[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 25 (Tuesday, February 11, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2172-S2176]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           AMERICA UNGUARDED

  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, as President Bush gears up for a possible 
war in Iraq, we have been treated to repeated announcements of troop 
deployments and callups of Reserve forces. A fourth aircraft carrier 
battle group centered around the USS Theodore Roosevelt is steaming 
toward the Persian Gulf, and the Navy is reportedly prepared to send up 
to three more carrier battle groups to the region. Two Marine 
amphibious groups of seven ships each are also already in the gulf. 
Military installations around the Nation are taking on an empty, 
shuttered feeling as unit after unit after unit packs up, says goodbye, 
wipes the tears away from their faces, from the faces of loved ones, 
and ships out. This is happening more and more and more all over this 
country.
  National Guard and Reserve forces have been mobilized not only to go 
to the Persian Gulf but also to guard military installations around the 
United States. And more and more and more, one will look at dinner 
tables and at countless workplaces, and there they will see vacant 
chairs, vacant spots.
  The 300th Chemical Company, headquartered in Morgantown, WV, was 
ordered, on January 3, 2003, to report to Fort Dix, NJ, in anticipation 
of deployment to some as yet undetermined final destination.
  West Virginia: one State, the 35th State in the Union. Every Senator 
here can look at his or her own State and see what is happening, see 
the same thing happening as I am seeing in West Virginia. These troops 
may be gone for a year. They may be gone longer.
  Other West Virginia Guard and Reserve units have already been called 
up, including members of the Bluefield-based 340th Military Police 
Company. That is on the southern border of West Virginia, on the border 
with the State of Virginia. And then there is the Romney-based 351st 
Ordnance Company. Romney is in the northeastern part of West Virginia, 
a community that changed hands 56 times in the Civil War.
  There, too, we see vacant chairs at the dinner tables. We see the 
families, the spouses with the children, spouses who have remained 
behind. They and their children bow their heads at mealtime and say: 
``God is great. God is good. And we thank Him for this food. By Thy 
goodness all are fed. Give us, Lord, our daily bread.''
  And the same scene is repeated and repeated in Kansas, in Florida, in 
California, in Washington, in Oregon, in Virginia, in South Carolina, 
in North Carolina, Pennsylvania, New York, Massachusetts, and on and on 
and on. And pretty soon it adds up.
  Then there is the Kenova-based 261st Ordnance Company and the 
Bridgeport-

[[Page S2173]]

