Date: 1981-01-21
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. within the executive branch of government. I believe the office of Secretary of State to be of an importance second only. in many respects. .to that of the Presidency Itself. As a result. the decision I have reached on the nomination of Gen. Alexander Haig was not easily reached. and the factors that influenced me are subtle and difficult to convey. In setting forth the basic rationale for our constitutional system. James Madison observed in the Federalist Paper No. 51. "If men were angels. no government would be necessary." Quickly recognizing this as little more than wishful thinking. Madison turned his attention to the central problem that confronted him and his colleagues in the drafting of the U.S. Constitution. "In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men." Madison wrote. "the great difficulty lies in this: You must first enable the government to control the governed and in the next place oblige it to control itself." And while recognizing that in such a government. the people themselves would exercise "the primary control over the government." Madison went on to observe. "but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions." It was with these thoughts in mind that the Founding Fathers devised our system of checks and balances. The purpose of this system must command the unfailing allegiance and loyalty of all who serve our Nation and our people. For those who hold public office or positions of trust in our Government. there must be a natural or spontaneous Inclination and desire to respond positively to this purpose and to all that it requires. From this perspective. I shall vote against the nomination of Alexander Haig to be Secretary of State. In this regard. I.have not attempted to persuade any of my colleagues as to the correctness of my decision. Quite the contrary. Moreover. I have attempted to expedite all of President Reagans nominations. because It is important for the President to have his cabinet confirmed and in place as soon as possible. The confirmation of Secretary of State Is no exception. Some time ago. in responding to a question at my weekly news conference. I said that General Haig. If nominated. would come under "Intense. thorough and appropriate scrutiny" during the confirmation process. I believegiven the Information available at this timethat the Committee on Foreign Relations has fulfilled this responsibility as well as it could under the circumstances that It had to deal with. I commend the members of that committee for their dedication to duty. My vote today is a personal decislon. But I do not mean it to carry the slightest animosity or convey the least ill will toward General Haig personally. I realize that General Haigs nomination will be confirmed today by a substantial majority of this Senate. As he begins his duties in this important post. I wish him well. and I assure him of my cooperation. I firmly believe that foreign policy has to be conducted in a bipartisan manner for the good interests of our country. I do feel. however. that. if only to be fair to the nominee. it is imperative for me to state the reasons for my opposition to this nomination. I cast my vote today not because of a single issue. or because of a regrettable event that occurred while General Haig served on the White House staff. I have attempted to examine the tapestry before us and to make my decision based on the totality of General Haigs record. which. in some areas. is exemplary. On certain issues. I find that General Haigs views and my own are similarparticularly in regard to his concerns about the actions. policies. and intentions of the Soviet Union and the need to strengthen the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. However. in my mind. despite more than 30 hours of testimony. the case for General Haigs confirmation remains clouded. In part. this is due not so much to unanswered questions on Watergate per se. but rather to unanswered questionssome of which were perhaps never askedregarding the abuse of powerand that. in the final analysis was what Watergate and wiretaps were all about. While I believe General Haig has respect for the Constitution of the United States. I am afraid that he lacks a fundamental understanding of. and sensitivity to. the designated and distinct roles and responsibilities of the executive and legislative branches of our Government. If he does have this comprehension. it was not. in my opinion. communicated clearly and to the fullest during his confirmation hearings. Senators were seeking assurances IV the hearings that the constitutional limits on executive power would be respected. and that there would be an appropriate sensitivity on the part of the nominee to the importance and propriety of the Congress role in foreign policy. Members of the Foreign Relations Committee attempted to obtain certain evidence that might have confirmed or dispelled questions that have arisen con* cerning General Haigs White House duty. They were unable to get that evidence. Since this information was unavailable. the past had to be explored in generalities. The committee members had to discern the nominees attitude about potential abuses of power by means of questions geared to reveal the way In which General Hais wouild apply his talents and experience. The questions were keyed to discovering how General Haig would interpret .S 373 and utilize his own power. how he perceived the sometimes thin distinctions between what is right. and what is merely expedient: how he would interpret violations of the public trust. and how strongly he believes in the tenet thatunder our form of governmentthe ultimate wisdom and authority lie with the people. The Senators on the committee were trying to perform their Constitutional duty. "Advise and consent" is notand never was intended to be--a pro forma exercise. Congress Is the peoples branch of government. And the adviseandconsent mechanism is the peoples only way of participating through their duly chosen representativesin the examination of the qualifications of nonelected. but vitally important officers of their government. The President. supported by the mandate of the electorate. should. of course. have the right to choose his own cabinet members and other aides. But simply put. the Senate bears the sober and heavy responsibility of judging whether Presidential nominees merit public trust. In my judgment. General Haigs testimony before the Foreign Relations Committee left me with a deep concerna concern that leaves me no choice but to cast one vote against the nominee. I hope that my concerns will give way to reassurance as Mr. Haigs experience in dealing with the affairs of State unfolds. It is also my hope that General Haig will come to appreciate and use the wealth of talent and expertise that reside within the Senate. on both sides of the aisle. Working together. with mutual respect. is the only way to approach the future. General Haig has my assurance of Co. operation and support in the field of foreign policy. and I hope that the Congress will benefit from his most candid. full. and forthright advice and trust as we work together in a bipartisan way to develop and implement a foreign policy that will best serve the United States of America.