Jon Kyl 

U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA 

TRIBUTES 

IN THE CONGRESS OF 

THE UNITED STATES 

UNUM

E PLURIBUS


congress.#15
Jon Kyl 

Courtesy U.S. Senate Historical Office 


81108.eps
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 2014

S. DOC. 113–10 

Tributes 

Delivered in Congress 

Jon Kyl 

United States Congressman 

1987–1995 

United States Senator 

1995–2013 

÷ 

Compiled under the direction 

of the 

Joint Committee on Printing 

[ iii ] 

CONTENTS 

Page 

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

Farewell Address ...................................................................................... vii 

Proceedings in the Senate: 

Tributes by Senators: 

Cardin, Benjamin L., of Maryland ............................................ 24 

Coats, Daniel, of Indiana ........................................................... 17 

Collins, Susan M., of Maine ...................................................... 3 

Cornyn, John, of Texas .............................................................. 12 

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

Isakson, Johnny, of Georgia ...................................................... 5 

Kerry, John F., of Massachusetts ............................................. 11 

Kyl, Jon, of Arizona .......................................................... 3, 10, 23, 24 

Leahy, Patrick J., of Vermont ................................................... 27 

Levin, Carl, of Michigan ............................................................ 25, 26 

McCain, John, of Arizona .......................................................... 7 

McConnell, Mitch, of Kentucky ................................................. 19 

Mikulski, Barbara A., of Maryland .......................................... 6 

Reed, Jack, of Rhode Island ...................................................... 25 

Reid, Harry, of Nevada .............................................................. 28 

Sessions, Jeff, of Alabama ......................................................... 3, 15 

[ v ] 

BIOGRAPHY 

JON KYL was born in Oakland, NE, on April 25, 1942. He 

received his BA with honors from the University of Arizona, 

Tucson, in 1964 and an LLB from the University of Arizona 

in 1966. He served as editor-in-chief of the Arizona Law Review. He was admitted to the Arizona State Bar in 1966 and 

practiced law with Jennings, Strouss and Salmon in Phoenix 

from 1966 to 1986. He served as chairman of the Phoenix 

Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce from 1984 to 1985. 

He was elected to the 100th Congress and to the three succeeding Congresses (January 3, 1987 to January 3, 1995). He 

was elected to the Senate in 1994 and reelected in 2000 and 

2006, serving until January 3, 2013. 

During his Senate tenure he served as chair of the Republican Policy Committee and as chair of the Senate Republican Conference. He was elected unanimously by his colleagues as Republican whip, the second-highest position in 

Senate Republican leadership, where he served from 2007 to 

2013. 

During his Senate tenure, JON KYL served on the Intelligence Committee, the Finance Committee, the Judiciary 

Committee, the Appropriations Committee, the Energy and 

Natural Resources Committee, as well as the Joint Select 

Committee on Deficit Reduction. 

As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee he played 

a key role in the confirmation of Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court. As ranking Republican on the Subcommittee 

on Terrorism, Technology, and Homeland Security he helped 

write the America Invents Act (patent reform) and the Crime 

Victims’ Rights Act as well as important provisions of the 

Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, and other 

antiterrorism laws. 

While serving on the Senate Finance Committee, he was 

chief advocate of the death tax repeal and other progrowth 

tax policies, including low tax rates on income, capital gains, 

and dividends. He was also a strong proponent of step-bystep solutions for health care reform. In 1999, Senator KYL

led the successful effort to defeat the Comprehensive Test 

Ban Treaty. 

[ vi ] 

The Wall Street Journal wrote in 2011 that Senator KYL

‘‘has made his mark the old-fashioned way—by knowing 

what he is talking about.’’ The New York Times in February 

2012 called him ‘‘the emissary of the Republican leadership, 

a gatekeeper of conservatism, and a bridge between his party’s most ardent conservatives and more pragmatic centrists.’’ His command of policy is why national TV news networks often invited him to serve as a commentator on various national issues. 

Time magazine recognized Senator KYL as 1 of the 

‘‘World’s 100 Most Influential People’’ in 2010, and as 1 of 

the 10 Best Senators in 2006. Capitol Hill’s newspaper, The 

Hill, identified him as 1 of the ‘‘25 hardest working lawmakers.’’ 

He and his wife Caryll have two children, Kristine Kyl 

Gavin and John Kyl, and four grandchildren. 

[ vii ] 

Farewell to the Senate 

Wednesday, December 19, 2012 

Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I am deeply honored to have 

served for 18 years as Arizona’s 10th Senator and for 4 

terms in the House of Representatives before that. Now it is 

time to move on. My successor, Senator-elect Jeff Flake, is 

a good and honorable public servant who will work hard on 

behalf of our great State of Arizona, and my colleague John 

McCain will continue his long and dedicated public service 

as well. I appreciate the remarks he delivered here yesterday. 

I say thank you to my colleagues for your friendship. It 

has been a privilege working with so many of you on both 

sides of the aisle. While it is true that Washington would 

benefit from more civility, the Senate behind the scenes is an 

extraordinarily collegial institution, and I will certainly miss 

that aspect of the job. 

I also thank my staff, past and present, for working so 

many long hours and for spending so much time analyzing 

the issues that will determine America’s future. 

Farewell speeches offer the opportunity to reminisce about 

the past. I actually do not believe that would be the best use 

of either your time or mine. Instead, I am going to comment 

on some of the biggest public policy changes America faces 

and recommend principles to guide the way forward. 

I was first elected to public office when the Reagan revolution was in full swing. Maximizing freedom guided the policies of that era, with tremendous success. My goal as a public servant has been to advance and maintain a consensus in 

favor of the so-called three legs of the Reagan public policy 

stool. 

One, dynamic, growth-oriented economics; two, the social 

values that make limited government possible; and three, a 

national security commitment that emphasizes a strong and 

sovereign America. In each of the three areas, maximizing 

freedom and the positive results that flow from that is the 

goal. 

[ viii ] 

Let’s turn first to economic freedom. The Reagan years 

showed us that expanding economic freedom should be the 

North Star, the guiding light of U.S. policy because it is the 

best way to achieve sustained and broad-based prosperity for 

all. Free markets, low taxes, and limited government allow 

citizens to use their talents and resources in whatever way 

they choose and keep more of the fruits of their labor. 

I encourage people to invest, work, start businesses, and 

hire others. In other words, free markets promote economic 

well-being for all. Cutting taxes at the margins; that is, reducing the rate of tax on the next dollar earned, encourages 

growth. Raising taxes can have the opposite effect. Nobel 

economist Edward Prescott of Arizona has found that higher 

marginal tax rates are the reason Europeans work one-third 

fewer hours than Americans. 

When marginal rates are lower, prosperity flows to other 

sectors of society, allowing businesses to create jobs and new 

products, compete for workers, raise wages, invest their profits, which then can be lent to other entrepreneurs. Everyone 

gains in a free economy. As John F. Kennedy put it, a rising 

tide lifts all boats. 

Look at what free enterprise has achieved. After President 

Reagan dramatically lowered tax rates and trimmed regulation, income increased in every quintile. Millions of new private sector jobs were created and the stock market soared, 

tripling in value over 8 years. The lower tax rates and reduced regulatory burden produced a more robust economy 

and a more robust economy meant more revenue for government. Similar results attended the tax rate reductions during the Presidency of George W. Bush. 

In recent years, many policymakers have forgotten these 

lessons. Since 2008, America’s score in the Index of Economic 

Freedom has declined significantly to the point that we are 

no longer considered a free economy but, rather, a mostly 

free economy. That is what happens when we dramatically 

increase government spending and regulations. Now we are 

on the verge of a massive tax increase which could undermine small businesses and stifle the economic growth America badly needs. 

Policymakers must focus on the basic laws of economic 

input. A faulty view has gained traction in recent years that 

consumption fueled by government spending actually creates 

economic growth. It doesn’t. It just moves money around by 

taking from people who produced it and could productively 

[ ix ] 

spend or reinvest it and giving it to government to spend. 

Consumption is the wrong target. 

People only change their spending habits when they know 

they will have greater consistent income over time; for example, when they receive a raise at work or get a permanent 

tax cut. That is why temporary stimulus tax gimmicks don’t 

work. 

If the problem with the economy is supposedly a lack of 

consumption, the government cannot solve that problem by 

spending for us. After all, it is our tax money that is being 

taken out of the economy and spent. When government borrows, it will eventually have to tax the people to pay back 

what it has borrowed. There is no free lunch. For the government to spend, taxpayers have to give up wealth they could 

have spent or invested. Keynesian demand-side economics 

assumes the government is more efficient at spending our 

money than we are. That assumption has proved to be incorrect time and again. 

Wise policymakers will find the right balance between the 

need for more tax revenue and the need for more economic 

freedom. They will remember there is no fixed economic pie 

that legislators should try to divide. They will remember 

that labor, capital, and technology are the real factors that 

drive long-term economic growth, not government spending. 

They will stop shackling would-be entrepreneurs and job creators with ever more burdensome regulations. 

Here is some more good news about growth-based free enterprise. It is the most moral economic system ever devised 

for three reasons. First, it is premised on the truth that success only comes by supplying something to others that they 

need or want. In the bargain, both sides benefit. Second, this 

system has produced incredible wealth around the world, 

lifting millions out of poverty. No economic system can come 

close in helping that many people. So it is the most moral 

economic system in providing material benefits, but that is 

only part of the story. 

Free enterprise provides more than increased income and 

material prosperity. Those things help, but they are not 

what make humans thrive. The key determinant of lasting 

happiness and satisfaction is what American Enterprise Institute president Arthur Brooks has called earned success. 

