Security and Accountability for Every Port Act
SECURITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR EVERY PORT ACT -- (House of Representatives - May 04, 2006)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Chairman, first, I would like to thank Chairman King and Chairman Lungren for working with me and other members on the committee to produce the bill before us today.
I especially want to commend my colleagues, Ms. Loretta Sanchez and Ms. Harman, for their hard work on this bill and on port security in general. Many provisions in this bill came from legislation they have introduced over the last 2 years, and for that I thank them. They have been leaders on this issue, and we need to give them credit before we discuss the full ramifications of this bill.
Madam Chairman, this bill represents an important step toward improving our port security, but it is only a step. We need to do more to get it right. I could talk about the good things in the bill; but with this limited time, I would like to focus on what is not in the bill. These are the things that are going to keep us up at night after today's votes are over.
Yesterday during Rules, it was said by folks on the other side that we need to look at where threats exist and do something that makes us a little safer. ``A little safer'' is simply not good enough after 9/11, and the threats left undone by this bill are significant.
I worry that unsecured nuclear materials, and there is a lot of that wandering around the Russian countryside, will be shipped here hidden in a cargo container that sails into Miami, New York, Houston, New Orleans, Los Angeles or Oakland. From there, the cargo container will be put on a train or truck headed to places like Chicago, St. Louis, Austin, Milwaukee, or Detroit. As the train or truck passes by our schools, homes, or who knows what else, what is going to stop a terrorist from detonating it. If this happens, what will my colleagues across the aisle recommend Congress tell Americans, we didn't know it would happen?
After 9/11 when terrorists surprised us by using our own airplanes against us, we cannot say we did not expect the unexpected. We must do better. It is our job to prevent disaster from happening, not react after the fact. We had the opportunity to do that today.
We could have voted on my amendment increasing the number of Customs and Border Patrol officers at our ports, but the amendment was not allowed on the floor. All the talk on border and port security means little if we do not have the boots on the ground to check what is coming into our Nation before it arrives here or before it leaves a foreign port.
And we could have ensured that more than the 5 percent of our cargo entering the country is scanned by voting on the Markey-Nadler amendment on cargo screening.
Madam Chairman, 5 percent does not make America a little safer; but the 95 percent of cargo left unchecked leaves us a lot less safe. This is not rocket science, Madam Chairman. Technology exists to scan cargo. It is being used in Hong Kong as we speak. It can be bought over the counter, and the amendment offered by my colleagues would have given DHS up to 5 years to get it right.
This bill is a good first step, but we need to start making giant steps to keep up with the terrorists.
Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Mississippi is recognized to control the 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment. The provisions on trade and maritime domain awareness it contains are strong improvements to the bill.
However, I must express my deep disappointment with one provision in the bill removed by this amendment. In committee, we included language that would have assured that the Coast Guard did not have to use bubble gum, bailing wire, and buckets in the coming years. This language was stripped out of the bill, meaning that we are going to have to make the Coast Guard spend the next two decades fighting a 21st century war on terror with assets built during the Vietnam War.
The Deepwater Program must be accelerated if our ports and coastlines are going to be safe. I know that if Chairman King had had his way this would have stayed in, and I thank him for that.
I am a strong supporter of this program. As a conferee on the last two Coast Guard authorization bills, I supported more funding for the Deepwater Program each year.
At one time during Hurricane Katrina, the Coast Guard used 78 Deepwater assets in Hurricane Katrina relief to save 33,000 people. One would think that the administration would be asking for more money for this type of equipment, not less.
The Commandant of the Coast Guard, ADM Thomas Collins, told me in February of this year that the Coast Guard can accelerate the completion of the Deepwater Program if given the funding, and that it would result in a large savings to the taxpayers.
I hope this Congress will reconsider accelerating Deepwater in the conference on this bill.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, in support of the amendment, I would like to compliment our chairman on really pulling together a good bill. Even though there were differences, we did the best we could to work those differences out in what I consider a very fair and reasonable manner; and I want to compliment him for that. I was able to in the course of this discussion go to New York and look at some of the fine things going there. So, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
The gentleman from New Jersey has indicated support for the Deepwater Program, additional monies for the assets. I look forward to supporting that effort.
The Coast Guard, as we know, serves a wonderful purpose. We need to make sure they have the assets to get the job done. So I look forward to working with him on that.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment which will ensure that port security grant funds be used by ports to purchase communication equipment that is interoperable with Federal, State and local communication systems.
I have been in countless hearings in the Department of Homeland Security Committee where first responders have told us how year after year they have not been able to communicate with each other.
I have also heard testimony from the operators of critical infrastructure such as hospitals affected by Hurricane Katrina who also still cannot communicate with government officials in an emergency.
We have not yet had a terrorist attack on a port in the United States, but I do not want to wait until one occurs to find out whether port operators face similar challenges.
Allowing port security grants funds to be used by ports to build interoperable communication systems will ensure that if an attack does occur at a U.S. port we are ready for it.
As a result, Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Connecticut for yielding me the time.
Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment. Many Democrats on the Homeland Security Committee have been asking for a long time why DHS is not more seriously looking at the ICIS system, and we have never gotten an answer from them.
The ICIS system proves that we can scan every container leaving for the U.S. without interrupting the flow of commerce. The Markey-Nadler amendment would exactly use technology like this if it had been allowed to have been debated here today. Unfortunately, we could not.
We cannot accept anything less than 100 percent container screening coming into this country. So I am in support of Mr. Shays's amendment. This at least moves us forward. It is unfortunate that we have to take baby steps rather than giant steps. But for the sake of moving forward, we support the amendment, and I compliment the gentleman from Connecticut for offering the amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov