Senate Passes Resolution Opposing Russian Offer to Question U.S. Officials, 98-0
House Session - July 26, 2002
Speakers:
Time
Action
  • 09:00:56 AM

    none

    House will be in order before the House communication from the speaker.…

    House will be in order before the House communication from the speaker. The speaker's rooms Washington D.C. July twenty sixth two thousand and two.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:01:13 AM

    >>

    and two. I hereby appoint the honorable Michael K. Simpson do act as…

    and two. I hereby appoint the honorable Michael K. Simpson do act as speaker pro tempore on this day .

    Show Full Text
  • 09:01:18 AM

    >>

    tempore on this day . Sign jadedness mastered. Speaker of the House of…

    tempore on this day . Sign jadedness mastered. Speaker of the House of Representatives there will be off by the chaplain.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:01:24 AM

    >>

    there will be off by the chaplain. Created in your image and likeness Lord…

    there will be off by the chaplain. Created in your image and likeness Lord God . We are endowed with noble rights . And held to certain responsibilities.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:01:36 AM

    THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

    certain responsibilities. As this one hundred seventh Congress and gauges.…

    certain responsibilities. As this one hundred seventh Congress and gauges. In decision making which will affect this nation. And

    Show Full Text
  • 09:01:44 AM

    THE CLERK

    which will affect this nation. And the world internationally. Help all…

    which will affect this nation. And the world internationally. Help all members. Reflect your image. And respect your likeness. And others. Today we pray for all Americans with disabilities.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:01:58 AM

    THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

    Americans with disabilities. Bless them with peace and strength. May their…

    Americans with disabilities. Bless them with peace and strength. May their efforts to create independent lives for themselves be rewarded . As they find their rightful place in the mainstream of American life . As their brothers and sisters. May all Americans. Prove to be helpful citizens. To those with disabilities . And seize every opportunity to protect their rights . To access and enjoy their fullest potential . In places of worship . Of work and learning . As well as on the streets in the public places of this nation . We are yours. One people . We are your people now and forever. Amen. The church JAMA Journal of the last days proceedings announcers of the house his approval there of present Clause one of Rule one The Journal stance approved the pledge will be led by the gentleman from Georgia Mr Norwood. Played remained standing hand over your heart. Face the flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag. Of the United States of America and to the republic which is things. One nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all .

    Show Full Text
  • 09:03:26 AM

    THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

    . Pursuant to House Resolution five o two and Rule eighteen the chair…

    . Pursuant to House Resolution five o two and Rule eighteen the chair declares the House and the Committee of the whole on the STATE OF THE UNION for the further consideration of the bill H.R.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:03:37 AM

    MR. NORWOOD

    of the bill H.R. fifty five. Will the gentleman from Georgia Mr Landor.…

    of the bill H.R. fifty five. Will the gentleman from Georgia Mr Landor. Kindly take the charity for the houses in the committee of the whole house on the STATE OF THE UNION for further consideration the bill H R five zero zero five which the clerk will report by title. A bill to establish a little apartment of Homeland Security and for other purposes .

    Show Full Text
  • 09:04:04 AM

    THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

    . When the committee of the whole row is on the legislative day of…

    . When the committee of the whole row is on the legislative day of Thursday July twenty fifth two thousand and two. Amendment Number sixteen printed in the House Report want to go seven dash six one five . By the gentleman from Connecticut Mr Shays had been disposed of. Pursuant to section four of House Resolution five zero two. And the order. Order of the house of that date is now in order to consider Memet number three. Put in the House report one one zero seven dash six one five percent to section four of House Resolution five zero two in the order the house of that date is now in order to consider them with number three part of House report one zero six six one five . What purpose

    Show Full Text
  • 09:04:26 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    consider them with number three part of House report one zero six six one…

    consider them with number three part of House report one zero six six one five . What purpose

    Show Full Text
  • 09:04:34 AM

    THE CLERK

    consider them with number three part of House report one zero six six one…

    consider them with number three part of House report one zero six six one five . What purpose

    Show Full Text
  • 09:04:38 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    one zero six six one five . What purpose of the gentleman from California…

    one zero six six one five . What purpose of the gentleman from California . Seek recognition. Mr Chairman I have an event at the desk clerk will designate him an amendment numbered three. Printed and House Report Number one zero seven six one five. Offered by Mr Waxman of California . Pursuant to the previous or the house the California Mr Waxman and a member oppose each will control ten. It's a chair recognized the gentleman from California . Mr Chairman of my colleagues this amendment would do three things . First it would cause to fire the Office of Homeland Security.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:05:19 AM

    >>

    of Homeland Security.

  • 09:05:21 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    In statute . And subject

  • 09:05:23 AM

    THE CLERK

    to congressional oversight. Second it would require that the director of…

    to congressional oversight. Second it would require that the director of this office be confirmed by the Senate.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:05:30 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    by the Senate. And third . It would provide the director of the office.…

    by the Senate. And third . It would provide the director of the office. With authority to review the budgets. Of all agencies involved in homeland security . To ensure that they conform to the objectives of the national strategy. If they don't.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:05:47 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    The director . Could decertify these budgets. This would prohibit the…

    The director . Could decertify these budgets. This would prohibit the O.M.B. director from submitting them to Congress. Unless the president made an express finding that they serve the national interest . Decertification would also trigger a requirement to report the deficiencies . To relevant committees in the House and the Senate. Mr Chairman creating a new department is fine. But the most critical challenge is and will continue to be coordinating the efforts of the entire federal government. As part of a comprehensive national strategy. This chart . To my right . Shows the current situation . There are one hundred fifty three different agencies involved in homeland security. And the chart. Next to it . To my right. Shows what this bill will do. There will be even more agencies involved in fact . According to the Congressional Budget Office. This new department is. So complex. It will cost. Over four billion dollars. Just to organize and . Manage the department . As the chart shows . Talking about the charge . On the floor right . Point with. One chart shows. Many agencies integral to homeland security. Will remain outside the new department including the F.B.I. CIA . The Defense Department the National Guard and many others. What's urgently needed is an office at the White House level with the mandate and authority. To develop a national strategy. And unite the government behind it. That's what my amendment would do . The starting point for this coordination. Should be the executive order that established the Office of Homeland Security. Within the White House. Which President Bush issued last October. This order appropriately created a White House level office . Charged with . coordinating Intelligence gathering. Preparedness . Prevention. Protection of critical infrastructure and response and recovery . Across the entire country . The main shortcoming of the executive order however is that it did not give the director of The Office official authority to implement these functions. This amendment Trax the executive order . But it also provides additional authority . To give the nation what it needs most a single office in the White House. With the mission. And authority. Needed to develop and implement a comprehensive national strategy for homeland security. This amendment would do more to protect our national security . I believe. Than the rest of the bill combined . And it is a whole. A lot simpler and less expensive. I urge members to vote yes on this amendment. And I reserve the balance of my time. And what purpose of Jennifer in Texas sick recognition. Mr Chairman I rise in opposition to the amendment. I don't want to recognize for ten minutes . A . Thank you Mr Chairman Mr Chairman at this time I would like to yield up for a menace to the gentle lady in California Mr Armey and we from California to recognize for four minutes . I thank the gentleman for yielding . And I thank him for his leadership on this bill and I say to my colleagues that I thank you too for your leadership and. Your participation in this important effort to secure the homeland .

    Show Full Text
  • 09:09:42 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    to secure the homeland . Mr Chairman I rise to address the context in…

    to secure the homeland . Mr Chairman I rise to address the context in which we consider this amendment .

    Show Full Text
  • 09:09:48 AM

    MR. ARMEY

    in which we consider this amendment .

  • 09:09:50 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . Coming late to this debate my colleague from California may not know the…

    . Coming late to this debate my colleague from California may not know the issues. History

    Show Full Text
  • 09:09:53 AM

    MR. ARMEY

    from California may not know the issues. History . His amendment is…

    from California may not know the issues. History . His amendment is similar in many respects to a bill that I in a bipartisan group . Introduced last

    Show Full Text
  • 09:09:59 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    to a bill that I in a bipartisan group . Introduced last October . At a…

    to a bill that I in a bipartisan group . Introduced last October . At a time when we believe the administration would not support. A large department of homeland . security

    Show Full Text
  • 09:10:08 AM

    MS. HARMAN

    . security We felt and still do . That there needs to be one integrating…

    . security We felt and still do . That there needs to be one integrating strategy. Across the federal government . One person needs to be accountable for budget. And coordination . One person needs to be a Cabinet level official confirmed by the Senate. The difference between now and last October . Is that under H.R. five zero zero five . That person is the secretary of homeland security. Who presides over the critical homeland security functions . And a large workforce. Under H.R. for all five . A statutory Homeland Security Council in the White House. Will coordinate government functions. Not contained in the new department. Just as the National Security Council coordinates defense. Foreign policy and other national security functions. If the sponsor of this amendment believes that the national security. And. Vizor lacks the authority to coordinate national security. I'm unaware of it. Mr Chairman . A long history . Got us to this concept . As I mentioned last October . I introduced the Office of Homeland Security Act with . Mr givens of Nevada and thirty four bipartisan co-sponsors . The sponsor of this pending a man meant. Was not one of them. The organizing principle of that was bill included in legislation introduced by Mr Menendez . And one hundred seventeen members of the Democratic caucus. The language was modified to accommodate concerns of our colleagues on the budget in Armed Services Committees. The sponsor of this pending Amendment did not participate in these negotiations . And did not co-sponsor the taskforce bill. Further . His amendment. The one we're considering today. Disregards the careful budget process. That our colleagues Mr Spratt Mr Skelton and Mr Turner helped construct when a bipartisan buy cameral group developed and introduced H.R.. Forty six sixty . Which combines the White House coordination and department of homeland security functions. And which is the precursor of the bill we're considering today . The principal sponsor of this amendment did not participate . On May twenty first. The minority leader . Supported this bill . Our bill forty six sixty at a press conference where we were joined by the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee. Mr Robey. This issue has been my principal focus . For this charm. In Congress. My position has adapted . As the context has changed . And I believe that careful consideration will show that the gentleman's amendment. Would hurt rather than help coordination. Finally I urge our colleagues to note that this amendment. Would cut. O.M.B. completely out of the budget process . For homeland security. The director of homeland security. This amendment is given the power to reject unilaterally. Homeland security budgets from any department. Time even the hands of the president. Mr Chairman there is a better concept in this amendment . And it is in the base bill . And the bipartisan process that developed that language . Should be respected . I urge our colleagues. To consider the context in which this amendment arises. And to reject it. I yield back the balance of my going to yield back the balance we're trying to go for now. Mr Chairman may inquire how much time there is only each one. Both. California and Texas have six minutes remaining. I'd like to you. Three minutes to the gentleman from California if you're going to work and I just want to see it . Thank you very much Mr Chairman I thank the gentleman for yielding and I thank him for his leadership as the ranking member on the Government Operations Committee . For his thorough understanding of the challenge that we have before us today. I

    Show Full Text
  • 09:14:04 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    have before us today. I also want to commend the gentle lady from…

    have before us today. I also want to commend the gentle lady from California for her.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:14:08 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    for her. Leadership over the past year . On this

  • 09:14:12 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    issue of homeland security. And I want to take my lead from her when she…

    issue of homeland security. And I want to take my lead from her when she said we must consider the context within which.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:14:18 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    context within which. This amendment will be judged . Because I believe…

    context within which. This amendment will be judged . Because I believe the context within which this amendment will be judged . Is the context

    Show Full Text
  • 09:14:26 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . Is the context

  • 09:14:27 AM

    MS. PELOSI

    of the very big. Bill to conk to establish a Department. Which we all…

    of the very big. Bill to conk to establish a Department. Which we all agree we need. But the size of which. And the approach to which. Harkens back to the fifty's. Rather than into the future. It is not a department . For this new century. It is old . Old and fashioned in a very old fashioned way. It does not utilize to the maximum extent . The technologies instead depends on locating one hundred and seventy thousand . People. That's the lowest in the G.A.O. says it could be as many as two hundred thousand people . Mr Chairman there are eighty five thousand . Minutes of jurisdictions in our country. Cities towns governments that . Of one kind or another that this . Homeland Security Initiative. Must communicate with of that eighty five thousand . Only about one hundred twenty . Are larger than this proposed department. Cities like Salt Lake City. Providence Rhode Island Portsmouth Maine read on Nevada the list goes on and on have fewer people. Then this Department of Homeland Security will have the C.B.S. says it will cost four and a half billion dollars. To set it up. It is so large. We'll pay any price to protect our people . That money might be better spent . Protecting our people than to go down this path . Of big government bureaucratic. Approach. A big bureaucratic approach. We want that Secretary of Department to be able to use his or her thinking about how to protect the American people . Rather than spend time. Managing a department larger than most cities and towns. In our country. But the main point that I want to make is that the G.A.O. the Government Accounting Office has said that it will take five to ten years . To have a department of this size. Up and running. We simply can't wait that long. Nothing less than the safety and security of the American people depend on us being. From day one . Ready to protect them in the strongest possible way. I have supported the gentle lady's Amendment. To have a pot of thought I at the Department of Homeland Security. The Office of Homeland Security . In the White House. I think it's a good idea. I think it's a better idea . To make that department stronger. At least for the time that it takes to set up this department . That's why I support the gentleman's . I commend him for tracking the president's executive order . And I hope that he will be open to compromise so that we can get this part of the bill and to have it signed I urge our colleagues to support the waxen and then I will support him and I said. Commend the general he only how it's going our leadership is Joan from Texas. A Great Commission thank the chair. Chair. What an hour at Yale. Time . The gentleman from while Mr Porter . How many minutes . Perhaps a farm gentleman from Ohio is recognized for four minutes . I thank the chair of the Select Committee for yielding to me. And I'm very eager to talk on this proposal this morning. First of all I like to say the gentleman California that I know he is. Well intended. I know that his proposal is sincere . I know that we

    Show Full Text
  • 09:17:52 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . I know that we share the same goal . But I strongly believe that the…

    . I know that we share the same goal . But I strongly believe that the structure he has laid out .

    Show Full Text
  • 09:17:58 AM

    MR. ARMEY

    Will fail. I also strongly believe that he doesn't understand . The design…

    Will fail. I also strongly believe that he doesn't understand . The design in the purpose of this new department . And I want to

    Show Full Text
  • 09:18:04 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . And I want to start by talking a bit about that.

  • 09:18:06 AM

    MR. ARMEY

    that.

  • 09:18:07 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    The chart we had a pier look a little like a health care plan we saw a few…

    The chart we had a pier look a little like a health care plan we saw a few years ago. And it does look very complicated it is very bureaucratic when you look at all the different agencies and departments now involved with combating terrorism.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:18:12 AM

    MR. PORTMAN

    bureaucratic when you look at all the different agencies and departments…

    bureaucratic when you look at all the different agencies and departments now involved with combating terrorism. That's the point. You do have over one hundred different agencies you have everyone in charge and no one in charge you need to bring accountability to this we need to align . Authority . With responsibility. With very aggressive congressional oversight the gentleman has been very good at that over the years . And I would hope that through Democrat or Republican administrations alike this Congress . And this gentleman as long as he's here will provide that oversight so that we have real accountability . That's what this is about . It's not about creating a nine hundred fifty sized. Organization it's about streamlining and consolidation. The chart the gentleman held up a lot of different boxes and agencies and departments this is the new Department of Homeland Security. This is a proposal the president sent us this is supposed to go through the various select committees this is the proposal. Committee is not a select committee. It has only four areas one is where almost the vast majority. Almost all of the employees will be which is a border and transportation security . The whole notion here is to streamline and consolidate and to get the synergies. Out of that consolidation and streamlining . And one new department . Where you have real accountability . Where somebody is in charge. That's the only way we're going to protect the homeland . He's talked a lot about the CVO study as has my friend from California Mrs Pelosi. I hope you read it. I hope all the my colleagues will read to Cabo study at least look at the summary of it. Four and a half billion dollars They say this will cost two point two billion dollars of that is an existing. Departments. In the Department of Defense. I don't know where they come up with that two point two billion dollars. The remaining part of it for administrative costs for start up is less than one percent of the budget of this entire department . Finally they take. Absolutely no account. Of any savings . They have no offsets at all for the consolidation and streamline again. With all due respect. The Congressional Budget Office. Is a twentieth century. Budget scoring. Organization trying to score a twenty first century idea. This merger. Will create synergies and will create over time I am convinced cost savings. If we do it right. And if the Congress provides the needed oversight I think there will be some startup costs . But they will be minor. And the more important thing is no midterm in the long term. There will be substantial efficiencies. And the most important thing is will have now accountability and we'll protect our kids and our grandkids. From the threat of terrorism that faces us. In this new century. One of the ironies in this debate to me as I listen to it last night and today is that the very people who are saying gee this is going to be a big new twentieth century bureaucracy nine hundred fifty S. bureaucracy are the same people who say we can't give the president . And this new department . The kind of flexibility is they'll need to manage this new agency . Managerial budget. And personnel flexibilities. Are absolutely critical to make this work I agree . We need to provide those . Today we'll have an opportunity to go a step further . As a number of amendments will be offered to try to take the select committee product which is a streamlined consolidated. Twenty first century agency . And try to take it back to the one nine hundred fifty S. We need to reject that. Finally the president's proposal . Does include a coordinating council he's already done that he set up. Homeland Security Council by executive order . In a select committee on a bipartisan basis in fact all four Democrats and three of us Republicans. Decided to support Jane Harman . And her proposal she's worked on . Not just for weeks or months but for years. To establish a coordinating council in the White House by statute. Why is that important because all this. Though this administration has shown that it's going to prioritize fighting terrorism by establishing it by executive order we want to be sure in Congress that future administrations will do the same . We do need to have this morning counsel thirty seconds. Mr Mr Chairman . Of additional thirty seconds. Directional thirty seconds. This is the right way to go . For three quick reasons number one. This allows the president to have an actual advisory. Otherwise if you have a statue up as Mr Waxman. Proposes. This advisor has to come up to testify before Congress has been confirmed by the Senate the president not rely on that person for candid advice . Period number two . It has no teeth. Look at the Council on Environmental Quality if you just an environment as Mr Waxman is . Tell me whether C.Q. has been effective in telling agencies how to prioritize their budgets. Tell me if the drug czar has been effective. That's the other model here. Those are not the right models. Third the right model is there. It's the National Security Council. That's the model Mrs Harman proposes that has teeth. Let's reject the toothless I'm alternatively let's go with the real thing. I'm jealous expired Californias recognize . Mr Chairman of my colleagues. We might have some difference about how this office ought to function in the White House . The proposal that I'm offering . Is not something that I alone have. I'm supporting . It is by the way the proposal that has reached by. Partisan support . In the Senate. Senator Lieberman's committee has supported this concept. The Brooking Institution. This is the core idea. Of their recommendation . The General

    Show Full Text
  • 09:23:13 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Accounting Office . Said that this is the kind of strong. We need a…

    Accounting Office . Said that this is the kind of strong. We need a stronger director . In the White House

    Show Full Text
  • 09:23:18 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    director . In the White House with the tools. To be able to do the job of…

    director . In the White House with the tools. To be able to do the job of coordinating these activities evidently none of the three of them . Talk to my colleague from California . Miss Harman. But they came to a different conclusion as. Have I to her recommendation and . I must say that. I don't think what we're proposing is inconsistent with what Mr Portman offered to create this Homeland Security Council. To advise the president homeland security matters. And work in consultation with O.M.B. on homeland security budget. The difference we had is the council would have much weaker powers. Than the director of homeland security under the current amendment. For example the council. Would not be permitted to decertify an agency's . Budget submission . It would not prohibit the Office of Management and Budget director from submitting the decertified budgets . To the Congress without the president's. Review and approval. And it would not be required to report deficiencies . To the Congress in other words . The director of Homeland Security would have far fewer tools. To coordinate the dozens and dozens of agencies that remain outside the new department. Passing this amendment in addition to the Portman language . Would not be inconsistent. Both. Could be included in the final bill . Mr Chairman of my colleagues. We're all trying to make this whole business work of trying to protect our country and . We are talking on a bipartisan basis about a department. And strengthening the coordination at the White House. I would submit to you that . My amendment . Which is the. Amendment that. Has been recommended by think tanks that have been involved in these organization questions for many years . Is a sound way for us to proceed. It gives the president the flexibility . And the tools. To have someone in the White House . Be able to do the job . And I fear that with all the. Rearranging of the bureaucracy if that's all we do . We will not have done enough. We may have differences on this opinion I respect the fact that people can have differences . But let us. Recognize that all of us are trying to do what we can. In the national interest. I reserve the balance in my judgment reserves a balance of time job. TEXT Mr Chairman I am ready to close now. The gentleman from California has more time he may want to go forward on California's thirty seconds. In the meantime Mr Chairman may I yield to the gentleman from Nevada for you know considering Jones recognized . Mr Chairman I ask unanimous consent . To enter my comments into the record. In opposition to the Waxman Amendment. Without objection. This gentleman from California seek to use up the remaining thirty seconds of his time chairman how much time do we have seconds.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:26:13 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    how much time do we have seconds. Thirty seconds . The thirty second

  • 09:26:17 AM

    MR. ARMEY

    one. So I yield to the my. What do you want your clothes he was a ranking…

    one. So I yield to the my. What do you want your clothes he was a ranking member on the Select Committee. That was recognized.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:26:24 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Thank you thank you Mr Chairman I thank you gentlemen again I college this…

    Thank you thank you Mr Chairman I thank you gentlemen again I college this fine work of Congresswoman Harman and the fine work .

    Show Full Text
  • 09:26:27 AM

    MR. ARMEY

    college this fine work of Congresswoman Harman and the fine work . Ranking…

    college this fine work of Congresswoman Harman and the fine work . Ranking member on foreign outbreak.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:26:32 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    outbreak.

  • 09:26:33 AM

    MR. GIBBONS

    Government Reform Committee Mr Waxman I just make this final point. I…

    Government Reform Committee Mr Waxman I just make this final point. I talked earlier about the size of this department and the number of localities in this country. That are larger

    Show Full Text
  • 09:26:40 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    and the number of localities in this country. That are larger . There…

    and the number of localities in this country. That are larger . There aren't that many that have more people than this department will have . The main

    Show Full Text
  • 09:26:46 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    will have . The main point about what we do here is about localities…

    will have . The main point about what we do here is about localities localities localities isn't it Mr Leader . How

    Show Full Text
  • 09:26:49 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    localities localities localities isn't it Mr Leader . How

  • 09:26:53 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    . How we communicate with them . How we do it immediately to protect from…

    . How we communicate with them . How we do it immediately to protect from day one the American people . CALLATE

    Show Full Text
  • 09:26:58 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    to protect from day one the American people . CALLATE

  • 09:26:59 AM

    MS. PELOSI

    day one the American people . CALLATE need a place to coordinate with that…

    day one the American people . CALLATE need a place to coordinate with that is strong and effective from day one and not wait five to ten years for the department to be established. I urge my colleagues to supply me gently to inspire Jim from Texas retired . Mr Chairman I yield myself the remaining time. I was recognize. Mr Chairman. Absent. This legislation that we are considering today . Proposition proposed by Mr Waxman might have been a good idea I think there was a time I was. But as soon as we turned ourselves in the direction of a stablish in a department of homeland security. With a secretary of Home Land Security . This proposition. Was just simply out of place .

    Show Full Text
  • 09:27:47 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    out of place .

  • 09:27:50 AM

    MR. ARMEY

    What we're doing with this legislation before us is establishing a…

    What we're doing with this legislation before us is establishing a Department of Homeland Security with a secretary of homeland security. The

    Show Full Text
  • 09:27:53 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    of Homeland Security with a secretary of homeland security. The

  • 09:27:58 AM

    MR. ARMEY

    Security with a secretary of homeland security. The secretary will himself…

    Security with a secretary of homeland security. The secretary will himself be confirmed by advise and consent the other body. As Will Several other. And Deputy undersecretaries that relate to the department . Mr Chairman I would submit that the other body will have all the opportunity to advise and consent on the question of Homeland Security that they can handle. Perhaps even more. The other thing about this that bothers me is . It's an imposition . Against the separation of powers we in the Congress. Jealously guard our powers. We would not accept the idea that anyone from the executive branch. Should tell us how to staff the United States Congress. Nor should we try to impose on the White House. How it should. Staff itself . President the United States is perfectly capable as we have seen in the case of . Governor Ridge . To make a decision about what is needed in his White House staff. Select the person that can perform the duties . That would be assigned to that person. And carry out those of us watching or oversight of those duties being carried out this amendment is out of step out of place. And I believe out of line. And we ought to vote it down time gentlemen have spent all time having expired the question occurs on the motion of John from California that his amendment be agreed to all those in favor say aye . All oppose no in the pit in the chair the nos have it. Mr Chairman of judgment in California and I request the roll call vote and pending got to make a point of origin or account for a form . It was gentle with the other point of order . Does a gentleman withdraw the point of order. I do Mr Chairman if we don't count the record of both those in support of the request for a quarter vote will rise make out of a sufficient number having risen the record voters order those in favor that men will vote I don't suppose we'll know the members record their votes but like chronic device.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:29:56 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    we'll know the members record their votes but like chronic device.…

    we'll know the members record their votes but like chronic device. Following those fifteen minute vote. On the Waxman Amendment. Pursuant to Clause six a really team proceedings will resume. On those amendments on which further proceedings will postpone last night in the following order . And them a number

    Show Full Text
  • 09:30:09 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    postpone last night in the following order . And them a number one by Mr…

    postpone last night in the following order . And them a number one by Mr Oberstar. I mean number eight but Mr Card. And a member

    Show Full Text
  • 09:30:14 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Card. And a member number fourteen Mr Rogers.

  • 09:30:20 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    This is a fifteen minute vote . The following three votes

  • 09:30:22 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . The following three votes would be through a five minute votes. So we…

    . The following three votes would be through a five minute votes. So we have a series of votes here on amendments to H.R. five thousand and five this is a bill to create a new Department of Homeland Security. They were added. Pretty late last night on the House floor working past midnight. On various amendments to this bill will look to get a journalist out there. In just a little bit to get up to speed on everything that's happened so far mobile happen today could be another late night in the House today on this. And possibly other bills. This is getaway day eighty five week recess is expected to begin after . Today. This is the Waxman Amendment as we've heard it. Codified and strengthens the White House Office of Homeland Security. It defines the function of the office. Among other things and the upcoming. Amendment votes deal with the fate of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Customs Service . As it relates to homeland security homeland security was the topic of a speech by President Bush. At the White House this morning spoke for about fifteen minutes . At the White House speaking before local law enforcement officials and mayors. The director of the Homeland Security Office . Tom Ridge also attended. Will take a look at that right now. Thank you all for coming Welcome to the White. House Good morning. And I appreciate so very much. Being joined here with firefighters and police officers and . Emergency personnel public officials at the local level. The state level I know we've got some governors year . And one thank you all for coming. Where . We're on the cusp of doing some right for America . And I appreciate . Members of my Cabinet who are here and . I want to thank the secretary defense attorney general secretary transportation. Has the Office of National Drug Policy. Kate James being here. I want to thank Tom Ridge for his hard work. But most important I want to thank the members of Congress. Who got up very early after not much sleep over your hard work in your care for our country . Senator Lieberman who is. Really working hard in the Senate to cobble together a homeland security bill that will work. Pretty Senator Nickles being here as well. Senator Bennett. From Utah thank you all for coming. Really want to thank Chris Shays and Jim Gibbons for coming and Mack Dohrn Berry as well. Three fine Republican members along with Steve La Tourette. But I also want to thank Ellen Tauscher from the state of California. She's been working really hard to make this bill a bipartisan bill . Where the American people can see both Republicans and Democrats working together to do what's right for the country . Really want to thank you all for coming. I also want to thank the heads of agencies who are here . Jim a lawyer who is the undersecretary for transportation . Chief operating officer of the Transportation Security Agency she served our country nobody is that. I was running the Coast Guard and is now . Put on another uniform. Called a coat and tie I want to thank Tom Collins who does head the Coast Guard. Robert Bonner who runs the customs. I want to thank Jim Ziglar of around the INS . I appreciate again my governor friends Rowland King and Patton. Coming up today and I also want to thank my Mayor Anthony Williams. Mayor of Washington D.C. . I want to acknowledge my Corona of ours County California. Is with us to Sheriff. Oh there you are. Mike looking right at you. I appreciate you come on he represents the local officials. But we call it Texas the high sheriff. He's the fellow who recently. Apprehended the. The killer of. Samantha Rio and you alone there in California I want to congratulate you for your good work helping make your community as safe as possible . Americans we're in our tenth month on the war on terror. And we've got to we've got a great deal to show for effort for making progress. And that's important for the American people to know. Our country. We continue to lead a mighty coalition . Of civilized nations. All adjoined in facing a common threat to humanity . This is the first war of the twenty first century. And we're making progress . We are our lives have uncovered. Terrorist cells all across the world . We're disrupting plots were doing a pretty good job of seizing their assets and cutting off their. Money . And we got him on the run. As these are international killers that's all they are. And when we get him on the run . So far we've captured over two thousand of the terrorists . And just about that many were quite as lucky. But there's still a lot I'm out there . And what you need to know as . Leaders in your communities . Is that no matter how long it takes. We're going to run them down one by one . And bring him to justice. And we do so not only defend freedom and civilization itself we do so to protect the American people which is our highest calling . We defeat the threat abroad and we're doing a pretty good job here at home as well. Congress has passed new laws to help. Congress has already acted . To help our law enforcement agencies investigate and prosecute terrorists. Congress responded quickly after September the eleventh in a fashion that made me proud. And I know made the American people proud. We strengthen our aviation security and tighten our borders. We stockpiled medicines defend against bioterrorism. We develop new technologies to help first responders. Identify and react. To attacks. Would dramatically improve information sharing amongst our intelligence agencies . And Governor Tom Ridge just produced the first comprehensive plan and our nation's history to protect America from terrorist attack. It's a good piece of work and I appreciate you and your staff Tom for working hard on it. We're taking urgent measures against clear vulnerabilities . And now we must also prepare our government our people for the long term vigilance. That the new threats will require. I say long term because this is a German enemy we face . This isn't just a. One battle war . This is . This is a war that will occupy . Not only our time . But will occupy the time of future presidents and future members of. United States Congress. And future agency heads . The number one priority. Of this government and the future governments will be to protect the American people against terrorist attack. And so therefore I believe it's important we must create a Department of Homeland Security to prepare America for the permanent duty . For the permanent duty . Of defending the homeland . And these members here today agree with me. We need this department for. One main reason. America needs a group of dedicated professionals who wake up each morning . With the overriding duty. Of protecting the American people. The agencies in this department have other duties. No question about it. But no higher responsibility . Protecting American citizens from harm is the first priority . And it must be the ruling priority . Of all of our government . The Department of Homeland Security will have four primary task it will control our borders and prevent terrorists and weapons from entering our country I like to put as we need to know who's coming and . And why they're coming in and what they're bringing in with them and whether or not they're leaving when they say they're going to leave. Secondly the new department will work with our incredibly brave. And dedicated first responders. Many of the representatives of whom are on the stage with me today. We need to be able to respond quickly and effectively to emergencies. Need good cooperation between the federal government . The state governments. And the local governments. We bring the best scientists together to develop technologies that will detect biological chemical and nuclear weapons and to discover drugs and treatments to protect our citizens . Need to harness the great genius of the American people. To make sure that it's focused on the true threat of the twenty first century. And for the first time this new department . Emerge under one roof the capability to identify and assess threats to the homeland. To map those threats against vulnerabilities. And then to act. To secure America . Apartment of Homeland Security will draw on the knowledge and experience of. Every sector in America . Will work in a collaborative way . With the people who care about America and that's the American leadership and American people at all levels of government this administration is working with Congress. To forge a bipartisan bill. And I want to preset the members of both parties for come under some morning. I believe we're making good progress and of course being a modest fellow that I am I'm willing to recognize a good idea even if it comes from Congress. Yeah . We want. It it's important understand this. I'm not going to accept legislation that limits. Or weakens the president's. Well established authorities. Authorities to exam parts of government from federal labor management relations statute. When it serves. Our national interests . Every president since Jimmy Carter has used the statute. This statutory authority. And a time of war. Is the wrong time to weaken the president's ability to protect the American people. And as Congress debates the issue of how to set up this department. I'm confident they're going to look to me to say what is being done right . After they got the bill passed. And therefore it is important that we have the managerial flexibility. To get the job done right. You can't meet we can't be micromanaged. You know and say let's make sure authority and responsibility are aligned . So they can more adequately protect the homeland. And look I fully understand the concerns of. Some of the unions here in Washington. Somehow they believe that this is an attempt by the administration to undermine the basic rights of workers . I reject that . As strongly as I can state it . I have great respect for the federal employees. I travel the country as. As one of them . Talking about how we need to work together to protect the homeland . I think of the times I'm going to Coast Guard cutters are going to ports of authority . Are Gone to our labs. Or seen our first responders . Many of whom have been to be a member of the you know Never have I said Show me your card. I've always said thanks for being a proud American and for working hard for the American people. So the notion of flexibility . Well in no way. Undermine the basic rights of federal workers. Workers were retained. Whistleblower protection . Collective bargaining rights and protection against. Unlawful discrimination. But the new secretary must have the freedom to get the right people in the right job . At the right time. And to hold him accountable . And he's ability to move money and resources quickly . In response to new threats that all kinds of bureaucratic rules and obstacles . And when we face and President threats like we're facing. We cannot have business as usual . I am. Appreciate the work of Senator Lieberman. He's working hard. I am concerned however . The way the committee has passed out the homeland security bill. The. Doesn't have enough . Managerial flexibility. As far as I'm concerned I look forward to working with the senator . And the Republican members. To get a bill right. To make sure that when we look back at what we've done we have left behind a legacy . A legacy that will allow future. Senators and future members of the house. And a future president to say. I can better protect the homeland thanks to what was done in the year two thousand and two . It's very interesting that Harry Truman. Took on the same task. And as I understand it was on this day thirty five years ago . That he signed the National Security Act of one nine hundred forty seven . It was acted help. When the Cold War by consolidating the Navy in the Army and the newly independent air force into what was an interesting called the National Military Establishment . Is now known as the Department of Finance. But he thought boldly and sort of the members of Congress. They recognized that after World War two are going to enter into a new era . And therefore they adjusted the sights of the federal government. That's what's happened now. History has called us in action we're entering a new era. And we must adjust our sights and must respond . And I know the members here. And I know the members on the floor that are working hard. And I'm confident we will respond in a way that will make America proud. America proud of our efforts to come together. But more importantly. American more secure in the knowledge that we're doing everything we can to protect the homeland. Thank you all for coming . May God bless your work. And may God bless America. Ah the old . The president at the White House within about the past hour . Dealing with Homeland Security he spoke to four local law enforcement officials. And mayors. Tom Ridge. Was also there . The House of Representatives. Taking up homeland security. Today it's H.R. five thousand and five and. You can read this legislation at our website CSPAN. Dot org an entire section on homeland security. The House is working its way through. Amendments to this legislation they started last night went past midnight . And are continuing here with a series of votes on amendments . Mr Waxman the Democrat from California would like to codify and strengthen the White House Office of Homeland Security which was established by Presidential Executive Order. Last year . It would also define the functions of the office. That's the vote. Taking place right now. And then a series of five minute votes in a couple of them deal with the future of the Federal Emergency Management Agency . And the Customs Service . As it relates to the homeland security bill. Long day of work here on this . And possibly other legislation . Before the house begins a five week recess . Mr Bush will also soon be receiving the corporate accountability bill. Which Congress approved yesterday . The House vote was for twenty three to three. The Senate also passed yesterday. By unanimous vote. We talked about that bill and what happens next with a Capitol Hill reporter. So Derek Willis of the monitor what happens now. What happens now I think is that most lawmakers will go home for the August recess . They won't leave until next week. But they'll go home and try to tell constituents and reassure them that they've done what they can . To confidence and faith in the markets. They feel that this bill once the president signs it. Most assuredly well . Is going to provide a boost for the economy hopefully although . The effects of that are it's really hard to speculate because on an issue as large and we have the is the economy it's . to Congress do something that definitively will impact the markets and certainly people talk about the boost that comes from passing legislation or speeches by Alan Greenspan or the president but it's something that I think most lawmakers . Realize and something that is for them. A large part beyond their immediate control. That's not to say that they won't be talking about it because their constituents will be interested in it and it also figures to be a campaign issue. Because between now and Election Day November. I think you'll see a lot of lawmakers a lot of candidates especially Democratic candidates saying that. What they've done isn't enough . And that . No more needs to be done and . They'll argue Democrats will. That President Bush and Republicans are not the best people to handle those tasks. So that's the political advantage of this how about the view from the Republicans Republicans is that. Certainly they feel this is a good piece of legislation and it needed to be done for. Investor confidence and to reassure. Constituents. But also you know in the sense that there. Have taken an issue of a potential issue off the table at least undercut it a little bit they feel. You know. When the economy is in trouble or with stock markets in trouble . And Republicans sort of don't really you know they insist that the economy itself is fine with the fundamentals are pretty good the stock market. Itself has been going down a little bit and they recognize that it meant that but that they can. Home and make the case that . They've done what they need to do in order to prevent further. Instances of these corporate abuses. And the accounting fraud and things like that that should be good enough. In terms of Congress' role. And I think Republicans are going to say . We reacted to this and we reacted to it appropriately . And that's all that they can do. How long did they wind up working on this. Well. If you talk to Republicans they say that the president asked for this. Several months ago and indeed the House passed a bill in April . Towards the end of April . And Republicans will also say that the Senate didn't act for some time after that. And that sort of the is their argument their counter argument to what Democrats say which. Democrats say that they were out in front of this all along . And that once the first inklings of the Enron collapse . Became news that they were talking about remedies and legislative actions they could do to prevent this sort of thing in the future. So this is an issue and . Legislative and political issue has been around for several months they've been working on this. Really since I think it really ratcheted up once the Senate passed the Sarbanes legislation by unanimous ninety seven nothing vote in that an action like that almost on any legislation is bound to get the House's attention and that really spurred them into a little further action and that's what drove them into getting an agreement . So that they can get a bill to the president's desk before the House leaves. Summer recess. Let's get into the legislation a bit now that it's passed in Congress. What some of the differences they had to work out in Congress to put it together. Well . Bill was something that was drafted almost drafted by Democrat Paul Sarbanes of Maryland. And also a sort of modified a little bit by. Majority Leader Tom Daschle and some of his closest aides and advisers . But the House Republicans objected to a couple things and one of which they felt was sort of a giveaway to trial lawyers and that's a frequent target of their. Of their scorn and they gave folks a little bit too much leeway . And obtain damages from companies that had gone bankrupt or. Had defrauded their investors or their shareholders . And I think they wanted Republicans at least wanted to try and curb some of that. They were really successful in in a lot of their their goals . Because of the fact that the Senate legislation was supported by every Republican in the Senate at least on the final vote. So in the end the house was really able to add only a few things to the Senate legislation . And Including was stiffer penalties longer jail terms for corporate executives who engage in this sort of accounting. Deceptive or. Fraudulent accounting practices and . Also able to try and get some language that would deal better with the distribution of assets or making it possible for to see what's going on as well . When a corporation. Its financial statements. Other words a call for greater transparency . On the part of executives. And I think. They want to do that they were serious about wanting this sort of reforms. But it was a way to do it that was already sort of built into the business cycle they would just ask for a little bit more information on a little bit more timely basis. So the Republicans were able to get a few issues . Into the final legislation . But for the most part. That's a Democratic piece of legislation. But if the impact will be on Wall Street. Well it's funny because . yesterday Early on in the day once. They had an agreement. The markets . Went up and a little bit and people were divided on whether that was a cause and effect. Thing . But in talking to lawmakers yesterday. I think. When I asked the question. What can you do. You know what can make the markets go up. They give a lot of different answers legislation doesn't always do it and. When it doesn't usually temporary. They mention things such as seeing people in jail. Going to jail or in handcuffs or being indicted . Several lawmakers said that. Pictures yesterday . That were shown on television of executives from Adelphia cable. Being led away by federal authorities . As much responsible for a market as anything. So I think it's you know say what exactly for sure their impact of this legislation will be . But they felt strongly that they had to have it done . Not only for the market but. I think more importantly in the public. Because economic anxiety among the public. Can quickly turn into political anxieties for people here in Congress to reading about this corporate accountability conference report in today's Daily Monitor thanks a lot . Thank you . On the motion of the gentleman from California.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:56:07 AM

    MS. PELOSI

    Five minutes or. Period of time which you recorded vote . Which was…

    Five minutes or. Period of time which you recorded vote . Which was postponed for the proceeding business as a record number one . Mr. From Minnesota Mr Which further proceedings were postponed. On which the voice vote the clerk will read doesn't mean the member.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:56:37 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    A recorded vote has been reports that those in support of the record and…

    A recorded vote has been reports that those in support of the record and be counted. It's a record of those and favor them and those opposing Members will record their vote . This is a five minute vote . So three more votes here five minute votes. On the bill H.R.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:57:10 AM

    THE CLERK

    five minute votes. On the bill H.R. five thousand and five dealing with…

    five minute votes. On the bill H.R. five thousand and five dealing with the creation of a new Department of Homeland Security . Mr Oberstar James Oberstar the Democrat from Minnesota.

    Show Full Text
  • 09:57:18 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Oberstar the Democrat from Minnesota. He is a ranking member of the…

    Oberstar the Democrat from Minnesota. He is a ranking member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. He came down last night to offer an amendment concerning the future of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. We have some tape from that debate last night as Mr Oberstar introduces his amendment . You know as the gentleman from Minnesota on his amendment . Thank you Mr Chairman I yield myself. Two minutes. Gentleman is recognized. Over the past decade. The Federal Emergency Management Administration has come to be recognized as one of our most effective. And widely respected . Federal government agencies. It has helped. Tens of thousands of our fellow citizens . Devastated by natural disasters floods fires floods fires . Earthquake hurricanes tornadoes blizzards. But if we transfer . Fema. To the Department of Homeland Security. We run the risk . Undermining the mission . And the effectiveness of the one agency in the US or I should say the one but one of the few. Agencies of this Government that . Touched the lives of Americans daily. That works effectively and smoothly and . Responds to the needs of American citizens . Where they are. When Disaster Strikes . Over the past several years . Fema has responded to for a federally. Declared disasters. Emerging from terrorism . The World Trade Center the Pentagon the bombing of Moore a federal building . The attack on the World Trade Center in one nine hundred ninety three. Effectively efficiently . Its response. I was never diminished by its independent status and was in fact. Enhanced by that status . Since nine hundred seventy six females responded to nine hundred twenty seven federally declared disasters . Seventy seven emergency declarations resulting from. Natural Hazards . Floods. Fire her crane. Earthquake and tornado. Responding . Effectively helping Americans devastated. And in the process. Earned the respect and admiration . Of the Congress. Of state and local officials and other nations who have come to study our system. To see how it works. And try to emulate it . The former director James Lee Witt who. Elevated the effectiveness of fema. You have myself. Thirty additional seconds. To this highly reached . Said that it's effective effectiveness. Was directly dependent upon its ability to stay out the larger bureaucratic morass of Washington agencies and allowed it to effectively coordinate the resources. Of twenty six. Federal agencies . Following disaster events . James Lee what said. The plan to move Fema to the new department. Would be a mistake . I concur . I reserve the balance of my time. Children from Texas opposed to the amendment. Mr Chairman yes I rise in opposition gentleman has ten minutes . Thank you Mr Chairman Mr Chairman I would like to yield pretty menace to the gentleman from Pennsylvania Mr Weldon filaments recognized. Without objection which Chairman I rise in opposition of the enemy . In spite of my respect for the author of the amendment. I agree with him on the. Support for fema. And on his support for James Lee Witt is a good friend of mine . In fact I talked to James Lee on a regular basis . I was with James in a number of those disasters . But the more a building bombing . Hurricane Andrew Hurricane Hugo the. Ali as far as in California and Colorado Loma Prieta Northridge. And I was with Joe all balled up at the World Trade Center in ninety three. And let me tell you Mr Chairman . And I want all of my colleagues to listen . Because three hundred sixty of you have joined with me . And with my colleague standing who are enjoying the fire caucus. And when you signed up to join the fire caucus you made a commitment to your firefighters . That you would work with them that you would listen to them. Because each of you in your districts. Have hundreds of firefighters both paid and volunteer who are the backbone of eighty five percent of them are volunteer . Mr Chairman. What did those firefighters say about this. A minute. What are the fire fighting organizations saying well let me read into the record . Mr Chairman . Your constituents when you pull out of the fire caucus. And all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. Who belong better listen . The International Association of Fire Chiefs. The International Association of Firefighters . The International Society of Fire Service instructors. The International Fire Service Training Association. The National Fire Protection Association. The National Volunteer Fire Council . The North American fire training directors are all unanimous . One point two million men and women in this country . From thirty two thousand departments. Have said on the record . Their first recommendation . On their position paper . For the Office of Homeland Security is the Federal Emergency Management Agency . Must be at the core of the Department of Homeland Security. So if you remember the fire caucus. And you support this amendment. You are slapping your firefighters across the face like they don't know matter and I'm going to remind them. So I encourage my colleagues. To vote against this amendment. And support the firefighters . Including the memory of my good friend. Ray Downey. From Minnesota . Not withstanding the gentleman's enthusiasm I don't think that that's a fair characterization of our. Amendment. That is not a slap in the face to firefighters are men when there's not a slap in the face to firefighters of all due respect to the general I yield myself fifteen seconds to yield to the job every fire organization. Opposes this amendment. It is. It is an overt characterization. To use the gentleman's language while you two minutes to the gentleman from Illinois . Thank the gentleman for yielding in. Mr Chairman I rise in support of the amendment. Offered by myself Mr Oberstar and Mr Roemer. This amendment will retain the independence of the Federal Emergency Management Agency rather than incorporated in the Department of Homeland Security . In the past twenty plus years famous become one of the best government agencies . With responsibility for responding to. Planning for recovering from and mitigating against disasters . Fema currently court needs the response activities of more than twenty five federal agencies and numerous. Non-governmental groups with more than twenty five hundred full time employees . And over five thousand standby disaster reservists. The traditional roles of Fame and clothing advising on building codes floodplain management . Teaching people how to get through a disaster helping a quick. A quick local and state emergency preparedness coronating federal response to disasters and the list goes on and on Mr Chairman . The core responsibilities. Are unrelated to homeland security. But are of the utmost important to our nation . Our amendment today will guarantee that femal will continue to focus on these tasks to prepare a nation for disasters. Under the amendment Fema will remain independent . And will not be absorbed into a large bureaucracy . Of bureaucracy with no experience aggressing these issues . Without the continuation of famous independence coronating role. We cannot ensure that the government will be able to. Affectively respond to and recover from disasters . Mr Chairman Fana has responded as the ranking member Mr Oberstar has indicated to over one thousand federally declared disasters and. Emergency duck declarations. They have done the job very well . I believe that they need to maintain their independence in order for us to continue with this agency that has been very effective the agency will be more effective both in its homeland security role. And its national preparedness role as an independent agency. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of us as both these are one sixty five the nays are two sixty one the most sales Speaker I yield to Mr John McCain his taxes are in the last for recorded vote on men in number eight. Offered by the gentleman from Maryland Mr Carden. Out

    Show Full Text
  • 10:14:50 AM

    THE CLERK

    When just a few moments the House of Representatives will return to…

    When just a few moments the House of Representatives will return to debate. On amendments possibly a long day of debate. On

    Show Full Text
  • 10:14:59 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    the bill H.R. five thousand five dealing with the creation of a new…

    the bill H.R. five thousand five dealing with the creation of a new Department of Homeland Security . The Senate is expected to debate this as well . Next week and possibly have a final version at some point soon or later on in the summer or early fall for the president to sign. There's one more Amendment here by. Congressman Harold Rogers the Republican from Kentucky deals with something known as the joint. Interagency Homeland Security Task Force. This was debated last night so here's some more tape from that floor debate . Means recognized. Chairman first I want to thank. The majority leader for. Working with us and our staff on this amendment he worked . Well into the night with us yesterday last night . Getting this together and I believe it's been thoroughly vetted by both sides of the. By the appropriate. Authorizing committees. This is a simple amendment . It grants . Permissive. Authority. To the new homeland security secretary for the creation of a joint and or agency. Homeland Security Task Force . Completely at the discretion of the new secretary . No way impeding. His flexibility . Or authority . In running . The new department. It does not grant any new authorities or powers. To the cooperating components of the task force not already authorized by the Congress and the task force if created is suggested to be modeled in the language of the amendment Mr Chairman . After the existing joint. Interagency Task Forces for drug interdiction. Currently operating as we speak . In two places Key West Florida for the East and . Alameda California for the West . And Mr Chairman the reason I suggest this type of a boiler room operation in the war on terrorism . Is the fact that these existing. Task Forces for drug interdiction. Are efficient . There to lean and there are highly successful operations in the war on drugs. And while the task of protecting the homeland. Is vastly more complicated. And different than any single drug mission. These centers. Are appropriate . Templates for how the various elements of our government should and can work together in a lean mean. Machine. War Room. The centers. Coordinate every aspect of the counter drug operation from intelligence gathering. Detection and monitoring. To the actual seizure and apprehension of those involved in these existing centers promotes security cooperation. And interagency efficiency. That's the exact kind of the concept we should be implementing. In our defense of the homeland. A combination of military civilian and intelligence agencies working together . In the same place. And given the inextricable link between terrorist activity and illegal drugs. These existing centers. Already have first hand knowledge and expertise in homeland defense. And could prove to be a very valuable to the new secretary as a template for the war on terrorism. We've taken great care Mr Chairman to craft the language in such a way that will not be perceived as. Expanding the powers of the secretary beyond. What's already in vision in the bill both the Armed Services and Judiciary Committees. Have made helpful comments on our original draft we've incorporated their changes in this language . And I appreciate their help as well. Mr Chairman in closing this amendment a simple. It seeks to establish a functioning . Interagency task force within the new department . Where coordination among the various agencies of the government the various components . Who remain under their own control. And we simply draw as we need something. For the particular task at hand from. All agencies. Of the government. The amendment. And no impeach the authority of the new secretary from carrying out his or her core mission . It's merely a suggestion for another important . I think and useful tool in the department's. Arsenal . And Mr Chairman with that. Reserve the balance of attack. Does anyone. Rise in opposition to the amendment. The rising opposition is recognized for five minutes. Thank you Mr Speaker Mr Speaker I'm afraid with this amendment were headed down a dangerous slippery slope and setting a dangerous precedent . My good friend. And colleague mentioned that he wants to build an efficient lean mean machine. And therein lies the very danger . In protecting our civil. Our citizens and our civil liberties . We don't need a lean mean. Machine that's what's anticipated by our Constitution. That's not what law enforcement this country. Is about soldiers don't need to be reading Miranda rights . With automatic rifles in hand . That's not their purpose . That's not what they're trained for . That's not what they do. In this country we have a posse comitatus . We've had that since eight hundred seventy eight and it makes it a crime to deploy federal troops as enforcers of civilian law that's worked in this country for one hundred twenty four years. The United States has always recognized a great importance . In the separation between the duties of the military and the duties of our domestic law enforcement. There's a good reason why it's stood the test of time. The military has a role in protecting our country. Domestic. Enforcement has a role in protecting our country. But there are separate roles. I noticed this morning that the New York Times had this to say not quote unquote the idea of military forces. Roaming the nation . Enforcing the laws. Sounds like a bad Hollywood script or life in a totalitarian society . Further I noticed that . Tom Ridge the homeland security chief said . In a right to go interview that this expansion. This abandoning of policy comma Tatas would quote go against our instincts. As a country . They're good practical reasons for keeping the military out of our domestic law enforcement . The mindset is completely different . In our country we have professional well trained law enforcement officers police that are talked to observe constitutional protections for our citizens they know about the procedure . Of criminal law . Soldiers on the other hand. Are trained in the use of force. Not the niceties of pursuit or both of those roles are necessary in our country both are important . Neither role should be mixed . The Christian Science Monitor said that the military exists to protect our country . Not to run it. Clearly the military and civilian forces should cooperate . They should work together in anticipating threats and responding to threats . But they must be separated. The armed forces should not be involved in domestic police tasks . They are best left to the law enforcement professionals . Of this country . Mr Speaker Posse Comitatus has stood the test of time. This is not a totalitarian state this is not a police state. We have domestic laws that protect our citizens. We have military to protect our shores . That's worked. It's stood the test of time our country is strong and so sure . Because of the hard work of our military in protecting our borders . We have freedom fighters all across the world right now protecting. Freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution . We have police that are keeping our homeland safe . Here in America . They're working well together but they're recognizing the fact that they have separate roles . And Mr Speaker I feel like that the amendment we're considering today . Would bar that lie and would mix that line and we would have the military. Roaming the country as the New York Times says . Trying to enforce the laws of our nation. Reserve the balance of my time. Just tell me has one minute gentlemen has one minute the gentleman from Kentucky has a right to close . Reserved gentleman from Texas . Mr Speaker . While this is a permissive. Amendment and my friend in the a's are two forty . The nays are one eighty eight the. Amendment is agreed to . Is now in order to consider Amendment seventeen printed in the House report . One o seven dash. Six fifteen for the for what purposes the gentleman from .

    Show Full Text
  • 10:24:53 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    Mr Murtha . And he and others. In this

  • 10:24:56 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    chamber requests the prayers of the members of this chamber . For those

  • 10:24:58 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    members of this chamber . For those

  • 10:25:00 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . For those miners for their families. And for the whole ROIC work. Of our…

    . For those miners for their families. And for the whole ROIC work. Of our rescue workers could I ask for a moment of silence.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:25:07 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    silence. With all members please stand. Thank you Mr Speaker Mr Chairman…

    silence. With all members please stand. Thank you Mr Speaker Mr Chairman for what purposes the gentleman from Connecticut arise . Mr Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk clerk will designate the amendment .

    Show Full Text
  • 10:25:44 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    clerk will designate the amendment . Amendment Number seventeen printed in…

    clerk will designate the amendment . Amendment Number seventeen printed in House report number one hundred seventy six fifteen . Offered by Mr Shays of Connecticut. Pursuant to House Resolution five zero two The gentleman from Connecticut Mr Shays. And a member opposed. Each will control ten minutes. The chair recognizes the gentleman from Knesset chairman .

    Show Full Text
  • 10:26:06 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    the gentleman from Knesset chairman .

  • 10:26:08 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . Mr Chairman this amendment is a matter of absolute national security and…

    . Mr Chairman this amendment is a matter of absolute national security and creating the Department of Homeland Security. It would be

    Show Full Text
  • 10:26:14 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    and creating the Department of Homeland Security. It would be dangerous to…

    and creating the Department of Homeland Security. It would be dangerous to leave the president with less authority to act in the interests of national security than he has under current law.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:26:19 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    interests of national security than he has under current law.

  • 10:26:21 AM

    THE CLERK

    interests of national security than he has under current law. Management…

    interests of national security than he has under current law. Management powers. Afforded every president since Jimmy Carter. Must be available to this president. And to future

    Show Full Text
  • 10:26:32 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    president. And to future presidents. To preserve the safety and defend the…

    president. And to future presidents. To preserve the safety and defend the disk your. Security of this great nation. The gentleman suspend order in the house plays .

    Show Full Text
  • 10:26:45 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    Gentleman from Connecticut. Mr Chairman this amendment. Addresses the…

    Gentleman from Connecticut. Mr Chairman this amendment. Addresses the heartfelt concerns of our colleague Miss Marella. And others who fear current authority. To exclude federal employees from coverage under the labor laws. Could be used. Over broadly. And a department with so broad a security mission. So we have included the morel Amendment. Adopted by the Government Reform Committee. But

    Show Full Text
  • 10:27:14 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Reform Committee. But with a safety valve the morel amendment would limit…

    Reform Committee. But with a safety valve the morel amendment would limit use of current exclusions that might otherwise apply to some Homeland Security Department employees . Existing exclusions.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:27:29 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    It's abilities that the affected agency or unit have changed materially…

    It's abilities that the affected agency or unit have changed materially and. A majority of the employees have their primary duty. Intelligence counterintelligence or investigative work . Directly related to terrorism investigation . But R M M It also provides an essential safety valve and safety is the reason we are creating the new department . Subsection C. would allow the president to apply existing exclusion. Authority in those special circumstances where he determines in writing that labor law cover to the agency in question would have quote. A substantial adverse impact end of quote on homeland security. This puts a new tough new standard on the top of the already rigorous tests the president must meet. Under Title five chapter seventy one. To exercise his national security authority under this provision. The president must pass through three gates. First. He must determine that the department's ability to protect home and security will be significantly and adversely affected. Then the current law attests must be met. Employes primary function is an intelligent. Counterintelligence investigative or national security work and. There is an incompatibilities between labor law coverage . And national security in the particular agency. We believe this approach represents a sensible and workable compromise between permanently diminishing. Presidential national security authorities . As Miss Morel is a member alone would do . And providing. No new standards for exercise. Of that authority in the new department. This amendment preserves the presence of billeted to act in the interests of national security . While acknowledging the unique circumstance of employees. Being transferred into this new department. I reserved. Gentleman reserves a bonus of his time . Gentleman from California. Mr Chairman I claim time in opposition to the amendment the gentleman's recognized. And I yield myself for two minutes. Mr Chairman . At the outset I want to comment on the process . Under which we're considering this and the Morello. Amendment. The Republican leadership has rigged the process. Regarding the Shays and the Morello amendments. By denying representative Morel up . A clean vote on her Amendment. The Shays . Amorello

    Show Full Text
  • 10:29:52 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Amendment. All right Dental to each other except that the Shays Amendment…

    Amendment. All right Dental to each other except that the Shays Amendment includes a final paragraph .

    Show Full Text
  • 10:29:57 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    includes a final paragraph . That on dues the rest of the amendment .

  • 10:30:00 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    rest of the amendment .

  • 10:30:01 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    . As a result. If both pass. The Morello. Amendment will be meaningless .…

    . As a result. If both pass. The Morello. Amendment will be meaningless . It will do nothing. Represented Mirelle asked for a chance to modify her Amendment . So that it could it could strike . The offending provision in the Shays Amendment. But she was denied the opportunity to do that by her own leadership . The result is a rigged process. So even if the Amendment prevails . She loses . If the Shays. Amendment is also adopted. Well I would urge my colleagues who want to support the Morello. Amendment . To vote for the Morello Amendment. And vote against the Shays Amendment. This issue deals with labor management relations. The amendment. Takes the America many amendments which passed out of the Government Reform Committee. On a bipartisan basis. And renders it useless. Let me explain the situation. Under existing law. The president can strip an agency's employees . Of collective bargaining rights . If he determines that the agency or subdivision's primary function is counterintelligence. Investigative or national security work. Represented Morello's Amendment provides a very limited exception to this authority . It says. That the collective bargaining rights. Of employees who are currently in unions. Cannot be eliminated. Unless their functions. Change. After they are transferred to the new department . The. SHAYS Amendment states that the American amendment would apply . Except if the president doesn't want it to apply. Well that means. The Merrill Amendment has no meaning to it . Basically it allows the president to do exactly what the amendment by. Miss Marella. Was seeking to prohibit Now the amendment is carefully crafted. It gives the president broad flexibility to restrict. Collective bargaining rights . When the duties of employee exchange. I just myself one additional minute. Gentleman's recognized wanted to show minute. Moreover it doesn't apply to over two thirds of the employees in the department . Because these employees are not currently in collective bargaining unit. And it will not apply to the new units. With sensitive responsibilities. Such as the new intelligence analysis office. The Morel. Amendment would not be needed. If the president and the administration. Had a track record of respecting employees legitimate rights . To organize and bargain collectively . Unfortunately the administration has not respected these rights. Earlier this year the president's trip to. Union rights. Away from. Clerical workers in the offices of U.S. attorneys. Many of these employees had been in union. Unions and they were union members. For over twenty years. So if we don't pass the morale Amendment. The same thing that happened. At the offices of the U.S. attorneys will happen in the new department . That is why she offered the amendment. In committee. And why it was adopted. So I would urge my colleagues . To vote against the Shays. Amendment and then when the moment my memory is offered to support it. Generously I have a solid hard time for what. For what purposes the gentleman from county to. rise Thank you. I would like to yield to our colleague from Pennsylvania Mr Weldon two minutes . Gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for two minutes without objections or research Chairman I rise in a difficult position but. Very supportive of the Shays amendment and I'm explaining why first of all as. Most of my colleagues certainly on this side know . I'm a

    Show Full Text
  • 10:34:09 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    strong supporter of the labor movement in this country . And I make no…

    strong supporter of the labor movement in this country . And I make no bones about it . I coauthored family medical leave with Mark warden. As a compromise. Many sessions ago.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:34:19 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    And still support that legislation I opposed NAFTA. I was one of the few…

    And still support that legislation I opposed NAFTA. I was one of the few Republicans that opposed my president on trade promotion authority .

    Show Full Text
  • 10:34:25 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    opposed my president on trade promotion authority . Supported Davis Bacon.…

    opposed my president on trade promotion authority . Supported Davis Bacon. So

    Show Full Text
  • 10:34:29 AM

    MR. WELDON

    Davis Bacon. So that our building trades have the kind of support that…

    Davis Bacon. So that our building trades have the kind of support that they need . Pension

    Show Full Text
  • 10:34:31 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    have the kind of support that they need . Pension

  • 10:34:33 AM

    MR. WELDON

    . Pension reform minimum wage. You name it I've been there . And that's…

    . Pension reform minimum wage. You name it I've been there . And that's because I come from a blue collar background. The youngest of nine kids my father worked in a factory all of his life . And was a member of the Textile Workers Union and I understand that my job here is to try to strike a balance between what's best for business . And what's best for the worker. In this case I have to come down . Not just on the side of the worker . And the right to organize . But on the support of our president to deal with the difficult issue of homeland security . And as I've looked at this amendment . And I have the highest regard for Miss Morel I might add and she's an absolutely tireless advocate for the rights of workers and she knows that I have the highest respect for her. But in this case the Shays Amendment changes the Morello Amendment. By one particular issue it still calls for three levels of a process of the president. Before he can take adverse action . But he must in fact sort of. That the effect on Homeland Security must be substantial and adverse. This just can't be a whim. That is put forth by someone in the White House or agency who is opposed to labor rights or the union. The union representation of the workers . It must require our president to take decisive action . Go beyond the fact that it's merely incompatible with national security and must actually determine that the effect is substantial and adverse. And so for these reasons . Mr Chairman . I think the. SHAYS Amendment. Is a good omen. Because it does in fact. Continue to protect workers. But it also gives the president that important . Capability that I think he deserves . In the new Office of Homeland Security. Gentleman's time has expired. For what purpose the gentleman from California rested Chairman I'm pleased to yield to the. Gentle lady from Maryland Miss Marella the author of the amendment on this whole subject . Two minutes. Gentlewoman from Maryland is recognized for two minutes. Thank you I thank the gentleman fielding. And I want to recognize the fact that Mr Shays is my friend. And while I appreciate the fact that Mr Shays Amendment. Mirrors mine. Almost exactly. Unfortunately has chosen to include one extra sentence which I see is the escape clause which negates the point of my amendment.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:36:50 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    my amendment. In the amendment that I will offer. I allow the union rights…

    my amendment. In the amendment that I will offer. I allow the union rights of existing employees transferred to the new Department of Homeland Security.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:36:54 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    existing employees transferred to the new Department of Homeland Security.…

    existing employees transferred to the new Department of Homeland Security. Who have the same duties. To remain in place . The kind of grandfathers the man. Mr

    Show Full Text
  • 10:37:05 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Shays is a man that has a loophole . In that it would allow

  • 10:37:07 AM

    MRS. MORELLA

    . In that it would allow the union rights to be stripped. For ambiguous…

    . In that it would allow the union rights to be stripped. For ambiguous reasons. Presently two sections of Title five provide for administrative actions to disallow union membership. For certain classes of federal employees . Section seven one zero three allows the president to issue an executive order taking away . Title. Five labor management rights including the right to be. A union for agencies or subdivisions for national security reasons. Section seven one one two of Title five makes the bargaining unit . Inappropriate for numerous reasons including the performance of national duty. Security duties now. Because the new homeland security agency's mission . Could easily all be defined automatically as national security . I am concerned that potentially tens of thousands of employees could be prevented from being members of a union. Even though their work and responsibilities have not changed. And you know this concern is really not groundless. Because in January five hundred Department of Justice employees. Had their union rights stripped. For national security work even though their responsibilities had not changed . Many of them had belonged to the unit for twenty years. And many of them had clerical. Responsibilities. So my amendment . Seeks to set a slightly higher standard for the president so that the transferred employees who have the same responsibilities. Who already are in the union not new ones . Do not see their union rights stripped for the same. Capricious reasons of those D.O.J. employees . And unfortunately as I reiterate . Mr Shays is a man and well intentioned has that escape clause. Just going to do is unacceptable a week. And I urge defeat. Of the Shays and gentlewoman's times. The gentleman from Connecticut right now. Thank you I'd like to give myself fifteen seconds . To just point out that what we want is for the president to have the same powers in collective bargaining issues . When national security is involved . That past presidents from President Carter have had and yet we are taking the lead and adding an additional test so we are making it a little more difficult for this president . I will now yield two and a half minutes to the gentleman from New York . If you gentlemen . Is Right it's two and a half thing Mr Chairman I'd like to distinguish speaker of the house.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:39:24 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    house. In a colloquy regarding subsection say.

  • 10:39:28 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    The speaker. Clearly this. Subsection Mr Shays amendment adds an…

    The speaker. Clearly this. Subsection Mr Shays amendment adds an additional requirement on the president. Over and above what I currently appears in Section seventy one or three of Title five before. This or any other president. Would be unable to exempt an agency or subdivision . From the provisions of the Federal Labor Management Act very important right very important protection. However when added to the original Morello and I meant.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:39:53 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Morello and I meant. As the Shays member proposes . Could it create a…

    Morello and I meant. As the Shays member proposes . Could it create a methodology by which a president might circumvent the limitations on that section seventy one zero three authority. That the original

    Show Full Text
  • 10:40:01 AM

    MR. MCHUGH

    limitations on that section seventy one zero three authority. That the…

    limitations on that section seventy one zero three authority. That the original moral and I met NY commander for that would have put in place under the department . Accordingly I believe that subsection C. authority should if it ever becomes law be limited. I believe that it should be crafted in a fashion that each time the president should invoke authority under subsection C. of the penny and that meant that the exclusion would only be effective for a period of no more than twenty four months . Further I believe that written notification of substantial adverse impact must be conveyed. To both houses of Congress no less than thirty days prior to the invoking of that subsection C. thereafter. Upon any subsequent finding of substantial adverse impact upon homeland security . The president could only again upon. Written determination . Conveyed to both houses of Congress no less than thirty days prior to the expiration of that original term of the exclusion . Extend the waiver for additional periods not to exceed twenty four months each. With written determination and congressional notification for each exclusion. As pleat previously described And lastly Mr Speaker . Upon such time as the war as one conditions even out waivers are no longer extended . Each bargaining unit previously recognized should be reinstated with all of its rights is that existed the day before the original. Waiver. And I would ask with the does. Staying which speaker agree with me . That we should provide for congressional law to fit cation allowing us to consider those issues. Make those determinations . Not as under current law forever but for a determined period. And when the war on terrorism is leveled out . Or is over and one of the workers in their union organization should fully return to their previous status and relationship. Well I think the gentleman makes a good point. As repos was certainly reasonable is my assurances the bill works through its way through the conference with the other body. I'll do my best to make sure the gentleman's proposal is not only considered carefully by the Congress and both sides but. We will take a very very extraordinary methods and work. To make sure that this type of. Concept is incorporated in the bill. It could form the basis I think for an excellent conference agreement I thank the gentleman. I thanked the speaker for assurance and I commend him his morale and Mr Shays all the people who worked so hard on this for their leadership.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:42:31 AM

    THE SPEAKER

    and Mr Shays all the people who worked so hard on this for their…

    and Mr Shays all the people who worked so hard on this for their leadership. Gentleman's time is expired. For what purposes gentleman from California right Mr Chairman I want to yield to one minute to the gentleman from Texas Mr Graves who has personal experience on this subject that I think members ought to know about how much time . One minute. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for one moment . Thank you thank you it's speaker and I thank the gentleman for yielding. I want to. Today offer personal experience.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:43:02 AM

    MR. MCHUGH

    Back in one nine hundred sixty nine when I first joined the Border Patrol…

    Back in one nine hundred sixty nine when I first joined the Border Patrol as a young officer. Freshly out of the military. After spending thirteen months in Vietnam. I went to a station. Of

    Show Full Text
  • 10:43:12 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    which I was one of only three Latinos and had not been for the fact that I…

    which I was one of only three Latinos and had not been for the fact that I was able to join the Border Patrol union. I

    Show Full Text
  • 10:43:15 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    been for the fact that I was able to join the Border Patrol union. I would…

    been for the fact that I was able to join the Border Patrol union. I would not have had a career in the Border Patrol for twenty six and a half years . Union

    Show Full Text
  • 10:43:24 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    years . Union

  • 10:43:25 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    . Union

  • 10:43:26 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    protection is vital and important for. Specifically for minorities but for…

    protection is vital and important for. Specifically for minorities but for all employees.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:43:30 AM

    MR. REYES

    minorities but for all employees. To somehow draw the conclusion that to…

    minorities but for all employees. To somehow draw the conclusion that to be able to have bargaining rights and . That would be contrary to this nation's national security. Is wrong. I intend to oppose the Shays. Amendment . And I intend to oppose anything. That would put in jeopardy . The kinds of rights. That gave me the opportunity to serve this country proudly in the United States Border Patrol. Both as an agent . Ultimately retiring. As a chief so I've been on both sides. I would rather have our employees. Have the protection . And have to deal with a problem employee. As a responsibility of achieve. Then to time the job Jackson's lawyers to no protections. I thank the gentleman from real time the gentleman has expired the gentleman from Connecticut . Thank you Mr. Mr Chairman I yield myself fifteen seconds to just respond to the gentleman. We are not trying to do anything with collective bargaining that doesn't exist. And present law in fact or even restricting in some ways . The power of the present. Collective bargaining still exists but like with Jimmy Carter all the way down. If there is a national security issue the president has the right to take action. Who saves time. Mr chance Mr Chairman I'm reserving the time jumping reserves of various wire how much time there is and it's . The

    Show Full Text
  • 10:44:46 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    reserves of various wire how much time there is and it's . The

  • 10:44:50 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    . The gentleman from California has four minutes . Gentlemen from…

    . The gentleman from California has four minutes . Gentlemen from Connecticut has two and a half minutes. Gentlemen from going to the gentleman from Connecticut have another speaker other than himself. That . Mr Chairman I inquired of the chaired gentleman of Connecticut . Whether he has another speaker other than himself.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:45:18 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    himself. I have on this department a close eye my make a comment after the…

    himself. I have on this department a close eye my make a comment after the nest. Next

    Show Full Text
  • 10:45:20 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    on this department a close eye my make a comment after the nest. Next

  • 10:45:23 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    after the nest. Next

  • 10:45:24 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    speaker but between me Mr Portman that. I

  • 10:45:27 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    that. I yield to three men. This is the gentleman from Maryland. Mr Hoyer.…

    that. I yield to three men. This is the gentleman from Maryland. Mr Hoyer. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized for three minutes .

    Show Full Text
  • 10:45:39 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    Mr Speaker . And my colleagues. If this were a campaign finance reform .…

    Mr Speaker . And my colleagues. If this were a campaign finance reform . The gentleman from Connecticut.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:45:55 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    Would have a sheet in your hands . Saying this amendment . Is a poison…

    Would have a sheet in your hands . Saying this amendment . Is a poison pill .

    Show Full Text
  • 10:46:03 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    Designed to undermine the morale of.

  • 10:46:07 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Amendment. This amendment . Is a wolf in sheep's clothing . It tries to…

    Amendment. This amendment . Is a wolf in sheep's clothing . It tries to send a reassuring message to federal employees that their rights will be protected. And their collective bargaining rights retain. I want to tell.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:46:21 AM

    MR. HOYER

    Our federal employees. Don't you believe it. This language provides the…

    Our federal employees. Don't you believe it. This language provides the president with a trap door . To deny union representation to anyone in this department . If he determines that it would have a substantial adverse impact on the department's ability to protect homeland security in general . That is the law . Why add this to provide the trapdoor to the morale Amendment. When the president removed collective bargaining rights . Of some five hundred Department of Justice employees. Earlier this year. He said. It was in the name of national security . Yet most of those employees work. In clerical jobs. And have been union members. For over twenty years. Last month ladies and gentlemen of this house. I had the opportunity to question the deputy director of the Office of Personnel Management . And I asked him. In the last twenty years . In the last fifty years. Can you cite me . One or two or three instances where union membership ever . In any instance. At any time. Adversely affected national security. I got back a two page letter with. Eleven pages of attachments. It does not cite one single incident where union membership . Had any adverse effect on collective bargaining. This is a windmill that the Republicans are tilting at because they do not believe in collective bargaining. That is their right . But don't be fooled. This amendment . Undermines and is designed to undermine I tell my friend from Connecticut . Like a poison pill . The fact of the morale Amendment. Do not tell my federal employees . Do not tell Mrs Marella that this is some but nine. Offering simply to make it a little better and to give the president. A little more flexibility. I say to my colleagues. If you read the law. The president has that ability . Now. And the O.P.M.. Sent me a leavened pages of attachment. Citing instances where every president . Admittedly in small instances because this is not a problem. Made such exemptions. My friends. And my friends on the Republican side of the aisle. Give Mrs Morello a fair shot. Don't play in legislative games whether this vote for Shays amendment down. And then vote for him and the morale Amendment R. I yield back the balance of my time. Mr and Mr Chairman I yield myself thirty seconds only to recognize two chairmen this isn't campaign finance reform it's national security. We want to present a united states to have the same power as previous presidents have had for national security. This is national security. What the morale and then meant. In my judgment is is a poison. Pill to his ability to govern this country under national security . Unless you

    Show Full Text
  • 10:49:34 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    have the safety valve that we have put in the well my friend yield on that…

    have the safety valve that we have put in the well my friend yield on that issue back.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:49:36 AM

    MR. HOYER

    the well my friend yield on that issue back. Currently not to the general…

    the well my friend yield on that issue back. Currently not to the general gentleman from Maryland.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:49:40 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    to the general gentleman from Maryland.

  • 10:49:42 AM

    MR. HOYER

    gentleman from Maryland.

  • 10:49:45 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    Thirty second I regret that my friend I spoke to did not yield. As I

  • 10:49:47 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    spoke to did not yield. As I

  • 10:49:49 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    told you I have eleven pages of attachment here from the Office of…

    told you I have eleven pages of attachment here from the Office of Personnel Management . Where presidents. Under existing authority. That is not adversely affected . Have that ability . No one in this House wants to adversely affect. National security. The point that I'm making is that the Office of Personnel Management . In direct response to my question . Cannot cite

    Show Full Text
  • 10:50:12 AM

    MR. HOYER

    a single incident. Not one in the history of this country . Or at least…

    a single incident. Not one in the history of this country . Or at least since

    Show Full Text
  • 10:50:17 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    . Or at least since we've had collected bargaining for federal employees.…

    . Or at least since we've had collected bargaining for federal employees. Where national security is adversely affected . Both

    Show Full Text
  • 10:50:22 AM

    MR. HOYER

    adversely affected . Both from Connecticut . Thank you Mr Chairman I yield…

    adversely affected . Both from Connecticut . Thank you Mr Chairman I yield myself fifteen seconds to the now before nine eleven we couldn't cite. Certain instances of terrorist activity. The bottom line is Miss morale I would restrict the presence to believe under national security. To take action. We are qualifying her restriction. Gentleman's time has expired. Through six time . But you can agree to me is the gentleman's time all. The gentleman from California has thirty seconds right we reserve the right to close the gentleman from Connecticut has the right to oppose the gentleman from California is right Mr Chairman and my colleagues.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:50:58 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    to oppose the gentleman from California is right Mr Chairman and my…

    to oppose the gentleman from California is right Mr Chairman and my colleagues.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:51:01 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    to oppose the gentleman from California is right Mr Chairman and my…

    to oppose the gentleman from California is right Mr Chairman and my colleagues. If Mr Shays . And some Republicans don't like the Morello. Amendment they should just voted against it. They shouldn't engage in this kind of trick . To put in what appears to be the Morello. Amendment

    Show Full Text
  • 10:51:19 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Morello. Amendment but then to negate it . If they were being honest about…

    Morello. Amendment but then to negate it . If they were being honest about the matter. They would simply oppose the. Amendment as Mr Shays did . And the governor.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:51:27 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    did . And the governor. Reform Committee.

  • 10:51:30 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    But a majority in that committee supported the Morello Amendment . I would…

    But a majority in that committee supported the Morello Amendment . I would urge the

    Show Full Text
  • 10:51:33 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    . I would urge the House to adopt the amendment and to defeat the Shays…

    . I would urge the House to adopt the amendment and to defeat the Shays Amendment. Because what

    Show Full Text
  • 10:51:37 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    the Shays Amendment. Because what it does. Is negate the morale of this…

    the Shays Amendment. Because what it does. Is negate the morale of this times of spar.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:51:41 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    morale of this times of spar. The gentleman from Connecticut is chairman…

    morale of this times of spar. The gentleman from Connecticut is chairman Chairman I yield the balance of our time to close to Mr Portman. The gentleman who is from Ohio is recognized for a minute. And three quarters. I thank you John I thank my friend from Connecticut. Less gentle Mrs Morello cares as deeply about national security as any member of this chamber and has been a pleasure to work with her on those we were able to come together but we try. They Shays Amendment is identical to the amendment. And by the way Mrs Meller will have the updated offer her Amendment. It's. It's

    Show Full Text
  • 10:52:17 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    been specified under the rule it's a special rule under the rule I'm glad…

    been specified under the rule it's a special rule under the rule I'm glad she has that right.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:52:20 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    she has that right. But Mr Shays. Has one additional feature . And…

    she has that right. But Mr Shays. Has one additional feature . And extremely

    Show Full Text
  • 10:52:25 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    important and limited. Safety valve. Which would allow the president to…

    important and limited. Safety valve. Which would allow the president to use the provisions of existing law . To exempt an agency or subdivision from collective bargaining. When

    Show Full Text
  • 10:52:32 AM

    MR. PORTMAN

    subdivision from collective bargaining. When he determines in writing that…

    subdivision from collective bargaining. When he determines in writing that it has an adverse. And significant impact on homeland security. That's a tougher standard. On top of the already existing standard. Than any other agency of government the employees in this new department . Will have more protections. Than the employees of. Any other department. Of the federal government . Here to time when we're trying to address this dangerous. New threat of terrorism. Would it be ironic if we took away. Existing. National security protection. That the president. Can employ through his waiver for the new Department of Homeland Security. In this amendment. I believe that we have struck a sensible compromise between doing nothing and adopting the amendment . Of the gentle lady from Maryland. It makes it harder for the president to exempt. Anyone that existing law would permit but it also has this important escape route to make sure that he can deal with homeland security emergencies and critical situations. If necessary . And that protection of bargaining rights for workers. Will not imperil the protection of the physical safety and security of all of us as Americans. I urge the yes vote on Mr Shays Amendment. I think it's a responsible. And correct compromise. I urge a no vote. On the Marella Amendment gentleman's time has expired all time is expired . The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Connecticut. Those in favor will say aye those opposed say no in the opinion of the chair the eyes have it. The amendment is agreed as to Chairman. The gentleman from California I ask for the days and days on that to vote in the pending that I make a point of order the court was not present . The chair will confort quorum. Does the gentleman withdraw his point of order I would my point of order the corpsman asked for the yesterdays the chair would conferee court and vote those in support of the request for recorded vote will rise and be counted . A

    Show Full Text
  • 10:54:24 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    support of the request for recorded vote will rise and be counted . A…

    support of the request for recorded vote will rise and be counted . A sufficient number having risen a recorded vote. Is ordered those in favor of the amendment will vote aye those opposed will vote no. Members will record their votes by electronic device this will be a fifteen minute vote.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:54:42 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    vote.

  • 10:54:48 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    The. SHAYS Amendment expands the president's ability to exclude in special…

    The. SHAYS Amendment expands the president's ability to exclude in special circumstances .

    Show Full Text
  • 10:54:56 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    . Homeland Security intelligence personnel from workers' rights…

    . Homeland Security intelligence personnel from workers' rights protections.

    Show Full Text
  • 10:54:59 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    from workers' rights protections. Now the president. President Bush must…

    from workers' rights protections. Now the president. President Bush must certify in writing that without the exclusion there would be a substantial impact on security. The amendment again is offered by Connecticut. Republican Christopher Shays . The house now voting on the amendment. After debate. And while we're watching that vote we're going to the other side of the Capitol to the Senate side for a news conference with the Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott of Mississippi . And right. Now here is Senator Lott live here on C.-SPAN. Back to my own experiences as a shipyard worker but for a while he was a small businessman a furniture store. And I always remember how hard I found it to understand why people would buy furniture on credit . Use it and not pay for it you know when you buy things in the fan thing to do is to pay for it. And then they got it there's got to and people should be able to duck their responsibilities under the cover of bankruptcy. At any level of income. That's one reason by the way the top level I . I didn't like these a homestead exemption of a million or seven hundred fifty thousand five hundred thousand. I thought that was outlandish and I voted repeal to do. Repeatedly for the coal amendment which had a very low . Essential homestead it's just you know. It's just fundamental. If you. You know spend money you make commitments . On your credit. You. You have a responsibility to pay for it and it has the bankruptcy laws I watched it very closely. Going back all the way back to my years in law school when I practiced law on working to make rough the laws in the past in helping develop the legislation that. Put the bankruptcy courts in place. When we made it too easy for people to view. The bankruptcy law. This will help straighten that out . Yes or. Possible. Some politicians are worried more about Russians and giving them. This their take on that we got the accounting reform bill done . I thought that was good work over the past two weeks I've supported it. And I think that is a power city of action. Dealing with the overall atmosphere . It's not as huge as some people made it out to be. Including some the local media . But it's it. It maybe it'll help. They'll be in the. You sure they'll be an independent board to review these accounting principles and we're going to have some division between of auditing and consulting and we did raise or clarified when it would be you know . A crime to shred documents and we raised the penalties for certain criminal acts. But most of what happened in recent days what we've been saying. Violated current laws . And there are a lot of people now that are taking a look at how their accounting is done . All of us the fourteen C.E.O.'s all over America going to sign a piece of paper saying our reporting is accurate our audit thing here is accurate. I'd be pretty nervous of our having to sign one of those tell you the truth because you know most C.E.O.'s most members of Congress are not accountants and so you're basically attesting that the accounting advice you got is accurate . But that is a part of the process too. There may be other. You know . Things come to light . Would people now want a company takes a look at their county principles it's almost like they did some wrong. A lot of what people are now being questioned about . Was generally accepted commonsense . Accounting Principles. Maybe in retrospect. Not the best way to do it. And maybe not the way to do it in the future. But now it's almost lift it like if you did somebody look at it what you don't know if you're look at what you've done . There's some indication you done things wrong. I think everybody is working to make sure their accounting is their order to is done carefully and there's nobody in the in in the country right now that wants. Accounting Principles and. And you know corporate executive conduct. To be confidence to be reinstated in both of those more than the corporate executives themselves. But I think that the mending process is underway . But the feeding frenzy is also still under way. And hopefully that will begin to fade away. As necessary actions are taken over the next few weeks. Can you talk for a moment about the politics of the prescription drug issue as it's unfolded. The last two weeks. I mean . If this was scripted for failure. How does that help the Democrats. I think it hurts the Democrats and that's why I sent her to the actual And. A lot of other Democrats are scrambling to try to figure out all of this didn't work like we had a plan. We thought we could call it up in a way that nothing would pass and blame the Republicans . Pretty hard to do when Republicans had not one not two but three . Alternative. Good proposals . And what I think really shocked some people was the Haydel engine plan actually got fifty one votes for it and a bipartisan vote . And it's also pretty hard to say . All the Republicans did it when the Democrats in charge. That might sell when we're in charge was very hard to say they caused this problem or they didn't provide enough votes when when when in fact they have the votes . So they're. They're concerned that this didn't work out like they planned and . They're even being criticized by their. Wholly owned subsidiary the A.A.R.P. . Saying wait a minute. You can't tell us is this is your highest priority and then you're going to walk away and leave it. So that's why there's all this burning around. But it's very hard to do. And this is legitimate. You've got people that want more money . You got people think in these targeted you've got people can just difference is. Over the livery system . One that is sort of a competition . To and choice for the constituents of for consumers. You know private sector no. Government do it all and all underlying all this is the base building what drug pricing and patents and importation. So this. This is . I been to so many meetings with the Finance Committee over the past few years. Where we sat down and went over the details of how you do these things this is complicated stuff . And yet it's so employ. To the people that need the help . It is very complicated and . That's why I have objected so . You know. You know regularly about the way it was done . The Finance Committee. Has men and women. On both sides of the aisle that work with a sort of thing all the time. We have a committee staff that. Have expertise . And how we should do these things . And how not to do . The Finance Committee was not allowed to act . Because twelve of the twenty one members of the Finance Committee would have voted for the Trop partisan bill. And so Senator Daschle Toles of the Baucus. Don't mark it up. Now we've got this complicated issue on the floor. But nobody having gotten more than fifty one of fifty two votes. Either any package and sixty votes are part one because it didn't come through financial. And two because the Senate didn't have a budget committee. And you're restricted to the three hundred billion dollars in the current law to address this problem. Now you have senators running down the hall together . Meeting in my office the next office on the floor. This approach that approach. It's carried me to death. That when you start writing a bill from from. You know. Sidesaddle and . Maybe maybe you know . Something will evolve. I'm sort of nationalist said we'll just leave it hanging in there while we continue to work on it just like next week. We've got sixty seventy nominations we've got to confirm. Probably at least twelve to fifteen of world. Require recorded votes. We've got to do the Defense Appropriations Bill . We've got the bankruptcy conference report . The . Which will take. Certainly a little time we've got the trade. They'll conference report. We hope to get one more appropriations bill . And in the middle of all that. We're going to. Stick a debate and a vote on a conclusion on one prescription drug. I don't see how you do it. It's like out of sorts so at that they will sometime the leadership. Is like the little boy at their dessert table. That has a so big of one it all. And he can't consume it all. It's just not possible to do all this . In four days. And that's what we're looking at four days next week. It's . Well I won I meant to mention that while ago the pending one out there is the McConnell. Medical malpractise reform Amendment . This is a big issue. There's no question that . Medical malpractise lawsuits from those lawsuits are out of control . They're driving our doctors out of states. Out of the practice. We have a serious problem in my own state and I know there's a huge problem in the bottom there. And there is I guess is that with trauma doctors that are closing down trauma centers in my state obstetricians. Are getting out of the delivery of babies . Where I have a large chunk of my state now where there are like. I don't know. Forty four thousand childbearing age women. Where there's no O.B. G.Y.N. practice nops obstetrician and. We have. Because that and some other leave in Mississippi going to lose out of a cause or lose out they have a cap on punitive damages . We don't have a cap . We're hoping to have a special session of our state legislature on tort reform because it's such a huge problem. We need medical malpractise reform the president was in North Carolina yesterday. Calling for this to be done and. Certainly that is one of the things that drives up the cost of health care in America. And drugs. And my state has a huge problem of frivolous lawsuits. And damages being returned in the multi millions. For. Very questionable actions. Thirty forty five thirty five million forty million. Juries are just completely out of control. And no restraint. So it's not just about my state this this is national. But a lot of states a lot of doctors can't afford the insurance or having their insurance canceled. And so that's one thing is pending . There also once Senator Rockefeller and others. Diverted from prescription drugs and went off to another subject. Medicaid additions. It opened. The whole bill up to all kinds of extraneous amendments. Once you breach that dam it's open and. There is if we builder's possibility that the A partial birth abortion amendment to would be offered to the bill that passed the House this week . So the. The and that the whole bill right now is in park. Let's see what happened here is homeland security on the part of the second to possibly finish the bill pulling security. I don't know quite That's one thing I did even mention Senator Daschle had indicated to the president as that we would finish homeland security before we go home for August recess. I think we should. I think we should even stay here over the weekend or. Into the next week if that's what it takes. Because we need to get this done so we'll have time to have a conference . Of working all of the August recess . And I'd still like for us to be able to meet the September eleventh goal of completing that . That bill. But at a very minimum. Sense . There's a threat of a filibuster. From Senator Byrd charter Hollings and perhaps others . He had a very minimum should call it up our culture on the motion to proceed . So that . That is the issue we've gotten through that process which eats up to the. He's and are ready to go on the bill itself. On the substance. The minute we return . And. But in answer your question. I think that the bill could be done in a week. We're going to have some amendments will Mike our best case . And then we'll . You know after that it'll move on to conference and in conference they will correct the problems or the present will be delayed. And we'll have to start all over again . But I still believe in the end will come up with a bill that's going to be a good one that will help Homeland Security the president. Hopefully will you know. Be able to sign it. But the problem is. It would take at least four. Probably four concentrated days. We don't have four concentrated they for that alone. If we're going to do conference reports the defense appropriations bill . Judicial nominations know the nominations on Fortunately the clock has run out. OK . I got very much Senator. Minority Leader Trent Lott of Mississippi . News conference on the U.S. Senate side of the Capitol this morning we're going to bring you the room. The beginning of this a press conference later on today during a future vote on the House floor again . Right now the House voting on an amendment to the Homeland Security Department. Bill the Shays Amendment. Offered by Connecticut Republican Christopher Shays. Expands the president's ability to exclude some homeland security intelligence personnel from workers' rights protections in special circumstances . The president under the amendment must certify in writing that without the exclusion . There would be a substantial impact on security and right now the. The house is there giving members time to get to the floor and vote on this amendment so we should. We should have a result a very very shortly so let's go back to the House floor . The eyes are to twenty nine The nays are two A one the much the amendment. Is agreed to in order to consider Amendment. Eighteen printed in the House report one zero seven six fifteen for what purpose. It from Maryland arise. Thank you. This speaker I have. I have and then the desk clerk will designate the amendment. Amendment Number eighteen printed in House report number one hundred seven six fifteen .

