FDCH TRANSCRIPTS
Congressional Hearings
Mar. 4, 2003
Senate Judiciary Committee Holds Hearing on War Against Terrorism
SCHUMER
Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Chairman, just before Senator Leahy, I wouldI was glad to hear that Mr. Mueller will come back for a separate hearing.
But I would ask thatthis is such an important issue. We're creating a whole new agency, and we have three hours here for all three witnesses together. Many of us won't even get to ask any questions, that if we could make time I think it's important enough to have each witness come individually and give us some time.
Because I have so many questions. I know every one of my colleagues do on both sides of the aisle. It seems that we're not giving this the attention time. And I'm sure the witnesses would be willing, if we accommodated their schedules, to come back individually.
HATCH:
Well, we'll certainly take that under consideration. Let me tell you three hours from these three gentlemen is like the world up here.
I think we will have time for everybody to ask questions. We're going to have seven minute rounds, and we'll see how far we go. But certainly, I've asked the FBI director, Mr. Mueller, to come back at a later time when we can discuss the FISA issues which are among the most important issues that this committee is concerned about.
But we'll certainly take that under consideration.
SCHUMER:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
SCHUMER:
That is good.
Thank you, and I very much appreciate all three of you being here. I have a couple of questions I'd like to ask.
First, I want to follow up on what Senator Feinstein had asked you, General Ashcroft. As you know, she authored the assault weapons ban in the Senate, I was author in the House.
And you mentioned you support the current ban. Would the administration support reauthorizing that ban, extending it, because if not it will expire?
Will you work for that?
What happens if in the House they decide to bottle it up?
Three questions.
So would you support reauthorizing it?
ASHCROFT:
As the president stated during his campaign, the administration supports the current assault weapons ban. The original law required a study. That study indicated that the results of the ban on gun violence were uncertain. We're continuing the study. The administration supports the current law.
SCHUMER:
But you're not saying whether you'd support a reauthorization bill that we hope we can pass.
ASHCROFT:
The administration supports the current law.
SCHUMER:
OK. Thank you.
Next question forand I'm sorry to be quick here, but we don't have much time, and I do want toSenator Hatch is not here, but I want to reiterate strongly that my request to him earlier tothis is one of the most important subjects we face, we have three of them of the most important gentlemen here, and I would say that we simply don't have enough time in seven minutes to cover the waterfront on so many of these issues; to not only have all three together, but to have them eachto limit the time until 12:30 p.m. doesn't really give justice to the importance of this. And I'm going to renew my request strongly, hopefully joined by others here, that we be allowed to have each of you come at your own schedules.
I don't care if we have to do it in the evening so that we can ask questions. And I take it none of you would object to coming back, is that fair to say?
CHAMBLISS:
You won't have any disagreement on our side.
SCHUMER:
OK, great. So let the record show all three have agreed that they would come back. Fair enough?
Will whoever doesn't want to come back raise their hand?
(LAUGHTER)
Let the record show none of these three fine gentlemen has raised his hand.
This one is for Mr.Secretary Ridge, and congratulations on your appointment. My question is about homeland security, where I have real worries. And let me just ask you one.
I've been very concerned about nuclear weapons being smuggled into this country, not so much dirty bombs, although I'm very concerned with that, that's harder to guard, but real nuclear material in bombs.
And Senator Warner and I, obviously in a bipartisan move, had put in first the homeland security bill and then in the supplemental appropriation a proposal to fund research for detection devices that could be placed on every crane that loads or unloads a container, on every toll booth where containers come through the Canadian and Mexican borders, to develop these detection devices, which can be done according to every expert.
The administration didn't oppose the language but opposed putting any money in, and we ended up with $15 million, which is not enough, and God forbid one of these weapons be smuggled into our country, the damage, as much as I grieve, I wear this flag every day in memory of the people who died in my city on 9/11 and elsewhere, this would even be worse.
Can we get your support, the administration's support, to find the dollars in the supplemental appropriation so that we can develop these kinds of detection devices?
No one objects to it in substance, they just say there's no money for it.
RIDGE:
Well, Senator, first of all I'm not familiar with the specifics of the legislation. I will certainly make myself familiar. But in the 2003 budget that we inherit in the Department of Homeland Security, we do have several hundred million dollars that'll be assigned to the unitto the Science and Technology Unit.
And one of our highest priorities is examining some of the research that's being presently conducted in either the national labs or the university research labs to see if there's anything out there that we could prototype to answerto address the concern that you have.
So I will just make it a point of personal interaction to get back with you, one, to reexamine the legislationI'm not sure at this time we need more money. Because of the 2003 budget, we do have dollars in the Department of Homeland Security and we'll see how they mesh and if there's a concern I'll get back to you.
But I think we've got...
SCHUMER:
Let me just say, and I don't want to carry on argument here because time is so limited.
The experts say it will cost about $250 million total to do this. The total budget for the research for everything, I don't think, is that. And so I think, you know, in all due respect, we need some more money for this, and it was not the Senate, not the House, not Democrats here, not Republicans here, but the administration, in the personage of OMB, who basically knocked out the dollars.
I had an agreement. Ted Stevens supported our amendment and put it in the Senate bill. So I hope you'd look at that.
RIDGE:
Yes, let me review. We did get ample funding. We did get some dollars transferred from, I think, from DOD, and I think it's important for me to take a look at whether or not they're eligible to begin that very considerable research initiative that you're talking about. It's something that we have as one of the highest priorities within the department.
Let me review it and get back to you.
SCHUMER:
Could you get back to me in writing?
RIDGE:
Absolutely.
SCHUMER:
One final question. I am very worriedI'm worried about so many things these days, as we all areshoulder-held missiles, shoot down an airplane, God forbid, and not only are hundreds killed but commerce basically comes to a standstill.
Some of us here, Senator Boxer and I, have proposed that we spend moneywe actuallywe proposed taking it out of the anti-missile defense, which is a longer-range threat, but it could come from anywhereand outfit every commercial airliner with the wherewithal to prevent the Stinger from hitting.
We do this in our military planes, we do thisEl Al Airlines does this, obviously, they're most concerned with security. And I'm wondering if the administration would support such a proposal to do this.
It is expensive, but the alternative if God forbid it happens, is even more expensive.
RIDGE:
Senator, withinliterally within hours, if not the next day after the failed effort to use the MANPADS overseas against the El Al airliner, we convened a group of representatives from all the agencies that had anything to doknowledge or experience with the MANPADS themselvesTSAas broad as possible a group of agencies to come up with countermeasures and to look at the existing technology, its cost and to basically do some work to see whether or not, because it is an extraordinarily expensive acquisition at this timebut to see whether or not there can be some modifications to existing technology that might be deployed.
So, again, that's an issue that as soon as it occurred we recognized the considerable impact on lives and on commercial aviation and on the economy and the catastrophic consequences.
We've taken a look at some countermeasures and that's part of the internal discussion, but there's certainly been no commitment one way or the other to deploy them on commercial airliners. To be determined.
SCHUMER:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just would ask, number one, that I be allowed to submit questions in writing, which the witnesses can answer; and, second, I would just reiterate to the attorney general, I'm disappointed that the administration will not come out and say they'll support an extension of the assault weapons ban, and respectfully ask you to consider doing that.