[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 120 (Friday, September 14, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9422-S9429]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           A UNITED RESPONSE

  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, there is a time to talk and there is a 
time to act. The Senate today has unanimously acted with force, with 
resolve, and with unanimity. We spoke for the people of our country 
about the heinous situation in which we find ourselves, and also about 
the resolve to keep this from happening again.
  We have passed a resolution giving the President of the United States 
our support and authorization for the use of military force against any 
person or any country that is helping the people who did the despicable 
acts of September 11. I heard a young woman on television this morning 
whose brother was lost in one of the World Trade Center Towers. The 
young woman was asked what she thought the response of the United 
States should be. She said, ``I don't really want to go to war. I just 
don't want anyone else to have to suffer what I am suffering today.'' I 
just want to say to that young woman, and to all of the other families 
of the victims of September 11, 2001, that it is exactly what we did 
today that will prevent other people in the future from suffering what 
she is suffering.
  If we do not respond with force, we will put American lives in 
jeopardy, and we will not be doing our job of protecting the people of 
our country whom we were elected to protect.
  No one would ever have the United States move before we had absolute 
evidence about who perpetrated this atrocity, but when we have that 
evidence, we are going to move.
  The Senate is speaking today in support of the President to take 
military action against those who have attacked our country, our 
people, our way of life, our very freedom.
  The most important responsibility I believe I have as a Senator is to 
keep the freedom that so many have died for in past years for our 
country. We are the beacon of freedom in the world. We are a democracy 
that has proven that, through our voting capabilities, we can become 
the strongest nation on Earth. It is freedom that is the foundation of 
the democracy and our way of life.
  To make sure we keep the freedom we have known--our mothers, fathers, 
grandmothers, and grandfathers have known--for our children and 
grandchildren, we must act decisively when an act of war has been 
perpetrated on innocent people of our country.
  As to the act that occurred on September 11--a day we will never 
forget in our lifetime, nor will our children or grandchildren ever 
forget--the only way we can respond to that kind of attack on our 
people and our freedom is to say we will fight, not just today or next 
month or 2 months from now, but we are in this for the long haul, and 
we are going to rid the world of the despots who believe they can prey 
on innocent citizens against freedom-loving people in the world.
  I am proud of the Senate. I am proud that we did not dillydally 
around to say, ``I wonder what we ought to do,'' but we are putting our 
faith in the President of the United States, our military forces, and 
our leaders who have the decisionmaking capabilities and the control of 
the military to act on our behalf and on behalf of the people of our 
country to assure that this will not happen again, and the force that 
we use will have the appropriate impact to protect ourselves and our 
freedom-loving allies wherever they may be in the world.
  Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, my mom has an expression: Out of every 
tragedy, something good will come if you look hard enough.
  I know the Presiding Officer, if he will forgive this point of 
personal reference, has had his share of personal tragedy. Everyone in 
this Chamber has. Some of us have gotten those phone calls that the 
people in New York are getting from cell phones and/or from a police 
officer and/or from a morgue.
  We know there is not a darn thing we can do now for those people 
except--it is strange the way human nature works, and I know the 
Presiding Officer knows this--except it is amazing how those people in 
that circumstance draw strength from the knowledge that other people 
understand their pain, that other people empathize with them, that 
other people care about what they are going through. It amazes me that 
you can draw strength from that.
  I think what we are doing and the Nation is doing is the right thing. 
Most important, what we did today should be noted is not likely to 
occur in any other country in the world, and that is, that we just a 
few moments ago operated under the rule of law.
  In all our anger, all our frustration, all our feelings, very 
bluntly, of hatred that exists now for those who perpetrated the act 
against us, we did not pell-mell just say: Go do anything, anytime, 
anyplace, Mr. President; you have to just go. We operated as our 
Founders, who were not naive people, intended us to operate. We 
operated under the rule of law.
  We went to our civil bible, the Constitution, and we said: What does 
it call for here? What it calls for is the U.S. Congress to meet its 
constitutional responsibility, to say: Mr. President, we authorize you, 
in the name of the American people, to take action, and we define the 
action in generic terms which you can take.
  We gave the President today, as we should have and as is our 
responsibility, all the authority he needs to prosecute war against the 
individuals or countries responsible, without yielding our 
constitutional right to retain the judgment in the future as to whether 
or not force against others could, should, or would be used.
  That is remarkable. I suspect not many people know, other than my 
distinguished colleague, the Senator from Texas, a former professor, 
one of the brightest guys with whom I ever worked, unfortunately 
leaving the Senate at the end of his term; what the leading scholar in 
the Senate, Senator Byrd, knows and what the experienced Senator from 
Alaska knows. My friend from Oklahoma is the only one in this place who 
can fully understand, I suspect, along with his Oklahoma colleague, 
what our friends from New Jersey, New York, Virginia, the District, and 
Maryland are going through. He understands it. He has internalized it. 
He knows it.
  I believe it is fairly remarkable that, in spite of the reasons for 
the attack on us and our way of life, we adhered to the rule of law; 
that even in this calamity, we acted with dispatch but under the law, 
under the Constitution.
  The resolution provides the President clear authority ``to use all 
necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, 
or persons that he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided 
the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored 
such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of 
international terrorism against the United States by such nations, 
organizations or persons.'' In short, the President is authorized to go 
after those responsible for the barbaric acts of September 11, 2001 to 
ensure that those same actors do not engage in additional acts of 
international terrorism against the United States.
  The authority permits the President wide latitude to use force 
against the broad range of actors who were responsible for the 
September 11 attacks. If any nation harbored the terrorists while they 
were in training, that nation may be subject to American military 
power. If a nation or organization financed the operation, they may be 
subject to American military power. It does not limit the amount of 
time that the President may prosecute this action against the parties 
guilty for the

[[Page S9423]]

September 11 attacks. We must all understand that the use of force will 
not be easy or quick. In extending this broad authority to cover those 
``planning, authorizing, committing, or aiding the attacks'' it should 
go without saying, however, that the resolution is directed only at 
using force abroad to combat acts of international terrorism.
  The authority granted is focused on those responsible for the attacks 
of September 11. The President's lawyers originally proposed that the 
resolved clause also include language authorizing military force to 
``deter and pre-empt any future acts of terrorism against the United 
States.'' Of course, the President has the Constitutional authority to 
deter terrorism through a broad range of means, including diplomatic 
measures, economic sanctions, seizing of financial assets, or 
deployment of forces. The President must also ensure that Executive 
Branch agencies devote the necessary resources and apply the full 
measure of the federal criminal laws to deter, prevent and punish 
terrorism. Further, the President has the authority under the 
Constitution to use force to pre-empt an imminent attack, including a 
terrorist attack, against the United States. Rather than purporting to 
extend these authorities in the resolved clause, the final whereas 
clause reflects these recognized powers of the President.
  I suggest what others have said, and that is, the President of the 
United States has our prayers, he has our good wishes, and he has our 
commitment under the Constitution now to support him in what action he 
takes as defined by the authority he has. That is a big deal. It is a 
big deal. It is worth noting.
  Lastly, I compliment the President on his patience, on his resolve, 
and his understanding of the need of certitude because the worst thing 
we can do, as he is uniting the world, is to act precipitously to meet 
our instinct for response immediately. I compliment him. I compliment 
his Secretary of State for the way he is handling this situation.

  I conclude by saying that I do not see what happened on the 11th as 
the beginning of the end of our way of life. I see it as the beginning 
of the end of terrorism as it has been able to be spawned over the last 
three decades. The world has come face to face with the reality that 
nation states, no matter what their ideological disposition, are all in 
jeopardy. We are united in understanding that we cannot allow these 
networks to be spawned.
  I thank my colleagues for allowing me to speak at this moment. Again, 
I compliment them all, Democrat and Republican, in the way we have 
stood united.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas is recognized.
  Mr. GRAMM. Mr. President, today, in a bipartisan unanimous vote, we 
gave the President the money and the power to make war on those who 
have made war on us.
  We are down, it seems to me, to a stark and bitter choice: We can 
hunt down those who made war on us and make war on them where they 
live, or we can allow them to make war on us where we live. We can 
either change our lifestyle, limit our freedom, reduce our prosperity, 
or we can change the lifestyle of those who have made war on us. I am 
not indifferent to that choice. I subscribe to the thesis that when our 
enemies are on the run, they cannot have the resources and the 
communications to carry out the kind of terrorist war they carried out 
against the Pentagon and against the World Trade Center.

  We have to be aware and we have to accept up front that if we go too 
far in limiting our freedom or our prosperity in trying to fight this 
war, then we are ceding the very thing the war is about. So I believe 
very strongly this money and this vast commitment of authority and 
power is meant to go after our enemies and to pursue them to the end of 
the earth and to never let up in that process.
  I do not believe this is going to be an easy war to fight, and I 
believe it is going to be a costly war to fight.
  Our enemies have a hate for capitalism and for democracy that we 
cannot comprehend or understand. I believe until they are hunted down, 
captured, or killed we can never reestablish the safety we felt prior 
to last Tuesday.
  I also want to make it clear that I believe we have to choose sides 
in this conflict. Those countries that harbor or abet or tolerate the 
actions of terrorists on their soil are making war against the United 
States of America, and I believe that we have to hold them accountable.
  Finally, I want to thank our leaders. I want to thank Senator Byrd, 
for working to come up with a responsible appropriation. I think it is 
clear that under these circumstances, the Congress would literally be 
willing to pass any appropriations bill and spend any amount of money. 
As this conflict lengthens, as other priorities emerge, as we need more 
resources, as we ultimately will in this conflict, we will wish we had 
been responsible. I think we took an important and responsible first 
step today. I personally believe we should set up a joint bipartisan 
committee with the job of overseeing these expenditures, just as the 
Truman Commission oversaw the expenditures of World War II. The job of 
this committee would not be to determine how the money is spent but to 
simply see it is being spent as we appropriate it; to see we are not 
being gouged in terms of prices when there is no competitive bidding, 
as there generally is not when you are doing things on an emergency 
basis; to try and see that we are being good stewards of the taxpayers' 
money and getting the return on that money in comforting people who 
have been hurt, helping those who have lost loved ones, rebuilding 
things that have been destroyed, and prosecuting this war against our 
enemies.
  It should be a joint bipartisan committee or commission to work with 
the GAO to see the money is well spent, to see it is spent for the 
purposes we provided it, to see we are being charged reasonable prices, 
and to hold people accountable for things they do under emergency 
situations in terms of prices that are charged. We did that in World 
War II. Harry Truman did an excellent job, and the country benefitted 
from it.
  It should obviously not be something on the scale of what we did in 
World War II, but something similar to that would be helpful. I intend 
next week, when we come back, to talk about it. I hope my colleagues 
will look at that idea, look back at what Harry Truman did in his 
committee in terms of following the expenditures on the war and how 
well the money was being spent and holding people accountable.
  I am proud of the Senate today, and I think we have a right to be 
proud. I believe the American people are proud.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mr. INHOFE. Will the Senator yield for a unanimous consent request?
  Mr. BYRD. Absolutely.
  Mr. INHOFE. I ask unanimous consent that at the conclusion of the 
remarks of the distinguished Senator from West Virginia, I be 
recognized for up to 15 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator from 
Oklahoma for his courtesy toward me. He was prepared to speak before I 
speak. I offered to wait and have him go ahead but he said no, so I 
thank him.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to speak 
for not to exceed 7 minutes, and I ask the Chair indicate when I have 1 
minute left.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BYRD. I thank the Chair.
  Today, the Senate passed the fiscal year 2001 Emergency Supplemental 
Appropriations Act for Recovery from and Response to Terrorist Attacks 
on the United States.
  Mr. President, the emergency supplemental appropriations bill adopted 
earlier today is an extraordinary response to extraordinary events. It 
sends a strong and unmistakable message to the world that the United 
States is prepared to move swiftly on all fronts to respond to the 
horrific attacks on our citizens and our territory. The unity and 
determination that have propelled this bill through Congress 72 hours 
after the assault on America speaks volumes about the strength and 
resiliency of our system of government.
  The supplemental provides $40 billion, to remain available until 
expended, to respond to the terrorist

[[Page S9424]]

events of September 11, 2001. This is an extraordinary bill that 
responds to extraordinary events. The President has not presented the 
Congress with any detailed estimates of agency needs in response to 
these terrorist acts. This is not a criticism. Federal Government 
agencies, such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the 
Department of Defense, and the Corps of Engineers, are on the ground, 
focusing all of their attention on responding to the crisis.
  Initially, the administration requested authority to spend any amount 
of money, for any purpose. The Constitution gives the power of the 
purse to the Congress. It is the Congress that has the responsibility 
to make sure that the needs of our people are met. This left my good 
friend Senator Stevens and me with a dilemma. How do we meet the clear 
and immediate need for funding while protecting the prerogatives of 
Congress?
  On Wednesday, Senator Stevens and I joined with our Senate leaders 
and the House leaders at a meeting with the President to discuss our 
response to these evil terrorist acts. At that meeting, I laid out four 
goals for funding the Federal response. First, we must appropriate a 
specific amount for particular purposes, not a blank check, not a Gulf 
of Tonkin Resolution, with ill-defined goals. Second, to reinforce bi-
partisan unity, we must all have trust and candor on the use of these 
funds. Third, the President must consult with the Congress in the 
allocation of the funds. Finally, there must be regular reporting to 
the Congress.
  Mr. President, the supplemental bill that the Senate approved today 
meets each of those goals. The bill provides $40 billion, all 
designated by the Congress as an emergency, and is contingent on the 
President designating the full amount as an emergency.
  Funds are available to: (1) provide Federal, State and local 
preparedness for mitigating and responding to the attacks; (2) provide 
support to counter, investigate, or prosecute domestic or international 
terrorism; (3) provide increased transportation security; (4) repair 
public facilities and transportation systems damaged by the attacks; 
and (5) support national security.
  Not less than $20 billion of the $40 billion is for disaster 
assistance and disaster recovery activities in New York, Virginia, 
Pennsylvania and elsewhere.
  Funds are available in three segments.
  The President has $10 billion available to him after consultation 
with the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the Appropriations Committees.
  The President has a second $10 billion available to him after the 
Director of the Office of Management and Budget has submitted to the 
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations a proposed allocation and 
plan for the use of the funds, and he then must wait 15 days. This will 
allow the Committees to review the President's plans and make 
suggestions--possibly enter into some negotiations with the President 
or his Office of Management and Budget Director.
  The President has an additional $20 billion available only when the 
amounts are allocated to specific programs in a subsequent emergency 
appropriations bill.
  Mr. President, I stress that this bill is just the first order of 
business for Congress. This bill deals with what has already happened 
but does not fully deal with it. Of course, even as scores of rescue 
workers continue to sift the rubble of the World Trade Center and 
search for victims in the shattered wing of the Pentagon, we in 
Congress must start looking forward. We must take steps now--today, 
tomorrow, next week--to re-double our efforts to intercept would-be 
terrorists before they can launch an attack.
  As most Americans, I am amazed by the sophistication, organization, 
and complexity of Tuesday's attacks on the United States. This was not 
a casual effort or the work of a lone madman. These attacks took 
elaborate planning, significant manpower, and detailed knowledge of 
U.S. aircraft and aviation systems. I have great admiration for our 
nation's intelligence agencies. I believe that they provide tremendous 
service to our nation with the resources they have, and I know that we 
rarely hear about their success stories. But it is, frankly, beyond 
belief that such a massive and well-coordinated assault on our nation 
could be executed without any discernable signals. It is beyond belief 
that our nation, with its vast and powerful network of worldwide 
intelligence resources, could be caught so utterly unprepared.
  It has long been acknowledged that to be forewarned is to be 
forearmed. Well, we have been forewarned. Now, we must focus our 
efforts on improving our intelligence-gathering systems so that we have 
a chance to thwart a terrorist plot before it can be executed, before 
innocent lives can be lost. The stunning attack on the heart of 
America's military, financial, and transportation centers has exposed 
our vulnerabilities.
  As we move quickly to provide assistance to the victims of these 
horrible acts, to improve security at our airports, to rebuild the 
Pentagon, and to repair the devastation of New York's financial 
district, so must we move to rebuild our intelligence capabilities. 
This emergency supplemental appropriations bill is the first step in a 
long road that will not end in my lifetime. We must guard against being 
sidetracked by politics or partisanship.
  There will still be politics. We have other things to do along with 
these matters. There will still be some politics and some partisanship, 
but we must not be sidetracked by politics or partisanship. Congress 
and the President have demonstrated this week that in times of crisis 
there is no center aisle. There is no aisle between us. We can overcome 
our political differences and work together. Make no mistake about it, 
we are in a time of crisis, and it is a time of suspended crisis. We 
will weather this crisis, but it will last a long time. We will emerge 
stronger. We must work together to achieve that goal.
  I close by commending Senator Ted Stevens, former chairman of the 
Senate Appropriations Committee, a very valued Member of this body, for 
his tireless strength and dedication and patriotism. I commend 
Representative Bill Young of Florida for his dedication to purpose, for 
his cooperation, for his characteristic courtesy to those across the 
Capitol and across the aisle. I commend Representative David Obey for 
his tenacity and determination, his patriotism, his dedication to the 
separation of powers in this great country of ours--all of these people 
for their outstanding contribution to this extraordinary bill. I could 
not sit down without commending, also, the Speaker of the House, our 
two leaders, in particular, Mr. Daschle and Mr. Lott, and our excellent 
staffs who have worked long hours and rendered invaluable assistance, 
without whom we could not succeed in this mighty effort.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Oklahoma is recognized 
under the previous order for 15 minutes.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I will identify myself with the remarks of 
the previous speaker, the distinguished Senator from West Virginia. He 
is a very wise man. He has thought this through. We have heard a lot of 
wisdom in the last few days in this Chamber.
  Sometimes a child has an innocent wisdom that is more wisdom than 
anything we hear in this Chamber. My wife and I have four children and 
nine grandchildren. I can recall when my No. 2 son, who is now a hand 
surgeon, was very small, I was teaching him how to ride a bicycle. We 
have all had this experience, running beside them, and finally they are 
balanced and they make the first trip around the block. He came up the 
hill panting away. He looked at me and said: Daddy, I wish the whole 
world was downhill.
  We know the whole world is not downhill. We think about these things. 
I had a phone call from my daughter, Molly, on Tuesday after this 
tragedy happened. She is a professor at the University of Arkansas, and 
a very accomplished one. She has four children--three boys and a little 
girl. In fact, the little girl she just adopted from Ethiopia. Her 
older boys are Jason, age 5; the next one is Luke, who is 3 years old. 
She was taking him to kindergarten.
  On the way to kindergarten, they were listening to the radio. It is 
Ed Koch speaking from New York. He said--I believe she told me--three 
times in a row: We need to kill bin

