 billion by the time it is completed.

The time schedule has experienced unconscionable delays. Last year cleanup of Pueblo was expected to be completed by 2011. The Department's latest budget decision has pushed the date all the way back to 2021, 9 years after the Chemical Weapons Convention treaty deadline.

Numerous safety incidents have occurred at operational sites, shutting down one facility for 9 months. Poor contracting has resulted in the shutting down of another facility, which is now costing the Federal Government $300,000 a day to keep operationally ready. It was hardly a surprise then when the President's own management assessment last year labeled this program as ineffective.

On top of these numerous problems, the Department of Defense has failed to fully communicate its intentions to either Congress or the local community. Last week, for instance, Senator Salazar, my colleague from Colorado, and I met with two Department of Defense officials to discuss this program. At that meeting we requested that the Defense Department answer some questions and were promised a written response from Under Secretary of Defense Michael Wynne within 3 days. That meeting was held over a week ago, and we have yet to receive a response.

At least we in Congress can get a meeting. Members of the local community in Pueblo, CO have been trying to get an official from the Defense Department to meet with them to discuss the Pentagon's plans for weeks. Despite the fact that the Defense Department is trying to unilaterally shut down the design work at Pueblo, the Pentagon has not taken the time to meet with the residents who, if the Pentagon gets its way, will be forced to live for another 15 years near an aging stockpile housing three-quarters of a million chemical weapons.

The latest and most frustrating Pentagon effort in this program is to study once again the possibility of transporting the 2,600 tons of mustard gas across the State of Colorado to an incinerator site out of the State. Never mind that this option has been studied at least three times in the past decade, and never mind that current law prohibits the transport of chemical munitions across State lines, and never mind that transporting these weapons out of State would violate the agreement the Defense Department made with the people in Pueblo.

This study is unnecessary and a waste of taxpayers' hard-earned dollars. I don't know how simpler we can make it. I have already been told by Pentagon officials that the study is going to conclude that the transportation of chemical munitions across State lines is not practical. If that is the case, why do the study? Why waste $150,000 to study the feasibility of an option that is against the law and has already been determined by the Pentagon to be impractical?

With the Department wasting money on meaningless studies, it is no wonder that this program is over budget and behind schedule. I think it is time we took a stand against the Pentagon's wasteful actions. Therefore, I am introducing legislation today that will stop this study and force the Department of Defense to recognize that the only option for destroying its chemical munitions is to build a disposal site in Pueblo.

I am pleased to announce that my colleague from Colorado, Senator Ken Salazar, has agreed to cosponsor this legislation. I wanted to mention, though, that Senator Mitch McConnell, Senator Bunning, and Senator Shelby have also agreed to cosponsor. We should not forget that Senator McConnell in particular has been fighting the Department on this issue for over a decade. In many respects, Senator McConnell's hard work has paved the way for the legislation I am introducing today along with my colleague from the State of Colorado, Senator Salazar.

I urge my other colleagues to join us in putting the Department on notice that this kind of wasteful, meaningless effort will not be tolerated.

I believe it is time the Pentagon took a good look at its chemical demilitarization program. Our country cannot afford to throw away our scarce defense dollars into a program that continues to be so incredibly mismanaged. Nor should our Nation's diplomats be put in the position of having to explain why we can't meet our treaty obligations to the likes of China, Iran, or France. Most importantly, we cannot forget the thousands of innocent Americans who continue to live near these sites. They bear the burden of the Pentagon's mismanagement. It is not fair to them when all they have asked for is that these munitions be cleaned up in a manner that is safe and does not harm the environment.

Mr. President, I rise to discuss an issue of considerable importance to the people of southern Colorado. For nearly 50 years, the people of

southern Colorado have lived with the knowledge that within a few miles of their homes, schools, and places of business lies one of the largest stockpiles of chemical munitions in the world. The Pueblo Chemical Depot was built during World War II and continues to this day to serve as an ammunition and material storage facility. Since the mid-1990s, the primary mission of the depot has been to protect the 780,000 chemical weapons being stored there.

As required by the Chemical Weapons Convention, the Department of Defense in 1997 launched an aggressive program to dismantle the U.S. chemical weapons stockpile. The program has since repeatedly stumbled and has not met the expectations of the international community, Congress and, most important, the people who live near these stockpiles. The costs of the program have risen from $15 billion in 1997 to $24 billion in 2001, an increase of $9 billion in 4 years. Some have estimated that the program will cost as much as $30 billion by the time it is completed.

