[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 123 (Wednesday, September 25, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9221-S9223]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 THE VICE PRESIDENT'S SPEECH IN KANSAS

  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I rise to discuss an issue that has 
been in the press much today, and I think there is a great deal of 
misinterpretation taking place about the President's and the Vice 
President's comments regarding homeland security and the war on 
terrorism.
  I make specific reference to a speech that Vice President Cheney gave 
in Kansas on Monday. I was at that event. I heard the speech. I was 
there supporting the candidate for whom the speech was given. Adam 
Taff, a fine candidate, is running for Congress in the Third 
Congressional District in Kansas. I want to make it very clear--and I 
want to enter into the Record a copy of the Vice President's words 
verbatim.
  I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the Vice President's speech 
which he gave on Monday in Kansas be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

Remarks by the Vice President at Lunch for Congressional Candidate Adam 
             Taff, September 23, 2002, Kansas City, Kansas

       The Vice President: Well, thank you very much, Adam. And 
     thanks for the kind words, and for the opportunity to be here 
     with all of you today. It's good to be back in Kansas, and 
     standing next to the next Congressman from the Third 
     District. (Applause.)
       I'm also delighted today to get the opportunity to spend a 
     little bit of time with Sam Brownback and Pat Roberts, two 
     great United States senators. (Applause.) I know--of course; 
     Pat was up here talking before we came on, and somebody came 
     in and said, you know, you've got to get right down there, 
     Senator Roberts is running out of things to say. (Laughter.) 
     I knew better. (Laughter.)
       It's always fun to get a chance to travel with my bride, 
     and spend a little bit of time out on the campaign trail, 
     doing important work. I often explain to people that we have 
     a Republican marriage, that if it hadn't been for that great 
     Republican victory in 1952, when Dwight Eisenhower was 
     elected President, that our lives would have come out very 
     differently. In 1952, when Eisenhower got elected, I was 
     living in Lincoln, Nebraska, with my parents, just a 
     youngster of some, I guess 11 years old at the time. But he 
     came in and reorganized the Agriculture Department--my dad 
     worked for the U.S. Soil Conservation Service. Dad got 
     transferred to Casper, Wyoming. We moved to Wyoming. I met 
     Lynn--we went to high school together, grew up together, got 
     married, celebrated our 38th wedding anniversary last August. 
     (Applause.)
       But I explained to a group of people the other night that 
     if it hadn't been for that Republican election victory, that 
     Lynne would have married somebody else. She said, right, and 
     now he'd be Vice President of the United States. (Laughter.) 
     There's no doubt in my mind that what that's true. 
     (Laughter.)
       Of course, my job now as Vice President--my only job, 
     actually, as Vice President--is to preside over the Senate. 
     And when they wrote the Constitution they decided they needed 
     a Vice President, somebody to back-up the President in case 
     something happened to him. But at the end of the 
     constitutional convention they realized they hadn't really 
     given the Vice President anything to do. So, finally, they 
     settled on making him the President of the Senate, so that he 
     could preside over the Senate and gave him floor privileges, 
     as well.
       And John Adams, of course, was our first Vice President, 
     the first President of the Senate. And he presided and he 
     also used those floor privileges--got up and could actually 
     participate in the debate and speak to the issues of the 
     moment and argue for and against the majors on the floor. And 
     then he did that a couple of times and they withdrew his 
     floor privileges. (Laughter.) And they've never been 
     restored. (Laughter.)
       But one of the things I do get to do is to swear in the new 
     Senate every January. And I'm enthusiastically looking 
     forward to next January, when I can swear-in Pat Roberts and 
     the new members of a Republican-led Senate in January.) 
     (Applause.)
       We've got a lot of races here in Kansas this year. Of 
     course, a new Secretary of State, Ron Thornburgh, I think 
     will do very well. Congressman Jerry Moran, who has proved to 
     be a great member of the House of Representatives. And, of 
     course, the next Governor of Kansas, Tim Shallenburger. 
     (Applause.)
       And I bring greetings to the people of Kansas from 
     President George W. Bush.
       We're all here today because there's an important race for 
     Congress in the third district--and we've got a tremendous 
     candidate. This seat belonged for many years to a great lady 
     and a close friend of Lynne's and mine. We all admire Jan 
     Meyers for her integrity and devotion to duty. (Applause.)
       I served for ten years in the House, most of that time with 
     Jan and explained to people, of course--it was a special kind 
     of arrangement to be the congressman from Wyoming, since 
     there was only one congressman from Wyoming. It was a small 
     delegation. (Laughter.) But it was quality. (Laughter.)
       But our nominee that we have for the third district today 
     follows very much in the tradition that January established 
     for this district. Adam is a first-class candidate; a 
     distinguished Naval aviator who has carried out missions in 
     many parts of the globe; a citizen actively involved in the 
     life of his community; and a person who understands the need 
     for limited and effective government.
       He'll be an effective voice for Kansas, and a fine addition 
     to your Republican delegation--already one of the most 
     talented we have in Washington. The election is just six 
     weeks away, and there's a lot of work ahead. And I am here 
     today to make absolutely certain that Adam Taff is the next 
     congressman from the third district in Kansas. (Applause.)
       The President and I look forward to welcoming Adam to the 
     nation's capital come January. He'll be vital in helping us 
     meet the key priorities for the nation--in terms of winning 
     the war on terror, strengthening the economy, and defending 
     our homeland.
       For the economy, this administration's goal is for faster 
     growth and for more jobs for American workers. Even in the 
     face of the major challenges--from the terrorist attacks to 
     recession--the economic picture is nonetheless promising. 
     Worker productivity has grown. Interest rates remain low. 
     Inflation is under control. Personal income has continued to 
     rise. And the economy continues to expand.
       All of these factors set us on a path for long-term growth 
     and prosperity. And if we