People are happiest when they do something they are good 

at, when they create value in the lives of others, and genuinely earn their income regardless of how much it is. 

Brooks put it very well in his book The Battle: 

[ x ] 

Earned success gives people a sense of meaning about their lives. And 

meaning also is key to human flourishing. It reassures us that what we do 

in life is of significance and value, for ourselves and for those around us. 

To truly flourish, we need to know that the ways in which we occupy our 

waking hours are not based on mere pursuit of pleasure or money or any 

other superficial goal. We need to know that our endeavors have a deeper 

purpose. 

The earned success that comes from doing a job well explains why fabulously wealthy people often choose not to retire after they have earned their fortunes. They are motivated by the satisfaction that comes from spending the day 

productively by creating, innovating, and solving problems. 

They are creating purpose-driven value in their own lives 

and oftentimes tangible value in the lives of others. 

The effect of earned success also explains why people who 

win the lottery often become depressed when they find out 

that free money offers hollow joy. Free enterprise promotes 

freedom to achieve and, therefore, more opportunities to earn 

success. It is the most moral economic system ever created. 

It is also the fairest system because it rewards merit, hard 

work, and achievement. This is what brought my grandparents to this country, along with millions of other immigrants. Incidentally, real free enterprise has no place for 

crony capitalism because it doesn’t have government picking 

winners and losers. 

The biggest economic favor policymakers can do for Americans is to follow the Reagan legacy and support free market 

policies that create more opportunity, more mobility, and 

more earned success and therefore more human flourishing 

possible for every American. Free enterprise is the only economic system that gives us so many opportunities to pursue 

fundamental happiness and lasting satisfaction. 

This brings us to the second leg of the Reagan stool—the 

question of values. President Reagan devoted his Presidency—and indeed his entire career in public life—to the expansion of economic freedom. He also understood that economic freedom depends on certain cultural underpinnings, 

such as marriage, family, and personal responsibility. He understood that family breakdown and social pathologies would 

ultimately make people more reliant on government and 

thus more eager for government to expand, sapping them of 

individual responsibility and the need to care for others in 

the family or community. 

In short, Reagan understood that economic conservatism 

would not and could not survive unless social conservatism 

survived too. 

[ xi ] 

The United States has a stronger philosophical attachment 

to freedom and limited government than any other nation on 

Earth. Yet I also recognize that many cultural trends are 

working against us. For example, nearly 41 percent of all 

American children are now born to unmarried women, compared with fewer than 11 percent in 1970. Without stable, 

two-parent families, the government bears more of a burden 

of caring for these children. The growth in food stamps and 

other support programs makes the point. At some point, this 

makes it harder to maintain a political consensus that favors 

limited government, economic freedom, and programs that 

help people out of poverty rather than entrenching it. Why? 

To quote Princeton scholar Robert P. George, limited government: 

Cannot be maintained where the marriage culture collapses and families 

fail to form or easily dissolve. Where these things happen, the health, education, and welfare function of the family will have to be undertaken by 

someone or some institution, and that will sooner or later will be government. 

In other words, in the absence of two-parent families, the 

government fills the financial role of the father, to say nothing of the critical roles fathers play. Over time, more and 

more Americans have come to rely on the government to provide for their most basic needs, needs that two-parent families have traditionally supported. Those Americans are now 

competing for increasingly scarce resources. 

This is not to judge the status of these families or to suggest it is in any way inappropriate for government to provide 

the help. It is precisely because we do care that we provide 

help through government and other institutions. But that is 

an action to ameliorate the effects of a condition, not to 

change the underlying condition. 

I believe we must do all we can to revive the marriage culture, increase family stability, and ensure that more children 

grow up in two-parent households. Strong families have always been the key to upward mobility and economic security. 

If we want to remain an aspirational society, a society 

where children have the opportunities and the resources to 

pursue their dreams and create a better life, we must encourage young Americans to embrace what Ron Haskins and 

Isabel Sawhill of the Brookings Institution have called the 

success sequence. That sequence is very simple: Complete 

high school, get a full-time job, get married before having 

kids. If we follow that sequence, we are virtually guaranteed 

to avoid poverty. 

[ xii ] 

The marriage culture is fighting an uphill battle against 

forces that threaten to overwhelm them. I urge everyone who 

believes in limited government, economic freedom, and the 

real self-worth and well-being of our children to do their part 

in rebuilding the institution of marriage. No other social 

cause or campaign is more vital to America’s future. 

When it comes to shaping our culture, we must also improve the quality of our students’ civic education. I fear that 

many American students are graduating from high school 

and college with only the vaguest knowledge of our founding 

and our Constitution and what it means to be an American. 

It is hard to defend rights if we don’t know what they are 

and where they came from. 

Schools shape students’ views about our priorities as a society and what principles are worth standing for. Instead of 

teaching history and the fundamentals of America’s founding, many curriculums focus on small, politically correct topics such as gender, class, diversity, and ethnicity. The entertainment industry and many major media outlets, too, dwell 

on these topics and lend them outsized importance. 

These topics tend to be political and emphasize what divides us. They ignore our common heritage of freedom, 

equality, self-reliance, human dignity, faith, and community. 

As William Bennett recently wrote: When we look at what 

students are being taught, it is easy to see why more of them 

prefer socialism over free market capitalism. He writes: ‘‘Politics is downstream from the culture.’’ 

Bennett also noted that Plato said the two most important 

questions in society are: Who teaches the young and what do 

we teach them? 

I believe we need to think long and hard about these two 

questions. It is time to have a serious discussion about civics 

education. If Americans don’t understand or appreciate the 

foundations of our republican government, those foundations 

will gradually erode. In that sense, political and historical 

literacy is critical to the preservation of our constitutional 

freedoms. 

As President Reagan famously said: 

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We 

didn’t pass it on to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, 

protected, and handed on for them to do the same. 

Moving to the last leg of the Reagan policy stool: national 

security. I have tried to follow the Reagan legacy of pursuing 

peace through strength. As President Reagan once said, ‘‘Of 

[ xiii ] 

the four wars in my lifetime, none came about because 

America was too strong.’’ 

President Reagan knew that weakness tempts aggression, 

and he believed that deterrence meant: 

[M]aking sure any adversary who thinks about attacking the United 

States . . . concludes the risks to him outweigh any potential gains. Once he 

understands that, he won’t attack. We maintain the peace through our 

strength; weakness only invites aggression. 

American strength remains the best guarantor against 

major armed conflict between nation-states. While it is not 

our role to police the world—and we couldn’t do it in any 

event—it is also true that we are the indispensable nation to 

help safeguard liberal values around the world. 

For America to continue its leadership role, however, we 

must have a military with both the capability and the flexibility to address a wide range of challenges. And, yes, it 

means adequately funding the military requirements, among 

other things, by avoiding the devastating sequestration of 

necessary defense investments. I wish to speak to four of our 

challenges: nuclear modernization, missile defense, terrorist 

threats, and transnational law. 

For the first time in the history of U.S. nuclear policy, the 

President has placed nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation, rather than nuclear deterrence, ‘‘atop the U.S. nuclear 

agenda.’’ 

Ironically, more treaties or unilateral actions that take us 

closer to nuclear disarmament will not help us reduce the 

dangers we face today. Such actions will only serve to make 

our allies who depend on U.S. nuclear guarantees more nervous, while potentially weakening the credibility of U.S. nuclear deterrence. Senate support for the 2010 New START 

Treaty was based upon a commitment to modernize our 

aging nuclear complex and weapons. As that commitment 

starts to decay, it will become increasingly difficult to rebuild 

the responsive nuclear infrastructure that even the President agreed is necessary for further nuclear reductions as 

well as the continued credibility of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. 

Note that I said ‘‘for further nuclear reductions.’’ They are 

literally dependent upon the U.S. modernization. 

The New START proceedings made it clear that the nuclear balance between the United States and Russia under 

New START force levels would be stable—except, of course, 

for the huge diversity—or disparity, I would say—in tactical 

nuclear weapons that Russia enjoys. But under this stability, 

there would be no incentives to strike first during a crisis 

[ xiv ] 

nor would there be incentives to grow our respective nuclear 

arsenals in the future. We should, therefore, think very carefully before we contemplate any changes to long-standing 

U.S. nuclear deterrence policies or pursue further reductions 

in support of the President’s disarmament agenda. 

We absolutely cannot know for certain that fewer numbers 

of weapons will make us safer. In fact, Henry Kissinger and 

Brent Scowcroft recently reminded us that: 

[S]trategic stability is not inherent with low numbers of weapons; indeed, 

excessively low numbers could lead to a situation in which surprise attacks 

are conceivable. 

Policymakers would do well to heed the advice of Winston 

Churchill offered in his last address to the U.S. Congress. He 

said: 

Be careful above all things not to let go of the atomic weapon until you 

are sure, and more than sure, that other means of preserving peace are in 

your hands. 

Against the backdrop of more than 100 million war casualties from conventional weapons in just the 30 years before 

development of the atomic weapon, Churchill’s advice is sobering indeed. 

The second challenge we face is with respect to missile defense. Recent events illustrate the importance of missile defense in today’s security environment. Israel’s Iron Dome 

missile defense system protected its population against rocket attacks, giving Israeli military and political authorities 

the time and the space necessary to avoid a devastating 

ground war, which is ultimately what made a truce possible. 

As Secretary of Defense Panetta said at the time, ‘‘Iron 

Dome does not start wars, it helps prevent wars.’’ 

