9/11 Recommendations Implementation Act
9/11 RECOMMENDATIONS IMPLEMENTATION ACT -- (Extensions of Remarks - October 11, 2004)
The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 10) to provide for reform of the intelligence community, terrorism prevention and prosecution, border security, and international cooperation and coordination, and for other purposes:
Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this measure, not because I endorse all of its provisions, but because I believe that Congress must act swiftly to reform our intelligence community and to protect our homeland.
As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I believe H.R. 10 does not go far enough to establish a National Intelligence Director with real authority. I agree that we must provide the Department of Defense and our men and women in uniform with the military intelligence needed to be successful, an assertion that 9/11 Commission Vice Chairman Lee Hamilton accepted even though it was not specifically addressed in the report. At the same time, if we do not grant the NID true authority over our intelligence assets, we run the risk of adding another layer of bureaucracy that complicates, not simplifies, the challenges facing our system.
Furthermore, I am disappointed that H.R. 10 is largely silent in addressing the threat of nuclear weapons proliferation. There is no greater danger to our homeland than the possibility of a nuclear weapon being smuggled into our country by terrorists. Russia and many former Soviet republics retain nuclear material that is not appropriately safeguarded, and the United States must lead an international effort to track down, lock up and destroy those potentially deadly weapons. Unfortunately, an amendment offered in committee by the gentlewoman from California, Mrs. Tauscher, and the gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Spratt, was blocked from consideration.
On a more positive note, this legislation appropriately recognizes the need to enhance our human intelligence capabilities and creates a national counterterrorism center to coordinate interagency intelligence efforts.
I am also heartened that H.R. 10 heeds the Commission's call to enhance America's image in the world and prevent the rise and recruitment of future terrorists. Dr. Joseph Nye, the former dean of the Kennedy School of Government and Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, has talked about the need to supplement our military might with "soft power"-efforts to win the world's hearts and minds with our values and culture. Successfully exercising this type of power requires that we pursue many fronts, including international diplomacy, democracy-building, cultural exchanges, economic development, educational initiatives and communication about our values and ideals.
To win the ideological battle being waged in the world today, we have to offer an alternative to the hopelessness and despair that the likes of Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida prey upon. There are millions of young people in the Islamic world who are hungry for hope and opportunity, and it is in our interest to show them that hope lies in freedom, liberty and democracy-not in extremism and hate. In doing this, we take a major step towards ensuring that we win the long-term war on terror.
As the 9/11 Commission so eloquently put it: "We need to defend our ideals abroad vigorously. If the United States does not act aggressively to define itself in the Islamic world, the extremists will gladly do the job for us." While H.R. 10 does not implement all of the Commission's recommendations in this regard, I am pleased that our nation is finally taking an important step toward bolstering its stature in the world. I am hopeful that the Conference Committee will adopt stronger provisions from the Senate bill regarding our efforts in Afghanistan, public diplomacy initiatives, educational and cultural exchange programs, and economic development initiatives.
With regard to domestic security, the measure before us today takes some major steps forward. As recommended by the Commission, the bill calls for the creation of a stronger biometric entry-exit screening system, global standards for security systems, a transportation security strategy for all sectors, and improved prescreening of airline passengers. H.R. 10 also moves closer to a threat-based formula for distribution of first responder grants, an important change in the way we fund state and local preparedness efforts. Unfortunately, the bill falls short of several critical goals, among which are protecting privacy in information-sharing, ensuring spectrum and equipment for public safety interoperable communications, enhancing private sector preparedness, and improving the way we track terrorist travel and financing.
Most disappointingly, H.R. 10 undertakes a number of controversial immigration modifications not recommended by the 9/11 Commission and not found in the Senate legislation, which passed earlier this week by a resounding vote of 96-2. The inclusion of these divisive sections will likely slow down the upcoming conference and delay implementation of the many beneficial parts of this legislation.
One worrisome provision of H.R. 10 strips from the courts their traditional judicial oversight in many immigration cases and may require automatic deportation of noncitizens, even if they will face torture in the country to which they are sent. Not only is this provision a violation of the International Convention Against Torture, it is morally unacceptable and risks further damaging America's image in the world.
In addition, the bill expands the use of secret intelligence court orders, which can be issued under a far lower standard than conventional warrants or wire taps. The unfortunate inclusion of these and other extraneous provisions threatens civil rights and civil liberties and endangers the future of intelligence reform. I look forward to addressing some of these issues during the amendment process and urge conferees to reject any provisions which would threaten the bipartisan, bicameral response that the 9/11 Commission's report requires.
I am pleased that we will have the opportunity to vote on a substitute offered by the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Menendez, and I urge all of my colleagues to support its passage. The Menendez substitute is based on the bipartisan McCain-Lieberman-Collins legislation, which has the support of the 9/11 Commission, the White House and families of the 9/11 victims. This amendment addresses all 41 of the Commission's recommendations, and does so without adding controversial and divisive provisions that jeopardize the broad-based support the recommendations have garnered.
I am deeply disappointed that the House leadership has denied the minority a voice in drafting this bill, and I urge my colleagues to support the Menendez substitute to correct these problems. However, should it fail, I am confident that we will be able to improve this legislation in negotiations with the Senate and the White House so that we may provide the type of reform that the American people deserve.