Thad Cochran

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, this amendment makes necessary technical changes in the bill language authorizing the Government Accountability Office--GAO--to perform review activities to verify air carriers' calendar year 2000 security costs and makes funds available to GAO for this purpose. Amendment No. 3587 This amendment makes a technical correction to the bill in conformance of Public Law 108-271 renaming the General Accounting Office the Government Accountability Office. Amendment No. 3588 This amendment makes technical corrections to bill language for the Government Accountability Office to report on the progress of the Secure Flight program.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I have no objection to the request for the time agreement.

Mr. COCHRAN. I strongly urge Senators to vote against the Leahy amendment.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, so there is no illusion about who is responsible for suggesting we have a vote on the Thomas amendment, it is me. It is not the majority leader. As the manager of this bill, I think we ought to follow the regular order. The Senator from Vermont laid down an amendment. The Senator from Wyoming offered an amendment to the amendment. It is in order. We have had a debate on it. He is entitled to a vote on his amendment. We ought to have it. If his amendment prevails, then we vote on the amendment as amended. Nobody is going to filibuster the bill on this side. I am not going to. I am not going to filibuster my own bill because of this amendment. I want people to understand it is not this big an issue. It is not going to bring down the Senate and block consideration of this bill as far as I am concerned.

Mr. COCHRAN. Reserving the right to object, Mr. President.

Mr. COCHRAN. I will give a quick answer. I am not going to, by unanimous consent, deprive any Senator of a right to offer an amendment. That is what I would be doing if I would, by agreement, say that you can offer an amendment and have a vote on it without any other Senator having an opportunity to modify it. That is not in the rules of the Senate. It is inconsistent with the traditions of the institution to do that.

Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be dispensed with.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry. If this is an amendment that has already been before the Senate and to which an amendment has been added, is it in order for the Senator to put before the Senate the same amendment as an amendment?

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. COCHRAN. Have the yeas and nays been ordered?

Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, it occurs to me that this is an issue that probably ought not be on this bill. As a matter of general principle, it is a legislative decision. It seems to me the committee of jurisdiction would probably be the committee chaired by the distinguished Presiding Officer. Having said that, that doesn't make this amendment go away by itself. We have to dispose of it. We have to deal with it. Frankly, I am confused about how the amendment got added to the House Appropriations Committee bill. I am told it was an amendment offered on the floor and it was adopted by the House. This seems to me an amendment that ought to be at least discussed in conference. If we adopt the Leahy amendment without changing it at all, then we are stuck with the language, it seems to me. I don't know how you get away from having this provision in the final version of the bill, and this appropriations process would have been subverted and it would have been distorted. This is not an appropriations amendment. We are not talking about an amount of money to be appropriated for any particular purpose. Immigration services are provided, of course, by the Department of Homeland Security and apparently the Department feels it ought to have flexibility in the administration of that program. We are singling out an employment circular to prohibit its effectiveness on an appropriations bill. I think it is fairly convoluted. I don't like the process. The Senator from Wyoming comes in and offers a modification, which basically requires the Department to provide information on its intentions. It must submit to Congress not later than 60 days before making an award. This is an award for providing services under the auspices of the Bureau of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Before it makes an award to someone to provide these services, it has to go through certain steps and make this disclosure to the Congress. It seems to me that this is an appropriate place to at least call time out and let us put this issue on hold and give the Appropriations Committee an opportunity to consider it in conference. We would have to resolve the differences between this amendment and this provision in the Senate and the one adopted by the House. I fully support the amendment offered by the Senator from Wyoming. Let me add one other note. The administration submits to the committee after we write a bill in the Appropriations Committee a Statement of Administration Policy. Looking at their Statement of Administration Policy on the bill as reported by our Appropriations Committee, you get down to the bottom of page 2 where it talks about competitive sourcing, it states: The administration has adopted a reasonable and responsible approach for ensuring the fair and effective application of public-private competition. On a government-wide basis, competitions completed in fiscal year 2003 are estimated to generate savings, or cost avoidances, of more than $1 billion over the next 3 to 5 years. The House version of the bill contains a provision that would block DHS from using competition to choose the best public or private sector source to handle basic administrative tasks associated with the processing of immigration applications and benefits. We understand an amendment may be offered on the Senate floor that would also preclude public-private competition and turn back DHS' efforts to significantly improve customer service for immigrants. If the final version of the bill were to contain such a prohibition, the President's senior advisers would recommend that he veto the bill. So I can't stand idly by and see this provision be included in the bill and risk the veto of this Homeland Security appropriations bill that we have worked very hard to craft, after hearings and hearings, and with the good assistance of other Senators on the subcommittee such as the distinguished Senator from Vermont. I would hate to see all of our work go for naught and have to start over with a vetoed bill. I am urging Senators to vote for the Thomas amendment and let us take this issue to conference and see if it can be resolved in a way that gets the bill signed and takes care of the concerns expressed by the distinguished Senator, my very good friend from Vermont.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I indicated earlier that the Senate Appropriations Committee met earlier this afternoon to approve the subcommittee funding allocations. The allocations approved are the same as those provided earlier by the full committee, for this subcommittee's information. For Homeland Security appropriations, the approved fiscal year 2005 discretionary spending allocation is $32 billion in budget authority and $29.873 billion in outlays. The bill reported by the committee is at the $32 billion discretionary budget authority allocation and $144 million below the outlay allocation. The allocations for this bill are $897 million in budget authority and $730 million in outlay above the President's request, showing the priority the committee has placed on Homeland Security accounts and its appropriations. This is a fiscally responsible allocation and Members will be required to provide offsets for any additional spending proposed by amendments to be added to this bill, or the amendment will be subject to a 60-vote Budget Act point of order, I am advised. Therefore, I make a point of order against the Schumer amendment under section 302(f) of the Congressional Budget Act that the amendment provides spending in excess of the subcommittee's 302(b) allocation.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I think the Senator asked for a parliamentary inquiry. I don't have standing to rule on parliamentary inquiries. That is the responsibility of the Chair.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I do not know what the amendment is. It was sent to the desk. It would be nice to know what it is so we would know whether we should agree to the unanimous consent request to limit 2 minutes to a side.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate vote on the motion to waive in relation to the pending Schumer amendment at 4:45 p.m. today, with the debate until that time equally divided in the usual form.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, a point of order. I have no objection to the dispensing of the reading of the amendment, but a point of order. Is there already an amendment pending from the Senator at the desk? Is this the second amendment or is this a different amendment?

