Improving America's Security Act of 2007--Continued

Floor Speech

IMPROVING AMERICA'S SECURITY ACT OF 2007--Continued -- (Senate - March 13, 2007)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. FEINGOLD. Madam President, I want to add my thoughts to the debate on the Improving America's Security Act of 2007.

First, I preface my remarks by applauding the chairman and ranking member of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee for their work on this important bill. This bill makes crucial and long overdue improvements in transportation security, critical infrastructure protection, and emergency response capabilities. There is no higher priority than protecting homeland security, and this bill is a key component in that effort.

Nearly 6 years since the horrific attacks of September 11, we are still struggling to give our first responders, law enforcement officers, and the employees of the Department of Homeland Security the resources they need to keep us safe. I thank these brave men and women who work daily to protect this Nation. They are on the front lines of the fight against terrorism. They are the ones who are called on to stop and respond to any future attack upon our Nation. This bill includes important resources these brave men and women need to perform their critical tasks.

I am pleased that the Senate has increased funding for State homeland security grants, emergency management performance grants, emergency communications and the Urban Area Security Initiative. I have long advocated for greater funding of emergency management grants because they are crucial in assisting State and local officials in preparing for all-hazards emergencies. These grants provide emergency managers with the resources they need to increase coordination and planning so that if an emergency occurs, State and local officials will respond much more efficiently and effectively.

It is my hope that this bill represents a lasting shift in priorities, a shift towards an enhanced focus on the most pressing threats facing our country. We are still spending almost twice as much on Iraq as is allocated for homeland security, diplomacy, and international assistance combined. The billions we spend each month in Iraq could be invested in the protection of critical infrastructure and our system of national preparedness and response that failed in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. As we consider the budget resolution and the defense and homeland security appropriations bills this year, I encourage my colleagues to take a broader view when it comes to our national security priorities and make the tradeoffs that must be made.

I am particularly pleased that the Federal Agency Data Mining Reporting Act is included in this bill as section 504. I have been working on this legislation for a number of years with Senator Sununu, Senator Leahy, and Senator Akaka. I am glad that Senator Sununu and Senator Akaka successfully offered the legislation as an amendment to S. 4 when it was before the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

Many law-abiding Americans are understandably concerned about the specter of secret government programs analyzing vast quantities of public and private data about their pursuits, in search of patterns of suspicious activity. Four years after we first learned about the Defense Department's program called Total Information Awareness, there is still much Congress does not know about the Federal Government's work on data mining. This bill is an important step in allowing Congress to conduct oversight of any such programs or related research development efforts.

The Federal Agency Data Mining Reporting Act would require Federal agencies to report annually on their development and use of data mining technologies to discover predictive or anomalous patterns indicating criminal or terrorist activity the types of pattern-based data analysis that raise the most serious privacy concerns. As amended on the floor, it would also allow classified information, law enforcement sensitive information, trade secrets, and proprietary business information to be provided to the relevant committees separately, in a nonpublic form, under appropriate security measures.

Intelligence and law enforcement agencies would not be doing their job if they did not take advantage of new technologies. But when it comes to pattern-based data mining, Congress needs to understand whether it can be effective in identifying terrorists, and Congress needs to consider the privacy and civil liberties implications of deploying such technology domestically. I hope these reports will help Congress--and to the extent possible, the public--finally understand what is going on behind the closed doors of the executive branch, so that we can start to have the policy discussion about data mining that is long overdue.

I am concerned about the ongoing development of the Information Sharing Environment without adequate privacy and civil liberties guidelines. In the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, Congress mandated that the President create an Information Sharing Environment, ISE, for the sharing of terrorism information among Federal agencies, State and local governments, and the private sector. This is a critical goal in our counterterrorism efforts. But that legislation also required that the President issue privacy guidelines for the ISE, in recognition of the serious privacy and civil liberties implications of facilitating more sharing of information among these entities. Those privacy guidelines were issued in December, but in my view are wholly inadequate. They touch on the most significant privacy issues and provide a framework for agencies to think about the privacy issues that might arise, but they do not include specific guidelines and rules for protecting privacy. That is why I filed an amendment to S. 4 that would have provided more direction to the ISE program manager about what should be included in these privacy guidelines and the need for more specific government-wide rules for the ISE. I was disappointed that my amendment was not included, but will continue to work to ensure that the guidelines for implementation of the ISE are sufficient to protect the privacy of Americans.

The bill mandates the declassification of the aggregate amount of the intelligence budget. This reform has a long history going back to the Church and Pike Commissions. It is supported by the current Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. It was also one of the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, which stated that ``when even aggregate categorical numbers remain hidden it is hard to judge priorities and foster accountability.'' I concur with the Commission, that aggregate budget figures ``provid[e] little insight into U.S. intelligence sources and methods.'' Sharing this information with the American people will, however, provide a greater level of transparency and accountability and in the end make us more secure.

I was pleased to support Senator McCaskill's amendment to ensure that workers at the Transportation Security Administration are afforded the same workplace protections as other DHS employees. The low retention rate at TSA resulting in part from lack of workers' rights threatens our security. This amendment will address this concern while giving administrators the flexibility they need to respond to imminent threats.

I am pleased that this bill includes provisions to ensure proper oversight of
oversight of expenditures at DHS, including an article in the Washington Post last November stating that the Department was unable to locate one-third of the files needed to perform an audit of its contracts. I therefore supported Senator Coburn's amendment to require DHS to perform audits on homeland security grants. While I understand concerns that this requirement could have led to delays in the issuance of grants in fiscal year 2008, I did not think it was unreasonable to require DHS to conduct the audits required in a timely manner. I will continue to work with my colleagues to improve oversight of homeland security funding.

I supported several amendments that would have added funding for critical security needs not fully addressed in this bill. I do not take lightly a decision to vote in favor of spending more money. Fiscal responsibility is one of my highest priorities, but it is imperative that we provide the resources needed to combat terrorism.

I voted for this bill because it makes key changes to address security needs. However, our Nation's vulnerabilities demand more and I will continue to work to ensure that our vital homeland security needs are met.

Source