Conference Report On H.R. 4954, Safe Port Act

CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 4954, SAFE PORT ACT -- (House of Representatives - September 29, 2006)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman. As there is a great deal of admiration in this room, let me say that I too admire the staff and the authors of this bill, Ms. Sanchez, Ms. Harman, Mr. Thompson, and the work of Mr. Lungren and Mr. King, but it is obvious we could have done more. And I listened to the distinguished gentleman talking about regular order. We have not had regular order this entire day.

I do want to say the good work shows that we are concerned about port security, with $400 million in port security grants, training for port workers, such as longshoremen, transportation workers' I.D. cards, screening of the 22 busiest airports, establishing the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, additional Customs and border protection personnel and port security plans.

But I am very proud of the language of training residents of seaport communities, that the conferees agreed that it is crucial to involve communities in disaster preparedness by providing for an annual community update to the homeland security training program described in this bill. This was language that I included because of the area in which we live in Houston where there is sizable populations living around the community.

The port security training program is designed for the purpose of enhancing the capabilities of each of the Nation's commercial seaports to prevent, prepare for, respond to, mitigate against, and recover from threatened or actual acts of terrorism, natural disasters, and other emergencies. The language I contributed extends this training program to include communities and neighborhoods in proximity of the seaports by educating, training, and involving population at-risk neighborhoods around ports, including training on an annual basis to learn what to watch for.

However, I would hope that we would move toward in the next few months 100 percent screening of container cargo, which we have not done.

I also hope that we realize, as my colleagues have said and as Mr. Thompson's overwhelming motion to instruct said, we have to be concerned about rail security. I mentioned during his motion to instruct that rail security is not just people riding Amtrak. It is the railroads that travel through neighborhoods throughout the regions of the Nation, including the South.

I would also note that I live around a very large port, and this will have a positive impact on the Houston port. I ask my colleagues to support it, though I am disappointed, Mr. Speaker, that we have extraneous material, such as the Internet gambling, on this bill.

I rise in support of the Conference Report to the SAFE Port Act of 2006, H.R. 4954, which represents a significant step forward toward national security and safety for our seaports. I am proud of my colleagues who have crafted this bill to be inclusive of many issues that members of the Committee on Homeland Security and other Members of the Congress have expressed over the last few years, and more intensely over the last few months.

All of us share the common goal of all Americans of making the movement of cargo through the global supply chain as secure as possible, and are committed to doing everything feasible to ensure the security of the Nation's ports.

Many elements of this legislation are beneficial: $400 million in port security grants for each of fiscal years 2007-2012; training for port workers, such as longshoremen; Transportation Workers Identification Credential (TWIC) cards to workers with access to secure areas of ports and background checks; screening at the 22 busiest seaports; establishment of the Domestic Nuclear Detection office, DNDO, within the Department of Homeland Security; additional Customs and Border Protection personnel; requires port security plans to include training for residents of neighborhoods around facilities.

Safe and secure seaports are an essential element in building efficient and technologically advanced supply chains that move cargo quickly to distribution centers, stores, and factories around the world. Although we have made progress since the 9/11 attacks in enhancing the security of the nation's ports, we cannot afford to be complacent.

INCORPORATED AMENDMENT: TRAINING FOR RESIDENTS OF SEAPORT COMMUNITIES

I am proud and thankful that the conferees agreed that it is crucial to involve communities in disaster preparedness by providing for an annual

community update to the Homeland Security Training Program described in this bill.

The Port Security Training Program is designed for the purpose of enhancing the capabilities of each of the Nation's commercial seaports to prevent, prepare for, respond to, mitigate against, and recover from threatened or actual acts of terrorism, natural disasters, and other emergencies.

The language I contributed extends this training program to include communities and neighborhoods in proximity of the seaports by educating, training, and involving populations of at-risk neighborhoods around ports, including training on an annual basis to learn what to watch for.

