[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 150 (Tuesday, November 19, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11531-S11536]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   MAKING FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2003

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the joint resolution.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A joint resolution (H.J. Res. 124) making further 
     continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2003, and for 
     other purposes.

  The Senate proceeded to consider the joint resolution.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I shall be brief and my colleague, Mr. 
Stevens----
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will come to order. Please remove 
conversations from the floor.
  The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the Chair.
  I do not intend to speak more than 15 minutes, if that much. And my 
colleague has indicated he will speak about the same amount of time. So 
I would say to Senators we ought to be voting within 30 minutes.
  Last July, almost 4 months ago, the Senate Appropriations Committee 
completed action on all 13 of our appropriations bills, each on a 
bipartisan unanimous vote. These bills restored essential funding for 
programs that the administration proposed to cut.
  We provided $1.1 billion more than the President requested for 
veterans medical care.

[[Page S11532]]

  We restored the $8.6 billion cut proposed by the President in highway 
funding.
  The President proposed only a 1-percent increase for education 
programs. He would turn the No Child Left Behind bill into another 
unfunded mandate. Our bill would have provided a 6-percent increase for 
education, including key funding to reduce class size.
  We included sufficient funding to keep Amtrak operating.
  We restored over $1 billion of cuts that the President proposed for 
State and local law enforcement programs.
  We fully funded the President's proposed increases for homeland 
security programs, but we provided the funds through existing programs 
that our nation's fire and police organizations support.
  We provided a significant increase for the Securities and Exchange 
Commission in order to investigate corporate fraud.
  We provided $400 million for election reform.
  Sadly, the President believes that these increases represent wasteful 
and unnecessary spending. He worked with the House Republican 
leadership to shut the appropriations process down. The House has not 
passed a regular appropriations bill in nearly 17 weeks. By contrast, 
the Senate Appropriations Committee reported all thirteen bills by July 
25th, the earliest date that this was accomplished since 1988. However, 
without the House-passed bills, our process stalled.
  The Senate Appropriations Committee, on a bipartisan basis, believes 
in making responsible choices. It believes in governing. The President, 
sadly, appears to believe more in rhetoric and political posturing.
  This year, only two of the thirteen appropriations bills have been 
signed into law. The House has voted for and the President has 
supported a fifth continuing resolution that would extend 
appropriations for the domestic side of the government until January 
11. This is the worst performance of the Congress in attending to one 
of its most basic responsibilities, the funding of the government, 
since 1976 when the beginning of the fiscal year was moved to October 
1.
  Why did the President precipitate this unprecedented failure? Despite 
the fact that Congress approved the President's 13 percent, $45 
billion, increase for defense programs and his 25 percent, $5 billion, 
increase for homeland defense programs, the President believes that the 
3.5 percent increase for domestic programs that the Senate 
Appropriations Committee approved, was excessive. The President 
proposed to virtually freeze domestic programs that were not for 
homeland defense. The Senate Appropriations Committee provided $13 
billion more for domestic programs, barely enough to cover inflation.
  The President has forced the entire domestic side of the government 
to operate on automatic pilot at fiscal year 2002 levels for over one 
quarter of the fiscal year. In a bit of pre-election posturing, the 
President's Press Secretary Ari Fleischer said on October 20th, ``For 
the first time in probably a decade, Congress has left town before an 
election without going on a spending spree using taxpayers' money. 
There's a new sheriff in town, and he's dedicated to fiscal discipline. 
And Congress for the first time in a decade has listened to the new 
sheriff.''
  That new sheriff is shooting the country in the foot with his 
Administration's shortsighted political games. But, were the items that 
the Senate Appropriations Committee funded with the $13 billion 
increase a spending spree?
  No.
  With great fanfare, the President signed numerous authorization bills 
this year that authorize increase spending on important programs. Last 
January, he signed the No Child Left Behind Act in order to invest 
additional resources in important education programs for our children. 
Last May, he signed a border security bill to strengthen glaring 
weaknesses in our border security. Last July, he signed the 
Bioterrorism Preparedness Act authored by Senators Kennedy and Frist in 
order to provide critical resources to State and local governments to 
improve the capacity of hospitals, clinics and emergency medical 
personnel to respond to biological or chemical attacks. Last July, he 
signed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act to combat corporate fraud. In October, he 
signed the election reform bill in order to help State governments 
overhaul the nation's electoral system.
  Yet, when it came time to actually fund these important initiatives, 
the President worked to postpone action on the FY 2003 spending bills. 
He worked with the House Republican leadership to force the funding of 
the entire domestic side of our government onto a continuing 
resolution. Instead of making careful choices, the President has forced 
the government to operate on automatic pilot, leaving the legislation 
that he signed with such fanfare, to operate without the increased 
resources authorized by those laws.
  The Senate is now considering a fifth continuing resolution to extend 
funding for the eleven bills that fund domestic agencies through 
January 11, 2003. This puts the entire domestic side of the government, 
including homeland security programs, on automatic pilot at the levels 
approved for FY 2002.
  You must watch what this President does, not what he says. What he 
has done, is to force the government to operate on automatic pilot. 
What he has said bears very little resemblance to what he has done.
  The U.S. Senate is reputed to be the world's greatest deliberative 
body. In ``Democracy in America,'' French visitor Alexis de Tocqueville 
described this body as an institution ``composed of eloquent advocates, 
distinguished generals, wise magistrates, and statesmen of note, whose 
arguments would do honor to the most remarkable parliamentary debates 
of Europe.''
  That was the Senate of 1831--an institution that prided itself on its 
deliberate, careful, judicious debates; an institution that possessed, 
as once the Senate of ancient Rome possessed, a great firmness, 
anchored by oratory that was as brilliant as the immense gold eagle 
atop the dais of the old Senate Chamber. But the Senate that de 
Tocqueville watched in 1831, I am sad to say, is a far, far cry from 
the institution that the American people have observed over the past 
few months.
  Instead, the American people have seen a body more concerned about 
politics than substance; more concerned about party than about the 
people; more concerned about the state of the midterm elections than 
the state of the union.
  President Bush came to Washington in 2001 and promised to change the 
tone in Washington. Instead, the President has sent an unambiguous 
message to Congress on virtually every major policy issue. His 
message--my way, or the highway. No room for debate. No room for 
deliberation. The nation needs to pursue energy independence, but the 
President has said my way or the highway. Our elderly need a 
prescription drug benefit, the President has said my way or the 
highway. The Director of Homeland Security says our nation is facing an 
imminent risk of a terrorist attack, but when it comes to homeland 
security legislation, the President said my way or the highway.
  Similarly, the Congress has been manacled by the President and the 
House Republican leadership in its efforts to fund the operations of 
government.
  On September 17, I came to the floor and I warned Members that the 
White House was leading an effort to stall the appropriations process. 
At that time, the House had not taken up an appropriations bill for 
eight weeks. I complained that the Administration seemed to believe 
that the federal government is nothing more than a ``Monopoly'' board, 
with the President living on Park Place, while the rest of the country 
relegated to Mediterranean Avenue.
  In those remarks, I noted that Lawrence Lindsay, the President's 
principal economic advisor, had estimated that the costs of the war in 
Iraq would be $100 to $200 billion but that spending at that level 
would have no impact on the economy. I stressed my concern that the 
White House is willing to put the entire domestic side of the 
government on automatic pilot in a long-term continuing resolution over 
their insistence that the $13 billion difference between the House 
topline for discretionary spending and the Senate topline is, in their 
view, excessive spending. I noted that the House Republican leadership, 
at the bidding of

[[Page S11533]]

