[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 166 (Tuesday, December 4, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12348-S12350]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PARTISAN ATTACKS ON THE MAJORITY LEADER
Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I rise today to express great concern
about recent events and comments that have been made in this Chamber
and in the House of Representatives that I believe are not in keeping
with the sense of cooperation and bipartisanship that we have seen
since September 11.
I remember, after the horrible attacks that we all grieved about and
have focused on, on that day of September 11 we joined together on the
Capitol steps, and one of our colleagues spontaneously started singing
``God Bless America,'' and we all joined in.
[[Page S12349]]
And there was a sense of purpose and dedication and commitment as
Americans. We all said that while we may have had differences--that is
what it is all about in a democracy--we were going to put aside the
partisan bickering and the personal assaults and do as our President
asked, which was to come together and focus on the needs of the country
and to set a new tone.
And then a few weeks later we saw our own majority leader and his
staff under another kind of attack, that of anthrax. It came to be an
attack on those of us in the Hart Building. And we have now seen other
letters. But we have seen our majority leader and his staff operating
with incredible dedication, with poise, with tremendous leadership. And
the hard work of the staff is continuing.
In fact, all of our staffs are continuing under very difficult
circumstances. My own staff operates out of a room in the loading dock
at Russell. We see people who are in various situations around this
complex of the Capitol, but they continue to serve.
We have done a lot of things. We immediately responded to the attacks
with a commitment of resources for New York and for the Pentagon.
Yesterday I had the opportunity to visit the Pentagon and see the
incredible changes that have taken place since September 11. They are
rebuilding the Pentagon with speed that is amazing. Everyone involved
in that should be commended for the work they are doing to rebuild this
important part of our country and our national security and leadership.
We have responded to that. We have passed airport security bills.
Yes, there were differences, but they were worked out to move us
forward in terms of airport and airline security.
We have passed economic legislation to support the airlines and
passed a sweeping antiterrorism bill that has included the ability to
track the money through money laundering provisions--I was pleased to
be a part of it in the Banking Committee--as well as upgrading the
tools available to law enforcement officials and create the kinds of
opportunities to reach out and prevent terrorism as well as to respond
to it.
We have continued to move the appropriations bills through this
process. We are coming to the conclusion of that in the next couple of
weeks. But we are still debating economic recovery, how best to do
that. What should be our priorities? Should we, in fact, invest in
additional homeland security, beefing up our public health
infrastructure, as I hope we will do?
But we are now seeing a constant drone of attacks and comments being
made about our Senate majority leader, and I just have to rise today to
express deep disappointment and concern about that. We have seen
personal comments being made.
Last week the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee made
statements about our leader saying there was nothing inside the
leader's head on which to focus. There have been implications, with all
kinds of derogatory statements that have been made about his leadership
and calls for him to step aside because he may be putting forward a
different vision or set of values and priorities than someone on the
other side--statement after statement, attacks about someone's
sincerity and their patriotism and their leadership that are just not
helpful and not necessary and, by the way, absolutely absurd.
I found it offensive, when we were listening to the debate on the
energy bill on Friday; over and over again it was laced with personal
comments, comments that are unbecoming to this body or the body on the
other side of the building from which I came as a House Member.
Mrs. BOXER. Will the Senator yield for a question?
Ms. STABENOW. I am happy to yield to my good friend from California.
Mrs. BOXER. First, I want to say how proud I am you took to the floor
to bring this to light. I think the American people are ill-served, as
you do, when there are personal attacks on any of our leaders.
Do we have differences? Yes. Should we express those differences?
Absolutely. Because, frankly, I have a lot of people who say: What
really is the difference between Democrats and Republicans? So the fact
that we do not agree on an economic stimulus package is to be expected.
The fact that the Democrats are fighting for people who lost their
jobs, yes, that is to be expected. The fact that we do not think it is
right to give big rebate checks to the largest and most wealthy
corporations in America and call it a stimulus, the fact that we do not
agree with it is to be expected. The fact that the other side would
support that is to be expected. So debating that is fine.
But my colleague has pointed out the viciousness of the attack
against the leader of this Senate, Tom Daschle, who happens to be one
of the kindest, most compassionate people in politics today, is
something that cannot go by without a statement.
So I say to my friend, by way of a question, isn't it true that the
people of this country expect us to have differences, expect us, on
domestic policy, to bring those differences to light, where we are so
united on the terrorism front--and we support our President and our
Secretary of State; and we are moving together in this fight; there are
no differences really, not even around the edges on that. But isn't it
a fact that it is fine for us to have these differences, but that these
differences should be debated with respect, with fairness, and with
dignity?
Ms. STABENOW. I couldn't agree more with my friend from California. I
know the families I represent in Michigan are saying to me: We know
there are differences in approaches.
That is a reason why they sent me here. And I am of a different
party, a different philosophy, on economic questions possibly, or other
domestic issues, than those on the other side of the aisle.
They expect us to operate with civility, with respect. I believe and
in fact have been telling people in Michigan that there is a new day,
that since September 11 we have come together. Yes, we have differences
in priorities. We are Americans. Under the Constitution, we have a
right, an obligation, to give our point of view. There will be
differences.
The personal attacks, the vicious partisan attacks that we have heard
recently are just the same old thing we have seen for too long around
here. People don't want to see that happening.
I will not question someone's patriotism. I will not say because they
differ with my thoughts that there is nothing between their ears or
that they are somehow a child who wants a recess and that they are a
third grader--whatever the comments were last week. Those kinds of
things, frankly, demean all of us. That is my concern.
We have a lot of work to do in this next couple of weeks. People
expect us to be focused on their needs and on the needs of the country,
the safety of the country, the economy. It is legitimate for us to
debate, and we have legitimate differences on how to move the economy
forward. I have spoken before in this Chamber about whether it is
supply side economics or demand side economics, what is the best mix?
That is legitimate. People expect us to do that. We would not be
fulfilling our own responsibilities as individual Senators not to come
forward with our own ideas. But when it goes on and we hear our leader
being attacked for abrogating his responsibility or that every day
someone is in pain should be laid at the foot of Tom Daschle, that is
uncalled for.
I was particularly concerned that there are actually ads being run
now attacking our leader in the Senate because of a meeting he had in
Mexico with the President of Mexico. Our President has met with Vicente
Fox. President Fox has been here. We have welcomed him to the Capitol.
They are our neighbors to the south. We have important work to do with
them. Certainly part of what happens economically relates to trade and
the relationship of our two countries. Yet we have those who have
actually paid for partisan ads back in our leader's home State to imply
that while a weekend in Mexico might be a nice break from the attacks
at hand, in fact, this trip was the wrong thing to do.
I hope we can decide we are going to dedicate the time between now
and the end of this session to the serious, vital business at hand and
the priorities about which we can disagree. We can disagree about
whether or not to drill in Alaska's national wildlife refuge. We
[[Page S12350]]
can disagree about appropriations priorities.
As someone who has tremendous respect for the leader of this body, I
will continue to object when there are personal comments made either
about our leader or about the Republican leader or about others on the
Senate floor. We have been through too much together since September 11
to turn back to the personal kinds of derogatory statements that were a
part of the past. We can do better than that. The American people
deserve better. The American people expect us to do better than that.
I call on the President of the United States and the Republican
leadership to join us in a vigorous, sincere debate on the priorities
for the country, the best way to achieve economic recovery and
security, and to do that with the highest and best that is in us. We
have a great body and people of wonderful good will on both sides of
the aisle in both Houses, as well as the White House. We can do what
the people expect us to do. We can do it right. I hope in fact we will
get about the business of doing it.
I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________