[[Page S9425]]

Laden. We need to kill bin Laden. We need to kill bin Laden.
  Little 5-year old Jason looked at up and said: Mommy, who is bin 
Laden?
  She said: bin Laden is a very evil, bad man.
  He said this. He said: Instead of killing Mr. bin Laden, why don't we 
do a powerful prayer, and we will build a powerful shield around him so 
that he cannot hear the voices of the devil. He will only hear the 
voice of God, and God will be in his heart.
  I thought, that is the real intellect in America.
  I believe that God is in the hearts of more Americans today than 
perhaps ever before. People realize that there is something bigger than 
what has been happening here on Earth.
  I think because of four reasons I probably had more opportunities to 
respond to this disaster than others. Those four reasons are: No. 1, I 
am on the Intelligence Committee; No. 2, I am on the Senate Armed 
Services Committee; No. 3, I am a licensed pilot; and No. 4, I am from 
Oklahoma.
  As far as being a pilot is concerned, I believe that since the 
retirement of John Glenn, Senator Glenn of Ohio, that leaves me as the 
last active commercial pilot in the Senate.
  I have been called by a lot of people in the media to talk about 
those issues. For example, most of my pilot friends would have thought 
the same as I did on Tuesday afternoon before any of the details came 
in, that virtually anyone who knew the basics of flying could take over 
an airplane that is already in the air and apply those basics to go hit 
a target--until I heard some of the details--for example, the 757 that 
I believe we now know, after picking up these fragmented details--we 
came to the conclusion, which may or may not be right, and we have 
expressed them here on the floor--the 757 was headed for the White 
House and for some reason made a diversion, for reasons which we don't 
know. Maybe that was the original plan. Maybe it was something that was 
there that made him believe he could not make that target and he made 
an alternative target, which was the Pentagon. He made a very steep 
207-degree turn with the 757 at a low attitude, knowing there is such a 
thing as a high-speed stall with a high bank.
  This guy knew what he was doing. He was an accomplished pilot, and he 
went ahead and hit, I believe, what was the second target in his very 
well executed terrorist act.
  Second, as far as flying is concerned, one of my closest friends is--
this goes way back from the time we were in the House of 
Representatives together--Norman Mineta, a Democrat from California. 
Both of us were on the Transportation Committee. He was chairman of the 
Aviation Subcommittee and then the Transportation Committee. We became 
very close friends.
  In fact, when he was appointed by President Bush, I called him up. I 
said: Norm, who was the only Republican who openly supported you even 
over your Republican opponents during the years that you served in the 
House. He said: This must be Jim Inhofe.

  We have had a chance to visit about this. I consider him a very close 
friend.
  There are some obvious things that can and will happen.
  One, I think we all know that we need to have secured doors for the 
cockpit. That goes without saying. It is very elementary and something 
that should probably have been done before.
  Second, sky marshals: It is very important that we adopt a program so 
that we have sky marshals.
  Third--and this has come about recently. Someone was very critical of 
me recently--yesterday, I believe--because I have a hold on one of our 
President's nominations. He nominated someone to be the Customs 
Commissioner.
  I have to share a frustration with you. When I was in the House in 
1988, when they had the Pan Am 103 disaster, Jim Oberstar, a Democrat, 
came with me as a Republican to Europe to test certain types of 
detection technologies out there that were better than what we had been 
thinking about.
  We have to do something to have better detection technology used to 
protect American travelers and the American people.
  We found several. We came back, and we were unable to get anything 
approved, accepted, or even tried by Customs. They were locked into old 
technology. They weren't going to move from that technology.
  I didn't do anything until 1995 and Oklahoma City, which is the site 
of the worst domestic, devastating attack by a terrorist in the history 
of this country--until this past week. I decided, again, after that, 
let's see what we can do to try to get some new technology.
  We discovered a technology called pulsed fast nutron analysis. It is 
called PFNA. This is a technology that not only shows through 
something, but for a sealed container, it has a three-dimensional view 
of what is inside. They can detect what substances are inside. They can 
detect the chemical composition from within.
  This is a possibility. I am not saying there is a great likelihood 
that if we had this technology on Tuesday the tragedy might not have 
happened because we would have been able to detect things we could not 
otherwise detect.
  We thought that this was worthwhile; let's go ahead and authorize it 
and ask the Director of Customs to have a side-by-side competition or 
technology competition. So we put that in some report language. Nothing 
happened. They didn't do it.
  I spoke to the previous--I will not mention by name--Customs 
Commissioner in my office. I said: Will you commit to having this 
competition that we have directed?
  He said: Absolutely. I will.
  And he didn't do it. I couldn't figure out why.
  It wasn't until this happened Tuesday that I thought we couldn't wait 
any longer. That is when I put a hold on this man because I wanted a 
commitment that this person who would be the Commissioner of Customs 
would obey the law and have the competition. In fact, we actually put 
it in. It is in the appropriations bill over in the House. It has $3 
million for the conduct of this competition down in El Paso, TX, and 
directs them to do it.
  The language is very clear. I have talked to Senator Dorgan and 
others over here. They agree that this should be a part of it. I think 
Senator Stevens would agree with that, as well as the President.