The time schedule has experienced unconscionable delays. Last year cleanup of Pueblo was expected to be completed by 2011. The Department's latest budget decision has pushed the date all the way back to 2021, 9 years after the Chemical Weapons Convention treaty deadline.

Numerous safety incidents have occurred at operational sites, shutting down one facility for 9 months. Poor contracting has resulted in the shutting down of another facility, which is now costing the Federal Government $300,000 a day to keep operationally ready. It was hardly a surprise then when the President's own management assessment last year labeled this program as ineffective.

On top of these numerous problems, the Department of Defense has failed to fully communicate its intentions to either Congress or the local community. Last week, for instance, Senator Salazar, my colleague from Colorado, and I met with two Department of Defense officials to discuss this program. At that meeting we requested that the Defense Department answer some questions and were promised a written response from Under Secretary of Defense Michael Wynne within 3 days. That meeting was held over a week ago, and we have yet to receive a response.

At least we in Congress can get a meeting. Members of the local community in Pueblo, CO have been trying to get an official from the Defense Department to meet with them to discuss the Pentagon's plans for weeks. Despite the fact that the Defense Department is trying to unilaterally shut down the design work at Pueblo, the Pentagon has not taken the time to meet with the residents who, if the Pentagon gets its way, will be forced to live for another 15 years near an aging stockpile housing three-quarters of a million chemical weapons.

The latest and most frustrating Pentagon effort in this program is to study once again the possibility of transporting the 2,600 tons of mustard gas across the State of Colorado to an incinerator site out of the State. Never mind that this option has been studied at least three times in the past decade, and never mind that current law prohibits the transport of chemical munitions across State lines, and never mind that transporting these weapons out of State would violate the agreement the Defense Department made with the people in Pueblo.

This study is unnecessary and a waste of taxpayers' hard-earned dollars. I don't know how simpler we can make it. I have already been told by Pentagon officials that the study is going to conclude that the transportation of chemical munitions across State lines is not practical. If that is the case, why do the study? Why waste $150,000 to study the feasibility of an option that is against the law and has already been determined by the Pentagon to be impractical?

With the Department wasting money on meaningless studies, it is no wonder that this program is over budget and behind schedule. I think it is time we took a stand against the Pentagon's wasteful actions. Therefore, I am introducing legislation today that will stop this study and force the Department of Defense to recognize that the only option for destroying its chemical munitions is to build a disposal site in Pueblo.

I am pleased to announce that my colleague from Colorado, Senator Ken Salazar, has agreed to cosponsor this legislation. I wanted to mention, though, that Senator Mitch McConnell, Senator Bunning, and Senator Shelby have also agreed to cosponsor. We should not forget that Senator McConnell in particular has been fighting the Department on this issue for over a decade. In many respects, Senator McConnell's hard work has paved the way for the legislation I am introducing today along with my colleague from the State of Colorado, Senator Salazar.

I urge my other colleagues to join us in putting the Department on notice that this kind of wasteful, meaningless effort will not be tolerated.

I believe it is time the Pentagon took a good look at its chemical demilitarization program. Our country cannot afford to throw away our scarce defense dollars into a program that continues to be so incredibly mismanaged. Nor should our Nation's diplomats be put in the position of having to explain why we can't meet our treaty obligations to the likes of China, Iran, or France. Most importantly, we cannot forget the thousands of innocent Americans who continue to live near these sites. They bear the burden of the Pentagon's mismanagement. It is not fair to them when all they have asked for is that these munitions be cleaned up in a manner that is safe and does not harm the environment.

Mr. President, I thank the majority leader for his very strong support of President Bush's nominee, Dr. Condoleezza Rice. I like to think of her as a Coloradan. In Colorado, we are extremely proud of her record.

I rise today in strong support of President Bush's nominee for Secretary of State, Dr. Condoleezza Rice. I ask my colleagues to join me in approving this nominee so that she can assist President Bush in making his version of a more secure, democratic, and prosperous world for the benefit of the American people and the international community a reality.

As many already know, Dr. Rice was born and raised in Alabama. In 1969, her father moved their family to Colorado to take an academic position at the University of Denver. Dr. Rice soon enrolled in Denver's St. Mary's Academy, an independent Catholic school and the first integrated school she attended. After high school, she earned her bachelor's degree in political science, cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa, from the University of Denver in 1974 and returned a few years later to get her Ph.D. from the Graduate School of International Studies at the University of Denver in 1981.

