[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 16] [Senate] [Pages 21526-21527] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]TRIBUTE TO KEN CUNNINGHAM Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I want to take this opportunity at the end of a Congress to express may gratitude and best wishes to Ken Cunningham, a long-time friend and staffer who has been like family to my wife Barbara and me for more than 25 years and left my staff a few months ago. He served me in a number of positions during those years, including chief of staff general counsel, legislative director, and legislative assistant--sometimes juggling multiple positions at once. I used to joke with him about all the titles that he had accumulated. But now faced with growing family obligations, he has left my staff to set up his own government relations firm. After 2 years working for former Congressman Tom Tauke, Ken joined my new Senate staff in 1981 to handle several legislative and regulatory areas initially focusing on commerce, telecommunications, transportation, and agriculture. In fact, my very first Senate legislative victories came with Ken's help on the 1981 farm bill. Ken and his wife Sherry lived near Barbara and me, so he and I would drive to and from work together. We got to know each other well during those commutes and quickly became good friends. It was clear that my new staffer possessed sound judgment, integrity, a strong work ethic, and a passion for serving our constituents. He worked many years in the Senate before it became popular around here to talk about the need for a ``family friendly'' schedule. And yet Ken found the time and energy to earn his law degree at the Georgetown Law Center. But I knew that I could always count on him to make the necessary sacrifices to get the job done here in the Senate no matter how long the hours. He probably set an office record in the early eighties during the crunch time of an ending Congress. As he juggled several pending legislative issues, he took only 7 hours of sleep for the entire week. As some know, the devastation of the farm crisis of the middle eighties so discouraged me that I almost did not run for reelection. But Ken, like me, grew up farming. He, too, had friends back home and was likewise crushed by their suffering. He worked tirelessly to help me fight for every bit of relief and assistance possible to help rural Americans through that tragic time. As partial testament to his effectiveness, when I did decide to run again, and we did some polling, my highest approval ratings came from farmers and their families. And while the farm crisis led to the defeat of many Midwest legislators, I was reelected by a wide margin. My good friend, former Senate majority leader, Bob Dole, has called Ken Cunningham the smartest staff man on Capitol Hill, and said that I am lucky to have him. Given the number of staffers Senator Dole has known over the decades, that is indeed a remarkable compliment. But Ken has proven time and again that he deserves that reputation. Ken has always been quick to grasp the complex. He possesses incredible discernment and political instincts. He has an intense competitive spirit. And he is tenacious--almost as tenacious as me. He probably learned that from me. Given these positive traits, combined with his understanding of Senate legislative rules and procedure, Ken can be either a great ally, or a most formidable opponent. Let me give you an example. Ken's expertise and qualities proved crucial in reversing a devastating tax legislation defeat handed to us by the House of Representatives, led by then-Ways and Means Chairman Bill Archer, during consideration of the 1997 reconciliation bill. Chairman Archer and big oil had long despised tax incentives for ethanol, one of America's few energy independence success stories, and the source of billions of dollars of income and thousands of jobs for rural Americans and farmers. By using reconciliation to kill these tax incentives and thus creating tax savings that protected other popular programs, Chairman Archer had devised and executed a plan to kill these tax incentives that were procedurally and politically virtually impossible to stop. He rammed it through his committee and then rammed it through the full House of Representatives. Pro-ethanol allies in both the House and the Senate faced what seemed like one of those ``deer-in-the-headlights'' moments. As the Senate Finance Committee prepared to take up the reconciliation package, farm and renewable fuels groups looked to me to lead the fight. But cracking reconciliation's procedural nut at this point was a daunting challenge at best. Ken, however, formulated a legislative response that overcame these obstacles. One Finance Committee tax counsel wryly characterized it as ``clever.'' The amendment was designed not only to stop Chairman Archer's handiwork, but also to extend the ethanol tax provisions by several years. This was a bold move for a number of reasons, not the least of which was the fact that it drew opposition from both the Finance Committee's chairman and ranking Democrat. The political obstacles were even more challenging than the legislative and procedural. Many Democrats were outright giddy with the prospects of taking back control of Congress by blaming Republicans for the loss of the ethanol program and the resulting harm to rural America. In recognition of this temptation, Ken recommended a particular Democratic cosponsor who, though not recognized as the most experienced in these battles, we felt would fight hard against political gamesmanship. He [[Page 21527]] also devised a plan that did not depend upon the Clinton administration's help to ensure success. I will never forget how quickly the loud chortling of the big oil lobbyists fell silent as they were stunned the night my amendment passed the Senate Finance Committee by a vote of 16 to 4. And to the amazement of many, we fought to a draw during the 1997 reconciliation battle. Both Chairman Archer's and my provisions were dropped in conference. We then braced for Chairman Archer's next attack that came with the 1998 highway bill. This time, however, Speaker Gingrich quietly assured me that if we could get my tax amendment passed once again in the Senate, he would find a way to help me in conference. As the time came close for the House/Senate conference, the Speaker had not yet said what he would do to help. Ken explored a number of ideas. It was common practice for House committee chairmen to designate members of their party and committee to attend conferences. But researching House rules, and seeking confirmation from the House Parliamentarian, Ken determined that the actual power of appointment resides with the Speaker. We approached the Speaker to suggest that he consider exercising this power. And indeed, that is ultimately what the Speaker did: he appointed pro-ethanol House conferees, and my legislation extending the ethanol tax incentive prevailed, while the Ways and Means chairman's language to kill the program was dropped. When I became the new chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Mark Prater, the committee's chief tax counsel, told me that this was by far the biggest victory he had witnessed of me. It was unheard of and astounding for a mid-level member of the Finance Committee to defeat, as I did, a Ways and Means chairman on one of his top priorities. Mr. President, even House Speaker Gingrich was amazed as the dust settled and we emerged victorious. Addressing a group of my constituents, the Speaker characterized legislate battle as, and I quote, ``the substance about which great novels are written.'' I will be first to acknowledge and express gratitude for all the help that many, many people provided in this fight, but I am convinced that we would have lost and there would be no ethanol program today had Ken Cunningham not come up with the right analyses and solutions at each and every critical juncture. Over the years, Ken helped me at one time or another in just about every area of legislation and committee assignment, but he also contributed greatly to my office as a manager--first as legislative director and then as chief of staff. He is very good with people--tactful and empathetic. He is firm, but always fair and even-handed. He has a way of bringing calm and resolution to tensions and conflict among staff. He is a good problem solver, teacher, and coach. It is said that actions speak louder than words. And although I am not at a loss for words of praise for Ken, I think one of my last acts before he left speaks volumes about my confidence in Ken's judgment, loyalty, friendship. I asked him to find and hire his own replacement--someone who was just as good with the same experience. I knew he would not let me down, and I think he did a pretty good job on that last assignment. Ken has a wonderful wife and four growing boys. Barbara and I extend our blessings and best wishes for Ken and his family. And we have absolute confidence that he will be successful in his new business. We miss seeing him at the office every day but know we will always be close friends. So, Ken, to a valued public servant and a trusted friend, Barbara and I say thank you for your long-standing service to Iowa and the U.S. Senate. ____________________