Security and Accountability for Every Port Act

SECURITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR EVERY PORT ACT -- (Senate - September 13, 2006)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ROBERTS. Madam President, I rise today in opposition to the amendment that is proposed by Senator Reid. The title of the act Senator Reid has proposed is called Real Security. If my colleagues on the other side of the aisle actually believe this amendment is real security, I encourage every American to go home and simply lock their doors.

There are provisions in the amendment that I like. In particular, I support the passage of the Intelligence Authorization Act as it was reported by the Intelligence and the Armed Services Committees. I hope the Senate can act on that bill by unanimous consent without insisting on needless partisan debate on a bill that has bipartisan support.

But now, on the other hand, I oppose the sense-of-Congress language Senator Reid has inserted in that bill that suggests the terrorist surveillance program is unlawful. Talk about the sense of the Congress--that means the Congress would not have any sense.

Like most Americans, I believe the President should use all the authority provided by the Constitution and laws of the United States to prevent terrorists from killing innocent Americans. If terrorists outside the United States are placing calls to individuals in the United States, as many people have said over and over and over and over and over again, our intelligence agencies should know about it.

The terrorist surveillance program is lawful. It has been effective. I will oppose any legislation that does not support the continuation of that very valuable program.

The bottom line on the terrorist surveillance program is this: The men and women of the NSA are working hard to protect our country day in and day out. We should let these patriotic Americans get back to doing their job.

Beyond that, I am convinced that my colleagues consulted perhaps a group of tenth grade English teachers in preparing this amendment. I haven't seen so many assigned reports since I was in high school.

Instead of providing flexible authorities to protect our Nation, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have proposed approximately 52--a deck of cards, 52--I say that again, 52 new and continuing reporting requirements. That is one new reporting requirement for every 9 pages of the amendment.

The U.S. Government should be focused on securing our borders, disrupting terrorists, and protecting our ports. This amendment does nothing but divert focus to reporting requirements.

My colleagues have also resorted to an old standby: If you don't have any ideas, throw money and people at a problem. There are about 29 sections that propose new or additional ways to spend our limited resources. We haven't had any committee hearings on these, but they are reported. There are three provisions that increase the size of our Government by adding more personnel.

As a substitute for congressional consideration of legislation to respond to the Supreme Court's Hamdan decision, my colleagues have proposed yet another national commission--yet another national commission. I am not going to go through the trouble of listing all of the commissions that we have had in the last 4 or 5 years. This one, however, is to focus on the detention and interrogation of terrorists captured in the war on terror. Let me give my colleagues the bottom line on the Government's detention and interrogation programs--and there will be legislation that already is reported from the Senate Judiciary Committee to take care of that--they have kept this Nation safe. I think we can forego another commission.

Finally, Senator Reid's amendment would authorize three new administrative subpoenas: one for the new commission, one for the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, and one for a new Senate committee.

If Senator Reid and his colleagues want real security, they should strip out these provisions and simply give the FBI an administrative subpoena to track terrorists and spies. But that is the point of this bill; it is not about real security. This bill is about real Monday morning quarterbacking. It is about tying the hands of our homeland security and intelligence professionals as they attempt to protect this Nation.

The only way this amendment would make the Nation safer is if we made copies of all of the reports that it requires and carpet-bombed Osama bin Laden. I am certain he would suffocate.

I will not support this amendment. I urge my colleagues to oppose it as well.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov