[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Pages 16474-16476]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




               STAYING IN TOUCH WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

  Mr. BYRD. Madam President, the President talks a lot about the coffee 
shop in Crawford, TX, which brings to mind Uncle Josh and Aunt Nancy's 
Smokehouse in West Virginia where I have been talking with people for a 
long time. You ought to come down to that shop sometime--Uncle Josh and 
Aunt Nancy's Smokehouse. I talk with those people quite often. We have 
one of those in every State, I suppose. I suppose each of the Senators 
here has a coffee shop such as the one in Crawford, TX, or like Uncle 
Josh and Aunt Nancy's Smokehouse in their State. So I have one of 
those.
  It is good to get back home and kind of get the feel of the people 
and ``press the flesh'' a little, as Lyndon Johnson used to say, and 
know what they are saying back there in that coffee shop.
  But, Madam President, despite all of his talk about staying in touch 
with the people at the coffee shop in Crawford, TX, the President seems 
to have lost touch with the needs of the American people. I worry that 
the extra caffeine must have affected the President's ability to take 
the pulse of America. After looking at some of the administration's 
actions over the past few weeks, I am almost certain of it.
  At almost every turn, the President seems to be a day late and a 
dollar short. Let me just give a few examples. On July 16, the House 
added $700 million of supplemental funding to the Interior bill to 
fight fires that are raging across this Nation. The administration, 
through the Office of Management and Budget, wrote to the Congress and 
strongly objected to that funding. Yet on August 28--just 6 weeks 
later--the President requested $825 million for emergency firefighting 
funding. It is a complete about-face.
  In mid-July, the White House, through the Office of Management and 
Budget, again pressed Congress to reduce the size of the supplemental 
that was then in conference. The OMB Director, Mitch Daniels, 
recommended that conferees on the bill reduce funding for the 
Transportation Security Administration by $219 million. The conferees 
acceded to the administration's request. Yet on September 3--just 6 
weeks later--the President requested that $219 million and an 
additional $327 million for the Transportation Security Administration. 
That

[[Page 16475]]