Mr. COCHRAN. It depends on what his amendment is. We may all rejoice and vote for it. Who knows? Again, we may not.

Mr. COCHRAN. Fine.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, the Senator talks about we have sort of rubberstamped what the President has asked for in some of these areas. We have agreed with the President on some of his initiatives because we thought he was right, but when we thought the administration was wrong or where they have requested funds, as he pointed out, in the railroad area, for security programs there, this committee has recommended and the Congress has agreed to add funds over and above what has been requested by the President. In this particular area, where the Senator is coming in now and doubling the amount of money we have in this one particular grant program--we have appropriated for this program almost $500 million, specifically for port security grants, since fiscal year 2002. We are addressing this issue. This is the point, and I am not apologizing for the decisions this committee has made and that have been ratified by both Houses of Congress and approved in the appropriations conference report. We have appropriated almost $500 million specifically for this program. We have asked for another $150 million this year. That is not enough, he says; double it. We can talk about it on and on and on and go into all the other accounts that involve security in urban areas, high threat areas, but we have to realize there is a limit. Some Senators think we can come in and double the amounts in individual accounts and it will not matter, but if we keep on doing that before this bill is passed, we will have added no telling how much to the deficit. We would have put the administration in a position where they are going to have to either ask for deferrals or recisions of funds. If they cannot possibly get grants out to people who are qualified to use the money or can justify the use of the funds, we cannot pour the money on the ground, and I am not going to stand here and go along with suggestions that amount to spending more because it sounds as if we are going to be doing more. It does not necessarily follow. I am hopeful we will have in place within the next few minutes some information about the total allocation of funding to this committee, because without that we can continue to add money for individual accounts in this bill for the rest of today and tonight and on into the weekend and then we will have to go back through and start striking funds that have been added so we will be consistent with the allocation to the subcommittee. What I am asking the Senate to do, and the reason I put in the suggestion for a quorum when I first made the point of order, is to await the advice of the Committee on Appropriations. I am told they sent the information over electronic device, but we need it written on paper so Senators can read it and can understand what the limitations are. So I am hopeful we can await the advice of the full committee on the action that has been taken today. I would appreciate it very much. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, it is always instructive to listen to the distinguished Senator from New York talk about programs and activities that are of major concern to his constituents, particularly in the New York City area, but New York State generally. We appreciate his observations and his expression of concern about technologies and advancements and new ways of protecting the citizens of his State and our country against nuclear threats or other threats to our security. We think the Department has made important progress in these areas, analyzing and understanding the technologies that are available. We have included, for example, encouragement for additional investigations in this area. I am reading from page 84 of the committee report now. It says: The Committee expects a significant expansion of the Countermeasures Test Bed being conducted with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey in testing technologies to detect radiation/nuclear threats to include railway, general aviation facility monitoring, expanded roadways coverage, and an additional seaport. The Committee is aware of technology proposals developed with national laboratories to facilitate the inspection of containerized cargo for fissile materials as a part of the normal off-loading process at the Nation's seaports. The Department is focused on the importance that we all believe should be paid to this area of interest and concern. We know that existing technologies are being deployed by agencies at ports of entry, including the U.S. Coast Guard and the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection. They provide an effective nuclear countermeasure system, but continued focused development can considerably extend these capabilities in order to develop technologies for application to specific locations, including those in the intermodal transportation system, in the maritime domain, at border ports of entry, and in the aviation industry. Specifically, the committee included in this section of the bill to which this amendment is directed great latitude in approving grants that can be the subject of applications from not only States but local jurisdictions such as port security areas. Of the total provided by the committee for urban area security initiative grants, $150 million is for port security grants; $150 million is included for rail and transit security grants; $10 million is available for inner city bus security grants for the improvement of ticket identification, the installation of driver shields, the enhancement of emergency communications, and further implementation of passenger screening; $15 million is also included for trucking industry security grants to continue the Highway Watch Grant Program. This committee had the responsibility of trying to help ensure that across the broad range of urban area security concerns funds were available for grants to local areas and to States to deal with these new challenges. The committee believes the