Elsewhere in the world, Turkey has requested NATO Patriot batteries to protect it against Syrian ballistic missiles 

potentially armed with chemical weapons. Meanwhile, 

Japan, South Korea, and the United States recently activated their ballistic missile defense systems in response to 

North Korea’s long-range ballistic missile launch—yet another reminder that the threat doesn’t stand still. 

In response to Iran’s development of nuclear weapons and 

longer range ballistic missiles, NATO has agreed to support 

the deployment of short, medium, and long-range missile defense systems to protect alliance territory and thereby avoid 

potential Iranian nuclear blackmail. So the benefits of defense are well appreciated, especially by those most directly 

affected or threatened. 

[ xv ] 

We have proven that it is possible to hit a bullet with a 

bullet, and we have debunked the cold war-era argument 

that missile defense contributes to a new arms race. In fact, 

since the United States withdrew from the ABM Treaty, we 

have reduced the number of deployed nuclear weapons from 

6,000 under START to 1,700 under the Moscow Treaty to 

1,550 under the New START Treaty. We must continue to 

disabuse some of the notion that U.S. vulnerability to the 

Russian and Chinese nuclear arsenals is a source of stability 

when, in fact, the most important constitutional and moral 

duty of any President is to protect the American people. 

We have made some progress in deploying domestic missile defenses since the United States withdrew from the 

ABM Treaty in 2002, though we have also squandered opportunities to do more. Here are just a few missile defense challenges for the future. 

First, over the past 4 years, the Obama administration has 

consistently reduced funding for missile defense. Second, it 

has refocused funding on regional missile defenses that protect others at the expense of protecting the homeland of the 

United States and developing future technologies. Third, the 

administration has scaled back the number of ground-based 

interceptors protecting the homeland from 54 to only 30— 

numbers that do not begin to meet the standard established 

by the Missile Defense Act of 1999, which required a defense 

capable of addressing accidental and unauthorized attacks 

from any source. Fourth, the administration has no plans to 

modernize interceptors that are more than 20 years old. That 

is the technology that is protecting America today, and it is, 

therefore, unlikely to keep up with future threats. 

As I said, there is very little funding devoted to new breakthrough technologies that could provide even more effective 

defenses for the United States, such as lasers and spacebased interceptors. 

We should remember, as NORTHCOM Commander General Jacoby has explained to Congress, that ‘‘no homeland 

task is more important than protecting the United States 

from a limited ICBM attack.’’ 

Finally, one of the greatest challenges we face today stems 

from Russian attempts to limit the development and deployment of U.S. and allied missile defense systems. The United 

States cannot allow Russia to dictate to us limits on the capabilities of U.S. missile defenses. If they could be effective 

against a Russian launch, then so be it. That is what it 

means to protect Americans from potential threats. If the 

[ xvi ] 

Russians argue that they pose no possible threat, then our 

missile defense should be irrelevant to them. 

From negotiations on the New START Treaty to threatening the United States and NATO in an attempt to limit 

our planned deployments in Europe, the Russians have 

never abandoned their goal of limiting the effectiveness of 

U.S. missile defense. The answer is not ‘‘reset’’ but recommitment to the principle that the most moral way to protect the 

American people from missile attacks is by missile defense. 

The third national security challenge I wish to briefly discuss is the threat of political Islam. To defeat an enemy, we 

must first know the enemy, and that includes calling them 

by their name: radical Islamists who seek to impose their 

ideology to rule others—to govern political, social, and civic 

life, as well as religious life. 

Intelligence is key to defeating political Islam. The Foreign 

Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, and the PATRIOT Act 

are good examples of the tools we need to know what our enemies are planning and who they are before they strike. 

These tools cannot be allowed to expire. 

The PATRIOT Act reflects a recognition that investigators 

charged with preventing acts of terrorism should have at 

least the same investigative tools as Federal agents charged 

with targeting mobsters or health care fraud. 

The fourth and last national security challenge I will mention is the rise of transnational law, which poses a serious 

threat to American sovereignty. Our government was founded on the principle that laws should be made through the 

democratic process so that the people could hold their legislators accountable. The American people elected their own 

representatives and, therefore, control their own affairs. 

That is the theory. 

Americans want the benefits of global cooperation based on 

widespread acceptance of useful international ‘‘rules of the 

road,’’ of course. But such rules, like our domestic laws, 

should be adopted through democratic processes that assure 

accountability on the part of the legislators. They should not 

be imposed by international bodies with zero accountability 

to the American people. 

The rise of global governance, I believe, challenges this 

principle. By ‘‘global governance’’ I mean the use of multilateral treaties and other agreements to delegate power on matters such as the environment, natural resources, and individual rights to new international bodies with broad powers 

and little or no political accountability. Such issues have traVerDate Aug 31 2005 14:04 Apr 24, 2014 Jkt 081108 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6688 Sfmt 6688 H:\DOCS\BYEBYE\BYEBYE12\81108.TXT KAYNE
[ xvii ] 

ditionally been decided by the laws of individual nations, not 

by international bureaucracies. Some treaties would directly 

implicate U.S. national security flexibility or capability. 

One such treaty was defeated by the Senate in 1999—the 

Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty, which would have 

jeopardized America’s nuclear deterrent by preventing us 

from ever again conducting tests of our nuclear weapons. We 

should never give up the right to verify that our nuclear deterrent works. It is critical that we know, that our allies who 

rely on these weapons know, and that our potential adversaries know, or our weapons will not have deterrent effect. 

I urge my colleagues to defeat this treaty again should it 

come up before the Senate in the President’s second term. 

In conclusion, in all three areas I have discussed here, we 

have had successes and we have had failures. I think of what 

Margaret Thatcher said as she was leaving public office; that 

there are no permanent victories in politics. What she meant 

was one can leave office having upheld their principles and 

having accomplished some of their policy goals, but that 

doesn’t mean there will always be a consensus in favor of 

their preferred policies or that their accomplishments would 

not be reversed in the future. 

As I look back on my 26 years in Congress and my 18 

years in the Senate, I am deeply proud of everything we 

have accomplished—from tax relief and welfare reform to 

missile defense and nuclear policy, not to mention things of 

primary importance to my State. But I also understand that 

political victories can be ephemeral because in a democracy, 

a debate over these issues never really ends. It is always ongoing. 

I will miss being involved in these important debates and 

decisions directly. From now on, my role in these matters 

will be as a private citizen, but I still aim to be involved. 

It has been an honor—really the privilege of a lifetime— 

to serve, and it is difficult to say goodbye. I will depart Capitol Hill with enormous faith in the American people, a profound appreciation for the miracle of the American Republic, 

and a resilient optimism about America’s future. 

I thank my colleagues. 

TRIBUTES 

TO 

JON KYL 

[ 3 ] 

Proceedings in the Senate 

THURSDAY, November 29, 2012 

Mr. KYL. Mr. President, first, let me thank my colleague 

from Texas [Mrs. Hutchison] for her leadership on this and 

so many other issues that we have worked on over the years. 

One of my regrets in leaving the Senate is that I will not be 

able to work with her, and she has said the same thing 

about me. We will be off doing something else, but we are 

not going to give up on some of the fights we have been engaged in during these years. . . . 

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I appreciate Senator KYL’s 

comments, and I share them. We are going to miss the most 

knowledgeable fiscal tax expert in the Senate, and his long 

career includes time on the Finance Committee. I thank Senator KYL. . . . 

THURSDAY, December 6, 2012 

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, in reflecting on Senator JON

KYL’s service to this institution and to our Nation, I am reminded of these words by Abraham Lincoln. He said, ‘‘Character is like a tree and reputation like a shadow. The shadow 

is what we think of, the tree is the real thing.’’ 

JON KYL is the real thing. During 18 years in the Senate, 

preceded by 8 in the House, JON has built a reputation that 

is a perfect image of his character. National magazines have 

named him one of America’s 10 Best Senators, one of the 

world’s most influential people, and one of our Nation’s hardest working lawmakers. 

His unanimous election in 2008 as our Republican whip 

and his recognized leadership on the great challenges of our 

time throughout the Senate reflect the esteem in which he 

is held on both sides of the aisle. These accolades confirm 

what we who have had the privilege of working closely with 

JON know from experience. He is intelligent, he is informed, 

[ 4 ] 

and he is fair. He is dedicated to the people of Arizona and 

exemplifies the principles that are the foundation of our Constitution and of our country. 

Of all the words that have been used to describe JON KYL, 

these five describe him best: As good as his word. JON has 

been an invaluable ally in the great challenge of defending 

America against terrorism, a challenge he recognized and 

worked hard to address long before the terrorist attacks of 

more than a decade ago. 

As the leader of the Judiciary Committee, he worked hard 

to strengthen our intelligence capabilities and was at the 

forefront of one of the most crucial antiterrorism issues, 

tracking, exposing, and cutting off financial networks that 

bankrolled terrorism. Combating this financing was one of 

our earliest and greatest antiterrorism successes, although 

work continues today, and it was JON KYL who played a key 

role. 

Arizona, similar to Maine, has a long international border. 

The American people fully understand the importance of borders that are close to our enemies as they remain always 

open to our friends. JON is dedicated to providing those who 

protect our borders with the personnel, the training, and the 

technology so America can continue to welcome with compassion those seeking a better way of life while turning away 

those who would do us harm. 

As a member of the Finance Committee, JON KYL has been 

one of the Senate’s most diligent fiscal watchdogs. He has a 

sharp eye for wasteful spending. He is dedicated to reining 

in deficit spending, reforming our Tax Code, and making 

government more accountable. 