is $546 million that, 6 weeks earlier, the administration did not think 
was necessary.
  In late July, Congress approved $200 million for economic assistance 
to Israel and $50 million of disaster assistance for Palestinians, 
which was not requested by the President. The President had until 
September 1 to designate the funds as emergency and, thus, make the 
funds available to spend. The President rejected the funding on 
September 1. He could have had it then. All he needed to do was sign 
his name. No, he rejected it on September 1. But 2 days later, on 
September 3, the President requested--you guessed it--$250 million for 
the very same purpose. Are we seeing a pattern here? It is as plain as 
the noonday Sun on a cloudless sky. On September 4, the administration 
wrote Congress to stress its desire for Congress to restrain spending 
by keeping spending for the fiscal year that begins October 1 to a 
level of $759 billion, and yet on August 2 and September 3 the 
President requested $1.3 billion of additional funding and proposed no 
offsets for that spending.
  The Congressional Budget Office now estimates that the President has 
requested $760.5 billion for the fiscal year that begins October 1, and 
yet the President insists we spend only $759 billion--that far and no 
farther, $759 billion. This President seems to rely on the same types 
of accounting techniques with regard to homeland security that are 
causing such problems in corporate America.
  The President and his administration love to tell Americans that we 
are constantly at risk of new terrorist attacks. The President's 
Cabinet members have been out in great force time and time again 
putting the country on alert for a possible terrorist attack. We have 
been told to watch the bridges, watch the fuel trucks, watch the banks. 
Remember the little boy who cried wolf too often, too many times?
  So we are constantly at risk, the administration says. In fact, just 
this afternoon the administration raised the Nation's level of alert 
from yellow to orange, believing there is a high risk for a terrorist 
attack.
  I have been thinking that, too. I suppose most people in this country 
have been concerned about that as well. Apparently, security concerns 
have grown by such an extent in the last 24 hours that Americans at 
home and around the world are being told to be extra vigilant and 
alert. Specifically, the Attorney General pointed to new threats aimed 
at embassies overseas, at our Nation's transportation network, and at 
the symbols and monuments of our country. That is why Congress 
overwhelmingly included in the emergency supplemental package $10 
million for embassy security. That is why Congress passed $17.7 million 
for security at the Washington Monument and the Jefferson Memorial. 
That is why Congress approved $150 million for airport security. That 
is why Congress approved another $42 million for security at air 
traffic control towers.
  Congress has not been asleep at the wheel. Congress has been acting 
like Paul Revere in saying: Alert, rise, for the day is passing, and 
you lie sleeping on. Others have girded their armor and forth to battle 
have gone. So Congress has been sounding this alert. That is why 
Congress approved $150 million for airport security and another $42 
million for security at air traffic control towers, but the 
administration rejected those items and labeled them as wasteful 
spending.
  Wasteful, my foot. There is nothing wasteful about investing in the 
security of the American people. Hear me down there at the other end of 
the avenue. Hear me, Mr. President. There is nothing wasteful about 
investing in the security of the American people who send us to 
Washington, whose taxes pay the bills, whose sons and daughters give 
their blood in wars--the American people.
  The only thing wasted by the President's rejection of these funds is 
time, time necessary to put these dollars to work and put them to work 
rightly, prudently, carefully, to put these dollars to work and to 
protect American lives.
  The administration is right to warn America when it learns of new, 
credible terrorist threats, whether at home or abroad. However, 
Americans must have the tools to secure our homeland. The homeland 
defense problem cannot be solved simply by moving boxes around on an 
organizational flowchart or by ``now you see it, now you don't'' 
funding shenanigans.
  A few weeks ago, Congress approved $2.5 billion for homeland defense 
programs, $2.5 billion that was put into legislation by this Senate 
through its Appropriations Committee, in a bipartisan display of 
support; $2.5 billion for homeland defense programs to secure our 
ports, our river ports, our seaports, to secure our airports, to secure 
our nuclear facilities, to train and equip our Nation's police and 
firefighters. Those are the people who ran up the steps, those are the 
people who sought to protect the lives of others, and those are the 
people who gave their own lives to save the lives of others. Those are 
the people who have now left widows and orphans, happy dreams forever 
gone. That is what Congress was thinking of when we put that money in 
the bill. This funding would have addressed the very security concerns 
the administration outlined this very afternoon.
  The first question that was ever asked in the history of the human 
race was, ``Where art thou?'' When God came in the cool of the day, 
walking in the Garden of Eden looking for Adam, Adam was in hiding. God 
said, ``Adam, where art thou?'' That was the first question that was 
ever asked in the history of the human race: ``Adam, where art thou?''
  I say, where were you? The people will say to the administration, 
where were you? Where were you when the Congress passed that measure 
providing $2.5 billion for the security, for the welfare, and for the 
protection of the American people? Where were you, Mr. President? Where 
were you? It was up to you. Just the signature of a name would have 
given the $2.5 billion to the firefighters, the policemen, the health 
emergency people, would have given you that money for the protection of 
our nuclear facilities, for the protection of our ports of entry, for 
better border security to the north, for better border security to the 
south, for more food inspectors. Why did you turn your back on that 
money for the security of the American people?
  I say again, that funding would have addressed the very security 
concerns the administration outlined this afternoon. Yet on September 
1, the President chose to cancel those funds, turn his back on those 
funds, push them away. I wonder what goes into that coffee in Crawford?
  Today, the Senate passed a drought relief amendment by a 79-to-16 
margin. This amendment would provide disaster assistance to our 
Nation's farmers and ranchers in the face of unprecedented drought. 
That ought to be pretty easy to understand. I have lived in northern 
Virginia now for 50 years, the same number of years that I have served 
in Congress. In those 50 years, I don't recall ever such a drought as 
we have experienced and such weather as we have experienced as this 
year. I have been accustomed to pulling up my tomato plants, cutting up 
the stems, and putting them in the trash bags to be hauled away by the 
garbage truck. And I have been accustomed to doing that in mid-
September or late September. This year, forget it. I did it in mid-
August. Those vines were dying. The blossoms that had come earlier had 
never flowered into tomatoes. Don't think I am a great tomato producer. 
I only have three or four vines. I have planted as many as seven or 
eight during the years I have been in McLean, but that is just from a 
wee tomato farmer.
  This is a drought. I have lived now 85 years, lacking a very few 
days--85 years. I have seen something happening out in the heavens as 
we witnessed pestilences and droughts, floods and fires. Something has 
happened. This was an unprecedented drought as far as I am concerned. I 
am probably not going to put out any tomato plants next year. The 
country will not miss my tomato plants, but the country misses the 
signature on that $2.5 billion that would have been turned loose,

[[Page 16476]]

that would have been there for the country, for the protection of the 
people, for all these items and more that I have mentioned.
  Yet the President has told our farmers and ranchers that he opposes 
this funding. How about that? He has told the farmers and ranchers he 
opposes this funding. But he did not oppose a $1.3 trillion tax cut 
that goes for the most part to the wealthiest in this country. Those 
people never lived on my side of the tracks, the people who are going 
to be the beneficiaries of most of that tax cut. They did not come from 
my side of the tracks. No, the people on my side of the tracks have not 
reaped any benefit from that tax cut. My side of the tracks, yes, had a 
coffee shop on that side, too, but not many people could afford 5 cents 
for the cup of coffee.
  So when the President tells our farmers and ranchers he opposes this 
funding, without this help many farms and ranches will dry up and 
disappear. Congress knows how to take the pulse of the Nation and to 
respond to the needs of the people. There are people in this Congress 
who may have lived on the other side of the tracks, mingled with people 
not just in the Crawford coffee shop but in Uncle Josh's and Aunt 
Nancy's Smokehouse from where the common people, the ordinary people 
come.
  If we wait for the President to change his mind, there may be no 
pulse to take for our farmers and ranchers. Once again, the President 
seems to be a day late and a dollar short. It is time for the 
administration to wake up and smell the coffee.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SPECTER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that further 
proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SPECTER. Madam President, I understand that on my call for 
regular order, we go back to the pending bill. Is that correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. SPECTER. Then I do call for the regular order.

                          ____________________