纳恩先生。总统先生，我敦促我的同事支持参议员拜登我知道，他会在几分钟内提出的动议 - 我认为尚未提出这项运动 - 建议会议报告，因为它无法解决法律中我们在法律上纠正的差距非常明显的差距通过了参议院法案，涉及在刑事恐怖活动中使用化学和生物杀害化学和生物武器。

武装部队具有特殊的能力，他们是唯一具有对抗核，生物和化学武器的特殊能力的人。在敌对情况下，他们经过训练和装备以检测，抑制和包含这些危险材料。我国和我国消防部门的警察当局没有能力应对化学和生物攻击或这些袭击的威胁。他们没有设备。他们没有防护装备。

在过去的6周中，我们在常设小组委员会的调查小组委员会中进行了四次听证会，我是等级成员和参议员Rothis the chairman. Let us be very clear. With the testimony from law enforcement officials, from fire officials, from city officials, State officials, and from our own people in the Federal Government, that, if there were a chemical or biological attack in this country, we would have as the first victims those who came to the rescue. It would be those personnel coming to the rescue of those innocent victims who are caught in that situation that would also become victims themselves because they are not equipped to detect. They are not equipped to really deal with and they certainly are not equipped to withstand the lethal capability of chemical and biological weapons. Over a period of time they may be able to.

我将在未来几周内谈论的一件事是一揽子立法，我希望参议员参议员卢加尔我将赞助。我认为，我们将要做的一件事是赋予我们的军队资助能力，以及帮助开始培训全国警察和执法人员的权力和责任。这将需要很长时间。

总统先生，我们现在处于不同的时代。许多人在东京发生袭击后没有认识到的一件事，该团体的宣告目标是真正为自己的人民准备了非常广泛的化学战能力后来，他们可能曾经有过，而不是15或20人被杀害，几百人受伤，从字面上看，在东京那里会有成千上万的死亡。我们现在正处于那个时代。

A lot of people do not also understand that in the World Trade Center bombing there was really very strong evidence that a chemical component was in the explosive material. There was an attempted effort at chemical attack there also, but the chemical element was consumed by the huge fire and explosion. So we have had that attempt also in this country.

My point is that it is a very dangerous omission in not giving the kind of clear authority in this conference report that we had in the Senate bill.

目前，在涉及大规模杀伤性武器的情况下使用武装部队在情况下使用武装部队的法定权力仅扩展到核材料。美国法典第181条第1831条允许武装部队协助涉及核材料的犯罪，当时总检察长和国防部长共同确定需要军事援助的紧急情况。在涉及使用化学和生物销毁的化学和生物武器的情况下，没有类似的权力可以在武装部队中使用特殊专业知识。

在俄克拉荷马城和世界贸易中心的联邦大楼发生毁灭性的轰炸之后，由于俄克拉荷马州的悲惨丧生和政府设施的破坏，我认为重新审查联邦反恐能力，是绝对必要的，绝对必要包括武装部队的作用。

100多年来，军事参与民用执法活动一直受到POSSE COMITATUS法案的管辖。该法案排除了军事参与法律的执行，但国会明确授权。这项具有里程碑意义的立法是国会关注对军事后战争时代的执法目的增加使用军队的结果，特别是在执行南部的重建法和抑制北部劳动活动方面。

There are about a dozen express statutory exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act, which permit military participation in arrests, searches, and seizures. Some of the exceptions, such as the permissible use of the Armed Forces to protect the discoverer of Guano Islands, reflect historical anachronisms. Others, such as the authority to suppress domestic disorders when civilian officials cannot do so, have continuing relevance--as shown most recently in the 1992 Los Angeles riots.

重要的是要记住，即使没有法定例外，该法案也不会禁止对平民执法人员的所有军事援助。长期以来，该法案一直被解释为不限制使用武装力量以防止生命丧失或在突然出乎意料的情况下破坏财产。此外，该法案被解释为仅适用于直接参与民用执法活动（即逮捕，搜查和扣押）。间接活动（例如设备贷款）被视为不禁止使用武装部队执行法律。

Over the years, the administrative and judicial interpretation of the act, however, created a number of gray areas, including issues involving the provision of expert advice during investigations and the use of military equipment and facilities during ongoing law enforcement operations.

