C. Cox

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference report on the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. The House Select Committee on Homeland Security, which I chair, was deeply involved in the efforts to put this bill together. The bill unfortunately does not contain all of the provisions that I believe it should contain--in particular, the Faster and Smarter Funding for First Responders Act, which was a major part of the House-passed 9/11 bill. But the bill as it is now before us meets the most important test: It will make America safer. The reform of our intelligence system is an historic and vitally necessary step forward. This bill will also ensure that U.S. officials on the border have access to the information they need to identify suspect and fraudulent identity documents. It will give consular offices the technology and training they need to recognize terrorist travel patterns and practices--as called for by the 9/11 Commission. We also know that a major problem along our borders today is the lack of detention space to hold illegal aliens who are awaiting deportation. The indefensible policy of ``catch and release'' that this necessitates is threatening our national security. The select committee worked with my good friend Mr. Bonilla of Texas, and the Judiciary Committee to insert into this bill a large increase in the number of detention beds to address this problem. The bill will also greatly enhance our efforts to improve the interoperability of first responder communications. It directs DHS to provide technical assistance to our highest-risk areas in order to rapidly deploy interoperable communications systems. And it establishes a comprehensive program to develop baseline capabilities and standards for interoperability nationwide. The bill before us also gives the Secretary of Homeland Security the flexibility to make multi-year funding commitments for interoperable communications projects. This change will encourage the long-term planning and local investment that is necessary to get such systems into place at the State and local level. I want to thank Mr. Fossella and Mr. Stupak for working with the Homeland Security Committee on this important reform. Finally, this bill will promote mutual aid at the State, local and regional levels--another key recommendation of the 9/11 Commission. I am disappointed that important reforms that were passed by the House are not included in this final bill, including standards for identification to board airplanes and buy weapons; the creation of an Assistant Secretary for Cybersecurity within DHS; and first responder funding reform to replace pork barrel funding with threat-based funding. That legislation will have to be our first order of business in the 109th Congress But we owe it to the American people to pass this bill now. I want to thank Chairman Hoekstra, who chaired this conference under challenging circumstances, and his staff for their cooperation and assistance. And I want to thank Speaker Hastert and President Rush for their personal efforts to ensure passage today of these important intelligence and homeland security reforms.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, had I been present on October 8, 2004, I would have voted ``yes'' on H. Amdt. 789, amending H.R. 10 to establish a ``zero tolerance'' policy towards the unlawful importation, possession, or transfer of shoulder fired guided missiles (MANPADS), atomic weapons, dirty bombs, and variola (smallpox) virus by making their unauthorized possession a federal crime carrying stiff mandatory penalties.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 40th Anniversary of Leisure World in Laguna Woods, California. It was on September 10, 1964 that the first residents moved into Leisure World, a private community designed especially for active, retired seniors. Within a mere 3 years, the community had grown to a population of 10,000, making it one of our country's earliest and largest agerestricted developments. Today, Leisure World is home to nearly 18,000 residents who enjoy a variety of housing options and social services, an abundance of recreational activities and organizations, and an exceptionally warm and welcoming community. Nestled in the rolling hills of South Orange County, Leisure World existed as an unincorporated part of the county for more than 3 decades. In 1999, the community made history when its residents voted for city-hood and the area officially became part of Laguna Woods, America's first and only age-restricted city. I had the pleasure of getting to know the residents of Leisure World when I was first running for Congress in 1988. And, for the past 16 years, it has been a true honor to represent this unique and thriving community. In my experience, Leisure World residents are among the most politically aware and active of my constituency. Local political clubs have included me in hundreds of roundtable discussions, candidate debates, and ``Get-Out-The-Vote'' events. Leisure World TV has interviewed me on numerous occasions for its local cable show, and the community newsletter has welcomed my columns. Most importantly, individual residents are always willing to share their informed opinions and suggestions on nearly any issue. Because of their insight, I have authored laws to reduce death taxes for seniors living in communities such as Leisure World, and to ease federal regulations that sought to outlaw age-restricted communities. I truly value my relationship with Leisure World, and I appreciate the opportunity to carry legislation on behalf of this community. Mr. Speaker, it is my sincere honor to ask the Congress of the United States of America to join me in congratulating Leisure World-Laguna Woods on the occasion of its 40th Anniversary.