TRIBUTES TO HON. ARLEN SPECTER 

Arlen Specter 

U.S. SENATOR FROM PENNSYLVANIA 

TRIBUTES 

IN THE CONGRESS OF 

THE UNITED STATES 

UNUM

E PLURIBUS


congress.#15
Arlen Specter 


64816_specter.eps
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 2012

S. DOC. 111–37 

Tributes 

Delivered in Congress 

Arlen Specter 

United States Senator 

1981–2011 

÷ 

Compiled under the direction 

of the 

Joint Committee on Printing 

[ iii ] 

CONTENTS 

Page 

Biography .................................................................................................. v 

Farewell to the Senate ............................................................................. xi 

Proceedings in the Senate: 

Tributes by Senators: 

Akaka, Daniel K., of Hawaii ..................................................... 12 

Alexander, Lamar, of Tennessee ............................................... 3 

Bennet, Michael F., of Colorado ................................................ 21 

Boxer, Barbara, of California .................................................... 23 

Casey, Robert P., Jr., of Pennsylvania ..................................... 15, 24 

Cochran, Thad, of Mississippi ................................................... 19 

Conrad, Kent, of North Dakota ................................................. 8 

Dodd, Christopher J., of Connecticut ....................................... 11 

Durbin, Richard, of Illinois ........................................................ 11, 17 

Enzi, Michael B., of Wyoming ................................................... 9 

Harkin, Tom, of Iowa ................................................................. 22 

Hatch, Orrin G., of Utah ........................................................... 13 

Levin, Carl, of Michigan ............................................................ 5 

Murkowski, Lisa, of Alaska ....................................................... 26 

Reed, Jack, of Rhode Island ...................................................... 5 

Reid, Harry, of Nevada .............................................................. 5, 7 

Sessions, Jeff, of Alabama ......................................................... 20 

Udall, Mark, of Colorado ........................................................... 22 

Warner, Mark R., of Virginia .................................................... 5 

[ v ] 

BIOGRAPHY 

Since first elected in 1980, ARLEN SPECTER has brought 

rugged individualism and fierce independence learned from 

his youth on the Kansas plains to become a leading Senate 

moderate. His work as Philadelphia’s tough district attorney 

gave him insights to write the Terrorist Prosecution Act, the 

Armed Career Criminal Act, and coauthor the Second 

Chance Act. 

His legal background and experience in constitutional law 

provided the skills to serve as Judiciary chairman during the 

confirmation hearings of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice 

Alito. In earlier confirmation hearings he had the courage to 

cross party lines in opposing Judge Bork and disagreeing 

with conventional wisdom in supporting Justice Thomas 

after dissecting the contradictory and highly charged testimony. 

As a consummate legislator, he has counseled compromise 

and conciliation in a Congress that has established new 

records for partisan discord. In foreign affairs, he has advocated dialogue and accommodation as an antidote to belligerency and saber rattling. 

ARLEN SPECTER’s five terms have made him the longest 

serving U.S. Senator in Pennsylvania’s history. A voice of 

reason, his independence and balance have won endorsements from the AFL–CIO and high marks from the U.S. 

Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, and the Americans for Tax Reform. 

Time magazine listed him among the Ten Best Senators in 

2006. Knowlegis rated him the second most powerful Senator 

in 2006 behind only Majority Leader Bill Frist. A November 

11, 2007 Philadelphia Inquirer editorial stated: ‘‘Senator 

ARLEN SPECTER has more clout than some sovereign nations.’’ 

Senator SPECTER attributes his zeal for public service to 

his experience as a child when he saw the government mistreat his father, Harry Specter, who migrated to the United 

States from Russia in 1911. Private Specter, serving in 

World War I in the infantry, was seriously wounded in action in France’s Argonne Forest. When the government broke 

[ vi ] 

its promise to pay World War I veterans a $500 bonus, the 

veterans marched on Washington. 

President Hoover called out the Army which fired on and 

killed veterans on the Mall in one of the blackest days in 

American history. As a metaphor, Senator SPECTER says he 

has been on his way to Washington ever since to get his father’s bonus and since he hasn’t gotten it yet, he’s running 

for reelection. The incident over his father’s bonus has made 

ARLEN SPECTER a fierce advocate for veterans’ benefits and 

the ‘‘little guy’’ in his battles with the Federal Government. 

From his immigrant parents, ARLEN SPECTER learned 

work ethics the hard way. His father, Harry Specter, who 

was a peddler, took 5-year-old ARLEN to small Kansas towns 

selling cantaloupes door to door with a small basket in hand. 

In his dad’s junkyard in Russell, KS, 16-year-old ARLEN

SPECTER cut down oil derricks with an acetylene torch and 

loaded scrap iron into rail freight cars headed for the smelter. 

His credentials include votes for the line-item veto and a 

constitutional amendment for a balanced budget. As a twoterm Philadelphia district attorney, he fought for tough sentences for tough criminals and later, in the Senate, wrote 

groundbreaking legislation providing for life sentences for 

three-time recidivists on violent crimes. 

Since 1981, he has played a significant role in Supreme 

Court nomination hearings, for Chief Justice Rehnquist, Justices O’Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Ginsberg, 

Breyer, and Judge Bork. Notwithstanding debilitating chemotherapy treatments in 2005, he stayed on the job as chairman of the Judiciary Committee to preside over historic Supreme Court confirmation hearings. His work on the Judiciary Committee has included writing significant legislation on 

dealing with constitutional law, civil rights, and privacy. 

As a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, he 

led the fight to increase funding for the National Institutes 

of Health from $12 billion to $30 billion to expand medical 

research to find cures for cancer, heart disease, Alzheimer’s, 

Parkinson’s, and other maladies. He has supported expanding health care for seniors and children and has proposed 

legislation to cover the almost 50 million Americans who do 

not have health insurance. 

Because Senator SPECTER is keenly aware of the importance of understanding the younger generation, he often visits and speaks at universities and high schools. He credits 

his parents, both immigrants, with emphasizing the imporVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:39 May 21, 2012 Jkt 064816 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6688 Sfmt 6688 H:\DOCS\BYEBYE\BYEBYE10\64816.TXT KAYNE
[ vii ] 

tance of education which has enabled his brother, two sisters, and himself to share in the American dream. To empower others with access to education, he led the fight on the 

Appropriations Subcommittee to increase Federal spending 

by 138 percent and raise funding for scholarships and student loans. 

Constituent service and promoting Pennsylvania’s economic interests have been the hallmarks of Senator SPECTER’s Senate career. He maintained offices in Philadelphia, 

Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, Erie, Scranton, Wilkes-Barre, and 

the Lehigh Valley to help residents of those areas who needed assistance to cut Washington’s redtape. 

From his experience as a teenager working on a farm in 

Kansas, the State where he was born, Senator SPECTER has 

understood and worked on the problems of Pennsylvania’s 

farmers from his position on the Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture. He frequently argues in the International Trade Commission to assist the steel industry from 

being deluged with unfair foreign imports. His proposed legislation, endorsed by both business and labor, would create 

a private right of action in Federal courts to stop subsidized 

or dumped products from being imported into the United 

States. 

He has supported the coal industry by promoting legislation for clean coal technology and securing $100 million for 

a Schuylkill County project to turn sludge into high octane, 

environmentally safe gasoline. Recognizing the long-term effects of global warming, he has cosponsored the BingamanSpecter bill to reduce harm from carbon emissions. 

As chairman of the Intelligence Committee in the 104th 

Congress and a member of the Appropriations Subcommittee 

on Foreign Operations, Senator SPECTER traveled extensively 

meeting with world leaders including Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev; French President Francois Mitterrand; 

Israel’s Prime Ministers Menachem Begin, Yitzhak Shamir, 

Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, Benjamin Netanyahu, Ehud 

Barak, Ariel Sharon, and Ehud Olmert; China’s President 

Hu Jintao; Indian Prime Minister Singh; Pakistan’s Prime 

Ministers Benazir Bhutto, Mohammad Zia, and Pervez 

Musharraf; Jordan’s Kings Hussein and Abdullah; and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. Strongly agreeing with 

Moshe Dayan’s famous statement that we make peace with 

our enemies not our friends, he has met with Syria’s Presidents Hafez al-Assad and Bashar al-Assad; the Palestinian 

Authority’s Chairman Yasser Arafat; Iraq’s President SadVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:39 May 21, 2012 Jkt 064816 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6688 Sfmt 6688 H:\DOCS\BYEBYE\BYEBYE10\64816.TXT KAYNE
[ viii ] 

dam Hussein; Cuba’s President Fidel Castro; Libya’s Leader 

Muammar Qadhafi; and Venezuela President Hugo Chavez. 

From these meetings and his studies of foreign affairs 

since his undergraduate days at the University of Pennsylvania, where he majored in political science and international relations, Senator SPECTER has been a forceful advocate for aggressive diplomacy to solve international conflicts. He wrote, with staffer Chris Bradish, an article for the 

Washington Quarterly (Winter 2006–2007), outlining a blueprint for diplomatic initiatives in the Mideast with emphasis 

on bilateral negotiations with Iran and Syria. Similarly, he 

has urged bilateral, as well as multilateral, negotiations with 

North Korea. 

Early in his Senate career in 1982, he was among the first 

to call for a U.S./U.S.S.R. summit in a resolution which 

passed the Senate 90 to 8. He participated extensively with 

the Senate observers at the Geneva Arms Reduction talks in 

the 1980s and led the fight for the broad interpretation of 

the ABM Treaty. Senator SPECTER consistently supported 

appropriations to fight global AIDS and promoted worldwide 

support for underdeveloped countries including free trade 

agreements. 