based 459th Engineer Company. Kenova is down near Huntington in 
southern West Virginia. Bridgeport is adjacent to Clarksburg in the 
north central part of West Virginia.
  Everywhere one looks, one sees these men and women departing, 
leaving--to return when? We know not when, and in some cases perhaps 
never.
  West Virginia Army National Guard members have been recalled to 
active duty, as have members of the Charleston, WV-based 130th Airlift 
Wing and the 167th Airlift Wing in Martinsburg.
  So over and over and over again, we see this happening, day after day 
after day.
  West Virginia is playing an active role in our Nation's military 
operations, and the story is the same in the other 49 States and the 
District of Columbia around the Nation as, week after week after week, 
small town newspapers display the smiling portraits of guardsmen and 
reservists called into the active service of their country.
  I suggest to other Members of the Senate that they take a look at 
what is happening within the borders of their own States, the States 
they represent in this great Chamber, and they will see what I see when 
I look at West Virginia.
  Even the Coast Guard is sending 8 of its 49 patrol boats and two port 
security units--some 600 personnel--to the Persian Gulf. By mid-
February, some 150,000 or more service personnel are expected to be in 
the Persian Gulf region, with the total expected to top 200,000 by 
early March--not even a month away.
  These new deployments to the Persian Gulf come on top of many other 
ongoing military operations around the globe. Approximately 9,000 U.S. 
service personnel remain active in Afghanistan battling Taliban forces 
and continuing to root out Osama bin Laden's followers. We spent $27 
billion in Afghanistan. Now we have upped that by an additional $10 
billion; 27 plus 10, that is $37 billion that the war in Afghanistan 
and the adjacent region has already cost, $37 billion; $37 for every 
minute since Jesus Christ was born; $37 billion spent in Afghanistan 
and the region.
  And where is Osama bin Laden? Where is he? Thirty-seven billion 
dollars? Yes. And has the countryside been subjugated? No. Only the 
city of Kabul, perhaps in the daytime.
  I went to Kabul 48 years ago with a codel from the House of 
Representatives, flew up the Khyber Pass in that landlocked country, 
Afghanistan. There it is today, the same country, landlocked, still 
ruled by tribal men warring with one another.
  Approximately 9,000 U.S. service personnel remain active in 
Afghanistan, battling Taliban forces and continuing to root out Osama 
bin Laden's followers. Yes, there it is. American service men and women 
all around the globe, around that globe around which Jules Verne wrote 
that great novel, ``Around the World in Eighty Days.''
  Military and political tensions in South Korea are as high as they 
have been at any time since the Korean war. I remember that Korean war, 
yes. Here we are, a half century later, with thousands of our American 
fighting men and women still there looking across the divided country 
that separates South from North Korea. Over 51,000 U.S. personnel live 
in South Korea, including 35,654 active duty military personnel. I 
visited there when Syngman Rhee was President. I visited the Korea 
Parliament. Men wore overcoats in the Parliament. It was cold. Can you 
imagine men and women seated in this Chamber in their overcoats? It is 
the dead of winter, isn't it? Yes, it is.
  Some 6,900 U.S. forces remain in Bosnia as part of the NATO Operation 
Joint Force. By mid-February, by this short count, 201,554 American 
service personnel will be far, far away, far from home, far from the 
lights of home, far from the warm fireplaces of home, far from the 
sisters and brothers and mothers and fathers and wives and children and 
husbands and children engaged in dangerous missions around the globe. 
This figure does not include forces permanently stationed in Europe, 
Japan, and elsewhere but those on temporary deployment. These deployed 
troops will be supported by many more military forces based in the 
United States.
  And how much are we debating that? Little is being said. Scarce to 
nothing is being said on the Senate floor as we prepare to go to war in 
all likelihood in a foreign land. Little or nothing is being said in 
this Chamber or in the other Chamber about what may happen at home once 
the attack upon Saddam Hussein is unleashed. Are we under a gag rule? 
What is going on? I can scarcely believe my eyes and my ears when I 
look about me. I sometimes say to someone, pinch me, pinch me. Is it 
real?
  What has happened to the U.S. Senate, this great forum, the greatest 
upper body in the world, the U.S. Senate? What has happened? What would 
the Framers think if they could come back and see this Chamber, 
austere, practically vacated? Of course, they knew nothing about 
television in their day. They didn't know that a few Senators could sit 
back in their offices because they didn't have the kind of offices that 
we have in our day either. But what would those Framers think?
  What would the 39 signers of the Constitution of the United States 
think if they could sit in these galleries and look down upon this 
Chamber today? What would George Washington have to say about that? 
What would James Madison have to say, or John Blair have to say? Or 
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, what would he say about that? What would 
Hugh Williamson have to say? How would he feel about it? How would 
Benjamin Franklin gauge the situation if he saw the U.S. Senate today 
as we are about to prepare to launch an attack upon a sovereign nation 
that has not attacked our own country? Benjamin Franklin, what would he 
say?
  What would David Brearley say as he looked about him and saw few 
Senators discussing the greatest issue of all--the issue of war and 
peace? What would James Wilson say? What would John Dickinson say? What 
would Thomas Fitzsimons have to say about it? What would Abraham 
Baldwin or William Few say about it? These were signers of the 
Declaration of Independence. Would George Read have any questions to 
ask? How far have we fallen short of the expectations of those who 
framed this Constitution? Here it is. I hold it in my hand. There were 
39 signers. How about John Langley? Rufus King; would he rise to his 
feet and have anything to say? What would Nathaniel Gorham and Nicholas 
Gilman say about this?
  Would they say: Awaken, awaken, take to the ramparts. In musical 
terms, the operational tempo of the U.S. Armed Forces has moved from 
adagio, which is slow, to allegro, which is fast, and is rapidly moving 
to prestissimo, as fast as possible, or too fast.
  No one wants our military to go to war without the resources that it 
needs, and we will certainly do everything within our power if our 
forces are sent into war by the executive. The Senate has attempted to 
wash its hands of the matter and hand the matter over to the President 
of the United States: Here it is; it is all in your hands. We have 
relegated ourselves to the sidelines. Yes. No one wants our military to 
go to war without the advantage of overwhelming force. But in this new 
era of terrorist attacks in the homeland, I have some concerns that we 
are leaving America unguarded as we attempt to initiate and sustain so 
many military operations overseas.
  Oh, yes, we see the national alert, the orange alert. Well, the 
forces that remain here to protect the American people are fast 
dwindling. How long before they dwindle more and more and more? Yet we 
are on ``orange alert.'' Where are the policemen, the National 
Guardsmen, the reservists, the firefighters, and the schoolteachers--
those all about us in our daily walks as citizens? More and more, we 
look to the right and then we look to the left and we see a vacant spot 
here and there. Yet we are on orange alert. Where are those who are to 
guard this country when it is on orange alert? Where are they?
  I am not alone in thinking our country is vulnerable to another 
massive terrorist attack. On Friday, Attorney General Ashcroft and 
Homeland Security Secretary Ridge announced to the Nation that 
credible, corroborated intelligence reports required an increase in the 
homeland security alert level. Yet look about you, and everywhere to 
the north, east, west, and south one sees line after line, busload 
after busload, planeload after planeload of National Guardsmen, 
reservists, men and