在1970年代末和1980年代初，我担心缺乏明确性正在抑制有用的间接援助，尤其是在倒车行动中。我发起的立法是在1981年作为《美国法典》第10章颁布的，以阐明有关民用执法机构军事支持的规则。

第18章颁布并随后进行了修订，通常保留有关逮捕，搜查和扣押的禁令，但阐明了涉及贷款和设备运营，提供建议以及航空监视的各种形式的援助。第18章不以逮捕，搜查和癫痫发作来与平民进行军事对抗。第18章还确保国防部获得军事援助的报销，而军事援助并不是提供与军事训练或行动相同的培训福利，而这基本上等同于军事培训或行动。

政府要求立法，该立法将允许军事参与与大规模杀伤性的化学和生物武器有关的特定执法活动，类似于现有法律已经存在的例外，这些例外允许直接军事参与有关不当使用法律的执行核材料。

Mr. President, the nuclear kind of incident is entirely possible. We have to be prepared for it. We are much better prepared to deal with nuclear than we are with chemical or biological. We have the capability in the Department of Energy with a team that has been training and working on this for years, and they are much better prepared. We do not have a similar capability for chemical or biological.

因此，由于本法案中的这一特定权威的省略，我们正在采用大规模毁灭武器（这是化学或生物学）最有可能的恐怖主义袭击途径类别为核，这是可能的，我们必须为此做好准备。但是核攻击并不像化学或生物学攻击那样发生。

Last June, the Senate included such legislation in the counterterrorism bill with safeguards to ensure that it would only be used in cases of emergency and under certain specific, carefully drawn limitations. In my judgment, the question of whether we should create a further exception for chemical and biological weapons should be addressed in light of the two enduring themes reflected in the history and practice and experience of the Posse Comitatus Act and related statutes:

First, the strong and traditional reluctance of the American people to permit any military intrusion into civilian affairs.

Second, the concept of any exception the Posse Comitatus Act should be narrowly drawn to meet the specific needs that cannot be addressed by civilian law enforcement authority. The record is abundantly clear that we are talking about exactly that. These are cases where local law enforcement and State law enforcement simply could not handle the job.

These issues were examined at a hearing before the Judiciary Committee on May 10, led by the chairman of the committee, SenatorHatch,和the ranking minority member, Senator拜登。在听证会上，出现了五个主要主题：

First, we should be very cautious about establishing exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act, which reflects enduring principles concerning historic separation between civilian and military functions in our democratic society.

其次，不应为使用武装部队定期补充持续不断的执法问题的平民执法能力的目的而创建《 POSSE COMITATUS法》的例外。

第三，如果执法人员在特定情况下没有武装部队的特殊能力，例如在敌对情况下应对化学和生物销毁的化学和生物生物武器，则可能是适当的例外。

第四，任何授权军事援助的法规都应被狭窄地征用特定标准，以确保只有在国防部长和总检察长等高级官员（例如高级官员仅在军事力量的协助下才能有效解决。

Fifth, any statute which authorizes military assistance should not place artificial constraints on the actions military officials may take that might compromise their safety or the success of the operation.

参议院的规定被起草是为了反映《 POSSE COMITATUS法》的传统目的以及该法案的例外性质有限。提出建议我们将在几分钟内进行投票的动议将要求陪同下的规定以较小的技术澄清来恢复该规定，这是自参议院法案通过以来一直引起的。

根据推荐动议，将授权总检察长要求国防部的协助，以在紧急情况下执行有关生物和化学武器的大规模杀伤性武器的禁令。

国防部长可以在国防部长和总检察长确定紧急情况的联合裁定后提供援助，而国防部长的进一步裁定，这种援助的规定不会对军事准备不利。只有在总检察长和国防部长共同确定存在以下五个条件中的每一个时，才可以在提议下提供军事援助。这是非常狭窄的绘制。

First, the situation involves a biological or chemical weapon of mass destruction.

第二,形势对th构成严重的威胁e interests of the United States.

第三，这种平民执法专业知识不容易就可以应对所涉及的大规模破坏的生物或化学武器所构成的威胁。

第四，需要国防部的特殊能力和专业知识来应对所涉及的大规模破坏的生物或化学武器所构成的威胁。

第五，如果没有提供国防部援助，对法律的执行将受到严重损害。

我很难理解为什么众议院不接受这项规定。也许是有原因的，但是我当然没有听到这个原因。我没有听到的任何东西表明为什么无法使用我们的军队，当我们在这种情况中涉及大规模破坏的生物学或化学武器时，对美国的利益构成了严重的威胁，就没有平民执法专业知识为了应对威胁，需要国防部的能力来应对威胁，如果不提供国防部援助，执法将受到严重损害。

我认为美国人民希望我们与军队一起参与其中，以保护美国公民的生活。

在紧急情况下可以提供的援助类型将涉及设备操作以监视，检测，禁用，禁用或处置大规模破坏或这种武器元素的生物学或化学武器。当局将包括寻求和抓住武器武器或要素的权力。

我们可能会遇到一个尚不完全清楚是否有化学武器或生物武器的情况，但是有人威胁说，这种武器被包含在城市某个地方的地下室中。

如果美国总统没有这个法定权威，他将非常不愿将军队纳入纽约市中心寻找化学或生物武器。执法部门承担这项任务将是极其危险的，但是总统将在非常保守的一方，并且非常不愿采取这一步骤，除非他绝对相信有这样的武器和灾难。

不幸的是，在我看来，我们将来不会有这样的清晰度。因此，国会要谈论这个问题很重要。

如果同意拜登修正案，并且可以恢复会议，这将成为法律，总检察长和国防部长将颁布联合法规，以定义可以提供的援助类型。该法规还将描述国防部人员在本节提供援助的情况下可能采取的行动，包括收集证据。这不包括逮捕，搜查或扣押的权力，除非立即保护生命或本规定或其他适用法律的其他授权。

This provision is set forth in the motion to recommit. If it is agreed to, and I hope it is, it would make it clear that nothing in this provision would be construed to limit the existing authority of the executive branch to use the Armed Forces in addressing the dangers posed by chemical and biological weapons and materials.

The motion to recommit would address two important concerns. First, as a general principle, the types of assistance provided by the Department of Defense should consist primarily in operating equipment designed to deal with the chemical and biological agents involved, and that the primary responsibility for arrest would remain with the civilian officials. As a law enforcement situation unfolds, however, military personnel must be able to deal with circumstances in which they may confront hostile opposition. In such circumstances their safety and the safety of others and the law enforcement mission cannot be compromised by putting our military in that dangerous situation and then precluding them from exercising the power of arrest or the use of force.

总统先生，有些人想通过一项法规，说军队可以做所有事情，但他们永远无法逮捕。我认为他们几乎在所有情况下都应该服从平民。但是我们不想让我们的军队穿着化学装备，寻找化学武器，其中一些可能已经逃脱了，没有警察可以因为他们没有设备而能够进入在中，直接陷入对行为的人，无法对此做任何事情。因此，我们必须在不寻常的环境中给他们那种有限的权威，上帝禁止 - 我希望他们永远不会发生。但是我必须说，在我看来，在接下来的5到10年中发生这种类似的可能性非常高。

提出的动议将要求国防部根据标题10的第377条（一般法规，负责偿还国防部的执法援助）的一般法规。这意味着，如果国防部没有基本上等同于国防部培训的培训或运营福利，则必须对国防部进行报销。

在提出的动议下，副检察长和国防部副部长分别可以行使总检察长和国防部长的职能，每个人都可以作为有关部门主管的改变自我。。只有在指定该官员行使该机构负责人的一般权力的情况下，才可以将这些职能委派给另一位官员。例如，这将包括一个属于国防部长的人，他在没有秘书和副手的情况下被指定为秘书。