JON KYL understands the challenges that confront America, and he also empathizes with the challenges that confront 

American families. His record is one of strong advocacy for 

our most vulnerable citizens, including victims of crime, children, and our seniors. 

JON often compares his work in the Senate to that of a 

teacher. Whether addressing constituents or colleagues, he 

strives to educate with facts, with evidence, and with truth. 

None of us has ever heard JON try to win an argument by 

belittling or berating an opponent. It is simply not in his 

character to do so. 

It has been said that a politician thinks of the next election and a statesman thinks of the next generation. This 

statesman from Arizona expresses his philosophy of government and the obligation of government leaders this way, ‘‘We 

[ 5 ] 

owe future generations the chance to live their dreams, to be 

successful, and—most important—to achieve true happiness 

by their own efforts.’’ 

Senator JON KYL’s commitment to the security of our Nation, to fiscal responsibility, and to helping those in need 

have earned him a reputation that is worthy of his character. 

The people of Arizona and America are grateful for his 

service. I am thankful for his guidance over the years and 

for his friendship. We wish him all the best in the years to 

come. 

TUESDAY, December 11, 2012 

Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, December of every evennumbered year is a sad time. Because of election outcomes 

or because of age and longevity, time takes over and some 

of our Members go and new Members come. I think it is important that we take the time to recognize those who served 

so long and served so well and served each of us—individuals such as JON KYL of Arizona, the whip for the Republican minority in the Senate. He is a great American, a great 

Arizonan, a man who carries a tremendous burden—two, as 

a matter of fact. One is trying to herd cats, known as the Republican conference, and the other is being the junior Senator to John McCain. Both of those are challenges that anybody would have a problem meeting, but JON KYL does it the 

right way. He has the temperament of a leader. I have been 

in 38 different legislative years, from the Georgia Legislature 

to the U.S. Congress. I have known a lot of whips. I have 

known a lot of them who cracked the whip, I have known a 

lot of them who were ineffective, and I have known a very 

few who were effective. JON KYL is the most effective whip 

I have ever worked with and ever seen. He knows the issues 

and has the ability to communicate them. He knows how to 

put the party ahead of individual priorities but keep the 

country first no matter what it is. 

I will give you one good example. We were debating the 

START Treaty 2 years ago, which is a very important treaty 

for the United States. The Presiding Officer [Mr. Casey] was 

on the Foreign Relations Committee when we had that debate. He might remember there were a lot of people who 

were concerned about the modernization of our nuclear arsenal while we were renewing the START Treaty and what we 

[ 6 ] 

would do in the prospective years ahead while we made a 

new treaty with Russia in terms of our modernization. It was 

JON KYL’s leadership, working with Senator Kerry as the 

chairman of the committee, Secretary of State Clinton as our 

Secretary of State, and interests on both sides who carved 

out the agreement that ensured for the American people that 

we would have the modernized nuclear force we need to meet 

whatever challenge might come our way. That treaty passed 

in large measure because he gained the assurances from the 

administration and from those who were opposed that without modernization and the commitment for the money for it, 

it would not take place. That is not just a whip, that is a 

leader. That is a man who found a problem, found a solution, 

married the two, and we ratified a treaty. America is a safer 

country because of it, and our nuclear arsenal is being modernized. 

That is the kind of man you look for in a legislator. JON

KYL is a great legislator, a great whip, and a great friend of 

mine. I pay tribute to him for his service to the U.S. Senate, 

for his service to the people of America, and for his service 

to the people of his State of Arizona. 

WEDNESDAY, December 12, 2012 

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I rise to comment 

about some wonderful men in the Senate who are retiring on 

both sides of the aisle. Earlier today I spoke about my deep 

affection and sorry-to-see-go friends Olympia Snowe and Kay 

Bailey Hutchison, but I want to rise as the dean of the 

women in the Senate to say some very special words about 

very special men on both sides of the aisle. Because when I 

came to the Senate, it was only Nancy Kassebaum and me, 

and yet we worked on so many issues together. There are 

really wonderful men here who supported me, supported our 

issues, but really stood up for those States and their communities. . . . 

I wish to comment about JON KYL. I have worked across 

the aisle from JON KYL and I have been seated across the 

table from him at everything from Bible study groups to the 

Senate Intelligence Committee. We studied the words of the 

Bible together to make ourselves better, and we worked in 

our committees to make the world better. 

We lived through September 11 and the terrible attacks 

that occurred in our country and the anthrax attacks in our 

[ 7 ] 

offices. With his steady leadership, his resourceful mind, his 

can-do know-how, we worked together to get the job done. I 

was delighted to be able to work with him in a way that 

called forth our highest and better selves to look out for our 

country. I wish him the best in his journey. . . . 

I wanted to be sure that the day would not end without 

my acknowledging these wonderful people who have given a 

big part of their lives to making this country a better place. 

I want to, in the most heartfelt way—I am so sorry we did 

not have a bipartisan dinner or party to be able to express 

this. I would have liked to have been in the same room, 

breaking bread with them, in order to be able to tell them 

how much we appreciate them, across party lines, across 

those lines that ordinarily divide us. They came from different parts of the country, they arrived in the Senate with 

different objectives, they will leave under different circumstances. But I want to again let them know that each 

and every one of them had a positive impact on me and I 

think a wonderful impact on the future of this country. So 

I wish them well. God bless and Godspeed. 

TUESDAY, December 18, 2012 

Mr. MCCAIN. Madam President, it is customary in the 

days before Congress adjourns—and I am still hopeful this 

Congress will eventually, mercifully adjourn—for Members 

to offer farewells and testimonials to departing colleagues. I 

rise today to say a few words about a Senator who is leaving 

us and whose example I esteem and friendship I have relied 

on for many years. 

Senator JON KYL and I have served the State of Arizona 

together for a quarter of a century since JON was first elected to the other body and I to the Senate in 1986. We have 

worked together in this body for the last 18 years. That is 

a long time to get to know someone with whom you share responsibilities to the State we are honored to represent, and 

I have gotten to know JON very well over these many years. 

I can also say in all honesty that my admiration for him has 

grown every single day I have been privileged to serve with 

him. 

I share that admiration for JON with the people of Arizona, 

who elected him to the Senate three times, and would have, 

I am sure, comfortably elected him to a fourth term had he 

sought reelection. Arizonans hold him in very high regard for 

[ 8 ] 

a very obvious reason: He has been a very diligent, very effective advocate for their interests. 

I have observed him closely as we tended to issues that 

might seem arcane and unglamorous to Senators from other 

States but are among the most important and often the most 

contentious issues to Arizonans—issues such as land exchanges and water rights settlements. I have never failed to 

be impressed by the qualities JON brings to these matters— 

his unflappable patience, his tireless work ethic, his careful 

attention to detail, his determination to be fair to all parties 

involved, and to achieve results that are in the best interests 

of our State of Arizona. 

I have tried to learn from his example, and I wish I could 

say I have emulated him, but, regrettably, as Arizonans and 

my Senate colleagues can attest, I still possess a short supply of some of JON’s most conspicuous leadership qualities. 

His patience, for example, his meticulous preparation and 

thoroughness are, I am sorry to say, not qualities I will be 

remembered for, but they have been indispensable to the 

people of our State. It is fortunate for them and for me that 

States are represented by two Senators and that Arizonans 

have had JON KYL here to compensate for my shortcomings. 

JON works harder than almost any Member of Congress I 

know. We all joke about how we are often required to vote 

on legislation before we have had time to read it. It is a poorly kept secret that we rarely, if ever, read from preamble to 

conclusion any of the bills we consider, even if we have had 

months to do so. JON does, though. He reads them. When 

you debate with him over legislation, you better know what 

you are talking about, because he does and he is almost always better prepared than you are not only to explain his argument but to explain yours as well. He often writes the bills 

he sponsors, work that most of us almost happily rely on 

staff to perform. He takes his responsibilities as the author 

of legislation literally, rather than figuratively, as most of us 

do. 

It is hard to imagine where he finds the time to hold himself to such exacting standards of responsibility, but he does, 

often working late into the night after the rest of us have 

gone home, when he reads bills and writes them and tends 

personally to the concerns of his constituents. He is a Senator’s Senator. He is principled, purposeful, informed, collaborative, and able to get things done by cooperation and 

compromise without ever sacrificing the principles that motivate his public service. He would rather reason with oppoVerDate Aug 31 2005 14:04 Apr 24, 2014 Jkt 081108 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6688 Sfmt 6688 H:\DOCS\BYEBYE\BYEBYE12\81108.TXT KAYNE
[ 9 ] 

nents than insult them. He prefers accomplishments to acclaim. 

It is little wonder then why our caucus elected and reelected him to our leadership. He has the complete confidence of every one of us. He is an easy man to trust with 

leadership responsibilities. He is scrupulous in his attention 

to his responsibilities and fairminded in use of authority. He 

has strong views on issues and advocates for them effectively. If he can’t persuade some members of our caucus to 

agree with him, he will do all he can to defend our rights to 

be heard and have our position considered fully by the Senate. 

I think Members on both sides of the aisle would testify 

to JON’s fairness, collegiality, and effectiveness. I think we 

would all testify too to the credit his service has reflected on 

the Senate, a place we all love but which we must admit 

doesn’t always function as well or as congenially as we would 

like, a failing that has not escaped the notice of the American people. JON was not the kind of politician who worried 

more about his press than his responsibilities to his constituents, his colleagues, and his country. I think many Americans would recognize him as the kind of Senator they want 

to see in Congress. 

