[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 17]
[Senate]
[Pages 22386-22387]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 A LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, EDUCATION APPROPRIATIONS BILL AND 
                             HABEAS CORPUS

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition to comment 
about the appropriations bill covering the Departments of Labor, Health 
and Human Services, and Education. It had been my hope that before we 
finished our work in the 109th Congress we would address an 
appropriations bill on the very important subjects covered by those 
three major departments--the Department of Labor, the Department of 
Health and Human Services, and the Department of Education. It appears 
at this juncture that we will not be taking up that bill, and I think 
it is very regrettable. Conceivably we could still act, having the 
balance of this week, and we could be in session next week, but I 
understand that does not appear to be the will of the Senate to 
proceed. It is unfortunate because there are a great many priorities 
which ought to be revised in that budget, which approximates $147 
billion.
  We have had a decrease in funding for cancer. As tough as that malady 
is in the United States, and as many people as it claims, we now find 
that we have $50 million a year less for the National Cancer Institute.
  We find that there has been a decrease in the funding for the 
National Institutes of Health generally, which is unacceptable. Senator 
Tom Harkin and I, as chairman and ranking--we change gavels from time 
to time on that, and we are about to do so again, but we called it a 
seamless exchange of the gavel--have worked with leadership to increase 
the funding for the National Institutes of Health from $12 billion in 
1995 to the current recommended funding level of $28.5 billion. 
Enormous advances have been made in combating Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, 
heart disease, cancer, and so many other maladies.
  We need to reevaluate many of the other programs in the health field, 
and in education funding for GEAR UP mentoring program. We need some 
rescission in appropriations on No Child Left Behind. We need revisions 
on worker safety. It is totally unsatisfactory to leave the 109th 
Congress with our having completed action on only 2 of 12 
appropriations bills. Ten bills are unattended to. Only the Department 
of Defense appropriations bill and Homeland Security will have been 
acted upon, which is not adequate for our responsibilities on these 
very important subjects.
  We had a series of hearings to investigate and inquire into how we 
ought to spend the money for the Department of Education. Now we are 
not permitted to act on those recommendations and to reassess the 
priorities and the interests of the American people. Chairman Regula of 
the House of Representatives and I have tried to conference on an 
informal basis. But I think it is most unfortunate that we are not able 
to complete this bill.
  It is my hope that we will take up the bill early in the 110th 
Congress. The new majority leader has outlined an ambitious work 
schedule. This ought to be a priority item to take up.
  I have been on the Appropriations Committee for all of my tenure in 
the Senate, ending my 26th year. We need to do better when we take a 
look at the appropriations process next year.
  Similarly, it had been my hope that we would have moved on the 
legislation to provide protection for civil liberties on the 
surveillance program put into effect by the President, which is 
designed to protect America from another terrorist attack and to 
balance security interests versus privacy interests.
  When this program was disclosed on December 16 of last year, almost a 
year ago, we moved ahead in the Judiciary Committee to have a series of 
hearings to try to find a way to have judicial review in accordance 
with the tradition and concept in the United States, having the 
impartial magistrate between the Government and the person subject to 
surveillance, to search and seizure, or to wiretapping. The initial 
legislation would have given that authority to the Foreign Intelligence 
Surveillance Court, which was selected because of the expertise that 
court has and because they can maintain secrecy. In my legal opinion, 
there is no doubt that the administration program violates FISA, the 
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. But the President has asserted 
that there was article II power, inherent powers as Commander in Chief, 
which warrants this program without--justifies this program without 
warrants.
  I cosponsored legislation introduced by the senior Senator from 
California, Mrs. Feinstein, which would extend the time for retroactive 
approval by the FISA court in 3 to 7 days and would increase the 
resources so that according to General Alexander, the head of NSA, 
there were such resources to have individualized warrants for calls 
originated in the United States and going outside the United States. 
According to General Alexander and the National Security 
Administration, and General Hayden his predecessor, there are too many 
calls coming from outside and in to have individualized warrants. But 
it would be an enormous step forward for civil liberties to have the 
individual warrants for calls originating in the United States and 
going out.
  As to the calls originating outside the United States and coming in, 
let's have the judicial determination made as to whether the President 
is correct that he has article II powers. That can only be determined 
by the court, weighing the invasion of privacy on the one hand against 
the interests of security on the other.
  The legislation which I introduced, S. 4051, modifies earlier 
versions, modifies the so-called Feinstein-Specter bill by recognizing 
the changing circumstances where a number of district courts have taken 
up the issue in the U.S. District Court in Detroit to declare the 
surveillance program unconstitutional. It is now in the Sixth Circuit.
  Let the process proceed to have the adjudication as to whether the 
President is right that there are article II powers or whether there is 
a violation.
  The legislation which I have introduced, S. 4051, on November 14, 
provides further for mandatory review by the Supreme Court and 
expedited review. If we would focus on this issue, we could come to 
grips with it and we could legislate. Every day that passes there is 
incursion on civil rights and constitutional rights because there are

[[Page 22387]]

wiretaps which are not supported by affidavit or probable cause and 
court authorization. We have it within our power to alter that today if 
we would come to grips with the issues on all the calls originating in 
the United States and going out and then, to repeat, to allow the court 
to decide whether the President is correct on whether calls outside 
coming in are covered by his article II powers.
  It is my hope that this legislation will be taken up early in the 
next session because we ought to come to grips with the balance of 
rights versus security.

                          ____________________