the White House, is willing to force all of the domestic agencies to 
operate at current rates over their objection to the Senate's wanting 
to provide a 3-percent increase for domestic health, education, 
environmental, law enforcement and other programs, barely enough to 
cover inflation.
  On September 24, I came to the Senate floor and I warned Members 
about the dire consequences of forcing veterans health care programs, 
education programs, transportation programs to operate at last year's 
spending levels.
  On October 2, I returned to the floor and I asked the White House why 
they had turned a deaf ear to the needs of the American people; and why 
the fundamental duties of the President and the Congress to make 
careful and responsible choices about how to spend the taxpayers' hard-
earned dollars had been put on automatic pilot.
  For months, the President called on Congress to send him the Defense 
Appropriations bill. The Congress fully cooperated with the President 
in this regard. Congress sent the President the Defense and Military 
Construction bills at levels $800 million above the original House 
bills.
  There is no doubt that the Congress and the President can work 
together. When the President asked for the necessary Defense funding, 
the Congress cooperated. But it's a far different story when it comes 
to the domestic programs of the United States Government.
  The rest of the appropriations bills remain on hold, stuck in the mud 
of election-year politics. The President has sent the message that he 
will be satisfied to put the entire domestic side of the government on 
automatic pilot. He has already signed four continuing resolutions that 
fund the government at the levels in last year's laws.
  Many members of Congress, myself included, are proud to wear the 
label of ``defense hawk.'' But, in this new age of terrorism, being a 
defense hawk must also mean being a ``hawk'' on domestic defense. It 
must mean defending and funding domestic initiatives that will make 
Americans safer and more secure in their own backyards just as 
vociferously as defending and funding the production of military 
aircraft, and missiles, and tanks.
  The White House stall on the remaining appropriations bills means 
that one front of our two-front war on terrorism will be provided with 
funds to do battle, but the other front will be shortchanged. If we 
fail to pass the rest of our appropriations bills, all of our efforts 
here, on American soil, to make more secure our states, cities and 
neighborhoods, will be getting short shrift.
  Many on the other side of the aisle have claimed that this fiscal 
train wreck is the result of the Senate's not passing a budget 
resolution. That may make for good campaign rhetoric, but every Senator 
knows that a budget resolution is not necessary to pass appropriations 
bills. Congress was able to pass appropriations bills for nearly 200 
years without a budget resolution.
  The Budget Act specifically provides authority for the House to move 
forward on the appropriations bills in the absence of a budget 
resolution. Sadly, the House Republilcan leadership, at the prodding of 
our ``my-way-or-the-highway President'', chose instead to shut the 
appropriations process down.
  The President insisted on a topline of $749 billion for the thirteen 
discretionary bills and has not budged. He seems satisfied to put the 
government on automatic pilot. No choices. No judgment. No opportunity 
for the Congress to reflect the needs of the American people in its 
consideration of the thirteen bills. No, let's just put the government 
on automatic pilot. Government by formula, rather than government by 
choice.
  According to news reports, the President considers himself to be an 
education President. He speaks before Veterans groups. He speaks about 
combating the war on terrorism by strengthening the FBI's investigative 
capabilities and shoring up security at the Nation's airports, ports, 
and borders. But talk is cheap. The necessary funding for these 
priority programs is not. Where is the White House cooperation when it 
comes to priority domestic funding, especially those relating to 
homeland security and the plight of our veterans and the state of our 
education programs? Remember, watch what he does, not what he says.
  Mr. President, as the days and weeks slip by and the domestic 
programs of the Federal Government limp along on autopilot under the 
provisions of the continuing resolutions, the four-million veterans who 
rely on the Veterans Administration for their health care are having to 
worry about whether that care will be available to them. Maybe they are 
not sleeping too well. While the weeks slip away, the 11,420 FBI agents 
who are supposed to be combating the war on terrorism are having to 
wonder whether they have the necessary resources to fight that war. 
Maybe we all ought not to sleep too well. While the weeks slip away, 
the government's effort to root out corporate fraud is being put on 
hold. Watch what they do, not what they say. While the weeks slip away, 
the President appears to be satisfied to forget his No Child Left 
Behind promise and turn the commitment to educating America's children 
into another unfunded mandate, another unfulfilled promise.
  The President is quick to champion homeland security, but his budget 
priorities reflect a different agenda. The administration's adamant 
refusal to move off of the dime in these appropriations discussions 
could jeopardize homeland security, no matter when or how any new 
Department of Homeland Security is created.
  Recently, former Senators Rudman and Hart released a report that 
concluded that the American transportation, water, food, power, 
communications, and banking systems remain easy targets for terrorist 
attacks. According to the report, ``A year after 
9/11, America remains dangerously unprepared to prevent and respond to 
a catastrophic terrorist attack on U.S. soil. In all likelihood, the 
next attack will result in even greter casualties and widespread 
disruption to our lives and economy.''
  The report highlighted the vulnerabilities created by: the minuscule 
fraction of trains, ships, trucks and containers that are searched for 
weapons of mass destruction; poor radio communications and equipment 
and training for police, fire and emergency medical personnel; 
inadequate coordination and focus on threats to food safety; lack of 
lab capacity to test for biological or chemical contaminants; and 
insufficient sharing of intelligence information with State and local 
governments on potential terrorist threats.