    Show Full Text
  • 11:17:50 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    printed in House report number one hundred seven six fifteen . Offered by…

    printed in House report number one hundred seven six fifteen . Offered by Mrs Merola of Maryland. Pursuant to the house rose . Resolution.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:18:19 AM

    MRS. MORELLA

    all members please take their conversations off the floor .

  • 11:18:23 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    all members please take their conversations off the floor .

  • 11:18:25 AM

    THE CLERK

    off the floor .

  • 11:18:33 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    And it.

  • 11:18:46 AM

    MS. MORELLA

    Well the members in the minority in the aisle please take the conversation…

    Well the members in the minority in the aisle please take the conversation off the floor please.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:18:52 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    aisle please take the conversation off the floor please. Americans…

    aisle please take the conversation off the floor please. Americans recognize thank you very much Mr Speaker . This is Speaker. I am going to offer this amendment despite the fact that. SHAYS Amendment. Did pass . Because I want to point out and I hope that this house will concur. What the government regenerate over me and what members please take their.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:19:26 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    and what members please take their. Conversations off the floor and take…

    and what members please take their. Conversations off the floor and take their conversations off the floor. Gentlewoman deserves to be heard John women's right thank you Mr Speaker.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:19:46 AM

    MS. MORELLA

    John women's right thank you Mr Speaker. I'm going to offer this…

    John women's right thank you Mr Speaker. I'm going to offer this amendment. Despite the fact that the Shays Amendment did pass . Because I believe the integrity of the Government Reform Committee . Is important enough . So that what they voted on in the full committee .

    Show Full Text
  • 11:20:03 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Should be. What is sent over to the conferees. And what ultimately will…

    Should be. What is sent over to the conferees. And what ultimately will become law. The minute that I'm offering today is with Congressman Danny Davis who is the ranking member of the civil service. Subcommittee and. Very much a supporter of federal employees. What the amendment does is simply aims to protect the union rights.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:20:24 AM

    MS. MORELLA

    does is simply aims to protect the union rights. Of existing employees…

    does is simply aims to protect the union rights. Of existing employees transferred to the new Department of Homeland Security. Who had the same duties. I want to point out at the onset . That the language of my imam it is similar to language that was included . And Congressman Thornberry original. Homeland Security Bill . And the language that was agreed to on a bipartisan basis . By the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee . Let me just say. One big agency. Twenty two other agencies become part of homeland security. Therefore everything under it is called security. Therefore it off as an opportunity for the trailer away . Saying that some union rights will be taken away from some people . One hundred seventy thousand employees would be part of that. Only fifty thousand employees who already belong to unions . Whose duties have not change. Would be able to continue with the functions of their of their unions and collective bargaining rights that solve is grandfathering those people and . Why do we need it. Already it has been mentioned as we discussed. The fact that . In January. Five hundred employees of Department of Justice lost their collective bargaining rights. They lost their rights even though many of them were clerical. And many of them had been parts of a union for over twenty years . I do want to say that this house . Really should be flecked at a time when we have. Commission number two . When we have Partnership for Public Service went to thirty one percent of our workforce to eligible to retire in five years when seventy one percent of the executives or those are eligible to retire in five years and we're trying to recruit and retain the fact that trust is. Is is so very important so despite the fact that the. Amendment passed that they passed tomorrow or amendment. So we can also send on the intent of the Government Reform Committee as well as this Congress. And I would now. I would now . Do you want to. I would now yield. I'm seeking my own. To two minutes to. Mr DAVIS . Gentleman from Illinois is recognized for two minutes . Thank you very much Mr Chairman Chairman I'm pleased to join with. Representative Mirella . And co-sponsor and. This amendment . And rise and support . The Morello Amendment provides that employees who have elected unions to represent intellect of bargain before being transferred into the Department of Homeland Security . Should not lose their representation right. Essentially the Morello Amendment. Is a

    Show Full Text
  • 11:23:18 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    grandfather clause . All it really say's is protect those individuals who…

    grandfather clause . All it really say's is protect those individuals who have collective bargaining rights .

    Show Full Text
  • 11:23:23 AM

    MR. DAVIS

    individuals who have collective bargaining rights . And are currently…

    individuals who have collective bargaining rights . And are currently union members. Now there are some people who suggest that this is going to undercut the presidents authority . Absolutely not. It only deals with those individuals who are currently union members. And it also provides enough flexibility . That if individuals work assignments change significantly . Then the president could in fact. Move them around . We also know that that that the president issued an executive order barring union representation in the U.S. attorney's office . Individuals who were doing clerical work were denied the opportunity to be unionized and to have the representation. As a matter of fact we believe in a strong presidency. We believe that the flexibility ought to be there. But we also believe that these are hard. One rights. That people have struggled to achieve. For years and years and years . They should not be diminished. They should not be taken away. And so I simply. Urge my colleagues . To stand with the American people who believe in civil service protection . Who believe in the rights of the individuals that work. Stand time is John who has a right Ironman. Now you know back gentleman's time is expired. It claims time gentlemen . The gentleman from California I ask unanimous consent and. As the ranking Democrat on the Government Reform Committee to manage their time on this . It's a it's a German A is the gentleman from Ohio speaking time in opposition. Exactly from a rising opposition to the memo. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized as a member of the Select Committee.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:25:32 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    of the Select Committee. I thank the chair and I your myself his time as I…

    of the Select Committee. I thank the chair and I your myself his time as I may consume . First of all we've already had a good debate on this issue . In the context of a Shays Amendment I appreciate the fact that Mrs Morel it comes at us in good faith and as I said earlier.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:25:45 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    said earlier. Nobody in this chamber cares more about national security we…

    said earlier. Nobody in this chamber cares more about national security we do differ on this issue. Mrs Morel a talk a lot about the government form committee and what the Government Reform Committee thinks about this I think it's only appropriate Mr Chairman. To

    Show Full Text
  • 11:25:56 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Chairman. To yield two and a half minutes to the chairman of the…

    Chairman. To yield two and a half minutes to the chairman of the government form Committee.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:26:00 AM

    MR. PORTMAN

    Mr Burton . I thank the gentleman for yielding generous and rolling eyes…

    Mr Burton . I thank the gentleman for yielding generous and rolling eyes for two and a half minutes. First of

    Show Full Text
  • 11:26:04 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    rolling eyes for two and a half minutes. First of all let me just say that…

    rolling eyes for two and a half minutes. First of all let me just say that . I can't seem as well because Mr Waxman is there but.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:26:10 AM

    MR. PORTMAN

    I have very high regard for Miss Marella. She's a very fine member of our…

    I have very high regard for Miss Marella. She's a very fine member of our committee as a matter of fact I admire so much we made her a subcommittee chairman. But we have a strong disagreement on this issue. We're at war. And we're talking about national security . And there's really no evidence that we have a problem . In fact . This very issue has been used very sparingly.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:26:37 AM

    MR. BURTON

    By past presidents both Republican and Democrat and they've never never…

    By past presidents both Republican and Democrat and they've never never abused the privilege .

    Show Full Text
  • 11:26:39 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    never never abused the privilege .

  • 11:26:44 AM

    MR. BURTON

    . Secondly as I said we're in a war . And the Homeland Security Department…

    . Secondly as I said we're in a war . And the Homeland Security Department . Is a very very important part of the president's strategy . And of dealing with that war . And this amendment . Would give the president . Less authority over the defense of America the new Homeland Security Department . Less authority than he has over any other department of government . Now why. Why would we do that. Why would we give the president less authority over the security of America the Homeland Security depart. Then he has over any other department . And makes no sense. And regarding this vote. This was one of the most controversy of votes we had before our committee . It came right down to the last vote. It passed by one vote and when it went to the select committee the leadership committee . That issue was reversed by one vote so this is a very very difficult issue for us to deal with and that's why we supported the Shays. Amendment . Because the Shays Amendment. Is an amendment we think that deals with the subject very well. And finally let me just say. President Bush is not an anti-union president. He cares about organized labor. And he will work with organized labor. So let's not give the president less authority. Than he already has over every other agency. In dealing with the security of this nation. It makes absolutely no sense and I hope you'll all vote against the middle Amendment. Now because she's not a lovely lady. Because it's the wrong thing to do. Joan's time is expired . Gentlewoman from Maryland. Thank you. I would now like to not like to you know two minutes to. Mr Waxman. Who's the ranking member of the full Government Reform Committee. Gentleman from California is recognized for two minutes . I think the gentle lady. For yielding to me there in the close of the last. Amendment. Mr Portman said that Mr Mellow was being treated fairly because she could offer her. Amendment. Now that is absolutely wrong. She is a senior member of Congress. She is the author of an amendment that passed in the committee on a bipartisan basis.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:28:51 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    basis. And she is being demeaned by that previous Amendment. That

  • 11:28:54 AM

    MS. MORELLA

    by that previous Amendment. That makes the vote on this amendment…

    by that previous Amendment. That makes the vote on this amendment completely meaningless and I support the Morello Amendment . You can vote for you can vote for or against it . It doesn't make

    Show Full Text
  • 11:29:02 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . It doesn't make any difference because even if it passed . The previous

  • 11:29:05 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    . The previous Amendment negates it. Now I just think that is an…

    . The previous Amendment negates it. Now I just think that is an incredible way to treat somebody in your own party. After all. She gave. Republicans the votes to organize the house . And what do they do they turn around and deny her. A fair opportunity . To offer her Amendment. And to try to convince members to support it. And to make it the House position. Now if we adopt a morel amendment it'll be the House position . But we've already adopted another amendment that says . The Morello Amendment. Is not going to be the House position. I think that this is a wrong way . On the process. To treat this matter. And I think it's an unfair way to treat . Miss Marella. And I I'm going to support them or elemental I asked for the time so we can control it. But we wouldn't even. You know weren't even given that courtesy . This is partisanship . In the sneakiest. Meanest narrowest way . And not to me. But to one of their own members. I commend Midsomer. She offered the amendment Committee. She argued for her arguments prevailed . And she won on a bipartisan basis . I'm going to vote for her Amendment. I urge other members to vote for it but we also time has expired meaningless. Gentleman's time has expired the gentleman from Ohio is regular myself sometimes may consume just gentlemen but really nice Mr Chairman I I wholeheartedly agree with you nor for Mrs Morel up my friend from California and appreciate it. She's a fine member and as I said earlier no one cares more about national security than her . I would just make the point very clearly that . Notwithstanding the fact that normally she would not be able to offer. The same amendment to the same section of the bill. This rule was drafted in a way to permit that and I think it's appropriate . And she does have the right to offer a member today and I'm glad she does . I would not like to yield. Two minutes . To another colleague on the government form committee of Mrs Morel as. Mr Davis of Virginia

    Show Full Text
  • 11:31:04 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    form committee of Mrs Morel as. Mr Davis of Virginia .

  • 11:31:07 AM

    MR. WAXMAN

    Gentleman from Virginia is recognized. To thank you

  • 11:31:08 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    is recognized. To thank you for yielding let me just add. This is

  • 11:31:11 AM

    MR. PORTMAN

    add. This is not the end of the legislation. This bill goes to conference…

    add. This is not the end of the legislation. This bill goes to conference . House vote on this is important in terms of. The message it says to conferees. And I think to dispel it is not appropriate . I also commend. My colleague for her work and her courage in standing up to leadership on this particular issue as she's done so many times during her career . And like her I have a number of federal employees and union members in my congressional district . And I believe strongly that the traditional federal workforce protections. Need

    Show Full Text
  • 11:31:41 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    protections. Need to be applied. And extended to federal employees. As…

    protections. Need to be applied. And extended to federal employees. As they are

    Show Full Text
  • 11:31:45 AM

    MR. DAVIS

    transition into the new Department of Homeland. Security But I differ with…

    transition into the new Department of Homeland. Security But I differ with her on this amendment for this reason. The underlying. Legislation. Gives the employees . The traditional rights they would enjoy in being able to transfer from one agency. To this new agency . Mrs Morales Amendment gives them. Additional rights that they currently . Don't enjoy under federal law . And it gives them. Additional rights at a time when we are at war with global terrorists. Where the president has come to us saying. This is the organization he needs to be able to win the war on global terrorism . And we're taking away. The president's flexibility to deploy people that he enjoys. In the Department of Defense . In the F.B.I. in the CIA. And every other federal agency . So they're treated under this. The same way as they are in those other agencies that help us fight wars . And if this amendment passes It basically creates a two tier system . And a lot of potential for inequities. For example in a time of crisis. The president would not be able to treat . Department of Justice. CIA in the same manner as he treats. Employees at the Department of Homeland Security. That doesn't make any sense . The CHAIRMAN. Section seventy one hundred three B. of Title five represents a finely crafted balance between the rights of poise and the duty of the president to act in exceptional times . In exceptional times. Rarely used in exceptional times. With exceptional action. We are at war now. And certainly these are exceptional times in my view. We should knacker legislation to give our commander in chief the tools the enemy Symes if we are in war on terrorists. Who seeks time to take him in from Maryland thank you Mr Speaker I yield myself his time as I may consume what I just want to make a brief statement I want to thank Mr Waxman for what he had said . But I want to disagree with him in money issue because this is not meaningless . Because if we pass this amendment. Then this also indicates the intent of the house the intent of the committee . And the battle has just begun . And I will not relent until we do what is best for our federal employees . I now would be happy to yield . One minute

    Show Full Text
  • 11:33:58 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    to. Mr Moran. The gentleman from. The gentleman from Virginia is…

    to. Mr Moran. The gentleman from. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for one minute.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:34:03 AM

    MRS. MORELLA

    is recognized for one minute. Mr Chairman Congressman acted civil service…

    is recognized for one minute. Mr Chairman Congressman acted civil service protections and collective bargaining rights so that they could attract the very best. To government service . As we stand together to fight terrorism we should also stand together . For the rights and well being of those people who are on the front lines of that fight . It's no secret that . One of the federal government's biggest challenges is recruiting and retaining high and. Highly qualified workers. Within three short years . The federal government will face a mass retirement of federal employees . Given the

    Show Full Text
  • 11:34:35 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    a mass retirement of federal employees . Given the composition of the…

    a mass retirement of federal employees . Given the composition of the workforce. There are

    Show Full Text
  • 11:34:39 AM

    MR. MORAN

    workforce. There are this is a given . I support the Morello Amendment.…

    workforce. There are this is a given . I support the Morello Amendment. Because it will ensure that federal employees the new Department of Homeland Security will retain their rights to belong to unions . This provision would guarantee that the fifty thousand employees only about twenty five percent of those expected to be transferred to the new department . And who are currently under collective bargaining agreements. Retain their union representation. Let's be clear that this amendment would apply only to those who currently have collective bargaining rights. And what a no way affect those employees who are not currently members of unions and need to establish this new department should not a gentleman as I was expelled. Attempt to strips federal servants of the fundamental civil service protection. And collective bargaining rights that a majority of the ice time Mr Chairman . The gentleman from our Chairman could you give us a division of time. Please. The gentleman from Ohio has five minutes remaining . And the gentlewoman from Maryland . Has one and a half minutes remaining. We will have a couple speakers and if that's OK you have the right to close of course of I would now like to yield. If I could . One minute . To the distinguished chairman of the civil service. Subcommittee of the government form Committee . Mr Weldon of Florida.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:35:51 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    How much time does the gentleman yield. In one minute the gentleman is…

    How much time does the gentleman yield. In one minute the gentleman is recognized for one minute.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:35:56 AM

    MR. MORAN

    for one minute.

  • 11:35:57 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    I thank the gentleman for yielding and I rise in opposition to the gentle…

    I thank the gentleman for yielding and I rise in opposition to the gentle lady's Amendment.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:35:59 AM

    MR. PORTMAN

    the gentleman for yielding and I rise in opposition to the gentle lady's…

    the gentleman for yielding and I rise in opposition to the gentle lady's Amendment.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:36:02 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    and I rise in opposition to the gentle lady's Amendment. I think it's…

    and I rise in opposition to the gentle lady's Amendment. I think it's going to be very very important as we move through the process of consolidating all these agencies together into one unified.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:36:12 AM

    MR. PORTMAN

    into one unified. Homeland Security Department . That the president of the…

    into one unified. Homeland Security Department . That the president of the United States has the ability to deal with the. Conflicting union agreements that he's going to have to try to bring together.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:36:26 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    I know the present United States is going to do everything he can to…

    I know the present United States is going to do everything he can to protect the rights of the workers.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:36:29 AM

    MR. PORTMAN

    to protect the rights of the workers.

  • 11:36:31 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    workers. This amendment . I think is extremely

  • 11:36:34 AM

    MR. WELDON

    . I think is extremely strange because it basically is saying that . We…

    . I think is extremely strange because it basically is saying that . We are going to take the right that the president of United States has to suspend. Collective bargaining agreements for national security purposes and. Deny it to the present United States within the Department of Homeland . Security If this amendment passes the present United States for national security reasons and this is an authority that. Democrat and Republican presidents. Can the gentleman you know generally more satisfying. Have yielded Genom an additional fifteen seconds. Democrats and Republicans presidents have exercised this authority. Rarely. And when they have they've done of the Procrit lay and to deny it . Within the Department of Homeland Security to me. Does not make any sense so I thank the gentleman. The gentleman's time has expired . The gentleman from Ohio . Which is here not now like to yield. Thirty seconds to another. Distinguished colleague one who has been at the forefront of this issue over the last several years not just weeks or months. General in Texas Mr Thornberry gentleman is recognized for one minute . Thank the gentleman for yielding . Mr

    Show Full Text
  • 11:37:44 AM

    MR. PORTMAN

    Chairman. Earlier this year I bipartisan group of House and Senate members…

    Chairman. Earlier this year I bipartisan group of House and Senate members a bipartisan group of of. Members from both

    Show Full Text
  • 11:37:48 AM

    MR. WELDON

    a bipartisan group of of. Members from both bodies introduced identical…

    a bipartisan group of of. Members from both bodies introduced identical bills and basically we said that this issue of collective bargaining ought to be the same that. In my

    Show Full Text
  • 11:37:59 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    view is the same as it is now . That in my

  • 11:38:02 AM

    MR. PORTMAN

    view is what the Shays amendment was it is it was unimaginable to us then.…

    view is what the Shays amendment was it is it was unimaginable to us then. And it is unimaginable to be now that we would reduce the ability of the president to act in a national security situation. That's why I

    Show Full Text
  • 11:38:14 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    situation. That's why I believe this amendment . Should be

  • 11:38:16 AM

    MR. THORNBERRY

    . Should be rejected. The gentleman's time has expired the gentleman from…

    . Should be rejected. The gentleman's time has expired the gentleman from Ohio . Mr Chairman. I would now like to yield. Thirty seconds to my friend and colleague from Maryland. We have more time than she does and she would like some additional time to correct you. Thirty seconds to the gentle even get a woman from Maryland has been so. If you know . If you do add there in the right direction. There on the next time you get to the gentlewoman from Maryland. The gentleman from Maryland has two minutes remaining. Splendid. I'd like to recognize Miss Maloney to wait for revision goodbyes and extend. I appreciate your yielding to me for a unanimous consent request I request that you revise its to my remarks I rise in strong support of the Morello Amendment. We don't

    Show Full Text
  • 11:38:52 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    revise its to my remarks I rise in strong support of the Morello…

    revise its to my remarks I rise in strong support of the Morello Amendment. We don't

    Show Full Text
  • 11:38:55 AM

    MR. PORTMAN

    strong support of the Morello Amendment. We don't make our homeland more…

    strong support of the Morello Amendment. We don't make our homeland more secure by undermining job security. I've now like to recognize.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:39:07 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    For thirty seconds . The gentleman from Maryland. Mr Blair. The gentleman…

    For thirty seconds . The gentleman from Maryland. Mr Blair. The gentleman is recognized for thirty seconds .

    Show Full Text
  • 11:39:18 AM

    MRS. MORELLA

    The Japanese attacked us at Pearl Harbor .

  • 11:39:24 AM

    MRS. MALONEY

    And we fought World War two. We went into Korea. We went into Vietnam. We…

    And we fought World War two. We went into Korea. We went into Vietnam. We went into Bosnia we went into the Persian Gulf . We did not do this. We saw no need to do it because we saw no threat from collective bargaining.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:39:40 AM

    MRS. MORELLA

    do it because we saw no threat from collective bargaining. My colleagues.…

    do it because we saw no threat from collective bargaining. My colleagues. Support

    Show Full Text
  • 11:39:46 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    the Morello Amendment. I agree whether it does mean something . It says to…

    the Morello Amendment. I agree whether it does mean something . It says to our employees we understand that your collective bargaining rights. Do

    Show Full Text
  • 11:39:54 AM

    MR. HOYER

    not in any way. At any time . Undermine our national security agenda which…

    not in any way. At any time . Undermine our national security agenda which we are all as well as white. And for which we will all support legislation to protect women. And gentlemen I'd like now to give Steele thirty seconds. To my colleague from Maryland. Mr Lamb. The gentleman is recognized for thirty seconds . I thank generally I rise in strong support of the morel a minute. I represent seventy two thousand federal employees. And I think the so-called flexibility . Is a great mistake. It abrogates. Employee rights and. Ultimately it undermines their morale. Our greatest asset is our human capital. We cannot expect. Our fellow employees to protect. Homeland Security. If we undermine their employment. Security. The Morel

    Show Full Text
  • 11:40:45 AM

    MRS. MORELLA

    Amendment provides a compromise. Allows the president to say. If they…

    Amendment provides a compromise. Allows the president to say. If they engage in investigative work relating to counterterrorism . Relating to the

    Show Full Text
  • 11:40:50 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    investigative work relating to counterterrorism . Relating to the war on…

    investigative work relating to counterterrorism . Relating to the war on terrorism . Then they can

    Show Full Text
  • 11:40:54 AM

    MR. WYNN

    . Then they can abrogate those rights. But if they don't have to perform…

    . Then they can abrogate those rights. But if they don't have to perform administrative a plaque a bunch is not related to investigations that are going to document it is by right. Support the morel Amendment. The gentleman from Ohio . Chairman can you give us a division of time a good gentleman from Ohio his two and three quarters remaining The gentlewoman from Maryland is one minute remain the chair is my understanding we have the right to close is that correct. The gentleman from Ohio has the right to close. Sherman I'd like to give most of you know the right to close. You have an additional speakers Mr Brown. You know like . You have you have time to close. OK . I would like to myself sometimes I may consume a gentleman's recognize. Again we've had a good debate here. Today in the

    Show Full Text
  • 11:41:37 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    context of the chaise amendment now the morel Amendment.

  • 11:41:39 AM

    MR. WYNN

    Amendment.

  • 11:41:40 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    The bottom line is we have a good compromise that's a Shays Amendment . It…

    The bottom line is we have a good compromise that's a Shays Amendment . It gives workers in

    Show Full Text
  • 11:41:42 AM

    MR. PORTMAN

    that's a Shays Amendment . It gives workers in

  • 11:41:44 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    this new department. More protection than a workers in any department .…

    this new department. More protection than a workers in any department . And government. And yet . It retains in the present to sixteen when Porton national security authority. It would be ironic if during this time of addressing this new threat of terrorism to take away that authority all together.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:41:56 AM

    MR. PORTMAN

    addressing this new threat of terrorism to take away that authority all…

    addressing this new threat of terrorism to take away that authority all together. I think the compromise makes sense I strongly urge a no vote . On the element which would. According to the president be the basis for a veto this legislation . Without I'd like to you all the remainder of our time to the gentleman from Connecticut Mr Shays a gentleman whose record. Thank you everyone from Connecticut instruction on this challenge how much time do I have . The gentleman has two minutes remaining. Thank you Mr Chairman Mr Chairman in the three and a half years my National Security Subcommittee has been looking at Homeland Security. One thing is very clear. We need to know what the threat is . We need to develop a strategy . And we need to do what we're doing today which is to reorganize . When this president meet is our federal government under our law. That we will provide him . He needs the same flexibility that President Carter had the same flexibility The President Reagan had the same Pres of flexibility President Bush had the same.

    Show Full Text
  • 11:42:47 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Pres of flexibility President Bush had the same.

  • 11:42:49 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    the same. Flexibility President Clinton had . He

  • 11:42:51 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    President Clinton had . He

  • 11:42:53 AM

    MR. SHAYS

    needs that same flexibility. It's interesting to note that my colleagues.…

    needs that same flexibility. It's interesting to note that my colleagues. Have not sought to limit past presidents and their ability to have this flexibility. To deal with national security . You must know on the morale and then that. It is in conflict with the amendment that's passed before . We included all aspects of the morel Amendment. But we had a safety valve. When you hear. Of the five hundred employees that were impacted. They were under the National Drug Intelligence Center the U.S. National Central Bureau of Interpol. The Office of Intelligence Policy and review. The criminal justice division of D.O.J.. They were clericals under the professionals. But the law doesn't give the president the ability to exercise . And leave the clericals in place . And that's what the morel Amendment should have done if she cared about the five hundred employees. Give the president the ability to do. To address this legislation in a more finer way . This is a matter of national security it would be absolutely unbelievable . If we would give the president less power. To fight terrorism . When we are dealing with these issues . Not a question of if but when where and what magnitude. We will face the potential of chemical biological nuclear attack. We had people in our committee that pointed out that a small group of scientists. Could alter a biological agent. And wipe out humanity as we know it. And we're talking about not thinking that federal employees aren't willing to step up to the plate and live under the same law that has existed under previous presidents. I believe. They want this law and the president to have the power that. Previous presidents have had the Gentleman's time is expired. The from gentlewoman Maryland. Thank you Mr Speaker. Yes. I don't see how . Being in a union would disallow any of those employees from performing their responsibilities . And you know I think. Mr Speaker members of the body the crux of this debate comes down to trust . And it is for this reason that. I simply refuse to buy the argument that. We have to matter of fact we give the administration or any administration is much less flexibility . As possible. I am a friend of the president. I think

    Show Full Text
  • 11:45:04 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    he's done a wonderful job guiding the country through this crisis . But on…

    he's done a wonderful job guiding the country through this crisis . But on the federal employee issues. His record is not as lot of zero as I would like it to be . And so my Inman

    Show Full Text
  • 11:45:11 AM

    MS. MORELLA

    lot of zero as I would like it to be . And so my Inman and speaks to those…

    lot of zero as I would like it to be . And so my Inman and speaks to those can see. It speaks to the lack of trust that's been engendered if we have policies that are anti federal employee rights and. That's why I feel it's necessary to create a slightly higher standard for this department . The fact is I simply cannot take the chance in being wrong on this issue. The president's executive order authority under that seventy one zero one seventy one zero three chapter has never been overturned . And there are simply too many federal employees who could lose their rights. For the same questionable reason that those five hundred D.O.J. employees did . Have seventy eight thousand federal employees living in my district. This issue is important to them. It is important to the country. I ask you to vote for the amendment gentlewoman's time has expired all time has expired the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Maryland all those in favor say aye aye . And the opinion of the chair of the nos have it. And the amendment is not adopted. To speak of . The gentlewoman from Maryland. On that. I asked very clear to the gentleman asked for a recorded vote in favor recorded. Stand to be counted as a sufficient number having arisen a recorded voters ordered those in favor of the amendment will vote. Oppose no. Members will record their votes by electronic device this will be a seventeen minute vote .

    Show Full Text
  • 11:46:33 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    device this will be a seventeen minute vote .

  • 11:46:47 AM

    MS. MORELLA

    So members continuing. Work on a

  • 11:46:51 AM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    So members continuing. Work on a list of a few dozen amendments to this…

    So members continuing. Work on a list of a few dozen amendments to this bill H.R. five thousand and five its a bill to create a new Department of Homeland Security. Want to remind folks they can learn more about this legislation and the issue of homeland security in general through our website at CSPAN. Dot org a long day of debate here in the house it's the final day of work before the August break so the house doesn't tend to finish. This bill today . This is a vote on the Marella. Amendment which would allow federal employees transferred into the Homeland Security Department . With the same job duties . To continue with their union membership. But if their duties change so that they are directly involved in this war on terrorism. The president would be able to exempt the worker. From the Union. More amendments today and. A final vote and. Possibly a final vote next week . Over in the U.S. Senate. On this lots of legislation and. Possibly a bankruptcy bill . And a fast track bill today in the house before they wrap up so we'll be talking with a reporter in just a moment to get an update on this bill. Well you're just joining us the house continuing with amendments to the bill H.R. five thousand and five to create a new Department of Homeland Security . Members are voting on the Marella. Amendment right now they've been at it since the nine o'clock this morning . After a late night. Past midnight last night on amendments to this bill. Going to get a live update now on this legislation from Mary Dalrymple of C Q daily. Monitor their Very good thank you for joining us want to start with the current action on the floor here give us some more insight into the Morello Amendment. Has a lot of federal employees in her district . And the new department. That employees are going to be transferred into is entirely devoted to national security . Currently the president has the ability to exempt employees from their union contracts for national security reasons and Connie we're all a little worried that the entire department will be exempted from their you contract because an argument can be made that they're all working. So what her amendment would do is limit that waiver to employees who move to the department . And whose jobs. Change substantially and they end up doing direct intelligence or counterintelligence work against terrorism . Not to put you on the spot but how do you think this amendable fair . I think it's going to go down somewhat narrowly. People who talk to the White House and who are doing the vote counts. Say they think it's going to fail . But. Said earlier that if it does pass . Both amendments this one and the previous one. Will go into the bill and we'll have to work it out in conference. We will look ahead. In a moment but let's look back . Mary Dalrymple who was a late night last night a lot of hours on this bill bring us up to speed on the whole role Bill where are we take care of a lot of non-controversial amendments. A lot of them had to do with. Research . There was one amendment of some significance that . They the House agreed to make steam an independent agency within the new department so that's a little bit of a change from what the original bill was . But in general the bill is very close to what the president originally wanted . As the Coast Guard . R.J. agencies that have to do. Border security transportation security. Will be folded into the bill. What lies ahead what amendments are you looking out for today. Well this year that are going on right now are really. The big ones there's also going to be some amendments later. About baggage screening . The Transportation laws passed last year. Would give the airports and the end of this year . To install equipment to screen for explosives . And that bill right now would give them an extra here so there's a lot of people who want to roll back that deadline to the original one. Just want to make sure this is the last day work before the August break and it's their intention to finish this bill right. Yes that is. Take it over to the Senate what's happening there on this legislation . Well Senator Lieberman finished marking up his version of the bill. This week and . The question is whether or not Senator Daschle can make time for it on the floor. There's a lot of big bills going on right now out there in a crunch to get out. For the August recess . And it looks like it might not get there next week so we might be have to wait until September for a floor action there. And again that gets us to that question of the September eleventh . Deadline that a lot of folks seem to have in their minds. What about that . All the two versions of the bill in the House and Senate are actually very similar so there's a lot of people saying that stuff on both sides can sit down. Work out a lot of the basic things over the August recess. And have a big framework in place already so that they can do it quickly once the bills get finished . But they're also a lot of holidays in early September so I'm guessing they're not going to make that deadline but they're still holding out it a bit if Mary Dalrymple of C.Q. Daily Monitor thank you for the update. Thank you. House continues its. Work here on the Marella. Amendment. More amendments coming as Mary Dalrymple said and a final vote before they head out for a five week . August. Through Labor Day break and. We may see legislation on the House floor later today dealing with. Bankruptcy. And dealing with fast track trade legislation . Reminder again about C.-SPAN dot org information on all of these bills . And the players the rules of the House and Senate. Anything you need on the members. And that's at C.-SPAN dot org the Senate . Is in session as well today continuing work on prescription drug legislation. You could watch that over on C.-SPAN two . Or two hundred seven . Mr Brown of Ohio . Mr Brown of Ohio votes I. Or two hundred thirty before . The eyes are two hundred and eight. The nays are two hundred twenty two . And the amendment is not adopted. It's now an order to consider an amendment. Number nineteen printed in House report one hundred seventy six one five. For what purpose does the gentleman from New York rise as the chairman of a member of the US. The clerk will designate the amendment. And then a number nineteen printed in House Report Number one zero seven six fifteen offered by Mr Quinn of New York.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:07:02 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    The house will be in order. Pursuant to House Resolution five zero two.…

    The house will be in order. Pursuant to House Resolution five zero two. The gentleman from New York Mr Quinn and a member each opposable control ten minutes . The chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:07:18 PM

    MR. QUINN

    New York. I have ordered place.

  • 12:07:20 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    ordered place.

  • 12:07:22 PM

    THE CLERK

    Members. The house will be in order members will take their conversations…

    Members. The house will be in order members will take their conversations to the cloakrooms.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:07:35 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    cloakrooms. The gentleman from New York.

  • 12:07:49 PM

    MR. QUINN

    gentleman from New York. Thank you Mr Chairman . But the chairman the…

    gentleman from New York. Thank you Mr Chairman . But the chairman the president called on the Congress to create the Department of Homeland . Already in an effort to

    Show Full Text
  • 12:08:01 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    condense the numerous government agencies . Performing these functions do…

    condense the numerous government agencies . Performing these functions do a single more manageable . Unit in department. This massive realignment of people and resources was carefully developed . To enhance the protection of our nation without a limit adding the basic rights of employees that compromised the department. Sherrick we want to place . The gentleman from New York deserves to be hard.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:08:23 PM

    MR. QUINN

    Members of the minority side . Will take their conversations to the…

    Members of the minority side . Will take their conversations to the cloakrooms. Gentleman from New York. Thank you Mr Chairman. President needs the flexibility we've talked about earlier today to have the right people in the right place at the right time to address rapidly evolving terrorist threats. His vision is of a performance based system that rewards employees will provide . Exemplary service

    Show Full Text
  • 12:08:52 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    and remove those that are not performing their duties adequately. With the…

    and remove those that are not performing their duties adequately. With the security of our nation at stake. It's our duty to provide this and future presidents . With this ability to Chairman it's an opportunity for me to also congratulate and thank Mr Marella for her work on this issue and thank you Administration in the president's personal involvement these past few weeks. To

    Show Full Text
  • 12:09:07 PM

    MR. QUINN

    Administration in the president's personal involvement these past few…

    Administration in the president's personal involvement these past few weeks. To get us to this point this morning. To thank my good friend from New York Mr McHugh. Speaker and Mr Portman. Once we have the system in place however it's important that we don't compromise the basic employee protections of the workers who perform these functions . Therefore Mr Chairman it's imperative that the House approve the amendment that I offer . The Quinn Amendment as it's outlined. Is a part of the overall picture that puts this. Department in place. We improve the personnel flexibility . Provisions in the underlying tax by expanding and broadening. Worker protections . In the following three ways . First of all it ensures that. Direct participation . Of employee representatives in the planning. The development. And the implementation of any . Human Resource Management System . That accomplishes this goal by requiring that the secretary of this new Homeland Security . And the director of the personnel management provide. Each and every employee number one. With a written description of the proposed amendment. Secondly sixty days to review the proposal. And thirdly. A full and fair consideration . All those employees . Recommendations. In other words Mr Chairman what this does is it puts the labor unions . The employees. A seat at the table. From the beginning. To the end of the process. Secondly with this amendment the smarting. It preserves the current appeals. Rights of . Ploy. Emphasizes due process . Expedites resolutions or requires consultations with the Merit Systems Protection Board . Which is already in place and thirdly the place is a sense of Congress language directly into the other knowing statute that clearly protects the employees right to appeal . And that due process . Mr Chairman this amendment allows the president to use provisions and current law to exempt an agency from collective bargaining. Only when he determines. In writing that substantial adverse impact on the homeland security exists. The standard is actually more restrictive . Now . Than current law. I believe that these protections are absolutely critical to employees of the new department. Mr Chairman it's an opportunity to point out that these employees of our federal government . Particularly the example of nine eleven. None of them asked when their shift change. Occurred. None of them. Asked if they were going to be paid. Over time. Nobody said it's my time to return . In a time of war . In a time when the president has to have all the tools necessary to fight terrorism . And this war . We know that these employees. Will respond the way they've always responded . We're proud of their work. We're proud of them as employees. We want . To make certain. Now that the morale up. Shay's issue has been settled . That we're able to talk about making certain that this president or any president doesn't take advantage of these workers these federal workers that were still products. Thank you Mr Chairman I reserve the balance much of gentleman reserves the balance of his time. The gentleman from California . Mr Chairman I seek to control the time an oppositional mind to recognize for ten minutes and to start off the debate on our side. I would like to yield to the gentleman from Illinois Mr Davis to manage. The gentleman from Illinois recognized for two minutes . Chairman. I rise in opposition to this amendment . And I do so because it is actually a step back. Which is

    Show Full Text
  • 12:12:46 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    back. Which is that is a step backwards.

  • 12:12:50 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    By taken away . Worker rights

  • 12:12:53 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    and protections that Americans have come to cherish .

  • 12:12:57 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    . When you take away a chapter five. You talk about fighting terror.

  • 12:13:04 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    You create terror . And strike terror and fear.

  • 12:13:09 PM

    MR. DAVIS

    In the hearts of workers . Because now you are saying to them that they…

    In the hearts of workers . Because now you are saying to them that they may not be able to get. Annual cost of living increases in their wages . That is no longer . Automatic. You say to those individuals who work in high market areas . That they may not get adequate compensation if they have to work in places like New York Chicago Washington D.C.. Places where the cost of living is much greater and much higher than. In other places. It means that you don't have to give employees . The right. To grief . And to have the protections that every American in the workplace. So rightly deserve . And so I can't imagine why it would be . They're ready to take views. Put away . Under the guise of. Five didn't count because I can guarantee you that the people. I've been speaking with. You know ran with fear that the rights they have earned . Will be taken away. I think you Mr Speaker in your back the balance of much gentleman's time has expired the gentleman from New York. Like to yield three minutes now to another fellow New Yorker one who worked on this package these last couple of weeks a leader in labor issues not only in our state of New York but the country. Which is we need to join I think is recognized for three minutes. I thank the gentleman for yielding the time and. Mr Chairman I thank you for recognizing me and I rise in strong support of Mr Quinn's. Amendment that I believe will provide personnel flexibility. Broadening worker protections you know. Mr Chairman we have had great discussions this morning . For the

    Show Full Text
  • 12:14:54 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . For the last several weeks . About the

  • 12:14:56 PM

    MR. QUINN

    . About the challenges that we face in forming a new Homeland Security…

    . About the challenges that we face in forming a new Homeland Security Department and . Providing for the protection of the American people. It seems in the course of those discussions we've needed to find a balance between the.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:15:09 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    a balance between the.

  • 12:15:11 PM

    MR. SWEENEY

    The needs to provide those protections against terrorist attacks . And…

    The needs to provide those protections against terrorist attacks . And worker rights. And I submit to you as the former state labor commissioner in New York State. Probably the largest unionized state . In the nation. That that conflict ought not to occur and I think today I'm very proud today that we seem to be moving in a very positive direction . Very positive direction and passing the Shays Amendment. I will note the colloquy that my colleague Mr McHugh from New York had with the speaker of the house. And the conversations that we had with the president of the United States in which they made commitments . To the basic precepts of collective bargaining. And the rights of workers . And ensure that workers rights would not be abrogated in this process and indeed with this amendment from Mr Quinn. Mr Speaker it is. Mr Chairman it is important that we . We reaffirm. Those commitments and those rights. As Mr Quinn pointed out on September the eleventh. As shift changes occurred at eight forty five A.M. and two planes flew into the World Trade Centers. Firefighters unionized firefighters and union unionized police officers. Didn't ask whether their shift was beginning or ending. They simply charged into those buildings. To do their jobs as they have always done their jobs and save American lives and that's why it's important that this amendment passed . That's why import it's important that we keep those commitments . First and foremost and forward. As we decide and deliberate how to best. Secure America's borders . On a personal note. I'd like to speak in terms of my commitment to collective bargaining and workers' rights because my dad Mr Chairman was a labor leader . He fought all his life for collective bargaining issues I sat at the kitchen table discussing those issues and I know indeed that I wouldn't be here today . Representing the people the twenty second Congressional District in New York had he not won those fights. This is not about an abrogation of those rights this is about ensuring that the present the United States has the flexibility to protect American lives . And American people. He's given his commitment that he will do that job as well will ensure that the workers who fulfill those duties. We know will fulfill those duties. Well as well be protected. I fully strongly support this amendment and all of the efforts. On the part of my colleagues. To ensure those rights are protected. And that the American public is protected from the terrorist attacks that we face. And I yield back the balance of my I think gentleman yields back the balance of his time the gentleman from California . Mr Chairman I yield two minutes to the John from Maryland Mr Cummings for John thank you recognize for two minutes . I want to thank you for yielding. A mistress Chairman I rise today. To ask my colleagues to vote against the Quinn Amendment. This amendment does not fix the problems in the civil service . Provisions of the bill . In fact the. When amendment is actually a step backwards from the trend long . In the underlying bill the new department does not have to comply with the essential parts of Title five.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:18:03 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    to comply with the essential parts of Title five.

  • 12:18:07 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    In fact the report a bill does not guarantee the federal employees . Will…

    In fact the report a bill does not guarantee the federal employees . Will Receive

    Show Full Text
  • 12:18:10 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    federal employees . Will Receive

  • 12:18:12 PM

    MR. CUMMINGS

    protections against . Unfair labor practices. Get cost of living increases…

    protections against . Unfair labor practices. Get cost of living increases or even locality pay . Mr Chairman as former. Ranking member of the government reform civil service subcommittee . I firmly believe it is critical that federal employees transferred to this new department . Retain their civil service protection . US federal employees whose responsibilities are the same today as they were a week ago . Or even a year ago . Could lose civil service protection is just because the government's organizational chart. Will change . This is an unfair. Result. And I know my colleagues want to avoid. Again I ask my colleagues to vote against the Quinn . Amendment and support. The Waxman Frost Amendment. Civil service protections . Should not be altered merely because employees are moved to the new department. The federal employees in the new mega agency. Should have the same rights as employees. In other agencies . But that. Mr Speaker I yield back. Gentleman yields back the balance of his time the gentleman from New York. Thank you Mr Chairman. This discussion these last few weeks have been including an awful lot of people Mr Portman of course with his expertise and involvement here in the house was very very helpful. It's a pleasure for me to yield to him now three minutes . I thank my colleague New York I want to say to my friend from Maryland and he is my friend that. This is a good man and because it does actually enhance the worker protections in the underlying bill I understand his concerns with General on Bill. But this amendment expands and it doesn't a few very specific ways. And I want to commend Mr Quinn because he listened . He listened

    Show Full Text
  • 12:19:52 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . He listened to the twenty five percent of the employees who are coming…

    . He listened to the twenty five percent of the employees who are coming into this new department who are currently represented by unions. And you

    Show Full Text
  • 12:19:56 PM

    MR. QUINN

    currently represented by unions. And you listen to the seventy five…

    currently represented by unions. And you listen to the seventy five percent of them . Coming into this new department . Who are not members of the Union . And what he did is very simple. He got the unions a place at the table . So that when we go through

    Show Full Text
  • 12:20:07 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    . So that when we go through these new flexibilities we're going to talk…

    . So that when we go through these new flexibilities we're going to talk about the next amendment. The unions have a voice. And they want that to make sure that the secretary of this new department . Could not use a waiver authority to pull. Union members out of collective bargaining for national security purposes which is in the underlying bill . He removes that authority. Again. Listening to the concerns of union members the representatives. And also for Zorzi P.O. rights for all workers this new department to make sure that due process is followed to clarify the underlying language and be sure that the merits of some Protection Board is used in the case of appeal should there be a firing. He also puts very important language in the amendment to clarify the intent of this entire bill. Which is exactly what I've heard on the other side of the aisle today by Mr Wynn and others. To be sure that we prioritize. Human capital . It is the key to good morale working as a team is the only way this is going to work. And the federal workers are going to be the heroes in this case they're going to be the ones responding as the first responders are going to be the ones protecting our kids and our grandkids over time. We need to be sure that this morale and this team effort. Is taken. I've heard a lot of comments here today about the underlying draft in the Q. Amendment and . Somehow it doesn't protect worker protections under Title five that's wrong . It does. We've heard for instance the merits system principals are optional they're not they're guaranteed in this bill and in the amendment the whistleblower protections are guaranteed . Political cronyism is not allowed in fact. All the language prohibiting political coercion is absolutely in this legislation explicitly veterans' preferences are not eliminated. They are guaranteed. Annual leave sick leave. Is totally guaranteed and protected diversity hiring. Is guaranteed . Nepotism prohibition I've heard that's not the bill it is . It's in the bill it is guaranteed . Arbitrary just missiles are not permitted. It is guaranteed that there is protection against arbitrary dismissal and finally health insurance and other retirement benefits are absolute guaranteed. In this legislation . Mr Chairman . The Quinn Amendment . Improves. Perfects and. Lying piece of legislation which gives the president the flexibility he will need to adequately protect our homeland. I strongly support the underlying bill. I support Mr Quinn's Amendment. And I hope my colleagues will support it as well. On a bipartisan basis . The gentleman yields back the balance of his time the gentleman from California. Myself one minute . Mr Chairman of my colleagues. Let me tell you what this doesn't do. Mr Portman tried to make you think that civil servants were going to be protected . Well. If an annual cost of living is going to other employees there's no guarantee that employees work in this department will get that. Or the locality pay increases . To offset the higher cost of living or . If there is a federal agency.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:22:44 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    federal agency. Engaging in unfair label. Labor practices such as coercing…

    federal agency. Engaging in unfair label. Labor practices such as coercing employees or discriminating against employees who assert their collective bargaining rights . That's not

    Show Full Text
  • 12:22:48 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    employees who assert their collective bargaining rights . That's not…

    employees who assert their collective bargaining rights . That's not restored . That's not protected anymore the employees are at the mercy of those agencies . And in fact . If an agency one that is taken adverse action against an employee. They don't even have to give them. As under the existing law thirty days notice . And seven days to respond . And then if there's an adverse action taken against the employee . There's no provision to give them the right to appeal . These are rights that are being taken away and. Mr Portman does not restore those right gentleman's time has exceeded the balance of back of the balance of my time . But Chairman Frank where is the amount of time in place a gentleman from New York has thirty seconds remaining and the right to close the gentleman from California has five and one half minutes remaining . We we would reserve our thirty seconds to close and . Let the other members speak of the speakers at this point . Mr Chairman I yield to the gentleman from Maine . Mr Allen one . minute The gentleman is recognized for one minute . I thank

    Show Full Text
  • 12:23:57 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    the gentleman for yielding . Mr Chairman I rise in strong opposite. Into…

    the gentleman for yielding . Mr Chairman I rise in strong opposite. Into the Quinn amendment which weakens the already weak civil service provisions of the underlying bill.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:24:03 PM

    MR. QUINN

    weak civil service provisions of the underlying bill.

  • 12:24:05 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    bill. Federal employees want more than the right to consult with their…

    bill. Federal employees want more than the right to consult with their employers they want to be partners with the government . In the effort to defend

    Show Full Text
  • 12:24:12 PM

    MR. QUINN

    the government . In the effort to defend our nation. Workplace rights for…

    the government . In the effort to defend our nation. Workplace rights for employees will not will not undermined homeland security. After all of the first responders the heroes of September eleventh . Can belong

    Show Full Text
  • 12:24:22 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    the first responders the heroes of September eleventh . Can belong to…

    the first responders the heroes of September eleventh . Can belong to unions and enjoy workplace protections . Surely the

    Show Full Text
  • 12:24:27 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    enjoy workplace protections . Surely the

  • 12:24:28 PM

    MR. ALLEN

    protections . Surely the staff of the Department of Homeland Security. Can…

    protections . Surely the staff of the Department of Homeland Security. Can do the same. Flexibility and consultation rights. With these words the Republican majority puts lipstick on they were attacked on existing civil service and collective bargaining rights of federal employees . If this new department is to succeed. Federal employees will make it work. We should treat these professionals with the respect they deserve . Defeat the quaint Amendment. And support. The Waxman Frost Amendment. I yield back the gentleman's time has expired. The gentleman from California. Mr Chairman I yield to a minister the gentle lady from Texas. Mr Sheila Jackson Lee . The gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes . I thank the distinguished gentleman I asked the chairman to address the house and advise and extend my remarks without objection let me offer to say to Mr Quinn I. A good friend I appreciate the good faith and the good intentions that may be behind the offering of this amendment. But let me . Mr Speaker

    Show Full Text
  • 12:25:31 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . Mr Speaker . Suggest what we are actually seeing here. In

  • 12:25:35 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    here. In contrast to what we are supposed to be doing. In a bipartisan…

    here. In contrast to what we are supposed to be doing. In a bipartisan effort . To

    Show Full Text
  • 12:25:40 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . To pass homeland security. And that is that.

  • 12:25:44 PM

    MS. JACKSON LEE

    On this floor today over the last hour. You have seen a change in the…

    On this floor today over the last hour. You have seen a change in the method or either the focus of this legislation . We're

    Show Full Text
  • 12:25:50 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    or either the focus of this legislation . We're

  • 12:25:53 PM

    MS. JACKSON LEE

    supposed to be fighting terrorism Mr Chairman. We're now fighting. Workers…

    supposed to be fighting terrorism Mr Chairman. We're now fighting. Workers . And the reason why I say that is because . We are offering legislation . Contrary to the forest where axemen. Amendment. That really implodes . Longstanding commitments and obligations and responsibilities . To the working people of America . This bill impacts negatively. Our federal firefighters . Our federal law enforcement . All military personnel . Is that what we want to say to those first responders that we don't care about your working rights. That's what this. Consultation Amendment does. Because it does not allow negotiations. And the reason why I know this bill doesn't have any teeth to it. Because in the morning's presentation that the administration had this morning. That many of us. Did not secure an invitation even though. We had responsibilities dealing with homeland security. The administration said pointedly. That they did not like the other bodies bill . Because the other body had a bill that was fair. That recognize that the thrust of Homeland Security should be fighting terrorism. And not writers. Not workers I don't believe that. Disallowing the rights that workers have . Is to suggest that we can be better secure. I am insulted to believe that Americans . When. Challenge. By foreign terrorist acts or domestic terroristic acts. Will not come together and will not relieve themselves from any sort of. Obligations. And stand united with this administration. The general I only destroying workers' rights. Mr Chairman. This is what this amendment does . I've asked my colleagues to defeat it . And vote for us Waxman. The gentleman from California who seeks time. For gentleman from New York. Reserves the right to close. As the gentleman from California have any additional We have no other requests for time and I presume you have no other requests on the other side . So we will yield back the balance of our time gentleman from California you'll see the balance visit on the gentleman from New York. With Mr Chairman simply and in closing I would say this I have spent a career here in the Congress ten years. Now fighting for workers' rights fighting for. Labor unions and working families across the country I wouldn't be here this morning.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:28:06 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    here this morning. Offering this amount if I didn't think it help the…

    here this morning. Offering this amount if I didn't think it help the working families of this country. And it helps our president. Protect the country those same workers . Not

    Show Full Text
  • 12:28:14 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    . Not exclusive of each other but the same people. All at the same time .…

    . Not exclusive of each other but the same people. All at the same time . And I would urge all those merits . And the help of a lot of

    Show Full Text
  • 12:28:21 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    friends in the house. Passage. Talk to the gentleman yield back the…

    friends in the house. Passage. Talk to the gentleman yield back the balance of his time the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York Mr Quinn.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:28:25 PM

    MR. QUINN

    the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York Mr…

    the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York Mr Quinn. Those in favor will say I suppose no in the opinion of the chair of the eyes having Mr Chairman . The I have it in the amendment is adopted the gentleman from New York I asked to record a vote. The gentleman from New York requests a recorded vote in favor recorded vote will stand to be counted . A sufficient number having arisen a recorded vote is ordered those in favor of those opposed no Members will record their vote by electronic device this will be a seventeen minute vote .

    Show Full Text
  • 12:28:57 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    device this will be a seventeen minute vote .

  • 12:29:13 PM

    MR. QUINN

    More amendments to the bill H.R. five thousand and

  • 12:29:14 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    More amendments to the bill H.R. five thousand and five dealing with the…

    More amendments to the bill H.R. five thousand and five dealing with the creation of a new Department of Homeland Security this is a bill that. We do expect to be completed today so. More amendments. This afternoon and. As we've pointed out this is the final day of work before a five week . August recess which will take the house. Into the month of September and one of the items that we may see . Later today on the floor is a bill. Dealing with the issue of bankruptcy. And Pamela Pamela Barnett of Commerce Daley joins us now. For a live interview on that legislation Hello . Thank you for joining us it seemed like an agreement on bankruptcy. As a bit of a surprise last night what finally happened to allow this bill to come to the floor. To work out how to do with. What types of deaths related to abortion clinic protests. Could be discharged in bankruptcy . Meaning which have to pay . If you were to declare bankruptcy. And after this year . Of negotiating but this bill is been around for five years. But after last night. Managed to come to an agreement . About the wording of that language and gave the go ahead to the legislation through the House and Senate floors How do negotiators bridge their differences in cases like that explain the process . Well it's a lot of work most of it is really just hashing out the legalities. Put a fine point on the legal language to make sure it says what they want to. And hard work. But work to get those. Give us a broader sense Pamela Barnett of this bankruptcy conference about what is the bill do . Well. The bill will make it harder for individuals to claim and bankruptcy essentially and make it so that debtors. Have to pay more . Pamela Barnett to the Senate. And the president how they can handle this. We are talking with Pamela Barnett of Congress. Thanks for supporting. House. Will later write to me on the homeland security bill. And tracking. Terrorism and direct about what's happening there . Millions of millions of dollars depending on how catastrophic. So what they want. Is the federal government to be a. Reinsurance backstop meaning that. Whatever losses the commercial insurance companies couldn't cover. Would then be picked up by the federal government. This bill has been in the midst of the goshi ation. Since last year late last year and. Both the House and Senate voted on their individual bills. A couple of months ago. And the Senate has taken a little bit of time and a point to get conferees . To reconcile their bill with out of the house. They need those called freeze this week after several delays and . The House is expected to follow suit. Sometime today. They may get some conferees. The staff will probably begin work over the August recess. Members are in their districts and. When members get back it's likely they'll wrap it up pretty quickly. Family Barnette on two topics here terrorism insurance and bankruptcy. Legislation Thanks a lot for your time. Thank you. And again those are two items that we expect to see on the floor later today the final day before the August breaks a bankruptcy conference aboard . And then that motion concerning terrorism insurance legislation we are also looking out for fast track. Legislation on the House floor today . But not before they complete this homeland security bill. House is working on a list of a couple of dozen . Amendments they started. Last night and went past midnight . Came back at nine A.M. today . Have been going at it. Ever since so he spent the final vote here and possible Senate. Work on this bill . A bit later. So for now for more information on the bottom of the screen here about this bill. And some C.-SPAN program notes.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:50:51 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    house will be an order. The gentleman from California will be recognized…

    house will be an order. The gentleman from California will be recognized for ten minutes.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:50:55 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    will be recognized for ten minutes.

  • 12:50:57 PM

    THE CLERK

    Members in the rear of the chamber will take their conversations off the…

    Members in the rear of the chamber will take their conversations off the floor.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:51:04 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    the floor. The gentleman deserves to be heard on his amendment . Mr…

    the floor. The gentleman deserves to be heard on his amendment . Mr Chairman I yield myself. Three minutes to a gentleman is recognized for three minutes . I rise

    Show Full Text
  • 12:51:14 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    for three minutes . I rise in support of the. WAXMAN Frost Amendment. On…

    for three minutes . I rise in support of the. WAXMAN Frost Amendment. On civil service. This amendment strikes the flawed Section seven sixty one . Which was reported out of the Select Committee . Regarding civil service. And replaces it with the civil service language reported by the Government Reform Committee . With unanimous. Bipartisan support .

    Show Full Text
  • 12:51:41 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    Our nation has the most honest . Most professional civil service in the…

    Our nation has the most honest . Most professional civil service in the world.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:51:45 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    civil service in the world.

  • 12:51:46 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    the world. And the reason . Is our civil service laws. Point of order Mr…

    the world. And the reason . Is our civil service laws. Point of order Mr Chairman the house is not in order. And. Members on both sides of the. Well. We'll take their conversations to the cloakroom. The gentleman is recognized . These service. Civil service laws prevent abuses such as. Patronage. They guarantee important rights such as appeals to the Merit Systems Protection Board . And they provide for collective bargaining rights. Now the president's proposal. Eliminated. These essential protections . But the committee of jurisdiction the Government Reform Committee chairman. Dan Burton. Crafted an amendment that resort the protections of Title five . To employees. Of this new department. His amendment received. Unanimous . Bipartisan support from the members of the committee. And we had other civil service amendments offered by Representative Norton. On preserving pay. Representative tyranny for ensuring that. T.S.A. procedures . Don't apply agency wide represented to Senate to protect whistleblowers . And these were all adopted by unanimous . Bipartisan support. Now this amendment I'm offering right now . Is simply chairman Burton's Amendment . As amplified by the other amendments . Adopted . Without dissent in our committee . As currently drafted in the bill before us. Section seven sixty one does not guarantee federal employees . Basic civil service. Protections. The section preserves. Some rights. It's an improvement over the president's proposal. But it specifically allows the secretary. To waive any of the provisions of chaff. Chapters forty three. Fifty one fifty. Three seventy one seventy five and seventy seven . Of Title five. This is wrong. Civil servants whose responsibilities. Will be the same today . If they're transferred into this new department . As they were before the transfer. Should not lose their civil service protections. Just because I don't like it as ational. Chart. May change . In essence . The bill before us . Makes the employees of the new department. Second class employees. Degrading the rights of federal workers in the new department makes no sense . We want the new department to succeed . But this won't happen. If the employees of the new department . Are stripped of their basic rights of myself. Thirty more seconds gentleman is recognized for thirty additional seconds . The Waxman Frost Amendment corrects these problems. It ensures that the basic title five protections apply to the new department . And it does so in exactly the same way that the Government Reform Committee recommended . Unanimously . That Government Reform Committee is the committee of jurisdiction . On civil service. And public employees issues. I am asking . And it's quite rare that I would do this for the members of this house . To support a den . Burton Amendment. That we all supported in committee. I didn't realize I was fired. And I resented the balancing act that your night. Cries in opposition to the Waxman gentleman is recognized for ten minutes. I thank the chairman you myself the times may consume . Mr Chairman General California has talked a lot about what having the governor for in committee and called this the Dan Burton Amendment thing it's only appropriate that. Mr Burton. Be able to explain his position on this amendment and on the underlying bill. Just to make one point though . What we're talking about here is an underlying draft that does protect. Title five. It does provide all those worker protections that the gentleman California referenced including patronage protections including whistleblower protections.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:56:04 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    patronage protections including whistleblower protections.

  • 12:56:07 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    protections including whistleblower protections. Including the other…

    protections including whistleblower protections. Including the other collective bargaining rights protections that are guaranteed in the underlying bill without Mr Chairman like to yield . Two and a half minutes to the chairman of the government form Committee . Mr Burton of Indiana . The gentleman is recognized for two and a half minutes . But first of all let me just say Mr Chairman that. My good friend Mr Waxman and I did work very closely together along with the Democrats on the committee to come up with a product that we could all be proud of and it did pass by a vote of thirty to one. And while I do have some pride of authorship . I do believe that the . PORTMAN amendment goes a little bit further and does a little bit better job than we did in my manager's amendment . First of all and the Government Reform Committee bill we maintain.

    Show Full Text
  • 12:56:53 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Whistleblower protections veterans' preferences. And we were chained.

  • 12:56:57 PM

    MR. BURTON

    Collective bargaining rights . Not that we thought the administration…

    Collective bargaining rights . Not that we thought the administration wouldn't. Would would. In some way violate those things but we thought they ought to be in the bill we just simply wanted to reassure the workforce the federal workforce . But the Portman of a language goes even further. It provides. Against political retaliation . Regarding the Hatch Act . It retains the protections against racial discrimination and gender discrimination. It protects health care benefits and retirement benefits . And it protects workers' compensation . And those are things that ought to be in the bill that. That isn't. Now. Putting this department together is a monumental undertaking we're talking about taking parts of twenty two different departments and bringing them together to protect this nation . And it's not going to be an easy job and the administration is going to have a difficult time getting. Getting all this accomplished. And they have to have flexibility wherever possible . In order to make this whole thing work . Now one of the things that concern me was protect. Sins against those who may be set aside . Because there's a possibility there's a national security concern about these people in their jobs and what they may or may not be doing. And for that reason I supported the Quinn amendment a while ago that provides due process . For those individuals. That wasn't in the manager's mark of the original bill. But it is now thanks to Mr Quinn. Now I know that federal employees are very nervous . And I know that change is hard and cause anxiety . But I believe the administration is going to be fair. I believe we're putting. As many protections as possible. In this legislation as we can. And still provide the flexibility that the president needs. We're talking about protecting every single American . And the president's going to have to have flexibility . And I believe that the bill that we passed in the committee. Much of which has been talked about here on the floor does that. And I believe the Portman Amendment even a bridge improves upon that. So I just like to say that . I support the Portman Amendment I did before the Rules Committee . And for that reason I hope will defeat this amendment that would take that out and . With that I yield back the balance of my time. Gentleman's time has expired John of California. Mr Chairman the improvements in the bill . Are improvements not from the language of the Government Reform Committee but from the original bill introduced by the president . What we need to do is restore . All of the provisions that were adopted by the Committee on Government Reform . I'd like to yield. Now to the gentleman from Texas the co-sponsor of this a mammoth three and a half minutes. Mr Forrester Frost is recognized for three and one half minutes .

    Show Full Text
  • 12:59:40 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Now I thank the gentleman for yielding misspeak or I ask unanimous consent…

    Now I thank the gentleman for yielding misspeak or I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks . Mr Speaker

    Show Full Text
  • 12:59:43 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    to revise and extend my remarks . Mr Speaker the Waxman Frost Amendment.…

    to revise and extend my remarks . Mr Speaker the Waxman Frost Amendment. Preserves the national security flexibility. The president needs without sacrificing the current. Civil service protections for the new department. It strikes from the bill. Needlessly partisan attack on the civil service system . And replaces it with the bipartisan compromise.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:00:06 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    bipartisan compromise. Adopted unanimously by the House Government Reform…

    bipartisan compromise. Adopted unanimously by the House Government Reform Committee the committee where the original jag.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:00:11 PM

    MR. FROST

    the committee where the original jag. Jurisdiction and expertise on civil…

    the committee where the original jag. Jurisdiction and expertise on civil service. The

    Show Full Text
  • 01:00:16 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Waxman Frost Amendment is essential because the underlying bill.

  • 01:00:20 PM

    MR. FROST

    And the Quinn amendment just a grade to contain a language that actually…

    And the Quinn amendment just a grade to contain a language that actually turns back the clock. On important civil service protections. That may be crucial to the ideology of some on the other side of the aisle . But it will harm the effectiveness of the new department. Throughout the spit. Process Mr Speaker. Some Republican leaders have thrown around a tax on worker protections in current law . The truth is the civil service system protects Americans . Against a spoil system that would allow politicians to reward their friends and supporters with important government jobs . And it is crucial that the Department of Homeland Security be staffed by professionals . Not by the cronies or whichever party. Happens to hold the White. House Mr Speaker Democrats and Republicans on the Government Reform Committee . Recognize this fact . So they voted unanimously to protect the fundamental title five protections. Of employees in the new department. Mr Speaker much has been said about flexibility. I want to assure the house. That the Waxman Frost Amendment. Ensures that the Department of Homeland Security. Has the flexibility to effectively and efficiently . Carry out its mission to protect the American people. Mr Speaker are federal employees . Are our most valuable asset in the Department of Homeland Security. They are first line of defense. We are entrusting our safety . To them because we know they will rise to the challenge . And serve the nation well . So it is critical that the new department . Hires and retains the best and the brightest employees . To protect our nation from terrorism . The question is. Do we treat these people with the respect and professionalism they deserve. Or do we undermine the morale of these employees . And risk compromising the mission of the new department . By gutting. Their most fundamental. Workplace rights. Are IT Republicans to join Democrats. In supporting worker protections . And the professionalism of the Department of Homeland Security. Support the Waxman Frost Amendment. You know back the balance of my time . Gentleman yield back the balance of his time Mr Portman. Chair and I'd like to yield. Two minutes to a member of the Select Committee on Homeland Security. General Michael homo who has been a leader on protecting the homeland actually long before September eleventh and has added to civil value to the work of a select committee into the debate today Mr Watts of Oklahoma . From Oklahoma's recognized for two minutes and. I thank my friend from Ohio. For yielding a couple minutes and then. You know it's interesting that a terrorist can attack us in a matter of five minutes . And then we've got

    Show Full Text
  • 01:03:00 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    us in a matter of five minutes . And then we've got

  • 01:03:03 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    us in a matter of five minutes . And then we've got these antiquated…

    us in a matter of five minutes . And then we've got these antiquated systems that . It could take us . Five months . In order to respond and what the president is asking is is for Congress . In this new

    Show Full Text
  • 01:03:20 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . In this new agency to give them the latitude and flexibility to.

  • 01:03:26 PM

    MR. WATTS

    Defend our homeland . And to make the necessary do the necessary things in…

    Defend our homeland . And to make the necessary do the necessary things in order to respond to these terrorist attacks and friends. We are in a new day . And I have heard all these things and I know Mr Portman. Talked about this a little earlier but I think this is worth repeating. To just kind of the noun some of the myths. And some of the accusations as been thrown around they say the merit system principles that. In the new bill that are optional. The merit system principles are guaranteed whistleblower protections I say there are. Unaided. They're guaranteed in the new bill political cronyism allow they say. Prohibit a prohibition on political courage and. Favoritism in our bill . We've got guarantees there are better terms preference they say it's a lemonade it that they are guaranteed in the legislation second annual leave unprotected they say. Second Annual Leave guaranteed. Diversity hiring and they say it's optional. In this bill not true minority recruitment and reporting under Title five is guaranteed net but nepotism is guaranteed . Nepotism . Prohibition is guaranteed . Protection against arbitrary dismissal. Guaranteed in this legislation . Health insurance if B.P. guaranteed in this legislation . The president saying give me the flexibility and latitude to defend our homeland. And we can still guarantee all these things employees will lose none of these benefits. still They're in place . But give the president. The latitude and the flexibility to defend our kids and our grandkids . Our families. Friends we're in a new world . We need to think outside of the box without thinking outside of the Constitution . And this is the right thing to do vote. Down . The Waxman frost. Amendment and. Support the legislation gentleman's time has expired Mr Waxman. Mr Chairman I yield one minute to the gentleman from Illinois. Mr DAVIS. Gentleman from Illinois recognized for one minute. you Thank Mr Chairman . You know I believe that preserving democracy is as important as fight in terrorism . And in a democracy . One set of rights. In the where the next that begins. Now we're here in this business . But there is not enough flexibility . That the secretary can deal with individuals who are not prepared to do their job.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:05:58 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    with individuals who are not prepared to do their job.

  • 01:06:02 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    Absolutely false . In Section five six and seven five three two.

  • 01:06:05 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    five six and seven five three two.

  • 01:06:08 PM

    MR. DAVIS

    three two. Of Title five. And I quote. It's a is not withstanding the…

    three two. Of Title five. And I quote. It's a is not withstanding the statues the head of an agency may suspend without aid and the employee . Of his agency when he considers that action. Necessary in the interests of national security. You can't be much clearer than that in terms of the ability of the secretary. To function. The real deal . Is that we are suspending individual rights and protections. The the. The the Waxman. Frost's Amendment . Restores those protections . And if we won't be agency to function vote for the amendment. I yield back. Time for the gentleman has expired or Mr Portman. Chairman could you give us a division of Time place. Gentleman from Ohio has five minutes remaining The gentleman from California has two and one half minutes remaining I'd like to yield a man and a half. To my colleague from Kansas who has been to forefront of these issues. Mr Ryan. Mr Ryan's recognizable I want to know what happened. It's. Here you will be on the front lines of the war on terrorism. The people who fulfill the department's mission must be highly qualified . Motivated

    Show Full Text
  • 01:07:31 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    department's mission must be highly qualified . Motivated and effective .…

    department's mission must be highly qualified . Motivated and effective . And attracting

    Show Full Text
  • 01:07:35 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    . And attracting and keeping this team. We will be competing against the…

    . And attracting and keeping this team. We will be competing against the private sector.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:07:38 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    against the private sector. Recognizing these challenges the president…

    against the private sector. Recognizing these challenges the president asked the Congress to give him the maximum flexibility in putting together and managing the department's workforce. The

    Show Full Text
  • 01:07:45 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    in putting together and managing the department's workforce. The…

    in putting together and managing the department's workforce. The legislation crafted by the select committee gives the president. The flexibility he requested wollop the same time . Preserving a

    Show Full Text
  • 01:07:53 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    requested wollop the same time . Preserving a number of important…

    requested wollop the same time . Preserving a number of important employment protections . This approach

    Show Full Text
  • 01:07:57 PM

    MR. RYUN

    employment protections . This approach represents what is best for both…

    employment protections . This approach represents what is best for both the name. Security and those who will serve in this new department. First of all. The bill last a secretary to develop a performance management program. That effectively links employment performance . With the department's objective and mission. Secondly the secretary will have the freedom to use a broad approach. And making job classifications. And will not be bound and he couldn't system that can the current system that confines federal workers to fifteen. Artificial grades. Additionally the secretary will not be restricted by the current rigid pay system . Rather the secretary will be able to meaningfully. Reward performance . We are engaged in a different kind of war. We face a new enemy. We must adapt to meet this new threat. This bill ensures that we will adapt to overcome. These new threats . I urge my colleagues to support the Select Committee's bill and vote against. FROST. Waxman. And I yield back the balance of my time . Gentleness time has expired . California. Mr Chairman I yield one minute to a very very important member of our committee. John Moore from Ohio Mr Carson that Mr considers to recognize for one minute. Thank you Mr Waxman. WHISTLEBLOWER rights . Our workers' rights . No worker . Should lose his or her job . For exposing waste. Coverup or lies . Of their supervisors. It is ironic that in a bill designed to fight terrorism.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:09:25 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    We have a provision .

  • 01:09:28 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    Designed to terrorize workers. Congress must be able to receive the…

    Designed to terrorize workers. Congress must be able to receive the insights of security guards.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:09:32 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    able to receive the insights of security guards.

  • 01:09:35 PM

    MR. KUCINICH

    Border Patrol agents. Policemen military and others who may need to X..…

    Border Patrol agents. Policemen military and others who may need to X.. Expose security weaknesses to Congress . Therefore the Waxman Frost Amendment. Improves the law protecting whistleblowers to ensure the security of our nation . It would apply remedies. A right to a civil action and a U.S. district court. Remedies available would include. Lost Wages and benefits . Statement. Cost an attorney's fees. Compensatory damages. And equitable injunctive or any other relief that the court considers appropriate . If we really want our nation to be secure. Then let's make sure the workers who are part of homeland security. Are going to be protected. When they do the right thing. Preserve the balance of my time. Gentleman's time has expired. The gentleman from California. Gentleman from Ohio. The Chairman we have one more speaker to close this right close. Gentleman from Ohio has a right to close . Gentlemen with state is it that whenever the amendments offered on the other side they get the right to close in one of the members often on our side . They still get the right to close. When they propose that they close and when they oppose it they close it. Is there. Is it is a dip Is it A or a rule or is it just simply go to the majority party.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:10:53 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    simply go to the majority party. The manager of the the Met in opposition…

    simply go to the majority party. The manager of the the Met in opposition has the right to close.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:11:00 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    Well that. Mr Mr Chairman that has not been the way that the House has…

    Well that. Mr Mr Chairman that has not been the way that the House has proceeded . Up to now

    Show Full Text
  • 01:11:05 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    proceeded . Up to now . Because I have been managing opposition to a…

    proceeded . Up to now . Because I have been managing opposition to a number of amendments and I've been told the other side has the right to close on those amendments because they're offering their members member from the select committee. In this

    Show Full Text
  • 01:11:11 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    because they're offering their members member from the select committee.…

    because they're offering their members member from the select committee. In this case. Opposing the amendment. What always have the right to close. I should thank you for the quite as consistent.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:11:27 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Gentleman from California .

  • 01:11:31 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    I don't you know two gentleman from Massachusetts . Mr tyranny. Thirty…

    I don't you know two gentleman from Massachusetts . Mr tyranny. Thirty seconds. Played a very important role in the developer of this bill in our committee and I yield to him thirty seconds Mr Chairman is recognized.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:11:47 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    recognized. I thank the gentleman for yielding. You know I have a…

    recognized. I thank the gentleman for yielding. You know I have a colleague from Oklahoma spoke a few moments ago about civil service laws meeting I would take five months for a response.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:11:58 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    But it didn't take the first responders in New York and Pennsylvania.

  • 01:12:01 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    And Virginia five months to respond to minutes to respond. It has taken…

    And Virginia five months to respond to minutes to respond. It has taken this administration five months or more than five months to fulfill its promises.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:12:07 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    administration five months or more than five months to fulfill its…

    administration five months or more than five months to fulfill its promises. To close up the cockpits of airplanes securely. And to screen luggage . And baggage for

    Show Full Text
  • 01:12:16 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    passengers. Civil service protections and not the issue of his homeland…

    passengers. Civil service protections and not the issue of his homeland security bill.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:12:19 PM

    MR. TIERNEY

    issue of his homeland security bill. And we need to encourage good…

    issue of his homeland security bill. And we need to encourage good employees not treat them as second class employees. We need to get people in understanding that they're important. This administration majority. We show great concern that they choose a homeland security bill . To take on an. ideological Effort. Against employees. I yield back the balance of my time. Gentleman's time has expired . Mr Waxman. Mr Chairman I yield thirty seconds to the. Gentle lady from Maryland . Mr All of a . Mr Chairman is strong support of the Waxman Prost Amendment . Exact language that the government and foreign committee unanimously adopted. It makes crystal clear that all federal employees. Transferred to the new department . Will continue to have full title five civil service rights and protections and while I appreciate the gentleman from Ohio missed part and offered better language in the select committee . From what the

    Show Full Text
  • 01:13:10 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Ohio missed part and offered better language in the select committee .…

    Ohio missed part and offered better language in the select committee . From what the

    Show Full Text
  • 01:13:14 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    . From what the administration had previously proposed. His language .…

    . From what the administration had previously proposed. His language . Would still allow the new secretary and the director of O.P.M.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:13:20 PM

    MRS. MORELLA

    director of O.P.M. to waive numerous sections of Title five. We need to…

    director of O.P.M. to waive numerous sections of Title five. We need to create this new department that demonstrates the value we place in civil servants . And not one that . Incidentally I just faster time has expired. Mr Waxman. Mr Chairman I want to yield the balance of our time . To the very distinguished weapons of the of the Democratic side. My colleague from California Mr Bossie and Miss Pelosi is recognized. Thank you very much Mr Chairman and I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his outstanding leadership. On protecting the civil service. We have a civil service for a reason . It has served our country. It serves . Democracy. Well. We are an example to the world. As

    Show Full Text
  • 01:14:04 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    we go forward to reduce risk . And to protect the American

  • 01:14:06 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    . And to protect the American people. We should not do so at the expense…

    . And to protect the American people. We should not do so at the expense of a democratic institution like so. Civil

    Show Full Text
  • 01:14:14 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    service. Some have said. One of the previous speaker said that they were…

    service. Some have said. One of the previous speaker said that they were competing with the private sector so we need this flexibility. We

    Show Full Text
  • 01:14:17 PM

    MS. PELOSI

    were competing with the private sector so we need this flexibility. We are…

    were competing with the private sector so we need this flexibility. We are competing with the private sector and that is precisely why we need to respect our workers. And give them. The civil service protection . That President Bush did in a market that the president sent to this body to support the president's. bill Support the Waxman and then . Time has expired all time has expired for the gentleman from California Mr Portman. I know you're myself. A man of our time. Gentleman is recognized as the. chairman We face an unpredictable and unprecedented. Agile and deadly threat . It's not the Cold War anymore. It's not about which side has the most . Muscle mass. It's not about what. The biggest department might be. It's about agility. It's about being able to meet the enemies agility with their own agility . And

    Show Full Text
  • 01:15:13 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    as any athlete will tell you including Jim Ryan who just spoke. You cannot…

    as any athlete will tell you including Jim Ryan who just spoke. You cannot be agile without being flexible first.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:15:17 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    without being flexible first. The president. And

  • 01:15:20 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    president. And presidents after him . Need. This flexibility.

  • 01:15:25 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    To be sure that this department works we simply cannot work with the one…

    To be sure that this department works we simply cannot work with the one nine hundred fifty S. era bureaucratic. Personnel practices. That would otherwise be available to him and again to future presidents and future secretaries. The Waxman Frost's Amendment protects the antiquated civil service system. In a way that blunts this apartment's ability to modernize to consolidate to streamline to bring together twenty two different . Personnel systems . Into one team. For instance the amendment prohibits the secretary from using innovative. Compensation plans like instead of pay. There is nothing more important than having a. Workforce what time around that's focused on a team effort to combat terrorism . This is all about human capital in the workforce. If you can't provide the kind of incentive pay. That the president . And the secretary want to provide to people who are performing. You're not going to have that kind of morale . It keeps the new agency stuck in the mud of over one hundred pay grades. Arcane job classifications that make no sense whatsoever and performance appraisals that are indifferent to the mission. Of this agency. You want to align the performance with the mission . On hiring. Let me raise a specific example because it was mentioned earlier that it took five seconds for a terrorist. To commit an act or five minutes and five months to respond Here's a specific example that. It takes five months . Conceivably to hire a bioterrorism expert under current . Civil service rules president it takes five minutes or five seconds to commit. That by a terrorist act why. Developing the written job description personal office classification. Conducting job analysis development through strategy announcing the position . Write applications . Rank qualified avocations. Refer the top three qualified. To the to the interviews conduct interviews and so on. Five months. That's a specific example of where this department otherwise would not have the ability to respond . Also the secretary could have a bureaucratic nightmare. Trying to decide who's a security risk and who's not. If you want to fire somebody under the current rules. It can take us weeks and months. Red tape comes first. So men security come second. The Quinn. Amendment. Guaranteed that in the appeals process . The due process will be protected in a marriage system Protection Board would be used . The Quinn amendment made sure that people would have that appeal. But matters of national security concern where there needs to be a severance must be disposed of immediately. When national security is at risk. It also doesn't allow the secretary to rationalize all these different departments coming in again twenty two different personnel systems or. To be one unified flexible system. Not only doesn't the Waxman Frost language provide any needed flexibilities. It actually doesn't provide the ability of the secretary to develop a human resources system at all. All it says is unbelievably that the new department has to propose to Congress . A new personnel system. And then Congress has to work its will on it. How long would that take I don't know. It would go through the committees it would go through the house. It would go through the Senate . Other agencies and departments don't even have to go through that process. All it does this amendment. Is allow the department to propose a system. Not even to develop a system . We want this department set up and ready to go immediately . And not when we finally get around to it here in Congress. Finally. While the Waxman frost. Amendment doesn't offer the flexibility it's absolutely needed it also doesn't provide the same civil service protections that the underlying bill provides. Yes. It mentions whistleblowers and veterans. But others it does not mention including. Racial discrimination for savings and so on . Mr Chairman . I asked my colleagues to give the president flexibility you need to protect the workers' rights at the same time. Support the underlying bill and vote no on the Waxman Frost a member . All time debate for debate on this amendment has expired . The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California. Those in favor say aye aye aye . Those opposed they know what they have been any of the chair the nos have it. The amendment is not adopted. Mr Chairman. I asked for every quarter thought out of them pursuant to Clause six of Rule eighteen further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California will be postponed . It is now in order to consider Amendment Number twenty one printed in House report one hundred seven dash six one five.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:19:45 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    printed in House report one hundred seven dash six one five. For what…

    printed in House report one hundred seven dash six one five. For what purposes the gentleman from Texas Mr Armey arise . Mr Chairman I have an amendment of the dress made in order under the rules . The clerk will designate the amendment. Amend the number twenty one point in the house for.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:20:01 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    Remember when I was seven six fifteen offered by Mr Armey of Texas .

  • 01:20:04 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . Pursuant to House Resolution five zero two The gentleman from Texas Mr…

    . Pursuant to House Resolution five zero two The gentleman from Texas Mr Armey and a member opposed each will control twenty minutes the chair now recognizes the gentleman the gentleman from Texas. Thank you Mr Chairman and Mr Chairman I yield myself five members. Gentleman is recognized for five minutes .

    Show Full Text
  • 01:20:23 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    . Mr Chairman this is the manager's amendment for of the bill.

  • 01:20:28 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    bill. The amendment includes the following .

  • 01:20:30 PM

    THE CLERK

    includes the following . Tactical amendments requested by Energy Commerce…

    includes the following . Tactical amendments requested by Energy Commerce Committee.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:20:36 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Technical amendments requested by the science committee. Taken. Technical…

    Technical amendments requested by the science committee. Taken. Technical correction regarding oil spill liability trust run or requested by Transportation Infrastructure Committee .

    Show Full Text
  • 01:20:47 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    . Technical amendments related to D.H. S privacy officer .

  • 01:20:52 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . Technical correction related to the biological agent registration…

    . Technical correction related to the biological agent registration function requested by agriculture committee .

    Show Full Text
  • 01:20:54 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    agent registration function requested by agriculture committee . Amendment…

    agent registration function requested by agriculture committee . Amendment to create a program to encourage and support innovative solutions do enhanced homeland security. Requested by Mr Davis and Mrs arm . Harman . Amendment to enforce nonfederal cybersecurity activities. Of Undersecretary for information analysis. And infrastructure protection requested by the science committee . An amendment to establish the net. Guard program to promote volunteer activities. And support of information technology protection activities. Requested by the Science Committee an amendment striking Section eight fourteen related to incidental transfers. By director of O.M.B. requested by Appropriations Committee . Technical correction two Section seven sixty one to reserve. Proper cross references . Management asserting a sense of Congress provision reaffirming our support for the Posse Comitatus Act. Amendment clarifying that . This act preemption no state or local law . Except that any preemption authority vested in. Agencies or officials. Transferred to Dewey D.H.H.S.. Shall be transferred to D.H. S. . Man when the surge in the text of Federal Information Security Management Act of two thousand and two . Recommended by. Committee on Government Reform and requests to Mr Davis. The amendment will achieve several objects is vital to Federal Information Security . Specifically it will one remove the Government Information Security Reform Acts Sunset Plaza and permanently require a federal agency wide. Risk based approach to Information Security Management. Where they're you know independent evaluations of agency and. Information security practices . To require that all agencies implement a risk based management approach to developing and implementing . Information security measures for all information in an information systems . Three streamline and make technical aggression to give to clarify and simplify its requirements for. Strength in the role of an AI nest in a standard setting process and . Five require on be to implement minimum and mandatory standards for federal information information systems. And to consult with the Department of Homeland Security. Regarding the pop promulgating of the standards. The amendment to subtitle F. of title. Seven related to liability management intended. Clarify. Availability of liability protections afforded by this title . And as an amendment asserting a new section to reinstate liability cap for aviation screening companies that are under contract with the Transportation Security Administration or are not De Bar De Bar. Mr Speaker. Let me be very clear about this is a man . It does not reinstate a cap for any company that has been De Barge that is . Argenbright . Just bigger . I must suggest that we will all be labored on to death with fulminations against our going right. So let me relate. Again . That this amendment does not reinstate a cap for any company that has been De Bar. That is. In particular are going broke. We would like that to be considered a fact. Mr Speaker amendments clarifying responsibilities of V.H.S. and the V.H.S. counter-narcotics officer with regard to narcotics. Interdiction was requested by Mr Astor a man must clarify on eligibility criteria for participation of certain extramarital extra Merl research programs. Other Department requested by Mr Dreier. Technical amendment to Section seven sixty six regarding regulatory authority requested by the Energy and Commerce Committee . Amendment or. Adding a new section expressing the sense of Congress. Regarding funding of trauma systems consisting consisting of language originally offered by Ms Harman. Mr Speaker you can see that the manager's amendment . Is a final. Full comprehensive and respectful. Regard to our colleagues in our their committee's standing committees of jurisdiction . And as members of this body. I wish consideration in this bill and I thank you and I reserve the balance of my dog gentleman from Texas reserves the balance of his time for what purposes the gentle lady from California arise. Mr Chairman I have rising opposition to that on block Amendment and. Break the past the time in opposition. Gentle lady is recognized for twenty minutes . I thank the gentleman . Mr Chairman. We ended throughout the course of all of this we have striven to find our areas of agreement . And we have made some successes . In that

    Show Full Text
  • 01:25:59 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    regard. Every now. Then something will come along . That just really takes…

    regard. Every now. Then something will come along . That just really takes your breath away.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:26:05 PM

    MS. PELOSI

    your breath away. That happened last week when we had the mark up of the…

    your breath away. That happened last week when we had the mark up of the bill when the majority. Try to give an indefinite. Extension for the installation of detection devices for explosives . And

    Show Full Text
  • 01:26:15 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    for the installation of detection devices for explosives . And baggage and…

    for the installation of detection devices for explosives . And baggage and .

    Show Full Text
  • 01:26:20 PM

    MS. PELOSI

    . The distinguished leader. Put into his mark . A total. Immunity . A…

    . The distinguished leader. Put into his mark . A total. Immunity . A total immunity for those who would even as who had. Were guilty of wrongdoing . And jeopardizing the safety of the American people. So here we now have today and on block Amendment. The on block Amendment of the chairman which we would all love to support the chairman has worked hard on this bill. And he has some technicalities he would like to correct . We would like to support him. Except once again . Out of the blue. Comes an amendment that fatally flawed as. This on block Amendment. Let's dissect that . This amendment is fatally flawed. That means it has a flaw. That kills. It is fundamentally flawed. It's flawed in a way that undermines any real reason why anyone should vote for the Army amendment takes a bad provision which gives immunity to corporate wrongdoers. And makes it even worse. I'm going to have more to say on the subject as we go along and. I'm pleased to recognize the distinguished ranking member on the Judiciary Committee Mr Conyers. For three minutes three minutes . Without objection so ordered. Thank you Mr Chairman . We've got a bit of a dilemma here . According to the General Services Administration . Excluded. Listing system. Argenbright Security . Incorporated .

    Show Full Text
  • 01:28:06 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    They will be excluded. Term day . Fourteen . Over

  • 01:28:16 PM

    MR. CONYERS

    two thousand and two. And so I say to the distinguished majority leader.…

    two thousand and two. And so I say to the distinguished majority leader. If that's what you call debarment. That's what I call somebody getting rolled in the House this afternoon . They are De Bar . For exactly two months . And they're back in business. And so I would rise in support of the gentle lady's objection to this block manager's amendment because notwithstanding all the concern about corporate accountability . That has been raised to the rule of fear on both sides of the Capitol. The last thing we need to do is to pass a special interest law . Which protects negligent airport screening companies . At the expense of victims of the September eleventh tragedy . Do you know what we're doing here. Two of these screening companies. Have been criminally convicted for falsely certifying that they made criminal background checks of their employees . When they didn't. Two of these companies . Have been convicted for knowingly hiring . Convicted felons . And last November when we passed the Aviation Security Act . We expressly decided that private screening companies. Should not be relieved. Of liability . That's because we have value evaluated airline security and way . In the wake of September eleventh . And it was obvious. On both sides of the aisle that the private companies conducting. Airline screening in general . Had. Wolf fully . An adequate job . And so now I should be shocked that the Republican leadership. Would use and and. Manager's amendment to the homeland security bill as a vehicle . To further harm to victims of the September eleventh terrorist attack. And yet. That is precisely what this amendment. Is not only protects Arjan bright . Arguably the most negligent. Could I get a minute more . In place to yield an additional minute to then. Distinguish me gentle lady and not only protect. Argenbright . But it protects their parent company as well. Totally. Shielding them from liability for letting terrorists and terrorist weapons through checkpoints . On September eleventh . And so those responsible for providing Stafford for example Logan Airport in Boston. Would receive liability protection Even the notorious . Screening company . That I've already named. Which provided security at Dulles . And Newark airports. And has been cited for more security violations. Than any other company . Would benefit from the Army Langridge. Urge my colleagues to reject this . And block . Manager's amendment that's before us now. And I reserve the balance of my time. Gentleman and he'll spec the balance of his time . Mr Armey. Mr Chairman let me first observe that the officials that are going right. Will be much. Comforted by the gentleman speech . Since they called my office viciously angry and upset. Disappointed that they are not included as men and so obviously they clearly understand their need themselves to be not included in this coverage and. Whether or not they take comfort from our. Remarks we just heard. I do not know . But that being as it is but me three minister the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina .

    Show Full Text
  • 01:32:44 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    minister the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina .

  • 01:32:47 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    . My classmate and. A subcommittee chairman of the Judiciary Committee Mr…

    . My classmate and. A subcommittee chairman of the Judiciary Committee Mr Cole. Mr Coble is recognized for three minutes the Chairman I thank the later for his lady for yearly tell me the manager's amendment. Just because I did not list Army technical. For the most part so I'm going to write my patients. Generate to the. The bill before us. Mr Chairman I traditionally oppose the capping all. Our program. Prohibition of damages. It's my belief that generally speaking the matter of awarded damages should be an exclusive assignment. To be discharged by the jury.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:33:24 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    jury. When first state legislatures in the Congress and in this third…

    jury. When first state legislatures in the Congress and in this third party or that third party began starting their own wars and do big juries waters regarding damages.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:33:27 PM

    MR. COBLE

    and do big juries waters regarding damages. Potential problems rear their…

    and do big juries waters regarding damages. Potential problems rear their respective troublesome heads. Invasions of the jurors probably should be pursued very delicately . Very deliberately. And very infrequently. They homeland security legislation . Direct our attention to plague . On relenting threats imposed on terrorism . And this is the. Hook on which I hang my departure from a long held in opposing cap and all restricting damages . This bill proposes the elimination of damages in certain instances . And given the nine eleven attack by those wicked messengers of evil. I believe this justifies capping off pro it prohibitive . Damages . Terrorism my friends in the house is not your traditional adversary. Terrorists. Punish the innocent. Terrorist recklessly and needlessly destroy your property. Terrorists are wicked and evil people . And given to us that our circumstances I believe our addressing damages . Is therefore justified . I do not believe . I am compromising my beliefs. I hold to my strongly held belief that the promise of the jury is close just like with ground. But in this instance I believe the proposals for that aid . And the homeland security legislation . Justified. My support. Of this bill and including the matter of damages. Numbers chairman there will be a subsequent amendment that will involve near universal indemnification. We can't ill afford to all of the riders they do goshi ation of blank checks . After nine eleven and. I believe Mr Chairman that this house. Proved that we will not leave helpless victims behind. But we must generously laced our proposals. With products . And Lou of fiscal recklessness. And finally I say to him. To be distinguished gentleman from Texas . Majority leader . I think you've done a good job . Mr Leader and crafting a responsible piece of legislation or get support . And I yield back the time Mr Chairman. Mr Coble yells back . The balance of this time. Miss Pelosi. Chairman and C.E.O. two minutes to get distinguished ranking member of the government for Reform Committee. Mr Waxman stor Waxman is recognized for two minutes Mr Chairman of my colleagues. I really can't believe this . Yesterday the Republicans were forced kicking and screaming to vote for legislation . On corporate responsibility and today. They are proposing legislation that would give a green light to corporate irresponsibility . Now remember

    Show Full Text
  • 01:36:32 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    when they passed under the contract for America. Private Securities…

    when they passed under the contract for America. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act . It's said to accountants they didn't have to be responsible anymore they couldn't be sued. So what

    Show Full Text
  • 01:36:40 PM

    MS. PELOSI

    didn't have to be responsible anymore they couldn't be sued. So what…

    didn't have to be responsible anymore they couldn't be sued. So what happened. We got Enron we got all these scandals .

    Show Full Text
  • 01:36:46 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    these scandals .

  • 01:36:48 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    This bill. Exams from liability. A company that would make a defective…

    This bill. Exams from liability. A company that would make a defective smallpox vaccine. It would exam from liability . A company owner of . What was supposed to be an anti-terrorism technology. That didn't work. They would allow. They would allow. They would allow people who are supposed to be doing the work of protecting the people . And who are negligent in doing it . Not to even be held responsible . Even worse . If somebody was grossly negligent and acted intentionally. They would still not be held liable let me give you another example a company that supposed to screen for our protection . At an airport . Could hire a known felon. And maybe someone that if they had checked and use reasonable due care . Could have found out was a terrorist. And they could hire them . As a terrible tragedy could occur . But the company wouldn't be responsible. They're not held. To be legally liable. Because they're given this exemption from any legal liability. Under this. Dick Armey proposal. This is a green light. Corporations to cut corners. To not have the incentive to do the job . Right because they're going to be second guessed. And held accountable in the courts . If they do it wrong. The biggest problem they might have is they might not have their contract renewed . But you know what . If they violate their contract . They can't even be sued. To do their part of the agreement because they are exempt from liability even under contract law. This is the most irresponsible . Provision I could imagine . And if anything you have to wonder how could they do this it must be a payoff. To corporations. The give a lot of campaign money. Because how else could anybody come up with something so we are responsible. In light of what this country has gone through. In these last few years . And all that our economy is suffering from gentleman's time has expired the gentleman from Texas . Mr Chairman I would . I would like to believe the gentleman from California . Could rise above the kind of SOP Marsh allegation that there are payoffs in the legislative process. I have been many times disappointed by the gentleman in California. But this is the first time I've been embarrassed for him. And I will yield three minutes . But generally from Ohio. The jurist. And member of the committee his price is recognized for three minutes . I think the gentleman for yielding and I compliment him once again on the wonderful job he has done with putting this together.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:39:21 PM

    >>

    again on the wonderful job he has done with putting this together. Mr…

    again on the wonderful job he has done with putting this together. Mr Speaker. The claims arising out of the deployment of qualified anti-terrorism technology. This technologies would be covered by litigation. Management provisions. That simply provide for this. Once again. Very simply the consolidation of claims in federal court . That makes perfect sense . The

    Show Full Text
  • 01:39:45 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    requirement that any non economic damages. Be awarded. Only in the

  • 01:39:49 PM

    MS. PRYCE

    proportion. To a party's percentage of fault. That makes perfect sense . A…

    proportion. To a party's percentage of fault. That makes perfect sense . A ban on punitive damages. A ban on punitive damages that so often arced. Portion that to any REAL. Claim. Or harm done. A ban on punitive damages once again perfect sense. Offsets of awards. Based on receipt of collateral sourced benefits . You can only get paid. Once not twice or three times a reasonable. Very reasonable limit on attorney's fees. Once again. Perfect sense. This just beaker. The Safety Act provisions of this on block manager's amendment. Are vital to ensuring that the American people are protected by the most reliable and. Up to date anti-terrorism technology available. Unfortunately the flaws in our current tort system . Keep that from happening right now . We need the life saving and life . Protecting technologies that are out there close to being developed. But one company. For instance based in my home state of Ohio. Produces a state of the art technology that's a vital to Dick. To keep decontamination . Following and anthrax attack. Yet they are prevented from using this technology to assist in the cleanup of any other infected. Areas or buildings. By the daunting. And limit. Limitless. Liability. That they could face . If their patriotic efforts failed. For some reason. The Safety Act provisions certainly do not provide. Immunity in any way. From any lawsuit. They simply place reasonable and sensible limits on lawsuits that. So that Americans America's leading technology. Innovators. Will be able to deploy solutions . Because toward. Terrorist attacks. The alternative solution of indemnification is no solution at all. It's fiscally irresponsible . It will attempt to put the Treasury and through it. The US taxpayers and their deep pockets at risk by those those very people that exploit . The technology producers who join in the fight against terrorism . Mr. Speaker. Business common stance. The time is right for it to happen . The threat of liability has a chilling effect . Both on. Technological advances. And the implementation of. Any new technology. I think it is a perfect place for it in the block Amendment. Is reasonable . It makes sense . The time is right for it. We need it now. And I yield back the balance of my time. Generally this time has expired . From California . And this chairman may place inquire as to what the time. Is remaining on both sides but time remains on both sides from California has twelve and one half minutes remaining . Texas has eight minutes remaining . As Pelosi. I thank you very much Mr Chairman is now my privilege to recognize for three minutes a very distinguished ranking member of the Transportation Infrastructure Committee . Mr Oberstar . Mr Oberstar will be recognized for how many minutes must Palosi.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:42:56 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    minutes must Palosi. Three three minutes three minutes . I thank Chairman

  • 01:43:00 PM

    MS. PELOSI

    . I thank Chairman of the for yielding and compliment her on her…

    . I thank Chairman of the for yielding and compliment her on her management of the time on our side on the on this whole process and for her splendid work in the select committee .

    Show Full Text
  • 01:43:07 PM

    THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

    and for her splendid work in the select committee . For whatever valid…

    and for her splendid work in the select committee . For whatever valid reasons there may be to extend. Liability to other functions . As have already been discussed and debated . And without entering into those merits I cannot for the life of me.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:43:27 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    of me. Imagine a reason . A valid reason for extending.

  • 01:43:33 PM

    MRS. MOSEY

    Liability to the screener companies . We debated this issue . At length.

  • 01:43:39 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    Last October and November . In consideration of the transfer to the…

    Last October and November . In consideration of the transfer to the aviation and transportation security . An act. That is now law . We discussed it in the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure . We debated it. In the House Senate conference committee . We discussed it at great length . And rejected. Any suggestion. And there were suggestions and. Proposals for extension of . A liability limitation and . Immunization for the airport screening companies. It's their . Possible. Negligence. That may have contributed to the subprime ber eleven attack. Why would you want to excuse them. If you will. In the. Amendment. Offered by the gentleman. Buried in this amendment is what I want my call. Mirage language. Whether by design or by. Inadvertence. Mr Chairman I I do not know I haven't been able to and I do not want to ascribe motives . It's just that here it is the language . Intends to on its face a debacle . Or exclude any screening company that is de barred under federal contracts. However the infamous. Argenbright companies department. Is over. In October two thousand and two. It then becomes eligible for liability protection under the gentleman's on block Amendment. Furthermore the parent company . Argenbright Security car is not barred from any federal contracts . So they are now covered by this. Immunization protection and . Look at Argenbright day. Some one last fall in the debate said . And I think it was a member on the Republican side is that Argenbright is the poster child for why we need to have a federalized screener. Program. They were in October two thousand and put on thirty six months. In order to pay a million six hundred thousand dollars fine for failure failure to conduct. Background checks on their employees and. Hiring convicted felons to. Staff security screening checkpoints. At the Philadelphia airport . Between one thousand nine hundred five and ninety nine a month after September eleventh. Argenbright SPRO Bay shouldn. Was extended by two years because they continued to hire convicted felons and improperly trained workers in violation of their probation terms . In the five years before September eleventh . F.A.A. prosecuted. One thousand seven hundred seventy six. Cases for screening violations. With. Eight point one million dollars in civil penalties. Two moment to the Gentleman I thank the gentleman on the on block. Vote. Furthermore. Extends liability protection . Put Argenbright aside. To other airport security firms. Global aviation services and Huntley USA corporation. The fact. Security companies . Responsible for checkpoint security. At Logan Airport on September eleventh and which continue to hold a contract with the Transportation Security Administration .

    Show Full Text
  • 01:47:17 PM

    MS. PELOSI

    Why would you want to exclude them. Why these are the same groups whose…

    Why would you want to exclude them. Why these are the same groups whose lobbyists .

    Show Full Text
  • 01:47:22 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    whose lobbyists . Argued last October. Against the federal screener…

    whose lobbyists . Argued last October. Against the federal screener program. It doesn't make sense to now . Exempt them. In May of this year Huntly security screeners are fired for allowing a man to go through a security checkpoint was too loaded . Semiotic. Semiautomatic pistols. In February of this year a global security screener fell asleep at a checkpoint. The whole terminal had to be evacuated at Louisville because of that failure . Why in heaven's name do you want to exclude them . This is. I it just defies imagination . It is the wrong thing to do is the wrong policy . We could move to strike this provision I would but. In lieu of that we ought to defeat the entire and block Amendment. Gentleman's time has expired Mr Armey. Mr Chairman I yield myself a minute just . Chairman of the confusion. About Argenbright . Has nothing to do with my man. My I'm arguing brite is today . To bar my amendment does not provide coverage to firms that are to bars . If the G.S.A. sometime in the future. Should remove that department.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:48:46 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    that department. The gentleman from Minnesota. What I have an argument…

    that department. The gentleman from Minnesota. What I have an argument with G.S.A.. But he has no argument with to respect.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:48:55 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    Argument right. When my amendment. If I were the gentleman from Minnesota…

    Argument right. When my amendment. If I were the gentleman from Minnesota I would take up his case for G.S.A.. And played with him. Do not left the department. On Argenbright. And this gentleman would join you. And you can find your time on your own side . A seconds to the time. Well . I just want to reaffirm. For the distinguished majority leader. That Argenbright. Debarment expires. In October of this year. Why would you not. Expects stand . A prohibition on coverage. I yield to the job. I feel myself thirty seconds to respond to the proposition that . You and I differ in our understanding of the facts. Who yells time . This policy

    Show Full Text
  • 01:49:43 PM

    MS. PELOSI

    . Is simply wrong . To

  • 01:49:47 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    speak to a lady from California . Mr Chairman I'm very pleased to yield…

    speak to a lady from California . Mr Chairman I'm very pleased to yield to. Two and a half minutes to a distinguished member of the transportation infrastructure for meeting Mr Bloom an hour. Gentlemen from Aren't you gentlemen for more.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:50:01 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    Recognized for two and one half minutes. Thank you and I appreciate the.…

    Recognized for two and one half minutes. Thank you and I appreciate the. Gentlewoman's courtesy in permitting me to speak and for her hard work on this issue. It's a tough one. But the manager's amendment that brought me that's brought before us this afternoon . Captures my

    Show Full Text
  • 01:50:13 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    this afternoon . Captures my

  • 01:50:15 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    concerns about the legislation . Why I'm. I guess the amendment and…

    concerns about the legislation . Why I'm. I guess the amendment and frankly I don't think I'll be able to vote for it in its final form.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:50:19 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    frankly I don't think I'll be able to vote for it in its final form.

  • 01:50:22 PM

    MS. PELOSI

    final form. This is legislation that has been candidly. Rushed forward.…

    final form. This is legislation that has been candidly. Rushed forward. They have an artificial deadline perhaps to beat the anniversary of September eleventh . But it's not because

    Show Full Text
  • 01:50:32 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . But it's not because this is the best. Time frame. To protect the…

    . But it's not because this is the best. Time frame. To protect the security of America.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:50:37 PM

    MR. BLUMENAUER

    of America. It includes elements that are not necessary and some which may…

    of America. It includes elements that are not necessary and some which may actually. Hinder both the discharge of the overall concept of the legislation and. Have critical functions for the American public that suffer. And we've had lots of discussion on this floor . About the potential problems. For fema. For the Coast Guard. Indeed almost all our colleagues. On all the substantive committees of jurisdiction . Reject the all encompassing approach that's been suggested here . The people who know something about these functions . And this. Frankly. Mr Speaker is an area that is where the . Approach that's being taken is contrary to my experience. Now I have not had the range of experience in Congress. That some of these people who have been here for. Not just years but for decades and I defer to them. But I have actually done. Work in government reorganization. On the state level . On the local level. City and County and. Without exception . Reorganization. Costs money. It's not cost neutral . Let alone with something with. Tens of thousands of employees . There it takes time . And there can be short term . Dislocations. As a result of these functions . And finally. It is critical that when you're dealing with people who are going to. Be moving in to new structure. To be able to have certainty of working conditions. And some of the proposals that we've had advanced. As a part of this. Are going to produce . Uncertainty of working conditions. Apprehension . For tens of thousands of dedicated public employees. And that's going to hurt. It's not going to help . Finally the manager's amendment. Is an example of my underlying concern. Adding the exemption that's been argued by my good friend . From Minnesota. Not asked for by the president. Not asked for by any committee. Where there are legitimate questions about the logic behind it that all sums up giving me a bad feeling. I'm a press. Afraid that serious problems. Are going to result from the manager's amendment. From the underlying bill. I hope I'm wrong . But I'm fear that I'm right. And I yield back the balance of my time to the gentle gentleman from Oregon yields back the balance of his time. Does the gentleman from Texas have additional speakers. Mr Chairman I reserve my time. Gentlemen reserves a balance of his time as Palosi Chairman I'm pleased he had a man and a half . To the sandwich gentleman from New York. Mr Hanks . Mr Hitchens the very distinguished gentleman from New York is recognized. One and one half minutes. Thank you very much Mr Chairman . This prevents us with a very interesting situation.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:53:28 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    prevents us with a very interesting situation. First we're told that the…

    prevents us with a very interesting situation. First we're told that the employees of the Homeland Security Department.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:53:35 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    Security Department. Cannot have civil service protection . That can't be

  • 01:53:39 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    unionized. We want to be flexible about them if they make any mistakes we…

    unionized. We want to be flexible about them if they make any mistakes we want to be able to throw them out . Yet at the same

    Show Full Text
  • 01:53:41 PM

    MS. PELOSI

    them if they make any mistakes we want to be able to throw them out . Yet…

    them if they make any mistakes we want to be able to throw them out . Yet at the same time. What do we do with regard to corporate entities that work for the Homeland Security Department . If

    Show Full Text
  • 01:53:48 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    entities that work for the Homeland Security Department . If the secretary…

    entities that work for the Homeland Security Department . If the secretary approves any design for any material of product that they sell . To homeland

    Show Full Text
  • 01:53:54 PM

    MR. HINCHEY

    approves any design for any material of product that they sell . To…

    approves any design for any material of product that they sell . To homeland security. So long as the secretary approves it. That cooperation is exempt from any product liability suits . The manager's amendment. However goes even further . It protects corporate wrongdoers. From any kind of action whatsoever . If the product doesn't work. If the product doesn't work because the corporation . Was fraudulent and its. Submission. If the product doesn't work because they willfully. Or maliciously. Made it so that it would not work effectively never the less they are exempt from any kinds of lawsuits . This this situation that we're presented with an ass to vote for . Is totally absurd. What you want to have a circumstance where by people are going to feel protected and will be protected. And if they're going to be protected you have to have the ability to have confidence in the corporate entities the private sector people who are supplying the new Homeland Security Office. Under the provisions of this bill. And particularly under the amendment. All of that confidence . Goes out the window. Why should we have any ounce of confidence if people can produce . Bad products . And not have to be responsible for the products that they produce . This is a bad piece of legislation . Gentleman's time has expired Mr Armey. Speaker I yield three minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut . Mr Shays. Mr Shays is recognized for three minutes . Thank you Mr Chairman I I rise to to thank the members on both sides the aisle for the basic decorum that has existed during the past two days . I'm beginning to feel that. Tempers are getting a little short and . We don't have much further to go I for one. Have been the focus of the majority leader's disappointment sometimes. But I have never

    Show Full Text
  • 01:55:47 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    leader's disappointment sometimes. But I have never ever questioned his…

    leader's disappointment sometimes. But I have never ever questioned his sincerity his fairness or his motives they are beyond.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:55:51 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    sincerity his fairness or his motives they are beyond.

  • 01:55:55 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    they are beyond. Repute. And I just would say to the members that. The

  • 01:56:00 PM

    MR. SHAYS

    that. The danger obviously when you have a managers amendment that has one…

    that. The danger obviously when you have a managers amendment that has one thousand person is going to be certain that somebody doesn't like . And I realize that's the risk and then everyone finds some part of a manager's amendment they don't like and they find a reason to vote against it. There are just too many important parts this amendment to be defeated . We need this manager's amendment . I'd like to take the time though to express disappointment . That I didn't make the managers demand that I didn't have an amendment called an order and I'd like to just have you really listen to what this was . This was the director of central intelligence shall to the maximum extent practical. In accordance with the law . Render full assistance and support . To the department and the secretary. I'm told this was not included. Because the Intelligence Committee had a problem with that. That to me is the very reason why it should have been included . What is amazing to me is that this very language is the. Danica language that can be found in establishing the office of the National Drug Control Policy . It's implicit in our bill is obviously support. By the head of the CIA . But nowhere does it state it . And I am very very concerned that this is lacking in our legislation I'm trying to get it in the Senate bill and I just hope that. And I'm using this opportunity to lobby the most distinguished . Gentle lady from California . And the most distinguished gentleman from Texas. I am live in both of you up front . And in this chamber. Please include this language . When we have final passage it's needed . And it's the very problem I encountered on my committee on national security. When we wanted the CIA to come and testify about the relationship they had with the F.B.I.. They got a permission slip from the Committee on Intelligence saying they didn't have to attend . A few months later we had nine eleven. I believe that we need to have very explicit language . Stating that the director of central intelligence will cooperate with the Department of Homeland Security and again I thank the lead. For what he has done . To and. The gentle lady from California to shepherd this bill through. I think we are close to passage. It's a pretty extraordinarily . Fine piece of legislation . I think it will be made matter better by the manager's amendment and I yield back the chair would inform the managers . On both sides that the gentleman from Texas has four minutes remaining. And the gentleman from California . Four minutes remaining and the gentleman from California does have the right to close the gentleman from Texas . But I might ask then a gentle lady how many marks because she has will be looking forward to the distinguished leaders remarks and then I will close. Fact that I must chairman at this time I'd like to see three menace to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia Mr Davis . One

    Show Full Text
  • 01:58:56 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    the distinguished gentleman from Virginia Mr Davis . One of the hardest…

    the distinguished gentleman from Virginia Mr Davis . One of the hardest working. And quite frankly most able legislators we have in his body. A good friend. And a member of that house and. Horton Provisions in this manager's amendment .

    Show Full Text
  • 01:59:16 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    Davis is recognized with everything and I thank you Jennifer yelling first…

    Davis is recognized with everything and I thank you Jennifer yelling first of all just to correct a couple things I keep hearing from the other side.

    Show Full Text
  • 01:59:20 PM

    MS. PELOSI

    things I keep hearing from the other side. About a government contractor…

    things I keep hearing from the other side. About a government contractor not being able to be sued if something goes on . Nothing could be further

    Show Full Text
  • 01:59:26 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    . Nothing could be further from the truth now . We do change through…

    . Nothing could be further from the truth now . We do change through traditional tort law . And that punitive damages are kept. And that you have comparative negligence in these kind of items. The reason we do this of course . In the amendment is to try to hold down the liability and get contractors. To be able to share some of their innovations with the government . Also on the

    Show Full Text
  • 01:59:47 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . Also on the Argenbright debarment issues.

  • 01:59:50 PM

    MR. DAVIS

    Department is traditionally done by the bureau. By professionals. In the…

    Department is traditionally done by the bureau. By professionals. In the procurement offices in federal agencies not by this Congress. You know whether it is . Extends or not I am. Technical innovation is language. That's included in Mr armies on block a minute this title is going to strengthen . Information Security Management. For the federal government. And this is critical in the war against terrorism. Because if we're vulnerable anywhere. It's in our critical infrastructures. And this language goes a long way toward strengthening that. Which it seems to me would be a prime target for terrorists. Poor Information Security Management has persisted in both the public and private sectors long before . Information technology became ubiquitous engine. Driving governmental. Business and even home activities. As our reliance on technology. And our desire for interconnectivity have grown over the past decade. Intensifying with the advent of the Internet. Our vulnerability to attacks on Federal Information Systems . Has grown exponentially. The high degree of interdependence between information systems. Both internally and externally. Exposes the federal government's computer networks to benign. And destructive disruptions. Therefore the federal information. Security Management Act of two thousand and two which I introduced with Congressman horn. Is included in this manager's amendment. And this requires the agencies. Utilize information security best practices . They're going to help ensure the integrity. Confidentiality and availability of Federal Information Services. And doing a lot of other things as well. I also want to thank the Science Committee chairman. Sherman Boehlert. And Billy Tauzin the Energy Committee chairman for working with us on this language . In addition to this. We have technical innovation language in this legislation that will allow the most up to date. Innovations in technology to come forward quickly and. Be processed at by the Homeland Security Agency. Where they can start looking as they set their requirements and find out what are the latest innovations that we have in technology around in this country that can we you can use to help fight terrorism. In February we held a hearing on this . Challenges facing us and one theme that was expressed unanimously by industry. Was the need for an organized. Cohesive and comprehensive process within the government. So that we could evaluate private sector solutions. To homeland security problems . We have a lot of contractors with great ideas running around but there is no place to really take them at this point. This manager's amendment now has a central clearinghouse for these part of us a link with the creation of the Homeland Security in the bill before today . Chairman Army has included language in this legislation that closes the loop and provides a vehicle . To get the solutions into the government. Into the frontlines in the war against terrorism. As soon as possible. I urge adoption. Of the managers in Gentleman's time has expired . The gentleman from Texas. Mr Armey. Mr Chairman I believe I have about a minute left. Let me just say I have myself to balance my time as chairman of this managers. Amendment. Exists in nineteen parts. Eight of the nineteen parts are included in the amendment at the request . Of the various committees of the house . The remainder included. Have to request of different. Members of the body from both sides of.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:03:17 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    We have had the opposition to the manager's amendment.

  • 02:03:22 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    opposition to the manager's amendment. Focused on one of the nineteen…

    opposition to the manager's amendment. Focused on one of the nineteen provisions .

    Show Full Text
  • 02:03:25 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    one of the nineteen provisions .

  • 02:03:27 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    . A provision that provides liability coverage . To providers of services…

    . A provision that provides liability coverage . To providers of services to homeland defense. And. A provision that has been passed by this house. Before . It is not something new. The only thing that is different about this provision. Niall as opposed to the time in which it was passed earlier. And this session. Is that we now have an identifiable . Pair of. Providers where they're not. Population who are to be barred from providing. It would not benefit . They have been identified under the. Their overall manager's amendment conform to the practice of the Select Committee and . To the commitment of this chairman. And that it gave . First priority. First President . Preference . First respect to the standing committees . And to the members of US by this body and their shared commitment to making this nation. Safe from terrorism. And I urge. Its passage. And I yield the balance of my time. Well as time has expired . All time for the gentleman from Texas has expired this Palosi. Thank you very much Mr Chairman I yield my Such my time. The Rainy of your major of my time that a man choir with that might be . Four minutes. I thank the gentleman. Chairman and his closing remarks are distinguished leader and . Explain how many elements there were to this on block Amendment and said that we were finding fault with a small part of it. The fact is that we would like to find no fault with an on block Amendment. There are many provisions in it. There say most of us haven't the faintest idea what they are.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:05:13 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    But we trust the chairman on those technicalities and recommendations from…

    But we trust the chairman on those technicalities and recommendations from the committee.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:05:18 PM

    MS. PELOSI

    This is usually a non controversy on measure that most members would…

    This is usually a non controversy on measure that most members would expect to support. That's why it's so disappointing .

    Show Full Text
  • 02:05:25 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . That this on the minute is being used to put a very controversial man…

    . That this on the minute is being used to put a very controversial man meant in. To use the

    Show Full Text
  • 02:05:27 PM

    MS. PELOSI

    being used to put a very controversial man meant in. To use the engine…

    being used to put a very controversial man meant in. To use the engine I've been on block on technicalities . For substantive change in the bill . That is controversial. Is unusual . And that is why we oppose it because of the substance of the . Of the provisions . It has been said that this is about protecting the American people let's keep our standards before us . How do we protect the American people. Best . In the big. And it was no other amendment will come up later was. The Turner memo to strike it but in the bill under sub. Section seven fifty three of the bill corporations can submit designs for antiterrorism products. To the Homeland Security Department those designs are approved by the secretary . Those corporations get total immunity from product liability lawsuits under the government contractor defense of any kind. Even if there is wrongdoing. Including willful and malicious . Corporate misconduct. Imagine that this bill. To protect the American people. Has that provision in it. The day after we passed the corporate accountability bill. But this amendment . This sound documented. Even does that one. One works. This amendment goes further to protect. Corporate wrongdoers . It extends total munity to all kinds of lawsuits. Even if a product doesn't work that they can sue for breach of contract etc . But this would give it a new unity for willful wrongdoing. To corporations that provide services. And software. I've heard people say that this is important so that we can get people to bid. The Turner Amendment addresses that next . With a wise. Amendment that addresses the concerns of the private sector. In a responsible way. In this bill the army Amendment immunizes. Airport screening companies whose negligence may have contributed to the September eleventh attacks. And I've heard people say here. Of course you can sue . Under this bill. But let me just read from the on block Amendment. It says that . It talks about the presumption. And it says the presumption. Only be overcome. In other words the presumption of innocence or that. That this immunity applies only be overcome by evidence showing that the seller acted. Fraudulently or with willful misconduct. In submitting information to the secretary. Only in an. Submitting information to the secretary. Not in how the person manufactured the product or spelled out how which and should be used. So this is the standard that is set in this bill is how you make your case to the secretary . Not about how you deliver on the . promise To protect the American people . We all know that in the time leading up to September eleventh . There were many causes . For the tragedy coming our way and one of them was . The fact that the airport screening companies played Russian roulette with the safety of the American people. Sooner or later. There was going to be a tragedy . Because of their lax. Approach to safety. In the screening and security and the screening process . This bill that we had before us . On a day when we are discussing how to make the country safer. In the best possible way. Says that we will make matters worse . By passing this on our own block. Amendment. And I just want to go. One place to the security again on the federal and Information Security Management Act is the gentleman says. Signaling that my time is coming to an end gentle it is Time Has an End that I would urge my colleagues to do the responsible thing and reject this on blocked Amendment. You know that the balance of my time. Journalese time has expired the question is now on the amendment offered by the gentle man from Texas . Those in favor say aye . Those opposed to you know . The opinion of the chair of the eyes have it the eyes have it of the amendment is a chairman. On that I asked for recorded vote from California request a recorded vote pursuant to Clause six of Rule eighteen . Further proceedings . On the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will be postponed .

    Show Full Text
  • 02:09:54 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    .

  • 02:09:56 PM

    MS. PELOSI

    It is now in order to.

  • 02:10:03 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    It is now in order to.

  • 02:10:18 PM

    MS. PELOSI

    It is now in order to.

  • 02:10:21 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    It is now in order to. Consider amendment number twenty two printed in…

    It is now in order to. Consider amendment number twenty two printed in House report. One o seven dash six one five . To speak rather Mrs desk . What purposes gentleman from Texas rise the clerk will designate the amendment and then number twenty two printed in House report number one of seven six fifteen offered by Mr Turner on taxes. Pursuant to House Resolution five zero two The gentleman from Texas Mr TURNER . And a member opposed each will control twenty minutes the chair now recognizes the gentleman from Texas. Mr TURNER. I thank you much of two minutes.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:11:23 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    thank you much of two minutes. Mr Speaker the amendment that we are…

    thank you much of two minutes. Mr Speaker the amendment that we are offering. Here on the floor . Today is the language . That was approved by the Government Reform Committee . That

    Show Full Text
  • 02:11:39 PM

    THE CLERK

    was sent to the special panel . In the Government Reform Committee it was…

    was sent to the special panel . In the Government Reform Committee it was adopted without opposition . With

    Show Full Text
  • 02:11:46 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    bipartisan support . The amendment. Is very important because it allows…

    bipartisan support . The amendment. Is very important because it allows the. Timely deployment of advanced technology in the fight against terrorism. While at the same time preserving the legal rights and remedies that are available to the victims of any terrorist incident.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:11:58 PM

    MR. TURNER

    and remedies that are available to the victims of any terrorist incident.…

    and remedies that are available to the victims of any terrorist incident. The Amendment extends to the Department of Homeland Security and other agencies that purchase . And terrorism technologies. A common practice of indemnity that's been around for a long long time at the Department of Defense. In fact this authority has existed since nineteen fifty eight . When President Eisenhower issued an executive order . Under a law which allowed. Indemnity bid to be granted by the secretary of defense . To certain of our defense contractors. The concept of indemnity is not only one that's been whether for a while but has been used most recently by President Bush when he granted the secretary. Health and Human Services the authority to give indemnity. To the manufacturers of separate. After the anthrax scare . The language that we offer today came to the attention of. The gentleman from Virginia Mr Davis as the chairman of the procurement subcommittee. Of Government of foreign men to me as the ranking member. It was brought to our attention by federal contractors a coalition including Lockheed Martin. Northrop Grumman . And the Information Technology Association of America. Our language. Which was adopted by the committee. Allows discretion. In the secretary of homeland security . To grant in whole or in part indemnity. Against potential liabilities . It requires that the companies carry insurance up to the amount that they recently can. This legislation is modeled as I said after existing law and practice and as they say if it ain't broke don't fix it . And so we're again offering today our language. Which we believe is fiscally responsible. Which is understandable and which is supported in a bipartisan way. The language that we have in our amendment protects. Thirty more seconds with the language in our. Amendment protects the federal treasury has been suggested by those who support the alternative languages in the bill that somehow we open the doors of the Treasury . If we grant indemnity. Our language makes it very clear that the indemnity offered by the secretary . Can be limited. Limited in amount. Limited in scope and wants the secretary makes the decision to grant indemnity it must be approved by the Office of Management and Budget. We believe this is a much superior . Way to get technology deployed in a rapid manner which is what this amendment is all about . The alternative language in the bill is going to slow down the process it requires an F.D.A. type. Approval procedure. That would allow the director of Homeland Security to examine the equipment and then certify we think that's the wrong approach . And we will urge adoption of our amendment. What purposes the gentleman. Texas writes. Chairman are rising opposition in general is recognized for twenty minutes. you Thank to Chairman Mr Chairman I yield at this time three minutes for the gentleman from Ohio one of the distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee . Mr Nussle Germans recognized for three minutes . First I want to thank the distinguished majority leader for his fine work on this . On this piece of legislation congratulate him on it while the. We've got a good bill here folks. And we're about to just blow all whole . So wide in the budget you ain't seen nothing . In

    Show Full Text
  • 02:15:42 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    fact we asked CVO to score.

  • 02:15:44 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    The Congressional Budget Office to score this amendment because we want to…

    The Congressional Budget Office to score this amendment because we want to at least be able to nail down a ballpark figure . Of

    Show Full Text
  • 02:15:46 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    at least be able to nail down a ballpark figure . Of

  • 02:15:48 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    at least be able to nail down a ballpark figure . Of what this would cost…

    at least be able to nail down a ballpark figure . Of what this would cost . And even CVO. Who has been known from time to time to guess and predict . And

    Show Full Text
  • 02:15:56 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    from time to time to guess and predict . And

  • 02:15:58 PM

    MR. NUSSLE

    and predict . And sometimes guess . Incorrectly even won't even hazard a…

    and predict . And sometimes guess . Incorrectly even won't even hazard a guess of what this bill costs . In fact what they tell us in the letter . Is that they know it's going to cost something they can't. They have no idea how much and why . Because you can't predict the future. But you can predict one thing. And that is Congress. Will respond . To just. Fully indemnify and to throw in this blanket blank check into this bill . Without recognizing the perspective. And the. The understanding of where we've been this year. Would be I believe irresponsible let's just review this year. Even before passing . The supplement. Where we increased homeland security funding this year . Already almost forty five percent in two thousand and one . And sixty five percent in two thousand and two forty billion . My colleagues . We in a bipartisan way. Spent in response in two supplementals. For reconstruction . And for the war . Eight point four billion in economic assistance to the aviation industry . Almost two hundred million. In the media is it. Immediate assistance. To victims of terrorism . And our two thousand and three budget included thirty five billion dollars increase. For defense to fully fund the president's request. Just this week . We passed an additional bill. For ten billion dollars. In addition to that thirty five . Just yesterday we sent to the president. A second supplemental. Where we provided. Twenty eight point nine billion in emergency funding . Thirteen of which went to defense . Eleven billion went to the other agencies. In addition. We provided roughly seventy five billion dollars of economic stimulus to help recover from the shock. Indemnification . I don't know what you're worried about here. We will respond . But to give a blank check . And to put the taxpayers . On the hook with absolutely no check. From the House of Representatives. With no oversight. With no accountability . And with no understanding of what this will do to the budget. Is the wrong thing to do . To this very responsible Bill. This bill fits within our budget. Do not pass this amendment. Or it bus. Every budget . Anyone has ever contemplated . Gentleman's time has expired . The gentleman from Texas Mr TURNER . Mr Speaker I yield to manage to the. Distinguished member of the Armed Services Committee . Mr Weldon. Mr Weldon is recognized for two minutes . Without objection so order was Chairman I rise in support of this amendment . Why do I rise in support of the amendment first of all before coming to Congress I work for the insurance industry. At the Home Office of the on a signal corporation. I spent eighteen years . Working on issues involving reinsurance. And liability concerns for the American people. I understand where we don't have enough. Market

    Show Full Text
  • 02:19:16 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    capability. Where the government has to come in and we in fact are doing…

    capability. Where the government has to come in and we in fact are doing that.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:19:19 PM

    MR. TURNER

    fact are doing that. This legislation that. Mr Turner's offers modeled…

    fact are doing that. This legislation that. Mr Turner's offers modeled after indemnification walls for the nuclear power industry . And the

    Show Full Text
  • 02:19:25 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    nuclear power industry . And the

  • 02:19:27 PM

    MR. WELDON

    commercial space launch industry. And they've operated

  • 02:19:29 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    successfully for decades.

  • 02:19:30 PM

    MR. WELDON

    decades. This is modeled after that. The second reason I come to the floor…

    decades. This is modeled after that. The second reason I come to the floor on this issue. And by the way the letter that we sent out was signed by . Twenty three Republican colleagues . On this very issue. Not more than several weeks ago . Was I worked very closely with this group. This is the N.B.C. working group. This group is made up of all the companies in America that produce cutting edge. Chemical nuclear and biological technologies. In fact I posted them twice on Capitol Hill . In the Rayburn building where members about a chance to go down and see technology associated with detection systems. With systems that are being designed on the cutting edge . To assist us in the war on terrorism. They have a major concern. Mr Chairman . They have a major concern . Relative to the ability of these kinds of companies . To still to continue to do the cutting edge research. Necessary to give us the products that we need this legislation that Mr Turner offers I think is a fair compromise . It gives us an ability to protect them . While still protecting the taxpayer in fact I think there is in fact a capping here that can be set by the administration . So the administration has the final determination . As a chairman of the procurement subcommittee for defense . My job is to work with our defense. Industrial base . To make sure that we're being given the cutting edge technology to fight the war on terrorism. Working closely with these industry groups. Working closely with the N.B.C. working group . I'm convinced that we need to have this kind of a moderate approach . And so I write in support of this legislation and urge my encourage my colleagues. To vote yes on the Turner Amendment gentleman's time has expired . Gentleman from Texas Mr Armey. Mr Chairman at this time is my pleasure to yield three minutes to the distinguished rep . The gentleman from Texas Mr Dooley distinguished your majority whip as recognized. Let me first . Mr Chairman. Say that those that are on the cutting edge of technology and wanting to provide it. Are protected in the basic text of the bill. By limiting their liability. And banning . Punitive damages like we've done in the Transportation Safety Administration another instances.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:21:44 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    instances. But Mr Chairman there is an unacceptable demand that America…

    instances. But Mr Chairman there is an unacceptable demand that America needs to know about right now.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:21:47 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    is an unacceptable demand that America needs to know about right now. Some…

    is an unacceptable demand that America needs to know about right now. Some of the largest and most profitable corporations in the country.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:21:55 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    country. Are attempting to pass off legal liability for their products .…

    country. Are attempting to pass off legal liability for their products . Onto

    Show Full Text
  • 02:22:00 PM

    MR. DELAY

    average Americans . These defense contractors are trying to feed the…

    average Americans . These defense contractors are trying to feed the taxpaying public to the crocodile's of the plaintiff's bar . American taxpayers shouldn't be asked to absorb the devastating financial consequences that would flow from creating and enormous new unfunded liability. Taxpayers shouldn't be footing the bill for a gigantic. New windfall for trial lawyers. Even now. The but plaintiff's bar is. Eagerly anticipating new ways to exploit the new terrorist attack. Through litigation against the companies that are developing terrifying tools. And what's even more outrageous . Is that multi-billion . Tractors. Have the nerve to come to Congress hand in hand to demand that foot. That taxpayers foot this bill. If these defense contractors. Bear the responsibility for the failure of their technology . Then they should be held responsible. And if these contractors are being unfairly sued. They should be penalized . Only because they contributed to the. Antiterrorism effort. In this country then these last suits. Need to be stopped. And that's exactly what our base tax insurers are we defining frivolous lawsuit. Suits. That do nothing but line the pockets of trial lawyers. When we indeed. Is broad based litigation reform . What we don't need . Are multi-billion dollar. Defense contractors making American taxpayers responsible for the quality of their technology this would truly be a case of corporate welfare. It's ironic that members of the minority who routinely maligned Republicans as the party of corporate America . Are so willing to subject taxpayers to a bottomless pit of unfunded liability to protect these corporations . Clearly . Supporters of this amendment. Place . A far greater weight. On the wishes of their trial lawyer friends than they do to the dangers. Created for fiscal discipline. And the American taxpayers. And I ask that you vote no on the Turner Amendment. Gentleman from Texas Mr TURNER. Ms figure I yield to vanish to the gentle lady from California. Miss Waters. Gentle lady is recognized for two minutes . I thank the gentleman from Texas for the time. I rise in support of the Turner men met . This amendment provides a reasonable balance between the protections needed by the liability insurance market. And the access to compensation . Needed by public uncertain and this trees. Such as the airlines . That turn in their mid uses like. Which. Which has received strong support from both sides of the aisle. Language that was contained in the bill reported by the Government Reform Committee . It provides

    Show Full Text
  • 02:24:52 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    bill reported by the Government Reform Committee . It provides

  • 02:24:55 PM

    MR. TURNER

    Reform Committee . It provides a sensible alternative to the bill . And

  • 02:24:59 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . And particularly to the only amendment. We

  • 02:25:02 PM

    MS. WATERS

    just debate it . H.R. five all five the homeland security act. Only…

    just debate it . H.R. five all five the homeland security act. Only require sellers. To carry liability insurance to the extent that it is reasonably of ale of all . From private sources . At prices and terms . That will not unreasonably distort the sales prices of sellers. Anti-terrorism technologies that simply means that if a company. Cannot obtain insurance that is reasonably priced. It does not need to have any insurance whatsoever. And victims cannot recover. One penny for their injuries. Amazingly. The Army Amendment is even worse . It would give total immunity from lawsuits . For any kind of wrongdoing . Including willful and malicious corporate misconduct . This is true so long as the designs for the anti-terrorism . Products and services . Have been approved by the Homeland Security Department . The only exception is if the seller. Acted fraudulent only all with willful misconduct prior to that approval. The seller is free to deceive the public . Or continue to market a product subsequently. Determined to be dangerous. Are defective. Even worse. The Army Amendment protects corporate wrongdoers. Against all other kinds of lawsuits. So a buyer can't sue the corporation. For breach of warranty. Breach of contract . Public nuisance or anything else. In other words the corporation's protection allows it to make products that don't even work. The Army Amendment protects the corporation. Against lawsuits by the. Injured victims and against lawsuits. By the airlines. Other groups who purchased a private. We do not need to be giving blanket immunity to. All corporations. Too many companies act in ways that are contrary to the public interest. And to many of our constituents. Are suffering as a result . We should not pass . Such a draconian. Amendment. Unanimous consent for thirty more seconds . Very much like what we should do is support the Turner. Amendment. This amendment. Maintains a cap on the libel ity of corporations . Recognizing the importance of doing so in order to stabilize the liability insurance market . That stability makes it easier for corporations to obtain. Capital to develop technologies that turn our men met. Also includes an indemnity clause. Such as the one used by the Department of Defense. This will enable victims . To receive compensation from the government for costs that exceed the corporate liability cap this is a good. Balanced approach to the real problems we're facing as a nation . Let's protect companies. And compensate victims . Support . The Turner. Amendment I yield back the balance of generally as time has expired Mr Armey. Speaker this time and I'm proud to yield three minister the distinguished gentleman from Oklahoma of the . Conference Chairman . And a member of the Select Committee Mr Watts to Watts is recognized for three minutes . Thank you must begin to thank the chairman for yielding. Mr Speaker the Turner Memon is fiscally irresponsible because it hands over the keys of the United States Treasury to trial lawyers. It would have the American taxpayer and. Not corporations but American taxpayers paying nearly infinite damages caused by terrorists we need the Safety Act provisions to ensure that Americans get the protection they deserve against future terrorists .