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call this Congress' attention to a devastating disease that affects millions of Americans. Systematic Lupus Erythematosus, commonly known as lupus, is a chronic, complex, and often life-threatening autoimmune disease. It causes the immune system to become hyperactive and attack the body's own tissue, damaging vital organs which can lead to severe disability or death. Research shows that 1.5 million people are afflicted with lupus in the United States--more than those affected by AIDS, Cerebral Palsy, Multiple Sclerosis, Sickle Cell Anemia and Cystic Fibrosis combined. In Southern California alone, more than 100,000 people suffer from this disease. Although lupus can affect people of all ages, it strikes primarily women between the ages of 16-45, and is currently the fourth leading cause of disability in females. To date, there is no known cure for lupus, and there are still very few treatments specific to the disease. However, with increased public awareness, education, and innovative research, we are hopeful that this battle can and will be won. Lupus International, a nonprofit organization in Irvine, California, has been a champion in the field of lupus research since it was founded in 1983. For over two decades, Lupus International has worked to alleviate suffering for millions of patients through support services, awareness promotion, and early detection of undiagnosed cases. On October 17, 2004, Lupus International held its fifth annual ``Lupus Race for Life,'' to raise money for lupus research. I ask my colleagues to join me today in honoring this outstanding organization for its 20 year commitment to finding a cure for lupus, and its tremendous service to the millions of Americans suffering from this devastating disease.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the community of Corona del Mar on the occasion of its centennial celebration. Residents, community leaders, and City officials have been planning the communitywide celebration of this historic anniversary for the last 2 years. It is with great pleasure that I recognize today the entire Corona del Mar citizenry for the outstanding quality of life, arts, education, and rich history that has made this area one of the most sought after places to live in America. On June 29, 1904, George E. Hart, a Los Angeles real estate mogul, signed an agreement with the Irvine Company for the purchase of a 706- acre corner of Irvine Ranch. In early July 1904, the transaction of this sale and ownership was officially recorded with the County of Orange, and the village of Corona del Mar was born. A grand celebration recently brought together the entire community in a citywide celebration to honor the 100th birthday of Corona del Mar, as well as to plan for the future. The official Centennial Celebration, which began with an official launch event and gala art show, culminated with the Centennial Celebration on the weekend of October 14-17, 2004 in Corona del Mar. I would like to commend the Corona del Mar Centennial Foundation and Organizing Committee for its dedicated commitment to plan a first class, year-long communitywide celebration honoring this important time in Corona del Mar's history. Certainly the village itself, and the people who live in it, deserve the very best. It is an honor to represent Corona del Mar in the United States House of Representatives.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner) and thanks also to the gentleman from Michigan (Ranking Member Conyers) for the Committee on the Judiciary's staunch leadership on this issue. Special thanks also to the chairman of the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law of the Committee on the Judiciary, the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Cannon), and, of course, to the Ranking Member, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt), the author of a critical amendment to this bill which makes it explicit that the Internet tax moratorium provides consumers with tax freedom from all forms of Internet access, regardless of the technology, wired or wireless, broadband or dial-up, or any pathway yet to be invented. While I am proud to be the author of the Internet Tax Freedom Act, which created the Internet tax moratorium in 1998, and the Internet Tax Nondiscrimination Act, which passed this Congress unanimously last year, this is the work of a great bipartisan team led on the Senate side by George Allen of Virginia and my original moratorium coauthor, who was then a member of the House, Ron Wyden of Oregon, and by President Bush who urged this Congress to extend this most valuable of consumer protections from taxation. Republicans and Democrats have come together to say that, no matter how we might choose to fund government services, we all agree that the worst way to do it would be to create new taxes on the