[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Pages 15399-15400]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                            PRESSING ISSUES

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I express my appreciation to the 
distinguished majority whip, the assistant leader. I acknowledge we 
have a lot of work to do during this work period. I hope we can 
accomplish a great deal. We had a great couple of weeks right before we 
left. I hope the week off, the Fourth of July, was good for everyone. I 
know it was for me to get away from Washington and breathe some of that 
good desert air.
  Sandra Day O'Connor retired just over a week ago. As the first woman 
to serve as a Supreme Court Justice, she blazed a trail which I hope 
many will follow. She decided cases the old-fashioned way, based on 
law, not politics.
  As a westerner, she brought to the Court a love of the land and an 
appreciation for individual rights. I salute the people of Arizona for 
giving us such a dedicated public servant, someone who served in the 
State of Arizona as a State legislator, a member of an intermediate 
court of appeals and, of course, an inspiring career as a Supreme Court 
Justice.
  Now we have begun the process of finding her replacement. The 
Constitution gives the President and the Senate shared responsibility 
to fill this vacancy because a President may only act with the advice 
and consent of the Senate. I appreciate very much President Bush 
beginning this process of consultation the way he has. I will always be 
grateful for the private meeting he and I had prior to her retiring and 
the phone call he placed to me the day of her retirement.
  It speaks volumes that his chief of staff, Andy Card, was calling 
various members of the Senate from Scotland. Harriet Myers called 
various members of the Senate. That is important. I appreciate it very 
much. In the days and weeks ahead, it is important that meaningful 
consultation continues. Together we can find someone who will bring the 
country together.
  The President has asked the majority leader, the ranking member and 
the chairman of the Judiciary Committee meet with him early tomorrow 
morning. I look forward to that meeting.
  This is what President Reagan did when he appointed Sandra Day 
O'Connor: He brought the country together. Both parties cheered her 
nomination. That can happen again if President Bush nominates us a 
Justice we can all be proud of, a mainstream Justice committed to 
protecting the rights of all Americans. There are large numbers of 
conservative jurists and lawyers who fit that description perfectly.
  Events in London last Thursday reminded us that the freedoms and 
rights Supreme Court Justices protect are a threat to those with a very 
different view of the world. My heart and my prayers go out to the 
victims of the London attacks and the people of Great Britain. The 
bombings were the acts of cowards. We must redouble our effort to track 
down the murderous thugs who committed those terrible acts. We must 
continue our effort to track down the murderous thugs who would do us 
harm.
  I have great affection and admiration for the people of Great 
Britain. Their proud tradition of resiliency and determination was on 
display last week in the face of this latest attack on their people and 
the great city of London.
  Unfortunately, the British people have considerable experience with 
attacks of terrorists on their homeland, including repeated terrorist 
attacks from supporters of the Irish Republican Army. There are 
important lessons that can be drawn from the British response to these 
attacks. First, Britain remains determined not to change its way of 
life and its principles while at the same time vigorously pursuing 
those responsible for the criminal acts.

[[Page 15400]]