[[Page S2174]]

women leaving their spouses, their children, shedding their tears, 
going away--miles away, hundreds of miles away, thousands of miles away 
across the seas. When will they see one another again?
  In light of this danger, it is almost bizarre that our military 
continues to run at full tilt to ready for war in the Persian Gulf. It 
is as if two ships are passing in the night--one filled with our 
soldiers headed for the hot sands of the Arabian Peninsula, the other 
carrying terrorists headed for our shores. Time after time, this 
administration and its Department heads have put this Nation on alert. 
If the risk to the American people were not so great, the situation 
would be almost comical.
  If an attack strikes a city in the United States, who will respond? 
Governors might wish to call out the National Guard in order to respond 
to an attack and restore order, but will any units be left to pick up 
the phone? The military's only mobile chemical and biological 
laboratory has deployed to the Persian Gulf. Chemical decontamination 
units, like Morgantown, West Virginia's 300th Chemical Company, have 
been called up and shipped out. Gone. The vacant chairs are still 
there. The vacant pews in the local churches are still there. But the 
men and women are gone. Many of our Nation's policemen, firemen, and 
other first responders are members of the National Guard and Reserves. 
They have been called up, and they have been shipped out, leaving one 
important national security job for another.
  It would be a mistake to assume that these troops would soon return 
home after defeating Iraq in battle. We may be lucky, pray God. The 
supreme fact in this universe of universes is a Living God. Men can 
study and plot and plan all they want to as to what created this Earth, 
created the universe, and created man, and come up with this idea and 
that thesis and that hypothesis, one after another. But the remaining 
supreme fact is that there is God. I hope God will give this country 
the good judgment, the wisdom it needs in the days ahead. We may be 
lucky. It may all be over in a day or two. Someone may be able to talk 
to Saddam Hussein and get him to leave and go somewhere else. Who 
knows? But suppose we are not lucky.
  Saddam Hussein's military is not as strong as it once was, but there 
is still the looming specter that one sees at night when the shades of 
darkness have fallen. One hears the rustling robes of night, those 
sable robes. One sees the specter, the possible specter of hand to hand 
to hand, building to building to building, block by block by block, 
street fighting in the megalopolis of Baghdad. That could become real.
  Then what will those who seem to be impelled to drive our Nation into 
war say, those who seem to look upon this forthcoming trial as but a 
video game? We press a button here, press a button there, poof, it is 
gone; Saddam Hussein is out of it, and his legions have been conquered 
and decimated and destroyed. Just a video game.
  I sometimes pinch myself as I sit down and watch the television. I 
wonder, can it be real that these people who have never shot a shot in 
their life probably--I cannot complain about that; I have not shot a 
shotgun either--but they are all for going to war. What do they have to 
lose? I do not know. But I wonder what is happening in our country 
today when everything is bent for war.
  Turn on the television set. The first television set we had at my 
house was in 1955. I was in my third year in Congress, my second term, 
and went home one afternoon, took some mail with me and was sitting 
after supper--we still think in terms of supper at my house, not 
dinner. We do not wear these monkey suits, certainly not as much as we 
used to. So we do not put on these fancy suits and go out to dinner at 
night.
  There I sat. I was signing my mail, and my wife and I sat there with 
our two daughters. She said: Robert, what do you see? Take a look 
around the room. What's new? I looked around the room. And there it 
was--a black-and-white television set, 1955.
  That is the year when the House of Representatives passed legislation 
providing that the words ``In God We Trust'' will be on the currency of 
this country--``In God We Trust.'' Those words were already on some of 
the silver coins, but we passed legislation in that year, 1955--it was 
June 7, 1955, when we passed legislation providing that the words ``In 
God We Trust'' would be on our currency. Here it is. It is right on 
there. Here it is on the $1 bill, with the greatest President of all, 
George Washington. There it is on that bill.
  That was June 7, 1955, and on June 7, 1954, we had passed in the 
House of Representatives legislation adding the words ``under God'' to 
the Pledge of Allegiance.
  There we were, sitting around my living room. I turned on that black-
and-white television set. Ah, I wish I could call those days back. 
There was Jackie Gleason and ``The Honeymooners,'' really a wholesome, 
fun picture. Then there was Matt Dillon in ``Gunsmoke.'' And there was 
Elliott Ness in ``The Untouchables.'' Those were the days, black-and-
white television.
  Anyhow, I turn the television on now in the evenings, when I can bear 
to look at it for a little while, and the same old story over and over 
is just beating into my ears; this go to war, this beating the drums of 
war. That is going to be a game. We hear that the game is over. This is 
not a game, as the French President reminded our own. This is not a 
game, and it is not over. But there I hear it every night over and over 
and over and over again. That is all the American people hear, this 
``going to war'' theme.

