[Senate Document 111-37]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
TRIBUTES TO HON. ARLEN SPECTER
Arlen Specter
U.S. SENATOR FROM PENNSYLVANIA
TRIBUTES
IN THE CONGRESS OF
THE UNITED STATES
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Arlen Specter
Tributes
Delivered in Congress
Arlen Specter
United States Senator
1981-2011
a
Compiled under the direction
of the
Joint Committee on Printing
CONTENTS
Biography.............................................
v
Farewell to the Senate................................
xi
Proceedings in the Senate:
Tributes by Senators:
Akaka, Daniel K., of Hawaii....................
12
Alexander, Lamar, of Tennessee.................
3
Bennet, Michael F., of Colorado................
21
Boxer, Barbara, of California..................
23
Casey, Robert P., Jr., of Pennsylvania.........
15, 24
Cochran, Thad, of Mississippi..................
19
Conrad, Kent, of North Dakota..................
8
Dodd, Christopher J., of Connecticut...........
11
Durbin, Richard, of Illinois...................
11, 17
Enzi, Michael B., of Wyoming...................
9
Harkin, Tom, of Iowa...........................
22
Hatch, Orrin G., of Utah.......................
13
Levin, Carl, of Michigan.......................
5
Murkowski, Lisa, of Alaska.....................
26
Reed, Jack, of Rhode Island....................
5
Reid, Harry, of Nevada.........................
5, 7
Sessions, Jeff, of Alabama.....................
20
Udall, Mark, of Colorado.......................
22
Warner, Mark R., of Virginia...................
5
BIOGRAPHY
Since first elected in 1980, Arlen Specter has brought
rugged individualism and fierce independence learned from
his youth on the Kansas plains to become a leading Senate
moderate. His work as Philadelphia's tough district
attorney gave him insights to write the Terrorist
Prosecution Act, the Armed Career Criminal Act, and
coauthor the Second Chance Act.
His legal background and experience in constitutional
law provided the skills to serve as Judiciary chairman
during the confirmation hearings of Chief Justice Roberts
and Justice Alito. In earlier confirmation hearings he had
the courage to cross party lines in opposing Judge Bork
and disagreeing with conventional wisdom in supporting
Justice Thomas after dissecting the contradictory and
highly charged testimony.
As a consummate legislator, he has counseled compromise
and conciliation in a Congress that has established new
records for partisan discord. In foreign affairs, he has
advocated dialogue and accommodation as an antidote to
belligerency and saber rattling.
Arlen Specter's five terms have made him the longest
serving U.S. Senator in Pennsylvania's history. A voice of
reason, his independence and balance have won endorsements
from the AFL-CIO and high marks from the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, and
the Americans for Tax Reform.
Time magazine listed him among the Ten Best Senators in
2006. Knowlegis rated him the second most powerful Senator
in 2006 behind only Majority Leader Bill Frist. A November
11, 2007 Philadelphia Inquirer editorial stated: ``Senator
Arlen Specter has more clout than some sovereign
nations.''
Senator Specter attributes his zeal for public service
to his experience as a child when he saw the government
mistreat his father, Harry Specter, who migrated to the
United States from Russia in 1911. Private Specter,
serving in World War I in the infantry, was seriously
wounded in action in France's Argonne Forest. When the
government broke its promise to pay World War I veterans a
$500 bonus, the veterans marched on Washington.
President Hoover called out the Army which fired on and
killed veterans on the Mall in one of the blackest days in
American history. As a metaphor, Senator Specter says he
has been on his way to Washington ever since to get his
father's bonus and since he hasn't gotten it yet, he's
running for reelection. The incident over his father's
bonus has made Arlen Specter a fierce advocate for
veterans' benefits and the ``little guy'' in his battles
with the Federal Government.
From his immigrant parents, Arlen Specter learned work
ethics the hard way. His father, Harry Specter, who was a
peddler, took 5-year-old Arlen to small Kansas towns
selling cantaloupes door to door with a small basket in
hand. In his dad's junkyard in Russell, KS, 16-year-old
Arlen Specter cut down oil derricks with an acetylene
torch and loaded scrap iron into rail freight cars headed
for the smelter.
His credentials include votes for the line-item veto and
a constitutional amendment for a balanced budget. As a
two-term Philadelphia district attorney, he fought for
tough sentences for tough criminals and later, in the
Senate, wrote groundbreaking legislation providing for
life sentences for three-time recidivists on violent
crimes.
Since 1981, he has played a significant role in Supreme
Court nomination hearings, for Chief Justice Rehnquist,
Justices O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas,
Ginsberg, Breyer, and Judge Bork. Notwithstanding
debilitating chemotherapy treatments in 2005, he stayed on
the job as chairman of the Judiciary Committee to preside
over historic Supreme Court confirmation hearings. His
work on the Judiciary Committee has included writing
significant legislation on dealing with constitutional
law, civil rights, and privacy.
As a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, he
led the fight to increase funding for the National
Institutes of Health from $12 billion to $30 billion to
expand medical research to find cures for cancer, heart
disease, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and other maladies. He
has supported expanding health care for seniors and
children and has proposed legislation to cover the almost
50 million Americans who do not have health insurance.
Because Senator Specter is keenly aware of the
importance of understanding the younger generation, he
often visits and speaks at universities and high schools.
He credits his parents, both immigrants, with emphasizing
the importance of education which has enabled his brother,
two sisters, and himself to share in the American dream.
To empower others with access to education, he led the
fight on the Appropriations Subcommittee to increase
Federal spending by 138 percent and raise funding for
scholarships and student loans.
Constituent service and promoting Pennsylvania's
economic interests have been the hallmarks of Senator
Specter's Senate career. He maintained offices in
Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, Erie, Scranton,
Wilkes-Barre, and the Lehigh Valley to help residents of
those areas who needed assistance to cut Washington's
redtape.
From his experience as a teenager working on a farm in
Kansas, the State where he was born, Senator Specter has
understood and worked on the problems of Pennsylvania's
farmers from his position on the Appropriations
Subcommittee on Agriculture. He frequently argues in the
International Trade Commission to assist the steel
industry from being deluged with unfair foreign imports.
His proposed legislation, endorsed by both business and
labor, would create a private right of action in Federal
courts to stop subsidized or dumped products from being
imported into the United States.
He has supported the coal industry by promoting
legislation for clean coal technology and securing $100
million for a Schuylkill County project to turn sludge
into high octane, environmentally safe gasoline.
Recognizing the long-term effects of global warming, he
has cosponsored the Bingaman-Specter bill to reduce harm
from carbon emissions.
As chairman of the Intelligence Committee in the 104th
Congress and a member of the Appropriations Subcommittee
on Foreign Operations, Senator Specter traveled
extensively meeting with world leaders including Soviet
President Mikhail Gorbachev; French President Francois
Mitterrand; Israel's Prime Ministers Menachem Begin,
Yitzhak Shamir, Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, Benjamin
Netanyahu, Ehud Barak, Ariel Sharon, and Ehud Olmert;
China's President Hu Jintao; Indian Prime Minister Singh;
Pakistan's Prime Ministers Benazir Bhutto, Mohammad Zia,
and Pervez Musharraf; Jordan's Kings Hussein and Abdullah;
and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. Strongly agreeing
with Moshe Dayan's famous statement that we make peace
with our enemies not our friends, he has met with Syria's
Presidents Hafez al-Assad and Bashar al-Assad; the
Palestinian Authority's Chairman Yasser Arafat; Iraq's
President Saddam Hussein; Cuba's President Fidel Castro;
Libya's Leader Muammar Qadhafi; and Venezuela President
Hugo Chavez.
From these meetings and his studies of foreign affairs
since his undergraduate days at the University of
Pennsylvania, where he majored in political science and
international relations, Senator Specter has been a
forceful advocate for aggressive diplomacy to solve
international conflicts. He wrote, with staffer Chris
Bradish, an article for the Washington Quarterly (Winter
2006-2007), outlining a blueprint for diplomatic
initiatives in the Mideast with emphasis on bilateral
negotiations with Iran and Syria. Similarly, he has urged
bilateral, as well as multilateral, negotiations with
North Korea.
Early in his Senate career in 1982, he was among the
first to call for a U.S./U.S.S.R. summit in a resolution
which passed the Senate 90 to 8. He participated
extensively with the Senate observers at the Geneva Arms
Reduction talks in the 1980s and led the fight for the
broad interpretation of the ABM Treaty. Senator Specter
consistently supported appropriations to fight global AIDS
and promoted worldwide support for underdeveloped
countries including free trade agreements.
Arlen Specter was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1980 and
served five terms. In 2005, Senator Specter became
Pennsylvania's longest serving U.S. Senator. He was a
senior member of the Senate Judiciary, Appropriations, and
Veterans Affairs Committees.