Internet. That would be harmful to consumers, destructive to technological innovation, and bad for our economy. The case for allowing Internet access to remain tax-free has never been stronger. With 200 million Americans now online, a new tax on access would be a tax on working families. Our citizens recognize the danger. Eighty-eight percent of Americans oppose new Internet access taxes. So one might say that this legislation, the Internet Tax Freedom Act and the Internet Nondiscrimination Act, this moratorium, are the most popular tax issues in America. New Internet taxes would also be highly destructive to the American economy. Studies from the Brookings Institution, the University of California, Harvard, Stanford, MIT, the Congressional Budget Office, the Department of Commerce, and the Federal Reserve all confirm the positive role of the Internet in making Americans more productive. New taxes can only slow this valuable and powerful engine of our economy and job growth, productivity and prosperity in America. Finally, Mr. Speaker, the United States of America needs to regain world leadership in encouraging other countries around the world to keep taxes off of the World Wide Web. The Internet is truly global commerce. The original Internet Tax Freedom Act instructed the executive branch to negotiate bilateral understandings with other countries, and our executive branch has done so. During the period of time when this moratorium was expired, America could hardly lead when our own policy was not clear that we forbid taxation of the Internet. Now we are back where we belong in our role of world leadership, and the Bush administration can once again resume with confidence negotiations with other countries to make sure that when we go online it is not just other foreign states that will not be taxing you, your Internet activities will not be prey to predatory tax policies from other countries as well. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to vote yes on this excellent legislation, S. 150, and yes on the enrolling resolution. I thank the chairman for this great success for consumers.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Many of our colleagues are just back from the Clinton library. I will never forget the night on this floor, not so long ago, in 1996, when in this very Chamber President Clinton said right on the heels of his attempt to have the Federal Government take over responsibility for one-sixth of the Nation's economy, ``the era of big government is over.'' That line recalled similar sentiments by such earlier conservative Presidents as Ronald Reagan, Calvin Coolidge and Abraham Lincoln, with the difference being that the latter three actually meant it. How many of you remember not just Clinton's favorite line but the entire passage in proper context? It went as follows: ``We know big government does not have all the answers. We know there is not a program for every problem. We have worked to give the American people a smaller, less bureaucratic government in Washington, and we have to give the American people one that lives within its means. The era of big government is over.'' I remember that moment vividly. I was, of course, sitting in this House Chamber, about 20 feet from the President, in this seat right here when he spoke those words. He was reading from the teleprompter, and his line of sight over the Plexiglas extended directly to my reserved place here at the leadership table. Because Bill Clinton was very comfortable using the teleprompter, he routinely made eye contact with the Members sitting in the Chamber, and he looked me directly in the eye, and at that moment I could see that he was enormously satisfied with that line in his speech. Yet in retrospect, when Bill Clinton declared ``the era of big government is over,'' he was right, for now we are living in ``the era of really big government.'' Assuming we keep to our schedule this evening, Mr. Speaker, the Federal Government will spend more than $100 million just in the time we are debating this debt ceiling legislation. The growth of government in modern history has been astounding. In 1952, the year I was born, which we all agree was not very long ago, Federal spending was a quaint $68 billion compared to over $2.5 trillion today. And it was just that high because America was at war in Korea at the time. When my oldest child was born in 1993, Federal spending was $1.4 trillion. In just one generation, the size of the Federal Government had increased more than 20-fold. We blew by the $2 trillion mark in 2002, and we have not even taken our foot off the accelerator. We are past the point where we can make excuses for the big government elephant in the living room. He has taken over our living space, contributing nothing to the family and, as Ronald Reagan knew, posing a threat to our freedoms. President Reagan, my first boss in Washington, said it best in his 1989 farewell address, ``Man is not free unless government is limited. There is a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts.'' President Reagan knew this fundamental truth: Big government is incompatible with freedom. There is a reason that fiscal restraint is a traditionally conservative value. Big government requires big spending and, therefore, a comfort level in taking and using the fruits of other people's