  I will leave that as the commitment that we are going to try that. As 
technology advances, we have to advance with it.
  Getting back to Oklahoma, Senator Biden said something a few minutes 
ago. He said that I am probably the only one here--prior to Tuesday--
who really understands the pain that goes with a disaster like that. Me 
pointed towards me. This is because in 1995 we had that terrible, 
tragic blowing up of the Murrah Office Building. I have to say that 
even though a detection device would not have precluded that from 
happening, it reminded me of the need for detection devices.
  I wouldn't expect that the next terrorist attack on America--there 
will be more--would come in the form of a 767 or 757. I don't think 
that is going to happen. But we can still have that technology in 
place.
  I can remember at that time--I was reminded of this last night. Last 
night, I went to the Pentagon. There are 194--I believe at the last 
count--lives lost at the Pentagon, and 168 in Oklahoma in 1995. It is 
very analogous. I stood there. I had tears in my eyes remembering 1995. 
I happened to be there right after it happened and hearing the 
thundering march of the volunteer firemen going into the Murrah Federal 
Office Building before it was secure and coming out with bits of body 
parts; there were hands stuck in the wall; there was a lady, a doctor 
went in and heroically amputated her leg so she could be pulled from 
the rubbish. She is alive today.
  I talked to Cindy Rice yesterday who lives in Oklahoma City. Her son, 
David, who we assume is dead today, called her. He was on the 104th 
floor of one of the two towers. I am not sure which one. She wasn't 
sure which one. He called his mother. She said to me: David has always 
been a very spiritual boy. Right then I detected from this story that 
he knew the Lord, and that he knew what was going to happen to him. And 
he called, really in a sense of joy, saying: ``Mother, don't worry 
about this. I'm going to be well taken care of.'' Here is a guy 
calling, knowing he is about to die in the implosion of that building.

  So these stories are out there, and we have heard so many of them. I 
think

[[Page S9426]]

we all have such a seriousness in our hearts for what happened, but I 
would like to say this: People ask the question, Should we declare war? 
There is all this talk about war. On whom do you declare war?
  I think we need to stand back and look and see. Yes, we think we know 
that Osama bin Laden was involved in this. It is not clear cut.
  I remember so well, as I am sure the President pro tempore remembers, 
back in 1986 when, in a discotheque in Germany, there was a terrorist 
attack that ended up injuring many American soldiers and killing 
another. At that time President Reagan was the President of the United 
States, and we determined that Muammar Qadhafi did it. In a matter of 
hours after that took place, he dispatched, in addition to other 
planes, the first real use of our first stealth plane, the F-111, to 
Libya. And they took them out. They bombed them. We have not heard from 
Qadhafi since then. That was 15 years ago. This is not that easy. We do 
not have the target out there. But we need to act just as decisively 
when that time comes. It would be a disservice to the American people 
and to our system and to America to do that before we know.
  But lastly, and this is the most significant thing I want to visit 
with--I do not say this critically of the previous administration--I am 
saying that during the Clinton administration the priorities were 
different than they were during the Reagan administration and the Bush 
administration before him. He did not have the emphasis on defending 
America and building a strong defense.
  Now, as evidence of that, I have a couple of charts I have made for 
this purpose. If you took the fiscal year 1993 budget, and you took all 
of the money that was appropriated in that budget for Labor, Health and 
Human Services, and Education, then that would be right at this point 
shown on the chart. Eight years after that, if you took the normal CPI, 
or any inflation figure you want to use--this is the index we use--and 
added for inflation, then what he would have appropriated for Labor, 
HHS, and Education would be this red line shown on the chart. However, 
this is what he did as shown on the green line. So at the end of 8 
years he ended up successfully asking for the appropriation of $150 
billion above the inflation rate.
  If you took Defense and you used that same model, and you started 
with fiscal year 1993, and took the amount that was appropriated at 
that time, if you added for inflation, this is where it would be today 
shown on the chart with the red line. However, the green line shows us 
the actual budget. So in that 8-year period, his request for 
appropriations, I say to Senator Stevens, was $375 billion below the 
inflation rate.
  Those were his priorities, and he was elected President. I do not 
have a problem with that. But I can tell you, we were saying all along 
we were getting into a very serious problem.
  I began to end every speech in 1995 with this phrase. I said: We, in 
America, are in the most impaired and threatened position today than we 
have ever been in the history of America.
  It was not until 1998, when the Director of Central Intelligence 
happened to be present, that I said this same thing in a meeting that 
was broadcast live on C-SPAN, when I was chairing the Readiness 
Subcommittee of the Armed Services Committee. I said: Mr. Director, I 
have been saying we are in the most threatened position today that we 
have ever been in in the history of America.

  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for 5 additional minutes.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. INHOFE. I thank the Chair.
  And he said: You are absolutely right.
  So this is the Director of Central Intelligence. Now it comes in 
three forms. First of all, our conventional capabilities are one-half 
of what they were in terms of force strength today. And the President 
pro tempore knows this in terms of the number of Army divisions, 
tactical air wings, ships dropping from 600 down to 300.
  No. 2, we have had all these deployments that have taken these rare 
assets and put them in the position where they are no longer usable.
  No. 3--this is what I am getting to right now--we were on schedule to 
have deployed a limited national missile defense system by fiscal year 
1998. We would have done that except for the vetoes of President 
Clinton.
  I carry with me his veto message of the 1993 Defense authorization 
bill when, I say to Senator Stevens, he said: I will continue to veto 
any bill that has money in it for a national missile defense system 
because the threat isn't there.
  What people do not understand is, when you take down our military, 
you are taking down our intelligence at the same time because the 
intelligence budget is tied to the Defense budget. So our quality of 
intelligence has deteriorated to the extent that in 1998, on August 24, 
when I had been asking for a response to a question--how many years 
will it be when North Korea has a multiple-stage rocket capability?--
the answer came in a letter from General Shelton. It was dated August 
24, 1998. It said it will be between 5 and 10 years. A week later, on 
August 30, 1998, they deployed from North Korea a multiple-stage 
rocket. I say that not to criticize General Shelton, but the quality of 
our intelligence is not good.
  What is the ultimate weapon of a terrorist? The ultimate weapon of a 
terrorist is a missile with a nuclear warhead. I really appreciated the 
editorial in this morning's Wall Street Journal. I will read one 
paragraph out of it in just a minute. But I want to say this: We have 
an opportunity now to take advantage of the fact that the No. 1 
priority of America should be to defend ourselves against an incoming 
missile.
  Now they might argue, they might say: Only China and Russia and North 
Korea have a missile that will reach the United States of America from 
halfway around the world. I think that may be true. On the other hand, 
we do know that Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, Pakistan--all these 
countries--have weapons of mass destruction and have at least 
intermediate-range missiles. So that threat is there today.
  So I only say that we need to get this done and get it done today.
  I am going to read just the first paragraph and one of the last 
sentences of an editorial in this morning's Wall Street Journal:

       Can anyone doubt that if the terrorists behind Tuesday's 
     attacks had had access to a ballistic missile, they would 
     have used it? Why settle for toppling the World Trade Center 
     if you can destroy all of New York in an instant, without 
     having to go to the trouble of sneaking a crew over the 
     border and arranging for pilot training in Florida?
       . . . The President's plan for missile defense ought to go 
     forward with all speed.

  I would say this, and ask it in a different way: Is there any doubt 
in anyone's mind in America that if an individual is willing to fly a 
767 into the towers in New York City, he would not be willing to deploy 
a missile at the United States of America?
  When I remember that screen, Mr. President--and you saw it, too--of 
New York City, the skyline, and those two buildings imploding, if that 
had been a nuclear warhead, there would be nothing but a cinder, and it 
would not be 10,000 or 20,000 deaths; it would be millions.
  I think this is an opportunity for us to make America strong again.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The senior Senator from Alaska.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, first, I thank the President pro tempore 
for his kindness in his comments about me in this Chamber today.
  As I sat in the chair, I was thinking about the fact that 37 years 
ago, approximately, at about 5:30 in the evening, I got on a plane to 
fly to Fairbanks, AK, along with my great friend, Lowell Thomas, Jr.
  Eight minutes after we took off, the largest earthquake to hit the 
North American continent in recorded times occurred. Somewhere around 
midnight, Lowell Thomas and I had chartered a plane and rounded up some 
physicians and nurses, and we flew back into Anchorage, landing at 
Elmendorf Field near our hometown of Anchorage. And I had to walk from 
that airfield over to my home in South Addition.
  Flying in, we saw the Anchorage International Airport, and it looked 
as if it had been bombed. I walked home through fissures that were 
still moving, some of them 20 and 30 feet deep.
  That was the largest natural disaster we have had in the United 
States.

[[Page S9427]]