  I hope we will be lucky. I hope we will be. I hope we will find a way 
out of going somehow. I think this Senate ought to debate it. I think 
we ought to talk about it in this Senate. What would those Framers say 
if they could see the Senate today, tucking its tail between its legs 
and running away from this, the greatest issue of our time: War and 
peace.
  Nothing is being said about it. Are we afraid to ask questions? Is it 
unpatriotic to ask questions? I say to these pages--we have a new flock 
of pages and they are all these fine young people who come into this 
Chamber. They are such wonderful young people--I say to them: What did 
you think before you came here? Did you expect to hear some great 
debates about the greatest issue of our day, our time? Did you think 
you were going to come here and hear about the problems of war and 
peace? Are you disappointed? Have you been disillusioned? You are not 
hearing it, are you? Here we are silent.
  Is it deemed to be unpatriotic to ask questions? The American people 
out there want us to ask questions. How much is it going to cost? We 
have already spent $37 billion now through the end of last December in 
Afghanistan, in that region. Where is Osama bin Laden? Where is he? $37 
billion. He was wanted dead or alive; $37 billion and still no Osama 
bin Laden. Now our troops are going to be sent to a foreign land, some 
of whom will die, will have their blood shed in the hot desert sands of 
a foreign country. And how many people there will die? How many men and 
women and children, little children, boys and girls, will die unless we 
are lucky and the bullets do not fly?
  Our troops could be forced into a wild goose chase for Saddam 
Hussein, just as Osama bin Laden has eluded our grasp for the last 14 
months. We could get lucky; we could win the war in a matter of days. 
Saddam Hussein could be served up to us on a silver platter by his 
generals who are desperate to save their own lives. But is that the end 
of the story? That is not the end of the story. Someone will have to 
occupy Iraq and purge the government of the Baathist Party elites who 
might wish to succeed one dictatorship with another dictatorship. 
Someone will have to calm the situation in the North where the Kurds 
might seek to form their own country, which is a serious concern for 
our ally Turkey.
  If the United States goes forward with a war with only token support 
from some of our allies, it is not hard to see that we will also bear 
the greatest burdens in the occupation of Iraq. Who knows that it is 
going to be all that easy?
  They should sit down in front of their television set tonight, as 
they listen to those talking heads as they gloss over the serious 
question of war and peace and they talk about going to war as though it 
were a video game.
  Somebody is going to die. America has lost men and women in wars, 
large and small, over these 215 years since ours became a republic. 
People always

