[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 5]
[Senate]
[Pages 6212-6214]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      HONORING GENERAL AL LENHARDT

  Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, a little over 18 months ago, I came to 
this floor to welcome MG Alfonso Lenhardt to the Senate on his first 
day as this body's Sergeant at Arms.
  Tomorrow will be GEN Lenhardt's last day in the Senate.
  It is with profound admiration, and more than a little sadness, that 
I rise today to thank him for his extraordinary service, and to wish 
him much success and happiness in the years ahead.
  Nominating Al Lenhardt to serve as the Senate's Sergeant at Arms was 
one of the great honors of my time as majority leader. It was also, I 
think, one of the best decisions I made in more than 30 years of public 
service.
  I did not know Al before we began the search for a Sergeant at Arms 
in the summer of 2001. He was recommended to me by our former Secretary 
of the Senate, Jeri Thomson.
  Jeri had met Al more than a decade ago when they were both at the 
Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. She was impressed by his 
intelligence, knowledge, steady demeanor and commitment to public 
service, characteristics she correctly noted are highly desirable in a 
Senate Sergeant at Arms.
  Twenty minutes after meeting Al, I knew Jeri had identified the right 
person for this job.
  I also knew, when I nominated Al, that he would make history in this 
Senate. What I did not realize is what a crucial role he would play, 
and what a difference he would make, in the history of this Senate.
  Al Lenhardt is the first African American ever to serve as the 
Senate's top law enforcement and administrative officer. In fact, he is 
the first African American to serve as an elected officer of the Senate 
or House--ever.
  That seems hard to believe, but it is true. And after 212 years, I 
must say, it was long overdue.
  And he was the individual serving as the top law enforcement officer 
of the Senate when the unimaginable happened--terrorists struck a 
devastating blow on American soil.
  The September 11 attacks occurred less than a week after Al Lenhardt 
was sworn in as Sergeant at Arms. I do not think he took a day off for 
over 5 months.
  Five weeks after September 11, a letter containing a lethal dose of 
anthrax was opened in my office.
  That incident remains the largest bioterrorism attack ever on U.S. 
soil, and one of the most dangerous events in Congress' history.
  Al Lenhardt's leadership ability, experience and demeanor were 
instrumental in the Senate's entry into the post-September 11 world. I 
am not sure that before that terrible day any of us fully appreciated 
the threat that America's enemies posed to our U.S. Capitol, a majestic 
and enduring symbol of our democracy.
  Al Lenhardt rose to the challenge of protecting against further 
terrorist attacks on the Capitol complex and protecting the people who 
work in and visit these buildings--without closing ``The People's 
House'' to the people themselves.
  Al provided calm and steady leadership in the face of danger that 
reassured us all in an extraordinarily stressful and emotional time.

[[Page 6213]]