  Not only has President Bush failed to lead the nation in addressing 
this vulnerability, he has, in fact, actively opposed efforts to 
provide the resources necessary to address these significant 
weaknesses. When it comes to homeland defense, the President talks a 
good game, but puts no points on the board for our needs. Under 
pressure from the White House, since September 11, 2001, critical 
funding to address the specific concerns identified in the Rudman/Hart 
report have been squeezed out of spending bills considered by the 
Congress.
  The Congress has succeeded in approving $15 billion for homeland 
defense programs in December of 2001 and July of 2002, $5.3 billion 
above the President's request. However, on several occasions in 
November, December and July, the President threatened to veto 
legislation that would have provided nearly $24 billion more for 
critical homeland security programs, including $15 billion from the 
stimulus bill and $8.9 billion from Fiscal Year 2002 bills reported by 
the Senate Appropriations Committee.
  In August of 2002, the President chose to terminate $2.5 billion of 
funding that Congress approved for homeland security programs in the 
Fiscal Year 2002 supplemental. He turned his back to funds that would 
have helped to save lives.
  In October of 2002, the White House took credit for forcing the 
entire domestic side of the government to operate by automatic pilot 
under a continuing resolution of last year's funding levels. That means 
that agencies like the FBI, the Customs Service, the new Transportation 
Security Administration, the Coast Guard, FEMA and the Immigration and 
Naturalization Service, agencies that are critical participants in 
securing our homeland, have no new resources to address known homeland 
security vulnerabilities. This postponed over $5

[[Page S11534]]

billion of increases approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee 
for homeland security programs.
  When the President called on Congress to send him the Defense bills, 
Congress responded. But, how about the other eleven bills? We hear no 
call from the President to send him the remaining bills. The silence is 
palpable.
  Under the long term continuing resolution, the veterans health care 
system will be funded at a level that is $2.4 billion short of the 
level proposed in the Senate passed FY2003 VA-HUD bill. There are 
currently over 280,000 veterans on waiting lists for VA medical care. 
Under a long-term continuing resolution, the waiting lists will more 
than double. VA will schedule 2.5 million fewer outpatient clinic 
appointments for veterans, and 235,000 fewer veterans will be treated 
in VA hospitals.
  Thousands of FEMA fire grants, grants to resolve the interoperable 
emergency communications equipment problem, grants to upgrade emergency 
operations centers, grants to upgrade search and rescue teams, grants 
for emergency responder training and grants to improve state and local 
planning would be funded under the Senate's appropriations bills. But 
the Administration insists on operating the domestic programs of the 
Federal Government under the autopilot provisions of the continuing 
resolution which are mindless, formulaic, and without any trace of 
human judgment.
  Has the President asked the Congress to send him the VA/HUD 
Appropriations bill that funds these critical veterans and homeland 
defense programs? No.
  Many of the requirements of the Transportation Security Act require 
large expenditures in the first quarter of Fiscal Year 2003. Local 
airports are required to purchase explosive detection equipment to keep 
bombs from being placed on our airliners. To do that, they need help. 
Our highway program is facing a $4.1 billion cut in spending that could 
reduce jobs by over 160,000. Could our economy use those jobs? Amtrak 
could go bankrupt, throwing 23,000 people out of work and eliminating 
train service to 1.7 million citizens per month. Merry Christmas Amtrak 
workers from the White House. The Senate Transportation bill addresses 
these concerns. Has the President asked Congress to send him the 
Transportation bill to fund these programs? No.
  Federal funds also are needed to hire new federal screeners and to 
make our nation's seaports more secure. But this cannot be accomplished 
under a continuing resolution. The INS is at a critical juncture in 
developing a comprehensive Entry/Exit system to protect our nation's 
borders. The Senate bill provides $362 million for this initiative. But 
the Administration's inflexibility means that this program is frozen 
under the provisions of a continuing resolution just like our progress 
on protecting our borders--frozen! The President signed an 
authorization bill to help root out corporate fraud, but the continuing 
resolution would deprive the Securities and Exchange Commission of $300 
million contained in the Senate bill to investigate corporate fraud. 
Let the fraud flourish for just a little while longer. Has the 
President asked the Congress to send him the Commerce/Justice/State 
bill that funds those programs? No.