labor. It is a comfort level found in socialism, not conservatism. So it is with great sadness that I come to the floor tonight to recommend a vote on increasing the debt ceiling. But the reason it is necessary is that the money has already been spent. The bills have come due for what this Congress has already voted for. Three years ago, we endured a vicious attack on our Nation. As horrifying as it was, it was a visible attack, an attack from without. We knew then how to mount a defense against a foreign enemy. We would not give in to terror. At the time, Osama bin Laden boasted, ``I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed.'' He was wrong then, and he is wrong now. We will not cede this Nation to tyranny, but neither should we cede it to the burdens of big government. We have got to acknowledge that, unlike the hideous face of terrorism, big government is an attractive seductress. It is sometimes enticing to our citizenry and certainly to many of us in this Chamber. But as chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security, I know that every tax dollar spent on nonessential functions of government is, in these times, doubly squandered. Monies given to National Public Radio or the National Endowment for the Arts cannot go toward our national defense. The truth is, rapid, unsustainable increases in nondefense spending threaten our ability to protect American citizens and to respond to future threats. Period. That is precisely what is happening now so long as the liberal big spenders in this Congress will not say no. This vote on the debt ceiling tonight is nothing but a reminder that it is high time we get back to pruning back the waste of government. It can be done. We did it in 1995, the first year of the Republican House majority, and we can do it now. The truth is, the biggest spenders in this Congress will be the ones who vote against this resolution. Because, for big spenders, reining in the government is not a serious priority. The majority of us, however, have got to be responsible. We have got to go forward with renewed resolve to be fiscally responsible. We have to keep uppermost in mind that big government does not have all of the answers. It really does not have many answers at all. Not good ones, anyway. We know there is not a program for every problem. We have discovered, after all these years, that is really a good thing. So as we do the right thing tonight, Mr. Speaker, let us vow to stick with what the Founding Fathers wanted us to do. Not surprisingly, those are the very things we have been good at all along.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a Californian whose dedication to the betterment of southern California has never wavered. Wally Kreutzen, retiring this month, will leave behind a remarkable legacy: A 51-mile network of toll roads he helped to propose, finance and build. Wally has over 30 years of combined public and private sector experience. He started his professional career working for a major U.S. oil company, and transitioned to the public sector where he worked for the citizens of Costa Mesa and Irvine. In 1989, Wally began as executive vice president--Finance and Administration for the Transportation Corridor Agencies, TCA, joint powers agencies charged with building new urban toll roads in Orange County. In that role, he coordinated the development of the initial plans of finance for the Foothill/Eastern and San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridors, which resulted in the issuance of over $2.7 billion in toll revenue bonds. Wally made it a priority to rely on alternative financing methods to build highways instead of relying on State and Federal gasoline taxes--the first time such innovative methods had ever been used in California. In 1997, Wally was appointed chief operating officer of the TCA, and in January 1999, he became chief executive officer. He has been responsible for all planning, construction, financing, and operations associated with the Foothill, Eastern and San Joaquin Hills toll roads, used by 290,000 drivers every day--and saving them an estimated 21 minutes per trip. Wally has an undergraduate degree in Political Science and a masters degree in Public Administration from California State University, Fullerton. He is a former instructor for the University of California Irvine. He is active in a number of organizations dealing with public/ private transportation partnerships and with the funding and maintenance of public infrastructure. On behalf of my colleagues, let me join the many friends, coworkers and admirers in wishing Wally Kreutzen nothing but the best in his retirement. He leaves behind an enormously positive legacy for Orange County's residents.