It has been my privilege to work with JON not only on 

issues of unique importance to the State of Arizona but on 

many of national importance. We worked together on comprehensive immigration reform in 2007. None of the sponsors 

of the legislation, including myself and my friend, the late 

Senator Kennedy, was more instrumental in forging the compromises necessary to put that bipartisan bill together or 

more diligent and effective in defending it in debate. 

I was running for President that year and often away from 

the Senate. In addition to all the work JON did to write the 

bill with Senator Kennedy and others, and seek support for 

it in both Houses, he had to assume many of my responsibilities as well. He did a better job with them than I did, and 

though we fell short of success, JON deserves none of the 

blame for failure and much of the credit for making the bill 

as broadly bipartisan as it was and for providing the framework for what will be the kind of compromise I hope and believe we will get to the President’s desk in the next Congress. 

Longevity in public office isn’t always that important a distinction. I have served one term more than JON and for that 

minor accomplishment I am referred to as the senior Senator 

[ 10 ] 

from Arizona. But honestly, I have always looked up to JON

as my senior. He has been my leader, my senior partner in 

much of the work we have done in Arizona, my friend, and 

one of the people I most look up to in this place, an example 

of selfless, capable, honorable public service. 

He is leaving the Senate, and he will have time now to 

spend with his lovely wife Caryll, his son and daughter, and 

his grandchildren. He will have more time too to hike his beloved White Mountains. I envy him that. I think we would 

all concede the Senate will miss him, and I will miss him 

particularly. 

Thank you, my friend, for your service, your example, and 

your friendship. It has been a privilege. 

I yield the floor. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The other Senator from Arizona. 

Mr. KYL. Madam President, if my colleagues would indulge me for just a moment so I may respond. 

I am deeply moved and very appreciative of the remarks 

of my colleague John McCain. The people of Arizona have 

been so fortunate to be represented by a very few remarkable people in the State’s history—only 10 U.S. Senators. 

John McCain is the ninth of those Senators and is as distinguished, if not more distinguished, than any who have 

served and represented the State of Arizona. 

He has set a standard for modern representation after 

being elected to the House of Representatives. None of the 

Representatives from Arizona were ever the same in their 

representation. He came home every week, maintained very 

close contact with his constituents, and set a pace that no 

one has since matched, let alone exceeded. So in many respects, John McCain has set a new standard for representation. 

But he didn’t leave it at the State of Arizona. He is a national figure of the first magnitude—one of our great national leaders of the day—and it has been an incredible 

honor for me to serve with him both in representing the people of our State but also working on the significant issues of 

the day. 

I will confess that some of the more mirthful moments 

have also occurred on some of the sojourns that Senator 

McCain has led abroad with our colleague Lindsey Graham, 

sometimes Senator Joseph Lieberman, and others, and these 

occasions also will bring great joy to me in my reminiscences, 

[ 11 ] 

because, obviously, at the end of the day it is friendships 

probably more than almost anything else we think of when 

we get toward the end of both career and the end of our life. 

Senator McCain was far too generous in his description of 

my capabilities. I want to thank him for, among other things, 

the responsibilities he did enable me to undertake, things 

which, as the senior—and yes, he is senior both in age and 

seniority—he could have taken unto himself but which he allowed me to do on behalf of the people of Arizona. He was 

interested in dividing responsibilities in a way the two of us 

could represent our State and our constituents to the maximum advantage, and I have always not only admired his 

approach—and the people of Arizona, I would say, should be 

grateful for that—but it enabled me to be involved in things 

and to have some extra responsibilities in areas I otherwise 

would not have. Not all of these were things Senator McCain 

wanted to deeply get into, such as the water rights settlements he mentioned. But nonetheless, he has been enormously cooperative on behalf of the people of Arizona in all 

of those endeavors. 

So as I near the end of my time here in the U.S. Senate, 

I have a lot of different emotions and a lot of things I would 

like to express. I regret one thing I won’t be able to do is to 

speak on the Senate floor extolling the virtues of my colleague John McCain when he is about to leave, but I assure 

you and assure him that I will do that from some other 

place, and that my deep respect for him, my appreciation 

and my gratitude for what he has said here today, I will try 

to reciprocate at the time he finally completes his service not 

only to the people of the State of Arizona but to this Nation 

of ours, and frankly also to so many people around the 

world. 

For me to have served with him in this body for 18 years 

is truly an honor, and I thank him for his comments today. 

Mr. KERRY. Madam President, I appreciate the words of 

the Senator from Arizona about the Senator from Arizona, 

and let me say I look forward to sharing some words on the 

floor at some point in the next few days about my friend 

Senator KYL. We have disagreed on things in some ways, 

but, boy, have we gotten to know each other. I respect his 

service enormously, and I look forward to having a chance to 

share some thoughts about that. 

[ 12 ] 

WEDNESDAY, December 19, 2012 

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I wish to say a few words 

about our colleague, Senator JON KYL. I have always appreciated his comments, his thoughtfulness, his patriotism, and 

his intellectual leadership in the Senate. He will be sorely 

missed after 18 years in the Senate. I am sorry the Senate 

will be losing Senator KYL’s extraordinary talents, but as he 

retires from politics at the end of this month, I know he will 

remain a powerful force in the world of ideas. 

Time magazine named JON one of the 10 Best Senators in 

2006. At the time, he said: ‘‘You can accomplish a lot if 

you’re not necessarily out in front on everything.’’ That 

echoes Ronald Reagan’s comment—one of his favorite slogans: ‘‘There is no limit to what a man can do . . . if he 

doesn’t mind who gets the credit.’’ 

Over the last 18 years, JON KYL has accomplished a lot in 

this Chamber, and he has never seemed to care one bit about 

who got the credit. When he announced his retirement, the 

Wall Street Journal said JON ‘‘has been as consequential as 

any Republican in Congress over the last decade and a half.’’ 

That is quite a compliment and thoroughly deserved. 

As you could tell from his comments, JON has spent a career promoting the Reagan legacy. After he leaves, many of 

us will be promoting the KYL legacy. 

He is a person of strong principle, a man deep in knowledge of public policy, and a person—uncharacteristic in politics—of remarkable humility. Here is how one writer described his unique skill set. Senator KYL, he wrote, ‘‘is one 

of those rare breeds who seem to make no strong enemies 

even while holding firm to a consistent philosophy.’’ As you 

have heard, he has been a leader on things ranging as wide 

as missile defense to criminal justice to tax policy. 

One of the things I have admired about Senator KYL is he 

always seems to be among the most knowledgeable people in 

any room at any given time on any given topic that is under 

discussion. When he speaks, people listen. But he often willingly pushes others into the spotlight rather than himself. It 

is because he thinks tactically: How can I advance this policy 

or this idea, not: How can I advance myself in the public 

spotlight. 

That certainly has been my experience with Senator KYL. 

But I would add something else. He has also been a courageous intellectual leader. He has consistently led on complex 

issues that other Senators have ignored or neglected or just 

[ 13 ] 

have a difficulty understanding, complex topics such as nuclear modernization, missile defense, and transnational law, 

each of which he mentioned in his remarks just a moment 

ago. It is not easy to become the Senate’s top authority on 

nuclear weapons, but JON KYL is, and it is not the best way 

to get your face on cable news. Not a lot of air time is given 

to people who want to talk about such arcane but important 

topics. 

I have also watched Senator KYL over the past couple of 

years cultivate more junior Senators and help them become 

experts in their own right on all of his favorite issues. As a 

matter of fact, I attended a meeting on that just today where 

he was trying to bring along a number of us on the nuclear 

issue. Senator KYL is always thinking about the future, always thinking about the next generation of American leaders 

and the challenges they will face. 

JON quoted Margaret Thatcher, reminding us there are no 

permanent victories in politics. He understands that the debate over limited government and a robust national defense 

will never be over, it will never be completely won and, hopefully, never completely lost. That is why he has worked so 

hard to educate and encourage other younger Senators who 

will be fighting these battles long after he leaves the Chamber. 

As I mentioned earlier, JON KYL is tremendously principled. He is a proud conservative, but he is also a fairminded and enormously effective legislator. Last February 

the New York Times declared that he ‘‘may be [one of] the 

rare member[s] of his party who combines the trust of conservatives, policy smarts, and forcefulness that are needed to 

secure deals that can pass.’’ 

It has been my great honor and privilege to work with JON

KYL on such issues as immigration reform and criminal law, 

among others. He is a true patriot, a true intellectual in the 

greatest sense of that term, and a truly effective Senator for 

his State and for the Nation. After more than a quarter century of public service, including 18 years here in the Senate, 

JON KYL deserves a happy and healthy and successful retirement, but he will be sorely missed by everybody in this 

Chamber. 

Mr. President, I yield the floor. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah. 

Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I wish to echo the comments 

of the distinguished Senator from Texas. I have served with 

[ 14 ] 

JON KYL for his whole time in the U.S. Senate, and he is a 

lawyer’s lawyer. I do not say that lightly. I do not consider 

many lawyers a lawyer’s lawyer. JON is an excellent lawyer, 

one of the best I have met and certainly one of the best ever 

to sit in Congress. 

He also does not go off the deep end. When he speaks, anybody with brains should listen. Plus, he is a tremendous example not just to some of us older guys around here but especially to the new Senators and others who have come into 

this body. He has been a pivotal member of the Judiciary 

Committee, including when I chaired it and when we did so 

many interesting things. He was a pivotal member on leading to a balanced budget in the middle of the 1990s. JON has 

argued for that, has argued for these types of fiscal restraints and responsibilities like no one I know. 