  The Customs Service is scheduled to hire more than 620 agents and 
inspectors to serve at the nation's high-risk land and sea points of 
entry. The Senate provides the funding for the Customs Service. But, 
again, the Administration seems to be satisfied with government by 
autopilot. A continuing resolution does not fund new agents for our 
border. Has the President asked the Congress to send him the Treasury/
General Government bill to fund that border security program? No.
  Without additional funding for security at our nuclear facilities, 
the Department of Energy will have to lay off 240 security guards at 
nuclear facilities in Tennessee and Texas. These 240 guards are the 
first line of defense between our enemies and a significant portion of 
our nation's nuclear material. Has the President asked us to send him 
the Energy and Water bill? No.
  By forcing the government to operate on autopilot, the Administration 
wants the nation to fight terrorism with a wink and a nod.
  Last month, Congress passed landmark election reform legislation. 
$3.8 billion is authorized for grants to state and local governments to 
improve our election systems. Yet, there is no funding for this 
initiative under a continuing resolution. Has the President asked the 
Congress to send him legislation to actually fund these new election 
reform grants? No.
  Last year, Congress passed the No Child Left Behind Act with 
bipartisan support. But, this law becomes nothing but an unfunded 
mandate on our local governments if the federal funding is not there 
for states to implement the new act. It takes money to reduce class 
size, to provide teacher training, to invest in new technology and to 
develop meaningful assessment tools. The No Child Left Behind Act 
requires States to ensure that all teachers teaching in core academic 
subjects are ``highly qualified'' by the end of the 2005-2006 school 
year. But, the President's budget included no new money for teacher 
training. The Senate bill would increase funding for Teacher Quality 
State Grants by $250 million, for a total of $3.1 billion. The 
President's budget would increase funds for education by just $367 
million--less than a 1% increase. That level gets an ``F'' in my grade 
book. The bill passed by the Senate Appropriations Committee, 
meanwhile, would increase education funds by $3.2 billion, or 6.5%. Has 
the President asked Congress to send him the Labor/HHS/Education bill? 
No.
  Here in the Senate, Senator Stevens and I sat down and worked out a 
topline for discretionary spending that reflected our views of the 
level of spending that would be required to produce thirteen 
bipartisan, fiscally responsible bills. We then followed through and 
the Senate Appropriations Committee produced all thirteen bills by the 
end of July consistent with that allocation. All thirteen annual 
appropriations bills cleared the Senate Appropriations Committee with 
fifteen Democratic members and fourteen Republican members voting aye. 
There is nothing partisan about these Appropriations bills. I worked 
with my Republican colleagues, led by that very able Senior Senator 
from Alaska, Ted Stevens, to make sure that these bills represented a 
consensus of our members, both Democratic and Republican. There are no 
gimmicks. The bills have been available for all Members to see for over 
sixteen weeks. Yet, the lack of action in the House has shut down 
progress in the Senate as well.
  Senators should know that frustration with the lack of progress on 
the FY 2003 appropriations bills is bipartisan and bicameral. In a 
recent, widely distributed memorandum to the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives, House Appropriations Committee Chairman Bill Young 
said, ``A long-term continuing resolution that funds government 
operations at FY 2002 levels would have disastrous impacts on the war 
on terror, homeland security, and other important government 
responsibilities. It would also be fiscally irresponsible.''
  All it would have taken to move the FY 2003 bills was some degree of 
cooperation between the House and Senate leadership, but the White 
House thwarted any chance of a compromise being reached. That's right. 
The White House--the Bush White House--the one that promised to change 
the tone in Washington, thwarted any chance of a compromise being 
reached. They did not want the work to be done. The White House 
spinners wanted to spin and weave their tangled web.
  We ought to be more concerned about how our actions will affect the 
course of the country than we are about how our actions or inactions 
will affect the direction of our polls. We ought to be more concerned 
about the price the people will pay for our actions or inactions than 
we are about the price our parties will pay at the voting booth. We 
ought to be more concerned about raising public awareness than we are 
about raising campaign funding. We ought to be more concerned about 
doing our jobs than we are about keeping our jobs.