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Madam Speaker, this year is the 150th anniversary of the founding of the Republican Party. Over a century and a half from the abolition of slavery to the establishment of women's suffrage to the liberation of millions of people in the Soviet Union, Afghanistan, and Iraq, the Republican Party has been the most effective political organization in the history of the world in advancing the cause of freedom. So that all of us can learn more about the achievements of this fundamentally American institution in its 150th anniversary year, the House Republican Policy Committee has published the 2005 Republican Freedom Calendar. Each day the Republican Freedom Calendar lists an important milestone in the Republican Party's history of advancing freedom and the civil rights of every American. On this day in 1948, we mourned the death of California Republican woman from my home State, Florence Kahn, the first Jewish woman to serve in the United States House of Representatives, who paved the way by her service for many more Jewish women who have followed. She was a Member of Congress from San Francisco from 1925 to 1937. Madam Speaker, the 2005 Republican Freedom Calendar is available on the Internet at policy.house.gov.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Chairman, I am proud to rise in support of this amendment. Congressman Bonilla's amendment seeks to increase alien detention bed space by 2,500 beds per year for fiscal years 2006 and 2007. It is a very simple provision, but it will have a material impact on improving the security of our homeland and discouraging illegal immigration. In order to have a successful border security strategy, it must be balanced. That is why this amendment is so important. There are other provisions in H.R. 10 that will increase staffing levels for the Border Patrol and ICE investigators. These, too, are important initiatives and will result in many more illegal aliens and immigration violators being apprehended. But in order to make the best use of these new assets, we must have adequate facilities to detain those additional immigration violators who are caught, especially those considered high-risk or in mandatory detention categories. The Department of Homeland Security's Detention and Removal Office, or DRO, is currently authorized to fund approximately 19,000 detention beds. However, they consistently hold over 22,000 illegal aliens each day in facilities around the Nation. In the first year, this amendment would increase available bed space to meet the minimum demand and then would go above that in FY 2007 to provide additional detention resources to meet the expected demand that these other new border control initiatives will create. It is a well-known fact that the majority of aliens not detained and released, pending an immigration hearing, never return for their scheduled hearing but seek instead to melt into U.S. communities. There are approximately 300,000 non-citizens in the United States who have received deportation orders, but who have not left the country. There is no doubt that more of these individuals would have left the country if they had been detained in the beginning. Approximately 50 percent of DRO detainees are Mexicans, but there is a growing number of individuals from different countries, called ``other than Mexicans'' or OTMs. Less is known about their motivation for coming to the U.S., and I have serious concerns about individuals illegally entering America who originally are from countries of interest with respect to terrorism. We must have the resources to detain these individuals to guarantee that we have an opportunity to verify their identity and motives, and that they are deported if necessary. In order to monitor more of the individuals that are released, DRO utilizes alternative methods of detention. This includes release on recognizance, release on bond, electronic monitoring devices (EMD), and the Intensive Supervision Appearance Program (ISAP). While these alternative methods are appropriate and responsible initiatives, it is essential that we have sufficient detention bed space for high-risk individuals, those with criminal records, and repeat immigration violators. As Chairman of the Select Committee on Homeland Security, I would like to thank Mr. Bonilla for offering this critical amendment and request the support of my colleagues in ensuring passage. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Amendment offered by my colleague and good friend, Mr. Shadegg of Arizona. Mr. Shadegg is a distinguished Member of the Select Committee on Homeland Security and ably serves as Chairman of its Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness & Response. Under Chairman Shadegg's leadership, the EP&R Subcommittee recently held a very informative and eye-opening hearing on the state of our Nation's warning and alert system. The Amendment that he is offering today is the product of that excellent hearing. I commend Chairman Shadegg for his foresight in recognizing the importance of emergency warnings and alerts, and for his leadership in offering this important Amendment. It is simply imperative that our Nation maintain and operate an effective emergency communication system. It is our responsibility to ensure that our citizens receive sufficient and timely warnings to enable them to take action necessary for their safety--whether the cause is a terrorist attack or a force of nature. This Amendment authorizes a pilot study examining whether a system like the AMBER Alert network should, and can, be used for emergency warnings and alerts. The AMBER Alert network, which provides actionable intelligence on a geographic basis to help identify and track missing children, is a proven success. This Amendment is certainly worthy of our support. Let me again commend Chairman Shadegg. And I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Shadegg Amendment.