  We have just witnessed the largest national disaster we have ever 
had.
  All of us have had varied feelings this past week, but mine have been 
really concentrating on what we could do to help--those of us on the 
committee that the distinguished President pro tempore chairs, and I 
used to chair--along with our colleagues in the House.
  I am delighted we have reacted in a way that shows we are prepared to 
finance the recovery from these disastrous attacks. As I figure it, 
what we have appropriated, or at least earmarked for appropriations 
today--some $40 billion--is about $160 for every man, woman, and child 
in the country.
  It is just the beginning. It is just the beginning. I appreciate what 
my friend from Oklahoma just said because we have really not addressed 
the need for the changes in our national defense and national security 
apparatus. We will do that in time. I believe we may have heard for the 
last time our people ask us, as we are talking about spending money to 
restore our national defense capability, ``What is the threat?''
  In past years, I have constantly been asked what the threat is. I 
have tried to articulate that we didn't have one single threat coming 
at us from a monolithic empire, the Soviet Union, but that we had 
asymmetrical threats that were hard to conceive. We witnessed one of 
those as our massive new aircraft were turned into bombs by those who 
are terrorists. And, obviously, as the distinguished President pro 
tempore said, we witnessed probably the most destructive singular 
command and control operation by a terrorist organization the world has 
ever seen.
  I don't think it is over, Mr. President. That is why today I am proud 
I have been able to work with the President pro tempore and our 
colleagues in the House, Congressmen Young and Obey, on this 
supplemental appropriations bill so that it starts the process of 
recovery and the process of being prepared--or trying to be prepared--
for future attacks against this country. But more than that, the 
resolution we have now adopted gives the President all the necessary 
and appropriate authority to use force against the persons or 
organizations that he determines planned, authorized, committed, or 
aided in the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11.
  Some people say that is a broad change in authorization to the 
Commander in Chief of this country. It is not. It is a very limited 
concept of giving him the authority to pursue those who have brought 
this terrible destruction to our country and to pursue those who have 
harbored them or assisted them and conspired with them in any way. I am 
delighted that the resolution says that ``he determines,'' that the 
Commander in Chief is in control, in charge, to find a way to react 
against these people who have brought this destruction to our shores.
  Mr. President, I commend you and those whom I am honored to work with 
on Appropriations for having the courage to proceed. I have to say, we 
were talking about $20 billion. The President met with the 
Representatives of New York and New Jersey and Virginia and decided 
that wasn't enough. He sent word to us that he wanted $40 billion. 
That, in the past, might have made all of us stumble a little bit. But 
I am delighted to see that all of us unanimously have said, yes, if he 
says he needs that much money, he should know he has that much money. 
We are going to review his plans and the requests of individual 
agencies, but we have committed $40 billion.
  Mr. President, I have to say that nations have defining moments. We 
had at least two in the 20th century--at the time when we entered World 
War I and Pearl Harbor. This is really the first true defining moment 
of this country in this millennium, and I am proud of the Congress.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The junior Senator from Alaska is 
recognized.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I join my colleague at this momentous 
time. I again recognize the President pro tempore and my senior Senator 
for the role they have played in bringing together the Congress and the 
appropriate authorization of funding to meet this crisis in our Nation.
  Mr. President, on Tuesday, I think we all learned the reality that 
the decade of peace we have known as the post-Cold-War era probably has 
officially ended. Things will not be the same. During the Cold War, the 
map of the world could perhaps be divided into two; you were either a 
friend or a foe.
  In the 10 years after the Cold War, the map became much more 
difficult to read. As we look back to Tuesday, the smoke rising from 
the devastation, the map is again becoming clear. We are learning, with 
horrifying swiftness, who our enemies in this new era will be.
  Now we are faced with a task of, once again, dividing the world into 
two and asking the question: Are you friend or foe?
  As we look at the decision that was made a short time ago by this 
body to authorize the use of force against those responsible for the 
recent attacks against the United States, we have to consider the 
consequences. We can only guess what they might be. Some say the only 
way to get to bin Laden--if indeed he is the responsible individual--is 
with ground troops. When people are speaking of having the stomach to 
do what is needed to be done, they are thinking about having the 
stomach to face the reality that innocent people will be killed in that 
process, that Americans will die. It could be bigger than just a simple 
operation in Afghanistan to get to bin Laden. To get any troops to 
Afghanistan, you have to go through Pakistan or down from the north. 
Would they let us? We don't know. Would we have to initiate a ground 
war from Pakistan first? We don't know. Will other Islamic nations just 
stand by? We don't know.
  I think you can see where I am going. We are flirting with a world 
war between Islam and the West and the unknown consequences. We can 
only guess what bin Laden's program is. Is this exactly what he wants? 
Is that why he did this, if indeed he did? Well, we can read his 
speeches and statements. It seems to be all right there. It seems that 
he really believes Islam will beat the West. He figures if he can 
polarize the world into Islam and the West, he has a billion soldiers.
  If the West takes military action against an Islamic nation, would in 
fact bin Laden welcome that? What could be better from bin Laden's 
point of view? This would be a war that could last for years and 
millions would die--not just theirs but ours. Who has the stomach for 
that? We know bin Laden does. But is this really what we want? 
Discretion is often the better part of valor, even if our stomachs 
hunger for more.
  American leadership has not been easy. This past century saw this 
great country become the world's only superpower through the grit and 
sheer determination of the American people--generations of American 
people who were called into service to lead the world back from the 
brink of chaos, to save civilization itself, in wars across many 
continents, against many terrible foes. Each time, we triumphed because 
of our spirit and resourcefulness but also because our cause is just 
and true.
  We have vanquished darkness before. Now we are called upon once again 
to fight the enemies of civilization and the enemies of peace, the 
shadowy armies of evil whose cause is destruction, terror and despair.
  We will not fail, nor will they succeed.
  Today's resolution approving the use of force is the call to arms 
against our foe in this new, uncertain era. Our enemies have unleashed 
upon themselves the dogs of war.
  Mr. President, in peace, American leadership has not always been 
appreciated by our fellow nations. We have been dismissed as naive, 
frivolous, and wasteful. We have been ridiculed for our championship of 
human rights, tolerance, and fairness. We are criticized for leading in 
peace, and we will face much greater challenges leading in a war. As we 
hunt down the murderers, the terrorists, as we go to the heart of 
darkness to rip out the roots of terror, and the systems that breed 
terror, we face an elusive and deadly enemy.
  Our friends, our allies, and those not as committed to this fight as 
are we will challenge our leadership. We heed them at our peril. 
Leadership can be a lonely business.
  My own State of Alaska, far from the battlegrounds of this fight, far 
from New York City, far from Washington, DC, is going to play an 
important role. Elmendorf, Eielson, Ft. Wainwright,

[[Page S9428]]

Ft. Richardson and surrounding communities will no doubt play a key 
role in winning this war. Located just 8 hours from New York, the 
Mideast, and the Asian subcontinent, Alaska has been a strategic 
keystone in our nation's defense for the last 50 years. Alaska will now 
be an offensive keystone in the battles to come. I can assure you, Mr. 
President, Alaskans and our adopted sons and daughters in uniform will 
be up to the task.
  I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, earlier today the Senate voted unanimously 
to authorize the President to use all necessary and appropriate force 
to respond to the attacks launched by terrorists on Tuesday. Those 
responsible for these heinous attacks must never be allowed to do so 
again. For that reason we have also taken note of the President's 
authority to deter and prevent acts of terrorism against the United 
States, consistent with provisions of the War Powers Act. There may be 
times when the President must act swiftly to preempt an imminent act of 
violence. In such cases, he may not be able to consult closely with 
Congress beforehand. However, as a general rule, in the exercise of the 
authority that we have just approved, it is my expectation that the 
President and his advisers will consult with the Congress before taking 
action is contemplated by the War Powers Act.
  Equally important, the U.S. Senate also voted unanimously to 
appropriate, on an emergency basis, some $40 billion in additional 
resources to enable New York City and the Washington, DC, area to cope 
effectively with the aftermath of the devastation wrought by those 
attacks. In addition, we have provided resources to enable the United 
States to counter domestic and international terrorism, enhance 
transportation security, and to undertake additional programs to 
enhance our national security.
  We have taken up and passed these two measures on an expedited basis 
because our national interests dictate that we do. The House will do so 
later today as well. The Congress has an obligation to reassure the 
American people that their government is working to do everything in 
its power to protect them from such heinous acts in the future, as well 
as to provide funding so that the cleanup and rebuilding efforts can 
proceed as quickly as possible.
  I believe that we are all in agreement that those individuals who 
were responsible for the premeditated murder of so many of our citizens 
must be found and stopped from ever conducting such actions again. 
Anyone who has aided, abetted or continues to harbor these terrorists 
is a terrorist as well. So too are those who knowingly facilitate the 
financial transactions that keep their organizations in business. While 
we do not know with 100 percent certainty that Saudi-born militant 
Osama bin Laden is the mastermind of this latest tragedy, we know full 
well based on past experience that he is fully capable of doing so. The 
President has directed that all of our intelligence resources be 
brought to bear to develop credible evidence as to who was in fact 
responsible. I am confident that we will have much better information 
in that regard in the very near future. And, when that moment arrives I 
believe we will act appropriately, consistent with our principles and 
values.
  Sadly Osama bin Laden is not the only individual who harbors 
irrational hatred against the United States. Many others around the 
globe do as well. I would call to the attention of my colleagues a very 
important article that appeared in today's Washington Post entitled 
``Zinni Urges Economic and Diplomatic Moves.'' In that article, ret. 
General Anthony C. Zinni cautions against an approach that is single 
pronged in attempting to eradicate terrorist organizations. An approach 
of simply bombing them back to the stone age may have appeal to some, 
but will, according to General Zinni, only perpetuate the problem by 
inflaming Anti-American sentiment in the Muslim world. Zinni urges the 
Bush administration to accompany any military action taken against 
Afghanistan or other states that harbor terrorists, with economic and 
diplomatic measures as well. Other governments in the region, Pakistan, 
Iran, Yemen, and Saudi Arabia, must be prepared to assist the United 
States in this multifaceted strategy.
  There is another element to the problem of countering international 
terrorism over the longer term, namely the Middle East conflict. That 
conflict has fueled the hatred, sense of injustice, and hopelessness 
that has provided and will continue to provide the foot soldiers of the 
Osama bin Laden's of this world. The Bush administration must make 
resolution of the Middle East conflict a higher priority than it has to 
date. Only with United States leadership will we galvanize our allies 
in Europe, and moderate Arab States to bring sufficient pressure to 
bear on the Palestinians to stop the violence and come back to the 
bargaining table so that a formula can be found that will permit 
Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace. Only with peace will we be 
able to prevent the emergence of another generation of terrorists 
imbued with a burning hatred of the United States.