提出的动议中规定的限制将解决联邦政府内部资源和职能的适当分配；并非旨在为排除证据或挑战起诉书提供基础。

The motion to recommit, which reflects the Senate-passed provision, is prudent and narrowly drafted. It was strongly supported in the Senate by the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, SenatorThurmond。参议院一致通过。国防部和司法部的政府都作证说，现行法律不足，他们需要处理类似于他们现在对核恐怖主义的权威的化学和生物恐怖主义的权力。让我们的执法人员和军事人员没有明确应对这些危险的权力，这是不负责任的。

我知道有这样的论点是我们已经在书籍上有起义法规，这可能涵盖了这种情况。我想在关闭该法规的阅读之前与同事分享，以便他们理解为什么我们需要澄清。

So this immediate-threat-to-life inherent authority, though possibly available in desperate situations, is simply not the way to proceed. It would be a classic lawyers' debate. What we are doing now, if we leave the law as it is, as this bill before us will do unless it is amended, unless it is sent back to conference and amended, we are basically saying we are going to have one big furious debate among lawyers as to what authority would be used in what could be a matter of urgency, extreme urgency where every minute and every hour counted for the military to get into the business where we have a true emergency and American life is threatened.

So the present law is inadequate. The constitutional inherent authority of the President is inadequate in this situation, and the insurrection law would be, I think, resisted fiercely by any President where you would have to basically make an almost preposterous-type plea for the people who are perpetrating this act of terrorism to disperse and retire peacefully to their abodes within a limited time.

我想听听有人解释为什么这不是本会议报告的一部分。我知道参议院支持它。我的同事，参议员Hatch，我敢肯定，敦促其在众议院收养。我不明白为什么这项法案已从这项法案中取出。

总统先生，我敦促通过拜登修正案。

主持人。来自犹他州的参议员得到认可。

[Page: S3373]

哈奇先生。总统先生，我知道与华盛顿的杰出参议员想发表一些评论，但让我只对我与佐治亚州的杰出朋友发表一些评论。

我不完全不同意参议员纳恩，佐治亚州的杰出参议员。从一开始，我想引起同事的注意，即国会今年已经在这一领域行事。1996年《国防授权法》第378条已经是法律，特别指出，军方可以在化学和生物学紧急情况下为联邦，州和地方执法部门提供培训设施，传感器，保护服装和解毒剂。

从这个国家的最早日子开始，美国人民试图限制军事参与民用事务。在俄克拉荷马州发生可怕的悲剧之后，由于对这个国家所面临的恐怖主义威胁的敏感性，有些人觉得为军方在打击国外和国外的恐怖主义方面发挥了更为重要的作用。这不是我们应该匆忙制定的政策。

我必须补充说，我支持参议院法案中的该条款，即被称为Nunn-Thurmond Propision。美国人一直怀疑在国内执法中使用军队，这是正确的。从宣布独立到《宪法》和《权利法案》，在该国的早期历史上对军事的平民控制和将军方与国内执法部门的分离显着。的确，在我们对英格兰国王的不满中列出了他“在我们中间，在和平时期，未经我们立法机关同意的站立军队中的驻军，并影响了军事，使军事部队独立于上级和上级致公民力量。

It was abuse of military authority in domestic affairs, especially in the South after the Civil War, that motivated Congress to impose the first so-called posse comitatus statute. The term `posse comitatus' means power of the country and has as its origin the power of the sheriff through common law to call upon people to help him execute the law.

The statute, in 18 U.S.C. 1385, prevents the Federal Government from using the Army or Air Force to execute the law, except where Congress expressly creates an exception. Domestic law enforcement thus remains as is, in the hands of local communities.

目前，据我了解，国会对POSSE COMITATUS法案创造了有限的例外。如果恐怖分子威胁使用核武器，或者拒绝任何人民的权利以及他们居住的国家无法或不愿意确保其合法权利，总统可以召集军队。

军方也有权分享智力information with Federal law enforcement in attempts to combat drug trafficking. These are limited exceptions to the act, however, and do not generally empower the military to be actively involved in the enforcement of domestic laws. We have done well with a separation between military authority and domestic law enforcement. Although this proposal seems sensible and appears simply to expand upon the military's preexisting authority, to become involved if the use of nuclear weapons or biological or chemical weapons is threatened, it may, in fact, be unnecessary.