Senator Specter was a member of the Senate Judiciary
Committee since he came to the Senate. As such, he played
an instrumental role in many of the Senate's most
important issues, including the confirmations of Chief
Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. and Justice Samuel Alito to
serve as Associate Justice on the U.S. Supreme Court.
Senator Specter also shepherded through the Judiciary
Committee legislation on asbestos litigation reform to
absolve what the Supreme Court once called an
``elephantine mass'' clogging our judicial system. Senator
Specter has worked in a bipartisan fashion to reauthorize
key provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act, an important tool
in the U.S. war on terror. He has also authored
legislation to help consumers better protect the privacy
of their personal information in the face of recurrent
data security breaches across the country.
On the Judiciary Committee, Senator Specter built on his
foundation as a lawyer and former district attorney. He
was the author of the Armed Career Criminal Act, which has
been praised for its long prison terms for repeat
offenders, and the Terrorist Prosecution Act, which
authorizes criminal actions in U.S. courts for assaulting,
maiming, or murdering Americans anywhere in the world.
As a senior member of the Appropriations Committee,
Senator Specter was chairman of the Senate Appropriations
Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and
Education. This subcommittee oversees Federal funding for
the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Centers for
Disease Control, educational programs like Head Start,
Pell grants, and GEAR-UP, and worker safety programs.
Under his leadership, funding for education has increased
by more than 130 percent. Senator Specter was also
instrumental in doubling the budget for NIH, which has
made major advances in curing Parkinson's, cancer, heart
disease, and delaying the onset of Alzheimer's. Finally,
Senator Specter is a strong proponent of stem cell
research for the purposes of discovering knowledge that
may lead to cures for these same ailments.
Strengthening our Nation's security has been a
longstanding priority of Senator Specter's. Thirty days
after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Senator
Specter drafted the legislation that established the
Department of Homeland Security. While serving as chairman
of the Senate Intelligence Committee in the 104th
Congress, he authored the bill creating the Inspector
General of the Central Intelligence Agency, marking the
only reform legislation to emerge from the Iran-Contra
affair.
Senator Specter continues his strong advocacy for
veterans, a passion born from the first veteran he ever
knew, his father, Harry Specter, who was wounded in World
War I. As a former chairman of the Veterans Committee, he
pushed for just treatment for veterans and increased
benefits. Working closely with the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs, Senator Specter oversaw the opening of four new
veterans outpatient clinics in Fayette, Northampton,
Venango, and Warren Counties and passed legislation to
create a new veterans cemetery in Southeastern
Pennsylvania.
A frequent visitor to all of Pennsylvania's 67 counties,
Senator Specter places constituent service high on his
priorities and has been instrumental on the Appropriations
Committee in promoting Pennsylvania's interests in
agriculture, high-technology, steel, coal, tourism, mass
transit, highways, and military installations.
In addition to tackling the major legislative business
before the Senate, Senator Specter also engaged in a
personal battle with Stage IV-B Hodgkin's lymphoma cancer
in 2005 and 2008. In both cases he underwent nearly 5
months of chemotherapy, but still maintained all of his
senatorial duties, including chairing hearings, voting,
and brokering important legislative initiatives. In July
2008, Senator Specter received his last chemotherapy
treatment and has since received a clean bill of health.
Senator Specter was born to immigrant parents in
Wichita, KS, and grew up in the small town of Russell, KS.
He is a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of the University of
Pennsylvania and served as an editor of the Yale Law
Journal. He began his career in public service as an
assistant Philadelphia district attorney. While serving in
that position, he was named assistant counsel on the
Warren Commission investigation into President Kennedy's
assassination. Two years later, Senator Specter was
elected district attorney of Philadelphia at the age of
35.
Senator Specter lives in Philadelphia with his wife
Joan. They have two sons, Shanin and Steve, and four
grandchildren, Silvi, Perri, Lilli, and Hatti.
Farewell to the Senate
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Mr. SPECTER. Madam President, this is not a farewell
address but, rather, a closing argument to a jury of my
colleagues and the American people outlining my views on
how the Senate and, with it, the Federal Government
arrived at its current condition of partisan gridlock, and
my suggestions on where we go from here on that pressing
problem and the key issues of national and international
importance.
To make a final floor statement is a challenge. The
Washington Post noted the poor attendance at my
colleagues' farewell speeches earlier this month. That is
really not surprising since there is hardly anyone ever on
the Senate floor. The days of lively debate with many
Members on the floor are long gone. Abuse of the Senate
rules has pretty much stripped Senators of the right to
offer amendments. The modern filibuster requires only a
threat and no talking. So the Senate's activity for more
than a decade has been the virtual continuous drone of a
quorum call. But that is not the way it was when Senator
Chris Dodd and I were privileged to enter the world's
greatest deliberative body 30 years ago. Senators on both
sides of the aisle engaged in collegial debate and found
ways to find common ground on the Nation's pressing
problems.
When I attended my first Republican moderates luncheon,
I met Mark Hatfield, John Chafee, Ted Stevens, Mac
Mathias, Bob Stafford, Bob Packwood, Chuck Percy, Bill
Cohen, Warren Rudman, Alan Simpson, Jack Danforth, John
Warner, Nancy Kassebaum, Slade Gorton, and I found my
colleague John Heinz there. That is a far cry from later
years when the moderates could fit into a telephone booth.
On the other side of the aisle, I found many Democratic
Senators willing to move to the center to craft
legislation--Scoop Jackson, Joe Biden, Dan Inouye, Lloyd
Bentsen, Fritz Hollings, Pat Leahy, Dale Bumpers, David
Boren, Russell Long, Pat Moynihan, George Mitchell, Sam
Nunn, Gary Hart, Bill Bradley, and others. They were
carrying on the Senate's glorious tradition.
The Senate's deliberate cerebral procedures have served
our country well. The Senate stood tall in 1805 in
acquitting Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase in
impeachment proceedings and thus preserved the
independence of the Federal judiciary. The Senate stood
tall in 1868 to acquit President Andrew Johnson in
impeachment proceedings, and that preserved the power of
the Presidency. Repeatedly in our 223-year history, the
Senate has cooled the passions of the moment to preserve
the institutions embodied in our Constitution that have
made the United States the envy of the world.
It has been a great privilege to have had a voice for
the last 30 years in the great decisions of our day: how
we allocate our resources among economic development,
national defense, education, environmental protection, and
NIH funding; the Senate's role in foreign policy as we
exercise it now on the START Treaty; the protection of
civil rights, as we demonstrated last Saturday,
eliminating don't ask, don't tell; balancing crime control
and defendants' rights; and how we have maintained the
quality of the Federal judiciary, not only the high-
profile 14 Supreme Court nominations I have participated
in but the 112 Pennsylvanians who have been confirmed
during my tenure on the Federal district courts or the
Third Circuit.
On the national scene, top issues are the deficit and
the national debt. The deficit commission has made a
start. When raising the debt limit comes up next year,
that will present an occasion to pressure all parties to
come to terms on future taxes and expenditures, to
realistically deal with these issues.
The next Congress should try to stop the Supreme Court
from further eroding the constitutional mandate of
separation of powers. The Supreme Court has been eating
Congress' lunch by invalidating legislation with judicial
activism after nominees commit under oath in confirmation
proceedings to respect congressional factfinding and
precedents. That is stare decisis. The recent decision in
Citizens United is illustrative. Ignoring a massive
congressional record and reversing recent decisions, Chief
Justice Roberts and Justice Alito repudiated their
confirmation testimony given under oath and provided the
key votes to permit corporations and unions to secretly
pay for political advertising, thus effectively
undermining the basic democratic principle of the power of
one person, one vote. Chief Justice Roberts promised to
just call balls and strikes. Then he moved the bases.
Congress' response is necessarily limited in recognition
of the importance of judicial independence as the
foundation of the rule of law, but Congress could at least
require televising the Court proceedings to provide some
transparency to inform the public about what the Court is
doing since it has the final word on the cutting issues of
the day. Brandeis was right when he said that sunlight is
the best disinfectant.
The Court does follow the election returns, and the
Court does judicially notice societal values as expressed
by public opinion. Polls show that 85 percent of the
American people favor televising the Court when told that
a citizen can only attend an oral argument for 3 minutes
in a chamber holding only 300 people. Great Britain,
Canada, and State supreme courts permit television.
Congress has the authority to legislate on this subject,
just as Congress decides other administrative matters such
as what cases the Court must hear, time limits for
decisions, number of Justices, the day the Court convenes,
and the number required for a quorum. While television
cannot provide a definitive answer, it could be
significant and may be the most that can be done
consistent with life tenure and judicial independence.