                      REIMBURSEMENT FOR NEW JERSEY

  Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I want to thank the President and the 
leadership of the Congress for their support and immediate response to 
the tragic events that have transpired over the past few days. While 
the attack on the World Trade Center physically occurred in New York 
City, the emotional physical, and financial tolls will be felt 
throughout the Metropolitan area but especially in northern New Jersey.
  I have heard estimates that over 50 percent of the people employed at 
the World Trade Centers were New Jersey residents.
  The Port Authority which is headquatered at the centers is a joint, 
bi-State New York/New Jersey agency that coordinates infrastructure 
needs for the airspace, mass transit, and commuter needs of our area. 
When the port rebuilds, it will rebuild as a joint entity.
  Fire, medical and emergency personnel and equipment, as well trades 
workers and their heavy equipment, hospitals and triage centers as well 
as transportation equipment shuttling the wounded and rescuers all have 
emanated from New Jersey communities.
  Let me share with my colleagues a few examples.
  Six hundred wounded were transferred to New Jersey hospitals for 
treatment. Jersey City Medical treated 150 people; 21 were admitted 
overnight; St. Francis Hospital/St. Mary's in Jersey City treated 50 
people and UMDNJ in Newark treated and released 17 victims.
  The New Jersey State Police mobilized 40 boats to ferry victims 
across the Hudson River and State Troopers have been sent to sort 
through rubble. New York Waterway has put all 24 of its ferries into 
service, transferring free of charge an estimated 200,000 people.
  The New Jersey National Guard established a field hospital at Liberty 
State Park that evaluated 2,600 people. At the Meadowlands, a makeshift 
hospital with hundreds of ambulances and 50 surgeons was created.
  The Jersey City Fire Department sent 4 fire trucks and Union County 
has sent 24 fire trucks and over 100 firefighters. The city of Trenton 
has sent 10 ambulance/paramedic teams. Middlesex County send 42 
ambulances, 20 fire trucks and 70 police officers. Burlington County in 
southern New Jersey sent 20 ambulances.
  The Elizabeth Urban Rescue Team which specializes in confined spaces 
rescue has been there from day one on 24-hour rotating duty because the 
heroic New York City teams were wiped out in the first minutes. The 
cost of this effort has already reached $150,000. Regular fire 
personnel from Elizabeth have been dispatched to Staten Island to free 
Staten Island Fire personnel to go to the World Trade Center site to 
help.

  The Sheriff's and Prosecutor's Office in Hudson County which is 
directly across from New York City has conservatively incurred $50,000 
in expenses. In Jersey City there are 60 officers working full time and 
countless numbers of fire fighters and equipment manning a major supply 
effort to New York via the Jersey City waterfront. The North Hudson 
Regional Fire Co. has spent over $150,000 on overtime, personnel, and 
equipment.
  Mr. BYRD. There are many more examples of the selflessness and 
sacrifice taking place, not just from New Jersey but across the 
country.

[[Page S9429]]

  I appreciate that the physical attack did not occur on New Jersey 
soil and that is why New Jersey is not referenced in this emergency 
appropriation as a location where the terrorist attack occurred as New 
York, Virginia, and Pennsylvania are listed.
  However, it is important to acknowledge and fully appreciate the 
human and financial expenses being incurred by the neighboring areas 
and that these areas be able to apply directly to the Federal 
Government for reimbursement.
  Mr. President, it is my understanding that the specific State 
listings in the supplemental specifically refer only to the physical 
locations where the attacks occurred and do not establish an exclusive 
list of areas eligible for financial assistance from this Federal aid 
package.
  Mr. CORZINE. I want to first associate myself with the remarks of my 
colleague from New Jersey and I would further appreciate the 
opportunity to clarify one additional point with my colleague from West 
Virginia. I understand that New Jersey was not listed because an attack 
did not physically occur there; however as my colleague, Senator 
Torricelli has stated, our State and communities have incurred 
significant human and financial costs in responding to this disaster.
  I would appreciate your acknowledgement that the State of New Jersey 
or its local communities who have incurred expenses in the relief 
effort, will be able to apply directly to the Federal Government for 
the assistance provided under this aid package.
  Mr. BYRD. It is my understanding that New Jersey is eligible to apply 
for any authorized disaster relief program in the same manner and under 
the same conditions as New York, Connecticut, Virginia, and other 
affected States.
  Mr. TORRICELLI. I appreciate Senator Byrd's statement and the 
opportunity to clarify this issue.
  Mr. CORZINE. I similarly appreciate Senator Byrd's statement 
clarifying this concern, as well as all his work.

                          ____________________