  Now, because of the White House's unwillingness to put what is best 
for the American people ahead of what is best for our political 
parties, the Congress is forced to pass a continuing resolution to fund 
the operations of government until the 108th Congress. The Congress 
will forsake one of its most

[[Page S11535]]

important functions--to ensure funding for the operations of the 
federal government--because is could not reason with this partisan, 
partisan White House.
  Call me old-fashioned, but I remember a time when compromises were 
crafted by individuals who had differing views on an issue. But with 
this President, it is my way or the highway.
  The Senate must not blindly follow, in the name of party unity or 
under the yoke of political pressure, a short-sighted path that 
ultimately undermines our Constitutional processes. He could not stay 
off of the campaign trail long enough to negotiate and help us pass 
these bills.
  Why isn't the Administration up here working in a bipartisan and 
flexible fashion with the leadership of the House and Senate 
Appropriations Committees to facilitate the processing of the 
appropriations bills that fund domestic programs so that the necessary 
funding can be provided to the veterans, the FBI, the education 
programs, the homeland security programs at the Federal, State, and 
local levels?
  Why the giant stall, the big freeze, the cold shoulder? This 
Administration is setting quite a track record. Unfortunately for the 
American people, it is not a record on which to look back with pride. 
It is a record that rejects reasonableness in favor of stubbornness. It 
is a record that rejects progress in favor of partisanship. It is a 
record that puts politics ahead of the American people.
  I, for one, can not forget what is important to America. I recognize, 
as do many members of this body, the critical nature of these 
appropriations bills to the future progress and security of this 
nation. I recognize the importance of these appropriations bills to the 
farmers, to the teachers and their students, and to the veterans. I 
recognize the importance of these bills to future breakthroughs in 
medical research and cancer treatments. I recognize the importance of 
these bills to our nation's energy independence and to our 
transportation network.
  I can only pray that the Creator will see fit to protect us from the 
plots of twisted souls who lurk in the shadows, and I can only hope 
that in January, either our shame or our fear or both will compel us to 
act.
  I have very strong feelings of gratitude for my colleague, Senator 
Stevens, the ranking member, who has worked so closely with me. And I 
am especially appreciative for all of the cooperation and 
bipartisanship that has been shown by the members of this committee.
  We have a committee of 29 members--15 Democrats, 14 Republicans. On 
all of these measures, we have reported the bills on a bipartisan basis 
without any partisan differences within the committee.
  So I have many reasons to thank the ranking member, Mr. Ted Stevens, 
former chairman of the committee. I want to take this opportunity to 
thank him, and to also thank the other members of the committee.
  I also want to thank staff on both sides of the committee. We have 
excellent staff that works with the Members. And I can only express my 
very deepest appreciation to the staff and to the membership.
  I urge the Members of the Senate to vote as they see fit on this 
continuing resolution. I shall support it, although I am not entirely 
pleased that we have been forced to engage in this exercise in passing 
continuing resolutions. But be that as it may, we do have to fund the 
operations of the Government. So I shall vote for the continuing 
resolution.
  The House has not taken up an appropriations bill for 8 weeks. When I 
came to the floor on September 17 and warned Members that the White 
House was leading an effort to stall the appropriations process, that 
process has been stalled. We sent two appropriations bills to the 
President. That is it. Eleven appropriations bill out of the 13 have 
not be sent to the President's desk. This is because the House 
Republican leadership has put the brakes on and has simply refused to 
let the Appropriations Committee in the House move the bills forward. 
The leadership on the House side has simply refused to have that body 
act on the appropriations bills that had been reported by the 
Appropriations Committee in the House.
  That is most unfortunate.
  I yield the floor in the event that my distinguished counterpart, Mr. 
Stevens, wishes to say whatever he wishes. He may have the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I thank you. I thank the distinguished 
chairman of our committee.
  The pendulum of politics is swinging. When we return in January, I 
will become, once again, the chairman of our committee, and I look 
forward to working with my great friend from West Virginia in the 
manner I have tried to work with him as he has been chairman.
  During the recent days, I have had the privilege of meeting with the 
President of the United States and the Office of Management and Budget 
Director, and with Congressman Bill Young. We discussed the process by 
which we might try to finish with the appropriations for fiscal year 
2003 so that we might be ready to handle the 2004 requests when they 
come following the State of the Union message that the President will 
deliver to us on January 20.
  I look forward to working with Senator Byrd in that regard. This 
continuing resolution is absolutely necessary to give us the 
opportunity to move forward, and sometime in the first week that we are 
back in January we can decide how quickly we want to finish this 
appropriations process.
  For myself, I am sure Senator Byrd and I will do our best to work in 
the Senate's best interest and to see to it that we finish these bills 
so that we can turn to the new task of dealing with the new budget 
requests which this time will include a new Department of Homeland 
Security. It will be a most interesting transition. And it is going to 
be a difficult problem for us in reorganizing the appropriations 
process to handle this new Department--whether or not we will create a 
new subcommittee or divide the work of the existing subcommittees to 
handle the new Homeland Security Department, that will have to be 
determined in the future.
  I will certainly consult with Senator Byrd on all of those details.
  For now, I urge Members to approve this continuing resolution and to 
understand the process. This is something the Senate is compelled to do 
in order to take us into a new Congress so that we can finish the work 
on the fiscal year appropriations for 2003. I hope everyone will 
understand the process and will give us their understanding even 
further when they return in January.
  If the Senator is willing to yield back his time, I will be glad to 
yield back. We have no request for time on this side.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I also want to take this opportunity to 
thank Chairman Bill Young, the chairman of the House Appropriations 
Committee. I enjoy working with Chairman Young. He has always been very 
cooperative and very gracious. He is a very courteous Member of that 
body, and is always very kind and considerate of me as I have labored 
to act as the chairman of the Appropriations Committee in the Senate 
upon more than one occasion.
  I also thank Dave Obey, the ranking member on the House 
Appropriations Committee. Dave Obey brings a great deal of experience 
and knowledge and is a very articulate and forceful member of the House 
Appropriations Committee.
  I enjoy working with Dave Obey, as I enjoy working with Bill Young.
  It has been a pleasure to work with the other members of the House 
Appropriations Committee on both sides--Republicans and Democrats. They 
have always been very nice to me.
  This year I will relinquish my responsibilities as chairman and will 
begin work with my former chairman, Mr. Stevens, and the other members 
of the committee as we go forward into the new year.
  I believe we will have difficult times ahead. But I have always been 
able to work with Senator Stevens. He has always been very nice to me, 
and very considerate, as has been his staff.
  While I hesitate to feel that we must probably look forward to a more 
difficult year in the future than we have in the past, I can only say 
that I hope Senator Stevens and our colleagues on