Additionally, I urge Congress to substantially increase
funding for the National Institutes of Health. When NIH
funding was increased from $12 billion to $30 billion
annually and $10 billion added to the stimulus package,
significant advances were made on medical research. It is
scandalous--absolutely scandalous--that a nation with our
wealth and research capabilities has not done more. Forty
years ago, the President of the United States declared war
on cancer. Had that war been pursued with the diligence of
other wars, most forms of cancer might have been
conquered.
I also urge colleagues to increase their activity in
foreign travel. Regrettably, we have earned the title of
ugly Americans by not treating other nations with proper
respect and dignity.
My experience on congressional delegations to China,
Russia, India, NATO, Jerusalem, Damascus, Bagdad, Kabul,
and elsewhere provided an opportunity for eyeball-to-
eyeball discussions with world leaders about our values,
our expectations, and our willingness to engage in
constructive dialogue. Since 1984, I have visited Syria
almost every year, and my extensive conversations with
Hafiz al-Assad and Bashar al-Assad have convinced me there
is a realistic opportunity for a peace treaty between
Israel and Syria, if encouraged by vigorous U.S.
diplomacy. Similar meetings I have been privileged to have
with Muammar Qadhafi, Yasser Arafat, Fidel Castro, Saddam
Hussein, and Hugo Chavez have persuaded me that candid,
respectful dialogue with our toughest adversaries can do
much to improve relations among nations.
Now I will shift gears. In my view, a principal reason
for the historic stature of the U.S. Senate has been the
ability of any Senator to offer virtually any amendment at
any time. This Senate Chamber provides the forum for
unlimited debate with a potential to acquaint the people
of America and the world with innovative proposals on
public policy and then have a vote on the issue.
Regrettably, that has changed in recent years because of
abuse of the Senate rules by both parties.
The Senate rules allow the majority leader, through the
right of his first recognition, to offer a series of
amendments to prevent any other Senator from offering an
amendment. That had been done infrequently up until about
a decade ago and lately has become a common practice, and,
again, by both parties.
By precluding other Senators from offering amendments,
the majority leader protects his party colleagues from
taking tough votes. Never mind that we were sent here and
are paid to make tough votes. The inevitable and
understandable consequence of that practice has been the
filibuster. If a Senator cannot offer an amendment, why
vote to cut off debate and go to final passage? Senators
were willing--and are willing--to accept the will of the
majority in rejecting their amendments but unwilling to
accept being railroaded to concluding a bill without being
provided an opportunity to modify it. That practice has
led to an indignant, determined minority to filibuster and
to deny 60 votes necessary to cut off debate. Two years
ago on this Senate floor, I called the practice
tyrannical.
The decade from 1995 to 2005 saw the nominees of
President Clinton and President Bush stymied by the
refusal of the other party to have a hearing or floor vote
on many judicial and executive nominees. Then, in 2005,
serious consideration was given by the Republican caucus
to changing the longstanding Senate rule by invoking the
so-called nuclear or constitutional option. The plan
called for Vice President Cheney to rule that 51 votes
were sufficient to impose cloture for confirmation of a
judge or executive nominee. His ruling, then to be
challenged by Democrats, would be upheld by the
traditional 51 votes to uphold the Chair's ruling.
As I argued on the Senate floor at that time, if
Democratic Senators had voted their consciences without
regard to party loyalty, most filibusters would have
failed. Similarly, I argued that had Republican Senators
voted their consciences without regard to party loyalty,
there would not have been 51 of the 55 Republican Senators
to support the nuclear option.
The majority leader then scheduled the critical vote on
May 25, 2005. The outcome of that vote was uncertain, with
key Republicans undeclared. The showdown was averted the
night before by a compromise by the so-called Gang of 14.
Some nominees were approved, some rejected, and a new
standard was established to eliminate filibusters unless
there were extraordinary circumstances, with each Senator
to decide if that standard had been met. Regrettably,
again, that standard has not been followed as those
filibusters have continued up to today. Again, the fault
rests with both parties.
There is a way out of this procedural gridlock by
changing the rule on the power of the majority leader to
exclude other Senators' amendments. I proposed such a rule
change in the 110th and 111th Congresses. I would retain
the 60-vote requirement for cloture on legislation, with a
condition that Senators would have to have a talking
filibuster, not merely presenting a notice of intent to
filibuster. By allowing Senators to offer amendments and a
requirement for debate, not just notice, I think
filibusters could be effectively managed, as they had been
in the past, and still retain, where necessary, the
opportunity to have adequate debate on controversial
issues.
I would change the rule to cut off debate on judicial
and executive branch nominees to 51 votes, as I formally
proposed in the 109th Congress. Important positions are
left open for months, and the Senate agenda today is
filled with unacted-upon judicial and executive nominees,
and many of those judicial nominees are in areas where
there is an emergency backlog. Since Judge Bork and
Justice Thomas did not provoke filibusters, I think the
Senate can do without them on judges and executive
officeholders. There is a sufficient safeguard of the
public interest by requiring a simple majority on an up-
down vote. I would also change the rule requiring 30 hours
of postcloture debate and the rule allowing the secret
hold, which requires cloture to bring the matter to the
floor. Requiring a Senator to disclose his or her hold to
the light of day would greatly curtail this abuse.
While political gridlock has been facilitated by the
Senate rules, I am sorry to say partisanship has been
increased greatly by other factors. Senators have gone
into other States to campaign against incumbents of the
other party. Senators have even opposed their own party
colleagues in primary challenges. That conduct was beyond
contemplation in the Senate I joined 30 years ago.
Collegiality can obviously not be maintained when
negotiating with someone simultaneously out to defeat you,
especially within your own party.
In some quarters, ``compromise'' has become a dirty
word. Senators insist on ideological purity as a
precondition. Senator Margaret Chase Smith of Maine had it
right when she said we need to distinguish between the
compromise of principle and the principle of compromise.
This great body itself was created by the so-called Great
Compromise, in which the Framers decreed that States would
be represented equally in the Senate and proportionate to
their populations in the House. As Senate Historian
Richard Baker noted: ``Without that compromise, there
would likely have been no Constitution, no Senate, and no
United States as we know it today.''
Politics is no longer the art of the possible when
Senators are intransigent in their positions. Polarization
of the political parties has followed. President Reagan's
``big tent'' has frequently been abandoned by the
Republican Party. A single vote out of thousands cast can
cost an incumbent his seat. Senator Bob Bennett was
rejected by the far right in his Utah primary because of
his vote for TARP. It did not matter that Vice President
Cheney had pleaded with the Republican caucus to support
TARP or President Bush would become a modern Herbert
Hoover. It did not matter that 24 other Republican
Senators, besides Bob Bennett, out of the 49 Republican
Senators, voted for TARP. Senator Bennett's 93 percent
conservative rating was insufficient.
Senator Lisa Murkowski lost her primary in Alaska.
Congressman Mike Castle was rejected in Delaware's
Republican primary in favor of a candidate who thought it
necessary to defend herself as not being a witch.
Republican Senators contributed to the primary defeats of
Bennett, Murkowski, and Castle. Eating or defeating your
own is a form of sophisticated cannibalism. Similarly, on
the other side of the aisle, Senator Joe Lieberman, a
great Senator, could not win his Democratic primary.
The spectacular reelection of Senator Lisa Murkowski on
a write-in vote in the Alaska general election and the
defeat of other Tea Party candidates in the 2010 general
elections may show the way to counter right-wing
extremists. Arguably, Republicans left three seats on the
table in 2010--beyond Delaware, Nevada, and perhaps
Colorado--because of unacceptable general election
candidates. By bouncing back and winning, Senator
Murkowski demonstrated that a moderate centrist can win by
informing and arousing the general electorate. Her victory
proves that America still wants to be and can be governed
by the center.
Repeatedly, senior Republican Senators have recently
abandoned long-held positions out of fear of losing their
seats over a single vote or because of party discipline.
With 59 votes for cloture on this side of the aisle, not a
single Republican would provide the 60th vote for many
important legislative initiatives, such as identifying
campaign contributors to stop secret contributions.
Notwithstanding the perils, it is my hope more Senators
will return to independence in voting and crossing party
lines evident 30 years ago. President Kennedy's ``Profiles
in Courage'' shows the way. Sometimes a party does ask too
much. The model for an elected official's independence in
a representative democracy has never been stated more
accurately, in my opinion, than it was in 1774 by Edmund
Burke, in the British House of Commons, when he said:
[H]is [the elected representative's] unbiased opinion,
his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience ...
[including his vote] ought not to be sacrificed to you, to
any man or any set of men living.
But, above all, we need civility. Steve and Cokie
Roberts, distinguished journalists, put it well in a
recent column, saying:
Civility is more than good manners ... . Civility is a
state of mind. It reflects respect for your opponents and
for the institutions you serve together ... . This
polarization will make civility in the next Congress more
difficult--and more necessary--than ever.
A closing speech has an inevitable aspect of nostalgia.
An extraordinary experience for me is coming to an end.