  It is important to note the people of Great Britain care about the 
Irish people, just as we do. I have been to that wonderful emerald 
isle. I love the country. I love the island. The fact that a few people 
perpetrated those acts of violence does not take away from our 
admiration for those people.
  The same applies in Britain with the acts of Islamic terrorists. That 
does not take away from the fact that the people who follow the Islamic 
religion are good people who follow a very important, good religion. 
The morality code of that religion is significantly important. They are 
good people. I have gotten so close to them.
  My wife's two physicians, a surgeon and an internist, are Pakistanis. 
They are among our closest friends. We visit each other's homes often. 
We celebrate different holidays together. We exchange presents. They 
are wonderful people. These are two devoutly religious men whose 
religion we have learned to respect greatly. The people of Great 
Britain understand that. They did not sever relations with an entire 
people because of the actions of a very few who are part of that 
people.
  There was great concern in the wake of these attacks about a backlash 
against the Arab community. What we saw was just the opposite: a couple 
of broken windows by a few troublemakers, but basically nothing. The 
people of Great Britain have come together, all people have come 
together, all walks of life, all religions. That is an example for us. 
I am hopeful Great Britain and we in the United States will continue to 
heed both of these lessons in the wake of last week's bombings.
  As the distinguished assistant leader mentioned, there is a third 
lesson we can draw from the London attacks and it is relevant to 
matters in the Senate. I say what my distinguished colleague mentioned, 
the senior Senator from Kentucky. We are going to take up the Homeland 
Security bill. The lesson we need to learn is simple: Fighting 
terrorism overseas is not enough to ensure that terrorists will not 
strike where we live. Today the Senate begins consideration of the 
Homeland Security appropriations bill. That will occur in less than an 
hour. We spend more in Iraq in a single month than we spend on first 
responders all year. Failure in Iraq is not an option, and we will 
continue to support our troops, but we must do more to support the war 
on terror here at home.
  The minority, the Democrats, are committed to doing everything 
possible to defeat terrorism abroad. We have repeatedly argued that we 
need to be equally vigorous in our efforts to protect the American 
people from terrorist attacks at home. Unfortunately, the 
administration has never grasped this reality. We have offered 
amendment after amendment and they have been defeated on party line 
votes.
  We supported establishment of the Homeland Security Department before 
September 11. And as we recall, this administration opposed the 
establishment of this agency even after September 11. Once the 
administration relented and a homeland security agency was established, 
Democrats repeatedly sought to ensure that this agency received the 
resources it needed to make Americans and America more secure.
  Democrats sought to beef up our security on rail and transit systems, 
our chemical plants, our nuclear power generating facilities, and this 
administration and the Republican Senators in this Senate said no.
  Democrats sought to increase security on chemical and nuclear 
facilities, as I have indicated, and other critical infrastructure. It 
was ``no'' again. Democrats attempted to improve security at this 
Nation's ports and the Bush administration, Republicans, said no. 
Finally, we sought to ensure that this Nation's first responders obtain 
the resources they need to deter terrorists from attacking, and again 
Republicans said no.
  The bill before the Senate presents another opportunity for all 
Members. We will have amendments to address each of these areas this 
week. I am hopeful, with everything we know, the majority will at long 
last agree with Democrats that we should be doing much more to protect 
the Nation from terrorist attacks at home.


                                Veterans

  Let me close with a few words about our Nation's veterans. After 
months of denial--in fact, more than a year--that a problem even 
existed, Senate Republicans late last month agreed with Democrats--
reluctantly--that our veterans were not getting the care and resources 
they earned and deserved. Remember, we brought this up before committee 
on at least two occasions, as well as on the Senate floor, and every 
time it was voted down by a strict party line vote and we did not get 
the veterans what they wanted.
  With great fanfare, Senate Republicans announced they were wrong for 
opposing Democratic efforts to provide additional efforts to the 
veterans health care system and would not support providing an 
additional $1.5 billion.
  We appeared to be on the road to getting something done for our 
veterans. Unfortunately, rather than quickly passing the Senate figure 
and ensuring our veterans immediately got the resources they need, 
House Republicans decided to play games and give our veterans 
significantly less in the process, more than half a billion.
  Even worse than what the Republicans in the House did, rather than 
standing up for a vote they had cast a day or so earlier, Senate 
Republicans blinked and backtracked. Senate Republicans objected to a 
unanimous consent request to make the House-passed bill consistent with 
the level they had supported just a few hours earlier.
  Our first amendment, then, on this bill will be to give the Senate 
majority another opportunity to show our veterans and the American 
public where they stand. We will offer an amendment to give the 
veterans an additional $1.5 billion. Probably that is not enough 
because from some of the statistics we hear it is now closer to $2 
billion. But what if we are wrong? What if we are giving the veterans a 
little more? Is there anything wrong with that? I do not think we are 
giving them a little more. We are giving them less. But would there be 
anything wrong with that? I hope the resounding answer is no.
  So I hope that the majority will join us in supporting this 
amendment. And, just as importantly, let's not play politics with 
America's veterans.
  I again thank my friend, the distinguished Senator from Kentucky, for 
allowing me to speak now because he did have the floor.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Kentucky.

                          ____________________