    Show Full Text
  • 02:28:30 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    get the protection they deserve against future terrorists .

  • 02:28:33 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    get the protection they deserve against future terrorists . The fatally…

    get the protection they deserve against future terrorists . The fatally flawed tort system in America and the unbounded threat of liability or blocking the deployment of anti-terrorism technologies.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:28:43 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    threat of liability or blocking the deployment of anti-terrorism…

    threat of liability or blocking the deployment of anti-terrorism technologies.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:28:46 PM

    MR. WATTS

    technologies. That could protect the American people and I want to give…

    technologies. That could protect the American people and I want to give you one illustration of where this where this really comes into play and shinin just give you some idea of the lack of common sense that the Turner amendment would tear down. And you might have heard this illustration a day but I still want to point out to you again . The insidious dynamic that prevails on the current law works as follows A company might produce a smallpox detection device and deploy one hundred of them. Terrorists strike ninety nine of the devices might work saving millions of lives . One device might not work and several thousand people might die of lawsuits will follow. The potentially infinite liability in which the lawsuits currently expose the company. Will prevent the company from being able to deploy. Any of the Hundred smallpox detection devices in the first place . The ninety nine that work will be pulled off the market which. If that happens . It would destroy it would put thousands and thousands millions of Americans. It would expose them . That is the tragedy that's the tragic consequence the. Safety Act. Is designed to prevent the Safety Act provisions place reasonable and sensible limits on lawsuits so that America's leading technology companies will be able to deploy . Solutions to defeat terrorists. And what the Turner Amendment does it actually takes the liability away . Or takes the safety features away from the people that go to the malls that go to the stadiums that the water treatment facilities . They all won't be able to have access to these technologies that protect us. That protect our kids that protect our families . That protect this nation . It just makes no sense. It's time for Congress to stand up to the trial. Law is yet again and say no. Especially now that we are at war against terrorists . Who will stop at nothing to harm innocent Americans we saw it on September eleventh . We saw it on April nineteenth one thousand nine hundred ninety five in Oklahoma City. This is about protecting American life. It's not about limitless . Lawsuits. Vote no on the Turner amendment on your back the balance of the gentleman yield back his time the gentleman from Texas . I'm the Speaker I yield one minute to the distinguished member of the Armed Services Committee. Mr Spratt a gentleman from South Carolina is recognized for one minute and without objection so as chairman this spill is this amendment fair basic what it does it takes blanket immunity that is added to this bill and replaces it we have selective indemnity. The bill as it stands would exonerate contractors who provide all kinds of a quip and gear and protective devices.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:31:50 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Undertaking the most serious sort of responsibility . From a liability

  • 02:31:53 PM

    MR. TURNER

    . From a liability whatsoever for the products I provide any just across…

    . From a liability whatsoever for the products I provide any just across the board blanket immunity .

    Show Full Text
  • 02:31:59 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . Instead it would say . Let's go back

  • 02:32:02 PM

    MR. SPRATT

    . Let's go back to the model of an old . Called

  • 02:32:04 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . Called Public Law eighty five eight zero four and allow on a case by…

    . Called Public Law eighty five eight zero four and allow on a case by case basis not apre or a not across the board but case by case .

    Show Full Text
  • 02:32:06 PM

    MR. SPRATT

    not apre or a not across the board but case by case . Indemnification to…

    not apre or a not across the board but case by case . Indemnification to be provided to these contractors so they would have this protection if they were sued. In certain cases under certain circumstances . It makes far more sense to try to sit here in judgment on all kinds of liability situations which we can't even begin to foresee . Much less render final judgment on. Eighty five eight zero four has been on the books for as long as anybody around there can remember. Lockheed aircraft Corp almost went broke. Bankrupt in one nine hundred seventy one it was thirty additional. You know thirty different. I was recognized for thirty seconds. It was the authority of . Eighty five eight zero for the extraordinary authority of that law that had been carried forward for at least sixty years . That allowed us to put. Lucky back on its feet . The largest contractor. That's basically what we're saying here let's use the extraordinary authority given . Agency heads . Which has been used paranoid. To negotiate these agreements selectively case by case as opposed to doing this across the board what we're doing here with this amendment is replacing something that is novel. New tried and. Vast was something that is proven to work. It's that basic that supple. And that's why we should adopt this a moment in time the gentleman has expired . The majority leader. The chairman at this time I'd like to yield three minutes to the gentle lady from Ohio. The member of the committee and the. Distinguished jurist in this part of the gentle lady from Ohio is recognized for three minutes. I appreciate those kind words and thank the majority leader and. The author of. So much that's good in this bill . Later army for yielding me this time. Mr Speaker we keep hearing. Reference to the word responsibility .

    Show Full Text
  • 02:34:07 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . We must have responsibility . And the Safety Act that the provision…

    . We must have responsibility . And the Safety Act that the provision included in the on block amendment the manager's amendment . Makes the

    Show Full Text
  • 02:34:12 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    included in the on block amendment the manager's amendment . Makes the…

    included in the on block amendment the manager's amendment . Makes the wrongdoers. Responsible. This indemnification Amendment. Makes the taxpayers responsible.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:34:24 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Responsibility is report is very important . But we

  • 02:34:27 PM

    MS. PRYCE

    . But we cannot make the taxpayers of this country responsible for…

    . But we cannot make the taxpayers of this country responsible for everything that goes wrong. We don't even know how much. This will cost. The bonus don't even ask for a cost estimate all we know . Is it C.B.O.T. . Tells us that it will cost a lot . Over a period of five years. Should we find out how much this will cost before we proceed by adopting this amendment. Mr Speaker . The Safety Act. Does not provide . Immunity from lawsuits . It simply provide that products. Approved by the federal government for use in homeland security. Approved by the federal government. For homeland security and deployed in cooperation with customers other than the federal government in order to save lives . Should be allowed the benefit of the existing government contractor defense. We already know that this works. It's already in law . Under the these provisions. Any person or entity. Who engages in criminal or terrorist acts including corporate crime such as consumer fraud and government. A contract fraud. They are denied . The protections. They don't get them. So the Democrats can't have it both ways . The Safety Act It's. In the manager's amendment. Is the fastest. And the most efficient way to deploy anti-terrorism technologies. Much needed technologies that will save lives . And it does it without extending. Any immunity . And it does it without leaving. The American taxpayers holding the bag . The tanner provision. Will do just that it will leave the American taxpayers. Holding the bag . And we get that assignment. All too often Mr Speaker. Allow the reasonable . Insurance coverage to kick in provide for limited. Very limited tort reform . And we have the answer we can go forward. And I yield back the balance my time. Generally. Back or try and. Gentleman from Texas . A much bigger you have to distinguish . Gentleman from Georgia. Member of the Intelligence Committee. As Bishop. Gentleman from Georgia is recognized for one and one half minutes . Thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr Chairman a rousing. Strong support of the turn on men . Which is a reasoned bipartisan alternative. To an irresponsible allow ability provision in the bill. That currently exist . A myriad of new and and applaud technology is that a need it now. To protect America from the threat of nuclear biological chemical and other terrorist threats.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:37:05 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    nuclear biological chemical and other terrorist threats.

  • 02:37:08 PM

    MR. TURNER

    and other terrorist threats. However under current law. Many of the…

    and other terrorist threats. However under current law. Many of the technologies may never be deployed because they cannot be insured under our current legal our belief structure.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:37:16 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    insured under our current legal our belief structure.

  • 02:37:19 PM

    MR. BISHOP

    Section seven fifty five three of the bill addresses this problem . But is…

    Section seven fifty five three of the bill addresses this problem . But is extremely misguided . And it's irresponsible . Under the bill. Victims who are injured . Cannot sue for personal injuries because the corporate wrongdoing. Enjoys. Total immunity from lawsuits . But any Can't of wrongdoing. Including willful and malicious corporate misconduct . Under the so-called government contractor defense. This is wrong is un-American . It's all the kill . It's throwing the baby out with the bath water . The turn on and that is now the tailored to address this issue. It allows the NEW TO problem of Homeland Security and other agencies that are responsible for homeland security . The discretion the discretion to indemnify providers of anti-terrorist technology. From liability . Above and beyond the coverage that they will to obtain. In the private marketplace. This approach is modeled after successful . Indemnification laws which are targeted . And fiscally responsible . Mr Speaker with fifty more seconds or four seconds Mr Speaker . The Turner Amendment gives America the technologies that we need to remain secure. While guaranteeing the victim's rights that they deserve. And entitled to under the law. It's a right thing to do and I strongly urge my colleagues to support it time the gentleman has expired. Majority leader. Has just been. Mr Chairman at this time I don't want America to distinguish gentleman from Virginia Mr Davis. John let me ask you to do that as I said one minute asking since revising stand. Without objection so are a lot to say . Let me say that the concept of contractor indemnification. Which is the core to the term. It's not a new plan it's been around since the one nine hundred fifty S.. Under Public Law eighty five eight zero four and for the bodies. So we understand less than one hundred million dollars has been paid out over the course of about forty five years . Because the

    Show Full Text
  • 02:39:20 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . Because the discretion that the agencies have in exercising that. And…

    . Because the discretion that the agencies have in exercising that. And also because under this.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:39:26 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    It would also be subject to be approval. In order to get protection under…

    It would also be subject to be approval. In order to get protection under either plan is the Turner plan or the army find the contractor has to require insurance . They don't need

    Show Full Text
  • 02:39:33 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    army find the contractor has to require insurance . They don't need

  • 02:39:34 PM

    MR. DAVIS

    to require insurance . They don't need

  • 02:39:36 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    to fully protect to the extent the risk is not covered by insurance.

  • 02:39:38 PM

    MR. DAVIS

    risk is not covered by insurance. And if a supplier of technology engages…

    risk is not covered by insurance. And if a supplier of technology engages in willful misconduct or displays a lack of good faith. Neither plan. Saves are the solutions proposed differ but I think each represents a via. Viable solutions to the dilemma faced by the nation. Our committee. Like the indemnification plan because it was written into current law. The Army plan though has been the policy of the house as we move legislation for these last I want to thank Mr Turner for working with us in this language in the committee. Appreciate that what he has done. On this and . Just to to finally add this . The price Anderson acts out of March and time the gentleman has expired with Law eighty five eight zero four prices for gentleman from Texas and. The Speaker I yield to manage to the distinguished ranking member of the dish or Harry committee misconduct. Gentleman from Michigan is recognized for two minutes. I thank the chairman for yelling. I just want to express my sympathies for my friend. My television friend. The. Gentleman from Virginia Mr Davis whose amendment this was when we were in committee and in rules . Now all of a sudden .

    Show Full Text
  • 02:40:58 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Something happened on the way to the floor. And so I just expressed to him.

  • 02:41:05 PM

    MR. TURNER

    to him. Maybe I can find out in the cloakroom what happened that caused…

    to him. Maybe I can find out in the cloakroom what happened that caused his sudden change of heart . And the support

    Show Full Text
  • 02:41:11 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    caused his sudden change of heart . And the support

  • 02:41:15 PM

    MR. CONYERS

    of the Turner Amendment. Now here we go again . We have unprecedented…

    of the Turner Amendment. Now here we go again . We have unprecedented corporate. Immunity . And subtitle of the Homeland Security Bill I'm going to tell my friends over here. You're going to lose votes on final passage . Mr Leader by keeping continuing to. Immune . Immunize these corporations . Against a liability . First it was the airport security group . Some of the. Lousiest contractors in the business . Are now going to get immunized . Now here we are going to give. Corporate immunity from companies that will not be able to be penalize. By juries what is this . This isn't a tort liability bill . This is a homeland protection. Department that you're trying to create and. All of this foolishness . Is not doing you any good . Extending this product liability . M.-E. an immunity to add a terrorist products . Is a bad idea . And I hope that we'll reject this amendment . And if necessary reject the whole bill. And I thank the gentleman and reserve the balance of our time . Well and heals back here in time the gentleman has expired . Six times the gentleman from Texas. A much bigger What's the remaining time on each side. The gentleman from Texas Mr Turner has seven and three quarter. Minutes remaining in the majority leader has seven one half minutes remaining . Authority leader or speaker I have one other speaker on the way he is not yet arrived if I do expect to close the debate . So I would

    Show Full Text
  • 02:43:18 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    suggest perhaps the gentleman from Texas might have another speaker . And…

    suggest perhaps the gentleman from Texas might have another speaker . And see if my mind of the speaker arrives. If the

    Show Full Text
  • 02:43:26 PM

    MR. TURNER

    gentleman going to join Leader reserves his time. Gentleman from Texas

  • 02:43:30 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . Thank you Mr Speaker I yield to manage to the distinguished lady. From…

    . Thank you Mr Speaker I yield to manage to the distinguished lady. From New York Ms Maloney. Gentle lady from New York is recognized for two minutes . I rise in support . The Turner Amendment is. Narrowly targeted . And

    Show Full Text
  • 02:43:45 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    fiscally responsible . And the Republican majorities. Immunity provisions…

    fiscally responsible . And the Republican majorities. Immunity provisions in the bill. Are the ultimate anti-corporate responsibility provisions. And living proof that the leadership is not serious about increasing. Corporate accountability .

    Show Full Text
  • 02:44:03 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . But the Turner Amendment addresses. One of the challenges that we…

    . But the Turner Amendment addresses. One of the challenges that we experienced in New York after September eleventh.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:44:07 PM

    MR. TURNER

    that we experienced in New York after September eleventh. One of the…

    that we experienced in New York after September eleventh. One of the biggest problems we had was the lack now of available insurance.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:44:13 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    was the lack now of available insurance.

  • 02:44:16 PM

    MRS. MALONEY

    It's stifling our economy. Commerce can't go forward without insurance .…

    It's stifling our economy. Commerce can't go forward without insurance . And I hope Congress will act quickly on anti-terrorism insurance. But similarly . We have very talented private sector industries . Developing cutting edge technology . To make our homeland secure. But without sufficient insurance coverage and. And liability. These technologies. Simply will not be offered. And without a safety net for catastrophe businesses simply. Do. Anti terrorism business. What this amendment does is that it indemnifies. Providers of anti-terrorism technology. Which we desperately need only . After they've obtained all the insurance. They that they can from the private market. And above that insurance. They are indemnified. For additional liability. I might say that they must also get the approval of the secretary of homeland security and zero zero zero M. B. . So I urge my colleagues . To support the Turner Amendment. It merely gives companies that will do business with the new Department of Homeland Security. The same protections. The same indemnity protections . To companies that work with other agencies like the Department of Defense. So I yield back my time and . Urge my colleagues . To vote in favor of the Turner. And then kind of generally has expired. The majority leader . Mr Chairman is that my pleasure this time to. You know three minutes to the distinguished attorney. And member of his body Mr Goodlatte from Virginia. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for three minutes . I thank the leader for yielding me this time and I commend him for his . Very strong work in creating this legislation that will allow homeland security. To be consolidated in one department of our government . And also on his work to make sure that we can effectively . Make

    Show Full Text
  • 02:46:15 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    effectively . Make sure that our country is indeed secure.

  • 02:46:20 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    I strongly oppose the amendment. Offered by the gentleman from Texas .…

    I strongly oppose the amendment. Offered by the gentleman from Texas . Advanced technology companies are developing technologies that can help detect and prevent acts of terrorism.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:46:28 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    can help detect and prevent acts of terrorism.

  • 02:46:31 PM

    MR. GOODLATTE

    However these companies are effectively prohibited from making these…

    However these companies are effectively prohibited from making these technologies widely available. Because they would be subjected to unlimited liability and. Uninsurable risks. As we sadly learned from the tragic events of September eleventh . Our terrorist enemies. Will not limit their attacks to government targets in choosing their targets terrorists make no distinction between military personnel and civilian men women and children. Therefore it is imperative that our local shopping malls ball field schools . And office buildings be protected from terrorist attack . One way to do that is to untie the hands of technology companies. And allow them to provide the best technologies available to the private sector. Without fear that they will be put out of business for doing so . The provisions in the bill help ensure that effective. Antiterrorism technologies that meet very stringent safety and effectiveness requirements. Are deployed and requires that companies selling such devices. Obtain the maximum amount of liability insurance possible . It also ensures that. Victims are compensated for demonstrably injuries as. Equitably as possible. Opponents argue that the bill provision provide for immunity to corporations who willfully sell defective products. But they are simply wrong . Nothing in these provision for vide immunity from lawsuits. Further. Any person who or company. Who engages in criminal or terrorist acts including corporate crime such as consumer fraud and government contract fraud . Is denied the protections of the act. In addition under the Act if a company engages in any fraud or. Willful misconduct in submitting information on product safety to the secretary of homeland security. It will be denied the opportunity to. Even assert. The government contractor defense. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the current provisions of the bill . So that Americans may be protected by the best technologies available . Without sticking American taxpayers with the bill. In the case of catastrophe caused by terrorists. Oppose this amendment. And support the legislation. I yield back the balance of my time. And heels back his time and the gentleman from Texas . A much bigger one minute to the distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee Mr Dog of Texas. Gentleman from Texas is recognized for one minute. Thank you . How very disappointing the south after noon that the leadership . Has chosen to reject a successful bipartisan initiative by Mr Turner and Mr Weldon that has already been endorsed by a number of major corporations. Seems to me that that public safety. Should be the first . The last. And the only gold of this homeland security bill.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:49:22 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Yet with this last minute. Legal loophole that has been tacked into the…

    Yet with this last minute. Legal loophole that has been tacked into the bill.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:49:26 PM

    MR. TURNER

    into the bill. The. Gold Is clearly to rid corporations of their…

    into the bill. The. Gold Is clearly to rid corporations of their responsibility for the harm that their products cause if the wrongdoer doesn't bear the responsibility . Then who

    Show Full Text
  • 02:49:30 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    if the wrongdoer doesn't bear the responsibility . Then who

  • 02:49:33 PM

    MR. DOGGETT

    if the wrongdoer doesn't bear the responsibility . Then who will bear the…

    if the wrongdoer doesn't bear the responsibility . Then who will bear the responsibility . While the decision Mr Armey has made . Is to place all of the responsibility for wrongdoing on the victim. This is basically a blame the victim. Let the victim bear the full cost of the wrong door. Approach. And it's so strange as to the timing not only the last minute way in which it was slipped down after the Government Reform Committee approved the bipartisan approach the moderate approach . But strange timing that in a year. When so many retirees . So many workers. So many investors are paying the very painful cost of corporate irresponsibility . That this Congress would come along and say let's have a little more of a kind of that has exploded. You know just in a minute Mr Jealous record I for one additional minute. The Reserve Officers Association . Certainly no. Group that has been involved in any of these high profile debates over tarte issues . Has stated its unqualified opposition to the special exemption. That this legislation provides. Noting that even unscrupulous government contractors guilty of. Willful misconduct . Will be let off the hook . When they are providing any terrorism technology. To our American troops . This isn't a debate about liability limits. It's a debate about TARP or the countability limits. A debate about TARP or responsibility limits. And I don't think we ought to limit that responsibility. Particularly at this time in American history. Clearly there are no limits . To the willingness of this leadership to provide backdoor favors. To their friends. Protecting Americans working at home and fighting abroad. Means holding corporate. Corporations responsible for their misdeeds . That's what we need to be doing instead of blaming the victim. Instead of saying that it will be the soldiers the fathers the mothers the children and other innocents all the victims . That they have to pay the price for corporate misconduct. We need to make a firm statement . In favor of a reasonable bipartisan approach that Mr Turner is on the gentleman has expired. General razor the balance of my time because. Joining me to reserves his time . Gentleman from Texas . Miss bigger I yield. One minute to the gentleman from California shift . Gentleman from California is recognized for one minute . Speak I raise in support of this amendment. Today our nation faces a new threat and a new enemy. And while the terrorists we fight have new methods of. attack We have much greater new abilities to defend this great nation . America has always

    Show Full Text
  • 02:52:19 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . America has always been the arsenal of democracy and we remain so.

  • 02:52:22 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    remain so. And the new tools we possess. Are

  • 02:52:25 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    the technologies that spring from the ingenuity of the American mind. We…

    the technologies that spring from the ingenuity of the American mind. We have seen those technologies deployed in the Gulf War in Afghanistan . And now those new

    Show Full Text
  • 02:52:31 PM

    MR. TURNER

    Gulf War in Afghanistan . And now those new technologies help protect us…

    Gulf War in Afghanistan . And now those new technologies help protect us here at home . In order to

    Show Full Text
  • 02:52:35 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    us here at home . In order to encourage the private . sector To use its…

    us here at home . In order to encourage the private . sector To use its ingenuity to develop these. Defensive capabilities . They must have

    Show Full Text
  • 02:52:42 PM

    MR. SCHIFF

    . They must have the ability to protect themselves from excessive exposure…

    . They must have the ability to protect themselves from excessive exposure and liability. There is a mechanism in existing law that provides indemnity. On a case by case basis . For those under contract with the Department of Defense . And as demonstrated by the extraordinary work of the Department of Defense. This targeted immunity works . The Turner Amendment. Based on a bipartisan agreement. Attested to by those who have contracted with the Department of Defense. Re stores. This. Targeted indemnity. The opposition says that what has worked. And additional thirty seconds. Gels recognized for additional fifteen seconds the opposition says that what has worked for the Department of Defense has done enough. They want blanket indemnity they want an indemnity so broad. It threatens to remove some of the vital and powerful incentives for technology makers to make sure they get it right. This goes too far. We want to incentivize the development of new technologies that work. That meet their promise that live up to their expectation to protect this country. And all who serve it that better men will do this time the only way to heaven and nothing less gentleman from Texas .

    Show Full Text
  • 02:53:54 PM

    MR. TURNER

    Majority Leader reserves his time . Mr Speaker

  • 02:53:56 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    reserves his time . Mr Speaker I yield one . minute To the gentle

  • 02:54:00 PM

    MR. SCHIFF

    lady from Texas . Miss Jackson Lee gentle lady from Texas recognized for…

    lady from Texas . Miss Jackson Lee gentle lady from Texas recognized for one minute. It is recognized for one minute. I thank you very much Mr Chairman . I rise to support the Turner man and I ask the question today on this very important debate. Are we fighting terrorism. Or are we fighting the American people.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:54:25 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Nothing in the Turner Amendment. Well throw out the intent of the…

    Nothing in the Turner Amendment. Well throw out the intent of the Department of Homeland Security. To save lives . And to prevent terrorism. The turn amendment will in effect. Encourage innovative. Devices and technology . To be

    Show Full Text
  • 02:54:39 PM

    MR. TURNER

    . To be presented to the government. It will not. On the other hand…

    . To be presented to the government. It will not. On the other hand provide the corporate excuse that the manager's amendment.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:54:44 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    the corporate excuse that the manager's amendment. Gives to this…

    the corporate excuse that the manager's amendment. Gives to this particular bill by not giving.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:54:49 PM

    MS. JACKSON LEE

    by not giving. Or giving immunity provisions. To those who would bring…

    by not giving. Or giving immunity provisions. To those who would bring technology that might harm us. What the turn a minute does is say bring your innovative devices. Bring your innovative technology. And we will provide. Indemnity with restrictions. Those restrictions will be the Department of Homeland Security secretary . And the O.M.B. director. What more can you ask. Are we here to save lives . All we're here to help the American people. Are we here to fight terrorism. Are we here to stop money. In corporate America's pocketbooks. Support the Turner Amendment I yield back the gentle lady has expired. The gentleman from Texas . Figure what's the remaining time on each side . The gentleman from Texas has one and one half minutes remaining in the majority leader has four and one half minutes remaining. Speaker out on reserve the balance of my time to close . We have no further speakers other than myself joining the majority leader closes. I'm sorry Mr Speaker thank you very much a misspeak or.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:55:59 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    I want to thank first Mr Davis for his efforts with me in crafting this…

    I want to thank first Mr Davis for his efforts with me in crafting this language and . We both

    Show Full Text
  • 02:56:04 PM

    MR. TURNER

    crafting this language and . We both work with Lockheed Martin Northrop…

    crafting this language and . We both work with Lockheed Martin Northrop Grumman and information technology show she ation to come forward with this language that we reported out of the Government Reform Committee unanimously without opposition.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:56:08 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    out of the Government Reform Committee unanimously without opposition.

  • 02:56:17 PM

    MR. TURNER

    without opposition. I miss Davis and I brought the amendment to the…

    without opposition. I miss Davis and I brought the amendment to the attention of the Rules Committee and I'm very grateful we had the opportunity to later to offer the amendment.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:56:24 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    opportunity to later to offer the amendment. I must say that it is…

    opportunity to later to offer the amendment. I must say that it is somewhat surprising to hear the criticism from the other side today of what is existing law.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:56:28 PM

    MR. TURNER

    the criticism from the other side today of what is existing law. The…

    the criticism from the other side today of what is existing law. The Department of Defense grants indemnity. To companies that launch missiles. Because of the concern. Of those corporations about business risk. I was quite surprised to hear the provision. Criticize because it's been in the lozenge nine hundred fifty eight and was first implemented by. President Eisenhower and most recently used by President Bush when he authorized the Department of Health and Human Services to indemnify. The manufacturers of separate. It would not provide that to our government unless we did so. Our amendment follows the existing law . Existing practice and most importantly. Doesn't take anyone's legal rights. Away from them. I would urge the House to join with us in supporting this bipartisan amendment. Twenty. Democrats and twenty one Republicans wrote a letter to the. Special panel asking them to include our language. In the bill. We enjoyed bipartisan support. We believe it's the right way to deal with a very serious problem. And we will be able on her our amendment to get the technology out there and in place. Much quicker than the approaches in the bill which requires a. F.D.A. type . Review process for every piece of equipment. Time legitimate had eight years to implement the technology we need to fight terrorism time the gentleman has expired majority leader . Mr Chairman I yield myself such time as remaining generous recognize . We have heard a great deal about the bipartisan support of this amendment . Irony of ironies where there is bipartisan support. That can be bipartisan rejection. I may say Mr Chairman this amendment had an interesting experience in the committee of jurisdiction one of the twelve Standing Committees.

    Show Full Text
  • 02:58:28 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    jurisdiction one of the twelve Standing Committees. That worked on this…

    jurisdiction one of the twelve Standing Committees. That worked on this bill. When it was proposed. On the eve of the markup of this bill . And that

    Show Full Text
  • 02:58:36 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    markup of this bill . And that committee.

  • 02:58:40 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    It was proposed and. Opposed

  • 02:58:42 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    and. Opposed by the ranking Democrat. On the committee . Mr Waxman who is…

    and. Opposed by the ranking Democrat. On the committee . Mr Waxman who is said and I quote . It really is opening up the treasury of the United States to a lot of companies that might have exercised due care and more importantly . When companies are indemnified . Even if they are negligent. There is not the incentive to avoid being negligent. This approach to the problem was contemplated in the other body and indeed. In this case the ranking minority member a Republican member in the other body had intended to offer this amendment in the other bodies markup just yesterday . And was dissuaded from doing so . By the majority members of the Democrats of the committee. Who thought it imposed too big a burden on the treasury of the United States. Mr Chairman . I'm not a lawyer . So I have to rely on other legal experts . Like for example . The Supreme Court. And as the Big eight. It has been argued that when a government contractor has a defense . It is an immunity. I get only a. I only point to the minority. That the Supreme Court has said . Eighty France is not imminent. And immunity is always going back to the legal questions that baffle us so much as. What the meaning of the word is is . But in this case . The meaning of the word defense is not . Immunity . Let me say Mr Chairman that I what we are trying to do was well describe. Several people were trying to encourage that pressure. Well American genius . To bring its product to the defense of America. What this. Base language that would be set aside by this amendment does do is provide a consolidation of claims in federal court. To stop venue shopping. It has a requirement that non-economic damages be awarded only in proportion to a party's percentage of fall . It has a ban on punitive damage it takes is not a simple practical American. Notion that if you are a victim. You should not be treated as if you were a perpetrator . Rather novel idea. I'm sure in some circles. But quite well understood by most Americans. The underlining language offsets. He says offsets are awarded based on receipt of collateral source benefits provided . Compensation for the same injuries no to. No double dipping . This is something that I have another context . Referred to as the down actual. Provision. Having been in law enacted in law . Pursuant to the innovation of the distinguished Democrat majority leader and the other body. The underlying language as a defense. Modeled on government contractors defense that applies. Following sales of qualified anti-terrorism technologies in the private sector . And it caps liability and ensures. This has been enacted . This body before this is not some johnny come lately notion. New to this body . It was part of the Aviation Security Act. It was part of the air Stabilization Act. It was part of the terrorism risk insurance bill. And it was part of the class action reform bill passed in this body. In this year. What we don't do. In the underlying language. That would be. Set aside by this amendment . Is put a cap on attorney's fees. Provide any immunity for anybody anywhere at any time or. . Exempt Criminals from coverage. Mr Chairman . I don't ask much. But I do ask for accuracy. And debate. There's been far too little of it. I asked a body reject this amendment and . Up all the underlying language time the gentleman has expired. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas Mr Charter. As many as are in favor will signify by saying I . Those opposed will say no to pay the chair the nose have it . Just. They are gentleman from Texas to request a record vote on grounds of Corman's not present. The chair account for a quorum is a gentleman withdraws point of order. Yes . Those in favor of record vote will stand to be counted. Sufficient number having arisen . A record vote. Is ordered. Those in favor the moment will vote aye of those opposed will vote no members record their votes by electronic device. Pursuant

    Show Full Text
  • 03:03:54 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    vote no members record their votes by electronic device. Pursuant to…

    vote no members record their votes by electronic device. Pursuant to Clause six of Rule eighteen following this fifteen minute vote. The chair were reduced to five minutes the time. For the vote. If. Ordered on Amendment twenty by Mr Waxman and then the twenty one by Mr Armey. This

    Show Full Text
  • 03:04:10 PM

    MR. TURNER

    Waxman and then the twenty one by Mr Armey. This will be a fifteen minute…

    Waxman and then the twenty one by Mr Armey. This will be a fifteen minute vote followed by two five minute votes.

    Show Full Text
  • 03:04:14 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    minute vote followed by two five minute votes.

  • 03:04:18 PM

    MR. TURNER

    There's an amendment protects companies that sell anti-terrorism…

    There's an amendment protects companies that sell anti-terrorism technology to federal state and local governments . From lawsuits

    Show Full Text
  • 03:04:19 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    technology to federal state and local governments . From lawsuits related…

    technology to federal state and local governments . From lawsuits related to the technology and design . The amendment is offered by Texas Democrat Jim Turner . The House will next take up a House Senate compromise bill on rules for people declaring bankruptcy . To learn a little bit more about that bill. We talked earlier with Pamela Barnett of Congress Daily who's following this story. Thank you for joining us it seemed like an agreement on bankruptcy. Came as a bit of a surprise that last night what finally happened to allow this bill to come to the floor. Well the last issue that the House and Senate conferees had to work out . Had to do with. What types of deaths related to abortion clinic protests could be discharged bankruptcy in. Meaning which debts would you not have to pay. If you were to declare bankruptcy . And after this year. Of negotiating but this bill is been around for five years . But after last night. The conferees managed to come to an agreement. About the wording of that language and. That gave the go ahead for the legislation to come to the House and Senate floors How do negotiators bridge their differences in cases like that explain the process. Well. It's a lot of staff work a lot of behind the scenes work most of it is really just how the legalities . Put a fine point on the legal language to make sure it says what they want to say and . It was a lot of hard work but. Work that they want to get the still going to give us a broader sense Pamela Barnett of this bankruptcy conference about what does the building. Well. The bill will make it harder for individuals to wipe the slate clean and bankruptcy essentially essentially will make it make it so that debtors have to pay more for what they owe . Even if they declare bankruptcy . Consumer activists. Concern that this will make things very difficult for most vulnerable individuals those who have lost their jobs or. Have a family member with a catastrophic illness . But this bill was heavily backed by the credit card industry which has a great deal with members on both sides of the aisle. And they made a very persuasive case . And they were like well under this bill because now I have to pay back more of their credit card debt. Even if they declare bankruptcy . And look ahead Pamela Barnett to the Senate. And the president how they can handle this. Oh the Senate is slated to take it up next week . There is opposition . Senator Wellstone Paul a Democrat from Minnesota for instance. Will probably try to filibuster this legislation. But he has taught attempted that many times in the past. He's always been cut off by his other colleagues. Through cloture votes that . Cut off debate and. Senator Daschle the majority leader in the Senate a Democrat from South Dakota. That has consistently backed efforts to cut off debate on this bill. And get it. Loaded on to kill or interest in the bill. On the so it looks like that will go through next week in the Senate. The president has already signaled that he will sign this legislation. We are. The house is now voting on an amendment to H.R. five thousand and five a bill to create a new Homeland Security Department . Aimed at preventing terrorist attacks. The Senate's been working on their own version of a bill to create a homeland security department . That bills coming out of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee . And the chairman . Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman . Is currently discussing the progress they've made on the bill . At this a live news conference . This is live coverage . On C.-SPAN. In this town today . All of which seems to center around . Whether or not the president of the new department should have the right. ALTER. Existing civil service and worker protections held by the employees. That will be working in the new department. Some people seem to be suggesting that the. Homeland Security ship has hit an iceberg. To me it seems a lot more like an ice cube. So this is no time for anybody to be jumping ship . The fact is existing law which is reaffirmed in our bill gives the president and secretary substantial flexibility to manage the new department and its one hundred seventy thousand employees. The secretary can reward excellence . Fire poorly performing employees offer recruitment bonuses . And more on top of that. Our bill included a number of important. New provisions. Not previously in law . That were specifically. Added during our markup . And would give the secretary. Additional authority and flexibility. To manage his or her employees . The bipartisan Voinovich Akaka Amendment. Did that. It would allow the agency to hire. Whomever it wants without going through a competitive hiring process if the Office of Personnel Management . Determines that there's a critical hiring need . The new secretary of Homeland Security could reform. Outdated competitive hiring. Procedures to speed up staffing. By new employees. And the new secretary . Could revise or rules risk. Restricting performance bonuses those are just a few of the additions to the management flexibility. That the new secretary would have that result from the one of its . Amendment to our bill. The bottom line is that the new department as we've designed it. Has the tools it needs to attract. Maintain and reward. Top flight. Checked our security. But. We are open to the possibility that. Because this is such a large number of employees being transferred into this department and others that will be hired. That some changes to the law . Might be warranted. As the reorganization gets underway. And that's why the legislation requires. The secretary of Homeland Security to report back to Congress. Every six months . During the organization process and . Explicitly. Invites the secretary. To propose changes in law . That experience suggests that would help create a more efficient and effective department . So . Let's all tone down the rhetoric . And stop . sounding False alarms. This is really a tempest in a teapot . One that should not and. Must not distract us from the real tempest of terrorism. That continues to threaten the security of the American people and is the reason why we have such broad agreement . On the necessity for a new Department of Homeland Security. Cynics think the politics is the art of making the possible impossible. Let's not prove them right. So the message I want to send today is this the Governmental Affairs Committee . Of the Senate . Has sent a good. Bipartisan bill to the Senate floor for consideration next week. Our bill. Can. Will and should be the basis for the Senate's final product. When passed and reconciled with the House bill. It will be the legislative blueprint for an effective efficient . And empowered. Department of Homeland Security . One that. I am confident. President Bush will sign into law. Thank you. Yes . It's safe to say. You were the fries . That's right you think the president. Yes. I was definitely surprised by the presidential veto threat I haven't exactly or explicitly heard it from him I've heard it from. Ari Fleischer and others around him . As I mentioned to the president this morning I've heard from President Flay sure that there might be a veto but I have not yet heard that and I hope I will not. From President Bush. And the reason is that this bill that we reported out of our committee. Gives President. Bush I'd say more than ninety percent of what he asked for in his proposal for a Department of Homeland Security. The differences that we have are honestly marginal and and. They don't go to the heart of the mission of new this new department . Which is how do we best protect the American people from terrorism how do we prevent terrorist attacks from occurring again . These are about . Civil service . And related questions. So let's not turn the. Critically important profoundly important . Quest for greater homeland security for the American people . Into a labor management dispute. It's not that it doesn't have to be that. Yes . This is marginal. I think you. Yeah. Right. What a few. Because we feel strongly about the correctness of our approach. I would say that our approach. The questions were involved in our marginal. But . We've we've got. As a co-equal branch of government a right to take the position that we think is correct Incidentally the this sections of our. Bill that the president is objecting to regarding. Management flexibility . Are not the ones that were in the Hart Rudman. Commission report suggested legislation. Are in our committee bill. They were added by the president. And they would subtract from the rights of federal workers today . We're saying it's foolish to get into that kind of battle . Today. Let's focus on what's our priority and that is to create a new Department of Homeland Security. But. There's you know you bring these human rights. Here I mean there are parts of this really that are saying we're doing exactly what he was less ability than others are already killing. Let me try to separate because it was about two or three different things going here and see if I can do it briefly . The first is on the overall question of management. Flexibility there. I'm seeing that as a result of our bill the news. The secretary of the Department of Homeland Security will actually have more management flexibility than any secretary has previously had. Because of the combination of existing civil service reform . And the reforms that are included in the Voinovich Akaka. Amendment that we adopted. In our committee. We don't give the president everything he wanted because we think he asked for too much that it was not necessary . In substance but also . And I have been saying this since this began to my friends at the White House. Let's not turn this into a labor management dispute. It's. It's not that. This is about protecting the security of the American people and my concern from the beginning . And I advise the White House. This that if you tried to strip back the protections of federal workers now have . It would make it more difficult to pass our bill. That's on civil service. Second is . It's bacon. We have extended to. Grants. Under this new law a new grants . Protections that exist in several other programs including the Clean Water Act Superfund. Which say that. If you use federal money to do construction or substantial renovation you've got to pay . Construction workers the prevailing wage rate which is a kind of. Average in the region. Incidentally no Republican member of our committee sought to strip that provision. From our bill . And I think it's because Davis make an application . To this kind of program enjoys bipartisan support this is actually not a partisan measure. The final one is on the collective bargaining rights and and. This gets a little intricate but let me see if I can do it directly . Current laws is that the president has the right . To eliminate the right of federal workers . Agency. Our subdivision of an agency wide . If he determines that national security is at stake. There is I can tell you from having heard from federal workers in great fear that this president may be tempted to strip . The union membership. Away from the fifty thousand some odd federal workers who are now members of unions who will be transferred to the new department . And are close in on this simply says . Mr President you can't do that. But here's what you can do. If any of the workers transferred to the new department. Change their job responsibilities . And you determine that those responsibilities do involve national security. If you make that case so the. Secretary does before the Federal Labor Relations Authority. You can take the union rights away from that worker. We also make clear that insofar as new divisions in the. But we're creating for instance a new division. On intelligence as that section. Is staffed by the president. He maintains under our proposal. The right to decide that the people working in that division should not have collective bargaining rights so again I think they're making a mountain out of a molehill . Here and and. Losing and taking their eye off the ball the ball . Is it is homeland security. And let's not let ourselves get distracted from the next breath . It's happened . Fortuitously that. We both walked into the Old Executive Office Building at the same time under umbrellas . And he offered to have a larger umbrella . And he invited me to come under his umbrella stand to hear my . Well actually held on to my own smaller umbrella is another area where we had a very cordial conversation and I said Mr President . I really hope you don't let . These minor disagreements over civil service. Affect our progress on this bill because my said to him basically what I've said to you this afternoon . This bill gives you more of the. Out of my committee gives you more than ninety percent of what you asked for. And he said he'd look at it but. They said I'm going to talk about this some in the statement . I'm about to give and he was treated his word is . You're right he's right . I think I'm going to pass on that I don't know what it is and we have nothing like that in our bill but obviously if it comes over. When we go to conference will trickle look at it. Sorry not to have a more specific response yes . It's you know. That's all the state of the Senate next week if you have any you. Well . I will tell you that. I'm concerned about the prospects for progress in the Senate next week and. More concerned than I thought it would be at this point . Back always when we started our deliberations here after the president's endorsement of the Homeland Security Department in June. Senator Daschle will ask me to have a bill out of my committee in time for a floor action. On Monday July twenty ninth so we could pick it up and pass it . Before we left for the August recess. I think that's in jeopardy now and I truly regret that. And it's in jeopardy . Because in part. Some consideration of. Prescription drug benefits for the elderly has taken more time that was thought. But there are some members of the Senate who intend to use their rights they have to delay consideration of the bill. I hope that they ultimately do not this is a matter of critical and. Urgent national necessity and . With rights come responsibilities . And that includes the rights that every senator has to stop the process when he or she wants this is a case of urge my colleagues to move we've got copies of the bill as it came out of our committee we're sharing them with the people who are who are concerned about different subject matter of urge them to take it home over the weekend read it if you've got questions on Monday ask us . But. Let's try to get this. Adopted before we leave. For August recess. Yes . That's right. As well I mean I'm not surprise you and you should. You know ask him yourself. Senator Byrd has spoken on this and. Brief conversation with him. On the floor of the Senate. This morning and. You know I think he feels this is a very big. Department or creating. And he doesn't want to. He wants the time to consider it in detail . And I've really urged him to try it with all respect . Which I do have for him to to to take a look at the content of the bill . As best he can with a step over the weekend and I hope that when we get when we return . On Monday that he will feel a greater comfort level to proceed with the bill next week and not to . Not to exercise the right that he has to object to motions to proceed and the like which would continue to require as you well know . A two day delays have to cloture petitions or file them in this is a . This is an unusual circumstance that we're going into where we have the majority the overwhelming majority of members of both parties who want. In the Senate who want to adopt a Department of Homeland Security . Which means that we have the two leaders working together here. And yet . The Senate rules being what they are one or two people. Can slow up the process . Yes . Well time will tell and I should leave it to you to talk to my impression. In our conversation today was that he intends to object to proceeding to the Senator Byrd intends to project a proceeding with the bill and . It is not a. It is not out of a specific objection to parts of the bill . Yet in fact. He. He was from what he has seen it was quite a compliment you might let me be more specific my staff. And I to go. She added . Was Senator Byrd and Senator Stevens about. Concerns that the Appropriations Committee in a bark bipartisan way had. About requests that the president had added to the homeland security. Proposal he made for the capacity for instance to transfer up to five percent of the funding. Of the. Component departments. Around within the new department and we know Senator Byrd thanks me for reaching agreement I did with Senator Stevens . Directly and himself also Senator Stevens is on the committee Senator Stevens. Voted for the bill which I was very grateful for so. I don't yet hear a specific objection from Senator Byrd I think he's just. He wants to take a long look at the boom . He actually does it. It's just this this is. You know this is going to be decided over my pay grade I think you've got us that went to Senator Daschle . Just as . I must to have and I haven't thought about that because I've been so . Focused our committee we're very hard on those of you who are in the room know we really drove each other to to get this bill. Completed. Marked up do it in a five full way. And get it out so it could be taken up next Monday and be completed by the time we left for the August recess so i or. I am. I will be very disappointed if that does not happen . So I haven't thought about any advantages that might come from the delay but I appreciate your giving me some reason to feel better about the possible delay. Jackie . That would be my feeling I mean I haven't counted but . You've got a combination again of Senator Daschle and Senator Lott want to support the bill there are differences but. We settled a lot of differences in committee there remain the differences we've talked about for instance on civil service and . There are differences for instance. That I don't know where that will come to the floor I know the administration feels that I'm with our committee. Created two independent Directorate of Intelligence they want to reduce its powers and combine it with critical infrastructure protection . But we can do this bill. In a week. Now do I know of any others who are objecting. I haven't talked to them directly I know that Senator I've been in lunch. Meetings early for lunch and meetings for that matter where Senator Hollings and he's concerned about parts of the bill it's. That's for sure there are things. I don't. I don't just I know that he was concerned about the. General movement. Yes . Yeah . And says you know. Well we'll see. I mean as you know Senator McCain and I introduced this . Bill calling for an independent . Citizens Commission to review the events that led to the attacks of September eleventh . I don't think you can ever do too much to try to determine how that tragedy occurred. And what we can do therefore to prevent it. I wish I was with a group of families of victims of September eleventh and the plaintive. Question that they keep asking is how could this have happened . And we owe it to them. To do everything we can to answer that question . So the fact that the house . Adopted the proposal for an independent commission which is a a more. And more narrowly focused. Commission on one Senator McCain and I have proposed is nonetheless encouraged and. You know John McCain and I spoke to smarting and . We're going to try to attach our our commission . Bill as an amendment to the to the earliest possible vehicle in the Senate and . It might be the intelligence authorization bill which is ready to go in the Senate. I suppose if I'm looking for some comfort. If we don't get to complete the homeland security bill it means that there probably will be vehicles on the floor next week for Senator McCain and I would touch her heart of September eleventh Commission bill to be carried. Yeah. It might well be at absolute my will be my first choice . If it . If it begins to move is the. Intelligence Authorization Bill. Because then if we can pass the commission. Amendment in the Senate. We've got the same bill meeting up with the same amendment. And conference committee could actually make it happen but McCain and I are not going to stop until we get this done and I think eventually it will be done. They've been questions about how much support it would have on the floor I think that what happened in the house is instructive and . I've always felt notwithstanding . The concerns expressed about the commission and whether it was duplicating other investigations that once you put this idea on the floor it is really hard for for senators to explain why they would vote against an independent commission. To determine how September eleventh happened and the numbers how can. you You can never have too much information about what might have caused that tragic event and why we didn't prevent it. Thank you all have a good weekend . This is live coverage of. House on C.-Span the houses. Currently voting on an amendment to the homeland security bill H.R. five thousand and five . The bill creates a new Homeland Security Department. Aimed at preventing terrorist attacks this is the first of three amendments on the bill expected to be voted on this afternoon the A's are two fourteen the nays are two thousand the man has not agreed to pursuant to Clause six of Rule eighteen the chair announces that he will reduce to a minimum of five minutes.

    Show Full Text
  • 03:58:07 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    The committee will be in order.

  • 03:58:10 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    The committee will be in order.

  • 03:58:12 PM

    THE CLERK

    The committee will be in order.

  • 03:58:20 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    The charity asked members on a minority side to please take your…

    The charity asked members on a minority side to please take your conversations off the floor. The gentleman from Minnesota is recognized for twenty two and one half minutes . Thank you Mr Chairman you've tried very hard to obtain order here . And I would like you to try again. The chair and asked members of please take their conversations off the floor. Particularly the members on the minority side in the back.

    Show Full Text
  • 03:59:18 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    minority side in the back.

  • 03:59:37 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    Gentleman from Minnesota. I thank the chair. Mr. Yield myself three…

    Gentleman from Minnesota. I thank the chair. Mr. Yield myself three minutes. Gentleman is recognized

    Show Full Text
  • 03:59:47 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    minutes. Gentleman is recognized for three minutes . Mr Chairman and…

    minutes. Gentleman is recognized for three minutes . Mr Chairman and colleagues. All of the amendments we debated last night and. So far today have had. Important consequences for the future of the country . For the operation of the Department of Homeland Security . For various aspects of our domestic life. The one I propose .

    Show Full Text
  • 04:00:14 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    At this point .

  • 04:00:16 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    . Is quite possibly the only life or death. Vote. We will consider. In

  • 04:00:23 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    consider. In this legislation .

  • 04:00:26 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    Because whether or not . Explosive detection systems are installed at…

    Because whether or not . Explosive detection systems are installed at airports . And whether or not complete screening of checked luggage. Is accomplished . At the nation's domestic airports. Will determine whether a terrorist can get a bomb aboard an aircraft . And blow it out of the sky . As happened with Pan Am one hundred three over Lockerbie Scotland . Make no mistake about it. There are serious consequences . Life or death . Consequences for what we do . In this piece of the legislation. Previously on they. And block Amendment of the majority leader. I said I cannot understand why anyone would want to protect the security company providers. From liability . In this amendment . And this provision of they. Committee bill. I can't understand why . Members are confused . And why there was an A an attempt to extend the deadline for compliance with the law that we enacted . A year ago. Eight months ago. In this body four hundred ten to nine. I understand that . Airport authorities have badgered. Members of this body. Airlines have lobbied. Members of this body . To extend the time . For compliance with that law . They're wrong . The law provides. Alternative means if we can't get explosive the Texan systems. In. Place by December thirty one The law specifically provides for alternative means of screening. Checked luggage . There is no excuse for removing the pressure upon the Transportation Security Administration. To comply with that law that every. Virtually everyone in this body . Everyone seated on this floor voted for. Why would you vote for airline security. Talk airline security measures and then turn around and on do it. Don't do it. Time to join letters which I remarked on Jonah reserves his time and what purposes. The gentleman from Ohio rise and I rise in opposition to him and the gentleman is recognized for twenty two and what happiness . I thank the chairman and I want to reserve . My time and at this point to. Mr Barton of Texas. How much time . You had to gentlemen two and a half minutes. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for two and one half minutes. I thank the thank the . Congressman and would ask unanimous since revised in my remarks. Without objection so ordered.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:03:36 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Mr Speaker let's that one thing straight . No money that opposes the…

    Mr Speaker let's that one thing straight . No money that opposes the amendment to strike the language that's before us at this point time is trying to take the pressure off of any airport .

    Show Full Text
  • 04:03:41 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    at this point time is trying to take the pressure off of any airport .

  • 04:03:45 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    at this point time is trying to take the pressure off of any airport .

  • 04:03:47 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    off of any airport . To not implement. Baggage screening processes .

  • 04:03:53 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    screening processes . The point of the fact is the major hub airports.

  • 04:03:56 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    of the fact is the major hub airports.

  • 04:03:59 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Simply cannot made it . I have Dallas Fort Worth Airport in my…

    Simply cannot made it . I have Dallas Fort Worth Airport in my congressional district.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:04:03 PM

    MR. BURTON

    Airport in my congressional district. Over one hundred thousand people go…

    Airport in my congressional district. Over one hundred thousand people go through that airport every day. Fifty

    Show Full Text
  • 04:04:09 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    five thousand bags are checked every day day after you and your management…

    five thousand bags are checked every day day after you and your management team have been working with T.S.A..

    Show Full Text
  • 04:04:11 PM

    MR. BURTON

    day after you and your management team have been working with T.S.A..…

    day after you and your management team have been working with T.S.A.. Since the law was passed. T.S.A. has yet to give them a definite answer. On their solution . There is a backlog of equipment that cannot. Be put in place. If we have to meet the deadline you know what he's going to do. They're going to have to hire fifteen hundred temporary employees are going to have to put up folding tables. They're going to have to check back hand. Almost every bag that comes in to be checked. Now that's going to be a long line and . It's going to cost one hundred forty two million dollars just it . And they're still going to have to come in with a permanent solution in the next year. That's going to cost another hundred fifty one hundred seventy million dollars. Why not give them a little extra time they still have to be working on the solution. They still have to try to get it done. But if they don't they're not going to be any penalties imposed . There are not enough equipment manufacturers to meet the sophisticated equipment for the larger hub airports that have to be in place if we literally tried to get it all done by December thirty first. Let me give you an example as up today . Of the four hundred twenty nine airports that are subject to the existing law . Only twenty four. One out of five percent. Have had a complete T.S.A. inspection . And had to sign off on the plan . There are another hundred twenty nine airports that have had. Negotiation some contact with T.. With T.S.A.. That means that sixty four percent of the nation's airports. The T.S.A. has not even come to the airport yet . And we want them to meet this arbitrary deadline by December the thirty first. It is physically impossible . And philosophically necessary. Vote against the over Starman. Gentleman from Minnesota. Mr Chairman I yield to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey a member of our committee in this tremendous three minutes. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for three minutes . National Airport where United Airlines Flight ninety three . Departed before crashing in Pennsylvania on September eleventh. I also represent the families of. Over hundred one victims who lost their lives in the attack on the World Trade Center. I have consoled enough families who were the victims of terrorist attacks . And I don't

    Show Full Text
  • 04:06:47 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    who were the victims of terrorist attacks . And I don't want there to be a…

    who were the victims of terrorist attacks . And I don't want there to be a reason to console. Anymore

    Show Full Text
  • 04:06:51 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    reason to console. Anymore . And I ask my colleagues if God forbid a plane…

    reason to console. Anymore . And I ask my colleagues if God forbid a plane is blown up by a device that could have been prevented by the deployment of these bomb detection devices explosive detection devices . Had T.S.A..

    Show Full Text
  • 04:06:59 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    bomb detection devices explosive detection devices . Had T.S.A..

  • 04:07:02 PM

    MR. MENENDEZ

    bomb detection devices explosive detection devices . Had T.S.A.. Met its…

    bomb detection devices explosive detection devices . Had T.S.A.. Met its requirements. Or if we can't T.S.A. speak to the fire. Who among us . Wants to go and console. Those families who among us wants to go and tell them that we delayed. Who among us wants to say that in expectation of some new technology that has not been approved yet . Then we waited. I don't. And I don't know anybody here who does. And that's why in the first round in our Select Committee my amendment was approved strike English language . Now the Congress charge the Transportation Security Administration. With the responsibility not the airports. T.S.A.. To determine whether or not an extension is needed. It is the responsibility of T.S.A. and neither the T.S.A.. Nor the administration . Nor the secretary of transportation . Nor the committee. On transportation . Has asked for such an extension as a matter of fact. The Committee on Transportation in a unanimous bipartisan vote. Said this should not be in the bill. Now the December thirty first deadline that we imposed . Was in the Act that passed this house. Four hundred and ten ten are in. And the deadline was necessary to ensure the security of our ideations system. As a matter of fact members on both sides of the aisle got up on the floor. And criticized the other bodies bill. Because it did not. Have the deadlines . And now there are those who would seek to our rights that . Look. If an airport like mine one of the largest in the nation can't meet the deadline . There are alternatives under the existing law . And for those airlines who say that those alternatives will cause delay I'll have the know that the Republican bill. The tax bill still insists on those alternatives. Even if you get the year extension. So you get the year extension for the explosive detection devices. You still have to implement the alternatives. The alternatives that the airlines and the industry are saying is going to cause them delays. Nothing changes . Nothing changes . And what do we say to the traveling public . And to those who would wish us ill. We're going to give you another year and I would venture to say that it's not only another year. If you look at what Section four zero nine says. It extends in my mind a deadline indefinitely because it says. You must develop a plan for the modifications. And the deadline for executing the plan for that modification is a year. From this December. But nowhere in the bill. Nowhere in the bill does it set a deadline for deployment of the explosive detection systems. That is a travesty . And it does not ensure the traveling public. And it certainly does not belong in this bill. That's why you should vote for the oldest I mean the gentleman has expired. The gentleman from Ohio . Like to yield it to manage to distinguish gentlemen from Arizona Mr Pastore the gentleman from Arizona is recognized for two minutes. Mr Chairman. Consent to revise and extend my remarks on objection so as the chairman I find myself in a very awkward situation because I think this is the only time that . I have been in opposition to. My two friends from the Democratic caucus. Bob Menendez and I are good friends and I have always followed the lead. Of Jim Oberstar. But do I want people to be less secure as they get on a plane . The answer

    Show Full Text
  • 04:10:21 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    to be less secure as they get on a plane . The answer

  • 04:10:23 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    to be less secure as they get on a plane . The answer is no. I fly.

  • 04:10:29 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Twice a week so obviously there's a self-interest to make sure that the…

    Twice a week so obviously there's a self-interest to make sure that the bad baggage is examined and it's safe.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:10:31 PM

    MR. PASTOR

    to make sure that the bad baggage is examined and it's safe.

  • 04:10:33 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    baggage is examined and it's safe.

  • 04:10:35 PM

    MR. PASTOR

    Did I vote for this bill. Yes I did . At the time . I thought it was…

    Did I vote for this bill. Yes I did . At the time . I thought it was needed. And the deadline was there. I'm a member of the transportation Appropriations Subcommittee . And since I voted for this bill . And today . I've been involved in a number of briefings . And also three hearings . That involve the T.S.A. . And I have to tell you that. After listening to the testimony and. Reading the evidence presented to me that I have to come to the conclusion that the airports. Need an extension. Not because they have pressured me. But because I think it's the right thing to do . If we talk about the equipment. And there's a various mix of equipment but if we talk about the detector. It's about as big as a V. and A cost about a million bucks and . I've been told at least in the evidence I've seen that probably. It works for one out of three baggage . So what . Thirty percent . That's affected. Well . I feel that if that's the case then possibly this technology . May not be the proper one . But then if you persuade me sad. You know we need it and. We can't delay . Let's order more of these machines. Well then I would tell you that at least . The evidence I've seen and. Testimony I've heard. The machines are going to take a long time to put in operation . And fact to give a little bit gentlemen an additional fifteen seconds. And was recognized for fifteen seconds while the operator is not going to have enough equipment to stall. And so in stalling this equipment it's going to take hundreds of millions of dollars for the airport . To install. And I would say. Let's take three deep breaths and . Let's make a decision . That would allow the airports. To take a reasonable time. To make sure that they're safe and secure and are not the time the gentleman has expired . The gentleman from Minnesota .

    Show Full Text
  • 04:12:48 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    Mr Chairman I yield myself. Five seconds.

  • 04:12:52 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    To point out to the gentleman from Arizona from I have great respect and…

    To point out to the gentleman from Arizona from I have great respect and affection that.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:12:54 PM

    MR. PASTOR

    Arizona from I have great respect and affection that. The explosive…

    Arizona from I have great respect and affection that. The explosive detection system is ten times it's by is certified to detect explosives. In all checked luggage . The question is the throughput rate . If you have a high throughput rate you may have a higher number of false positives . But it works. It's certified by the F.A.A. and the. And the T.S.A. now you'll to minister the gentleman from New Jersey Mr Pasqual distinguished member of our committee. Gentleman from New

    Show Full Text
  • 04:13:17 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    gentleman from New Jersey Mr Pasqual distinguished member of our…

    gentleman from New Jersey Mr Pasqual distinguished member of our committee. Gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for two minutes. Mr Chairman I rise in strong support of the Oberstar Menendez amendment to strike the extension for airline baggage screening.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:13:24 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    amendment to strike the extension for airline baggage screening. It is no…

    amendment to strike the extension for airline baggage screening. It is no secret that there have been serious problems at the Transportation Security Administration . With fun shortfalls in organizational issues . Causing troubles. However. Extending the deadlines in this manner . Is not the way to go about securing our homeland. Homeland. Not all federal agency has asked for a delay. The administration has not asked for delay.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:13:56 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Do not allow the whole new war. Yet

  • 04:13:57 PM

    MR. PASCRELL

    whole new war. Yet nonexistent technologies. Into the work of the T.S.A..…

    whole new war. Yet nonexistent technologies. Into the work of the T.S.A.. We cannot. And we should not allow the T.S.A. to their efforts toward implementing a program. Of one hundred percent explosive screening at all commercial airports by years and . The D.L.G. inspector general. Was always brutally honest . When reporting to the Congress . Told the Aviation Subcommittee just this past Tuesday . That quote. We will be in a much better position in a month. To. What is or is not feasible . To accomplish by the deadlines. Unquote . One month to forty five days to be exact. According to the I J. Now is not the appropriate time to delay the Congress should not be undermining. A law that the House passed four hundred ten to nine. This is important for the security of everybody in this room. Here on the floor. And up on the gallery to tell than. Tell America what's going on here. The airwaves are suffering. Economic damage . And yet we don't want to help people get back on the airlines. So that they feel more secure . It doesn't make sense. There's not one federal agency. That supports that the way it always we're doing is bailing out some and organization in organizations that for twenty years I've been told. You better secure the baggage. Until I came to the Congress Mr Chairman. I thought every piece of baggage was checked. Boy was I sadly we were wrong. We should not go backwards. We need to go forward. So we put our actions wore out and all that has expired. Thank you. The gentleman from Ohio . Thank you Chairman and. I now like to yield four minutes. To the gentle lady from Texas Miss Granger a member of the transportation pro-creation subcommittee. The gentle lady from Texas is recognized for four minutes. Thank you. This Congress said they simmer thirty first as the deadline for screening checked baggage for explosives and. Seventy five percent of our airports will make that deadline . But for the other twenty five percent. We have a train wreck coming . It's a crisis and it's a crisis of our own making.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:16:14 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Because the deadline can't be met and let's understand why first of all…

    Because the deadline can't be met and let's understand why first of all let's talk about equipment the baggage screening systems that will be this.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:16:17 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    of all let's talk about equipment the baggage screening systems that will…

    of all let's talk about equipment the baggage screening systems that will be this. As of this month. Only four hundred eighty eight machines or .

    Show Full Text
  • 04:16:25 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    machines or . That leaves six thousand six hundred machines that have to…

    machines or . That leaves six thousand six hundred machines that have to be bought and stalled and tested for accuracy by December thirty first.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:16:31 PM

    MS. GRANGER

    stalled and tested for accuracy by December thirty first. Can that be…

    stalled and tested for accuracy by December thirty first. Can that be done. Well . How well we've done so far. The Transportation Security Administration has been buying installing and testing one machine every forty eight hours . And perhaps that's OK . Except T.S.A. will have to go from one every forty eight hours. To one every thirty five minutes to make the December thirty one deadline . That's assuming the machines can even be manufactured and ready. Six thousand six hundred in the next five months so let's now go to person mail we have a big debate over. Federal baggage screeners and upon our instructions T.S.A. began hiring. Thus far T.S.R. T.S.A. has had one hundred sixty six . Federal baggage screeners at the right of one. Every other day . To meet the requirements in a van for a December deadline. T.S.A. has to recruit a high end train. And another twenty one thousand four hundred thirty four baggage screeners the next. Hundred fifty nine days . That means not one every other day . But one . Every eleven minutes . But it gets worse . Because if you add the thirty thousand five hundred twenty five passengers screeners . Still needed to be hired T.S.A. will have to speed up to one new screener . Every four and one half seconds. Equipment personnel. But I think you're seeing a problem I saw that one of the problems. There'd be out there if we could recruit and train and. Those people and how are the ever four and a half seconds and install the equipment every thirty five minutes . All airports are alike and you know what a nine know. it In fact they're greatly different in design and configuration but we set specific instructions as to how each airport. What accommodate those S.U.V. sized machines . If they were alive. So if it were possible to get them in my. In them in the next five months we'd have to reconfigure one. Out of every four of our major airports in the country I'm talking moving walls reconfiguring sets us blowers. Major renovations . And one airport alone we're talking two hundred million dollars . And constructions. In five months . Construction completed . It just can't be done. And last but not least there's the work of the Transportation Security Administration that has to approve every plan. Visit every airport in return to conquer port Congress on what we've demanded. Well how is this working . I'll tell you the airport I fly in and out off . They submitted their play out in March . Telling T.S.A. exactly what they had to do to make the December deadline March. And it hasn't been approved to this day. Others haven't even started because T.S.A. hasn't told them what can or how they missed many machines or even needed. Is there solution yes there is a solution a solution that gives T.S.A. a deadline. Gives the deadline to airports . Demands reporting to Congress. And also as to why our original date . What if we don't do this what if we don't fix it today. What we'll spend millions of dollars. Unnecessarily will force airlines to use a less than ideal solution . Well how high are thousands of people who will be dismissed. When their interim machines are scrapped. And will force three and four hour waits at every major airport in this nation. At one of the most heavily used times in the year. Distemper . And that security problem that I don't want to face. That's not what I want to be a part of so let's do the right thing today let's quit posturing let's do something that's reasonable and responsible . And by the why in the time of the ideas to explain the last Miss for people in one machine. That I would generally has expired. The gentleman from Minnesota . The speaker I was Chairman I yield myself to come seconds. If this is war as the president has repeatedly said that I am a strong us by the rep. Titian of the can't do . And of two that I've been hearing so far . At the outset of World War two we took on a million men in one year. Has expired. Are you . The distinguished gentleman from Oregon. Two minutes. Gentlemen from Oregon is recognized for two minutes. Your

    Show Full Text
  • 04:20:49 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    purity. I think the gentleman. Fourteen years ago.

  • 04:20:54 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    ago. Pan Am one hundred two blown from the sky over Scotland. In response.…

    ago. Pan Am one hundred two blown from the sky over Scotland. In response. The British government screens every piece of baggage we're told we can't do it here . Guess where they bought the technology. Right here in the United States of America. Every machine that I observed over there was manufacture in this country . But we can't do it

    Show Full Text
  • 04:21:11 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . But we can't do it in the United States.

  • 04:21:13 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    Why not because the special interests are almost back because of the…

    Why not because the special interests are almost back because of the incompetence of this administration . Ten

    Show Full Text
  • 04:21:19 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    years ago. Ramzi Yousef. He developed a plan to blow us. Ten

  • 04:21:23 PM

    MR. DEFAZIO

    twelve seven forty seven simultaneously from the sky US planes over the…

    twelve seven forty seven simultaneously from the sky US planes over the Pacific . He was only discovered and thwarted by accident. They will return to these patterns. This is a known threat. How quickly . We're forgotten September eleventh . And this body. How quickly . We buy out the powerful special interests and campaign contributors. We can meet this deadline. That last week the Bush administration fired the head of the Transportation Security Administration. For incompetence. Thank God he's gone. He was doing orrible job. Now we've got a man in charge. Who's. Knows how to get things done Admiral Loy . Let him come to us with a plan in September and I know he can get this job done. We've got someone in charge . And then they say well it's not enough money. Guess what the night before the money was voted on the Office of Management and Budget the head of whom is appointed by the present the United States. And works I think pretty closely with the president of the White House. Recommended cutting. Two hundred nineteen. Million dollars from this program . To detect explosives to make American safe and other Republicans say. There is not enough money. Does the right hand. Of the administration. Know what the left hand is doing . Until we can go there wasn't one person in the administration is that they could make these deadlines. Then they fire the incompetent head of the agency. We've got a competent head now. What changed in a week. Politics change especially address change. Shame on you . If you don't support this amendment . When a plane goes down. I'll expect you. TIME The time has expired families . What purpose the gentleman from Ohio rise. Chairman I yield myself such time as I might consume gentleman from Ohio is recognized for his but such time as you may consider. Mr Chairman a member of the Select Committee I heard a lot of this discussion and . I just wanted to make a comment on some of the comments we've had in the floor. Not referring to you Mr over Starr but a lot of raising voices and yelling isn't going to get the job done. We all share the same goal and that's what the flying public be safer. My own airport. Greater Cincinnati airport. Says they can't

    Show Full Text
  • 04:23:39 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    meet deadline a. Even other pushing hard they do have to reconfigure the…

    meet deadline a. Even other pushing hard they do have to reconfigure the building. I mean you

    Show Full Text
  • 04:23:43 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    know I won't be with a gentleman yield. Chair

  • 04:23:47 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    gentleman yield. Chair . The gentleman from Ohio controls the time and the…

    gentleman yield. Chair . The gentleman from Ohio controls the time and the will not yield clearly more raising of voices and more yelling is going to solve this problem what's going to solve the problem is putting together a plan to get it done .

    Show Full Text
  • 04:23:53 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    what's going to solve the problem is putting together a plan to get it…

    what's going to solve the problem is putting together a plan to get it done . The gentleman from Ohio controls the time. The gentleman from Ohio controls the time. As has been stated earlier in the debate. Three quarters of our reports can probably meet the deadline. They'll push hard and I'll make it. For those who can't make it the question is will the flying public be safer if we force this deadline. Will the flying

    Show Full Text
  • 04:24:21 PM

    MR. DEFAZIO

    safer if we force this deadline. Will the flying public be safer . If we…

    safer if we force this deadline. Will the flying public be safer . If we give them a

    Show Full Text
  • 04:24:24 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . If we give them a plan where they have to meet a deadline over a…

    . If we give them a plan where they have to meet a deadline over a specified period which is one year. Instead.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:24:27 PM

    MR. DEFAZIO

    specified period which is one year. Instead.

  • 04:24:29 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    It's the same date that passed this house. By an overwhelming bipartisan…

    It's the same date that passed this house. By an overwhelming bipartisan vote. December thirty first of three. I don't know how the gentlemen voted is now walking off the floor but that was a vote in this house.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:24:40 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    The D.O.T. inspector general

  • 04:24:43 PM

    MR. DEFAZIO

    can meet his recently told us. And this is a quote from him this is the…

    can meet his recently told us. And this is a quote from him this is the Department Transportation inspector general. The

    Show Full Text
  • 04:24:46 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    is the Department Transportation inspector general. The challenge facing…

    is the Department Transportation inspector general. The challenge facing T.S.A. in meeting the December thirty first deadline of this year is unprecedented an effort of this magnitude has never been executed in any single country . Or group of countries. And that's what we've heard from his Granger and others. Most airports are going to meet it but those who can't. We need to be sure they have a plan to meet it so the flying public is safer. Now . If we force . Machines into these airports. That don't work as well as machines that would be able to be in place within this plan within the one year extension . Is a fine public safer. I don't think so more important that we get it right . And do it in haste . I don't like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from Georgia has been a lot of time on this issue Mr Isaacson. The gentleman from Georgia is recognized for two minutes . I thank the chairman for all the time of the time. And I thank Ms Granger for leadership and . I have great respect for Mr Starr and I accept the fact that he is confused we do confusing things sometimes . But you know facts are stubborn things . Two hundred eighty six of us voted in favor when T.S.A. left this house . Of a two thousand and three deadline. Because at that time as it came out of our committee we made the judgment we thought that was the right night Now hundred thirty nine. And didn't vote for it. But the fact is that was originally the House position . Fact number

    Show Full Text
  • 04:26:08 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    the House position . Fact number

  • 04:26:10 PM

    MR. ISAKSON

    two. We created. The deadline on the same day when we finally fans of the…

    two. We created. The deadline on the same day when we finally fans of the comp. Cobs report . We created ages they were the deadline before the due diligence had been done to see what we could do. It's only reasonable to assume they want to do the due diligence and you learn some facts then maybe you. Make some adjustments . Now the third fact. The gentleman from Oregon I take every vote very seriously and it didn't miss me the inference the gentleman made with regard to the responsibility of this vote . If I thought are voted cos the single American their life of course I'd never vote that way. And neither would anybody else in this house this is about us doing the right thing. This is not about us being irresponsible . This is about the most important thing the U.S. economy could have our aviation industry . I visit my airport I serve on the aviation committee I've done my due diligence. If they need the opportunity to adjust. That timetable to allow the right installation to be done on a timely basis . They should have that authority facts are stubborn things . We are all responsible for our votes. We're all responsible for what we do. On November the first we responsibly thought two thousand and three was the right day . Due diligence has told us that probably is correct. But we don't just accept it. We just say if it can't be met . Then we'll use reasonable judgment to give the time for the right installation to be implemented. I think that's fair and I think that's right now you know back the balance of my time. Time to gel that has expired. Gentlemen from Minnesota . Mr Chairman I yield two minutes the gentleman from Ohio Mr Strickland. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized for two minutes. Of the like to ask my friends . On this side of the aisle if you knew for sure that an airplane was going to be blown out of the sky on March the fifteenth of next year . Would you dare. Would you dare not support this amendment . How

    Show Full Text
  • 04:28:20 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . How ironic . How ironic that in a bill that is supposed to create a new…

    . How ironic . How ironic that in a bill that is supposed to create a new Department of Homeland Security . We are.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:28:28 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    . We are. Taking an action that will make the traveling American public.…

    . We are. Taking an action that will make the traveling American public. Less secure . And I am raising my voice because I think it's a serious matter . How

    Show Full Text
  • 04:28:38 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . How would you feel.

  • 04:28:40 PM

    MR. STRICKLAND

    If you vote against this amendment . And in February March April May of…

    If you vote against this amendment . And in February March April May of next year . An American passenger plane. Is blown out of the sky. How will you feel . The American people are watching us today . But that. Terrorists that terrorists are watching us today. We must not give them an easy way to kill . Additional. Americans don't put the wishes of the special interests above the safety of the American people and of the gentleman has expire. The gentleman from Ohio. Could we have a division at times with the gentleman from Ohio has ten minutes remaining . And the gentleman from Minnesota has ten minutes. Chairman I now like to yield . Three minutes . To the chair of the subcommittee. Mr Michael. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for three minutes. Thank you Mr Speaker and my colleagues.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:29:50 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    My colleagues. This is not a time . To come before the House of…

    My colleagues. This is not a time . To come before the House of Representatives . Or the American people and make charges that are. Are not

    Show Full Text
  • 04:30:00 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    and make charges that are. Are not

  • 04:30:03 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    make charges that are. Are not correct. Every member in this body wants to…

    make charges that are. Are not correct. Every member in this body wants to make certain that their family. Is

    Show Full Text
  • 04:30:11 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    family. Is secure. That every American is secure . As they

  • 04:30:17 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . As they travel our airways. I've had the great honor.

  • 04:30:22 PM

    MR. MICA

    Privilege of working with the ranking member of the full committee Mr .…

    Privilege of working with the ranking member of the full committee Mr . Over. Star and Mr Lipinski we set forth some goals that we knew were very difficult to meet . And I don't think we should back off from those obligations . But we now as members of that committee. That the math. Today . Does not add up. To accomplish the task that we set forth in the law . November nineteenth. The math. Does not add up . Here is the appropriations. That we passed and voted for. And we are approved forty five thousand employees . Here's a report by the inspector general of facts . You need sixty seven thousand employees . To complete the task. Mr Oberstar and I heard testimony that in fact. They can only produce . Eight hundred machines . Because we've missed the deadline . By the delay in the appropriations. Measure and passing the supplemental appropriations measure . So ladies and gentlemen what you have. Is the potential if you pass this of leaving a state of chaos and disorder. For the December deadline . We don't need chaos and disorder. Disorder. What we need is the plan that's been put together . First by. Miss Granger. And then. Modified so it requires that when we don't meet the technical or personnel. Requirements that we put in place a plan . Do we want chaos . Or do we want. Order. This requires order. The amendment does not. Are we to build bureaucracy. In the name of security I say no. But we have a responsibility. I just met with the president downstairs and he talked about homeland security. And that's what this bill. And about what this measure is a. Is also about acting responsible. Putting the facts together and doing the best job we can. As representatives of the people . To secure to secure for us. The best security possible yes I'll be glad to yield. An extension. But the second I was very much Transportation has that in fact that we cannot meet a gentleman now we have to act responsibly and . Acting responsibly . As as not putting chaos in the place that I'm you know that has I'm tired. I yell that there are times that you know that ominous authorized bills thirty seconds to the gentleman from Minnesota a member of the transportation was recognized for thirty seconds. I think . My friend for yielding. Let's be clear . We have appropriated every dollar. Asked for for equipment .

    Show Full Text
  • 04:33:25 PM

    >>

    We've appropriated. More dollars than asked for for installation .

  • 04:33:29 PM

    MR. MICA

    for installation . We have approved. Falzon sub employees for this agency.…

    for installation . We have approved. Falzon sub employees for this agency. Very few who have been hired . That clearly have the ability to manage the person now the porter more there need it.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:33:42 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    the person now the porter more there need it.

  • 04:33:45 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    There may or may not be a reason for this amendment. But the . The reason .

  • 04:33:51 PM

    MR. SABO

    . There's delay. Does not relate to money . It relates to management. TIME…

    . There's delay. Does not relate to money . It relates to management. TIME The gentleman has expired. Gentleman from Minnesota . You . One minute to the tumors the gentleman from California . The gentle lady from California is recognized for two minutes . Gentlemen Now this is not the star for the time I rise to support the oldest daughter and then does the man mad. That deletes the deadline extension for airports to install. Explosive detection equipment .

    Show Full Text
  • 04:34:32 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Steps nine eleven Congress. And the administration . Have been consumed…

    Steps nine eleven Congress. And the administration . Have been consumed with fighting the war on terrorism.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:34:38 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    terrorism. Congress has responded to all of the administration's requests…

    terrorism. Congress has responded to all of the administration's requests developed its own initiatives and bent over backwards to protect the American people from further terrorist attacks today we are completing consideration of H.R. five zero zero

    Show Full Text
  • 04:34:46 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    today we are completing consideration of H.R. five zero zero

  • 04:34:53 PM

    MS. WATERS

    five. The homeland security act. A massive and complex piece of…

    five. The homeland security act. A massive and complex piece of legislation to create a new Homeland Security Department . Members of Congress have been working hard on this legislation. Eleven standing committees of the House of Representatives. Have made individual recommendations on various aspects of the legislation in order to improve our nation's ability to anticipate and prevent every conceivable type of potential terrorist attack. Now . At the eleventh hour. We're be and. Ask to undo a critical provision of anti-terrorism legislation that we passed last year . We're been asked to extend. For all whole year there . The day some a thirty first two thousand and two deadline for airports to install . Explosive detection equipment . This equipment. What are our commercial airlines. To screen the baggage that is checked at the gate and load it into the bellies of the airplanes . The deadline extension. Was not recommended by the committee of jurisdiction. Or the administration . Is even if some airports. Are unable to meet the deadline. Last year's law gives the Transportation Safety Administration . The flexibility to have baggage screened by other means . While the installation has been completed. These alternatives include. Positive bag matches manual searches. And bomb sniffing dogs. We must maintain the deadline. And last year's of all. We want every airport to make every effort to install explosive detection equipment. As I will tell you he was a liar . Different is a gentleman from Ohio right . Next year and I like to yield one minute. To the gym in California Mr Dooley who has a special interest in this issue. The gentleman from California is recognized for one minute. Thank you Mr Chairman and I rise in opposition to this amendment. You know I think all of us in this chamber understand that our objective is to enhance the safety of passengers on our airlines . There's nothing is legislation that is. Circumventing that objective . When we last year when we recognized after the events of September eleventh that we had to do more to enhance safety. We set

    Show Full Text
  • 04:37:05 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    some arbitrary deadlines and timelines for us to shoot for our just…

    some arbitrary deadlines and timelines for us to shoot for our just average goals when we could have equipment in place . That could make a

    Show Full Text
  • 04:37:09 PM

    MS. WATERS

    just average goals when we could have equipment in place . That could make…

    just average goals when we could have equipment in place . That could make a

    Show Full Text
  • 04:37:10 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    goals when we could have equipment in place . That could make a

  • 04:37:13 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    difference. That could ensure greater safety. But with a lot of goals and…

    difference. That could ensure greater safety. But with a lot of goals and objectives that are established that sometimes it becomes apparent that we do not have the resources . Nor the

    Show Full Text
  • 04:37:17 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    apparent that we do not have the resources . Nor the

  • 04:37:19 PM

    MR. DOOLEY

    apparent that we do not have the resources . Nor the time. In order to…

    apparent that we do not have the resources . Nor the time. In order to achieve them. What we're doing today is insane in any way that we're backing away from our commitment to provide safety. It is a recognition that we need to set up a process that recognizes that there are some airports in this country. That unfortunately cannot meet this deadline . And order to meet the needs of those airports as well as the passengers they serve . We need to have some per script ins. And some guidelines that are going to sure that they are going to be on a track. To at the earliest possible moment. To implement those systems that can make a difference in ensuring that our air traffic is any gentleman has expired . The gentleman from Minnesota. Mr Chairman. My math is right . I have seven and a half minutes for management. That's ground zero has six minutes . That's correct. Are you with us of the gentleman from California who is true gentleman from California is recognized for two minutes . I think the gentleman for yielding in Iraq has the support of the Oberstar Amendment. Mean. We must not delay. We must accept no excuse for any delay in the immediate improvement of the. Security at our airports Congress should speak. Unambiguously. Find a way to get the job done.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:38:34 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    the job done. Now. Can it be done by the end of the year.

  • 04:38:37 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    end of the year. Yes. The Secretary the administration and the agency…

    end of the year. Yes. The Secretary the administration and the agency charged with this responsibility. All say it can be done. Will it be difficult. Yes.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:38:47 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Is the challenge any greater than the technological.

  • 04:38:48 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    any greater than the technological. Logical challenges we faced.

  • 04:38:52 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Immediately after a Pearl Harbor . In gearing up our industrial capacity .…

    Immediately after a Pearl Harbor . In gearing up our industrial capacity . Of course

    Show Full Text
  • 04:38:56 PM

    MR. SCHIFF

    . Of course not. This task is infinitely simpler. Will it cause some…

    . Of course not. This task is infinitely simpler. Will it cause some delays at some airports in flights. . Yes In all likelihood . Will it cause the adoption and deployment of technologies that will need to be replaced in the future. It just might. After all technologies all technologies . Eventually become obsolete . But what is the cost of delaying our efforts to secure our airports and our airplanes the cost is potentially catastrophic . Imagine. The devastation to the families if a plane is blown out of the air. Imagine . The devastation to our economy. Imagine. The loss of confidence in our nation's ability to defend itself . In the very department. That we established today. On September eleventh terrorists. Turned our planes into jet fuel powered bombs . That was the last attack. Some would argue since we are now better prepared against that eventuality. We can delay our preparedness against other attacks. We must not fight the last war . We must be prepared to fight terrorism in whatever form . Terrorists do not need to hijack planes. To devastate. This country. Placing a block. A bomb in the cargo hold of a plane is all that it would take. We must defend against this massive vulnerability. And we must do it now. We cannot delay . I urge your support of this amendment . And make this country safe. Today. TIME The gentleman has expired. The gentleman from Ohio. I think the chairman I like to yield two minutes to a member of the Select Committee on Homeland Security and one of the House leaders on this issue Mr Watts. From Oklahoma . The gentleman from Oklahoma is recognized for two minutes . Thank you Mr Speaker and I thank my colleagues for yielding. You know we probably have served the last eight years in the United States House of Representatives. I have often said that we made a real mistake. Forty years ago . By not creating a federal department of unintended consequences because we often do things and then after we've done it we look back and say oops . We

    Show Full Text
  • 04:41:00 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    things and then after we've done it we look back and say oops . We

  • 04:41:03 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    after we've done it we look back and say oops . We blew it we made a…

    after we've done it we look back and say oops . We blew it we made a mistake. You know. Friends let me tell you there's about twenty five percent of the nation's airports that. Can

    Show Full Text
  • 04:41:12 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    airports that. Can not comply with this deadline . On

  • 04:41:16 PM

    MR. WATTS

    deadline . On December thirty first of this year it again is just totally…

    deadline . On December thirty first of this year it again is just totally unrealistic . The Transportation Safety Administration . These airports many of these airports they have submitted plans to comply that they need to have certified by T.S.A. . They haven't gotten a certification . In order for all airports to meet the deadline T.S.A. must purchase and install an E.T.S. E.T.T. machine. Every thirty five minutes between now and December thirty first in order for all airports to have the security staff needed to operate the newly required machinery T.S.A. will need to hire and train . And make operational a new screener about every four and a half minutes between today and the summer thirty first of two thousand and two . And we're saying that these people are going to be able to comply . You know if you vote to strip the December thirty first two thousand and three deadline. You're voting for three or four hour. Airport lines that are that are inviting. Targets for terrorists . You know I think we're making a huge mistake by not extending these deadlines . Get the bureaucracy off their duff and have them certify these air. Plans . And then let's move forward and I you know I tell you what. And in the end I think that's a shame that we would come and talk about these things. And all the rhetoric that I've heard I mean we're literally telling the terrorist . What's going on. You know we need to extend this deadline . Get those plans certified by the T.S.A. get the people hired get a director and I had a gentleman as a liar go. Vote no on this. I'm a gentleman from Minnesota. Are you one minute to the distinguished gentleman from Washington Mr Inslee. Gentleman is recognized for one minute. We're surviving today. Without a job and so forth. In one thousand nine hundred eighty one President Kennedy sat right there . And said America is a country that can do the moon. Now we've got people around here saying America is a country that can't even do checked baggage. Why would you want to take a bill called the homeland security bill . And change it to the home air . In security bill.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:43:31 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    And you're darn right there's some challenges in getting this done.

  • 04:43:33 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    this done. But it didn't help that this administration has demonstrated…

    this done. But it didn't help that this administration has demonstrated rank. Incompetence.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:43:39 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    For months and months and months . Doing

  • 04:43:41 PM

    MR. INSLEE

    . Doing nothing on this . issue It took

  • 04:43:43 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . issue It took them seven months . Torture

  • 04:43:45 PM

    MR. INSLEE

    . Torture the first machine . After September eleventh . I will not allow…

    . Torture the first machine . After September eleventh . I will not allow or vote for this administration . Rank in ethnos. To endanger my flying public . For the next year . And if you can't get this job done . Turn the administration over to us because we will do it because we know if you want some horses . To go you put the spurs to him . And this administration needs it. TIME The gentleman has expired . Who six time gentleman from Ohio. Thank you Chairman I'd like to yield a minute a half to the gentleman from Texas. Mr JOHNSON. Gentleman from Texas is recognized for what I want to have missed and. Without objection so order. Set the record straight . THE SECRETARY . Based on current. Facts. Says that they're unable to make these deadlines. Without us given a billion dollars more . I know the contracts with Boeing Siemens I've talked to those people they can do it by the end of the year but only to have the machines by the end of the year that doesn't mean there are any airports. So I'm

    Show Full Text
  • 04:44:48 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    machines by the end of the year that doesn't mean there are any airports.…

    machines by the end of the year that doesn't mean there are any airports. So I'm

    Show Full Text
  • 04:44:51 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    end of the year that doesn't mean there are any airports. So I'm concerned…

    end of the year that doesn't mean there are any airports. So I'm concerned that the worst case scenario the Transportation Security Agency is going to be unable to train personnel to install necessary equipment to meet this deadline . And under the

    Show Full Text
  • 04:44:55 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    install necessary equipment to meet this deadline . And under the

  • 04:44:58 PM

    MR. JOHNSON

    install necessary equipment to meet this deadline . And under the

  • 04:45:00 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    install necessary equipment to meet this deadline . And under the

  • 04:45:03 PM

    MR. JOHNSON

    deadline . And under the best case scenario. I'm concerned that. T.S.A.…

    deadline . And under the best case scenario. I'm concerned that. T.S.A. will meet the deadline but all only by ample amening and in effect even outrageously expensive a temporary solution either way the safety of our travelers. And the security of our system will benefit from giving. Not giving them the long term permanent solution . And not a quick fix unfortunately only seventy five percent of our airports are going to be able to make that . December thirty first deadline and those are those smaller airports that are going to rely for their long term solution . They're going to be using primarily small machines it's no longer feasible to meet the D.'s Imber third. Thirty first deadline for a larger airports especially like my hometown D.F.W. . Since they've submitted their plan in March they still have yet to hear back from the T.S.A. to find out if they've been approved in or on the right track for larger airports like D.F.W. It's impossible for them to be ready by the end of the . year Haven't we provided enough bureaucracy. It's ridiculous that opponents to this commonsense measure would rather have airports missed the deadline . Altogether. Isn't it a general fits all solution. You know back about this month that gentleman from Minnesota. Mr Chairman man choir. The time remaining. Both sides . Gentleman from Minnesota has four and one half minutes remaining and the gentleman from Ohio has two and one half minutes remaining. As the gentleman from Ohio have further speakers. I believe we have just one speaker to close. And I guess we have the right to close yes. And they have one more fifteen seconds Baker here but doesn't she have more time than he ought to go. I'm at this point Mr Chairman I'm one minute to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey. It's tremendous member of the Select Committee. Gentlemen from New Jersey is recognized for one minute.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:47:04 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    is recognized for one minute.