ARLEN SPECTER was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1980 

and served five terms. In 2005, Senator SPECTER became 

Pennsylvania’s longest serving U.S. Senator. He was a senior 

member of the Senate Judiciary, Appropriations, and Veterans Affairs Committees. 

Senator SPECTER was a member of the Senate Judiciary 

Committee since he came to the Senate. As such, he played 

an instrumental role in many of the Senate’s most important 

issues, including the confirmations of Chief Justice John G. 

Roberts, Jr. and Justice Samuel Alito to serve as Associate 

Justice on the U.S. Supreme Court. 

Senator SPECTER also shepherded through the Judiciary 

Committee legislation on asbestos litigation reform to absolve what the Supreme Court once called an ‘‘elephantine 

mass’’ clogging our judicial system. Senator SPECTER has 

worked in a bipartisan fashion to reauthorize key provisions 

of the USA PATRIOT Act, an important tool in the U.S. war 

on terror. He has also authored legislation to help consumers 

better protect the privacy of their personal information in 

the face of recurrent data security breaches across the country. 

On the Judiciary Committee, Senator SPECTER built on his 

foundation as a lawyer and former district attorney. He was 

[ ix ] 

the author of the Armed Career Criminal Act, which has 

been praised for its long prison terms for repeat offenders, 

and the Terrorist Prosecution Act, which authorizes criminal 

actions in U.S. courts for assaulting, maiming, or murdering 

Americans anywhere in the world. 

As a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, Senator SPECTER was chairman of the Senate Appropriations 

Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and 

Education. This subcommittee oversees Federal funding for 

the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Centers for Disease Control, educational programs like Head Start, Pell 

grants, and GEAR–UP, and worker safety programs. Under 

his leadership, funding for education has increased by more 

than 130 percent. Senator SPECTER was also instrumental in 

doubling the budget for NIH, which has made major advances in curing Parkinson’s, cancer, heart disease, and delaying the onset of Alzheimer’s. Finally, Senator SPECTER is 

a strong proponent of stem cell research for the purposes of 

discovering knowledge that may lead to cures for these same 

ailments. 

Strengthening our Nation’s security has been a longstanding priority of Senator SPECTER’s. Thirty days after the 

terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Senator SPECTER

drafted the legislation that established the Department of 

Homeland Security. While serving as chairman of the Senate 

Intelligence Committee in the 104th Congress, he authored 

the bill creating the Inspector General of the Central Intelligence Agency, marking the only reform legislation to 

emerge from the Iran-Contra affair. 

Senator SPECTER continues his strong advocacy for veterans, a passion born from the first veteran he ever knew, 

his father, Harry Specter, who was wounded in World War 

I. As a former chairman of the Veterans Committee, he 

pushed for just treatment for veterans and increased benefits. Working closely with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, 

Senator SPECTER oversaw the opening of four new veterans 

outpatient clinics in Fayette, Northampton, Venango, and 

Warren Counties and passed legislation to create a new veterans cemetery in Southeastern Pennsylvania. 

A frequent visitor to all of Pennsylvania’s 67 counties, Senator SPECTER places constituent service high on his priorities 

and has been instrumental on the Appropriations Committee 

in promoting Pennsylvania’s interests in agriculture, hightechnology, steel, coal, tourism, mass transit, highways, and 

military installations. 

[ x ] 

In addition to tackling the major legislative business before the Senate, Senator SPECTER also engaged in a personal 

battle with Stage IV–B Hodgkin’s lymphoma cancer in 2005 

and 2008. In both cases he underwent nearly 5 months of 

chemotherapy, but still maintained all of his senatorial duties, including chairing hearings, voting, and brokering important legislative initiatives. In July 2008, Senator SPECTER

received his last chemotherapy treatment and has since received a clean bill of health. 

Senator SPECTER was born to immigrant parents in Wichita, KS, and grew up in the small town of Russell, KS. He 

is a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of the University of Pennsylvania and served as an editor of the Yale Law Journal. He 

began his career in public service as an assistant Philadelphia district attorney. While serving in that position, he was 

named assistant counsel on the Warren Commission investigation into President Kennedy’s assassination. Two years 

later, Senator SPECTER was elected district attorney of Philadelphia at the age of 35. 

Senator SPECTER lives in Philadelphia with his wife Joan. 

They have two sons, Shanin and Steve, and four grandchildren, Silvi, Perri, Lilli, and Hatti. 

[ xi ] 

Farewell to the Senate 

Tuesday, December 21, 2010 

Mr. SPECTER. Madam President, this is not a farewell 

address but, rather, a closing argument to a jury of my colleagues and the American people outlining my views on how 

the Senate and, with it, the Federal Government arrived at 

its current condition of partisan gridlock, and my suggestions 

on where we go from here on that pressing problem and the 

key issues of national and international importance. 

To make a final floor statement is a challenge. The Washington Post noted the poor attendance at my colleagues’ farewell speeches earlier this month. That is really not surprising since there is hardly anyone ever on the Senate floor. 

The days of lively debate with many Members on the floor 

are long gone. Abuse of the Senate rules has pretty much 

stripped Senators of the right to offer amendments. The 

modern filibuster requires only a threat and no talking. So 

the Senate’s activity for more than a decade has been the 

virtual continuous drone of a quorum call. But that is not 

the way it was when Senator Chris Dodd and I were privileged to enter the world’s greatest deliberative body 30 years 

ago. Senators on both sides of the aisle engaged in collegial 

debate and found ways to find common ground on the Nation’s pressing problems. 

When I attended my first Republican moderates luncheon, 

I met Mark Hatfield, John Chafee, Ted Stevens, Mac Mathias, Bob Stafford, Bob Packwood, Chuck Percy, Bill Cohen, 

Warren Rudman, Alan Simpson, Jack Danforth, John Warner, Nancy Kassebaum, Slade Gorton, and I found my colleague John Heinz there. That is a far cry from later years 

when the moderates could fit into a telephone booth. 

On the other side of the aisle, I found many Democratic 

Senators willing to move to the center to craft legislation— 

Scoop Jackson, Joe Biden, Dan Inouye, Lloyd Bentsen, Fritz 

Hollings, Pat Leahy, Dale Bumpers, David Boren, Russell 

Long, Pat Moynihan, George Mitchell, Sam Nunn, Gary 

Hart, Bill Bradley, and others. They were carrying on the 

Senate’s glorious tradition. 

[ xii ] 

The Senate’s deliberate cerebral procedures have served 

our country well. The Senate stood tall in 1805 in acquitting 

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase in impeachment proceedings and thus preserved the independence of the Federal 

judiciary. The Senate stood tall in 1868 to acquit President 

Andrew Johnson in impeachment proceedings, and that preserved the power of the Presidency. Repeatedly in our 223- 

year history, the Senate has cooled the passions of the moment to preserve the institutions embodied in our Constitution that have made the United States the envy of the world. 

It has been a great privilege to have had a voice for the 

last 30 years in the great decisions of our day: how we allocate our resources among economic development, national 

defense, education, environmental protection, and NIH funding; the Senate’s role in foreign policy as we exercise it now 

on the START Treaty; the protection of civil rights, as we 

demonstrated last Saturday, eliminating don’t ask, don’t tell; 

balancing crime control and defendants’ rights; and how we 

have maintained the quality of the Federal judiciary, not 

only the high-profile 14 Supreme Court nominations I have 

participated in but the 112 Pennsylvanians who have been 

confirmed during my tenure on the Federal district courts or 

the Third Circuit. 

On the national scene, top issues are the deficit and the 

national debt. The deficit commission has made a start. 

When raising the debt limit comes up next year, that will 

present an occasion to pressure all parties to come to terms 

on future taxes and expenditures, to realistically deal with 

these issues. 

The next Congress should try to stop the Supreme Court 

from further eroding the constitutional mandate of separation of powers. The Supreme Court has been eating Congress’ lunch by invalidating legislation with judicial activism 

after nominees commit under oath in confirmation proceedings to respect congressional factfinding and precedents. 

That is stare decisis. The recent decision in Citizens United 

is illustrative. Ignoring a massive congressional record and 

reversing recent decisions, Chief Justice Roberts and Justice 

Alito repudiated their confirmation testimony given under 

oath and provided the key votes to permit corporations and 

unions to secretly pay for political advertising, thus effectively undermining the basic democratic principle of the 

power of one person, one vote. Chief Justice Roberts promised to just call balls and strikes. Then he moved the bases. 

[ xiii ] 

Congress’ response is necessarily limited in recognition of 

the importance of judicial independence as the foundation of 

the rule of law, but Congress could at least require televising 

the Court proceedings to provide some transparency to inform the public about what the Court is doing since it has 

the final word on the cutting issues of the day. Brandeis was 

right when he said that sunlight is the best disinfectant. 

The Court does follow the election returns, and the Court 

does judicially notice societal values as expressed by public 

opinion. Polls show that 85 percent of the American people 

favor televising the Court when told that a citizen can only 

attend an oral argument for 3 minutes in a chamber holding 

only 300 people. Great Britain, Canada, and State supreme 

courts permit television. 

Congress has the authority to legislate on this subject, just 

as Congress decides other administrative matters such as 

what cases the Court must hear, time limits for decisions, 

number of Justices, the day the Court convenes, and the 

number required for a quorum. While television cannot provide a definitive answer, it could be significant and may be 

the most that can be done consistent with life tenure and judicial independence. 