Mr. COX. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Fossella- Stupak amendment. From the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 to the attacks on September 11, 2001, the inability of our first responders to communicate adequately and effectively has posed a serious obstacle to our Nation's ability to respond to acts of terrorism and other emergencies. Regrettably, there is no silver bullet or panacea that will enable us to attain interoperable communications overnight. And, contrary to the good intentions of some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, merely throwing more money at the problem or creating new grant programs is not the answer. We already have enough programs. Indeed, since 2002, the Federal government has awarded more than $1.2 billion in grant assistance specifically for the purpose of enhancing interoperable communications. And, unfortunately, our progress has been disappointing. The primary reason for this--according to the Government Accountability Office--is that Federal interoperable communications grant programs ``present challenges to short- and long-term planning.'' That is why I rise in support of the Fossella-Stupak Amendment. It does not create a new interoperable communications grant program. Rather, it gives the Department of Homeland Security much needed flexibility to support State and local short- and long-term planning for interoperable communications. Specifically, under the Fossella-Stupak Amendment, the Department may issue Letters of Intent to commit future funding for interoperable communications for up to three years. These commitments must be made pursuant to existing grant programs. States and local governments have been reluctant to invest in expensive and complicated communication systems due to uncertainty over the availability of Federal funds from year to year. Providing cash- strapped States and local governments with reasonable assurance that multi-year Federal assistance will be available should spur comprehensive planning and meaningful investments in communications. The Fossella-Stupak Amendment also requires applicants to develop multi-year interoperable communication plans. Such plans are essential for long-term planning, such as coordinating communications strategies with different agencies and neighboring jurisdictions, and for preventing funds from being wasted on hastily planned systems. I understand that numerous fire service and law enforcement groups, State and local government organizations, and other entities representing the public safety community played a key role in drafting this Amendment. They and I support this Amendment, and so should you. I commend Representatives Fossella and Stupak for their leadership and vision in offering this important Amendment. As Chairman of the Select Committee on Homeland Security, I strongly encourage my colleagues to support this Amendment.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Weldon-Andrews amendment on emergency preparedness compacts. The terrorist attacks of September 2001 stretched the response capabilities of our local, State, and Federal emergency agencies to the breaking point. The attacks caused an unprecedented number of deaths, unprecedented physical destruction, and, at times, utter chaos. The attacks also presented planning, operational, and logistical problems of new and different dimensions. Both the Bush administration and 9/11 Commission have recognized that no one community can cope with such an unparalleled catastrophe by itself. Indeed, the President's Homeland Security Directive 5 and the 9/11 Commission's report both stressed the vital importance of ensuring that all levels of government across the Nation have the capability to work together efficiently and effectively. This is precisely why emergency preparedness compacts are so important. They enable emergency managers from different jurisdictions and agencies to provide personnel and equipment in the event of acts of terrorism, disasters, and emergencies. They ensure that no community is overwhelmed. And this is also precisely why I urge you to support the Weldon- Andrews amendment. Their amendment would require the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, to establish a program supporting the development of emergency preparedness compacts across the Nation. This program will identify and catalog all existing emergency preparedness compacts. This program also will encourage jurisdictions without compacts to enter into them by disseminating the best examples of such compacts. Finally, this program will create, and update as necessary, an inventory of Federal response capabilities and make it available to State and local government officials. I commend Representatives Weldon and Andrews for their bipartisan leadership and vision in offering this important amendment. As chairman of the Select Committee on Homeland Security, I strongly encourage my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes and 45 seconds. I rise in strong support of H.R. 10, the 9/11 Recommendations Implementation Act. Mr. Chairman, as chairman of the Select Committee on Homeland Security, I want to begin by thanking my ranking member, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner). The