[[Page S11536]]

both sides of the aisle in that committee enjoy a wonderful 
Thanksgiving, a lovely Christmas, and a Happy New Year.
  And may God look down upon us and help us in our struggles, as we 
will continue to do our best, with limited resources, in the 
forthcoming year.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If all time has been yielded back, the clerk 
will read the joint resolution for the third time.
  The joint resolution was read the third time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The joint resolution having been read the 
third time, the question is, Shall the joint resolution pass?
  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Missouri (Mrs. Carnahan). 
the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Cleland), and the Senator from New York 
(Mr. Schumer) are necessarily absent.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. 
Helms), the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. T. Hutchinson), and the Senator 
from Alaska (Mr. Murkowski) are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 92, nays 2, as follows:

                        [Rollcall Vote No. 253]

                                YEAS--92

     Akaka
     Allard
     Allen
     Barkley
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chafee
     Clinton
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Corzine
     Craig
     Crapo
     Daschle
     Dayton
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham
     Gramm
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hollings
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lott
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Miller
     Murray
     Nelson (NE)
     Nelson (FL)
     Nickles
     Reed
     Reid
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Torricelli
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Wyden

                                NAYS--2

     Kerry
     Lincoln
       

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Carnahan
     Cleland
     Helms
     Hutchinson
     Murkowski
     Schumer
  The joint resolution (H.J. Res. 124) was passed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland is recognized.
  Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to proceed as in 
morning business for 5 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________