[[Page S2175]]

die in war. Have we discussed this one? Have we debated it? Have we 
asked the questions our people expect us to ask?
  Suppose we get into a war and it does not go well. Suppose it turns 
out to be something other than a video game. Then our people back home 
will say: Where were you?
  The first question that was ever asked in the history of mankind was 
asked in the Garden of Eden, in the cool of the day, when God searched 
for Adam and Eve and He asked the first question that was ever asked: 
Adam, where art thou? Old Adam and Eve were over behind some bushes, 
wearing some fig leaves, trying to hide from God.
  No, one cannot hide from God. One cannot hide from the Creator. And 
we will not be able to hide from our constituents if this war goes 
sour, if it goes south. They will ask: Robert Byrd, where were you when 
they voted to turn this matter over to the Commander in Chief, turn it 
over to the Chief Executive, hand it over to him and wash your hands? 
Were you there, Robert? Did you wash your hands on that day? Where were 
you?
  We will be asked the question. I kind of hate to look at myself in 
the mirror and ask myself that question, Where were you when you turned 
your back on the Constitution of the United States, which says Congress 
shall have power to declare war? Did you turn that over to the 
President, Robert Byrd? Did you vote to turn that authority over to the 
President? If you did, did you sunset it so that that same power would 
not be in the hands of the next President? No, the Senate did not even 
want to sunset it.
  What would those Framers say to us? Where were you? You stood up at 
that desk, put your hand on the Bible, and said you would swear to 
support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all 
enemies, foreign and domestic. Where were you on that day?
  If the United States goes forward with a war with only token support 
from some of our allies, it is not hard to see that we will also bear 
the greatest burdens in the occupation of Iraq. Then look in the 
shadows, look into the shadowy mists halfway around the world, and see 
what is there. North Korea, with its nuclear programs. Now we are 
becoming a little afraid of Iran. We are becoming wary of Iran, which 
is third in the forces of evil that have been named. Are they next?
  The Department of Defense has so far been reluctant to hazard a guess 
at how many troops might be required and how long their mission might 
last. Perhaps those numbers--we are talking about a postwar Iraq, a 
post-Saddam Iraq. The Department of Defense has been reluctant to 
hazard a guess at how many troops might be required and how long their 
mission might last. Perhaps those numbers are too alarming to discuss 
at this point, but one British think tank has estimated that occupation 
of Iraq may require 50,000 to 200,000 troops and cost $12 billion to 
$50 billion per year for 5 years, perhaps more.
  Who knows what the ultimate costs will be--$200 billion, $300 
billion, $500 billion, a trillion? Add up all of the costs. So long as 
this occupation continues, how is the National Guard supposed to help 
our States in the homeland security mission? Our police forces can 
hardly pick up the slack. They are already working full tilt, 
performing the myriad tasks that keep our streets and schools safe 24 
hours a day, with crime increasing 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year.

