[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 145 (Thursday, October 16, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12671-S12673]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[[Page S12671]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate
EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS--Continued
Amendment No. 1868
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there are now 4
minutes equally divided on the motion to table the Lautenberg
amendment.
The Senator from New Jersey is recognized.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. I thank the Chair.
Mr. President, I offer this amendment to correct the situation that
came about as a result of Vice President Cheney's statement on ``Meet
the Press'' a couple of weeks ago. I wish to quickly respond to some
things that were said about my amendment and the Vice President's links
to Halliburton.
First, Halliburton absolutely had a no-bid contract with the Army
Corps for oil-related services in Iraq, and it has billed American
taxpayers $1.4 billion so far. No other company was given the
opportunity to bid. That contract occasioned a unanimous vote, led by
the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, that we would not allow
that kind of contract to appear again. It is stated on the record by
Senator Warner from Virginia.
Halliburton has other contracts that were bid, but the massive oil
services contract was not.
Second, I appreciated the reading of the Vice President's comments on
``Meet the Press'' because even CRS agreed that deferred compensation
and stock options held by the Vice President are, in fact, financial
interests in Halliburton.
Third, the other member of the President's Cabinet who came into
service after serving as CEO, John Snow, took his deferred compensation
in a lump sum and got rid of his stock options immediately. That is the
right thing to do when you are at the top of the executive branch with
the direct ability to affect billions of dollars in contracts.
I urge my colleagues to attach some ethical guidelines to the Iraq
reconstruction funds. I urge my colleagues to think it through and send
a picture out to the American public that says: No, no one is on the
inside enough that they can influence what happened and profit from a
position that takes us through the reconstruction of Iraq after the
war.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired. Who speaks in
opposition?
The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. GRAHAM of South Carolina. Mr. President, in 2 minutes it is hard
to respond the way the Vice President deserves to be defended. I tell
every Member this: I am preparing a memo on the statement on ``Meet the
Press'' with the Vice President, his relationship with Halliburton, his
financial disclosure form, what he did in 1998, what he did in 2000,
and what he did in 2002.
Vote however you like. I am going to join sides with most of my
Democratic friends in a minute and oppose the Vice President and the
President on something very important to them. This amendment is
political slander. This amendment has as its basis untruth and is
factually incorrect. In 1998, the Vice President chose a deferred
compensation package that was irrevocable. He couldn't change his mind.
He insured that package with a private insurance policy because the
Office of Government Ethics told him that is what everybody does, and
he was exempt from going to the Office of Government Ethics.
I will ask unanimous consent to introduce the Vice President's
financial disclosure form. He went above and beyond the call of duty.
He has no financial interest in Halliburton. You are trying to accuse
him of being a liar. Your facts are wrong. This is manipulation. This
is politics at its worse. Please, look at what you are doing before you
vote here. The Vice President doesn't deserve this, and I am going to
send you a memo with what I believe to be the true facts, and we are
going to get to the bottom of this.
Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, as a member of the Senate Ethics
Committee, I take seriously any action which raises questions about the
integrity of the Federal Government. I believe firmly that the Federal
contracting process in Iraq and elsewhere should be transparent and
accountable to ensure Federal tax dollars are spent appropriately. Like
many of my constituents, I question the circumstances under which
Halliburton was awarded a contract in Iraq in a process that did not
include soliciting competitive bids from other companies. I believe all
aspects of that transaction should be carefully examined and open to
public inspection.
While I sympathize with the proponents of the Lautenberg amendment, I
do not believe a punitive, absolute statutory prohibition is the
correct approach under the circumstances. Instead, I support efforts to
ensure Federal contracts in Iraq are awarded through a process that is
subject to rigorous Congressional oversight and that applies strict
penalties for any unethical or illegal conduct that is uncovered.
Additionally, I believe contracts should be awarded through full and
fair competition.
As a U.S. Senator, I am ethically bound to conduct my official duties
in a manner that avoids even the appearance of impropriety. I fully
intend to honor that commitment to my country and my constituents. I
also intend to hold the Bush administration to the same standard.
Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, this is a very curious amendment. It tries
to take a stealth approach to the matter, but in fact, its real purpose
is pretty obvious. I don't think anyone will be fooled by it because we
all know who it is directed against.
Back in my home State of Wyoming, a lot of people who know Dick
Cheney will be surprised to see the Senate using its valuable time in
what some might see as a witch hunt against the
[[Page S12672]]
President and Vice President. It's a curious time for such an
activity--even if Halloween is rapidly approaching.