Dr. Rice may have only spent a few years in Colorado but we in Colorado are certainly proud of what she has accomplished and like to consider her a daughter of the Centennial State.

Clearly, Condoleezza Rice is eminently qualified for the post of Secretary of State. I know many of my colleagues are aware of her years at Stanford University, including her service as provost. In addition, she served on the National Security Council during George H. W. Bush's administration as Director of Soviet and Eastern European Affairs, which witnessed the fall of the Berlin Wall. She has come full circle since then and again served on the National Security Council but this time as the national security adviser to our current President and has done a magnificent job during very turbulent times.

Since then, Dr. Rice has consistently provided the President with sound advice on national security and foreign policy. She has been balanced, fair, and determined to ensure that President Bush received the best possible advice.

Some have questioned Dr. Rice's role as national security adviser and how she shaped the Bush administration's policies since the tragedy of September 11, 2001--specifically, our action against the Saddam Hussein regime. I believe she was instrumental in encouraging the President to utilize every diplomatic approach possible. We should not forget that President Bush went to the United Nations, secured a Security Council resolution demanding disarmament, and worked with our closest allies to ensure that Saddam Hussein complied with his obligations. The President also sought authorization from this Congress, which over three-quarters of this body supported. Unfortunately, Saddam Hussein would not keep his end of the bargain and we were left with no choice but military action. I am thankful during this turbulent period that Dr. Rice ensured the President received advice from multiple viewpoints so he could make the bold decisions necessary for our security.

The Hussein regime is now out of power. The former dictator and killer of thousands is sitting in prison and the first democratic elections in Iraq are about to take place. Our Nation is more secure because a dangerous regime, with a history of aggression and links to terrorist organizations, is no longer in power.

Today, America has demonstrated its resolve in the global war on terror. American troops and their coalition allies have achieved this historic effort thanks to their sacrifice.

As democracy in Iraq succeeds, a message will be sent forth that freedom can be the future of every nation and that freedom improves the peace and security of the United States.

I am certain Dr. Rice will present this powerful message abroad with skill and determination. Just as importantly, Dr. Rice understands that successfully fighting the war on terror is not solely a military task. Dr. Rice will seek to use our powerful diplomatic leverage to better protect our Nation. She will also guide our Nation's diplomatic efforts to solve regional and civil conflicts in the Middle East, between Israel and its Arab neighbors, in Sudan, Congo, and Liberia, in the Balkans, in Cyprus, in Haiti, in Northern Ireland, and elsewhere. Her leadership in the important multilateral discussions with the North Koreans on their pursuit for weapons of mass destruction will be pivotal.

There are also other challenges which Dr. Rice must tackle with our social and economic development programs that the State Department manages. The promotion of free trade and investment worldwide, the fight against HIV/AIDS, and the implementation of the Millennium Challenge Account are but a few ways we can seek to provide our friends and allies around the globe with much needed stability and vitality.

When the President announced his intention to nominate Dr. Rice to be Secretary of State, he spoke of relying on her counsel, benefiting from her experience, and appreciating her sound and steady judgment. I am pleased that the President has sought to replace our current Secretary of State, Colin Powell, with another so well equipped for the challenges that lie ahead.

I would be remiss if I did not thank Secretary Powell for his service to our great Nation. He has given so much of himself while serving during his long and distinguished military career before finally leading the Department of State. These two Americans are two of our best. We are privileged that while Secretary Powell steps down to pursue new challenges, the United States has someone of Dr. Rice's credentials to continue to carry the torch of liberty abroad.

I urge my colleagues to confirm Condoleezza Rice as our 66th Secretary of State.

I yield the floor and 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 would like to exercise my right under morning business to make a comment on the Marriage Protection Amendment.

Does my colleague from Montana have a question?

Less than 10 minutes.

Mr. President, I would like to first express my gratitude to the leadership for making the Marriage Protection Amendment a priority in this Congress. The Marriage Protection Amendment is a constitutional amendment that I have introduced today. It is S.J. Res. 1. In the press conference earlier today I indicated I hoped that the designation of the number would reflect its priority with the leadership. I realize that was an overly optimistic request, but I am very pleased we have the support from leadership that we do and that it is among their priority items. We have the complete support of the leadership. They all signed as cosponsors on S.J. Res. 1.

As of this very moment, we have a quarter of the Senate who have signed on as cosponsors. I think that is fabulous. It is certainly a better start than we had in the last session. In the last session, if my memory serves me correctly, I think we only had about 13 or so cosponsors on it, even after we had the debate in the Senate. So even before we have sent out a letter to our colleagues in the Senate, we have 25 original cosponsors. I am excited about that.