Department's practice over the past 2 years to allocate appropriated funds could be improved. We suggested, for example, that they all not be made available early in the fiscal year but to leave some opportunities for later grantmaking authority so that if any new discoveries or intelligence of recent terrorist threat information became available, these funds could be targeted to higher risk areas and where we would get more for our money. It is easy to offer an amendment to double an appropriation, and that is what this amendment does. We have $150 million in the bill for this one particular grant program within the broad urban area security initiative grants. What the Senator from New York is doing is asking that be doubled. You can just about go through this bill, I suggest, and find every incremental amount that is in this bill and pick out one and offer an amendment to double it and make a good persuasive case why it would be better off if we could spend twice as much money as we have allocated for that one activity. That is a pretty easy argument to make. But it is also a cheap shot, and the reason I am calling it a cheap shot is that we have within this Urban Area Security Grant Program $1.2 billion for discretionary grants to high-threat urban areas. The Secretary has to make these decisions on the basis of the applications and the proposals that are submitted to the Department. If we in the Congress are going to go back through the bill and try to second-guess every one of these accounts and double it and ask for a vote, you could easily double the whole cost of the bill. We have a $33.1 billion bill. It probably would be harder to get a vote to double that to $66 billion, but you could make some arguments why we could spend that amount of money. But could we spend it in a thoughtful way that would efficiently and responsibly use the taxpayers' dollars in this area of concern, homeland security? We have had 2 years of experience in writing this bill. Last year, we ended up having to make points of order on the basis of the fact that some of the amendments were in excess of the allocation that was given to this subcommittee. I understand the full committee has been meeting this afternoon during the last hour to review the amount of funding that would be available to each subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee. And I understand soon, if it has not already been done, there will be filed with the Senate this allocation, and this subcommittee will have a limited amount of money to use in writing this bill. I am not suggesting we have gotten the cart before the horse, but I am suggesting that before we vote on this amendment, I want to be sure I know what the allocation amount is for this subcommittee. It is not just targeted to the amendment of the distinguished Senator from New York that I do this, but any amendment that would come in and double an amount without any more justification than it would be good if we could spend twice as much as we are spending. And that is really the argument. Sure, it would be good if we could spend twice as much as we are spending in a lot of areas, but we have to make the choices within a framework of funds available to the committee for a wide range of activities, all of which are very important. We have to choose among programs of the U.S. Coast Guard, programs of the Transportation Security Administration, of the Secret Service, of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and many others whose accounts are funded in this annual appropriations bill. I am hopeful we can withhold action on this particular amendment and let us have an opportunity to review the committee's work. So awaiting the further advice of the chairman of the Appropriations Committee or his staff, Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I am very pleased to present this appropriations bill to the Senate. It is the culmination of a lot of hard work by all of the members of our subcommittee, as we conducted hearings to review the proposed budget from the Department of Homeland Security, and as we listened to those who have responsibilities for managing the various directorates and other agencies and activities that come within the ambit of the responsibilities of the Homeland Security Department. We learned a lot in the hearings. We learned about new procedures that were being developed and deployed. We learned about new technologies that were being explored. In the bioterrorism area, we were learning about the research that is being done to make our capacity more sophisticated and capable of protecting the health and safety of all Americans from attacks in that area. We have been challenged as we have never been challenged before to look again carefully at how we go about protecting the citizens of our great country. The experience of September 11, of course, stays in our mind as something that is unthinkable. The fact that it did happen is still unbelievable, and we realize that we have the responsibility-- representatives of the people of this country serving in Congress today--to try to get it right so that kind of thing can't happen again. We are blessed to be served in the administration by people such as Tom Ridge, the new Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. The President recommended this new Department be created. The Congress responded. The Governmental Affairs Committee, on which I served at that time, dealt with the challenge of the legal framework of defining the responsibilities of a new department and what activities would come under the Department. We brought together under this one Department 22 different Federal agencies, or at least parts of 22 different agencies. Some, such as the U.S. Coast Guard, were transferred underneath the jurisdictional responsibility of the Department to help make our effort more coherent, more effectively and efficiently managed, and to achieve the goal of making our country safer and more secure for the citizens who live in the United States. I think we have made great progress. This bill specifically