Now, I'm not standing here to defend the Vice President because he is
from Wyoming. I'm not even defending him because he's a fisherman
either--though to accept this amendment at face value you have to
swallow hook, line and sinker some pretty misleading information.
In fact, I can tell you, because I've fished with him, that although
fishermen sometimes have an unjust and unfair reputation for telling
stories, the only thing fishy about this whole affair is the text of
this amendment.
First of all, the amendment should be withdrawn because the vice
President has gone out of his way to explain his ties to his old
company and what they mean to him financially. No matter what happens
in the months to come, nothing will benefit him personally. Still, we
have some Members who aren't quite satisfied.
Right now a couple of us Senators have blind trusts. It's an
interesting thing that this amendment takes such a strong stand against
a Vice President who took the same ethical approach to this issue that
I did.
This whole situation points out the need for a national energy
policy. Halliburton has come under attack because there were
fluctuations in oil and gas prices that forced some mega mergers to
occur to keep the energy companies competitive. As a result, there were
only a few companies that could provide the service that was needed on
such short notice. Still, that isn't a good enough explanation for
some.
Even if we ignore that piece of the puzzle, however, the important
thing to note is the Vice President's decision to donate to charity the
after-tax proceeds he would receive from the exercise of his
Hallliburton stock options. In other words, even if his options were to
increase in value as a result of anything that happened during this
time, he still wouldn't receive anything from it.
Who would? you might ask.
According to the Vice President's signed agreement from January 28,
2001, there are three charities named. They are the Capital Partners
for Education, the George Washington University Medical Facility
Associates and the University of Wyoming.
I believe it is clear that there is no basis for the allegations or
concerns that led to the production of this amendment and it clearly
should be withdrawn. It goes against the grain of fairness, it can only
be defended by misrepresenting the facts on the Vice President's
financial interests, and it can't be seen as anything but an unfair
commentary on the Vice President's and the President's commitment to
ethics.
No serious-minded individual who belongs to any political party,
really believes this amendment is necessary or needed. It must be
withdrawn and an apology extended to both the Vice President and the
President for its promotion.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, has all time expired on this amendment?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic time has expired. There are 30
seconds remaining to the Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. REID. I advise everyone, this next vote is a 10-minute vote. The
prior vote was a 15-minute vote and went about 27, 28 minutes. I hope
we can have the 10-minute vote in maybe 20 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's point is well taken.
Mr. GRAHAM of South Carolina. Mr. President, do I have 30 seconds?
If you wonder what he did with the stock options, he assigned them
all to charities. Look at the facts before you vote because the facts
do not sustain these allegations. The allegations are off base. I
promise you, I will send you a memo. Please look before you vote. I
move to table.
Mr. NICKLES. I move to table the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion to table has already been made. The
yeas and nays have already been ordered. This is a 10-minute vote,
under the previous order.
The question is on agreeing to the motion to table amendment No.
1868. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Connecticut (Mr.
Lieberman) is necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 65, nays 34, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 386 Leg.]
YEAS--65
Alexander
Allard
Allen
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Breaux
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Campbell
Carper
Chafee
Chambliss
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeWine
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Ensign
Enzi
Fitzgerald
Frist
Graham (FL)
Graham (SC)
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Jeffords
Kyl
Landrieu
Lincoln
Lott
Lugar
McCain
McConnell
Miller
Murkowski
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Nickles
Roberts
Santorum
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Talent
Thomas
Voinovich
Warner
NAYS--34
Akaka
Baucus
Boxer
Byrd
Cantwell
Clinton
Corzine
Daschle
Dayton
Dodd
Durbin
Edwards
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Hollings
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Mikulski
Murray
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Sarbanes
Schumer
Stabenow
Wyden
NOT VOTING--1
Lieberman
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I have been carefully listening to this
debate for weeks, and I have tried to keep an open mind to the
opposition's arguments--insofar as those arguments have been
substantive.
I have been dismayed by the deliberate manipulation of statements and
arguments that have been made by members of the other party, such as:
Denunciations of the President over the fact that weapons of mass
destruction have not been discovered to date, despite the fact that
reports issued as late as last week indicate the fact that reports
issued as late as last week indicate that Saddam had clandestine plans
and activities for systems proscribed by the international community
under international law. False assertions that the President claimed an
imminent threat on the eve of this decision to remove Saddam Hussein
from power, when in fact the President stated in his State of the
Union:
Some have said we must not act until the threat is
imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced
their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they
strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly
emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would
come to late.