So today we have reintroduced the Marriage Protection Amendment in the Senate. The intent and policy goals remain the same as last year. It is the same bill we debated on the floor of the Senate. What it does is define marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

The amendment represents a democratic process: the voice of the American people following recent and widespread efforts by activist courts to change this ages-old definition of marriage.

People say, well, what about the rights of the State legislature? What we are trying to do is protect the voice of the American people. The right place for this to be determined is in the legislative bodies of this country, in the Congress of the United States and each and every legislature in every State, and not in the Federal courts. The amendment does restrict the ability of the courts to define marriage. The Marriage Protection Amendment does not override State and local authority. Under the Marriage Protection Amendment, cities, States, and private companies would still be free to determine for themselves civil union, benefit, and partnership definitions.

The Marriage Protection Amendment would not permit the redefining of marriage, a definition agreed upon by every civilization, culture, ethnicity, and religion around the world.

The definition of marriage in itself is not discriminatory. Those who have been opposed to the amendment tried to make that argument in the last session. Even civil rights leaders, Hispanic and African Americans, have said this is not a civil rights issue.

Congress does have a vital role to play in this debate. The policy goals are widely agreed upon. Recent election results illustrate broad support for the definition of marriage.

Mr. President, 14 million voters in 11 States voted for constitutional amendments on November 2, 2004, with an average majority of 67 percent. This reflects great support throughout the country. Some 13 States voted on the ballot issue in 2004.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have the information on this chart printed in the Record, which illustrates what happened in each one of those elections.

The emphasis here must be on the process, democratic, deliberative, and responsive to the electorate, not to just appointed judges and lawyers. We want the American public to have a say in this debate. Courtrooms are not the place for this important decision about the most fundamental institution of mankind, and that is the definition of marriage. Courts should interpret the law, not write it.

So we are eager to begin to have hearings, to talk about the research, to debate and have constructive dialog on this very important issue. It is important to the American people. It is important we continue to move forward with the momentum that has evolved as a result of our debate last year and the momentum that has evolved as a result of the elections of this past fall.

I am excited about introducing the Marriage Protection Amendment, which is exactly the same amendment we debated on the floor of the Senate last year.

Mr. President, before I wrap up, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Coburn be added as an original cosponsor and Senator Stevens be added as an original cosponsor.

Again, in conclusion, I thank the leadership for their support and my colleagues for their support on this particular amendment. We had a number of elections for Senate seats where this was a very important issue and critical to the election of many of our new Members in the Senate. We have at least five votes that have switched as a result of this election. I think that is the American people having an opportunity to speak their mind.

I can say, this amendment is to protect the voice of the American people. The proper way to have this debate is in the legislative bodies of America. That includes the Congress and each and every legislature.

Again, I thank the leader for his leadership on this particular issue. I also thank my colleagues who showed up at the press conference this morning to talk about this issue, particularly Senator Santorum, Senator Hutchison, Senator Sessions, and Senator Thune who joined me in the press conference. I thank them for their leadership this morning in that press conference.

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

Mr. President, I wish to congratulate Robert von Dassanowsky and Carl Wieman for being selected by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and the Council for Advancement of Support Education as this year's U.S. Professors of the Year.

Robert von Dassanowsky, Ph.D., is associate professor and chair of Languages and Cultures and director of Film Studies at the University of Colorado, Colorado Springs. A widely published literary and film historian, Dr. Dassanowsky is founding VP of the Austrian American Film Association, which promotes scholarly and production activities between the two nations.

Carl Wieman, Ph.D., is a physicist at the University of Colorado at Boulder. In 2001, Dr. Wieman was honored with the Nobel Prize in Physics. He gives approximately 60 talks a year on the topic of physics research and science education.

This recognition represents the culmination of a great deal of hard work and determined effort. It acknowledges their dedication to teaching and commitment to students. They should be very proud of this honor.

Now more than ever, our Nation needs the skills and talents of college professors like Robert von Dassanowsky and Carl Wieman. They understand the importance of a well-rounded college education for students if we are to produce the next generation of leaders. We are very grateful for all they do to make a difference. Their effort is greatly appreciated.

Congratulations again to two of Colorado's outstanding citizens.

Mr. President, on this occasion I pay tribute to a dear friend and employee, Carol Salisbury. Carol joined my office in January of 1991, when I was first elected to Congress from the Fourth Congressional District. One of my original staffers, Carol

has served my office and the people of Colorado for 14 years, and she has done so with grace and conviction. She will be leaving my office in January 2005.

Carol began her career working out of my Fort Collins Congressional office, and later, the Senate offices in Greeley and Loveland. As Area Director, she managed the office and provided dedicated service on a variety of issues, including housing and healthcare. Carol was instrumental in establishing the Fall River Visitor Center at Rocky Mountain National Park, the acquisition of Cherokee Park by the Forest Service, and many other smaller projects that have greatly benefitted our public lands and will lead to greater enjoyment by the public. She was passionate about historic preservation and worked tirelessly on behalf of many worthwhile interests, including the historic Cumbres & Toltec Scenic Railroad in Southern Colorado. Her presence on Team Allard will be missed and I know the Northern Colorado community will miss her as well. Carol was a hard working and earnest friend and employee.

My wife, Joan, joins me in thanking her for dedication and loyalty. We both wish her and her husband Jack the best in their future endeavors.

Mr. President, today I recognize the commendable performance of the Fort Lewis College Cycling Team. On the treacherous slopes of Seven Springs Resort in Pennsylvania the Skyhawks competed against the Nation's best cyclists to determine who was the best. When the dust settled at the bottom of the track the Fort Lewis College Skyhawks stood victorious, clinching the National Collegiate Cycling Association, NCCA, Mountain Bike Championship.

Fort Lewis College has a distinguished history of athletic excellence. This impressive win was the sixth time in the sport's eleven year history that the Skyhawks have brought the championship trophy back to Durango, CO.

In addition to the impressive overall team achievement there were several individual athletes that stood out; Susan Grandjean, Leana Gerrard, Matt Shriver, and Paul Smith all delivered championship performances. Fort Lewis College's victory would not have been possible without the leadership of the team's coach, Rick Crawford.

I would like to share my congratulations with the entire Fort Lewis College Community. Congratulations to all Fort Lewis College Skyhawks, congratulations to President Brad Bartel, congratulations to the Board of Trustees of Fort Lewis College, and especially congratulations to the members of Fort Lewis College Cycling, students and fans. You have made all Coloradans proud.

Mr. President, on this occasion I pay tribute to a dear friend and employee, Carol Salisbury. Carol joined my office in January of 1991, when I was first elected to Congress from the Fourth Congressional District. One of my original staffers, Carol has served my office and the people of Colorado for 14 years, and she has done so with grace and conviction. She will be leaving my office in January 2005.

Carol began her career working out of my Fort Collins congressional office, and later, the Senate offices in Greeley and Loveland. As area director, she managed the office and provided dedicated service on a variety of issues, including housing and healthcare. Carol was instrumental in establishing the Fall River Visitor Center at Rocky Mountain National Park, the acquisition of Cherokee Park by the Forest Service, and many other smaller objects that have greatly benefitted our public lands and will lead to greater enjoyment by the public. She was passionate about historic preservation and worked tirelessly on behalf of many worthwhile interests, including the historic Cumbres & Toltec Scenic Railroad in Southern California. Her presence on Team Allard will be missed and I know the Northern Colorado community will miss her as well. Carol was a hard working and earnest friend and employee.

My wife, Joan, joins me in thanking her for dedication and loyalty. We both wish her and her husband Jack the best in their future endeavors.

Mr. President, I express my appreciation and gratitude to Marti Morgan for her dedicated service and contributions to my office and to the people of Colorado. Marti will be leaving my office on January 5, 2005. As the 108th Congress concludes, a career that began during the 102d Congress comes to a successful and resounding conclusion.

Marti began working in my office nearly 13 years ago, in January 1992. Working out of my northern Colorado office, located first in Fort Collins and Greeley and then in Loveland, Marti has been an excellent employee and a true constituent representative. Her work and expertise in the areas of natural resources, water, and endangered species, among others, will be truly missed. Through her tireless work, she has helped me protect and improve national treasures like the Rocky Mountain National Park. Having served as my academy nominations coordinator, Marti has assisted thousands of Colorado's best and brightest youth in their aspirations to become the future leaders of our military and our nation.

My wife, Joan, joins me in expressing our thanks for Marti's many years of hard work, and in wishing her the best for whatever venture she may pursue in the future.

Madam President, first of all I would like to recognize the strong leadership that we receive from the majority leader. I think he needs to be complimented for his inclusive leadership. We have accomplished a lot this session because of his efforts.

Madam President, I take a moment to talk about 4 colleagues whom I have had an opportunity to serve with in the Senate.

First of all, I want to talk about my colleague from the State of Colorado, who is not going to be with us as we go into the waning days of the 108th Congress.

I had an opportunity to get to know Ben Campbell in the Colorado General Assembly. In 1982, he was elected to the State house and I was elected to the State senate. It was not long before the buzz in the Capitol was all about this great Native American whom we had serving in the State house who brought to the Capitol some common sense from western Colorado, an individual who in his own right had already gained some national notoriety.

Senator Campbell came from a family that was somewhat dysfunctional. It was a poor family. He joined the Air Force. While he was serving in the Air Force, he had an opportunity to get his GED. He served in Korea. While serving in the Air Force, he also spent some time in Japan where he received some judo training. He became a member of the first Olympic judo team representing the United States. He had the distinction of carrying the flag representing the whole United States entourage that was there participating in the Olympics.

This individual brought a considerable amount of national notoriety to the Colorado General Assembly. But he became even more respected because of his firm conviction, his hard work, and his commitment to small business, and to water issues of the western slope in the State house district he represented. In fact, having finished his first term, he was recognized as one of the 10 best legislators in the Colorado General Assembly. He had an opportunity to serve for about three terms and took on an incumbent congressman. He won that particular race and ended up in the U.S. House of Representatives in 1986; then got elected to the U.S. Senate in 1992, and reelected in 1998.

During this period of time, I had an opportunity to be able to establish a personal relationship with Senator Campbell in the State legislature. I respect a lot of the values he brought to the legislature. I had an opportunity to work with him for a short period of time in the U.S. House of Representatives. He certainly was a team player and somebody whom I felt I could work with. I looked forward to the opportunity when I could serve with him in the Senate. While serving here in the Senate, we became known as a team representing the interests of Colorado, which has been pretty effective. A lot of the issues that are important to the State of Colorado we were able to accomplish. A lot of it was because he was willing to take on the responsibilities of the Appropriations Committee. Representatives from Colorado ordinarily didn't seek out these committees, but he made a big difference.

I consider it a great pleasure to be able to serve with him. I consider him family. Not only are we close friends, but my niece married his son. I have the greatest respect for the Campbell family. They are great Americans and I am pleased to be considered part of his family.

Don Nickles

Madam President, I also want to take a moment to talk about another colleague, Don Nickles, who has had a long and distinguished career as we move into the waning days of the 108th Congress.

He brought to this Congress a perspective from the private sector. I am a small businessman. I grew up in the private sector. In my view, too few of us have had to meet the challenges and meet a payroll. I think it affects how you view rules and regulations and taxes.

Senator Nickles from Oklahoma became a strong advocate of small business issues and worked hard to hold down the tax burden and regulatory burden.

I had an opportunity to serve with him when he was chairman of the Budget Committee, and I very much appreciated his leadership on that committee.

I also appreciated the opportunity to be able to work with him in holding down and actually eliminating the death tax which has such devastating effects on small business.

During his many years here in the Congress, he has been an individual who maintained integrity in the process.

Peter Fitzgerald

Madam President, I want to express my appreciation for the hard work of Peter Fitzgerald. I am disappointed he is only serving one term in the Senate. It is a voluntary decision that he made to step down after one term.

His family has business interests in Colorado. I have enjoyed working with him, particularly when we served on the Agriculture Committee, and I began to respect his values as well as his work ethic.

Zell Miller

Madam President, I wish to take a moment to recognize Zell Miller, who replaced Paul Coverdell. He is someone I have grown to admire during my service here in the Senate. He is a principled individual and truly represents his great State of Georgia.

With each day of this session, I continue to admire his strength and tenacity and ability to stand up for what he believes is right.

I view these four individuals as four individuals who have distinguished themselves in my mind and four individuals whom I have appreciated having the opportunity to serve with in the Senate and whom I hold in great esteem. I wish them the very best as they pursue life's journey, having served in a distinguished way in the Senate. I wish them the very best and Godspeed.

Mr. President, in January the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, CO, will have to say goodbye to the man who has been their director since 1997. Admiral Richard Truly has brought a great deal to NREL and I would like to take a moment to recognize him for his many impressive achievements, and to thank him for his service to NREL, to Colorado, and to the Nation.

Admiral Truly has a biography that is as diverse as it is interesting. For many being the director of a national lab, and managing an annual research budget of about $200 million, would be the crowning highlight of a career. And such may be the case for Admiral Truly. But with all of the other experiences he has had, there would be tough competition.