  • 04:47:06 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    We heard about facts facts the House voted four hundred ten to nine for…

    We heard about facts facts the House voted four hundred ten to nine for these deadlines fact.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:47:09 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    hundred ten to nine for these deadlines fact. Neither the president the…

    hundred ten to nine for these deadlines fact. Neither the president the secretary of transportation T.S.A.. Or

    Show Full Text
  • 04:47:14 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    T.S.A.. Or the Transportation Committee has asked for an extension.

  • 04:47:18 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    extension. Fact the bill extends the execution of a plan for another year…

    extension. Fact the bill extends the execution of a plan for another year . But it has no deadline for deployment of explosive detection devices fact . Technology to

    Show Full Text
  • 04:47:29 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    . Technology to detect bombs exists now and is certified . No other…

    . Technology to detect bombs exists now and is certified . No other technology. Is certified fact. Alternatives exist on the law the deadlines cannot be met. And they

    Show Full Text
  • 04:47:38 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    on the law the deadlines cannot be met. And they

  • 04:47:41 PM

    MR. MENENDEZ

    are the same as the bill before us . Fact . Congress delayed in a similar…

    are the same as the bill before us . Fact . Congress delayed in a similar case in the eighty's and technology to avoid collisions midair. And we had three mid air collisions. Who went to those families and said. We're sorry we delay . We waited for a better technology ask your constituents if after the events of September eleventh. With they rather save a few minutes . Or save lives. The answer would be . Save lives . And that's what this . MENENDEZ. Amendment does . And that's why you should be voting for it. TIME The gentleman has expired. The gentleman from Minnesota . And do your fifteen minutes speaker. Fifteen seconds because we just have one remaining speaker who will close to a story. You know . You Jeff. And from Minnesota is recognized for what I want happiness . I think I beg your pardon three and unhappiness . And wiser than my without objections or. Mr Chairman. We have all come to this issue with good will and.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:48:48 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    and. Those who advocate the extension of the . deadline Have come.

  • 04:48:54 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    Genuinely inspired by their airports. Or airlines.

  • 04:48:58 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    Out of a concern as. Repeated speakers have said we can't meet the.…

    Out of a concern as. Repeated speakers have said we can't meet the. deadline

    Show Full Text
  • 04:49:02 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    we can't meet the. deadline

  • 04:49:05 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    I've always thought. Of America as a can do nation. Not a can't do .…

    I've always thought. Of America as a can do nation. Not a can't do . Nation and World War two we put a million men under arms in one year.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:49:11 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    two we put a million men under arms in one year.

  • 04:49:13 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    men under arms in one year. And World War two we produced an average of…

    men under arms in one year. And World War two we produced an average of sixty thousand warplanes. A

    Show Full Text
  • 04:49:16 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    War two we produced an average of sixty thousand warplanes. A year from.…

    War two we produced an average of sixty thousand warplanes. A year from. Starting from zero. Why can't we do this now . We can do it. Is the point . And I've heard the argument about long lines. The question you have to ask yourself is. Which do you fear more . Long lines or a bomb aboard an airplane . I also read the language proposed very carefully. Now many are not aware that they are language . Of the amendment. Proposes to give the airport. The decision on whether to demand a delay. Not . The Transportation Security Administration who's paying the cost. And also . Vests with. Airports. The authority to develop a plan . To the maximum extent. Practicable to do certain things. This is the response. This is a change in the fundamental way the program is operating. I wasn't aware of that. Till late last night. Early this morning reading this . Language more carefully. That shouldn't be done . We have provided. Authority in the basic law that was an enacted for ten to nine . For alternative means. To check luggage. To screen luggage check the board aircraft . If you can't meet the December thirty one deadline for explosive detection systems. It includes authority for the T.S.A.. To certify or to verify . The use of explosive trace detection systems. If they can't deploy . The explosive detection systems . There is ample authority to use other means . You know. We're all human beings that's why the leadership here keeps us. To late at night . Because we work against deadlines . And then the stingers to whip knows that. But I come . For another purpose . Twelve years ago. As a member of the Pan Am one hundred three Commission. I stood at Lockerbie Scotland . At the abyss . Of Pan Am one of three. Where a trench. Fourteen feet deep forty feet wide and one hundred forty one hundred twenty feet long. Was dug by that airplane. And two hundred fifty nine lives . Aboard that plane and eleven on the ground were incinerated . Because of bomb was aboard that airplane. In a piece of luggage . That didn't have a passenger accompanying it. And we members of that commission . Two of us from the House John Paul Hammerschmidt. Distinguished member from Arkansas and I looked in the abyss. And said never again will we allow this to happen. We're going to pass. Tough legislation to make. Aviation security the best in the world. And we passed it. And now we stand on the abyss. Again. Never again do I want to confront families and say. We didn't do enough. Please don't let that happen. Don't extend that deadline . Time to gel it has expired. Gentleman from Ohio . Right to happiness for me. Chairman I yield the remainder of our time to a member of the Select Committee on Homeland Security the distinguished majority whip. Mr De Lay of Texas . Gentleman from Texas is recognized for two and one half minutes . And that almost brought a tear to my. Well I have to tell you after Lockerbie. England. Went for this technology that the gentleman wants to install. Took him eight years to install it. Eight years . I

    Show Full Text
  • 04:53:10 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    was twelve years ago . That same technology. Is what he wants to buy a…

    was twelve years ago . That same technology. Is what he wants to buy a twenty year old technology . That doesn't work

    Show Full Text
  • 04:53:14 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    buy a twenty year old technology . That doesn't work . Let me just or…

    buy a twenty year old technology . That doesn't work . Let me just or isn't as good as other technology that's being suggested . Let me just clear the air here. A

    Show Full Text
  • 04:53:25 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    the air here. A little bit. First of all.

  • 04:53:28 PM

    MR. DELAY

    I think it's irresponsible to try to scare the American people away from…

    I think it's irresponsible to try to scare the American people away from frying. The rhetoric on this floor is as irresponsible in doing that. Let me just say that one hundred percent . One hundred percent of your bags today . Are being checked before they go on a plane. What this arguments about . Is buying a machine . A bomb detection machine. To try to make it more efficient. To check your bags. Now they want you to buy a twenty year old technology that's wrong. Thirty percent of the time so that you get to how this works . Thirty percent of the time it's wrong. So when it's wrong you have to take it off the machine and . Check it by hand. Adding to the time. Of that plane taking off. What we want. Is a technology that is ready . It just needs to be set up. Sort of FIDE. That has. Last than a five percent error rate. Technology is coming online. And decide you know what these deadlines that they are so interested in this House voted two hundred eighty six to one thirty nine . For the deadline that's in this bill. And so the deadlines that were put in there and I want to argue the . deadline But what's really interesting about this. Is that the deadlines. That they are so adamant to have been have all this wonderful rhetoric. In a little demagoguery. Added to it . Is that the deadlines have no penalties . Their deadlines. Have no sanctions . So it doesn't matter if they can't meet the deadlines. They can't meet the deadlines. You're stranded and we're going to meet these deadlines . You can't make them do anything. So I'm and I will not you know that the so . What we have done. Is realize that there is a problem here . That we that we can put. Good technology as quickly as possible . But we need a good solid process by which . By which to implement this . And we're suggesting that process there is a process that we go through this makes sense . It makes common sense. It faces reality time a gentleman down to our member. Tyrant has a parliamentary inquiry Mr Chairman General status inquiry . Mr Chairman

    Show Full Text
  • 04:55:58 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    . Mr Chairman is a require that one use accurate facts during debate on…

    . Mr Chairman is a require that one use accurate facts during debate on the floor of the house .

    Show Full Text
  • 04:56:01 PM

    MR. DELAY

    facts during debate on the floor of the house . For the purpose of debate…

    facts during debate on the floor of the house . For the purpose of debate is to discuss issues as members see them. Doesn't require the use of. Accurate facts or is. Fabrication allowed . That's for each member to ascertain . In his own mind . Of those those remarks I thank the gentleman we just heard fabrication. All time has expired the question is on the amendment. Offered by the gentleman from Minnesota.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:56:28 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Minnesota. As many as are in favor of signify by saying I don't suppose…

    Minnesota. As many as are in favor of signify by saying I don't suppose we'll say you know .

    Show Full Text
  • 04:56:30 PM

    >>

    signify by saying I don't suppose we'll say you know .

  • 04:56:31 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    signify by saying I don't suppose we'll say you know .

  • 04:56:34 PM

    MR. DEFAZIO

    . The pain the chair the you knows have it. Just what are general chairman…

    . The pain the chair the you knows have it. Just what are general chairman . On that I

    Show Full Text
  • 04:56:39 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . On that I demand a record vote. Pursuant to Clause six of Rule eighteen…

    . On that I demand a record vote. Pursuant to Clause six of Rule eighteen further proceedings on the amendment.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:56:44 PM

    MR. DEFAZIO

    proceedings on the amendment. Offered by the gentleman from Minnesota will…

    proceedings on the amendment. Offered by the gentleman from Minnesota will be postponed .

    Show Full Text
  • 04:56:49 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    .

  • 04:56:54 PM

    MR. DEFAZIO

    The committee will rise informally to receive a message .

  • 04:56:59 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    The committee will rise informally to receive a message .

  • 04:57:12 PM

    MR. OBERSTAR

    The committee will rise informally to receive a message .

  • 04:57:15 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    The committee will rise informally to receive a message . Journal receive…

    The committee will rise informally to receive a message . Journal receive a message. Mr Speaker. A message from the Senate. Mr Speaker Mr I've been directed by the Senate to inform the House that the Senate has disagreed to the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R.. Forty five forty six. To Bob Strong National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year two thousand and three request. Conference with the House they're all .

    Show Full Text
  • 04:57:59 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    The committee will resume its setting it is now in order to consider…

    The committee will resume its setting it is now in order to consider Amendment.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:58:09 PM

    THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

    it is now in order to consider Amendment. Or twenty four printed in House…

    it is now in order to consider Amendment. Or twenty four printed in House report one hundred seventy six fifteen . For what

    Show Full Text
  • 04:58:15 PM

    THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

    report one hundred seventy six fifteen . For what purpose the gentle lady…

    report one hundred seventy six fifteen . For what purpose the gentle lady from Illinois writes. Mr Chairman I meant . Do you work or will designate the men and women numbered twenty four printed in the House Report Number one zero seven six fifteen. Offered by Ms Schakowsky of Illinois .

    Show Full Text
  • 04:58:35 PM

    THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

    . Pursue a Dallas Resolution five zero two The gentle lady from Illinois…

    . Pursue a Dallas Resolution five zero two The gentle lady from Illinois Mr check out a member opposing each control fifteen minutes.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:58:43 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Chair recognizes a gentle lady from Illinois . Thank you Mr Chairman I…

    Chair recognizes a gentle lady from Illinois . Thank you Mr Chairman I yield. Myself as much time to time I consume gentle lady as recognize for as much time as she may consume . On behalf of Congresswoman me. And

    Show Full Text
  • 04:58:58 PM

    MS. SCHAKOWSKY

    Congressman Chris in a dry run as to offer an amendment . That will prevent

  • 04:59:00 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    offer an amendment . That will prevent

  • 04:59:02 PM

    THE CLERK

    the Department of Homeland Security from becoming the Department of…

    the Department of Homeland Security from becoming the Department of Homeland secrecy . I want to commend Mr Waxman and his staff as well as Select Committee. Particularly

    Show Full Text
  • 04:59:11 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Committee. Particularly its ranking member Ms Pelosi. First this…

    Committee. Particularly its ranking member Ms Pelosi. First this amendment. Strikes subtitle C. of Section seven of the underlying bill.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:59:20 PM

    MS. SCHAKOWSKY

    Language that excludes the Freedom of Information Act . From the from the…

    Language that excludes the Freedom of Information Act . From the from the Freedom of Information Act information submitted voluntarily by corporations.

    Show Full Text
  • 04:59:26 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Act information submitted voluntarily by corporations.

  • 04:59:30 PM

    MS. SCHAKOWSKY

    Regarding critical infrastructure information. It strikes language that…

    Regarding critical infrastructure information. It strikes language that pre-amps all state and local open records laws . Second this amendment strikes Section seven sixty two language that allows the secretary to circumvent the Federal Advisory Committee Act Foka. By putting all the deliberations of those advisory committees beyond. Public reach there this amendment provides real T. It's to protections against retaliation for whistleblowers. The kind of individuals who have been the lifeblood of exposing failures that the F.B.I.. To heed warnings of terrorists within the country. And exposing corporate misconduct. The Freedom of Information Act as a law carefully crafted to balance the ability of our citizens . To access information and the interests of those who want to protect some such information from public scrutiny . There are nine exam. Exemptions to foil. Including national security information and business information . For I am currently protect them from ation that is a trade secret or information that is commercial and privileged or confidential. In addition President Reagan. Issued executive order one two six zero zero . That gives businesses even more opportunities to oppose disclosure of information . In fact . I and other members of the government formed committee repeatedly have asked proponents of this exclusion including the F.B.I. and Department of Commerce. For even one single example of when a federal agency has disclosed voluntarily submitted agency. Data against the express wishes of the industry. That submitted that information they could not name one case . Instead we're told that foyer. Rules just aren't conducive to disclosure. That corporations aren't comfortable releasing data needed to protect our country even if we are at war. Is our new standard for deciding. Such fundamental questions of openness and accountability in our democracy . How comfortable industry will be . Environmental groups. Open government groups and Cross organization support my amendment . Because the broad secrecy provisions of the new department would hide information . Critical to public. To protecting public safety . Such as chemical spills results of testing to determine levels of water and air pollution . Compliance records. Maintenance repair records . Corporations could dump information they want to hide into the department under the cover of critical infrastructure information . Corporate lobbyists can meet with government officials in the name of critical infrastructure protection . And hide their collusion. Behind this exclusion. If we create the department with my Without my amendment . Corporations will no longer need to bury their secrets. In the footnotes . Or even shred their documents . They can hide them in the foyer. Exclusion. At the Department of Homeland Security. No longer will industry officials have to hide their meetings with government officials . The exemption from Foka. Well offer them a safe haven in which to have those secret meetings . State and local authorities would also be barred from and subject to jail sentences for disclosing information that they required to make make public. Even if it is with. Because it is withheld at the federal level . This amendment also protects the rights of whistleblowers . My colleagues will go into more detail. But most whistle blowers are not as high profile as Sherron Watkins' of then Iran or Colleen Rose Riley of the F.B.I.. To whom we owe a great debt . And many of them suffer retaliation they often lose their jobs or our demoted . As punishment for speaking out . It's clear that the protections currently available. Simply aren't working since Whistleblower Protection Act was amended in one nine hundred ninety four. Seventy four of the seventy five court decisions have gone against. Whistle blow against whistle blowers . So my amendment gives. Was a lowers the right to go to court. Instead of going through the administrative processing with choirs the same burden of proof . To be used in whistleblower cases as in all other cases involving personal actions. Mr Chairman I believe that we are in great danger today . Of tipping the delicate balance between security and basic precious. Freedoms . Those rights that uniquely define our American democracy . We can have both . And I urge my colleagues to restore the balance . And support my amendment . I reserve the balance of my time generators or valves for time purposes the gentleman from Texas. Mr Chairman I rise in opposition to the bill. The gentleman recognized for fifteen minutes . I was chairman I am happy to. Hero to minister the distinguished gentleman from Texas Mr Carver was on various recognized. Fifteen minutes. I thank the majority leader from others. For you holding. Mr Chairman. I oppose this amendment . Because I believe that this amendment. Will significantly damage the ability of the Department of Homeland Security to be effective . Now

    Show Full Text
  • 05:04:20 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    to be effective . Now let me make a couple points clear from the beginning…

    to be effective . Now let me make a couple points clear from the beginning . Whistle

    Show Full Text
  • 05:04:25 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    . Whistle blowers are protected. In the

  • 05:04:27 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    protected. In the legislation now . That is one

  • 05:04:30 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    of the specific protections we were talking about earlier . And the…

    of the specific protections we were talking about earlier . And the various management flexibility amendments which were offered whistleblowers are protected . Now.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:04:37 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    which were offered whistleblowers are protected . Now. Now under current…

    which were offered whistleblowers are protected . Now. Now under current law . Various companies and industries have to disclose a certain information visit.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:04:45 PM

    MR. THORNBERRY

    have to disclose a certain information visit. Nothing changes under this…

    have to disclose a certain information visit. Nothing changes under this bill. They still have to disclose that information . And we add no loopholes . There are no new requirements so they can't hide. They still have to meet the current requirements . But our hope is that under the new law the Department of Homeland Security will receive additional information. Voluntarily . From industries. They will tell us. They're vulnerable. BILL OF THESE. They will tell us what they're worried about in their computer networks. They will tell us what they're worried about in their infrastructure . And we want them to tell the federal government that information voluntarily . So that we can help protect that infrastructure. They will not disclose that information . If you just turn right around and make it public . It could be trade secrets. It could be information that you're giving to the terrorists . You certainly do not want to help them. And so . To go as far as the admin does in requiring this additional information which is which is voluntarily disclosed to the government. To turn around and make all that public. Means that companies simply will not disclose it we will not know their vulnerabilities and. This department will not be able to do its job . To protect infrastructure. I would suggest that the better course would be to reject this amendment. There are central protections. Already in the bill. We don't need more . From Illinois . Build three minutes to the gentle lady from Hawaii . Who is a co-sponsor of. The amount of. The gentle lady from voice recognize with the gentleman for yielding . I would like to directly respond to the prior speaker. Who made a case for further extension of the. Exemptions for their Freedom of Information Act by arguing that it was necessary in order to protect . Private sources of information that might be necessary for this new department . I want

    Show Full Text
  • 05:06:52 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    to call attention of the house . To the

  • 05:06:55 PM

    MS. SCHAKOWSKY

    current. Freedom of Information Act which already includes nine.

  • 05:06:59 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    nine. Exemptions that all federal agencies including the Defense…

    nine. Exemptions that all federal agencies including the Defense Department. And

    Show Full Text
  • 05:07:02 PM

    MRS. MINK

    agencies including the Defense Department. And all the other security type…

    agencies including the Defense Department. And all the other security type organizations that now exist. That fall under the Freedom of Information Act . And have done so for the last thirty years. Because they are protected. Under the exemptions that exist under current law. Big sanctions are all classified documents . The government has the power to classified documents. And so if there is something in their possession. That is essential to the national security or homeland security. They could classify those documents. They have the power. Inherent in the legislation. As far as . Private confidential trade secrets. There is an example specifically for business information . And so. There exists already the power of the government to classify as not approachable by Freedom of Information request. Information which is private. Trade secrets . Or something which is essential to the protection of business. All of these rules exist . The exemptions exist. They were part of legislation which I helped to work out in the early one nine hundred seventy S.. And they have stood the test of time . It has created a broad range of protections for the people of the United States. The most important . Liberty freedom that we have. Is that we as . Individual citizens of this country . Have the Right to Information that the government possesses. And we do so by making up for your requests . I can't conceive of enlarging the nine example. Already exists. What kind of a Department of Homeland Security are we creating . Why it doesn't have to have. All of those super. Protections. Of private information when we already have nine exemptions that exist. That can protect every single suggested. Item. That have been discussed here on the floor. So I hope that the people will realize that. Under this climate. Of being concerned about terrorism and and. The protection of property . And the protection of life and so forth. We cannot jeopardize. Those things that we have fought for so ard so diligently and which have to a large measure . And Mabel the public. Of the United States should know what is going on but nuclear tests out in the Midwest and the terrible things that happen from them . Would have continued to be the sequence of the government. If we didn't have the oil. But because we had the Freedom of Information Act. We enabled the public to be better informed . We enable the Congress to do it that way I mean that buy it and I urge those. Adoption of this one gentleman from Texas . How much Mr Chairman I have to be able to manage the gentleman from Virginia. I'm sorry. what Three minutes to the gentleman from Virginia. Mr Davis the author of the original for your language. Who has done such an excellent job . The job of the region in Mr Davis is recognized for three minutes past mission right revise and extend . Without objection. Let me first of all say I think the problem with this amendment it goes in the wrong direction . We're all strong supporters of legislation I served in local government for fifteen years and the Freedom of Information Act applies to local government.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:10:22 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    and the Freedom of Information Act applies to local government.

  • 05:10:27 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    government. Strangely enough Congress is exempt from many of these…

    government. Strangely enough Congress is exempt from many of these exemptions. This is a very narrowly tailored for a exemption. That will allow companies out there that have. Innovative ideas in terms of how to protect our critical infrastructure .

    Show Full Text
  • 05:10:41 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . From disco it will allow them to disclose it to the government . Without…

    . From disco it will allow them to disclose it to the government . Without fear of

    Show Full Text
  • 05:10:45 PM

    MR. DAVIS

    . Without fear of it being discovered by competitors.

  • 05:10:47 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    competitors. Or terrorists.

  • 05:10:49 PM

    MR. DAVIS

    We have to remind ourselves . We discovered when we went into the caves in…

    We have to remind ourselves . We discovered when we went into the caves in Afghanistan . That al Qaeda groups had copies of G.A.O. reports. And other government information obtained through the Freedom of Information Act. And while we work to protect our nation's assets. In this war against terrorism. We also need to ensure that we're not arming terrorists. And previous speakers spoke about how they'd work on this in the early one nine hundred seventy S. I would submit. The world has changed. There was a challenge for. I'd say . There were no instances where information wasn't shared. Well just last year it was discovered that the widely used implementations of the simple network management protocol. A fundamental element of the Internet . Contained vulnerabilities that could expose the Internet's infrastructure to attack. Many companies were reluctant to give the government information about these vulnerabilities. Which were not yet mentioned in the general press . For fear that the vulnerability information. Would be forced to be disclosed . Once it was in the government's hands. And that this could create substantial risk to their customers . And to the Internet. And the U.S. economy . Might also have the department information for years. Department of Energy for years . Has asked electric utility industry to write a list of critical facilities . They have consistently refused . Because they don't want to create a target list. That could be released under the Freedom of Information Act. And I suspect there are many many others . We need to remember that the critical infrastructure of the United States is largely. Own to and operated by the private sector. Ninety percent. Operated by the private sector. Understanding the vulnerabilities. Experiencing the vulnerabilities. Finding. If you will anecdotes . To these. Antidotes to these vulnerabilities. Are something that the private sector has much more experience than the public sector. We need that information . At the federal level if we're to protect our critical infrastructure . And this very narrowly tailored. Amendment . I might add. Went through the Senate Committee on a bipartisan . Unanimous vote . No concerns over there because it's narrowly tailored. This is essential if we're going to get companies to be able to volunteer to the government solutions that can help us protect our critical infrastructure . There is precedent for this I've heard the argument that this is unprecedented . Because if you take a look at the successful Y2K act. Information readiness Disclosure Act. It provided also a limited foyer exemption . And civil litigation protection for shared information . We narrowly tailor. These so that we don't. Take away the what for you offers the general public. Very important protections . But if we don't allow it in these narrow instances. I'm afraid we're not going to have the tools to fight terrorism . By this legislation I think helps the private sector including the Iowa says to move forward without fear from the government. It's essential I oppose this and then John this time is expired the gentleman from Illinois. I'm proud to yield two minutes. To Mr Waxman the ranking Democrat on the government form Committee . And a leader in this house on both homeland security. And a good government . The gentleman is recognized for two minutes . I think the gentle lady. For yielding to me. It's remarkable . The position of the Republican Party today. It really shows the bankruptcy of that party. It used to stand for. The idea that there was should be some distrust of government. It can get too big it can get too bureaucratic . It could interfere in the lives of individuals . And start dictating

    Show Full Text
  • 05:14:10 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    in the lives of individuals . And start dictating

  • 05:14:12 PM

    MS. SCHAKOWSKY

    . And start dictating . Policies from Washington. So what does this bill…

    . And start dictating . Policies from Washington. So what does this bill do . It grows the bureaucracy . It wastes money . And

    Show Full Text
  • 05:14:20 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    . And with these Freedom of Information and.

  • 05:14:23 PM

    MR. WAXMAN

    Of thought the changes. It allows the government to keep things secret .…

    Of thought the changes. It allows the government to keep things secret . You know who wrote the Freedom of Information Act. Barry Goldwater wrote that . Barry Goldwater wrote that because he said a government that has so much power. Can intrude in the lives of individuals . And he wanted the public to know what was going on this bill . In the way it's drafted without the Chicago Amendment. Would it allow this administration . To meet in secret with business executives and lobbyists . Just like the energy task force a Vice President Cheney chaired. And they could keep it all quiet. They could in the name of national security . Reward all these big industry groups. That they're now so. Beholden to by. Meeting with executives from the air. In industry. When they come in for special favors. But the public will never know because the Freedom of Information Act which protected all of us will now be wiped out. Now remember the days when the Republicans said. Not everybody and why everything in Washington is the place where all the wisdom is located where what do they do they. Preempt the states. From having Freedom of Information laws that are more open to the public than what we're going to get in the bill passed today. It is a very sad day to see the Republican Party. I didn't used to agree with them. But I used to respect them . When they worried about a big intrusive government. That wasted money . The growth bureaucracy . And they became inefficient and is responsive now. Just to the special interest big money . Shot of us times it's by the gentleman from Texas Mr Chairman I am pleased through through you three minutes to Mr Burton the gentleman from Indiana . And the distinguished chairman of the Government Reform Committee the committee of jurisdiction . The gentleman from India has recognized for three minutes . Well I think that I thank the gentleman for yielding Mr Chairman. I just like to say to my good friend Mr Waxman emission Koski that. I have high regard for both of them and . We have tried to work on this in a bipartisan manner and I really hope that this whole issue doesn't degenerate into a political namecalling session because we all want the same thing . We want to make sure

    Show Full Text
  • 05:16:39 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    namecalling session because we all want the same thing . We want to make…

    namecalling session because we all want the same thing . We want to make sure

    Show Full Text
  • 05:16:42 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    . We want to make sure that Americans are secure and free from the threat…

    . We want to make sure that Americans are secure and free from the threat of terrorism. Now the president wants to encourage the private sector to give information to the Department of Homeland Security . To

    Show Full Text
  • 05:16:53 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Homeland Security . To enhance the safety of the American people.

  • 05:16:56 PM

    MR. BURTON

    American people. He's concerned at the people . We're talking about won't…

    American people. He's concerned at the people . We're talking about won't volunteer information if they think that whatever they turn over will be released to the public. Under the Freedom of Information Act . And I think he's right you would want some terrorist getting some of this information that would be voluntarily given. To homeland security. Let me give you an example if a. Business owner recognizes a some part of his business infrastructure. Might be vulnerable to a terrorist attack. We want him to be able to come to the government tell us about what he thinks might be done and how to deal against and deal with it. We want him to go to the Department of Homeland Security and be very candid . We want to be proactive not reactive . This is a sort of information we must have to prevent. Prevent tragedy to the American people. But if the businessman is worried . And if his lawyers are worried that whatever he voluntarily discloses. Will go straight into the public domain . And hands. Maybe to the terrorists. As we said earlier today. Then he probably won't do it. Where in a war. I hope my colleagues all remember that we are in a war. We need to take steps to guarantee that those people will come to us with that information . To protect the safety of the American people that's why I oppose this amendment. I think that the concerns raised by the sponsors of the bill and I have high regard for both of them all of them . Are misplaced. The Freedom of Information Act will not be harmed . The legislation will vote on later today will not allow people to dodge the Freedom of Information Act. This bill doesn't change . For you or the rules of for you for any other forms that businesses have to produce . To any agency of the federal government. The only thing that won't be subject to for information. Or The View are the vulnerabilities to terrorist attacks. The government needs . The kind of information we're talking about. And we won't get it . Unless there's a voluntary decision by the businesspeople . And the private sector to disclose that the government. They're not going to do it if they feel like they're going to be threatened. Or they're going to expose something that might lead to a terrorist attack. This is a common sense real war proport real war proposal. And we should not try. Our hands behind our backs. When it comes to fighting terrorism . And protecting the American people. I hate to say this but I have high regard for Mr Schiewe Mr cowskin Mr Waxman. But this amendment . Would do more harm. Good. We need to make sure we take every step possible to get to the private sector working with the government. To make sure we're free from terrorist attacks. And I yield back to bounce my time. The chair was just to inform members that the gentleman from Texas has seven minutes remaining in the gentlewoman from Illinois five and a half minutes remaining gentleman from Illinois . Gentleman from Illinois . Thank you Mr Chairman I now yield three minutes to the gentleman from Ohio . Whose whistle blower amendment passed in the Government Reform Committee the language included in this bill as to consent of the gentleman from Ohio as working as for three minutes . Thank you Mr Chairman would be unfortunate in our efforts to improve homeland security of suddenly our government became less open.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:19:58 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    our government became less open. Less transparent . It would appear if we…

    our government became less open. Less transparent . It would appear if we do that then the terrorist win because their attack is on our basic premise of democracy of a free and open society .

    Show Full Text
  • 05:20:10 PM

    MS. SCHAKOWSKY

    democracy of a free and open society . The current language in the bill…

    democracy of a free and open society . The current language in the bill fails to protect transferred homeland security. Civil servants from whistleblower reprisals . Under the current Whistleblower Protection Act. The

    Show Full Text
  • 05:20:23 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    standard bureaucratic response has been to silence messengers blowing the…

    standard bureaucratic response has been to silence messengers blowing the whistle on national security breakdowns.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:20:26 PM

    MR. KUCINICH

    messengers blowing the whistle on national security breakdowns. Now the…

    messengers blowing the whistle on national security breakdowns. Now the should because. Senate Meant commandment is designed. And it's needed to protect national security whistleblowers. By allowing them to petition Congress directly . And providing an effective remedy for any reprisal taken by the new agency . WHISTLEBLOWER rights our workers' rights . And no worker. Should lose his or her job . For exposing waste. Cover up . And lies . Of his or her superiors. It is ironic that a bill which is designed to fight terrorism . We have a provision. Designed to terrorize workers. The passage of this amendment . Is vital to protect the security of the American people . The September eleventh terrorist attacks. Highlight a longstanding necessity to the strength of. Speech protections for National Security Whistleblowers a number of whom have already made significant contributions to reducing U.S. terrorist vulnerability. Now Mr Chairman I just want to offer one example of a case that this house ought to be aware of the case of Marc Graf Marc Graf was an alarm station supervisor unauthorized derivative classifier. He worked seventeen years at the Department of Energy's Rocky Flats environmental technology site after the Web Services a private security agency took over the site. With more than twenty one tons of your radium and plutonium. Mark graph witness the elimination of their bomb detecting unit slappy emergency drills and negligence in taking inventory of the plutonium for months at a time . He and several other high level officials raise serious concerns about a terrorist risk. To the security of plutonium. As more than a ton of the material is unaccounted for at Rocky Flats. He took his concerns to management. Which took no action in one thousand nine hundred ninety five after blowing the whistle. To a member of Congress. Mr GRAEF was immediately reassigned from the areas that raise concerns in the first place . In a classified memo to the site supervisors. And later to the defense nuclear facility Safety Board. He outlined specific vulnerabilities which if exploited. Could be so out of catastrophic consequences . With no corrective active being taken. He did an interview with C.B.S. News. After the interview was subjected to a psychological evaluation and placed on administrative leave. As a condition of returning to work. He was gagged from speaking to Congress. The media the agency under the and. And also under the threat of job terminations. In one thousand nine hundred eighty five and later want to whistleblower replies with a complaint currently being appealed by his employer's disclosures. Contributed to legislation in the one nine hundred ninety eight defense authorization bill requiring an annual review of the safety and security program. We have now have another thirty seconds. Yield the gentleman thirty seven was recognized with three have a nuclear industry. In this country . With over one hundred nuclear reactors. Many of which have been realized since and have reactor vessels that have been in brittle. We have a hole in the reactor that's trying to be repaired in Toledo Ohio. Nuclear reactors are part of the critical infrastructure . This bill would let a coverup. Be in a fact. OK . In the name of national security . So that the public would never know about a hole in a nuclear reactor or anything that was done . That compromise the security of people lived in the area. This amendment is necessary this amendment is in the interest of our national security and our public gentleman's time has expired . Gentleman from Texas Chairman Issa my pleasure the you know two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio Mr Portman. The gentleman from Ohio West Point most recognizable two minutes. I thank you Chairman and. I think the for your concerns over. Parts as Memon have already been made by others but I'll just say to my friend that is clearly not the intent of the underlying bill. Nor is it the impact of the underlying bill. All of the foyer requirements that you would have . Including right to know. But continue to be operative. This is a very narrow .

    Show Full Text
  • 05:23:48 PM

    MR. KUCINICH

    continue to be operative. This is a very narrow .

  • 05:24:28 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    Stipulation that with regard to. Infrastructure information provided by…

    Stipulation that with regard to. Infrastructure information provided by the private sector you would get limited. For your protection

    Show Full Text
  • 05:24:34 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    . Which is absolutely necessary for national security and that's been…

    . Which is absolutely necessary for national security and that's been discussed . But this amendment would also create a plaintiff's lawyers dream as I see it. And that is the

    Show Full Text
  • 05:24:39 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    a plaintiff's lawyers dream as I see it. And that is the

  • 05:24:42 PM

    MR. PORTMAN

    civil actions open to. Punitive damages for whistleblowers. Claiming to…

    civil actions open to. Punitive damages for whistleblowers. Claiming to have suffered from reprisal . The mere threat of these punitive damages can cause to thin as including the government to settle cases and it does . Settle cases that question just to reduce that risk of an extreme verdict . And the opportunity of punitive damages for a plaintiff can make an otherwise meritless case look awfully tempting to pursue . Just in case a jury does come in with a big verdict. It's excessive. Let's be clear. The committee bill does. Have traditional whistleblower. Protections in it. I'm kind of tired to hear it done please turn to page one hundred five of the bill because it's right there . These are the whistleblower protections that we have currently . And they should be continued they're important. We should be promoting team spirit . At this new department. Collaboration . The bill gives the department a chance to give merit pay . Performance bonuses . In order to make this department work better as a team . That's the right incentives let's not give incentives to start disputes. In the off chance that a clever plaintiff's lawyer might find something to win. In a settlement. Let's stick with the strong whistleblower protections we have an underlying legislation. Let's stick with the foyer part. Provisions which are appropriate to provide this narrow . Limitation with regard to. Infrastructure information. That is important to protect the national security this country. Let's vote down this amendment. And support. The underlying bill has expired the gentleman from Illinois . Could I inquire as to how much time we have remaining The gentleman has two minutes remaining . I'd like to do is to now yield the balance of the time. To the gentleman from Texas Mr Doggett. Jonathan Texas is recognized for two minutes. The speaker. How many times will this Congress need to really learn . The very basic lesson. That an unaccountable government. Is an

    Show Full Text
  • 05:26:31 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    government. Is an irresponsible government. When we confront difficult…

    government. Is an irresponsible government. When we confront difficult problems . We can either

    Show Full Text
  • 05:26:35 PM

    MS. SCHAKOWSKY

    confront difficult problems . We can either work to try to solve them.

  • 05:26:39 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    them. All we can seek to hide them . Without

  • 05:26:41 PM

    MS. SCHAKOWSKY

    hide them . Without the amendment that is being advanced at the moment it…

    hide them . Without the amendment that is being advanced at the moment it is the latter choice that is being made.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:26:47 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    being made. Exempting so much of this new bureaucracy from the Freedom of…

    being made. Exempting so much of this new bureaucracy from the Freedom of Information Act. And denying basic protections to whistleblowers is a true ticket to trouble for America.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:26:56 PM

    MR. DOGGETT

    is a true ticket to trouble for America. It's a. Kill the messenger and…

    is a true ticket to trouble for America. It's a. Kill the messenger and hide the body approach . That tries to sweep all problems including ones that endanger basic public health and safety . Under the carpet . By increasing the power of self-appointed censors and denying whistleblowers protect. From retaliation . Some people. The only put thing that they have learned from Enron. Is the value of secrecy. After all who exposed in Ron's misconduct. A whistleblower and I'm sure and Watkins. Certainly no one in this Congress exposed and. Indeed they're still trying to sweep it under the rug in the causes of what happened in Enron . Meanwhile the administration. Well this is not the only place they like secrecy just asked Vice President Cheney about his energy policy development group you can ask . But he won't tell until a court makes him do it. Congress should not shield unscrupulous employers who wield the powerful weapon of the pink slip. To intimidate our workers. Into silence and order to conceal and perpetuate activities that endanger America. These are citizen crime fighters. And they deserve the protection that we provide crime fighters. Not our scorn. I have confidence in the power of courageous individuals to make a lasting contributions to our nation. To improve our private and public institutions . And Congress should advance that interest by building into government accountability . And by ensuring that our government as as open as possible. Where employees are encouraged to fix security problems. Not to hide the vote in favor of the sure Koski Amendment. Jenna's time's expired. The gentleman from Texas . Mr Chairman I'm proud do . You know of one minute to the distinguished gentleman from your town Mr Cannon general from Utah is recognized for one minute. I think the majority leader and I thank you Mr Chairman I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend that objection I was intrigued by the comments of the gentle lady from Hawaii . And also the gentleman from California . I might my first job as a lawyer was to work with Stuart. Your dog in the late one nine hundred seventy S. when he was a suing the federal government . On the facts

    Show Full Text
  • 05:29:14 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    that came out . About. The fallout and Dan which came out in fact . In the…

    that came out . About. The fallout and Dan which came out in fact . In the context of

    Show Full Text
  • 05:29:17 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    Dan which came out in fact . In the context of forty requests and. Let me…

    Dan which came out in fact . In the context of forty requests and. Let me say that the information that came out . Was remarkable.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:29:23 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    that came out . Was remarkable. I read every page of that information of…

    that came out . Was remarkable. I read every page of that information of the discussions that were held in very high levels in the military.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:29:26 PM

    MR. CANNON

    information of the discussions that were held in very high levels in the…

    information of the discussions that were held in very high levels in the military.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:29:31 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    About how how that.

  • 05:29:33 PM

    MR. CANNON

    How how they should control. The time and submit the information about…

    How how they should control. The time and submit the information about fought and subject Citizens United States knowingly. To the unknown effects. Known to be bad but. The scope of those effects were unknown at the time and and . I agree that it was appropriate to have that information come out and be the subject of a lawsuit . The fact though is that that was government activity . That was made available through the Freedom of Information Act Up. Mr Waxman from California . Talked about . About the Republican Party let me just say that these are governmental activities. We're dealing with in this exception. Is information that comes from private parties who own ninety percent of the infrastructure . And this amendment is ill advised inappropriate and I suggest that my colleagues vote against . Thank you Neal that gentleman from Texas. Thank you chair General . And I'm proud now to yield to minister the gentleman from the Virgin Yeah Mr Mr Moran. The gentleman from Virginia Mr Moran's recognize for two minutes thank you Mr Chairman I really like and respect its author of but I have to urge my colleagues to vote against the Chicago's get amendment on the for your act this is a very narrow restriction on public disclosure of information about the private industries critical infrastructure. We all rely on that privately owned infrastructure of this nation computer networks phone and power lines airplanes etc. As Mr

    Show Full Text
  • 05:30:57 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    computer networks phone and power lines airplanes etc. As Mr

  • 05:31:01 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    airplanes etc. As Mr Davis said. Ninety percent of our critical…

    airplanes etc. As Mr Davis said. Ninety percent of our critical infrastructure is owned by the private sector.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:31:07 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    private sector. And President Clinton's directive sixty three. An effort

  • 05:31:11 PM

    MR. MORAN

    was put into play to enable the owners of this infrastructure . To…

    was put into play to enable the owners of this infrastructure . To communicate with the. Each other and formulate effective response plans to terrorism extortion and hacking However P.T. sixty three that presidential directive found the companies. What not share information about threats to their infrastructure. Because of the lawyers concerns about for us and antitrust sharing such up for the nation would put them in an even more vulnerable position with respect to their customers . Their shareholders and their competitors. And I have to say. Some of the objections that this segment. That this amendment. Addresses are misleading. It's not unprecedented . Congress passed why to create legislation to exempt it from Nation sharing about critical infrastructure vulnerabilities. From use in lawsuits and disclosure that they're at parties. It's narrower than that wide to claim legislation that contains no Most definitions. It provides no immunity from liability no limit on Discovery lawsuits. No free pass on criminal activity. All of it caught required disclosures under the Clean Air and Clean Water Act must continue. If you don't include. This limited for your restructure and you won't be able to say that we did everything we could to prepare and defend our homeland . That's a narrowly crafted restriction of fire. And it can help when the where the war on terrorism. So I urge my colleagues to join me in voting of voting against the Chicago men men . And for the Davis Moran language which comes up next thank you Mr Chairman. Gentlemen Texas . Mr Mr Chairman that I believe the general is time has expired. That's right and I yield to myself my remaining time to close. John as recognized Chairman General it is a mad man would do two things he would set aside some very carefully crafted. Language that modifies for a lot of consideration for private sector firms who are asked to share. Crucial information with the government .

    Show Full Text
  • 05:33:06 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    I would be a mistake to decide we need these firms at all in so much of…

    I would be a mistake to decide we need these firms at all in so much of our infrastructure . To cooperate

    Show Full Text
  • 05:33:11 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    much of our infrastructure . To cooperate and let me just say . For you.…

    much of our infrastructure . To cooperate and let me just say . For you. Designed for the American people to understand what's going on is government.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:33:18 PM

    THE CHAIRMAN

    American people to understand what's going on is government. It's not…

    American people to understand what's going on is government. It's not designed and nor what I think many Americans would consider it appropriate to use for you to force.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:33:24 PM

    MR. ARMEY

    to use for you to force. Private citizens or corporations. To give their…

    to use for you to force. Private citizens or corporations. To give their information up. To people like . Trial lawyers. Newspaper editors or. College professors the. Three principal categories of people who access for your information . The second part of the. Gentle ladies Amendment is predicated on the. Misrepresentation that we do not protect whistleblowers in this legislation . This myth. Has been running amok and . Public discourse. Since the president proposes. It was always the president's pretty. Intention and I believe. Discerning people would have recognized the president's intention in everything he said. And submitted . It certainly is our intention on page one eighty five of this bill . To protect whistleblowers . So one. Mr Chairman. The argument that this bill contains no protection for whistleblowers is just plain flat wrong. They perceptiveness of any eighth grader who can read . Would reveal that to anyone . Now what the general A does building on the myth that there is no protection is provide extra special protections . And the former compensatory damages and. I like this one Lawyers across America must be left in there. Licking their chops over this one. Any other. Relief that the court consider appropriate . Not currently available to Wesel blowers . Ladies and gentlemen. If you want to win the lottery. Buy a ticket. In the meantime bow down this amendment . And a fan. Rights of the American people that are legitimate. And just type of John at his expense. That expired. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois . Those in favor say aye aye. Those opposed say no in the opinion of the chairs the nos have it the amendment is not adopted Tam and I request to Roll Call the record out. For so it's a clause six of relay team for the proceedings on the amended offered by the gentleman from Illinois will be postponed. It is now an order to consider . Amended number twenty five. And then at number twenty five printed an in-house report.

    Show Full Text
  • 05:35:53 PM