Thad Cochran

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished assistant leader from Nevada, and I thank the distinguished Senator from New York and the distinguished Senator from Maine, as well, for the discussion we have had on the issue of formulas. I look forward to joining them in a careful consideration of the issues that have been discussed.

Mr. COCHRAN. I join the senior Senator from New Mexico in urging the Department of Homeland Security to utilize the National Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center and to support partnerships with the DOE national laboratories in New Mexico. I concur that the Nation's critical infrastructure is a potential target for future terrorist attack and that the Department must move swiftly to assess the nature of those threats and secure our critical infrastructure against such attack.

Mr. COCHRAN. The Senator from New Mexico is correct. Although the Department of Homeland Security is newly constituted and its budget submission is not completely detailed, I have confirmed with the Administration that the National Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center, or NISAC, receives $23 million in the budget request for the Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Directorate. Those funds are approved in the Committee-reported bill.

Mr. COCHRAN. The Committee supports the creation of a national, all hazards warning network, and will work in conference to achieve this goal.

Mr. COCHRAN. That is my expectation.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, the amendment offered by Senators Schumer and Baucus increases the funding available for personnel along the northern border by $200 million to meet a level of personnel authorized by the USA PATRIOT Act. This amendment is identical to the portion of the amendment offered by the Senator from West Virginia, Mr. Byrd, yesterday on which a point of order was made and the motion to waive failed. So the amendment was not agreed to. I will make the same statements I made yesterday but in a different way--it won't be exactly the same--to explain why the funding made available in the bill has gone a long way toward achieving the goal. In fact, before the end of this fiscal year of 2004, there will be the number of agents anticipated and contemplated by the USA PATRIOT Act, and they are funded in the legislation that is before the Senate now. Since fiscal year 2002, more than 5,000 additional inspectors, special acts, and Border Patrol agents have been funded by the Congress. The supplemental included $75 million for additional staffing for the northern border and maritime ports of entry. It also included $25 million to transfer 285 Border Patrol agents to the northern border. The Bureau of Customs and Border Protection reports that over 4,000 inspectors have been added since September 11, 2001. Over 1,000 inspectors have been added to the northern border since 9/11; 613 Border Patrol agents are assigned to the northern border compared to 368 before September 11, 2001. Commissioner Bonner plans to have 1,000 agents on the northern border by October of this year. When the new agents funded in the bill are counted, there will be over 11,600 Border Patrol agents in fiscal year 2004. This bill includes the maximum number of new border agents that can be absorbed in 1 year. But for the purpose of our discussion on this specific amendment, I am constrained to point out that the amendment provides spending in excess of our allocation under the Budget Act and, therefore, I am constrained to make a point of order, and do hereby make a point of order, 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. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. COCHRAN. Let me assure the Senator from New Mexico that I recognize the need for continuation of this project in his State, and that the funding provided to the Department of Homeland Security by this bill would be available for this purpose.

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

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, the Senator's amendment will add $80 million to the appropriations for the Office of Under Secretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection, and it is earmarked specifically to conduct chemical facilities security assessments. Our bill provides a total of $823,700,000 for the information, analysis, and infrastructure protection operating expenses. The Senator adds his $80 million to that account and earmarks it for chemical facilities. There is no offset for this amendment. Therefore, it violates the Budget Act inasmuch as it surpasses the allocation available to the subcommittee to use in writing this bill. At the appropriate time I will make a point of order that it violates the Budget Act in that it is spending in excess of the subcommittee's allocation. I assume the Senator will move to waive the Budget Act and get the yeas and nays and the vote will occur on the motion to waive the Budget Act. That is my expectation. I am hopeful the Senate will refuse to waive the Budget Act. What we are doing if we start down this path is not only adding money that is not available to the subcommittee, but we are earmarking specific, critical infrastructure facilities and telling the Department how much money they should spend on each one, or selected ones. It deprives them of the flexibility they need to use the funds they are given under this legislation to assign priorities as they understand the threats. Changing threats could mean a change in the areas where they are concentrating their activities and assessing the security of specific facilities in addition to chemical facilities. Chemical facilities, incidentally, are considered critical infrastructure and they are defined as such in the bill. So there is no restriction for this agency to use the funds appropriated in this act for the purposes of assessing the security needs of chemical facilities. I don't know how much time remains for the Senator, but I don't intend to debate this any further. When the time of the Senator is yielded back or used, I will make the point of order. I make the point of order under section 302(f) of the Congressional Budget Act that the amendment provides spending in excess of the subcommittee 302(b) allocation.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, in addition to the research account that the Senator seeks to amend with the amendment he submitted and which is at the desk, the Department of Homeland Security is engaged in a wide range of broad-based research activity under the auspices of the Science and Technology Directorate. The Transportation Security Administration funding is affected by the amendment at the desk. There is a lot of other research that is being done relating to radiological and nuclear countermeasures. I am convinced that much of what is being done in terms of developing new ways of dealing with the problem the Senator describes is being done under the auspices of the Science and Technology Directorate. Here are some examples of the work that has been funded over the last 3 years and is being funded again this year in this bill: sensor research and development. This is for radiological and nuclear countermeasures. In 2003, there was $10 million appropriated and enacted; $40 million reprogrammed for this account in fiscal year 2003. Mr. President, $71 million is contained in the Senate bill for sensor R&D. So over that 3-year period--$10 million, $40 million, $71 million--you have $121 million that has been appropriated for sensor R&D. Also, there are other accounts, such as detection systems product improvement, demonstrations, remediation and consequence management--a wide range of other activities. The total for radiological and nuclear countermeasures for this year alone, in the bill we have presented, is $131 million. In 2003, the total was $75 million. So we have almost doubled the amount for the science and technology research that is being done in this particular area. So this isn't the only account that is available.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield, the technological center is in Atlantic City, NJ.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, if the Senator has completed his statement, I would be happy to continue. The committee is recommending in the appropriations bill $130.2 million for research and development. The way that is broken down even further as explained in our committee report on page 31, $55.2 million goes to a Technological Center for Research and Development. That is where the kind of work the Senator is talking about is done. An additional $45 million goes to the next generation of explosive device systems. The third category of funding is $30 million which goes to an air cargo pilot program. The point is the Senator is coming in and adding $70 million to this account without an offset. That is going to violate the Budget Act. Because we have been unable to accept any amendments that are drafted like that, I would be constrained to make a point of order because the amendment would violate the Budget Act. That would be my intention if the Senator insisted on this amendment. If the motion to waive the Budget Act fails, the Senator can offer his alternative. I do not know how else to proceed to consider the other amendment unless we deal with this one first. I just wanted to make that point. Work is being done now. I am advised that work is being done now on the kind of research that would lead to, we hope, eventual deployment of the kind of system about which the Senator is talking. But we are unable to earmark that kind of money in this bill without eliminating funding for other research activities which are also underway. We can't do everything at once. There is just not enough money. That is the rationale for having to make some choices and to allocate the funds as the committee has chosen to do in this bill. If the amendment the Senator is offering does violate the Budget Act, I am going to have to make a point of order. And the Senator can move to waive it. The Senator can move to waive it, if he so chooses. He has that right.