significant portions of H.R. 10 that were produced by the Select Committee on Homeland Security will represent the lasting contribution of our retiring colleague, and he is to be congratulated for his hard work in this effort. I am sponsoring this legislation, H.R. 10, because I believe it represents a significant step in our ongoing battle to protect our Nation from terrorism. It is a truly comprehensive response to the 9-11 Commission recommendations. Although the Commission's report and its recommendations are only 2 months old, the Select Committee on Homeland Security has been working on these very issues for 2 entire years; issues such as reforming our first responder funding system, enhancing interoperable communications, integrating intelligence and operational information to better track terrorists and frustrate their planned attacks, and improving information-sharing and cyber security. All have been the work of this committee. Building on this work in over 50 hearings over 2 years, the Select Committee on Homeland Security has held hearings this August with the 9/11 Commission. We took testimony from Chairman Kean and Vice Chairman Hamilton, and from the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Tom Ridge, among others, about the substance of these recommendations and the substance of this legislation. Based on this work, the Select Committee on Homeland Security has included in this legislation several proposals that comprise the bulk of H.R. 10. First, reform of first responder grant funding, Title V, subtitle (a) of H.R. 10, fully incorporates H.R. 3266, the Faster and Smarter Funding For First Responders Act. This legislation satisfies each and every one of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations concerning the delivery of Federal homeland security assistance to State and local governments. Of all the proposals to reform Federal terrorism preparedness funding, H.R. 10 best exemplifies the spirit and intent of the Commission's recommendations in this area. Specifically, H.R. 10 will require the Department of Homeland Security to prioritize homeland security assistance grants based upon risk to persons and to critical infrastructure. That is a key Commission recommendation. H.R. 10 requires the Department of Homeland Security to establish specific and measurable essential capabilities for State and local government terrorism preparedness, based on the recommendations of a 25-member advisory body comprised of first responders themselves, another key Commission recommendation that will help to control and prioritize spending in this area. H.R. 10 requires States to allocate their Department of Homeland Security grant funding according to these prioritized criteria, as the 9/11 Commission recommends. And, H.R. 10 guarantees that each State will receive a sufficient minimum amount each year. Mr. Chairman, beyond the Commission's recommendations, the Select Committee on Homeland Security also found that billions of dollars authorized and appropriated by this Congress and granted by the Department of Homeland Security, intended for first responders, are stuck in the pipeline. That money is not being spent. Only 29 percent of the billions of dollars of assistance from 2003 that this Congress has authorized only 29 percent of that assistance from fiscal 2003 has yet been spent. This legislation will unclog that pipeline and make sure the money gets to the front lines, the men and women who need it most. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COX. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Dunn), the vice chairman of the Select Committee on Homeland Security.

Mr. COX. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Cyber Security, Science and Research and Development.

Mr. COX. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Shadegg), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness and Response.

Mr. COX. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute. H.R. 10 includes several different provisions that the Select Committee on Homeland Security produced and assisted in drafting in this final product. One is the provisions responsive to the 9/11 Commission's concerns about terrorist travel. H.R. 10 includes specific activities to be undertaken by several Federal agencies. It establishes a program within DHS to focus exclusively on terrorist travel. It ensures that this critical information will be shared with frontline personnel at our borders, our ports, and our consulates. The Menendez bill, unfortunately, does not include these vital provisions and simply requires DHS to submit a strategy. H.R. 10 and the Select Committee on Homeland Security produced recommendations, legislative recommendations, to increase the number of border patrol agents, immigration and customs and enforcement investigators on our Nation's borders. The ranking minority member on the Select Committee on Homeland Security produced a very thorough report highlighting the vulnerability of our Nation's borders. This is a very real concern to which H.R. 10 responds, but the Menendez bill strips out all of these provisions. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), the majority leader.