  When deadly anthrax was released in the Hart Building, 50 Senators 
and their staffs, and 15 committees and their staffs, were displaced 
for 96 days while the building was remediated.
  Never before--not even when the British burned the Capitol in 1814, 
had so may Senators been uprooted.
  Relocating them and their staffs presented an unprecedented 
logistical challenge. But Al Lenhardt and his staff, and the staffs of 
the Rules Committee and the Secretary of the Senate, responded quickly 
and well. The business of democracy never stopped.
  Al Lenhardt stood tall in the face of danger. And his steady hand 
assured that the Senate kept functioning.
  Over the past 18 months, Al Lenhardt rose to the occasion, 
demonstrating to me that he was indeed the right man, with the right 
skills and experience, in the right place, at the right time.
  Al Lenhardt has had a remarkable public career.
  He served in the United States Army for 32 years and as a combat 
veteran wears the Purple Heart earned in Vietnam.
  He retired from the Army in 1997.
  His last Army position was commanding general of the U.S. Army 
Recruiting Command at Ft. Knox, KY. From that post, he managed more 
than 13,000 people in 1,800 separate locations.
  Before that, he served as the senior military police officer for all 
police operations and security matters throughout the Army's worldwide 
sphere of influence.
  In the 1980s, he did counter-terrorism work in Germany against the 
Baader-Meinhof Gang and other terrorist groups.
  He also was the former commander of the Army's Chemical and Military 
Police Centers at Fort McClellan, AL, which trains the military police 
who are guarding our bases overseas.
  Al Lenhardt was born in Harlem 59 years ago.
  He earned a bachelor's degree in criminal justice from the University 
of Nebraska, a master of arts degree in public administration from 
Central Michigan University, and a masters of science degree in the 
administration of justice from Wichita State University. He has also 
completed post-graduate studies at the Kennedy School of Government at 
Harvard, and the University of Michigan Executive Business School.
  Between the Army and the Senate, he served for 4 years as executive 
vice president and chief operating officer of the Council on 
Foundations, where he worked to harness the power of philanthropy to 
meet some of America's most urgent unmet needs.
  He has been active in an array of organizations, from the Boy Scouts 
of America, to the Boys and Girls Clubs of Washington, DC, the National 
Office of Philanthropy, and the Black Church Project.
  He has been married for 38 years to Jackie Lenhardt, one of the few 
people I have ever met who has a more commanding presence than Al. 
Jackie and Al have three daughters--two lawyers and a doctor--and two 
grandchildren, Olly, who is 4, and Maya, who was born 2 months ago.
  The closest thing to a complaint I've ever heard from anyone who knew 
Al Lenhardt in the Army was from an officer who took a battalion six 
years after Al had left it.
  He said: ``It's tough to go into a unit after Al Lenhardt because he 
leaves such strong footprints. Six years later, his policies and 
procedures still stood. He made a lasting impact on soldiers.''
  The one consolation in saying goodbye to Al Lenhardt is knowing that 
the policies and procedures he instituted here in the Senate will 
continue protecting us in the future.
  Al's predecessor, Jim Ziglar, began the effort to modernize security 
and protect the Capitol in an age of terrorism. And he made a good 
start.
  But I think even Jim would acknowledge that it is Al Lenhardt who 
deserves the lion's share of the credit for leading the Senate into the 
modern age of security and law enforcement.
  If Congress is ever forced to vacate this building, or even this 
city, for any length of time, the Senate will be able to move and 
resume the work of democracy immediately in a new location under a 
``continuity of operations'' plan that Jim Ziglar started and Jeri 
Thomson and Al Lenhardt completed.
  While Al would be the first to state that more needs to be done, he 
has ensured that the Senate will continue operations in the event of 
any emergency.
  The physical security around the Capitol is much stronger and 
intelligence gathering, analysis and sharing is much better today than 
it was on September 11th--largely because of Al Lenhardt.
  We are better prepared to prevent attacks--and to respond if attacks 
happen--than we were before Al Lenhardt came here.
  Because of Al Lenhardt, we now have an effective crisis 
communications network that uses state-of-the-art technology.
  We have emergency evacuation plans and drills.
  We've implemented state-of-the-art mail security to prevent another 
nightmare like the anthrax attack.
  Capitol Police officers are getting new training to deal with the new 
threats. We are also expanding the police force--so our officers can 
get some much-deserved rest.
  Al Lenhardt has played a leadership role in building stronger working 
relationships with security and intelligence experts at the departments 
of Homeland Security, Justice, Defense and other agencies.
  That is another way Al Lenhardt made history.
  The first Saturday morning after the anthrax letter was opened, Al 
was at work in the Capitol, surrounded by scientists and investigators. 
He had been at work until late the night before.
  That morning, someone asked him: ``If you had to decide all over 
again, would you still want this job?''
  Al smiled his great, broad smile and--without a moment's hesitation--
replied: ``Absolutely. To be in a position to serve your country--what 
better job could there be?''
  To that, Mr. President, I can only add: What better person could 
there have been in the Senate Sergeant at Arms' position these last 18 
months than General Alfonso Lenhardt?
  Certainly no one I have ever met.
  Al Lenhardt has earned the respect and gratitude of every member of 
this Senate, and of this nation.
  I am proud to have recommended him. I am proud to have served with 
him. And I am even more proud to call him my friend.
  Indeed the entire Senate community is grateful to Al Lenhardt for 
what he has contributed to us, and we will miss him.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. Before the majority leader leaves the floor, I ask to be 
associated with the remarks he made about General Lenhardt. I add that 
in the years Senator Daschle has been the Democratic leader--he is 
starting his eighth year--he has done a lot of very good things for the 
State of South Dakota, our country, and the Senate. But nothing he has 
done has been more meaningful than selecting this professional, the 
first time in the history of our country, the Sergeant at Arms was a 
professional who had experience.
  He was in charge of all the military police in the Army, a general in 
the United States Army, and was called upon for duty by Senator 
Daschle. If there were ever anyone with a vision regarding the problems 
this country faced and this Senate passed, Senator Daschle, in 
selecting General Lenhardt--because September 11 came during his 
honeymoon period. He had just gotten here.
  We were so well served and have been so well served. I want the 
Record to reflect not only my great admiration and my friendship for 
General Lenhardt, I want the record to reflect for all Senator Daschle 
has done, nothing has been more important in the Senate than his 
selecting this good man for this most important job.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I thank my dear friend, the Senator from Nevada, for his 
very kind words.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, I walked over to the floor without 
realizing we were giving a testament to

[[Page 6214]]