Mr. COCHRAN. I am happy to yield.

Mr. COCHRAN. I have yielded the floor.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I compliment the distinguished Senator from Maine for her leadership as chairman of the Governmental Affairs Committee in helping shape the legislation that created this new Department and in monitoring its activities and keeping up with how they are going about managing their responsibilities. Legislation has already been reported out of that committee, for example, that deals with such issues as formulas for dividing money among agencies and sharing money with State and local governments. These are very important challenges the committee faces because they are the committee of jurisdiction of homeland security. We are just simply providing the funds and trying to allocate it within the terms of a budget resolution, trying to maintain an awareness of the importance of holding down the deficit, being responsible, making sure the funds we invest in these activities are used wisely and efficiently and effectively. We want them to really count. We want to be sure we are upgrading the quality of our capability of responding to national emergencies, manmade and natural disasters as well. It is a big challenge. There is no end to the list of ways we could spend more money in trying to do that. We are guided by the legal authorities laid out by the Committee on Governmental Affairs. We appreciate so much the guidance and leadership of the distinguished Senator from Maine in this effort. I commend her very much.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I was listening to the Senator from New York to be sure I understood what he was suggesting. He said if I didn't agree to one thing he would offer another thing and I am not sure what he sent to the desk and that is why I decided to go look. From what I understand, the Senator has offered an amendment that would--well, the reading of this seems to add $70 million, or earmark $70 million from the amount made available for research and development to the Secretary of Homeland Security, to award grants to national laboratories, private and nonprivate organizations, institutions of higher education, and other entities for the support of research and development of technologies that can be used to secure the ports of the United States. What he then talked about was a technology he would require to be developed with funds in this amendment to detect nuclear explosive devices that were attempted to be brought into ports or brought into the United States. The point is, we already have in the bill $55.2 million for a technology center which conducts the research and engages in the work that leads to the development of such protective devices. I am confused by what the Senator said he is trying to do and what he sent to the desk. I have to be honest.

Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, there has been much made about the suggestion from the Coast Guard that we should have over $1 billion available for port security activity. Let me point out that in fiscal years 2003 and 2004, several other agencies of the Department of Homeland Security, other than the Transportation Security Administration, have been provided funds that are to be used for port security activities. The Coast Guard itself has been provided up to $888 million in 2003, and it is provided $1.201 billion in this bill. The Bureau of Customs and Border Protection has been provided $170 million for increased personnel at maritime points of entry, and $33 million is available in this bill for all ports of entry, including seaports, for the container security initiative. All have been funded in a total amount, if we add it up over 2003 and 2004, of $3.29 billion available for the security of our Nation's ports. We are doing our best to allocate the funds to those agencies within the Department that can help us secure our maritime ports. I hope the Senate will agree with us, but it is now time for the Senate to work its will. I move to table the amendment of the Senator from South Carolina, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, we are prepared to suggest to the distinguished Senator from Nevada, if we could get consent, we would ask that votes on the Boxer amendment or in relation to the Murray amendment occur at 12 noon today. We are hoping we can get consent. I think it would be good for us to do that. We could vote on one amendment and then I think a motion to waive the point of order that I made would be the vote that we would have on the Murray amendment. If the Senator would consider this: I ask unanimous consent that at 12 noon today the Senate proceed to a vote in relation to the Boxer amendment, No. 1331, to be followed by an immediate vote in relation to the Murray amendment, No. 1327, provided further that there be 2 minutes equally divided for debate prior to each vote and that no second degrees be in order to the amendments prior to the vote.

Mr. COCHRAN. I thank the Senator and I thank the Senator from West Virginia as well. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a markup on Wednesday, July 23, 2003, at 9:00 a.m. in Hart Room 216.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 at 2:45 p.m. to hold a hearing on Iraq: Status and Prospects for Reconstruction--Next Steps.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 at 9:30 a.m. to hold a Business Meeting.