[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 126 (Tuesday, September 25, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Page S9800]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       THE RESPONSE TO TERRORISM

  Mr. WELLSTONE. Madam President, I would like to, in 10 minutes, cover 
three topics. First, I want to talk a little bit about September 11 and 
now. And I want to just say, in an ironic way--not bitterly ironic--the 
days I have had in Minnesota have maybe been some of the better days I 
have had because--and I am not putting words in anybody's mouth; and I 
do not do damage to the truth; I have too much respect for people, even 
when we disagree--most of the people with whom I have spoken back in 
Minnesota have said a couple things.
  First of all, they have said we need to do a better job of defending 
ourselves. Who can disagree with that? Second of all, they have said--
they have not been jingoistic; and they have not said we need to bomb 
now--we need to do this the right away. Many of them have expressed 
concern that we not let terrorists define our morality and that we 
should take every step possible to minimize the loss of life of 
innocent civilians in Afghanistan, or any other country, starting with 
innocent children. I am proud of people in Minnesota for saying that.
  People in Minnesota have also said they understand this is not going 
to be one military action. They know this is going to be a long 
struggle. They know we are going to need a lot of cooperation from a 
lot of other countries. They think it should be international.
  Above and beyond the way people come together to support each other, 
I am so impressed with the way I think people are really thinking 
deeply about this and want us to stay consistent with our own values as 
a nation. I just want to say that. That is my view.
  I find myself kind of on two ends of the continuum. I had a 
discussion with some friends who were telling me that I should speak 
out more about the underlying conditions and causes of this violence, 
this hatred and violence. I told them there is a divide between us 
because I cannot do that because there are no conditions or 
explanations or justification for the mass murder of innocent people. I 
do not even like to talk about war because I do not think warriors 
murder people. Warriors are not involved in the slaughter of innocent 
people; criminals are.
  A second point, which now gets closer to the defense authorization 
bill: On economic recovery, we have to really focus on economic 
security. I believe, and will always believe, we should have included 
assistance for employees in the package we passed last Friday.
  I say to the Senator from Massachusetts, when I went home to 
Minnesota, I heard about that. People were not bitterly angry, but they 
said: How could that happen to us and our families who are out of work? 
That has to be a priority, along with safety, to get help to employees.
  I would argue, maybe it is a sequence; you can't do everything at one 
time. It is easier to give a speech than to actually do it. But above 
and beyond help for employees and employment benefits and making sure 
people can afford health care needs and making sure there is job 
training and dislocated worker funding and, I would argue, having to 
deal with some child care expenses, I want to say one other thing. The 
truth is, I think we have to also think about an economic recovery 
package. And that should include, I say to my colleague from New 
Jersey, a workforce recovery package because not only are we going to 
need to extend the lifeline to people by way of helping them--when 
people are flat on their back, Government helps them; that is what 
Government is for--it is also true that that is part of an economic 
stimulus because you do not want to have a lot of people--people who 
work in hotels and restaurants and small businesspeople, all of whom 
now are really hurting--you do not want to have a whole lot of people 
shut down and not able to consume at all.
  So we need to think about this package in broader terms as well. 
Finally, on the defense authorization bill, if I had my own way, there 
are at least a couple of provisions I wish were in it. One of them 
Senator Levin worked so hard on, and other colleagues support it. It 
made it clear that if President Bush requested funding for missile 
defense tests that violated the ABM Treaty, he would need congressional 
approval to spend those funds. I wanted that language in this bill in 
the worst way. If I had time, I would argue over and over again, but I 
don't want to impose my own agenda on what our country is facing right 
now. But we need to reorder some of our priorities, and clearly more of 
the money--some of the money in this bill that I don't think we need 
for certain items I would put into homeland defense and helping 
families with economic security.
  I think there are a lot of threats our country is faced with that 
come way before a rogue nation sending missiles our way by suitcase, by 
boat, by plane, chemical, biological--there are lots of other threats 
with a much higher priority. I wish we hadn't dropped that language. I 
understand that the majority leader and Senator Levin and others made a 
commitment that we will come back to that language and that provision.
  I believe missile defense doesn't make the world more secure; it 
makes it less secure for our children, grandchildren, and for all God's 
children. I could argue that for the next 5 hours. I don't have 5 
hours.
  I congratulate Senators on both sides of the aisle for the way in 
which we have worked together. We probably need each other as never 
before. There will be some sharp disagreement on policy issues--some of 
the issues that deal with education and health care, prescription 
drugs, you name it. Frankly, I am sure there will be questions many of 
us have as we go forward. But for right now, I want to just dissent on 
missile defense and say to my colleagues we need to get back to that 
debate. I think we are going to have to see more of an emphasis on 
priorities, including some of the money from some weapons systems that 
are not necessary to what we are talking about now by way of our own 
national security and homeland defense.
  I say to Senator Levin and others, I appreciate the additional 
support for the armed services, especially when they are about to go 
into harm's way. I want to say to every Senator that we did not do well 
for too many people in this package for the industry, which was 
necessary. I don't think the companies and CEOs were crying wolf, but 
we didn't help the employees, and the economic security of these 
working families has to be the next step, along with safety. That has 
to happen soon.
  Finally, I believe we are going to have to have a broader workforce 
recovery bill as part of economic recovery legislation, as a part of 
how we deal with this recession in hard economic times, because there 
are a lot of other people who are really hurting right now. The 
Government should be there to help people when they are flat on their 
backs through no fault of their own. That is going to be a big part of 
our work as well.




                          ____________________