这项修正案的前提是，在平民执法部门之间，没有有效应对化学或生物学药物的专业知识。但是，我认为这种专业知识可在军队之外提供。尤其是在化学代理领域，民政当局甚至私营部门在含有这些物质方面都有丰富的经验。

此外，军方已经可以帮助民事当局解决该修正案所考虑的危机类型的各个方面：实际使用军事人员来禁用或包含该设备。军方可以借用设备，它可以提供有关如何禁用或包含化学或生物代理的指示和技术建议，并在必要时可以训练民事当局。

这项修正案增加了军方协助民事执法能力的一件事是，允许将军事人员置于现场并将其直接注入平民执法。在我看来，这是我们不应该做的一件事。

这项修正案将使Posse Comitatus法案的核心引起令人不安的含义。它必须承认，每当执法人员参与不断发展的犯罪事件时，都会有不可预测且紧急的情况。现场的人员必须能够采取必要的步骤，包括逮捕，进行搜查和癫痫发作，有时还使用武力来保护生命和财产。然而，精确颁布了POSSE COMITATUS法规，目的是确保军方不会从事这种平民执法职能。

Let me just say this. I agreed to the language that the distinguished Senator would like to put back in this bill in the Senate bill. I would not be unhappy if that language was in this bill. Unfortunately, the reason it is not is because we have people in the other body who basically are concerned about some of these issues that I have just raised. Rightly or wrongly, they are concerned, and we were unable in our deliberations, as much as we got this bill put together, as much as we have made it a very strong bill, we were unable to get that provision in.

让我们对此坦率地坦率。如果在此问题或任何其他问题上提出提出的提议，并且该动议已获得参议院的批准，那么《反恐怖主义法案》将死亡。如果我们不这样做，就有机会通过。

Frankly, we have a very good bill here. It may not have every detail in it that I would like to have. It does not have every detail in it that the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee would like to have or our distinguished colleagues Senators拜登或者纳恩想拥有。我可能会补充说，它没有国会议员的所有规定Barr和McCollum和买方和Schiff和其他人想拥有。

Nobody is totally going to get everything they want in this bill. But what it does have is a lot of good law enforcement provisions that will make a real difference, in fact, right now against terrorism in our country and internationally. We simply cannot shoot the bill down because we cannot get a provision in at this particular time that we particularly want.

我们都明白这个过程。我们都明白that we cannot always get everything in these bills that we want to. But I will make a commitment to my friend and colleague from Georgia, as I have on other matters. I do not disagree with him in the sense that this is something that perhaps we should do. I will make a commitment to do everything in my power to make sure we look at it in every way, and if we do not do it here--and I suggest we should not do it here on this bill under these circumstances--then I will try later in a bill that we can formulate that will resolve some of these conflicts that both the distinguished Senator from Delaware and I and the distinguished Senator from Georgia and I would like to see in this bill--and others, I might add.

因此，不希望将任何人的规定拒之门外。不想解决这个问题。问题是我们不能在这项法案上做到这一点，并通过今年的抗恐怖主义法案。我认为总统上周日打电话给我的一个原因是，因为他一直在要求我们为他申请恐怖主义法案。就是这个。这是这样做的一周。我认为我们已经做出了非常出色的工作，可以从众议院通过账单时带回该法案。

我赞扬众议院成员。那里有很多很棒的人为此而努力。我今天在这里的讲话中提到了其中一些。但是当然，那边的杰出董事长查克·舒默（Chuck Schumer），和others, and鲍勃·巴尔和其他人在这项法案上非常努力。

我们中没有人在这项法案中拥有我们想要的一切。而且，我们没有一个人希望看到它的失败，因为任何一项规定都可以在以后继续研究和研究此事时解决。

同时,我们在努力的一个问题bring together people on this very important piece of legislation is that there have been some perceptions over in the House as a result of some of the mistakes that law enforcement has made that perhaps we might be going too far if we follow completely the Senate bill as it came out of the Senate Chamber.

I think those perceptions are wrong, but the fact is they are there. I think we have to work on them and educate and make sure that we, by doing future bills, will resolve these problems, solve them in the minds of not only Members of the House of Representatives who have complaints against some of this information, but also in the minds of others who would like their own provisions in the bill.

我不得不说，有些人 - 我不包括佐治亚州的杰出参议员 - 但有些人只是简单，只是试图阻止这项法案。他们讨厌本法案的人身保护规定。我知道与佐治亚州的杰出参议员没有，他在这些问题上与我同在，但他们确实如此。金博宝正规网址他们将使用任何策略试图制止该法案，因为他们不想进行死刑改革。该法案将将其带给我们所有人。这是值得的。

如果这是我们在本法案中所拥有的全部，那就是昨天和过去出现在这里的每个受害者都说他们想要的比其他任何受害者都要多。仅出于这个原因，就有一个很好的理由通过这项法案。但是法案中还有许多其他好的规定，我们应该通过它。我们应该通过它，即使我们认为可能会使法案更好的一项或多项规定目前无法投入。

我们真的很努力地提出了一项法案，我认为可以以两党的方式得到支持。我们真的很努力。我不在乎谁获得了这项法案的信用。我可以说，我们非常非常努力地拥有我们所有人都为之骄傲的账单。我认为我们确实有一个。里面有一切吗？不。但是它有很多东西，我们确实必须继续完成并完成它。

如果该动议或随后的任何推荐动议通过，则该法案将死亡。我认为这将是本周本周最悲惨的事情之一，即俄克拉荷马城爆炸案周年纪念日的几天。

昨天，我们也有来自Pan AM 103的人。我们有其他。坦白说，他们都要求我们通过这项法案。我正在竭尽所能。因此，我希望人们会投票反对这一动议，即使我本人对佐治亚州参议员有很大的尊重，对他的立场有很多同理心，即使我不明白，我也会想像我经常在美国参议院地板上所做的那样，支持他。

我认为基本上是这样说的。我希望人们能够投票反对任何提议的动议，因为这项法案下降将是悲惨的。我无法想象以这种方式投票的大多数人。我希望他们不会在这个特定的情况下。

我屈服于地板。

[页：S3374]

纳恩先生在椅子上讲话。

主持人。佐治亚州参议员得到认可。

纳恩先生。总统先生，我将简要介绍一下。

I have tremendous respect for my friend from Utah. He knows that. He and I have been on the same side of the habeas corpus issue for a long time. Now the Governor of Florida, then Senator from Florida, Lawton Chiles, and I came to the floor for 2 or 3 weeks in a row every day back in the 1970's, I believe--time slips by--about the importance of reform in habeas corpus. So I certainly share his view on that.

As much as I think that needs reforming, I do not think that habeas corpus statutes are the problem now. It has been somewhat modified by the courts themselves. I do not think that is as urgent as what we are talking about here, because with the hearings we have had and with the tremendous amount of effort that I have made and Senator卢加尔和others have made in this whole problem of the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons, I do not know whether anything is going to happen next week, next month, or next year.

I do know that we could have some calamity happen without any notice in this area. I hate to see our Nation so ill-prepared to deal with a threat that is much more likely to happen than some of the threats that we are prepared to deal with.

总统先生，我们在众议院的共和党朋友发生了一些事情。我不确定那边达成了什么交易，但是我记得在参议院的地板上非常好 - 我来自犹他州的朋友也可能回想起这一点 - 当众议院通过了一项修正案，这是一个多年前，里根政府（Reagan Administration） - 基本上下达了命令，放弃了Posse Comitatus法规，给了国会议员的命令Hunterfrom California, to shut the borders down with our military, basically shut them down, I believe, within 45 days saying the military would be deployed all over the borders of the United States to basically close the borders, not let any drugs come through.

We computed that we would have to bring all our military forces back from Europe, from Korea, from Japan, everywhere else to put them side by side virtually on the border to comply with that. It passed the House, and it was a Republican-sponsored amendment. Of course, after some light was shone over here on the floor of the Senate, we rejected that amendment. It did not happen.

I also have a long history in this posse comitatus area because I thought certain carefully crafted exceptions to the statute needed to be made in the law enforcement and drug area, but carefully constructed so we did not get our military involved in search and seizure and arrest on a routine basis. I found myself debating the then-Senator from California, now Governor of California, where he proposed an amendment that would have had the military be able to make any kind of arrest and search and seizure for drug transactions in the domestic United States.

这是我本来可以反对的posse comitatus法规的又一方面的豁免。这将在日常基础上对执法部门做出军事反应。我反对。那太过分了。

Here we have my colleagues on the House side, and for some reason now they have switched all the way over and they are worried about even using the military in a situation where we have a desperate situation with chemical and biological weapons where nobody else can handle it. I do not understand it. I do not understand what has transpired. But something strange has taken place here.

I do think we have to approach this whole posse comitatus area with great care. We do not want our military engaged in law enforcement except as an absolute last resort when there is no other alternative and when the result of failure to be involved would be catastrophic.

我还会问我的朋友来自犹他州 - 我知道他试图维持参议院的立场。我非常了解他，知道他已经做到了，您不能在会议中的每个项目上都这样做 - 但我不明白如何支持Posse comitatus comitatus comitatus法规的人如何里根政府的要求现在有不同的看法。在里根政府期间，他们说他们需要这个例外。当时，我们有相同的宪法，同一最高法院的裁决，相同的起义法规，但他们希望对核地区进行豁免，以便他们显然可以拥有法定权力。我们支持这一点。那根本不是党派问题。民主党人和共和党人支持它。里根总统将其签署为法律。

现在，在化学和生物学区域，我们的情况几乎相同。我们在白宫有另一个总统，他是民主党人，我们在人们说：``哦，我们不需要的位置上都有一个整体转变。我们不需要它。我们不能给他们这个权威，等等。

我不明白。我了解党派的立场，但我不明白对这种性质的某些东西完全切换哲学立场。

I make one other point. The Senator from Utah mentioned the provision we passed recently in the defense authorization bill that allowed the equipment of the military to be used and to be loaned to law enforcement and other domestic officials in situations that are chemical-biological. That is a very useful addition to the present authority. What you have to have there is personnel who are trained to use that equipment. You cannot jump into chemical protective gear and know how to operate it in an emergency situation, if the Defense Department brings it in and hands it to local police. You have to be trained in that.

军方在这方面花了数百个小时培训人们。培训该国各地的国内执法和消防官员将花费数年和几年的时间来使用这种设备。除非已经接受过培训，否则该法规将在紧急情况下无法进行实际使用。他们可能会尝试使用它，但是它不会完成这项工作，因为它不授权军事人员操作设备。

我们只是在这个国家中有很多城市可以袭击，我们不能冻结，并阻止军方作为最后的度假胜地卷入紧急情况。我们必须有培训的人，并且知道如何使用设备，不仅是防护装备，而且要使用防护设备。在遭受直接攻击威胁的最后一刻不能完成。

总统先生，如果我不认为在这方面未能采取行动可能会产生非常严重的后果，我就不会赞成这样的动议来对这样的重要法案提出建议。我们谁都无法在什么时间间隔中预测会发生类似的事情。我希望永远不会。

我必须说，在未来几年中，在美国发生某种化学或生物学攻击的可能性是很高的可能性。到目前为止，我们将不得不做更多的事情才能为此做好准备。我希望众议院以某种方式认识到这一点。

我知道来自犹他州的参议员对他愿意重新审视这个问题并试图将其提交另一项法案绝对是真诚的。如果这一动议没有通过，我将在这方面与他合作。我希望房子里的人能重新审查自己的位置。我希望他们能让一些员工浏览记录。关于这个明确的观点，我们有大量听证会。

我们从全国各地的消防队长，执法人员，司法部官员，联邦调查局，军方都有各种各样的专家证词。我们在东京发生了有关袭击的详细听证会。在这方面，我们不仅没有准备执法人员，而且我们在大多数美国城市中都没有紧急医疗培训，以应对此类事件的后果。我们将不知所措，人们会问我们所有人。为什么有人不试图防止这种情况发生，或者至少使我们准备应对这种攻击的可怕医疗，悲惨的后果？

同样，我敦促采用拜登修正案。