provides funding of $33.1 billion for the Department of Homeland Security for this next fiscal year, 2005. This is the second appropriations bill to fund the Department which began its operations short of a year and a half ago. The new Department has made substantial progress to merge the agency functions and the employees who were transferred under its responsibilities and to undertake its new duties to better secure and more effectively protect our great Nation. We also have seen a new system put in place called the US VISIT Program to screen visaholders and to stop potential terrorists and those who may be dangerous, because they have committed crimes in the past, from entering our country to start with. US VISIT, through biometrics and other new innovations, has already identified, apprehended, or arrested more than 400 individuals. Through the science and technology directorate, the Department has aggressively moved forward on the successful testing of the first commercial portal monitors and handheld radiological identifiers to detect the smuggling of materials which could be used to build weapons of mass destruction. Federal air marshals have been deployed. State-of-the-art technologies have been introduced, and cockpit doors have been modified to increase the safety of air travel. I know there can be criticism leveled at the efforts of the Transportation Security Administration which has been the agency identified with the responsibility for overseeing aviation security and many other areas of responsibility. But let me remind Senators--and this is contained in our committee report--I invite the attention of the Senate to the report, on page 31, where we talk about aviation security. My good friend, the distinguished Senator from West Virginia, mentioned people who might bring in bombs or material that can be used as explosives to blow up planes and otherwise harm us. The Transportation Security Administration aviation security account [in this legislation] provides for Federal aviation security by employing the most efficient screening of all passengers and baggage, deployment of onsite law enforcement, continuation of a uniform set of background requirements for airport and airline personnel, deployment of the most current explosive detection technology, and creation of a model workplace. The aviation security activities include funding for Federal and private contract passenger and baggage screeners, including personnel compensation and benefits, training, and human resource services; passenger checkpoint support; air cargo security; procurement and maintenance of explosive detection systems; and checkpoint support. I suggest that the $4,386,083,000 for aviation security contained in this bill is designed to meet the needs we have for improved and safer air travel, working with the airlines who are spending their own money in many of these and other areas. I suggest we have the safest air transportation system in the world. And we are going to continue to monitor the activities. We are going to continue to engage in oversight and interaction with the Federal agencies involved, as well as Department of Homeland Security officials, to see that we stay on course and that we continue to upgrade, improve, and take advantage of the latest technologies to guarantee the safety and security of American citizens. Looking at another area, efforts have been undertaken to increase our stockpile of antibiotics, vaccines, and other medications to protect Americans in the event of a terrorist attack and to identify and develop new countermeasures to protect Americans against new biological threats. Today our first responders, those who work at the fire departments, the police departments, the emergency medical centers, have been provided with resources from the Federal Government to buy necessary equipment, to increase training to better protect our communities throughout the country. Including the resources in this bill we are presenting today to the Senate, over $12 billion will have been appropriated to our State and local partners across the country, over $2.5 billion to firefighters alone. The Department of Homeland Security has made important strides in this last year. The bill we present to you today will allow the Department to continue to build on its success and make our Nation even more secure. If Senators look at the provisions in the bill, they will see that it reflects suggestions made by Senators on both sides of the aisle. This is a bipartisan bill. It is not a Republican bill or a Democratic bill, it is an American bill. It is a bill to protect the safety and security of all Americans. Our committee held hearings and listened to every suggestion made by all Senators for the levels of appropriations for all of these activities. This is the second year of this bill, as I said, but I think we have made important strides forward. I particularly thank again the distinguished Senator from West Virginia for his cooperation, his support, and his assistance during the development of this bill and the conduct of our hearings and the presentation of the final work product to the Senate today. I am going to close my remarks--and I will be prepared to receive any suggestions for changes in the bill or amendments or other statements from Senators--by quoting from something Tom Ridge said with which I was particularly impressed. Our Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security said: Homeland security is about the integration of a nation, everyone pledged to freedom's cause, everyone its protector, and everyone its beneficiary. It's about the integration of people and technology to make us smarter, safer, more sophisticated, and better protected. It's about the integration of our national efforts, not one department or one organization, but everyone tasked with our Nation's protection. Every day, we work to make America more secure. Every day, the memories of September 11th inspire us to live our vision of preserving our freedoms, protecting America, enjoying our liberties, and securing the homeland.