[[Page S9222]]

     continue the positive direction President Bush has set for 
     the nation--with solid, pro-growth, pro-job reforms--
     Americans will enjoy even greater prosperity in the years 
     ahead. But we will not be satisfied until every sector of the 
     economy--from agriculture to high-tech--is vigorous and 
     growing. And we will not rest until every person in America 
     who wants to work can find a job.
       We'll see more growth and new jobs when Congress passes the 
     President's energy policy--a policy that encourages efficient 
     technology and conservation, and increases production here at 
     home. Especially in times like these, we must pass a 
     comprehensive energy bill, and reduce America's dependence on 
     foreign oil.
       We'll see more growth and new jobs when people around the 
     world have more opportunities to buy things that are made and 
     grown here in America. Under President Bush's leadership, 
     Congress has passed trade promotion authority, signed into 
     law just recently. The President will use that tool to open 
     up new markets to our country's farmers, ranchers, and 
     manufacturers.
       Congress has also followed the President's lead in passing 
     a new law to protect investors, to bring more accountability 
     to corporations, and to ensure tougher oversight in the 
     accounting profession. Our country has the most productive, 
     creative, and promising economic system the world has ever 
     known. The President's reforms will bring out the best in 
     that system, and make it even stronger and better than ever 
     before.
       Americans can also count on President George W. Bush to 
     continue working to reduce the federal tax burden. Last year 
     we passed the biggest taxpayer relief package in a 
     generation. As enacted, however, those reductions stay in 
     place only for a time, and then expire in the year 2011. Even 
     the death tax is scheduled to rise from the dead that year. 
     For the health of the economy--and for the well-being of 
     every taxpayer--we need to make the Bush tax cut permanent, 
     and enforce spending discipline in Washington, D.C. 
     (Applause.)
       Some in that city need reminding that every dime the 
     government spends was earned and sent in by someone else. And 
     we have a responsibility to help keep spending under control. 
     In a time of war and recession-induced deficits, we need to 
     show extra care in our spending priorities, and the 
     discipline that fits the times. The President's budget 
     commits most new spending to national security and to 
     homeland defense, and seeks to hold the rest of government to 
     an increase of two percent. Were spending to grow without 
     restraint, billions more would be diverted from families and 
     entrepreneurs, limiting the economy's ability to expand in 
     the future. President Bush is going to insist on spending 
     discipline in Washington--and, if necessary, he'll use the 
     veto power to protect the American taxpayer.
       Another responsibility the President takes very seriously 
     is the job of placing qualified, common-sense judges on the 
     federal bench. (Applause.) The Senator has a responsibility 
     of its own--to give every nominee a prompt hearing and a 
     vote. The Democratic leadership has refused to do so. Dozens 
     of judgeships sit empty, while many of the President's 
     judicial nominees have waited for more than a year for the 
     Senate Judiciary Committee to even give them the courtesy of 
     a hearing.
       In nominating judges President Bush chooses men and women 
     of experience, judicial temperament, and good judgment--
     people who respect the Constitution, and understand the 
     limits of judicial power. The Senate should move to confirm 
     the President's nominees for the federal courts, and they 
     should do so without wasting another day. (Applause.)
       As we look to the agenda for the fall, we are keeping first 
     things first. The most important responsibility we have, as 
     Adam mentioned, is to protect the American people against 
     future attack and to win the war that started on September 
     11, 2001.
       This has been a period of testing for the United States. 
     The American people have met that test. We are united. We 
     understand the threats that have formed against us. We are 
     determined to protect our country. And we will prevail.
       In the past year, we have captured many terrorists, and 
     frozen the assets of many terror groups and front 
     organizations. Our people in law enforcement and 
     intelligence, working under the most urgent and sometimes 
     dangerous circumstances, have disrupted terrorist plots here 
     and abroad. At home, we are reorganizing the federal 
     government to strengthen our ability to guard against further 
     attacks. And of course in Afghanistan--where so many 
     terrorists were housed, armed, and trained--we have shut down 
     the camps, and liberated an entire nation from the Taliban 
     regime. In the case of Osama bin Laden--as the President said 
     recently--``If he's alive, we'll get him. If he's not alive--
     we already got him.'' (Laughter.) That's a Texas phrase, I 
     guess. (Laughter.)
       Every bit or progress we've achieved, all of us appreciate 
     that we are still closer to the beginning of this conflict 
     than to its end. The President and I begin each day with a 
     briefing on the threats facing the country. There is little 
     doubt that our enemies are determined to do further 
     significant harm to the American people. Nine-eleven and its 
     aftermath have given us a clear picture of the true ambitions 
     of the global terror network, as well as the growing danger 
     of weapons of mass destruction.