  Just because the threat of terrorist activity is higher does not mean 
that run-of-the-mill villains go on vacation. Just because Osama bin 
Laden is still on the loose does not mean that the John Allen Muhammeds 
of the world will decide not to go on random nationwide shooting 
rampages.
  At a time when port security has become increasingly important, and 
in which we have learned what a tiny fraction of incoming ships and 
containers are being searched for weapons of mass destruction, the 
Coast Guard is reducing its interdiction capability by sending one-
sixth of its patrol craft to the Persian Gulf.
  How many more Haitian refugees will be able to land on our shore? How 
many more drug shipments will make it in? How many ships in distress 
will have to wait to get help? How many terrorists will be able to land 
on our shores? One key problem, in trying to balance the demands of 
States for National Guard to perform homeland security missions with 
the deployment of guardsmen to deal with international crises in 
Afghanistan, Iraq, and perhaps elsewhere, is that the military reserves 
are the well from which the Active-Duty Forces must draw for units with 
unique skills. If the military needs large numbers of military police, 
engineers, or civil affairs specialists, it has no choice but to draw 
from the Reserve components.
  Our military is arranged so that the Active Forces alone simply are 
not able to carry out long periods of conflict or peacekeeping 
missions. The Department of Defense has announced that it will seek to 
realign some units so that our Active-Duty Forces will be better able 
to perform specialized missions without drawing so heavily from our 
citizen soldiers. But would the Framers have questions about how this 
will be done? How will it be done? Will the 300th Chemical Company be 
ripped out from its home in West Virginia and sent to a military base 
hundreds or thousands of miles away? If so, on whom would Governor 
Weiss of West Virginia then call if a chemical attack were to occur in 
my State?
  Each Senator should ask themselves the same question about their own 
State. The President has repeatedly said our country is in this war on 
terrorism for the long haul. We should not seek Band-Aid solutions to 
important problems. Realignment of Reserve and Active Forces might make 
sense for fiscal year 2004, but what are we going to do about the 
problem today? What needs to be done to prepare for 10 years down the 
road? I will not be here.
  You may not be here or you may be here, Mr. President. But that 
problem will face this country. Years will come and the years will go, 
problems will come ever nearer. Let us start by asking some tough 
questions.
  Do we need more Active-Duty forces to do everything that the 
President is asking our military to do? If so, can we increase our 
recruiting to find more Americans who are willing to serve in the 
military? Do we want to go back to the draft? That question may come 
ever closer.
  While the White House is prepared to dedicate ever greater sums to 
our military, have we underestimated the manpower requirements for the 
war on terrorism or for nationbuilding in Afghanistan or for a war in 
Iraq or for maintaining our security guarantees to South Korea? Let us 
not shy away from asking these questions simply because we are afraid 
of honest answers that could expose a weakness in our military 
planning.
  Our States, cities, and towns are in a homeland security crunch. 
Security demands are increasing. State budget deficits are soaring. Ask 
the Governors of this land about their budget deficits. Ask them about 
the shortfalls within their own States. Perhaps the homeland security 
crunch could not have been avoided completely, but its effects could 
have been mitigated.
  In November 2001 I offered a $15 billion package to address urgent 
homeland security needs. Did the White House support it? Did the White 
House support that package? No. This White House opposed it.
  In December 2001 I proposed $7.5 billion in homeland security funds. 
Did the administration support that? No. The administration shaved that 
down to a fraction of its size. Wouldn't our communities be better 
prepared today for the current terrorism warnings, for the current 
orange alert, if those funds had reached our communities more than a 
year ago?
  With the homeland security crunch now affecting virtually every State 
in the Union, one would think that we should have learned a lesson. 
Have we?
  Just last month I offered a $5 billion amendment to H.J. Res. 2, the 
fiscal year 2003 omnibus appropriations legislation to fund these 
programs that the President had authorized in earlier legislation. Did 
the White House support my amendment? No. The White House opposed that 
amendment, terming it ``new extraneous spending.'' How about that?
  My opinion differs from that of the White House. I believe that 
providing funding for programs that have been requested and authorized, 
and which are critical pieces of homeland security, is just as critical 
as going for the

[[Page S2176]]

public acclaim that comes from proposing a bureaucratic reorganization.
  Words, and promises, need to be backed up with the money to make 
those words a reality. Empty promises and hollow rhetoric, no matter 
how stirring, how bedecked in flags and bunting, will not protect our 
families, our neighbors, and our fellow citizens.
  Iraq is not the only crisis on the American agenda. Hundreds of 
thousands of troops are shipping out for distant lands while the threat 
of terrorism is growing here at home; while the Nation, for the first 
time, is being put on orange alert.
  These troops have our support and our prayers for their safe return. 
The families they leave behind also need the very best that we can do 
for them. They need our prayers, and they need more than our prayers; 
they need to have programs designed to improve their safety and 
security funded and implemented, not put on hold.

  Having lost the $5 billion, then I sought to come through with a $3 
billion homeland security amendment. The same thing happened.
  I hope the view from the White House will expand to focus, not just 
beyond our shores, but also within our shorelines. We must not leave 
America unguarded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, the Senator from West Virginia has had a 
cold the last week or so, so we have missed him in the Chamber. It is 
good to hear you have your voice back and are gaining your strength. It 
is good to sit and listen to you.
  I have had a lot of good education. As I said once in a debate in the 
Senate Chamber--we were talking about the distinguished Senator from 
Maryland, who is a Rhodes scholar. It was a colloquy between the 
Senator from West Virginia and the Senator from Maryland. I 
interrupted, with the consent of the Chair, and said: I am not a Rhodes 
scholar; I am a Byrd scholar. And I really am. I appreciate the 
Senator's remarks. He always pushes to better things. Better parts of 
us come out when you lead us. I appreciate very much the Senator's 
statement.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished whip for his 
comments. I thank him for his work that he performs here daily for his 
country, for his State, and for his colleagues in the Senate.
  Mr. REID. I thank Senator Byrd very much.

                          ____________________