General Lenhardt. But I could not agree more with the words I heard 
from Senator Daschle, as well as the words from Senator Reid of Nevada. 
It is true, as I reflect upon it, that I know of no man who contributed 
greater service for his country than Al Lenhardt. He is such a 
professional. He is such a gentleman. He is so good. We trust him so 
much. We are so lucky that he was our Sergeant at Arms during the 
tragic times the Capitol family has been through the last couple of 
years.
  I know we are all extremely proud of him and we will have very fond 
memories of his service here. I say to General Lenhardt, you are a 
great man, and we appreciate your service.
  Mr. President, I rise today to pledge my support for our brave men 
and women who are on the front lines protecting America as we work to 
eliminate terrorism. . . . To pledge my support for the United States 
and all that our country represents: democracy, freedom of speech and 
religion, independence of thought. . . . And to pledge my support for 
our leaders and our free and open elections that allow democracy to 
thrive.
  I also rise today to urge and insist that throughout the ongoing 
situation with Iraq, we remember our underlying goal: To protect our 
country from weapons of mass destruction and terrorist threats and stop 
those who provide assistance to terrorist operations. In order to fully 
accomplish these goals, we need the support and assistance of the 
broadest possible worldwide coalition of our allies.
  It's not in our Nation's interest to establish arbitrary deadlines to 
force us to act without the support of others. This is not the time to 
isolate our country by moving into a unilateral war against Iraq.
  A war that could result in massive casualties and long term 
devastation. A war that has the likely potential of increasing 
terrorist threats against our Nation.
  There is no question that the United States has the ability and the 
right to take necessary action to protect our country. But we should 
not burn bridges--bridges that we will surely need down the road--in 
our rush to war with Iraq.
  There is no debate that the brutal regime of Saddam Hussein must come 
to an end. He has a long history of attacking and murdering his own 
people, employing chemical and biological weapons, and continually 
defying the limits set forth by the UN. There have been reported links 
between Iraq and terrorist activity, although no link has been 
established between Iraq and the events of September 11. The Iraqi 
people and the global community deserve to be free from a cruel 
dictator and the threat to safety that he represents. The credibility 
of the United Nations and of America is on the line.
  We must take the time to fully weigh the risks and costs associated 
with unilateral action against the results we will achieve. The threat 
Iraq poses is not imminent, at least not so imminent that we can't 
continue with another week, or another month, of negotiations to garner 
the support of members of the United Nations Security Council.
  The clock is ticking, but the alarm has not yet rung. I encourage the 
administration to continue inspections beyond their self-imposed March 
17 deadline. In these final critical minutes, we have the opportunity 
to lay out hard and fast, mutually agreed upon benchmarks for Hussein 
to meet--or not meet--to determine his fate. Britain laid out 
definitive steps yesterday, such as allowing Iraq scientists to be 
interviewed abroad, destroying banned weapons and providing documentary 
evidence of any such destruction in the past.
  While support for their resolution has not been overwhelming, it is 
important to continue along this path. Indeed, it is critical. We must 
both provide assistance to Britain, our strongest ally, while employing 
every resource at our command to garner Security Council support.
  As the world's superpower, it is not only our responsibility, but it 
is in our best interest to lead. It's our responsibility to walk with 
and secure the support of our allies. The decisions we make in the 
coming days will have global reverberations and I am hopeful we won't 
have to endure the impacts alone.
  In the case that unilateral military action is decided upon, the 
ramifications, lengthy reconstruction process and costs involved must 
be addressed. There are numerous reports that a war with Iraq will be a 
relatively short operation. But what follows in a month, in 6 months, 
in a year?
  If the United States chooses to go it alone in Iraq and forsakes the 
support of a majority of our allies, the hurdles and pitfalls will be 
numerous. And the likelihood of long term success and stability will be 
diminished. If we are successful in our mission to remove Saddam, a 
successor will need to be determined. The likelihood of Iraq becoming a 
democracy in our lifetime is unlikely. Even with the ousting of Saddam, 
we must be prepared and accepting of a moderate Arab government similar 
to others in the region.
  The cost of rebuilding the country will be enormous, both in terms of 
money and manpower. From ensuring the Iraqi children can obtain clean 
water to establishing a forum for a free and open government to thrive. 
Are we willing to take those costs solely upon ourselves?
  We must also be ready to focus our resources on the stability of the 
entire Middle East region and Muslim world. We need a comprehensive 
policy of economic engagement, one that includes expanded trade.
  We should consider a trade benefits program similar to what we 
currently do for Africa, the Caribbean, and the Andean countries. In 
order to achieve long-term stability and reduce the terrorist threat, 
we will need to engage the entire region. And we will need our allies 
to assist in this engagement.
  It's time to face facts. Our country is facing a troubling economy, 
unemployment, low growth, large national debt. Interest rates can't go 
much lower.
  If we continue to disregard the concerns of other Security Council 
members and move forward with only a small band of countries that 
support immediate military action, the lion's share of the costs and 
military burden will fall on America's shoulders. Where will this money 
come from. How long must our troops be away from their families--
months, years, decades? We must be fully prepared for this scenario 
before we move forward.
  We are all in agreement that Saddam Hussein is a bad man and the 
threat he poses cannot be disregarded. While I unequivocally support 
removing Hussein from power, knowing that he is a peril to the region 
and the world, I urge that we move forward with a strong coalition of 
support. The clock is running down, but there is still time to gather 
our allies. Our long term interests--on every front--will be best 
achieved by standing together, united behind our common goal of 
eliminating terrorism and keeping our countries safe.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Alexander). The Senator from Utah.

                          ____________________