But my dominant feeling is pride in the great privilege to
be a part of this very unique body with colleagues who are
such outstanding public servants. I have written and will
write elsewhere about my tenure here, so I do not say
farewell to my continuing involvement in public policy,
which I will pursue in a different venue. Because of the
great traditions of this body and because of its historic
resilience, I leave with great optimism for the future of
our country, a great optimism for the continuing vital
role of the Senate in the governance of our democracy.
I thank my colleagues for listening.
(Applause, Senators rising.)
?
TRIBUTES
TO
ARLEN SPECTER
Proceedings in the Senate
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, 16 Senators will retire
this year. There is a pretty big turnover in this body,
but that is a lot of Senators at once. We are losing an
enormous amount of talent, but, of course, we are gaining
a lot of talent with the new Senators.
I wish to show my respect for those who have served,
which I will do in a summary fashion because we are
talking about 16 individuals with very complex and
distinguished backgrounds.
One might ask, what are the characteristics of a
Senator? There are a lot of different answers to that,
depending on your background and attitude toward politics
and government. First, I have always thought that one
characteristic of almost every Member of the Senate is
that he or she probably was a first grader sitting in the
front row, hand in the air waiting to be recognized. This
is an eager bunch or you would not have gotten here.
Second, it is a group of risk takers. Most people who
end up in the Senate get here because a lot of other
people who wanted to be Senators were standing around
waiting for the right time to run. A lot of people who
were elected to the Senate seemed to have no chance of
winning at the time they decided to run, but the voters
decided differently, and here they are.
Third, we are almost all professional and congenial.
That is a big help. It is almost a requirement in an
organization of 100 individuals who spend almost all their
time with one another, who serve in a body that operates
by unanimous consent, when just one Senator can bring the
whole place to a halt, and whose job basically is to argue
about some of the most difficult issues that face the
American people. So it helps that almost every Member of
the Senate is an especially congenial person.
Back in Tennessee, people often say to me it must be
rough being in that job. They are awfully mean up there.
The truth is, I don't know of a more congenial group than
the Members of the Senate. We begin the day in the gym.
The next thing you know we are at a Prayer Breakfast, and
then we are at a committee hearing. Then we are on the
floor voting, and then we have lunch. It goes through the
day until 7 or 8 o'clock, or sometimes later. We live
together and we get along very well. We know and respect
each other.
Not long ago, the Presiding Officer (Mr. Udall of New
Mexico) and I were having dinner together with our wives.
We were lamenting the loss of families who know one
another, the way it happened when his father was serving
in Congress and when I first came to the Senate to work
for Senator Baker. And that's true. We've lost some of
that. Still, there is an enormous amount of affection and
good will here. You don't always get to be very close
friends in this job, but you get to be very good
acquaintances, and you learn to respect people for their
strengths.
Senator Domenici said, when he left, that we don't do a
very good job of saying goodbye here. That is true. As one
part of saying goodbye, I wish to say at least one good
thing about each one of the 16 retiring Senators. Much
more could be said about each, of course. Mostly, I am
going in alphabetical order. ...
The word to describe Arlen Specter from Pennsylvania is
``courage.'' The other word is ``survivor.'' And they both
go together. Arlen has had a distinguished career from his
youngest days. He was a member of the Warren Commission,
investigating President Kennedy's assassination. In the
Senate, his work has spanned the entire mark. One of the
things I appreciate most about Senator and Mrs. Specter is
their work on Constitution Hall in Philadelphia, which is
such an example of living history. ...
It has been my privilege to serve with these 16
Senators. We thank them for their service to our country.
They have had a chance to serve in what we regard as the
world's greatest deliberative body; it is a special
institution. We will miss their leadership, and we hope
they will stay in touch with us because they are not just
retiring Senators, they are all our friends.
I yield the floor.
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that
there be printed as a Senate document a compilation of
materials from the Congressional Record in tribute to
retiring Members of the 111th Congress, and that Members
have until Thursday, December 16, to submit such tributes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Friday, December 10, 2010
Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to
our colleagues who are departing the Senate after
distinguished service on behalf of their States and on
behalf of the Nation. I have been privileged to work with
these individuals, to learn from them, to collaborate and
cooperate with them, and to, in some small way, help them
do what they have done so well--represent their States
with fidelity, with great effort, and to move the agenda
of the Nation forward. ...
Let me say to Arlen Specter and Joan Specter, thank you
for such service. Senator Specter is the champion of NIH.
It is an incredible achievement, what he has done to fund
that over the years. ...
To all of these colleagues and their families, my
deepest appreciation and my profoundest respect.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise again to recognize the
service of another great Federal employee. This is a
tradition that was started by our friend and former
colleague, Senator Kaufman, and I am proud to carry on
that tradition. But I want to first say that I appreciate
the remarks of the Presiding Officer (Mr. Reed) about our
colleagues who are leaving this body, and I share his
great respect for not only Senator Kaufman but all of the
colleagues who are leaving the body at the end of this
Congress. ...
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, for five terms, longer than
anyone in his State's proud history, Arlen Specter has
represented the State of Pennsylvania in the U.S. Senate.
Over that time, he distinguished himself greatly, from his
commendable work on the Judiciary Committee to his recent
efforts to reestablish legal protections against fraud. We
saw from the beginning of his Senate service his
impressive grasp of issues. As he prepares to leave the
Senate, I would like to focus on two examples from his
time here that I believe speak to his formidable
character.
In early 2008, our Nation faced its most daunting
economic situation in decades. It was clear that private
demand in the economy was fading in the face of a
devastating financial crisis. Economists across the
political spectrum were convinced that Federal fiscal
stimulus was desperately needed as part of a strategy to
keep recession from turning into depression. And yet there
was significant doubt as to whether Congress could summon
the political will to do what was necessary. Without at
least a handful of Republican supporters in the Senate,
the desperately needed economic rescue package would not
pass.
At that moment, under immense political pressure,
Senator Specter was one of just three Republicans willing
to vote for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
Thanks to the foresight of these Senators, millions of
Americans have jobs today who otherwise would be
unemployed. We should all be grateful for Senator
Specter's determination to do what the country needed.
Senator Specter has faced down more dire circumstances
than those surrounding the stimulus vote. In 1993, he was
diagnosed with a brain tumor--one neurosurgeon told him he
had just weeks to live. In 2005 and again in 2008, he
coped with Hodgkin's disease.
In each of these cases, Senator Specter not only faced
down a deadly disease, but he pushed the limits of
physical and mental endurance to remain deeply engaged in
his Senate work. Work, for him, was integral to recovery.
As he wrote in an inspirational book on his health
experiences:
Good health is a precious possession that is often taken
for granted. The same is true of the time we have been
given to contribute to the world around us. Poor health
may limit our time and capacity for achievement, but I
firmly believe that vigorous work provides the best way to
overcome a health challenge.
Senator Specter, thank you for the inspiring example of
your determination. Thank you for a long and productive
career in this body, a career that has meant much to the
Senate, to Pennsylvania, and to the Nation.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Mr. REID. Mr. President, if you asked anyone in this
body to summarize Arlen Specter, I think the words that
would come up most often would be he is a real fighter.
Arlen Specter fought to defend our Nation in Korea. He
fought crime in the streets of Philadelphia as a district
attorney. He has fought cancer and won three times. And he
has fought for Pennsylvania every day he has served with
us here in the U.S. Senate.
Senator Specter has witnessed three decades of progress
in Washington. He is a man who has risen above party lines
to demonstrate his independence time after time. But his
independence was not about him; it was about the people of
Pennsylvania, whom he has served with honor and dignity
for 30 years, even when cancer tried to keep him from
doing so.
I have known and served with Senator Specter for almost
30 years, and I have come to admire his service and
dedication. We have not always agreed on how to solve the
issues facing America, but he has always been willing to
listen to me and any other Senator in the hopes of forging
bipartisan agreements that would help the country. He is a
very principled man, a man who does what he believes is
right, even when few others agree with him.
Senator Specter was raised in the Midwest by his mother
and a Russian immigrant father who came to the United
States and later served his new country in World War I.
He first discovered Pennsylvania as an undergraduate
student at the University of Pennsylvania, where he earned
a degree in international relations. After serving 3 years
in the Air Force during the Korean war, he attended law
school at Yale and established a successful law practice
in what would become his home State, Pennsylvania.
Just as his father left his native land and served his
new home as a member of the U.S. military, Senator Specter
left his home in Kansas and served his adopted
Commonwealth in a different way--first as a district
attorney in Philadelphia for 9 years, and then as a U.S.
Senator for the last 30 years. And he did this with his
tenacity. He lost a number of elections. He kept coming
back, never giving up.
As a Member of Congress, he has been a stalwart for
justice, health, and education. He has presided over
several Supreme Court confirmation hearings, and played a
major role in many more.