Many communities across the country have a ``Neighborhood Watch'' program that teaches citizens to watch for suspicious activity or other signs of danger. This language provides for a similar ``citizens corps'' preparation program in anticipation of a national security threat. The intent is to mimic the Citizen Corps initiative begun by the White House and the Department of Homeland Security in 2002.

While 44 percent of Americans say their neighborhood has a plan to help reduce crime, only 13 percent report having a neighborhood plan for disasters. Nearly two-thirds of respondents, 63 percent, believe it is important for neighborhoods to have a way to work together on emergency preparedness.

Fifty-two states and territories have formed state level Citizen Corps Councils to support local efforts. My hope is that before the next disaster, our citizens will be aware and trained to react effectively and timely, and perform as local responders themselves.

MORE MUST BE DONE 100% SCREENING

While there are good elements of this bill, I am compelled to discuss the fact that this bill could have been so much more, and could have definitively contributed to national security efforts. I am dismayed at the fact that there are gaps in this report wide enough to let terrorists through.

Apparently, it is not important to know what is arriving by sea cargo.

This bill fails to require 100 percent scanning of contents bound for our borders before they leave other nations. By the time they arrive and are unloaded onto our soil, it is too late.

We have the technology to do this--the ports of Hong Kong and Boston already screen most inbound cargo for both radiation and lead shielding (to hide the radiological materials) using commercially available technology without interrupting the flow of commerce. As we continue to fight to protect our borders, we need to continue to develop cutting edge technologies to detect and defeat next generation threats to port security.

According to security expert Steve Flynn, the cost would be about $50--$100 per container--minimal compared to the $4000 per container it costs to ship from Asia to the U.S., and to the $66,000 in average worth that each container carries. This is accessible, technologically feasible, and necessary. It is beyond me why it is not a part of this bill.

RAIL AND MASS TRANSIT

It is unacceptable to consider rail and mass transit security, as Secretary Chertoff stated, ``goulash.'' I fear the day when a tragedy will strike on a subway, or on a bus, and we will suddenly discover how large a mistake it was to miss this opportunity . We know how easy a target mass transportation can be-witness Israel, London, Madrid, and Mumbai amongst so many others. We have focused so much effort on securing our borders. I wonder why Republicans are not just as concerned with securing us.

I am disappointed that this provision is not included in this conference report. At the very least, yesterday's Motion to Instruct the Conferees, which passed 281-170, instructed the conferees to accept the rail and mass transit provisions from the Senate. It takes gall to ignore an on-record vote of the House of Representatives.

Houston Port and Economic Data

The Port of Houston is a 25-mile-long complex of public and private facilities located just a few hours' sailing time from the Gulf of Mexico. The port is ranked first in the United States in foreign waterborne commerce, second in total tonnage, and sixth in the world.

About 200 million tons of cargo moved through the Port of Houston in 2005. A total of 7,057 vessel calls were recorded at the Port of Houston during the year 2003.

Economic studies reveal that ship channel-related businesses support more than 287,000 direct and indirect jobs throughout Texas while generating nearly $11 billion in economic impact. Additionally, more than $649 million in state and local tax revenues are generated by business activities related to the port. Approximately 87,000 jobs are connected with

the Port of Houston itself, and over 80% of those people live in the Houston metropolitan area.

Centrally located on the Gulf Coast, Houston is a strategic gateway for cargo originating in or destined for the U.S. West and Midwest. Houston lies within close reach of one of the nation's largest concentrations of consumers. More than 17 million people live within 300 miles of the city, and approximately 60 million live within 700 miles.

Conclusion

The danger is very real that we may be escorting a weapon of mass destruction to its target. For every mile along the Houston Ship Channel that dangerous cargo passes, an additional 2000 people are at risk. Clearly, once the cargo reaches the city, the risk is greatest.

There are many such cities and states across the country that are vulnerable and need the federal government's leadership for security and protection. The legislation is a good start, yet it will not be sufficient. I challenge my colleagues on the Homeland Security Committee to consider this only the first step in securing and protecting our nation's ports, and a necessary gateway to addressing the vulnerabilities of rail and mass transit.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov/