at the conclusion of this year, we will bid farewell to a Senator who is larger than life, both literally and figuratively. Fred Thompson, may chairman of the Governmental Affairs Committee, and my food friend, will be leaving the Senate after 8 years of distinguished service. While there is no question that the people of Tennessee would have returned him to the Senate for another term had he chosen to seek it, Fred decided that there is life after the Senate--and if the past is prologue, we can be sure that it will be an interesting life. Fred came to this body after a varied and distinguished career. He had been a prominent public servant--most notably as an assistant U.S. attorney and as the Republican counsel to the Watergate committee--as well as a skilled lawyer and a gifted actor. From his days with Senators Howard Baker and Sam Ervin in the Watergate hearings, to his role in exposing the sale of pardons in the State of Tennessee, to his acting in 18 films, Fred brought a keen intellect, a great sense of humor, and an exceptional capacity for hard work to every task. And those are the very characteristics that have marked his Senate service. Fred has been a leader in the Senate on a wide variety of critical issues, including intelligence reform and oversight, reducing the threat posed by the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and reducing the tax burden on American families.
Editor's note · Context
Paying tribute to Senator Fred Thompson as he prepares to leave the Senate.
Share
More from Susan Collins
What appears to have happened is that there now has been ... somewhat of an increase of ICE activities before the additional training and body-worn cameras were deployed.
the fact remains that there are must-pay bills and urgent requirements facing the department that affect the ability of our troops to be well trained and more broadly of the U.S. military to deter and defend against potential aggressors…
They don’t have them yet. The orders were placed, but they couldn’t [process] the orders when the government was shut down.
I took particular issue with the provision that would allow political appointees to review grant proposals, noting that it would undermine the goal of awarding funds 'based on scientific merit and value, rather than political ideology.'