Some of this rhetoric, we must, regrettably, accept as the level of
debate that now occurs. But nothing offends me more than suggestions
that members of this administration, particularly my dear friend, the
Vice President, have venal motivations attached to the policy decisions
they support.
Dick Cheney is an older friend of mine. He has sacrificed for his
country most of his life. He does so today. When the chairman of the
Appropriations Committee responds to the amendment by the Senator from
New Jersey by calling it a slur, I have to agree. Dick Cheney has not
benefitted from this war, and I find it a profound calumniation that
anyone would imply that.
I ask my colleagues that we return to a dignified level of debate,
where we try to advance, improve on the grave issues of war and peace
before us.
I beg my colleagues that we desist from the politics of imputing
venality on those who are serving the public trust.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I will send up an amendment.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, will the Senator yield without losing his
right to the floor? For the information of Senators, Senator Inouye is
here. He is waiting. He has to make a statement. And Senator McConnell
has the floor now for his amendment.
I ask unanimous consent that following the disposition of the
McConnell amendment, the Senator from Hawaii have 20 minutes.
[[Page S12673]]
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. McCONNELL. Reserving the right to object, the Senator from
Connecticut and I wanted to enter into a very short colloquy about an
unrelated matter. Therefore, if it would be all right with the
chairman, I ask to amend the consent to allow for a brief colloquy
between Senator Dodd and myself on an entirely different matter.
Mr. STEVENS. I have no objection. Just, when Senator McConnell yields
the floor, that Senator Inouye get the floor. I did commit we would set
aside some time for him to make a statement. He has not made a
statement on the bill yet.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Amendment No. 1874
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask
for its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the pending amendments will
be set aside. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. McConnell] proposes an
amendment numbered 1874.
Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment
be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. . SHORT TITLE.
SEC. . (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following
findings:
(1) That on October 7, 2001, the Armed Forces of the United
States and its coalition allies launched military operations
in Afghanistan, designated as Operation Enduring Freedom,
that quickly caused the collapse of the Taliban regime, the
elimination of Afghanistan's terrorist infrastructure and the
capture of significant and numerous members of Al Qaeda;
(2) That on March 19, 2003, the Armed Forces of the United
States and its coalition allies launched military operations,
designated as Operation Iraqi Freedom, that quickly caused
the collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime, the elimination of
Iraq's terrorist infrastructure, the end of Iraq's illicit
and illegal programs to acquire weapons of mass destruction,
and the capture of significant international terrorists.
(3) That success in those two campaigns in the Global War
on Terrorism would not have been possible without the
dedication, courage, and service of the members of the United
States Armed Forces and their coalition partners;
(4) That throughout the proud military history of our
nation, we have recognized our brave men and women of the
Armed Forces by awarding them service medals for personal
bravery and other leadership actions and for their service in
military operations abroad and for support operations at home
and abroad;
(5) That historically the President has relied on senior
military officers to recommend the personal and theater
campaign medals and that, in keeping with these longstanding
traditions, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the combatant
commanders, including General Tommy Franks, U.S. Army, former
Commander of the United States Central Command, recommended
the awards described below in recognition of the worldwide
nature of the current conflict;
(6) That following the advice of his senior military and
civilian defense leaders, President Bush, by Executive Order
13289 on March 12, 2003, established the Global War on
Terrorism Expeditionary Medal to be awarded to service
members who serve in military operations to combat terrorism
on or after September 11, 2001, including, but not limited to
actions in Operations Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi
Freedom, in such locations as Afghanistan, Iraq, the Republic
of the Philippines, and elsewhere in Southwest Asia, in
recognition of the sacrifice and contributions military
members make in the global war on terrorism;
(7) That eligibility for the Global War on Terrorism
Expeditionary Medal is predicated on deployment abroad for 30
days or more in support of Global War on Terrorism operations
on or after September 11, 2001;
(8) That by the same Executive Order, the President
established the Global War on Terrorism Service Medical
recognizing duty in Operation Noble Eagle and the homeland
defense mission against further terrorist attacks, and which
recognizes duty in support of military operations performed
in areas that do not qualify for the Global War on Terrorism
Expeditionary Medal; and
(9) That implementing regulations for eligibility have not
been issued by the Secretary of Defense.
(b) Sense of the Senate on the Award of Campaign Medal.--It
is the sense of the Senate that the Secretary of Defense
should, on an expedited basis, issue the necessary
regulations to implement these awards and ensure that any
person who renders qualifying service with the Armed Forces
in those phases of the Global War on Terrorism including
Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom, and
Operation Noble Eagle should promptly receive these awards.
____________________