JON is one of the most honest and decent and credible people I have known in the whole time I have been in the U.S. 

Senate. He has been an excellent leader for our party. As assistant minority leader and assistant majority leader, he has 

been a great leader in our party. We have all trusted him because he is a person who is trustworthy. We have all listened 

to him because he is a person worth listening to. We have 

all shared the pains of this place with him as friends and 

brothers working together, we hope in the best interests of 

our country. There is no question in anybody’s mind on either side of this floor, when it comes to JON KYL, they know 

he is a true American patriot who has done everything he 

could while he has been here to keep this country strong. 

I have to say I have always been impressed with JON KYL. 

I have watched him close up for all these years, but I do not 

know that I have ever been more impressed than when he 

led the fight with regard to nuclear weapons and with regard 

to START. He not only was well informed, he was the best 

informed, and this body should have listened to everything 

he said. I am sure most people did. 

I do not think any of us would fail to try to serve this 

country to the best of our ability. All I can say, in closing, 

is that JON has served this country to the best of his ability, 

and his abilities are extraordinary. 

I personally count him as a friend. When I had this very 

interesting reelection this last time, with what seemed like 

the whole world coming down on me for some reason, one of 

the first people to offer help was JON KYL. He came to Utah, 

and it meant so much to me. 

[ 15 ] 

All I can say is, wherever JON goes after this is over, they 

are going to be lucky people to have him around. I wish him 

all the success in the world. He deserves it. I hope he and 

his wife and family—whom I like very much—will have a 

wonderful, glorious existence from this day onward. 

We are going to miss you, JON. We are going to miss your 

intellectual capacity. I am personally going to miss your 

legal capacity. All of these other accolades that have been 

given your way, I will miss all of those too. You have a friend 

here, and this friendship, in my opinion, is an eternal one, 

and anything I can ever do for you, I will certainly try because I know you would never ask for anything that was not 

accurate or right. So I wish you Godspeed, and know there 

are a lot of us who really hate to see you go. 

I yield the floor. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama. 

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I would like to associate 

myself with the remarks of Senator Cornyn and Senator 

Hatch. Both of them have spoken eloquently and correctly 

about the absolutely unique and exceptional contributions 

JON KYL has made to America and to the U.S. Senate. 

There is no Senator I have admired more, no Senator I 

look to more to decide how to cast my vote, and I mean that 

absolutely as a fact. The words they have used I am not so 

eloquent as to say, but they do not overstate the value of my 

friend JON KYL. 

His statement that we just heard is a comprehensive analysis, overview of the current situation of this great Republic 

of which we are a part. He meant every word of it. One of 

the most remarkable things about it is that on every vote, 

every time an issue came up, those are the values he sought 

to advance. Sometimes you have to take a step back to gain 

two steps forward, but Senator KYL always had a vision for 

what America should be. I believe it is the correct vision that 

we have inherited from our ancestors that has made this 

country so productive and so valuable. Everything he has 

done, every effort he has made has been to advance those 

good values—a great America, a decent America. And he has 

understood it. 

When he talks about free enterprise, he explains why that 

is preferable to other forms of distribution of wealth. Would 

you rather have politicians distribute the wealth in this 

country? He can articulate that in a way that emphasizes 

the moral power of it, the need to have peace in the world, 

[ 16 ] 

but how do you have it? Do you get peace through weakness 

or do you have peace through strength? And are the nuclear 

issues necessary to our posture as a strong nation in the 

world that is resistant and deters attack? Yes, they are. He 

understands those issues. 

I serve on the Armed Services Committee. JON does not, 

but he knows more about that issue than I do. I have found 

his leadership so valuable because it is a thankless task. 

People do not want to talk about it, but he has talked about 

it. He knows it is important, even though no one would give 

him credit politically for being engaged in those issues. It is 

important for America, and he is willing to commit himself 

to that. 

I will join with Senator Hatch and Senator Cornyn in my 

admiration for JON’s service on the Judiciary Committee. 

That is an important committee, and he has been a rocksolid member of it. Even though he has been in the leadership, so therefore he did not chair the committee—and he 

would have been one of the great chairmen we would have 

ever had of that committee—he has moved the committee 

and brought forth issues and advocated principles that are 

consistent with the great American rule of law. 

Today we just got word that Robert Bork died. He had a 

classical view of how the Constitution should be interpreted 

and one I basically share for the most part. I think JON has. 

He understands those issues. He is able to communicate the 

great richness of the American heritage of law to the common people in language people can understand, but he is 

also capable of reading the most complex legal document and 

able to spot problems with it and advocate changes in law 

that are sophisticated in the most technical details. 

I guess I would have to say Senator Hatch is correct. This 

Senate, in my view, has never had a better lawyer than JON

KYL. He has argued cases before the Supreme Court in his 

private practice days. Not many have been a part of that. 

So whether we are talking about the crime victims advocacy efforts he has made over a long period of time here, recognizing that the law should be in existence to advance and 

protect innocent people against the wrongdoers, we ought 

not to become so obsessed with defendants’ rights that we do 

not remember the victims who deserve vindication and remuneration for the crimes that have been put upon them. 

There are other things I could say and other issues we 

have joined in, that we have fought on. On more than one 

occasion, JON has felt something was important. Sometimes 

[ 17 ] 

those issues were not very popular, but he believed they 

were important and would rally people. I have joined with 

him. We have had some good battles. We have won a few, 

frankly, several I never thought we were going to win. Somehow, with his legislative skill, his determination, his feisty 

spirit, we stayed in there and bad things did not occur, at 

least from my perspective, that may have occurred otherwise. 

It is a great pleasure to have served with JON. I consider 

him—I know the grammar is not perfect—our most invaluable Senator. We are going to be losing someone of great national importance. I know he will be active. He has got a fabulous wife, Caryll. They have been partners for so many 

years. I enjoy watching them and how they interact as a 

family. He has the values that reflect the highest qualities 

of American life. 

I yield the floor. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana. 

Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I am joining my colleagues in 

rising today to pay honor and respect to the service of JON

KYL, a tribute to his passion for public service and his State 

of Arizona and his country in this Congress for 26 years. I 

echo all the sentiments and all the words that have been 

said by our colleagues. There are not enough adjectives to 

adequately describe the extraordinary service JON has provided to this country. 

I have had the pleasure of serving alongside him in the 

House of Representatives, in the Senate—two times, as some 

know. I served before and then was out for 12 years and 

then came back. In my many years of service here, it is hard 

to think of a person who has been more influential and been 

more of someone I wanted to emulate and to learn from and 

to look at as a wise counsel than JON KYL. 

He has been described as an influential member of the Judiciary and Finance Committees. Yes, he has been an outspoken leader on issues of very significant importance to this 

country—significant issues including the landmark Crime 

Victims Rights Act, pro-growth tax policies that we have 

been debating here, patient-centered health care reform, and 

antiterrorism laws, nuclear proliferation, safeguarding our 

nuclear stockpile. On and on it could go. 

JON recently called me to his office and said, ‘‘You know, 

there are 13 separate things here that have been the highest 

priority for me.’’ Now not many Senators will tell you they 

[ 18 ] 

have got 13 high-priority issues they not only are interested 

in but have drilled down in a unique, in-depth understanding of those particular issues. JON said, ‘‘One thing I 

want to accomplish before I leave is to make sure someone 

will pick up the ball and take the baton and carry on those 

issues after I leave.’’ 

That is an extraordinary statement. First of all, I do not 

think any one person here could begin to duplicate the 

breadth and the depth of his engagement and his knowledge, 

and the leadership that he has provided on issues of significant importance to the future of this country. JON was listed 

as 1 of the World’s 100 Most Influential People—well-deserved recognition. 

In Washington, he has been labeled as 1 of the 25 hardest 

working lawmakers. I cannot think of anybody who stands 

higher in that list than JON KYL. My mental image of JON

KYL is JON striding through the Halls of Congress literally 

leaning into the wind. It is as if there is a 60-mile gale coming in his face, and JON is leaning into it with determination. 

I see his staff nodding their heads here. It has got to be hard 

to stay up with JON when he has his mind on something and 

he is determined to get something done. He is leaning in like 

a ship into a gale, moving forward to try to accomplish his 

mission. 

We all say when someone leaves here, we are losing someone whom maybe we cannot replace. That may or may not 

be true. In my first iteration, when I gave my farewell 

speech, I think there were probably a lot of people who said, 

‘‘We can find a substitute for Coats; that will not be too 

hard.’’ It is true. Finding a replacement for JON KYL is a tall 

task. It is going to be very hard to find someone who has the 

passion for this, his service, the intelligence, and the knowledge of the issues he engages in, the leadership qualities he 

provides, the counsel he provides to all of us. JON KYL is the 

go-to guy. JON KYL is the person you go to to say: ‘‘JON, how 

do we get this done? What should our strategy be? If you are 

on board, I think we can accomplish this.’’ I know I am repeating a lot of what has been said already about JON and 

will be said by others here who will come down, but to find 

someone this grounded in his endeavors is hard to find. 

JON is also grounded in his faith, his faith in God, his faith 

in America, his faith in his constituents, his faith in this institution, not a perfect institution, one which we are struggling in right now, but his faith that in the end we are here 

to do what is best for America. In the end, we will need to 

[ 19 ] 

make hard decisions. JON has always been one leading that 

effort, always one willing to stand up to make those decisions. 