Additionally, I urge Congress to substantially increase 

funding for the National Institutes of Health. When NIH 

funding was increased from $12 billion to $30 billion annually and $10 billion added to the stimulus package, significant advances were made on medical research. It is scandalous—absolutely scandalous—that a nation with our 

wealth and research capabilities has not done more. Forty 

years ago, the President of the United States declared war 

on cancer. Had that war been pursued with the diligence of 

other wars, most forms of cancer might have been conquered. 

I also urge colleagues to increase their activity in foreign 

travel. Regrettably, we have earned the title of ugly Americans by not treating other nations with proper respect and 

dignity. 

My experience on congressional delegations to China, Russia, India, NATO, Jerusalem, Damascus, Bagdad, Kabul, and 

elsewhere provided an opportunity for eyeball-to-eyeball discussions with world leaders about our values, our expectations, and our willingness to engage in constructive dialogue. 

Since 1984, I have visited Syria almost every year, and my 

extensive conversations with Hafiz al-Assad and Bashar alAssad have convinced me there is a realistic opportunity for 

a peace treaty between Israel and Syria, if encouraged by 

[ xiv ] 

vigorous U.S. diplomacy. Similar meetings I have been privileged to have with Muammar Qadhafi, Yasser Arafat, Fidel 

Castro, Saddam Hussein, and Hugo Chavez have persuaded 

me that candid, respectful dialogue with our toughest adversaries can do much to improve relations among nations. 

Now I will shift gears. In my view, a principal reason for 

the historic stature of the U.S. Senate has been the ability 

of any Senator to offer virtually any amendment at any time. 

This Senate Chamber provides the forum for unlimited debate with a potential to acquaint the people of America and 

the world with innovative proposals on public policy and 

then have a vote on the issue. Regrettably, that has changed 

in recent years because of abuse of the Senate rules by both 

parties. 

The Senate rules allow the majority leader, through the 

right of his first recognition, to offer a series of amendments 

to prevent any other Senator from offering an amendment. 

That had been done infrequently up until about a decade ago 

and lately has become a common practice, and, again, by 

both parties. 

By precluding other Senators from offering amendments, 

the majority leader protects his party colleagues from taking 

tough votes. Never mind that we were sent here and are 

paid to make tough votes. The inevitable and understandable 

consequence of that practice has been the filibuster. If a Senator cannot offer an amendment, why vote to cut off debate 

and go to final passage? Senators were willing—and are willing—to accept the will of the majority in rejecting their 

amendments but unwilling to accept being railroaded to concluding a bill without being provided an opportunity to modify it. That practice has led to an indignant, determined minority to filibuster and to deny 60 votes necessary to cut off 

debate. Two years ago on this Senate floor, I called the practice tyrannical. 

The decade from 1995 to 2005 saw the nominees of President Clinton and President Bush stymied by the refusal of 

the other party to have a hearing or floor vote on many judicial and executive nominees. Then, in 2005, serious consideration was given by the Republican caucus to changing the 

longstanding Senate rule by invoking the so-called nuclear or 

constitutional option. The plan called for Vice President Cheney to rule that 51 votes were sufficient to impose cloture for 

confirmation of a judge or executive nominee. His ruling, 

then to be challenged by Democrats, would be upheld by the 

traditional 51 votes to uphold the Chair’s ruling. 

[ xv ] 

As I argued on the Senate floor at that time, if Democratic 

Senators had voted their consciences without regard to party 

loyalty, most filibusters would have failed. Similarly, I argued that had Republican Senators voted their consciences 

without regard to party loyalty, there would not have been 

51 of the 55 Republican Senators to support the nuclear option. 

The majority leader then scheduled the critical vote on 

May 25, 2005. The outcome of that vote was uncertain, with 

key Republicans undeclared. The showdown was averted the 

night before by a compromise by the so-called Gang of 14. 

Some nominees were approved, some rejected, and a new 

standard was established to eliminate filibusters unless 

there were extraordinary circumstances, with each Senator 

to decide if that standard had been met. Regrettably, again, 

that standard has not been followed as those filibusters have 

continued up to today. Again, the fault rests with both parties. 

There is a way out of this procedural gridlock by changing 

the rule on the power of the majority leader to exclude other 

Senators’ amendments. I proposed such a rule change in the 

110th and 111th Congresses. I would retain the 60-vote requirement for cloture on legislation, with a condition that 

Senators would have to have a talking filibuster, not merely 

presenting a notice of intent to filibuster. By allowing Senators to offer amendments and a requirement for debate, not 

just notice, I think filibusters could be effectively managed, 

as they had been in the past, and still retain, where necessary, the opportunity to have adequate debate on controversial issues. 

I would change the rule to cut off debate on judicial and 

executive branch nominees to 51 votes, as I formally proposed in the 109th Congress. Important positions are left 

open for months, and the Senate agenda today is filled with 

unacted-upon judicial and executive nominees, and many of 

those judicial nominees are in areas where there is an emergency backlog. Since Judge Bork and Justice Thomas did not 

provoke filibusters, I think the Senate can do without them 

on judges and executive officeholders. There is a sufficient 

safeguard of the public interest by requiring a simple majority on an up-down vote. I would also change the rule requiring 30 hours of postcloture debate and the rule allowing the 

secret hold, which requires cloture to bring the matter to the 

floor. Requiring a Senator to disclose his or her hold to the 

light of day would greatly curtail this abuse. 

[ xvi ] 

While political gridlock has been facilitated by the Senate 

rules, I am sorry to say partisanship has been increased 

greatly by other factors. Senators have gone into other 

States to campaign against incumbents of the other party. 

Senators have even opposed their own party colleagues in 

primary challenges. That conduct was beyond contemplation 

in the Senate I joined 30 years ago. Collegiality can obviously not be maintained when negotiating with someone simultaneously out to defeat you, especially within your own 

party. 

In some quarters, ‘‘compromise’’ has become a dirty word. 

Senators insist on ideological purity as a precondition. Senator Margaret Chase Smith of Maine had it right when she 

said we need to distinguish between the compromise of principle and the principle of compromise. This great body itself 

was created by the so-called Great Compromise, in which the 

Framers decreed that States would be represented equally in 

the Senate and proportionate to their populations in the 

House. As Senate Historian Richard Baker noted: ‘‘Without 

that compromise, there would likely have been no Constitution, no Senate, and no United States as we know it today.’’ 

Politics is no longer the art of the possible when Senators 

are intransigent in their positions. Polarization of the political parties has followed. President Reagan’s ‘‘big tent’’ has 

frequently been abandoned by the Republican Party. A single 

vote out of thousands cast can cost an incumbent his seat. 

Senator Bob Bennett was rejected by the far right in his 

Utah primary because of his vote for TARP. It did not matter 

that Vice President Cheney had pleaded with the Republican 

caucus to support TARP or President Bush would become a 

modern Herbert Hoover. It did not matter that 24 other Republican Senators, besides Bob Bennett, out of the 49 Republican Senators, voted for TARP. Senator Bennett’s 93 percent 

conservative rating was insufficient. 

Senator Lisa Murkowski lost her primary in Alaska. Congressman Mike Castle was rejected in Delaware’s Republican 

primary in favor of a candidate who thought it necessary to 

defend herself as not being a witch. Republican Senators 

contributed to the primary defeats of Bennett, Murkowski, 

and Castle. Eating or defeating your own is a form of sophisticated cannibalism. Similarly, on the other side of the aisle, 

Senator Joe Lieberman, a great Senator, could not win his 

Democratic primary. 

The spectacular reelection of Senator Lisa Murkowski on 

a write-in vote in the Alaska general election and the defeat 

[ xvii ] 

of other Tea Party candidates in the 2010 general elections 

may show the way to counter right-wing extremists. Arguably, Republicans left three seats on the table in 2010—beyond Delaware, Nevada, and perhaps Colorado—because of 

unacceptable general election candidates. By bouncing back 

and winning, Senator Murkowski demonstrated that a moderate centrist can win by informing and arousing the general 

electorate. Her victory proves that America still wants to be 

and can be governed by the center. 

Repeatedly, senior Republican Senators have recently 

abandoned long-held positions out of fear of losing their seats 

over a single vote or because of party discipline. With 59 

votes for cloture on this side of the aisle, not a single Republican would provide the 60th vote for many important legislative initiatives, such as identifying campaign contributors 

to stop secret contributions. 

Notwithstanding the perils, it is my hope more Senators 

will return to independence in voting and crossing party 

lines evident 30 years ago. President Kennedy’s ‘‘Profiles in 

Courage’’ shows the way. Sometimes a party does ask too 

much. The model for an elected official’s independence in a 

representative democracy has never been stated more accurately, in my opinion, than it was in 1774 by Edmund Burke, 

in the British House of Commons, when he said: 

[H]is [the elected representative’s] unbiased opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conscience . . . [including his vote] ought not to be sacrificed to you, to any man or any set of men living. 

But, above all, we need civility. Steve and Cokie Roberts, 

distinguished journalists, put it well in a recent column, saying: 

Civility is more than good manners . . . . Civility is a state of mind. It 

reflects respect for your opponents and for the institutions you serve together . . . . This polarization will make civility in the next Congress more 

difficult—and more necessary—than ever. 