If you ask the Admiral how he first became interested in the issue of energy and technology development the story would probably start something like, ``when I was orbiting Earth in the space shuttle . . .'' Few people have had the experience of orbiting the Earth, and that experience has obviously widened the field of how he views problems. One often hears him relate the fact that seeing the Earth from space helped him to see that issues that may seem isolated to a distinct region, are really the results of a larger global challenge.

Admiral Truly piloted the Space Shuttle Columbia in 1981 and commanded the Challenger in August and September, 1983. He left to become the first commander of Naval Space Command in 1983, and served as the Administrator of NASA from 1989 to 1992, under the first President Bush. After the tragic Challenger accident, he led the accident investigation and was vital in rebuilding the Space Shuttle program. He also won the approval of President Reagan and Congress to build Endeavor, which replaced the Challenger. Under his direction NASA finalized plans for building the Space Station and implemented a number of streamlining reforms.

During Admiral Truly's tenure at NREL there have been many strides and innovations in the research done there. In the last 7 years the scientists at NREL have been able to improve wind technology, the fastest growing source of electric energy; increase the efficiency, and decrease the cost of solar energy; and advance the technology of bio- energy, which converts plant and animal waste to energy. These technological advancements provide great benefits to our economy, while also benefiting the environment.

However, the economy and the environment are not the only beneficiaries of Truly's work. Because he has helped NREL to become one of the premier research laboratories in the world, Colorado is the home to world-class scientists and researchers. Coloradans have a direct exposure to the newest, most up-to-date technology in the renewable industry. Numerous individuals, businesses and communities have benefited from partnerships with NREL which have produced new technological processes. Admiral Truly was instrumental in leading the lab down the path of success.

He has been the recipient of numerous awards, including the Presidential Citizen's Medal which was awarded by President Reagan in 1989. But one can see the personal side of Admiral Truly when he is around his staff, and others in the community. He is an unassuming and sincere person, with a ready smile for everyone he sees. He has a real instinct for what is best for the institution, but seems to balance that with what is best for the individuals. He also gives much of his time to community activities. In Colorado he has been an active advocate for the scientific and academic communities, and is a member of the Colorado Governor's Commission on Science and Technology, The Regis University Board of Trustees, and the Advisory Board to the Colorado School of Mines Board of Trustees. He has also served on the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Advisory Council, the Board of Visitors to the U.S. Naval Academy, the Defense Policy Board and the Army Science Board.

As I close, I wish to extend my thanks, but also the thanks of the people of Colorado and the Nation. Admiral Truly has given a large part of his life to public service and helping to better the world around him. I congratulate him on his retirement after a long and prosperous career, and wish him luck and happiness as he embarks on the next phase of his life.

I request from the chairman 10 minutes. I probably will not use that amount, but if there is a minute or two, I will yield that back.

Mr. Chairman, if I might have 10 minutes. I am not sure I would use that time, but I appreciate that.

That is all right with me. I yield 3 minutes.

Mr. President, I have the utmost confidence in Dr. Francis Harvey and I do believe he will act on behalf of our men and women in the field. I think he has a sincere concern about what happens to them and that they have the adequate equipment and manpower and whatnot to do their job. Frankly, it boils down to the fact that we can always anticipate what the force size has to be. That has to be determined basically by the men in the field, the commanders in the field. To try to run a war out of the Pentagon is a mistake. I happen to be rising in support of the nomination of Dr. Francis Harvey for the post of Secretary of the Army because I think he understands that.

I will say a few things here to comment on Dr. Harvey's qualifications.

In addition to the time Dr. Harvey spent with us in committee hearings, I spoke with him individually on a variety of Army issues, critical not only to our overall national security but also the citizens of Colorado. I believe Dr. Harvey to be fully qualified for this post. My distinguished colleague from Alabama, I think, went over some of his qualifications. I thank our distinguished chairman from Virginia for this timely debate and confirmation.

Let me first acknowledge the outstanding performance of the current Acting Secretary of the Army, Les Brownlee. Secretary Brownlee, together with General Schoomaker, the Army Chief of Staff, has successfully directed the Army through this time of challenge and change. The Army is leading our Nation in the global war against extremist terrorists, and is making giant strides in transforming warfighting, logistics, and business management capabilities.

Additionally, I know the Nation greatly appreciates the significant improvements in the quality of life of our Active Duty, Reserve, and National Guard soldiers. This includes our retirees, veterans, and dedicated spouses and families. I applaud Secretary Brownlee for these achievements and am thankful for his continued service to our country.