I count him as a friend. Marsha and I wish you, JON, and 

Caryll, all the best in this next chapter of your life. I am 

comforted by the fact that you will not be more than a phone 

call away, and the fact that I am going to need wise counsel 

on a number of things; more than that, that we can retain 

a friendship which we have enjoyed in our service together 

on two separate occasions interrupted by 12 years. I am looking forward to continuing to enjoy our time together. I want 

to wish you and Caryll not only our thanks, thanks from the 

people I represent, and thanks from America for your service, but the very best wishes for both of you in the future. 

THURSDAY, December 20, 2012 

Mr. MCCONNELL. I rise to pay tribute to a dear friend 

and an extraordinary public servant, Senator JON KYL. For 

the past 18 years it has been my honor to serve alongside 

JON in the Senate, and it has been my great privilege to get 

to know him personally and to work with him as closely as 

I have. 

JON has built a well-earned reputation as one of the great 

policy minds of our time. He has an encyclopedic knowledge 

of policy issues, and we all know he is one of the hardest 

working Members of Congress. 

He has been a leader on his own State’s interests, and he 

has emerged as one of the strongest leaders in our entire 

party on the issues of nuclear strategy and arms control. JON

has explained to an entire generation of Republicans President Reagan’s enduring philosophy of peace on strength and 

then applied it. 

JON has been a zealous proponent of a strong missile defense, and more than any other Senator he helped ensure 

that the United States had a working nuclear arsenal after 

the cold war had ended because, in his view, a strong America that can deter a threat is always the best avenue to 

peace. 

Over the past decade, JON has applied that same standard 

to the war on terror, and no one has worked harder to explain the threat of Islamist terrorism or helped equip our 

Nation with the tools we need to confront and defeat it than 

JON KYL. 

[ 20 ] 

Not enough thought has been given to the role of nuclear 

weapons in American foreign policy and how strategy will 

evolve as our conventional military is drawn down due to a 

diminishing investment and how nuclear weapons will be 

employed to support the articulated strategic pivot to the 

Asian Pacific theater. The Senate and the country will be 

well served by JON’s thoughts on these challenges over the 

coming years. Fortunately, he has thought ahead by encouraging others to step into the void after he leaves. 

Throughout his time in Washington, JON has been guided, 

as he explained in eloquent detail yesterday, by a profound 

belief in and commitment to the expansion of freedom and 

the three primary areas where that commitment plays out in 

the public square: growth-oriented economics, the social policies that make limited government possible, and any policy 

that emphasizes a strong and sovereign America. These 

three pillars have been JON’s guidepost, and we have all benefited tremendously over the years as a party and as a Nation from his faithful application and patient explanation of 

the enduring importance of all three. 

In short, JON is whip smart, and he is a passionate believer and defender of American exceptionalism. Besides all 

this, he is also a fantastic individual, with a peerless reputation on both sides of the aisle as a man of principle and integrity. I have personally benefited from JON’s policy mind 

and advice countless times, and, JON, I want to say how 

grateful I am for your steady hand and wise counsel over the 

years. 

I always knew I could throw JON into the middle of any 

fight, confident our team would own the field. He wasn’t just 

prepared, he was eager to take on the most thankless tasks, 

and he never ever let me down. 

One suspects the seeds of JON’s wisdom and equanimity 

were planted in his upbringing in the Midwest. As a young 

boy growing up in Nebraska and Iowa, he learned the value 

of hard work. His dad led the local chamber of commerce and 

worked as a high school principal and superintendent. Later 

on, he joined JON’s uncle in the clothing business—and eventually he served six terms in Congress. 

It was a stable, happy, middle-class childhood centered on 

work, family, and service. It laid a solid foundation for JON’s 

later successes. ‘‘It was very important to Dad,’’ JON once 

said, ‘‘that we recognize that even though we weren’t rich, 

we still had an obligation to get involved and give back to 

the country.’’ 

[ 21 ] 

After graduating from high school, JON enrolled at the 

University of Arizona, where he was very much the bundle 

of energy that anybody who has ever walked more than 10 

feet with him is familiar with. Incidentally, I am told that 

you don’t want to go on a hike with JON unless you are a 

trained Olympian. He hikes up Camelback Mountain almost 

every weekend he is home, and there are two routes; one is 

somewhat challenging and the other one is akin to a 

Stairmaster. JON takes the Stairmaster because it is faster. 

He climbs up without stopping, and then as soon as he gets 

to the top, he comes right back down. Most people stop to eat 

an apple or look at the vista—not JON. He powers right back 

to the bottom. There is too much work to be done. 

During his college years, JON got involved in debate, politics, and a number of service organizations, graduating with 

honors in 1964. It was also during his college years that JON

fell in love with Arizona, its red sunny vistas, big skies, and 

warm inviting people. It is there that he fell in love with 

Caryll Collins, whom he met at church one Sunday and who 

has been his constant companion and his anchor ever since. 

I know JON would agree that without Caryll’s support, patience, and understanding he would never have been able to 

accomplish all he has over the years. JON and Caryll have 

been married nearly 50 years. They have raised two great 

kids, Kristine and John. They have seven grandchildren. 

They have been blessed. 

After college, JON went on to earn a law degree from the 

University of Arizona College of Law, where he was editor of 

the Law Review. He must have had some great teachers because it is hard to imagine anyone who loves the study and 

the application of the law as deeply as JON KYL. 

JON practiced at a firm in Phoenix for 20 years when he 

decided to follow his father’s footsteps and take a turn toward public service. As one longtime friend described it: 

[JON] sat down with . . . Caryll, who is really his partner, and decided it 

was time. . . . He could have been a rich man. But he decided this was more 

important. 

JON ran for Congress in Arizona’s Fourth District and won 

handily, serving eight terms before winning his Senate seat 

in 1994. 

One way to illustrate how hard JON has worked over the 

years is to look at the coverage he got then versus the coverage he gets now. When he first ran for office, one unfriendly paper called him an enigma. By 2006, that same 

paper would describe him as a: 

[ 22 ] 

[N]ational, political figure . . . and one of the five most powerful Senators 

in Washington . . . a man who most everyone says is a hard-working, keenly 

intelligent, humble, civilized gentleman who seems always to be doing what 

he believes is best for America. 

Most of us couldn’t get that out of our own press secretaries, let alone the hometown paper. 

It says everything we need to know about JON KYL. His 

work ethic is legendary. For 15 years, JON labored mostly behind the scenes on one of the most complicated and sensitive 

issues in Arizona politics, settling American Indian claims to 

Colorado and Gila River water and resolving an intergovernmental dispute about how much money Arizona should pay 

for the Central Arizona Project, completed in 1993. 

These were long-standing, thorny, legal, and political 

issues in Arizona. Some thought a settlement was impossible. They didn’t know JON well enough. By 2004, he had 

succeeded in passing the Arizona Water Settlement Act, simultaneously resolving the outstanding Indian lawsuits and 

resolving the issue of Arizona’s reimbursement rate to the 

Federal Government. 

According to one political commentator, ‘‘It was the most 

far-reaching Indian water settlement in history,’’ and it 

‘‘wouldn’t have happened without the hard work and keen 

legal mind of JON KYL.’’ As JON himself put it: 

It was one of the hardest things I’ve ever done, but I was in a position 

to be the catalyst. There wasn’t anybody else who could do that water deal. 

And it had to be done. 

JON’s work on water settlements carries a lesson for all of 

us. Similar to any true leader, he saw the need to do something, not just for the folks who elected him but for the generations of Arizonans to come. He thought ahead, and now 

the people of Arizona can go about their daily lives without 

having to worry about water at all for generations to come. 

It will be a huge part of his legacy—and it went more or less 

unnoticed by most folks in Washington. That is why JON

truly embodies the old maxim, popularized by President 

Reagan, who had it placed on his desk, that there is no limit 

to what a man can do or where he can go if he doesn’t mind 

who gets the credit. He almost seems to relish the thankless 

task. A lot of people don’t know this, but JON actually volunteered to serve on the supercommittee. 

At press conferences, JON has even been known to lean up 

against a wall so others get noticed instead of him, which, 

as we all know, is pretty unthinkable to most of the folks 

around here. 

[ 23 ] 

JON’s intelligence and personal humility are just two of the 

reasons he has been so good at persuading people to his 

view. He persuaded his colleagues to oppose President Clinton’s Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. He has used 

his immense powers of persuasion literally countless times 

as minority whip, and he has done all this without ever offending anybody. He is that rare politician who manages to 

always stand on principle without ever damaging a relationship. I mean it when I say that to the degree I have had any 

success at all in my role, it has been only because JON KYL

has been my partner, counselor, and friend. 

JON always tells folks he is serious because the issues he 

deals with are serious, and I can’t tell you how grateful I am 

that we have had him for as long as we did and how much 

I will miss having JON KYL around when the gavel falls on 

the 112th Congress. 

One last point. People who know JON well know he is a 

huge NASCAR fan. He knows the drivers. He knows the 

lingo. He goes to two big races every year in Phoenix and 

nothing, I mean nothing, can keep him from going. 

Why do I mention this? As a young lawyer, JON used to 

volunteer to be the lookout guy on the hill around the track. 

This is a guy who keeps a lookout for oil on the track. His 

view was it might not be the most glamorous work but that 

it was essential to maintain the safety and the integrity of 

the race to have someone up there on the lookout. I can’t 

think of a better way to sum up his service in Washington. 

JON has been that serious, behind-the-scenes legislator 

who always did what needed to be done. He was happy to 

do the work while others took the credit, and he was happy 

to explain any issue to anyone and to provide not only the 

intellectual explanation for the right policy but the elbow 

grease to get it enacted into law. What mattered to JON was 

the good of the country. 