A closing speech has an inevitable aspect of nostalgia. An 

extraordinary experience for me is coming to an end. But my 

dominant feeling is pride in the great privilege to be a part 

of this very unique body with colleagues who are such outstanding public servants. I have written and will write elsewhere about my tenure here, so I do not say farewell to my 

continuing involvement in public policy, which I will pursue 

in a different venue. Because of the great traditions of this 

body and because of its historic resilience, I leave with great 

optimism for the future of our country, a great optimism for 

[ xviii ] 

the continuing vital role of the Senate in the governance of 

our democracy. 

I thank my colleagues for listening. 

(Applause, Senators rising.) 

TRIBUTES 

TO 

ARLEN SPECTER 

[ 3 ] 

Proceedings in the Senate 

TUESDAY, November 30, 2010 

Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, 16 Senators will retire 

this year. There is a pretty big turnover in this body, but 

that is a lot of Senators at once. We are losing an enormous 

amount of talent, but, of course, we are gaining a lot of talent with the new Senators. 

I wish to show my respect for those who have served, 

which I will do in a summary fashion because we are talking 

about 16 individuals with very complex and distinguished 

backgrounds. 

One might ask, what are the characteristics of a Senator? 

There are a lot of different answers to that, depending on 

your background and attitude toward politics and government. First, I have always thought that one characteristic of 

almost every Member of the Senate is that he or she probably was a first grader sitting in the front row, hand in the 

air waiting to be recognized. This is an eager bunch or you 

would not have gotten here. 

Second, it is a group of risk takers. Most people who end 

up in the Senate get here because a lot of other people who 

wanted to be Senators were standing around waiting for the 

right time to run. A lot of people who were elected to the 

Senate seemed to have no chance of winning at the time they 

decided to run, but the voters decided differently, and here 

they are. 

Third, we are almost all professional and congenial. That 

is a big help. It is almost a requirement in an organization 

of 100 individuals who spend almost all their time with one 

another, who serve in a body that operates by unanimous 

consent, when just one Senator can bring the whole place to 

a halt, and whose job basically is to argue about some of the 

most difficult issues that face the American people. So it 

helps that almost every Member of the Senate is an especially congenial person. 

Back in Tennessee, people often say to me it must be 

rough being in that job. They are awfully mean up there. 

[ 4 ] 

The truth is, I don’t know of a more congenial group than 

the Members of the Senate. We begin the day in the gym. 

The next thing you know we are at a Prayer Breakfast, and 

then we are at a committee hearing. Then we are on the 

floor voting, and then we have lunch. It goes through the day 

until 7 or 8 o’clock, or sometimes later. We live together and 

we get along very well. We know and respect each other. 

Not long ago, the Presiding Officer (Mr. Udall of New Mexico) and I were having dinner together with our wives. We 

were lamenting the loss of families who know one another, 

the way it happened when his father was serving in Congress and when I first came to the Senate to work for Senator Baker. And that’s true. We’ve lost some of that. Still, 

there is an enormous amount of affection and good will here. 

You don’t always get to be very close friends in this job, but 

you get to be very good acquaintances, and you learn to respect people for their strengths. 

Senator Domenici said, when he left, that we don’t do a 

very good job of saying goodbye here. That is true. As one 

part of saying goodbye, I wish to say at least one good thing 

about each one of the 16 retiring Senators. Much more could 

be said about each, of course. Mostly, I am going in alphabetical order. . . . 

The word to describe ARLEN SPECTER from Pennsylvania is 

‘‘courage.’’ The other word is ‘‘survivor.’’ And they both go together. ARLEN has had a distinguished career from his 

youngest days. He was a member of the Warren Commission, 

investigating President Kennedy’s assassination. In the Senate, his work has spanned the entire mark. One of the things 

I appreciate most about Senator and Mrs. Specter is their 

work on Constitution Hall in Philadelphia, which is such an 

example of living history. . . . 

It has been my privilege to serve with these 16 Senators. 

We thank them for their service to our country. They have 

had a chance to serve in what we regard as the world’s 

greatest deliberative body; it is a special institution. We will 

miss their leadership, and we hope they will stay in touch 

with us because they are not just retiring Senators, they are 

all our friends. 

I yield the floor. 

[ 5 ] 

WEDNESDAY, December 8, 2010 

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that 

there be printed as a Senate document a compilation of materials from the Congressional Record in tribute to retiring 

Members of the 111th Congress, and that Members have 

until Thursday, December 16, to submit such tributes. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. 

FRIDAY, December 10, 2010 

Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to 

our colleagues who are departing the Senate after distinguished service on behalf of their States and on behalf of the 

Nation. I have been privileged to work with these individuals, to learn from them, to collaborate and cooperate 

with them, and to, in some small way, help them do what 

they have done so well—represent their States with fidelity, 

with great effort, and to move the agenda of the Nation forward. . . . 

Let me say to ARLEN SPECTER and Joan Specter, thank 

you for such service. Senator SPECTER is the champion of 

NIH. It is an incredible achievement, what he has done to 

fund that over the years. . . . 

To all of these colleagues and their families, my deepest 

appreciation and my profoundest respect. 

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise again to recognize the 

service of another great Federal employee. This is a tradition 

that was started by our friend and former colleague, Senator 

Kaufman, and I am proud to carry on that tradition. But I 

want to first say that I appreciate the remarks of the Presiding Officer (Mr. Reed) about our colleagues who are leaving this body, and I share his great respect for not only Senator Kaufman but all of the colleagues who are leaving the 

body at the end of this Congress. . . . 

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, for five terms, longer than anyone in his State’s proud history, ARLEN SPECTER has represented the State of Pennsylvania in the U.S. Senate. Over 

that time, he distinguished himself greatly, from his commendable work on the Judiciary Committee to his recent efforts to reestablish legal protections against fraud. We saw 

from the beginning of his Senate service his impressive grasp 

[ 6 ] 

of issues. As he prepares to leave the Senate, I would like 

to focus on two examples from his time here that I believe 

speak to his formidable character. 

In early 2008, our Nation faced its most daunting economic 

situation in decades. It was clear that private demand in the 

economy was fading in the face of a devastating financial crisis. Economists across the political spectrum were convinced 

that Federal fiscal stimulus was desperately needed as part 

of a strategy to keep recession from turning into depression. 

And yet there was significant doubt as to whether Congress 

could summon the political will to do what was necessary. 

Without at least a handful of Republican supporters in the 

Senate, the desperately needed economic rescue package 

would not pass. 

At that moment, under immense political pressure, Senator SPECTER was one of just three Republicans willing to 

vote for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. 

Thanks to the foresight of these Senators, millions of Americans have jobs today who otherwise would be unemployed. 

We should all be grateful for Senator SPECTER’s determination to do what the country needed. 

Senator SPECTER has faced down more dire circumstances 

than those surrounding the stimulus vote. In 1993, he was 

diagnosed with a brain tumor—one neurosurgeon told him 

he had just weeks to live. In 2005 and again in 2008, he 

coped with Hodgkin’s disease. 

In each of these cases, Senator SPECTER not only faced 

down a deadly disease, but he pushed the limits of physical 

and mental endurance to remain deeply engaged in his Senate work. Work, for him, was integral to recovery. As he 

wrote in an inspirational book on his health experiences: 

Good health is a precious possession that is often taken for granted. The 

same is true of the time we have been given to contribute to the world 

around us. Poor health may limit our time and capacity for achievement, 

but I firmly believe that vigorous work provides the best way to overcome 

a health challenge. 

Senator SPECTER, thank you for the inspiring example of 

your determination. Thank you for a long and productive career in this body, a career that has meant much to the Senate, to Pennsylvania, and to the Nation. 

[ 7 ] 

WEDNESDAY, December 15, 2010 

Mr. REID. Mr. President, if you asked anyone in this body 

to summarize ARLEN SPECTER, I think the words that would 

come up most often would be he is a real fighter. ARLEN

SPECTER fought to defend our Nation in Korea. He fought 

crime in the streets of Philadelphia as a district attorney. He 

has fought cancer and won three times. And he has fought 

for Pennsylvania every day he has served with us here in the 

U.S. Senate. 

Senator SPECTER has witnessed three decades of progress 

in Washington. He is a man who has risen above party lines 

to demonstrate his independence time after time. But his 

independence was not about him; it was about the people of 

Pennsylvania, whom he has served with honor and dignity 

for 30 years, even when cancer tried to keep him from doing 

so. 

I have known and served with Senator SPECTER for almost 

30 years, and I have come to admire his service and dedication. We have not always agreed on how to solve the issues 

facing America, but he has always been willing to listen to 

me and any other Senator in the hopes of forging bipartisan 

agreements that would help the country. He is a very principled man, a man who does what he believes is right, even 

when few others agree with him. 

Senator SPECTER was raised in the Midwest by his mother 

and a Russian immigrant father who came to the United 

States and later served his new country in World War I. 

He first discovered Pennsylvania as an undergraduate student at the University of Pennsylvania, where he earned a 

degree in international relations. After serving 3 years in the 

Air Force during the Korean war, he attended law school at 

Yale and established a successful law practice in what would 

become his home State, Pennsylvania. 

Just as his father left his native land and served his new 

home as a member of the U.S. military, Senator SPECTER left 

his home in Kansas and served his adopted Commonwealth 

in a different way—first as a district attorney in Philadelphia for 9 years, and then as a U.S. Senator for the last 30 

years. And he did this with his tenacity. He lost a number 

of elections. He kept coming back, never giving up. 

As a Member of Congress, he has been a stalwart for justice, health, and education. He has presided over several Supreme Court confirmation hearings, and played a major role 

in many more. 

[ 8 ] 

He has ensured that vital and potentially lifesaving research for cancer, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, and other diseases receives Federal dollars to pave the way for real breakthroughs. 