He has ensured that vital and potentially lifesaving
research for cancer, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and other
diseases receives Federal dollars to pave the way for real
breakthroughs.
One personal experience with Senator Specter--the so-
called economic recovery package, the stimulus. He was the
key vote--one of the three key votes. He was a Republican.
He and the two Senators from Maine made it possible to
pass that. His passion in that legislation was the
National Institutes of Health. Part of the deal was that
they had to get $10 billion. Money well spent. But it is
something he believed in fervently, and we were able to do
that.
He has also worked to cover children and seniors who
struggle to get access to health care they desperately
need. He has done that as a member of the Appropriations
Committee, where he has worked to make more education
available to all students with the help of scholarships
and student loans. Furthermore, his work with constituents
of every stripe makes a difference everyday.
Senator Specter is a throwback to a previous chapter in
the history of the Senate--a time when moderates were the
rule, not the exception.
When I came to Washington, Republicans such as Arlen
Specter were everyplace. That is not the case now. He is a
rare breed and will truly be missed.
I wish Senator Specter, his wife Joan, and their two
sons and four grandchildren the very best in the coming
weeks, months, and years.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, today I wish to pay tribute
and recognize the achievements of a colleague who will be
leaving the Senate at the end of this term. Senator Arlen
Specter has represented Pennsylvania in the Senate for
three decades, making him the longest serving Senator in
his State's history. During his tenure, he has been an
unrelenting advocate for his constituents and working-
class Americans.
Senator Specter has had an impressive career in both the
public and private sector. After graduating from the
University of Pennsylvania, he served in the U.S. Air
Force from 1951 to 1953. Following his service, he
attended Yale Law School and worked as editor for the Yale
Law School Journal. After graduating from law school,
Senator Specter became an outstanding lawyer. As an aide
to the Warren Commission, he investigated the
assassination of former President John F. Kennedy. He also
served as the district attorney in Philadelphia from 1966
to 1974, and practiced law as a private attorney before
being elected to the U.S. Senate in 1980.
In the Senate, Senator Specter and I found significant
common ground, as his strong sense of integrity and
moderate philosophy have been key in passing some of this
institution's most important legislation. During his time
in Congress, the Senator will be remembered for presiding
over historic U.S. Supreme Court confirmation hearings as
chairman of the Judiciary Committee. While undergoing
chemotherapy for advanced Hodgkin's disease, Senator
Specter managed the intense confirmation proceedings for
Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr. and Justice Samuel Alito,
Jr. As a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, he
led the fight to increase funding for the National
Institutes of Health from $12 billion to $30 billion to
expand medical research to find cures for cancer,
Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and other devastating and
debilitating diseases. It is no wonder that Time magazine
listed him among the Ten Best Senators in 2006.
Arlen Specter embodies what it means to be a good
Senator--integrity, a strong work ethic, courage,
dedication, and being true to one's convictions. Senator
Specter has been a real champion for Pennsylvania and this
country. His compassion, independence, and voice of reason
will be missed in the U.S. Senate. I have appreciated the
opportunity to work with Senator Specter, and wish him and
his family the very best.
Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, soon the current session of
Congress will be gaveled to a close. When that happens it
will also bring to an end the Senate careers of several of
our colleagues. I know we will miss them and the
contributions they have made over the years to the debates
and deliberations they have participated in on the Senate
floor and in committee.
In the years to come I know I will miss Arlen Specter.
He has been such a strong and active presence in the
Senate for so many years and in so many ways the coming
session of Congress won't be the same without him.
His long and varied history as a public servant really
began to take shape when he was asked to bring his skills
and abilities to the Warren Commission's investigation of
the circumstances surrounding the death of President John
F. Kennedy. It was a difficult and challenging job, but
Arlen proved to be well up to the task. After studying and
surveying the evidence surrounding the President's murder,
Arlen developed the ``single bullet theory'' that proved
to be the key to the case that helped to explain what
happened that day.
In the years soon after, Arlen's understanding of the
law and all the technicalities and the countless details
that surround it made him an ideal candidate for the
position of district attorney. In 1965 he ran for the
position in Philadelphia and served there for 8 years.
I have always believed that every life is a mixture of
both success and disappointment. How we handle them both
defines to a great extent the quality of our lives.
That is why Arlen's unsuccessful reelection bid and a
few disappointments after that may have slowed him down--
but it didn't stop him. It was just a few years later that
Arlen would run a successful campaign for the Senate. It
was here that Arlen really found his niche as he was soon
in the middle of a number of high profile battles in the
Judiciary Committee that won him the notice of his
colleagues for his indepth knowledge of Senate procedure,
the law, and our Constitution.
Arlen's reputation as a warrior has stayed with him over
the years as he has faced a number of challenges in
committee and on the floor--as well as a number of very
difficult health issues in his life. He fought them all
with the same strength and heartfelt determination that
would make any fighter from Philadelphia proud.
Although Arlen credits his successful return to health
to his enjoyment of squash, a difficult sport that he says
kept him strong and healthy enough to make it through each
health crisis he faced, I credit his good health to his
strong Philadelphia roots.
As Arlen wrote in his book ``Never Give In,'' the key to
so much of life is to ``keep working and keep fighting.''
That is the only way to ensure you will continue to make
progress--or at least--make your presence felt in the war
you are waging. That is how Arlen has lived his life as he
has pursued each goal he set his sights on. In the end, as
he wrote in his book, ``The tougher the battle, the
sweeter the victory.''
Arlen has now served five terms for a total of 30 years
in the Senate. He has survived countless battles at the
ballot box and a wealth of health issues that would have
convinced a lesser individual that the time had come to
take it easy for awhile. Not Arlen, however. He has always
been someone who fought with all his heart for the things
he believed in and as a result, he has known the sweetness
of victory many times in his life.
Arlen is not only the longest serving Senator in
Pennsylvania's history, he is also one of the most
productive. He has left a remarkable legacy and shoes that
will be very difficult for any future Pennsylvania Senator
to fill. Together with his wife Joan they have been a team
that has made a difference throughout their home State of
Pennsylvania and the Nation.
Thanks, Arlen, for your willingness to serve the people
of your home State for so long and so well. Diana joins in
sending our best wishes and our appreciation for your
friendship to you both. I hope you will keep in touch with
me and with all your colleagues in the years to come. Good
luck. God bless.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that
the order for the printing of tributes be modified to
provide that Members have until sine die of the 111th
Congress, 2d session, to submit tributes and that the
order for printing remain in effect.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise today to honor my friend
and longtime colleague, Senator Arlen Specter, the longest
serving U.S. Senator in Pennsylvania history.
As many of you know, Arlen and I were freshmen Senators
together 30 years ago. I was the only Democrat newly
elected to the Senate in 1980. Senator Specter was one of
12 new Republicans elected that year, in the so-called
``Reagan landslide,'' that gave his party the Senate for
the first time in 28 years.
I bring this up because, even though I was a new Senator
in the minority, we quickly began working on a bipartisan
basis. For those listening today, the idea of a bipartisan
Senate may seem strange. Back then, it was commonplace and
I know that Arlen and I both hope that newly elected
Members of this body will revive this tradition in the
coming years.
Early in our Senate careers, Arlen and I started the
Senate Children's Caucus. We believed that as the largest
nonvoting constituency in the country, children had the
greatest need for champions to advocate on their behalf.
The Children's Caucus has provided strong leadership on
early childhood education, funding for childcare programs,
and making passage of the Family Medical Leave Act
reality. I want to thank Senator Specter for being one of
my partners on these critically important issues for
almost 30 years.
Senator Specter's accomplishments carry beyond his
defense of children. Over the course of his career, he has
served as the chairman of three important and influential
Senate committees: the Select Committee on Intelligence,
the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, and the Committee on
the Judiciary. In each of these capacities he has worked
to ensure that America's legal system is true to our best
traditions and ideals, while ensuring that we have the
tools to prevent terrorism and protect our citizens. He
has also used his role on the Senate Appropriations
Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and
Education to increase research funding for the National
Institutes of Health. His work here in the U.S. Senate has
improved the lives of countless Pennsylvanians and
countless Americans.
Of all Senator Specter's achievements, I have yet to
mention the most impressive. Since 2005, he has continued
to serve while fighting Hodgkin's lymphoma. Twice since
being diagnosed, Arlen has undergone chemotherapy for the
disease. Yet he continued serving the people of
Pennsylvania.
I have worked with Senator Specter both as a Democrat
and a Republican, and I can tell you this--his commitment
to bipartisanship and independence should be a model for
all current and future Members of the U.S. Senate.
I would like to thank Arlen for his many years of
service, and wish him and his wife Joan well as he leaves
the Senate. It has truly been a pleasure working with him
over the years. I know the State of Pennsylvania will miss
their senior Senator and I firmly believe that this body
will not be the same without him.
Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to bid farewell
to a number of our friends and colleagues who are ending
their service in the Senate. Their contributions are too
numerous to mention, therefore I would like to take just a
few minutes to highlight some of the memories of the
Senators I came to know personally.
Some of the departing Senators I have served with for
decades. Others were here for only part of a term. All of
them worked hard for their constituents and our country.
...
I served with Senator Arlen Specter for many years on
the Veterans' Affairs Committee. He twice served as the
committee's chairman, and, in recent years as I chaired
the committee, he remained a strong and vital force
working on behalf of our Nation's veterans, on both sides
of the dais. He has been an institution in the Senate for
many years, and it has been a genuine pleasure working
with him. I appreciate and applaud his long, dedicated
service to those who have worn our Nation's uniforms. ...
In closing, the end of this Congress is bittersweet,
with so many talented and dedicated public servants
leaving this institution. All of them made a lasting
impact on the Senate and on our country. Mahalo nui loa,
thank you, for all your work.
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise to speak today to
recognize the departure of my good friend, the senior
Senator from Pennsylvania. Senator Arlen Specter has been
present here in the Senate through some of its most
contentious times. He and I have worked side by side--
sometimes in agreement, other times in opposition--for
many years. His presence will be sorely missed.
Arlen is the son of immigrant parents. He was born in
Wichita, KS, in 1930, to Lillie Shannin and Harry Specter.
Harry served in World War I in the U.S. infantry, just a
few years after migrating to the United States from
Russia. While in combat in France, Arlen's father was
seriously wounded. Yet, a few years later, the Federal
Government, strapped for funds, broke its promise to pay
World War I veterans a bonus. This, of course, led to a
veterans march on Washington and a tragic encounter
between the U.S. Army and the protesting veterans. It also
led, indirectly, to Senator Specter's career in public
service as he has been fond of saying that he came to
Washington to get his father's bonus and that he would run
for reelection until he got it.
Arlen attended college at both the University of
Oklahoma and the University of Pennsylvania, graduating
from the latter in 1951. He served in the Air Force during
the Korean war as an officer in the Office of Special
Investigations. In 1953, he married Joan Levy, with whom
he has raised two sons and four grandchildren. In 1956, he
graduated from Yale Law School and entered into private
practice.
Senator Specter's career in public service began in 1959
when he became an assistant district attorney in
Philadelphia. In 1963, he was appointed to serve as
assistant counsel on the Warren Commission, investigating
the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Two years
later, he was elected to serve as the district attorney
for the city of Philadelphia, a position he held for 8
years. After another brief stint in the private sector,
Arlen was elected to the Senate in 1980 and has been the
longest serving Senator in Pennsylvania's history.
Arlen has had his hand in a number of high-profile
efforts here in the Senate. However, I will always
remember him for his role in some of the most contentious
Supreme Court confirmation fights in our Nation's history.
He and I both served on the Judiciary Committee during the
confirmation hearings for Judge Robert Bork, which were,
at the time, the most contentious in our Nation's history.
In the end, Arlen and I reached different conclusions as
to whether Judge Bork should have been confirmed. I still
think Arlen was wrong to oppose Judge Bork, but, I have
never doubted that his decision to do so was sincere.
Arlen and I once again found ourselves at the center of
a Supreme Court fight during the nomination hearings for
Justice Clarence Thomas. During those hearings, Senator
Specter had the daunting task of questioning Ms. Anita
Hill for the Republican side. I was and continue to be
impressed with the manner in which he handled that
responsibility. Those were difficult, sensitive issues.
None of us wanted to disrespect Ms. Hill, but we believed
it was important to ensure that the truth be examined and
brought to light, and I've always thought that Arlen
handled the matter with the necessary professionalism and
respect.
In the years that followed the Thomas hearings, a number
of people expressed their displeasure for the way I
treated Ms. Hill during those hearings. I was always quick
to remind them that it was Arlen who questioned her, not
me. I was the one who questioned Justice Thomas. But, in
the end, I think the historical memory of that time has
tied the two of us together.
Senator Specter has a reputation for being a fighter.
Having been on both sides of the debate with Arlen, I have
to concur with that assessment. His was among the sharpest
minds we have known here in the Senate and I am grateful
for the privilege I've had to serve alongside him.
I want to wish Arlen and his family the best of luck.
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I wish to offer some remarks
in furtherance of what Senator Specter told us about this
great institution (see farewell speech, page xi). I wanted
to spend a moment talking about his service to the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
When I came to the Senate in 2007 as a Senator-elect,
one of the first things I did was go to see Senator
Specter. He asked me at that time to go to lunch. From the
moment I arrived in the Senate, he made it very clear to
me that not only did the people of Pennsylvania expect,
but he expected as well, that we work together.
From the beginning of his service in the Senate, way
back when he was elected in 1980 all the way up to the
present moment, he has been a Senator who was focused on
building bipartisan relationships and, of course, focusing
on Pennsylvania priorities. I am honored to have worked
with him on so many priorities, whether it was veterans or
workers, whether it was dairy farmers or the economy of
Pennsylvania or whether it was our soldiers or our
children or our families. We have worked on so many
priorities. He has been a champion for our State and he
has shown younger Senators the way to work together in the
interests of our State and our country.
That bipartisanship wasn't just a sentiment; it was
bipartisanship that led to results. I wish to point to one
example of many I could list: the funding for the National
Institutes of Health, that great bulwark and generator of
discoveries that cures diseases and creates jobs and hope
for people often without hope because of a disease or a
malady of one kind or another. That bipartisanship Senator
Specter demonstrated every day in the Senate has achieved
results for Pennsylvania, for sure, in terms of jobs and
opportunity and hope but also results for the Nation as
well.
I know we are short on time, but I wanted to make one
note about the history of his service. No Senator in the
history of the Commonwealth--and we have had 55 or so
Senators, depending on how you count those who have been
elected and served, but of those 55, no Senator has served
longer than Senator Specter. I recall the line--I think it
is attributed to Abraham Lincoln, it is a great line about
what years mean and what service means, and I will apply
the analogy to Senate service. The line goes something
like this: ``It is not the years in a life, it is the life
in those years.'' I am paraphrasing that. The same could
be said of the life of a Senator. It is not just that he
served 30 years. That alone is a singular, unprecedented
achievement. In fact, the Senator he outdistanced in a
sense in terms of years of service was only elected by the
people twice. Senator Specter was elected by the people of
Pennsylvania five times. But it is the life in those
Senate years, the work in those Senate years, the
contribution to our Commonwealth and our country in those
Senate years that matters and has meaning. His impact will
be felt for generations--not just decades but for
generations.
Let me close with this. There is a history book of our
State that came out in the year 2002, and it has a series
of stories and essays and chapters on the history of
Pennsylvania. It is a fascinating review of the State's
history. The foreword to that publication was written by
Brent E. Glass, at the time the executive director of the
Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission. He wrote
this in March 2002. It is a long foreword which I won't
read, but he said in the early part of this foreword the
following:
One way to understand the meaning of Pennsylvania's past
is to examine certain places around the State that are
recognized for their significance to the entire Nation.
Then he lists and describes in detail significant places
in Pennsylvania that have a connection to our history,
whether it is the Liberty Bell or the battlefield of
Gettysburg; whether it is the farms in our Amish
communities or whether it is some other place of historic
significance. I have no doubt whatsoever that if the same
history were recounted about the people who had an impact
on our Commonwealth--the people who moved Pennsylvania
forward; the people who in addition to moving our State
forward had an impact on the Nation--if we make a list of
Pennsylvanians who made such contributions, whether it
would be William Penn or Benjamin Franklin--and you can
fill in the blanks from there--I have no doubt that list
would include Senator Arlen Specter. He is a son of Kansas
who made Pennsylvania his home. He is a son of Kansas who
fought every day for the people of Pennsylvania.
So it is the work and the achievements and the passion
and the results in those years in the Senate that will put
him on the very short list of those who contributed so
much to our Commonwealth that we love and to our country
that we cherish.
For all of that and for so many other reasons, as a
citizen of Pennsylvania, a resident of Pennsylvania, a
citizen of the United States but as a Senator--I want to
express my gratitude to Senator Arlen Specter for his 30
years of service, but especially for what those 30 years
meant to the people, sometimes people without a voice,
sometimes people without power.
Thank you, Senator Specter.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I wish to join my colleagues
in noting the farewell address of Senator Arlen Specter is
an inspiring moment in the Senate.
It has been my great honor to serve with Senator Specter
and to be a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee with
him as well. I think of his contribution to the Senate at
many levels. I certainly appreciate what he did for the
Senate and for the Nation when he chaired the Judiciary
Committee and served on that committee, particularly when
it came to the hearings involving the appointment of new
Supreme Court Justices. Without fail, Senator Specter at
those hearings would always have dazzling insight into the
current state of the law and the record of the nominee. I
couldn't wait for him each time there was a hearing to see
what his tack would be. It always reflected a thoughtful
reflection on the historic moment we faced with each
nominee. The questions he asked, the positions he took,
the statements he made, all made for a better record for
the United States as the Senate proceeded to vote on those
historic nominations.