He has been a model public servant. JON, I can’t tell you 

how grateful we all are that you were here. Thank you for 

everything, my friend. I truly hate to see you go. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona. 

Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I will just say thank you to my 

leader. There is a lot that is enjoyable, some not so enjoyable, about serving here in the Senate. My time as whip in 

particular has been one of the most enjoyable things I have 

done, both because it is in behalf of our colleagues here, 

helping to get things done, but also because I have been able 

[ 24 ] 

to work alongside a great Republican leader, Mitch McConnell. I will treasure that always, and I am deeply grateful for 

the comments he made today. 

Thank you. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland. 

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, before Senator KYL leaves 

the floor, I would like to join the Republican leader in congratulating him on his public service. He and I came to the 

Congress the same year, after the 1986 elections—we are 

part of the 100th Congress—and we became friends. I 

couldn’t agree more with the Republican leader and his example of following your convictions with the highest degree 

of integrity in the work you have done. I had a chance to 

serve with you on the Judiciary Committee, and I can tell 

you that you added greatly to the respect for that committee 

and our respect for the process and for the rule of law and 

for civil liberty issues. And most recently, with the work you 

did on the Magnitsky bill. The Republican leader is absolutely right—you did not seek the headlines on that legislation, but it could not have been done without your direction 

and your help. 

I just want to thank you for what you have done to advance the reputation of the Senate and public service, standing by your convictions, yet doing so in a way that we could 

work together, respecting everyone’s right to be heard and 

our right to work together. You are indeed a model Senator, 

and it has been an honor to serve with you in the Senate. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona. 

Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I would respond by saying thank 

you very much. I would just add one other thing. In this Senate family, although we may be of different parties, we make 

good friendships, and it should not go unnoticed that our 

spouses also make good friendships. This is a case where my 

wife and Senator Cardin’s wife are very good friends, which 

necessarily draws us closer together, and for that we should 

both be grateful as well. 

I thank my colleague. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland. 

Mr. CARDIN. Senator KYL is absolutely right. I get my 

best information from Myrna as to what is going on in the 

Senate. So I appreciate his comments. 

[ 25 ] 

Mr. REED. Madam President, at this time, I wish to take 

a few minutes to salute my colleagues who are retiring at 

the end of this year with the conclusion of the 112th Congress: Daniel Akaka of Hawaii, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, Scott Brown of Massachusetts, Kent Conrad of North 

Dakota, Jim DeMint of South Carolina, Kay Bailey 

Hutchison of Texas, Herb Kohl of Wisconsin, JON KYL of Arizona, Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, Richard Lugar of Indiana, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Olympia Snowe of Maine, 

and Jim Webb of Virginia. They have all worked ceaselessly 

to give their constituents the best representation and give 

the country the benefit of their views, their wisdom, and 

their experience. They are men and women who are committed to the Nation, and they have every day in different 

ways contributed to this Senate and to our great country. 

I wish to thank them personally for their service, and, in 

so many cases, their personal kindness to me; for listening 

to my points and for, together, hopefully, serving this Senate 

and this Nation in a more positive and progressive way. . . . 

I could go on with all of my colleagues, just thanking them 

for their friendship, for their camaraderie, and for their commitment to the Nation and the Senate. As they depart, they 

have left an extraordinary legacy. Now it is our responsibility to carry on in so many different ways, and I hope we 

measure up to what they have done. If we do, then we can 

go forward confidently. 

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, if success in the U.S. Senate 

depended only upon working alongside those with whom we 

agree, this would be a pretty uncomplicated and 

uninteresting place. We are a large and complex Nation, 

made up of people with varying interests, preferences, and 

beliefs. This is where the representatives of a diverse Nation 

come to try to resolve those differences into coherent national policy. Success in this body depends on the efforts of 

Senators of differing beliefs and backgrounds who labor to 

discover common ground. 

This is on my mind as I consider the career of Senator JON

KYL, who is leaving the Senate at the end of his third term 

representing the people of Arizona. We have differed many 

times here in the Senate. We have also sought common 

ground. These efforts are totally consistent. 

In the wake of the 2001 terror attacks, our Nation’s response took many forms. Our military, intelligence, and security agencies were obviously essential to that response, but 

importantly, we did not neglect a less obvious need: the need 

[ 26 ] 

to cut off terrorist financing. Senator KYL played an important role in this. He was a cosponsor with me of legislation 

to give financial regulators important new authorities to act 

against terror financing. 

We found common ground on the need to speak out in 

strong and clear opposition to the repressive regime in Iran. 

Last year, he and I were part of a bipartisan group that offered a resolution calling for an end to the violent repression 

Iran’s government has carried out against its own people, 

urging international action to support the people of Iran, and 

reaffirming America’s commitment to universal freedoms. 

I was proud to work with Senator KYL on these and other 

important issues before the Senate. I respect and deeply appreciate his commitment to protecting our Nation and the 

universal standards of human rights that are such an important part of America’s legacy. I wish Senator KYL and his 

family every success and happiness as he returns to Arizona. 

FRIDAY, December 21, 2012 

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, it is a tradition in the Senate 

to take a moment at the end of the session to express our 

appreciation for the service of those Senators who will be retiring at the end of the year. This year it seems that we have 

quite a few retiring Senators who will be greatly missed because of the important role they have played in our leadership on both sides of the aisle. Such a Senator is JON KYL. 

I know we will miss him, his willingness to work with all of 

his colleagues, and his understanding of the issues and the 

need for us to come together to address them. 

JON KYL may very well be one of the smartest individuals 

I have ever met. More important, he is not just highly intelligent, he also has an abundance of wisdom. That means he 

not only knows what is right—he does it. Putting knowledge 

into action is always the toughest part of the equation. 

Here in the Senate, JON has taken on a combination of assignments that most Members would have found impossible. 

JON not only served as our party whip, but he also helped 

to direct our efforts with his great understanding of the 

many details that form such an important part of every issue 

we take up in the Senate. 

JON has been such a great asset for our party because his 

focus is on the details of every issue that comes before the 

Senate. That is why, more often than not, when a complex 

[ 27 ] 

matter is up for our consideration, many of us want to know 

what JON thinks and what his recommendation would be. 

His insights have always been an important part of many of 

his colleagues’ consideration of what each of us should do to 

further the interests of the people of our home States. 

One thing everyone who has spent some time with JON

knows about him is his great love for NASCAR. It is more 

than just an appreciation—I don’t think there are many who 

understand it with the depth that he does. He not only 

knows the stats, he has a great feel for how each race played 

out, the strategy that was employed, and the significance of 

the results. The way he describes how the game is played, 

the rules, and the key players in every race is enough to get 

anyone interested in attending the next event. NASCAR 

ought to make him their ambassador. He would increase interest in it right away. He has done a lot to make me a fan, 

too. 

Politically, JON is a staunch conservative. In fact, I am 

sure if you look up ‘‘staunch conservative’’ in a reference 

book it will refer you to their article about JON. JON’s great 

talent makes him the perfect example of what a conservative 

is, and his knowledge serves to highlight the positions and 

issues that are important to all conservatives. 

Something else that we have all come to know and appreciate about JON is the strength of his faith and his belief in 

the importance of the family. One of his first considerations 

when we took up any legislation was how will this affect our 

Nation’s families? It was that important to him. I cannot 

imagine a better starting point for our discussions and deliberations. 

Thank you, JON, for your willingness to serve. You have 

made a difference in more ways than you will ever know. In 

the months to come, I will miss seeing you around the Capitol Building. I will also miss having the benefit of your advice and counsel—though I intend to keep your number 

handy. What I will miss the most, however, is your friendship. Keep in touch with us. We will always appreciate hearing from you. 

THURSDAY, December 27, 2012 

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, there are many times when 

those of us in the Senate disagree. It is when we can find 

ways to work together, across party lines, to advance meanVerDate Aug 31 2005 14:04 Apr 24, 2014 Jkt 081108 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 6688 Sfmt 6688 H:\DOCS\BYEBYE\BYEBYE12\81108.TXT KAYNE
[ 28 ] 

ingful legislation that we can really make a difference. One 

of the things I have always appreciated about Senator JON

KYL is his commitment to his word. This year will mark his 

last in the U.S. Senate. I have welcomed his partnership on 

many issues, from cyberlegislation to matters protecting 

crime victims. He was a key ally in our efforts to make the 

first meaningful reforms to the Nation’s patent system in 

nearly 60 years. And we have worked together on issues relating to national security and border security. 

Fewer Senators are more hard working than JON KYL. He 

is a constant presence in the Judiciary Committee, where he 

has served as the top Republican on the Crime and Terrorism Subcommittee. He is active in the Finance Committee. And of course, he holds a key position within his caucus, serving as the Republican whip. 

I have, of course, worked most closely with Senator KYL in 

his nearly two decades of service on the Judiciary Committee. There, he has championed a number of important 

issues, from crime victims’ rights to antiterrorism legislation. 

We have been close partners on intellectual property legislation, from patent reform to copyright and trademark protections. Even in the most contentious of national security 

issues, we have worked to find common ground on such 

issues as the PATRIOT Act. 

On Capitol Hill, Senator KYL is known throughout the 

Senate for his dedication and work ethic. He is a great ally 

and a formidable adversary; in Congress, there is often no 

higher praise. He is a good personal friend and I wish him 

and his family all the best as he takes on his next challenge. 

THURSDAY, February 7, 2013 

ORDER FOR PRINTING OF TRIBUTES 

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 the retiring Members of the 112th Congress. 

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

Æ