One personal experience with Senator SPECTER—the socalled economic recovery package, the stimulus. He was the 

key vote—one of the three key votes. He was a Republican. 

He and the two Senators from Maine made it possible to 

pass that. His passion in that legislation was the National 

Institutes of Health. Part of the deal was that they had to 

get $10 billion. Money well spent. But it is something he believed in fervently, and we were able to do that. 

He has also worked to cover children and seniors who 

struggle to get access to health care they desperately need. 

He has done that as a member of the Appropriations Committee, where he has worked to make more education available to all students with the help of scholarships and student 

loans. Furthermore, his work with constituents of every 

stripe makes a difference everyday. 

Senator SPECTER is a throwback to a previous chapter in 

the history of the Senate—a time when moderates were the 

rule, not the exception. 

When I came to Washington, Republicans such as ARLEN

SPECTER were everyplace. That is not the case now. He is a 

rare breed and will truly be missed. 

I wish Senator SPECTER, his wife Joan, and their two sons 

and four grandchildren the very best in the coming weeks, 

months, and years. 

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, today I wish to pay tribute 

and recognize the achievements of a colleague who will be 

leaving the Senate at the end of this term. Senator ARLEN

SPECTER has represented Pennsylvania in the Senate for 

three decades, making him the longest serving Senator in his 

State’s history. During his tenure, he has been an unrelenting advocate for his constituents and working-class Americans. 

Senator SPECTER has had an impressive career in both the 

public and private sector. After graduating from the University of Pennsylvania, he served in the U.S. Air Force from 

1951 to 1953. Following his service, he attended Yale Law 

School and worked as editor for the Yale Law School Journal. After graduating from law school, Senator SPECTER became an outstanding lawyer. As an aide to the Warren Commission, he investigated the assassination of former President John F. Kennedy. He also served as the district attorVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:39 May 21, 2012 Jkt 064816 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6688 Sfmt 6688 H:\DOCS\BYEBYE\BYEBYE10\64816.TXT KAYNE
[ 9 ] 

ney in Philadelphia from 1966 to 1974, and practiced law as 

a private attorney before being elected to the U.S. Senate in 

1980. 

In the Senate, Senator SPECTER and I found significant 

common ground, as his strong sense of integrity and moderate philosophy have been key in passing some of this institution’s most important legislation. During his time in Congress, the Senator will be remembered for presiding over historic U.S. Supreme Court confirmation hearings as chairman 

of the Judiciary Committee. While undergoing chemotherapy 

for advanced Hodgkin’s disease, Senator SPECTER managed 

the intense confirmation proceedings for Chief Justice John 

Roberts, Jr. and Justice Samuel Alito, Jr. As a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, he led the fight to increase funding for the National Institutes of Health from $12 

billion to $30 billion to expand medical research to find cures 

for cancer, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, and other devastating 

and debilitating diseases. It is no wonder that Time magazine listed him among the Ten Best Senators in 2006. 

ARLEN SPECTER embodies what it means to be a good Senator—integrity, a strong work ethic, courage, dedication, and 

being true to one’s convictions. Senator SPECTER has been a 

real champion for Pennsylvania and this country. His compassion, independence, and voice of reason will be missed in 

the U.S. Senate. I have appreciated the opportunity to work 

with Senator SPECTER, and wish him and his family the very 

best. 

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, soon the current session of Congress will be gaveled to a close. When that happens it will 

also bring to an end the Senate careers of several of our colleagues. I know we will miss them and the contributions 

they have made over the years to the debates and deliberations they have participated in on the Senate floor and in 

committee. 

In the years to come I know I will miss ARLEN SPECTER. 

He has been such a strong and active presence in the Senate 

for so many years and in so many ways the coming session 

of Congress won’t be the same without him. 

His long and varied history as a public servant really 

began to take shape when he was asked to bring his skills 

and abilities to the Warren Commission’s investigation of the 

circumstances surrounding the death of President John F. 

Kennedy. It was a difficult and challenging job, but ARLEN

proved to be well up to the task. After studying and surveying the evidence surrounding the President’s murder, 

[ 10 ] 

ARLEN developed the ‘‘single bullet theory’’ that proved to be 

the key to the case that helped to explain what happened 

that day. 

In the years soon after, ARLEN’s understanding of the law 

and all the technicalities and the countless details that surround it made him an ideal candidate for the position of district attorney. In 1965 he ran for the position in Philadelphia 

and served there for 8 years. 

I have always believed that every life is a mixture of both 

success and disappointment. How we handle them both defines to a great extent the quality of our lives. 

That is why ARLEN’s unsuccessful reelection bid and a few 

disappointments after that may have slowed him down—but 

it didn’t stop him. It was just a few years later that ARLEN

would run a successful campaign for the Senate. It was here 

that ARLEN really found his niche as he was soon in the middle of a number of high profile battles in the Judiciary Committee that won him the notice of his colleagues for his indepth knowledge of Senate procedure, the law, and our Constitution. 

ARLEN’s reputation as a warrior has stayed with him over 

the years as he has faced a number of challenges in committee and on the floor—as well as a number of very difficult 

health issues in his life. He fought them all with the same 

strength and heartfelt determination that would make any 

fighter from Philadelphia proud. 

Although ARLEN credits his successful return to health to 

his enjoyment of squash, a difficult sport that he says kept 

him strong and healthy enough to make it through each 

health crisis he faced, I credit his good health to his strong 

Philadelphia roots. 

As ARLEN wrote in his book ‘‘Never Give In,’’ the key to 

so much of life is to ‘‘keep working and keep fighting.’’ That 

is the only way to ensure you will continue to make 

progress—or at least—make your presence felt in the war 

you are waging. That is how ARLEN has lived his life as he 

has pursued each goal he set his sights on. In the end, as 

he wrote in his book, ‘‘The tougher the battle, the sweeter 

the victory.’’ 

ARLEN has now served five terms for a total of 30 years 

in the Senate. He has survived countless battles at the ballot 

box and a wealth of health issues that would have convinced 

a lesser individual that the time had come to take it easy for 

awhile. Not ARLEN, however. He has always been someone 

who fought with all his heart for the things he believed in 

[ 11 ] 

and as a result, he has known the sweetness of victory many 

times in his life. 

ARLEN is not only the longest serving Senator in Pennsylvania’s history, he is also one of the most productive. He 

has left a remarkable legacy and shoes that will be very difficult for any future Pennsylvania Senator to fill. Together 

with his wife Joan they have been a team that has made a 

difference throughout their home State of Pennsylvania and 

the Nation. 

Thanks, ARLEN, for your willingness to serve the people of 

your home State for so long and so well. Diana joins in sending our best wishes and our appreciation for your friendship 

to you both. I hope you will keep in touch with me and with 

all your colleagues in the years to come. Good luck. God 

bless. 

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent 

that the order for the printing of tributes be modified to provide that Members have until sine die of the 111th Congress, 

2d session, to submit tributes and that the order for printing 

remain in effect. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. 

THURSDAY, December 16, 2010 

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise today to honor my friend 

and longtime colleague, Senator ARLEN SPECTER, the longest 

serving U.S. Senator in Pennsylvania history. 

As many of you know, ARLEN and I were freshmen Senators together 30 years ago. I was the only Democrat newly 

elected to the Senate in 1980. Senator SPECTER was one of 

12 new Republicans elected that year, in the so-called 

‘‘Reagan landslide,’’ that gave his party the Senate for the 

first time in 28 years. 

I bring this up because, even though I was a new Senator 

in the minority, we quickly began working on a bipartisan 

basis. For those listening today, the idea of a bipartisan Senate may seem strange. Back then, it was commonplace and 

I know that ARLEN and I both hope that newly elected Members of this body will revive this tradition in the coming 

years. 

Early in our Senate careers, ARLEN and I started the Senate Children’s Caucus. We believed that as the largest nonVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:39 May 21, 2012 Jkt 064816 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6688 Sfmt 6688 H:\DOCS\BYEBYE\BYEBYE10\64816.TXT KAYNE
[ 12 ] 

voting constituency in the country, children had the greatest 

need for champions to advocate on their behalf. The Children’s Caucus has provided strong leadership on early childhood education, funding for childcare programs, and making 

passage of the Family Medical Leave Act reality. I want to 

thank Senator SPECTER for being one of my partners on 

these critically important issues for almost 30 years. 

Senator SPECTER’s accomplishments carry beyond his defense of children. Over the course of his career, he has 

served as the chairman of three important and influential 

Senate committees: the Select Committee on Intelligence, the 

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, and the Committee on the 

Judiciary. In each of these capacities he has worked to ensure that America’s legal system is true to our best traditions and ideals, while ensuring that we have the tools to 

prevent terrorism and protect our citizens. He has also used 

his role on the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on 

Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education to increase research funding for the National Institutes of Health. 

His work here in the U.S. Senate has improved the lives of 

countless Pennsylvanians and countless Americans. 

Of all Senator SPECTER’s achievements, I have yet to mention the most impressive. Since 2005, he has continued to 

serve while fighting Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Twice since being 

diagnosed, ARLEN has undergone chemotherapy for the disease. Yet he continued serving the people of Pennsylvania. 

I have worked with Senator SPECTER both as a Democrat 

and a Republican, and I can tell you this—his commitment 

to bipartisanship and independence should be a model for all 

current and future Members of the U.S. Senate. 

I would like to thank ARLEN for his many years of service, 

and wish him and his wife Joan well as he leaves the Senate. It has truly been a pleasure working with him over the 

years. I know the State of Pennsylvania will miss their senior Senator and I firmly believe that this body will not be the 

same without him. 