       In that changing environment, as always, we must take the 
     facts as they are, not as we wish they were, and we must 
     think anew about the requirements of national security. In 
     the days of the Cold War, we were able to manage the threat 
     with strategies of deterrence and containment. But it is a 
     lot tougher to deter enemies who have no country to defend. 
     And containment is not possible when dictators obtain weapons 
     of mass destruction and are prepared to share them with 
     terrorists.
       We have already found confirmation that the al Qaeda 
     terrorists are seriously interested in nuclear, chemical and 
     biological weapons. At the same time, there is a danger of 
     terror groups joining together with regimes that have or are 
     seeking to building weapons of mass destruction. In the case 
     of Saddam Hussein, we have a dictator who is clearly pursuing 
     these capabilities--and has used them previously, both in his 
     own against Iran and against his own people.
       The government of the United Stats must not look the other 
     way as threats gather against the American people. We are 
     consulting with Congress and with our friends and allies 
     around the world about the course of action. In his speech to 
     the United Nations General Assembly, President Bush made 
     clear to the international community the kind of challenges 
     we must face together.
       The President reminded the U.N. that Saddam Hussein made a 
     series of commitments after his defeat in Desert Storm--and 
     that he has broken every one of them. Saddam agreed to cease 
     at once his repression of his people--yet the systematic 
     violation of human rights continues in Iraq to this day. He 
     agreed to return all prisoners from Kuwait and other lands--
     yet more than 600 are still unaccounted for, and one American 
     pilot--a Kansan named Scott Speicher--is among them.
       Saddam Hussein agreed to renounce all involvement with 
     terrorism, and to permit no terrorist organizations to 
     operate in Iraq. Yet Iraq continues to shelter and support 
     terrorist organizations. Dissidents abroad are targeted 
     for murder. The Iraqi regime has attempted to assassinate 
     the Emir of Kuwait and a former President of the United 
     States.
       Saddam Hussein promised the United Nations that he would 
     destroy and cease further development of weapons of mass 
     destruction and long-range missiles--and that he would submit 
     to unrestricted inspections. He has flatly broken these 
     pledges, producing chemical and biological weapons--
     aggressively pursuing a nuclear weapons program--and working 
     to develop long-range missiles. And for four years now, he 
     has refused to admit U.N. inspectors--four years during which 
     he has been able to plan, to build and to test in secrecy.
       Last week's letter from the Iraqi government to the United 
     Nations, now pledging to allow inspectors back into the 
     country, is another attempt to avoid strong action by the 
     Security Council. We have seen this kind of tactic before. In 
     the letter, the regime says it has no weapons of mass 
     destruction. We know this is a lie. The entire world knows, 
     beyond dispute, that Saddam Hussein holds weapons of mass 
     destruction in large quantities, and is seeking to acquire 
     more. This is not a matter of inspections. The only issue is 
     the disarmament of Iraq, the elimination of the weapons of 
     mass destruction, as required by Security Council 
     resolutions.
       False statements from the Iraqi regime will not cause us to 
     ignore history or reality. Saddam Hussein has spent more than 
     a decade in complete defiance of all the demands of the 
     United Nations.
       The question for the international community is whether the 
     Security Council resolutions will be enforced, or disregarded 
     without consequence--whether the United Nations will be 
     effective, or irrelevant. As for the United States, the 
     President has made our position abundantly clear: we want to 
     work with the United Nations to meet the common challenge. 
     The Security Council resolutions are to be enforced, or 
     action will be unavoidable. We must, and we will, take 
     whatever steps are necessary to defend our freedom and our 
     security. (Applause.)
       In the challenges to America we will be expecting a lot 
     from our military--and those who serve have a right to expect 
     a lot from us. If we're going to ask young men and women to 
     defend our country, our allies, and our freedom, if we're 
     going to send them into harms' way, on dangerous missions to 
     fight determined enemies--they deserve the best tools, the 
     best training, and the best support we can possibly give 
     them.
       We are investing in our military so that we can deploy 
     swift and agile forces--any place, any time they're needed. 
     We are building precision weapons that can spare the lives of 
     American soldiers, and innocent civilians in foreign lands. 
     We will multiply every advantage in order to prevail over any 
     enemy. And to have this capability, President Bush has asked 
     for the most significant increase in defense spending since 
     Ronald Reagan lived in the White House.
       The conduct of our military does more than bring credit to 
     the country; it reflects the basic character of the American 
     people. This is a good, and decent, and generous land. We 
     fight not for revenge against our enemies, but for the 
     freedom and security of our own people--and for the peace of 
     the world. At times in our history the price of freedom has 
     been very high, but Americans have always been willing to pay 
     that price--even when the odds weighed heavily against us.

[[Page S9223]]

       I was reminded of this the other day as I read David 
     McCullough's biography of our first Vice President, John 
     Adams. When Adams and his fellow delegates voted to approve 
     the Declaration of Independence, they knew precisely what 
     kind of trouble they were bringing on themselves. To sign the 
     Declaration, one of the founders said, was like signing your 
     own death warrant. As of July 4, 1776, they would be 
     considered traitors to the king, at war with the army of an 
     empire.
       Large numbers of enemy soldiers were already positioned on 
     American soil, intent on crushing the rebellion in short 
     order. In mid-August, 32,000 British troops landed at Staten 
     Island--an army greater in size than the entire population of 
     our then-largest city, Philadelphia. The American force was 
     far smaller, had very little in the way of equipment and 
     supplies, and was comprised almost entirely of poorly-trained 
     volunteers. All they had was the courage of human beings 
     determined to live in freedom.
       Before they prevailed the Americans endured not weeks, not 
     months, but years of hardship and struggle. The American 
     victory at Yorktown didn't come until the fall of 1781. The 
     Treaty of Paris, which John Adams helped negotiate and which 
     ended the Revolution, was finally concluded in September of 
     1783--more than seven long, difficult years after the 
     Declaration was signed.
       From that day to this, the people of the United States have 
     understood that the freedom that we enjoy did not come 
     easily--and we have no intention of letting it slip away. 
     History has called generations of Americans to defend our 
     country and to defeat some of the gravest threats known to 
     mankind. We have accepted that duty once again, because we 
     know the cause is just--we understand that the hopes of the 
     civilized world depend on us--and we are certain of the 
     victory to come.
       In this critical time I have the honor to stand beside a 
     President who has united our nation behind great goals. For 
     all the challenges we face, the United States of America has 
     never been stronger than we are today--and even better days 
     are ahead of us. President Bush and I are very grateful for 
     the opportunity to serve our country. We thank you for your 
     support--not just for our efforts, but for good candidates 
     like Adam Taff, who will make a fine partner for us in the 
     important work ahead.
       Thank you very much. (Applause.)