Mr. COCHRAN. I am happy to compliment the distinguished Senator for his description of the damages in Florida. We are all keenly aware, because the of the images on television, and the description in the newspapers, conversations with friends and family members in that State, how terrible those storms have been and the devastation that has been caused. One thing that reminds me of the history of my own State is the terrible force of the wave action. I can remember when Hurricane Camille struck the Mississippi Gulf Coast in, I think, 1969, that storm did more damage than any other hurricane that had ever hit that part of the gulf of Mexico. I recall going down to the gulf of Mexico and visiting that area, seeing how devastating the damage was and how long it took to recover from it. As a matter of fact there are still scars. There is one shrimp boat about 2 blocks inland now that is sitting there as a reminder of the force of that hurricane. The fact of the matter is, and the Senator is correct, the $2 billion the Congress has approved for a supplemental appropriation for the Federal Emergency Management Agency is targeted just to the Disaster Relief Fund. This is, as the Senator knows, to provide emergency assistance of food, shelter, debris cleanup--taking care of the emergency situation that exists. That fund was going to be exhausted this morning when the President signed the bill appropriating this additional money. So, with this funding, that account is taken care of. As the Senator indicates, there is a lot of other damage that is outside the jurisdiction of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies may have responsibilities and they may not have sufficient funds to meet all the needs for which some people are entitled to reimbursement or some kind of disaster relief under Federal law. For that reason the President indicated in his request to Congress which he submitted on September 6--and I'll read this. He said: The enclosed request requires immediate action by the Congress to ensure that the immediate response efforts to these recent disasters continue uninterrupted. I anticipate making a further request in the coming days that will provide for a comprehensive response and recovery effort addressing the impact of both of these hurricanes. In addition, federal government agencies will continue their response and recovery efforts using existing resources and programs. What we get from that is the President is submitting and, we have been advised by the President's staff, that in the coming days there will be another supplemental appropriations bill requested by the President. It will not be the bill that we are considering today, though. This is the annual appropriations bill that funds the entire Department of Homeland Security, Coast Guard, the Secret Service--the 22 various agencies that are combined within the ambit of the Department of Homeland Security. I suggest to the Senator we would welcome any suggestions he has for inclusions in the additional supplemental that will be before the Congress soon, at the request of the President.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, before we start agreeing on times for votes, that is above my pay grade. We have a distinguished majority leader, and we will have to consult with him and other Senators.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be dispensed with.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, we are now on the Homeland Security appropriations bill for the next fiscal year, 2005. For the information of Senators, this morning the President signed the supplemental appropriations bill the Senate passed last night. The President had requested a supplemental for the Disaster Relief Fund of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Because of the pressure on that fund, the Agency would have run out of money this morning if the Congress had not acted in response to the President's request on yesterday. The House acted and the Senate approved the supplemental appropriations bill for the Department. So I am happy to make that report to the Senate. There was some discussion of that issue last night, and I appreciate the cooperation and the support of the Senate in taking the action we did. We are now prepared to consider the full year appropriations bill for the Department of Homeland Security. We have some opening statements we will make. Senator Byrd is the senior Democratic member of this subcommittee, as well as the full committee of the Appropriations Committee. He has a statement he wishes to make. After opening statements are made, we will be happy to consider any amendments Senators wish to offer. We hope to be able to complete action on this bill as soon as reasonably possible. By the end of the week would be great, if we could accomplish that. But if not, I think we will have the support of the leader and the chairman of the full committee to continue to work on this bill until we do finish it. It is a matter of great importance that these agencies and this Department know what the funding levels are going to be for the fiscal year that begins very soon, October 1. We certainly need to take action in a timely way for orderly planning for the use of those funds that are appropriated by the Congress for this important work. Protecting our homeland is a very important--there is no more important action by the Federal Government, in my opinion. So I hope we can consider this bill with a sense of serious deliberation and work hard to complete action in a timely fashion. I appreciate very much the cooperation of Senators who are letting us know about suggestions they have for changes in our bill as reported by the Appropriations Committee. We will consider them, and we will accept those that we can accept. We hope we will be able to have the full cooperation of all Senators in that respect.