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to bid farewell to 

a number of our friends and colleagues who are ending their 

service in the Senate. Their contributions are too numerous 

to mention, therefore I would like to take just a few minutes 

to highlight some of the memories of the Senators I came to 

know personally. 

Some of the departing Senators I have served with for decades. Others were here for only part of a term. All of them 

worked hard for their constituents and our country. . . . 

[ 13 ] 

I served with Senator ARLEN SPECTER for many years on 

the Veterans’ Affairs Committee. He twice served as the 

committee’s chairman, and, in recent years as I chaired the 

committee, he remained a strong and vital force working on 

behalf of our Nation’s veterans, on both sides of the dais. He 

has been an institution in the Senate for many years, and 

it has been a genuine pleasure working with him. I appreciate and applaud his long, dedicated service to those who 

have worn our Nation’s uniforms. . . . 

In closing, the end of this Congress is bittersweet, with so 

many talented and dedicated public servants leaving this institution. All of them made a lasting impact on the Senate 

and on our country. Mahalo nui loa, thank you, for all your 

work. 

SUNDAY, December 19, 2010 

Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise to speak today to recognize the departure of my good friend, the senior Senator 

from Pennsylvania. Senator ARLEN SPECTER has been 

present here in the Senate through some of its most contentious times. He and I have worked side by side—sometimes 

in agreement, other times in opposition—for many years. His 

presence will be sorely missed. 

ARLEN is the son of immigrant parents. He was born in 

Wichita, KS, in 1930, to Lillie Shannin and Harry Specter. 

Harry served in World War I in the U.S. infantry, just a few 

years after migrating to the United States from Russia. 

While in combat in France, ARLEN’s father was seriously 

wounded. Yet, a few years later, the Federal Government, 

strapped for funds, broke its promise to pay World War I 

veterans a bonus. This, of course, led to a veterans march on 

Washington and a tragic encounter between the U.S. Army 

and the protesting veterans. It also led, indirectly, to Senator 

SPECTER’s career in public service as he has been fond of saying that he came to Washington to get his father’s bonus and 

that he would run for reelection until he got it. 

ARLEN attended college at both the University of Oklahoma and the University of Pennsylvania, graduating from 

the latter in 1951. He served in the Air Force during the Korean war as an officer in the Office of Special Investigations. 

In 1953, he married Joan Levy, with whom he has raised 

two sons and four grandchildren. In 1956, he graduated from 

Yale Law School and entered into private practice. 

[ 14 ] 

Senator SPECTER’s career in public service began in 1959 

when he became an assistant district attorney in Philadelphia. In 1963, he was appointed to serve as assistant counsel 

on the Warren Commission, investigating the assassination 

of President John F. Kennedy. Two years later, he was elected to serve as the district attorney for the city of Philadelphia, a position he held for 8 years. After another brief stint 

in the private sector, ARLEN was elected to the Senate in 

1980 and has been the longest serving Senator in Pennsylvania’s history. 

ARLEN has had his hand in a number of high-profile efforts 

here in the Senate. However, I will always remember him for 

his role in some of the most contentious Supreme Court confirmation fights in our Nation’s history. He and I both served 

on the Judiciary Committee during the confirmation hearings for Judge Robert Bork, which were, at the time, the 

most contentious in our Nation’s history. In the end, ARLEN

and I reached different conclusions as to whether Judge Bork 

should have been confirmed. I still think ARLEN was wrong 

to oppose Judge Bork, but, I have never doubted that his decision to do so was sincere. 

ARLEN and I once again found ourselves at the center of 

a Supreme Court fight during the nomination hearings for 

Justice Clarence Thomas. During those hearings, Senator 

SPECTER had the daunting task of questioning Ms. Anita Hill 

for the Republican side. I was and continue to be impressed 

with the manner in which he handled that responsibility. 

Those were difficult, sensitive issues. None of us wanted to 

disrespect Ms. Hill, but we believed it was important to ensure that the truth be examined and brought to light, and 

I’ve always thought that ARLEN handled the matter with the 

necessary professionalism and respect. 

In the years that followed the Thomas hearings, a number 

of people expressed their displeasure for the way I treated 

Ms. Hill during those hearings. I was always quick to remind 

them that it was ARLEN who questioned her, not me. I was 

the one who questioned Justice Thomas. But, in the end, I 

think the historical memory of that time has tied the two of 

us together. 

Senator SPECTER has a reputation for being a fighter. Having been on both sides of the debate with ARLEN, I have to 

concur with that assessment. His was among the sharpest 

minds we have known here in the Senate and I am grateful 

for the privilege I’ve had to serve alongside him. 

[ 15 ] 

I want to wish ARLEN and his family the best of luck. 

TUESDAY, December 21, 2010 

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I wish to offer some remarks 

in furtherance of what Senator SPECTER told us about this 

great institution (see farewell speech, page xi). I wanted to 

spend a moment talking about his service to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 

When I came to the Senate in 2007 as a Senator-elect, one 

of the first things I did was go to see Senator SPECTER. He 

asked me at that time to go to lunch. From the moment I 

arrived in the Senate, he made it very clear to me that not 

only did the people of Pennsylvania expect, but he expected 

as well, that we work together. 

From the beginning of his service in the Senate, way back 

when he was elected in 1980 all the way up to the present 

moment, he has been a Senator who was focused on building 

bipartisan relationships and, of course, focusing on Pennsylvania priorities. I am honored to have worked with him on 

so many priorities, whether it was veterans or workers, 

whether it was dairy farmers or the economy of Pennsylvania or whether it was our soldiers or our children or our 

families. We have worked on so many priorities. He has been 

a champion for our State and he has shown younger Senators the way to work together in the interests of our State 

and our country. 

That bipartisanship wasn’t just a sentiment; it was bipartisanship that led to results. I wish to point to one example 

of many I could list: the funding for the National Institutes 

of Health, that great bulwark and generator of discoveries 

that cures diseases and creates jobs and hope for people 

often without hope because of a disease or a malady of one 

kind or another. That bipartisanship Senator SPECTER demonstrated every day in the Senate has achieved results for 

Pennsylvania, for sure, in terms of jobs and opportunity and 

hope but also results for the Nation as well. 

I know we are short on time, but I wanted to make one 

note about the history of his service. No Senator in the history of the Commonwealth—and we have had 55 or so Senators, depending on how you count those who have been 

elected and served, but of those 55, no Senator has served 

longer than Senator SPECTER. I recall the line—I think it is 

attributed to Abraham Lincoln, it is a great line about what 

[ 16 ] 

years mean and what service means, and I will apply the 

analogy to Senate service. The line goes something like this: 

‘‘It is not the years in a life, it is the life in those years.’’ I 

am paraphrasing that. The same could be said of the life of 

a Senator. It is not just that he served 30 years. That alone 

is a singular, unprecedented achievement. In fact, the Senator he outdistanced in a sense in terms of years of service 

was only elected by the people twice. Senator SPECTER was 

elected by the people of Pennsylvania five times. But it is the 

life in those Senate years, the work in those Senate years, 

the contribution to our Commonwealth and our country in 

those Senate years that matters and has meaning. His impact will be felt for generations—not just decades but for 

generations. 

Let me close with this. There is a history book of our State 

that came out in the year 2002, and it has a series of stories 

and essays and chapters on the history of Pennsylvania. It 

is a fascinating review of the State’s history. The foreword 

to that publication was written by Brent E. Glass, at the 

time the executive director of the Pennsylvania Historical 

and Museum Commission. He wrote this in March 2002. It 

is a long foreword which I won’t read, but he said in the 

early part of this foreword the following: 

One way to understand the meaning of Pennsylvania’s past is to examine 

certain places around the State that are recognized for their significance to 

the entire Nation. 

Then he lists and describes in detail significant places in 

Pennsylvania that have a connection to our history, whether 

it is the Liberty Bell or the battlefield of Gettysburg; whether it is the farms in our Amish communities or whether it 

is some other place of historic significance. I have no doubt 

whatsoever that if the same history were recounted about 

the people who had an impact on our Commonwealth—the 

people who moved Pennsylvania forward; the people who in 

addition to moving our State forward had an impact on the 

Nation—if we make a list of Pennsylvanians who made such 

contributions, whether it would be William Penn or Benjamin Franklin—and you can fill in the blanks from there— 

I have no doubt that list would include Senator ARLEN SPECTER. He is a son of Kansas who made Pennsylvania his 

home. He is a son of Kansas who fought every day for the 

people of Pennsylvania. 

So it is the work and the achievements and the passion 

and the results in those years in the Senate that will put 

him on the very short list of those who contributed so much 

[ 17 ] 

to our Commonwealth that we love and to our country that 

we cherish. 

For all of that and for so many other reasons, as a citizen 

of Pennsylvania, a resident of Pennsylvania, a citizen of the 

United States but as a Senator—I want to express my gratitude to Senator ARLEN SPECTER for his 30 years of service, 

but especially for what those 30 years meant to the people, 

sometimes people without a voice, sometimes people without 

power. 

Thank you, Senator SPECTER. 

I yield the floor. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois. 

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I wish to join my colleagues 

in noting the farewell address of Senator ARLEN SPECTER is 

an inspiring moment in the Senate. 

It has been my great honor to serve with Senator SPECTER

and to be a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee with 

him as well. I think of his contribution to the Senate at 

many levels. I certainly appreciate what he did for the Senate and for the Nation when he chaired the Judiciary Committee and served on that committee, particularly when it 

came to the hearings involving the appointment of new Supreme Court Justices. Without fail, Senator SPECTER at 

those hearings would always have dazzling insight into the 

current state of the law and the record of the nominee. I 

couldn’t wait for him each time there was a hearing to see 

what his tack would be. It always reflected a thoughtful reflection on the historic moment we faced with each nominee. 

The questions he asked, the positions he took, the statements he made, all made for a better record for the United 

States as the Senate proceeded to vote on those historic 

nominations. 

But there is one area he touched on ever so slightly that 

I believe is equal to his mark on the Senate Judiciary Committee. This man, Senator ARLEN SPECTER, with the help in 

some respects and in some efforts by Senator Tom Harkin, 

has done more to advance the cause of medical research in 

his time than virtually any other Member of Congress. He 

had a single-minded determination to advance medical research and to put the investment in the National Institutes 

of Health. On the House side, Congressman John Porter 

joined him in that early effort—John Porter of Illinois—but 

time and again ARLEN SPECTER would have as his last bargaining chip on the table, whenever there was a negotiation, 

[ 18 ] 

that we needed to put more money in the National Institutes 

of Health. I know he was probably inspired to that cause by 

many things, but certainly by his own life experience where 

he has successfully battled so many medical demons and is 

here standing before us as living proof that with his selfdetermination and the advancement of science, we can overcome even some of the greatest diseases and maladies that 

come our way. 

He was, to me, a role model many times as he struggled 

through cancer therapy and never missed a bell when it 

came to presiding over a committee hearing or coming to the 

floor to vote. There were times when all of us knew he was 

in pain. Yet he never let on. He did his job and did it with 

a gritty determination, and I respect him so much for it. 

That personal life experience, I am sure, played some role in 

his determination to advance medical research. 

So as he brings an end to his Senate career, there are 

countless thousands who wouldn’t know the name ARLEN

SPECTER who have benefited by this man’s public service and 

commitment to medical research. I thank him for that as a 

person, as does everyone in this Chamber who has benefited 

from that cause in his life. 

I also think, as I look back on his work on the stimulus 

bill when he was on the other side of the aisle, that it took 

extraordinary courage and may have cost him a Senate seat 

to step forward and say, I will join with two other Republicans to pass a bill for this new President Obama to try to 

stop a recession and to give some new life to this economy. 

There were very few with the courage to do it. He was one 

of them. Sitting with him in the meetings where the negotiations were under way, then-Republican Senator ARLEN SPECTER drove hard bargains in terms of bringing down the overall cost of the project and dedicating a substantial portion— 

$10 billion, if I am not mistaken—to the National Institutes 

of Health. Again, the final negotiation on the stimulus bill 

for America included ARLEN SPECTER’s demand that the National Institutes of Health have additional research dollars. 

His commitment to make that happen did make it happen. 

Those three votes from the Republican side of the aisle made 

it happen: a stimulus which averted, in my mind, a terrible, 

much worse recession, maybe even a depression in America. 

It was the best of the Senate, when a Senator had the courage to stand up, take a position, risk his Senate seat because 

he believed in it, and do some good for America which would 

benefit millions, as his vote and his effort did. 

[ 19 ] 

When I look at those whom I have served with in the Senate, there are precious few who meet the standards for 

ARLEN SPECTER. I am going to miss him for so many reasons, but I know his involvement in public life will not quit. 

That is often a cliche we hear on the floor after a farewell 

address. But I know it because he has been hammering away 

at me every single day about bringing those cameras over to 

the Supreme Court. So even when he leaves this body, if it 

is not done then, I am sure I am going to hear from him 

again on televising the Supreme Court proceedings. I give 

my word that as long as I am around here, Senator, I will 

carry that banner for you, and if I have a chance to help you 

pass that measure at some point in the future I am going to 

do it because I think it is the right thing to do and I know 

it has meant so much to you. 

The Senate’s loss is America’s gain as he becomes a public 

figure in a different life. During his tenure in the Senate he 

has graced this institution with an extraordinary intelligence, a determination, and a belief that the national good 

should rise above any party cause. I am going to miss ARLEN

SPECTER, and I thank him for being my friend. 

I yield the floor. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi. 

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I was pleased to have an 

opportunity to hear most of the remarks made this morning 

by my friend and colleague from Pennsylvania and others 

who have spoken on the occasion of his retirement from the 

Senate. 

I couldn’t help but remember when he was campaigning in 

his first race for the Senate and I had been asked to be 

available to help out in some campaigns that year. I was a 

brand new Senator and didn’t know a lot of the protocols, 

but when I heard ARLEN SPECTER wanted me to come up and 

speak in Pennsylvania somewhere during his campaign, I decided I would accept the invitation, although I was a little 

apprehensive about it, about how I would be received as a 

Republican from Mississippi going up and helping this new 

candidate who was running on the Republican ticket too. His 

wife Joan was a member of the city council in Philadelphia, 

as I recall—very well respected. Anyway, I enjoyed getting to 

know the Senator and his wife better during those early 

campaign events. Then, after he was elected, he asked me to 

make one more trip up. 

[ 20 ] 

He could not go to Erie, PA, and keep an invitation that 

he wanted to accept and speak to a retired group of businessmen. These were older gentlemen who had been prominent 

in Pennsylvania business and political life. I worried about 

it—that they would not think much about me. But I went up 

there and nearly froze to death. I thought this is just a payback for the Civil War, I guess, that ARLEN never got to express. He was going to do his part to help educate me and 

refine me in the ways of modern America. But that led to an 

entire career here working alongside him on both sides of the 

aisle, which I have enjoyed very much. 

We have all learned from him the commitment that he 

makes to the job, the seriousness of purpose that he brings 

to committee work, and he has truly been an outstanding 

leader in the Senate, through personal performance and his 

serious and impressive record of leadership. 

I am glad to express those thoughts today and wish ARLEN

well in the years ahead. We will still have a friendship that 

will be appreciated. I look forward to continuing that relationship. 

I yield the floor. 

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I see my other colleagues. 

I do wish to talk about one or two judicial nominees, but I 

want to say first how much I appreciate Senator SPECTER. 

I have had the honor to serve on the Senate Judiciary 

Committee with Senator SPECTER the entire time I have 

been in the Senate—going on 14 years, I guess. No one has 

a clearer legal mind. The clarity of his thought and expression is always impressive to me. As someone who practiced 

law, I see the great lawyer skills he possesses. 

Also, I note that he has not just today but throughout his 

career defended the legitimacy of the powers of the Senate. 

He was very articulate over the past number of years in 

criticizing the abuse of filling the tree, where bills can be 

brought up and amendments are not allowed. He has believed that is an unhealthy trend in the Senate, and he has 

been one of the most effective advocates in opposition to it. 

He sponsored and helped pass the Armed Career Criminal 

Act. He was one of the leaders in that. Having been a longtime prosecutor in Philadelphia, I like to tease our good 

friend Senator Leahy that he was a prosecutor, but it was 

in Vermont. Senator SPECTER had to deal with a lot of crime 

in Philadelphia and was consistently reelected there for his 

effectiveness and is a true source of insight into crime in 

[ 21 ] 

America and has been an effective advocate for fighting 

crime. 

I note also that he has a good view about a Senator. He 

respects other Senators. He was talking with me one time or 

I was sharing with him my concern about a matter, and he 

used a phrase I heard him use more than once: ‘‘Well, you 

are a U.S. Senator.’’ In other words, if you do not like it, 

stand up and defend yourself. He respected that, even if he 

would disagree. 

I remember another time Senator SPECTER was on the 

floor. I had just arrived in the Senate. I wanted him to do 

something—I have long since forgotten what. 

I said, ‘‘Senator SPECTER, you could vote for this, and back 

home, you could say thus and so.’’ 

He looked right at me, and he said, ‘‘Senator, I don’t need 

your advice on how to conduct myself back home politically.’’ 

I learned a lesson from that. I never told another Senator 

what I said to Senator SPECTER. Who am I to tell you how 

to conduct yourself politically back home in the State of 

Pennsylvania? 

Senator SPECTER chaired the Judiciary Committee during 

the confirmations of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito. 

He was the leading Republican chair at that time. He raised 

questions about the nominees. But as chairman of the committee, with the votes and support of his Republican colleagues, he protected our rights, he protected our interests. 

He did not back down one time on any action by the other 

party that would have denied the ability to move that nomination forward to a vote and protect the rights of the parties 

on our side. 

Those are a few things that come to mind when I think 

about the fantastic service he has given to the Senate. He is 

one of our most able Members, one of our most effective defenders of senatorial prerogative and independence, one of 

our crime fighters without par, and one of the best lawyers 

in the Senate, a person who is courageous and strong. Even 

when he was conducting those very intense Alito and Roberts hearings—it was just after he had serious cancer treatment, the chemotherapy. I know he didn’t feel well, but he 

was fabulous in conducting himself at that time. Throughout 

all of that treatment, his work ethic surpassed by far that 

of most Senators in this body. It has been an honor to serve 

with him. 

Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, I wish to say how much I appreciated the remarks of Senator SPECTER today. I, for one, 

[ 22 ] 

hope Senators on both sides of the aisle, Democrats and Republicans, heed his closing remarks as he described them 

and also the farewell remarks of so many Senators over the 

last 2 or 3 weeks. I think there is a lot of wisdom we can 

apply to our work going forward. 

I thank Senator SPECTER very much for his service. 

I yield the floor. 