But there is one area he touched on ever so slightly
that I believe is equal to his mark on the Senate
Judiciary Committee. This man, Senator Arlen Specter, with
the help in some respects and in some efforts by Senator
Tom Harkin, has done more to advance the cause of medical
research in his time than virtually any other Member of
Congress. He had a single-minded determination to advance
medical research and to put the investment in the National
Institutes of Health. On the House side, Congressman John
Porter joined him in that early effort--John Porter of
Illinois--but time and again Arlen Specter would have as
his last bargaining chip on the table, whenever there was
a negotiation, that we needed to put more money in the
National Institutes of Health. I know he was probably
inspired to that cause by many things, but certainly by
his own life experience where he has successfully battled
so many medical demons and is here standing before us as
living proof that with his self-determination and the
advancement of science, we can overcome even some of the
greatest diseases and maladies that come our way.
He was, to me, a role model many times as he struggled
through cancer therapy and never missed a bell when it
came to presiding over a committee hearing or coming to
the floor to vote. There were times when all of us knew he
was in pain. Yet he never let on. He did his job and did
it with a gritty determination, and I respect him so much
for it. That personal life experience, I am sure, played
some role in his determination to advance medical
research.
So as he brings an end to his Senate career, there are
countless thousands who wouldn't know the name Arlen
Specter who have benefited by this man's public service
and commitment to medical research. I thank him for that
as a person, as does everyone in this Chamber who has
benefited from that cause in his life.
I also think, as I look back on his work on the stimulus
bill when he was on the other side of the aisle, that it
took extraordinary courage and may have cost him a Senate
seat to step forward and say, I will join with two other
Republicans to pass a bill for this new President Obama to
try to stop a recession and to give some new life to this
economy. There were very few with the courage to do it. He
was one of them. Sitting with him in the meetings where
the negotiations were under way, then-Republican Senator
Arlen Specter drove hard bargains in terms of bringing
down the overall cost of the project and dedicating a
substantial portion--$10 billion, if I am not mistaken--to
the National Institutes of Health. Again, the final
negotiation on the stimulus bill for America included
Arlen Specter's demand that the National Institutes of
Health have additional research dollars. His commitment to
make that happen did make it happen. Those three votes
from the Republican side of the aisle made it happen: a
stimulus which averted, in my mind, a terrible, much worse
recession, maybe even a depression in America. It was the
best of the Senate, when a Senator had the courage to
stand up, take a position, risk his Senate seat because he
believed in it, and do some good for America which would
benefit millions, as his vote and his effort did.
When I look at those whom I have served with in the
Senate, there are precious few who meet the standards for
Arlen Specter. I am going to miss him for so many reasons,
but I know his involvement in public life will not quit.
That is often a cliche we hear on the floor after a
farewell address. But I know it because he has been
hammering away at me every single day about bringing those
cameras over to the Supreme Court. So even when he leaves
this body, if it is not done then, I am sure I am going to
hear from him again on televising the Supreme Court
proceedings. I give my word that as long as I am around
here, Senator, I will carry that banner for you, and if I
have a chance to help you pass that measure at some point
in the future I am going to do it because I think it is
the right thing to do and I know it has meant so much to
you.
The Senate's loss is America's gain as he becomes a
public figure in a different life. During his tenure in
the Senate he has graced this institution with an
extraordinary intelligence, a determination, and a belief
that the national good should rise above any party cause.
I am going to miss Arlen Specter, and I thank him for
being my friend.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I was pleased to have an
opportunity to hear most of the remarks made this morning
by my friend and colleague from Pennsylvania and others
who have spoken on the occasion of his retirement from the
Senate.
I couldn't help but remember when he was campaigning in
his first race for the Senate and I had been asked to be
available to help out in some campaigns that year. I was a
brand new Senator and didn't know a lot of the protocols,
but when I heard Arlen Specter wanted me to come up and
speak in Pennsylvania somewhere during his campaign, I
decided I would accept the invitation, although I was a
little apprehensive about it, about how I would be
received as a Republican from Mississippi going up and
helping this new candidate who was running on the
Republican ticket too. His wife Joan was a member of the
city council in Philadelphia, as I recall--very well
respected. Anyway, I enjoyed getting to know the Senator
and his wife better during those early campaign events.
Then, after he was elected, he asked me to make one more
trip up.
He could not go to Erie, PA, and keep an invitation that
he wanted to accept and speak to a retired group of
businessmen. These were older gentlemen who had been
prominent in Pennsylvania business and political life. I
worried about it--that they would not think much about me.
But I went up there and nearly froze to death. I thought
this is just a payback for the Civil War, I guess, that
Arlen never got to express. He was going to do his part to
help educate me and refine me in the ways of modern
America. But that led to an entire career here working
alongside him on both sides of the aisle, which I have
enjoyed very much.
We have all learned from him the commitment that he
makes to the job, the seriousness of purpose that he
brings to committee work, and he has truly been an
outstanding leader in the Senate, through personal
performance and his serious and impressive record of
leadership.
I am glad to express those thoughts today and wish Arlen
well in the years ahead. We will still have a friendship
that will be appreciated. I look forward to continuing
that relationship.
I yield the floor.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I see my other colleagues.
I do wish to talk about one or two judicial nominees, but
I want to say first how much I appreciate Senator Specter.
I have had the honor to serve on the Senate Judiciary
Committee with Senator Specter the entire time I have been
in the Senate--going on 14 years, I guess. No one has a
clearer legal mind. The clarity of his thought and
expression is always impressive to me. As someone who
practiced law, I see the great lawyer skills he possesses.
Also, I note that he has not just today but throughout
his career defended the legitimacy of the powers of the
Senate. He was very articulate over the past number of
years in criticizing the abuse of filling the tree, where
bills can be brought up and amendments are not allowed. He
has believed that is an unhealthy trend in the Senate, and
he has been one of the most effective advocates in
opposition to it.
He sponsored and helped pass the Armed Career Criminal
Act. He was one of the leaders in that. Having been a
longtime prosecutor in Philadelphia, I like to tease our
good friend Senator Leahy that he was a prosecutor, but it
was in Vermont. Senator Specter had to deal with a lot of
crime in Philadelphia and was consistently reelected there
for his effectiveness and is a true source of insight into
crime in America and has been an effective advocate for
fighting crime.
I note also that he has a good view about a Senator. He
respects other Senators. He was talking with me one time
or I was sharing with him my concern about a matter, and
he used a phrase I heard him use more than once: ``Well,
you are a U.S. Senator.'' In other words, if you do not
like it, stand up and defend yourself. He respected that,
even if he would disagree.
I remember another time Senator Specter was on the
floor. I had just arrived in the Senate. I wanted him to
do something--I have long since forgotten what.
I said, ``Senator Specter, you could vote for this, and
back home, you could say thus and so.''
He looked right at me, and he said, ``Senator, I don't
need your advice on how to conduct myself back home
politically.''
I learned a lesson from that. I never told another
Senator what I said to Senator Specter. Who am I to tell
you how to conduct yourself politically back home in the
State of Pennsylvania?
Senator Specter chaired the Judiciary Committee during
the confirmations of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice
Alito. He was the leading Republican chair at that time.
He raised questions about the nominees. But as chairman of
the committee, with the votes and support of his
Republican colleagues, he protected our rights, he
protected our interests. He did not back down one time on
any action by the other party that would have denied the
ability to move that nomination forward to a vote and
protect the rights of the parties on our side.
Those are a few things that come to mind when I think
about the fantastic service he has given to the Senate. He
is one of our most able Members, one of our most effective
defenders of senatorial prerogative and independence, one
of our crime fighters without par, and one of the best
lawyers in the Senate, a person who is courageous and
strong. Even when he was conducting those very intense
Alito and Roberts hearings--it was just after he had
serious cancer treatment, the chemotherapy. I know he
didn't feel well, but he was fabulous in conducting
himself at that time. Throughout all of that treatment,
his work ethic surpassed by far that of most Senators in
this body. It has been an honor to serve with him.
Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, I wish to say how much I
appreciated the remarks of Senator Specter today. I, for
one, hope Senators on both sides of the aisle, Democrats
and Republicans, heed his closing remarks as he described
them and also the farewell remarks of so many Senators
over the last 2 or 3 weeks. I think there is a lot of
wisdom we can apply to our work going forward.
I thank Senator Specter very much for his service.
I yield the floor.
Mr. UDALL of Colorado. ... I also wanted to associate
myself with the remarks of Senator Bennet, the Senator
from Colorado, in regard to Senator Specter's farewell
address to the Senate. In particular, I think Senator
Specter laid out a thoughtful and comprehensive way we can
change the Senate rules in the upcoming 112th Congress in
ways that respect the rights of the minority but also
provide the Senate with some additional ways to do the
people's business.
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, time and time again I have
come to the floor to give a few remarks about Senators who
are retiring and leaving the Senate. They all contributed
in their unique way one way or the other to the Senate.
...
Mr. President, I wish to pay a farewell to another
longtime legislative partner, and that is Senator Arlen
Specter of Pennsylvania.
I listened with great interest to Senator Specter's
farewell remarks yesterday. He decried the decline of
bipartisan cooperation in this body. As he put it:
In some quarters, compromising has become a dirty word.
Politics is no longer the art of the possible when
Senators are intransigent in their positions.
During his remarkable 30 years in the Senate--he is the
longest serving U.S. Senator in Pennsylvania's history--
Arlen Specter has been admired for his fierce independence
and for his willingness to cross party lines in order to
accomplish big and important things for this country.
Nowhere has this been more vividly on display than in
the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, on which
Senator Specter and I are senior members. Before last
year, when he returned to his roots as a Democrat, Arlen
was the senior Republican and I was the senior Democrat on
that subcommittee. Since 1989, as the majority in the
Senate has gone back and forth between the two parties, we
alternated as either chair or ranking member. But the
transitions were seamless as we passed the gavel back and
forth because Arlen and I forged an unshakable
partnership.
That partnership has been grounded in our shared
commitment to finding cures for diseases ranging from
cancer to heart disease to Alzheimer's and in our
determination to maintain the National Institutes of
Health as the jewel in the crown of international
biomedical research. Our proudest accomplishment was our
collaboration in doubling funding for the National
Institutes of Health over a 5-year period, between 1998
and 2003. Last year, we again collaborated in securing $10
billion for the National Institutes of Health in the
Recovery Act, although I must be honest and give the
senior Senator from Pennsylvania the lion's share of
credit for that accomplishment.
I say without fear of contradiction that there has been
no Member of Congress in the Senate or the House who has
championed NIH as passionately and relentlessly and
successfully as Senator Arlen Specter. Indeed, at times,
in my role when I was chair of the Appropriations Labor,
Health and Human Services, and Education Subcommittee, I
have had to remind Arlen that there were other programs
besides the NIH in our appropriations bill. In fairness,
Senator Specter has also fought passionately to increase
funding for public schools and to increase access to
higher education, but there is no question that his great
passion, his living legacy, has been the National
Institutes of Health and biomedical research. Today, the
prowess and excellence of the National Institutes of
Health is truly a living legacy to Senator Specter, and we
have countless new medical cures and therapies because of
Senator Specter's long and determined advocacy.
Mr. President, I will miss my good friend and colleague
from Pennsylvania, who has been a tremendous ally for many
years. As he departs the Senate, he can take enormous
pride in 30 years of truly distinguished service to the
people of Pennsylvania and the United States. I wish Arlen
and his wonderful wife Joan the very best in the years
ahead.
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to our
friend and colleague, Senator Arlen Specter.
Senator Specter has spent five terms serving the people
of Pennsylvania here in Congress--longer than any other
Pennsylvania Senator. All of us can take a lesson from his
dedication and passion for fighting for the people of his
State.
A member of the Judiciary Committee since he joined
Congress, Senator Specter built on his background as an
attorney and eventually assumed the chairmanship of the
committee. His expertise on constitutional issues has long
been admired by his colleagues.
Senator Specter was always a leader on issues relating
to our National Institutes of Health, championing
investment in scientific research to find lifesaving
treatments and cures for a range of diseases. He
understood first hand how crucial such funding could be,
having fought his own battle with cancer. When we passed
the Recovery Act, it was Senator Specter who ensured that
it would include significant investments in NIH. His
efforts to help double NIH's budget have contributed to
advances in treatments for Parkinson's, cancer, heart
disease, and Alzheimer's.
I am pleased to have had the opportunity to work closely
with Senator Specter on the Senate Environment and Public
Works Committee. He has been a thoughtful and constructive
member committed to addressing climate change and fighting
for clean energy jobs.
Senator Specter loves this institution, and he will be
missed. He has left his mark, and I thank him for his
decades of dedicated public service.
Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, when I came to the Senate in
2007 as a Senator-elect, one of the first things I did was
to go see Senator Specter. He asked me at the time to go
to lunch, and from the moment that I arrived in the
Senate, he made it very clear to me, not only did the
people of Pennsylvania expect, but he expected as well
that we work together.
From the beginning of his service here in the U.S.
Senate, way back when he was elected in 1980, all the way
up to the present moment, he has been a Senator who has
focused on building bipartisan relationships and, of
course, focusing on Pennsylvania priorities.
I have been honored to have worked with him on so many
Pennsylvania priorities, whether it was veterans or
workers, whether it was dairy farmers or the economy of
Pennsylvania, or whether it was our soldiers, or our
children, or our families. He has been a champion for our
State, and he has shown younger Senators the way to work
together in the interest of our State and our country.
That bipartisanship wasn't just a sentiment. He is a
legislator who sought compromise that led to results in a
Senate often divided by partisanship.
His record is long, so I will only highlight a few
areas.
He helped to lead the effort to dramatically increase
funding for the National Institutes of Health, that great
generator of discoveries that cure diseases and create
jobs and hope for people often without hope because of a
disease or a malady of one kind or another.
His experience working on a farm as a boy, in Kansas,
not in Pennsylvania, helped him to understand and work on
problems affecting Pennsylvania agriculture and farm
families.
He stood up for Pennsylvania industry and workers
against subsidized or dumped products that hurt
Pennsylvania's steel industry.
He fought to bring Federal funding back to Pennsylvania
to create jobs, build infrastructure, and invest in local
communities.
No Senator in the history of the Commonwealth has served
longer than Senator Specter. In fact, the Senator that he
outdistanced in a sense, in terms of service, was only
elected by the people twice after several terms elected by
the State legislature. Senator Specter was elected by the
people of Pennsylvania five times, but it is the life in
those Senate years, the contribution to our Commonwealth
and our country in those 30 years that really matter. His
impact will be felt for generations, not just decades, but
for generations.
There was a history book of our State that came out in
the year 2002. It was a series of stories, essays, and
chapters on the history of Pennsylvania, and it is a
fascinating review of the State's history. The foreword of
that publication, that book, was written by Brent D.
Glass, at the time the executive director of the
Pennsylvania Historical Museum Commission. He wrote this
in March 2002. It is a long foreword which I won't read,
but he wrote in the early part of this foreword the
following:
One way to understand the meaning of Pennsylvania's past
is to examine certain places around the state that are
recognized for their significance to the entire nation.
Then he lists and describes in detail significant places
in Pennsylvania that have a connection to our history,
whether it's the Liberty Bell or the battlefield at
Gettysburg, whether it's the farms in our Amish
communities or whether it's some other place of historic
significance.
I have no doubt whatsoever that if the same history were
recounted about the people of Pennsylvania, the people who
moved Pennsylvania forward, the people who in addition to
moving our State forward had an impact on the Nation; if
we had to make a list of Pennsylvanians who made such
contributions; whether it would be William Penn, Benjamin
Franklin, you can fill in the blanks from there, I have no
doubt that that list would include Senator Arlen Specter,
a son of Kansas who made Pennsylvania his home, a son of
Kansas who fought every day for the people of
Pennsylvania.
So it is the work and the achievements and the passion
and the results in those years in the Senate that will put
him on a very short list of those who contributed so much
to our Commonwealth that we love and to our country that
we cherish.
So for all that and for so many other reasons, I, as a
resident of Pennsylvania and a citizen of the United
States, but as a Senator, want to express my gratitude to
Senator Arlen Specter for his 30 years of service, but
especially for what those 30 years meant to the people of
Pennsylvania. Thank you, Senator Specter.
Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, when the 111th Congress
draws to a close, we will bid farewell to 16 colleagues
who have collectively given more than 200 years of service
to our Nation through their service in the Senate. These
include seven of the Senate's most experienced Members.
People like Chris Dodd and Arlen Specter who have each
served five terms in the Senate. Kit Bond who has served
four terms and Bob Bennett, Byron Dorgan, Russ Feingold,
and Judd Gregg, who have each served three terms in this
Chamber. ...
My neighbor in the Hart Senate Office Building, Arlen
Specter, is one of the Senate's most independent voices
and perhaps the best friend that the National Institutes
of Health, and every American who benefits from its
cutting edge research, has ever had on Capitol Hill. ...
It has been an honor and a pleasure to serve with each
of the people who will leave this Chamber when we adjourn
sine die. Each has made substantial contributions to their
States, to the Nation, and to the Senate during their time
here.