The challenges and pace of change in the Army remain steady and are top national priorities. Based on my conversation with Dr. Harvey, I am confident he has the right skills and experience to lead this next period of transformation. Dr. Harvey demonstrated a record of management success in both public and private enterprise that will enable him to develop prudent choices and solutions for several strategic Army outcomes. Among the key strategic evaluations are force structure and force sizing reviews in pursuit of Army transformation objectives; global posture and ``mission needs'' evaluations to improve Army mobility and responsiveness regarding future demands at home and abroad; and, finally, manpower studies to assess and balance both the military, civilian, and the Active-Reserve distribution of skills to ensure we are optimally employing our military personnel and resources. These critical activities will define the composition and capability of the U.S. Army for the foreseeable future, and will improve the recruitment, retention, and motivation of our men and women and families throughout the Army family.

Another high priority I covered with Dr. Harvey is the Army's commitment to, and funding for, our obligations to eliminate our chemical weapons stockpiles. The Army is the executive agent to carry out the chemical demilitarization and disposal program at various sites across the country. Unfortunately, the program is falling behind schedule and costing more money than originally planned.

Dr. Harvey's qualifications and experience are well suited to address the problems associated with the chemical demilitarization program. In my personal conversations with the nominee, and again in public testimony, I received Dr. Harvey's assurances and commitment for Army leadership to pay close attention to and fix the problems within the technology and demilitarization programs at all of our chemical weapons facilities. I am convinced Dr. Harvey is as dedicated as I am to seeing the United States fulfill our chemical weapons treaty obligations.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to speak in support of Dr. Harvey's nomination. I believe Dr. Harvey is well qualified for the significant challenges facing him and I look forward to working with him to keep our Army the greatest the world has ever known.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today I pay tribute to a singularly worthy public servant, Mr. Robert Snyder, Senior Executive Service, who has served our country and the American people with great distinction for over 35 years. I make this statement to recognize his retirement from his current position as Executive Director and senior civilian of the Missile Defense Agency.

Rob Snyder has been uniquely qualified to discharge his responsibilities at MDA. A graduate of Temple University in business administration, he went on to earn two masters degrees, one in business and another in public administration. He is a graduate of executive programs at American University, the Federal Executive Institute, and Harvard. And he served with honor in Vietnam with the U.S. Army.

After working for almost two decades elsewhere in the Defense Department--most of that time involved in trench warfare over budgets-- in 1988, he came to the missile defense business. That year, he was promoted to the Senior Executive Service as the Deputy Comptroller of SDIO, the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization. His maturity of judgment, breadth of experience, and absolute integrity quickly made him a driving force for getting things done, and done the right way. Five years ago, after earning several promotions, he was made the first Executive Director of what was then BMDO, the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, and is now MDA.

His responsibilities increased, but he never lost his focus on programmatic issues. When we, here on the Hill, needed accurate and timely responses to our detailed questions on what has always been a politically contentious program, more often than not, it was Rob Snyder who came over to brief us. We always came away from those meetings better informed of the specifics and purposes behind the issues at hand, and with a clearer understanding of the rationale for Agency decisions and recommendations.

We came to rely on him the same way that multiple Directors have, first, of SDIO, then, of BMDO, and now, of MDA. He has been, almost single-handedly, the missile defense program's institutional memory.

His work on various Agency efforts has been largely out of public view. But that's not to say he didn't have an impact. Program audits, financial controls, budgetary accuracy, facility relocation, personnel management--all must be managed efficiently, effectively, and with absolute integrity. Any shortcomings here can lead to chaos in an organization. Yet as the Agency's first Executive Director, Rob Snyder maintained the highest standards, held himself accountable, and kept this infrastructure in solid shape so that senior program managers could focus on making the missile defense program a successful one.

He has been a hero behind the scenes, and because of his enduring contributions to the missile defense program, we stand on the threshold of eliminating long-standing vulnerabilities to the very real threat of ballistic missile attack to our homeland, our deployed troops, and our allies and friends.

Among other recognitions, he has received the Department of Defense's highest award for civilians. With over 16 years in the SES--almost half of his Federal service--he has had an extraordinarily productive career and one we in this Chamber are right to honor.

We will miss his wise counsel as he moves on to a well-earned retirement. We owe him a profound debt of gratitude for the contributions he has made to our Nation and our security over a lifetime of service. I am sure I speak for all of us in this body in saying that we wish him and his family many years of health and happiness.