Mr. UDALL of Colorado. . . . I also wanted to associate myself with the remarks of Senator Bennet, the Senator from 

Colorado, in regard to Senator SPECTER’s farewell address to 

the Senate. In particular, I think Senator SPECTER laid out 

a thoughtful and comprehensive way we can change the Senate rules in the upcoming 112th Congress in ways that respect the rights of the minority but also provide the Senate 

with some additional ways to do the people’s business. 

WEDNESDAY, December 22, 2010 

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, time and time again I have 

come to the floor to give a few remarks about Senators who 

are retiring and leaving the Senate. They all contributed in 

their unique way one way or the other to the Senate. . . . 

Mr. President, I wish to pay a farewell to another longtime 

legislative partner, and that is Senator ARLEN SPECTER of 

Pennsylvania. 

I listened with great interest to Senator SPECTER’s farewell 

remarks yesterday. He decried the decline of bipartisan cooperation in this body. As he put it: 

In some quarters, compromising has become a dirty word. Politics is no 

longer the art of the possible when Senators are intransigent in their positions. 

During his remarkable 30 years in the Senate—he is the 

longest serving U.S. Senator in Pennsylvania’s history— 

ARLEN SPECTER has been admired for his fierce independence and for his willingness to cross party lines in order to 

accomplish big and important things for this country. 

Nowhere has this been more vividly on display than in the 

Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, on which 

Senator SPECTER and I are senior members. Before last year, 

when he returned to his roots as a Democrat, ARLEN was the 

senior Republican and I was the senior Democrat on that 

subcommittee. Since 1989, as the majority in the Senate has 

[ 23 ] 

gone back and forth between the two parties, we alternated 

as either chair or ranking member. But the transitions were 

seamless as we passed the gavel back and forth because 

ARLEN and I forged an unshakable partnership. 

That partnership has been grounded in our shared commitment to finding cures for diseases ranging from cancer to 

heart disease to Alzheimer’s and in our determination to 

maintain the National Institutes of Health as the jewel in 

the crown of international biomedical research. Our proudest 

accomplishment was our collaboration in doubling funding 

for the National Institutes of Health over a 5-year period, between 1998 and 2003. Last year, we again collaborated in securing $10 billion for the National Institutes of Health in the 

Recovery Act, although I must be honest and give the senior 

Senator from Pennsylvania the lion’s share of credit for that 

accomplishment. 

I say without fear of contradiction that there has been no 

Member of Congress in the Senate or the House who has 

championed NIH as passionately and relentlessly and successfully as Senator ARLEN SPECTER. Indeed, at times, in my 

role when I was chair of the Appropriations Labor, Health 

and Human Services, and Education Subcommittee, I have 

had to remind ARLEN that there were other programs besides the NIH in our appropriations bill. In fairness, Senator 

SPECTER has also fought passionately to increase funding for 

public schools and to increase access to higher education, but 

there is no question that his great passion, his living legacy, 

has been the National Institutes of Health and biomedical 

research. Today, the prowess and excellence of the National 

Institutes of Health is truly a living legacy to Senator SPECTER, and we have countless new medical cures and therapies 

because of Senator SPECTER’s long and determined advocacy. 

Mr. President, I will miss my good friend and colleague 

from Pennsylvania, who has been a tremendous ally for 

many years. As he departs the Senate, he can take enormous 

pride in 30 years of truly distinguished service to the people 

of Pennsylvania and the United States. I wish ARLEN and 

his wonderful wife Joan the very best in the years ahead. 

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to our 

friend and colleague, Senator ARLEN SPECTER. 

Senator SPECTER has spent five terms serving the people 

of Pennsylvania here in Congress—longer than any other 

Pennsylvania Senator. All of us can take a lesson from his 

dedication and passion for fighting for the people of his 

State. 

[ 24 ] 

A member of the Judiciary Committee since he joined Congress, Senator SPECTER built on his background as an attorney and eventually assumed the chairmanship of the committee. His expertise on constitutional issues has long been 

admired by his colleagues. 

Senator SPECTER was always a leader on issues relating to 

our National Institutes of Health, championing investment 

in scientific research to find lifesaving treatments and cures 

for a range of diseases. He understood first hand how crucial 

such funding could be, having fought his own battle with 

cancer. When we passed the Recovery Act, it was Senator 

SPECTER who ensured that it would include significant investments in NIH. His efforts to help double NIH’s budget 

have contributed to advances in treatments for Parkinson’s, 

cancer, heart disease, and Alzheimer’s. 

I am pleased to have had the opportunity to work closely 

with Senator SPECTER on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. He has been a thoughtful and constructive member committed to addressing climate change 

and fighting for clean energy jobs. 

Senator SPECTER loves this institution, and he will be 

missed. He has left his mark, and I thank him for his decades of dedicated public service. 

Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, when I came to the Senate in 

2007 as a Senator-elect, one of the first things I did was to 

go see Senator SPECTER. He asked me at the time to go to 

lunch, and from the moment that I arrived in the Senate, he 

made it very clear to me, not only did the people of Pennsylvania expect, but he expected as well that we work together. 

From the beginning of his service here in the U.S. Senate, 

way back when he was elected in 1980, all the way up to the 

present moment, he has been a Senator who has focused on 

building bipartisan relationships and, of course, focusing on 

Pennsylvania priorities. 

I have been honored to have worked with him on so many 

Pennsylvania priorities, whether it was veterans or workers, 

whether it was dairy farmers or the economy of Pennsylvania, or whether it was our soldiers, or our children, or our 

families. He has been a champion for our State, and he has 

shown younger Senators the way to work together in the interest of our State and our country. 

That bipartisanship wasn’t just a sentiment. He is a legislator who sought compromise that led to results in a Senate 

often divided by partisanship. 

His record is long, so I will only highlight a few areas. 

[ 25 ] 

He helped to lead the effort to dramatically increase funding for the National Institutes of Health, that great generator of discoveries that cure diseases and create jobs and 

hope for people often without hope because of a disease or 

a malady of one kind or another. 

His experience working on a farm as a boy, in Kansas, not 

in Pennsylvania, helped him to understand and work on 

problems affecting Pennsylvania agriculture and farm families. 

He stood up for Pennsylvania industry and workers 

against subsidized or dumped products that hurt Pennsylvania’s steel industry. 

He fought to bring Federal funding back to Pennsylvania 

to create jobs, build infrastructure, and invest in local communities. 

No Senator in the history of the Commonwealth has 

served longer than Senator SPECTER. In fact, the Senator 

that he outdistanced in a sense, in terms of service, was only 

elected by the people twice after several terms elected by the 

State legislature. Senator SPECTER was elected by the people 

of Pennsylvania five times, but it is the life in those Senate 

years, the contribution to our Commonwealth and our country in those 30 years that really matter. His impact will be 

felt for generations, not just decades, but for generations. 

There was a history book of our State that came out in the 

year 2002. It was a series of stories, essays, and chapters on 

the history of Pennsylvania, and it is a fascinating review of 

the State’s history. The foreword of that publication, that 

book, was written by Brent D. Glass, at the time the executive director of the Pennsylvania Historical Museum Commission. He wrote this in March 2002. It is a long foreword 

which I won’t read, but he wrote in the early part of this 

foreword the following: 

One way to understand the meaning of Pennsylvania’s past is to examine 

certain places around the state that are recognized for their significance to 

the entire nation. 

Then he lists and describes in detail significant places in 

Pennsylvania that have a connection to our history, whether 

it’s the Liberty Bell or the battlefield at Gettysburg, whether 

it’s the farms in our Amish communities or whether it’s some 

other place of historic significance. 

I have no doubt whatsoever that if the same history were 

recounted about the people of Pennsylvania, the people who 

moved Pennsylvania forward, the people who in addition to 

moving our State forward had an impact on the Nation; if we 

[ 26 ] 

had to make a list of Pennsylvanians who made such contributions; whether it would be William Penn, Benjamin 

Franklin, you can fill in the blanks from there, I have no 

doubt that that list would include Senator ARLEN SPECTER, 

a son of Kansas who made Pennsylvania his home, a son of 

Kansas who fought every day for the people of Pennsylvania. 

So it is the work and the achievements and the passion 

and the results in those years in the Senate that will put 

him on a very short list of those who contributed so much 

to our Commonwealth that we love and to our country that 

we cherish. 

So for all that and for so many other reasons, I, as a resident of Pennsylvania and a citizen of the United States, but 

as a Senator, want to express my gratitude to Senator 

ARLEN SPECTER for his 30 years of service, but especially for 

what those 30 years meant to the people of Pennsylvania. 

Thank you, Senator SPECTER. 

Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, when the 111th Congress draws to a close, we will bid farewell to 16 colleagues 

who have collectively given more than 200 years of service 

to our Nation through their service in the Senate. These include seven of the Senate’s most experienced Members. People like Chris Dodd and ARLEN SPECTER who have each 

served five terms in the Senate. Kit Bond who has served 

four terms and Bob Bennett, Byron Dorgan, Russ Feingold, 

and Judd Gregg, who have each served three terms in this 

Chamber. . . . 

My neighbor in the Hart Senate Office Building, ARLEN

SPECTER, is one of the Senate’s most independent voices and 

perhaps the best friend that the National Institutes of 

Health, and every American who benefits from its cutting 

edge research, has ever had on Capitol Hill. . . . 

It has been an honor and a pleasure to serve with each of 

the people who will leave this Chamber when we adjourn 

sine die. Each has made substantial contributions to their 

States, to the Nation, and to the Senate during their time 

here. 

Æ