  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I think it is important that we work 
off actual words and not headlines, off actual words and not 
interpretations, and off actual words and not feelings towards words.
  That is the reason I wanted to enter into the Record the specific 
wording the Vice President used in the speech that is being commented 
upon a great deal by a number of Members. The headline that was out was 
not something that was said by the Vice President. I think it is 
important we get the actual words he used on Monday.
  I want to also make something very clear. The Vice President did not 
at all challenge the patriotism of any Member of Congress--House or 
Senate, Republican, Democrat, or Independent. He did not challenge any 
of that. He didn't mention any member by name other than the one he is 
supporting, and who is running for the House of Representatives.
  He spoke at length about Saddam Hussein, about the need for homeland 
security, and about the need to move these bills forward.
  There was no accusation whatsoever about any lack of patriotism on 
anybody's part. He is supporting, in this case in Kansas, the Third 
District candidate, Adam Taff, a man who is a former military man, an 
F-18 pilot, who fought in the gulf war the first time around, and who 
is running for Congress. This particular individual actually served as 
an F-18 pilot in the military when Vice President Cheney was then 
Secretary of Defense.
  Here is a person, a candidate, Adam Taff, who actually worked for the 
Vice President when he was Secretary of Defense, in a military 
capacity, and he does push forward his military credentials, as any 
candidate for office would push forward his credentials for office. And 
Adam Taff claims his military credentials. I think that is fully 
laudable and appropriate.
  I think it is important to make clear that the Vice President didn't 
challenge any patriotism whatsoever and did not reference the Senate in 
any of his comments. Again, as I stated, I have here his actual 
comments that have been submitted for the Record.
  I think there has been far too much protesting about this when what 
we really need to do is get homeland security passed and get an Iraqi 
resolution dealt with and I hope passed. I hope we can get a 
resolution, work together in a bipartisan fashion, and get an 
overwhelming majority for the Iraqi resolution. If we need to adjust 
words on it, I think that is fully appropriate because we need to show 
to the world a united front and that this distraction today is just 
that--a distraction.
  Homeland security we should have passed some time ago. We have been 
on it now for 3 weeks. We have been on it primarily because of special 
interest issues and not because of interests for the country. I think 
we need to get that bill posted and cleared in this Congress. It would 
be an important thing for us to do. It is the time for us to get that 
done. We have dawdled too long on it.
  But these allegations coming forward today that somehow there has 
been a challenge to the patriotism of other Members of this body are 
simply not supported by the facts. They are not supported by the facts 
anywhere. They are not supported by what the Vice President said in 
Kansas.
  We clearly need to deal with the facts instead of trying to divert 
attention by saying there is an accusation going on which is not built 
upon the facts--allegations that are coming forward challenging the 
patriotism of people who have served in the military and in this body. 
Nobody is challenging that.

  There is a clear challenge that we are not getting homeland security 
passed. We have been 3 weeks at it. There is a clear challenge that we 
have to get an Iraqi resolution passed before this body goes out for 
the election period--possibly an extended recess, or coming back in a 
lame duck session, whichever actually takes place.
  We really should get this bill moved forward. I think if people want 
to do away with these accusations, the best thing we can do is pass the 
homeland security bill and pass an Iraqi resolution that we work and 
mold together here as a body, and get that passed by an overwhelming 
majority in this body.
  I urge my colleagues; I think it would be wise for us to lower our 
decibel level on this, look at the factual material, and not go after 
misleading headlines but actually examine the record and move forward 
with these two very serious pieces of business. It is important that we 
do that.
  The Vice President has not--and I don't think in the future will--
challenged anyone's patriotism. People disagree on political issues. 
They disagree on issues of policy. That is clear. That is why we have a 
body that debates these issues.
  Some people view homeland security one way, and some people think we 
ought to support giving the President the authority to take whatever 
means necessary to remove Saddam Hussein. The former Vice President 
articulated a couple of days ago, saying no, that this is something we 
don't need to do and shouldn't do at this time. That is the former Vice 
President's opinion. Others have a different opinion on that.
  But we would be wise to debate what those issues are, and the 
specifics, and not allege issues of character which are not being 
challenged by the President or by the Vice President.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________