Mr. COX. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his excellent work on this legislation. I would like to speak as the chairman of the Select Committee on Homeland Security about portions of this legislation, H.R. 10, with which our committee has been very, very closely concerned and portions of this substitute which lack those same elements. First, the 9/11 Commission in their report recommended that Congress ``should pass legislation to remedy the longstanding indemnification and liability impediments to the provision of public safety and mutual aid in the national capital region and, where applicable, throughout the Nation.'' H.R. 10, the 9/11 Recommendations Implementation Act, includes these very provisions just as the 9/11 Commission recommended. We ease the liability problems for first responders crossing jurisdictional boundaries so they do not need to worry they will be subject to some other liability regime when they help out in time of need. The Menendez bill ironically limits this liability relief to the capital here, but it does not do anything for the rest of the Nation as the 9/11 Commission recommended. It does not even do anything for the author's home State of New Jersey. If New Jersey first responders were to go into New York City and help out, they would not have the liability relief that the 9/11 Commission recommended that they have. First responders from across the country have endorsed the first responder provisions in H.R. 10. The commission, the 9/11 Commission, recommended that moneys be allocated to State and local governments on the basis of threat and on the basis of risk. That is exactly what H.R. 10 does. But the Menendez substitute does not require the Secretary of Homeland Security to prioritize applications on the basis of risk. It does not require States to prioritize the allocation of their grant awards to localities on the basis of risk. The Menendez substitute does not guarantee first responders a voice in establishing terrorism preparedness benchmarks that will guide spending. H.R. 10, on the other hand, has a task force comprised of first responders themselves. The Menendez substitute does not identify either permitted or prohibited use for first responder grant awards, and it does not provide any penalties for failing to get money to first responders on time. H.R. 10 has strict penalties for failing to get funds to their intended destination, the men and women on the front lines, within 45 days. For that reason, all of the major first responder groups, including the International Association of Firefighters, the International Association of Fire Chiefs, the National Volunteer Fire Council, the Fraternal Order of Police, the Major Cities Chiefs Association, and the National Sheriffs Association have endorsed the Faster and Smarter Funding For First Responders Act included in this legislation. The Menendez bill is not supported by any first responder group. Let us reject the Menendez substitute and enact H.R. 10.

Mr. COX. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder), which is an important amendment. It will ensure that the people responsible for screening border crossings, airline passengers and other transportation systems have access to all the law enforcement and intelligence information they need and it will ensure that they have access to all the law enforcement and intelligence information available to the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. It is well-known that several Federal agencies have long maintained separate watch lists and that work is well underway to completely consolidate these. But the purpose of watch lists is to identify terrorists who are attempting to gain entry into the United States. If they are not integrated, in the meanwhile, we do not have seamless electronic access to that information in multiple databases, and they cannot do their job. The Department of Homeland Security combined no less than 22 separate Federal agencies, and those agencies brought their legacy databases with them and their separate screening processes, which were developed to aid in their own separate missions before the merging. The 9/11 Commission report recommends that ``all points in the border system, from consular offices to immigration services, will need appropriate electronic access to an individual's file.'' And they note that ``scattered units at Homeland Security and the State Department perform screening and data mining: instead,'' they say, ``a government- wide team of border and transportation officials should be working together.'' The 9/11 Commission report stresses the need to have border screening systems ``integrated into a larger network of screening points that includes our transportation system.'' This amendment offered by the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder) addresses these concerns by ensuring that the Department of Homeland Security pursues the best way to link these systems together. As chairman of the Select Committee on Homeland Security, I would like to thank the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder) for offering this important amendment.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, this year is the 150th anniversary of the founding of the Republican Party. Over a century and a half, from the abolition of slavery, to the establishments of women's right to vote, to freeing millions of people in the Soviet Union, Afghanistan and Iraq, the Republican Party has been the most effective political organization in the history of the world in advancing the cause of freedom. The right of American women to vote is a uniquely Republican accomplishment advanced by Republicans, opposed by Democrats. All of the leading suffragists, including Lucretia Mott, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and Susan B. Anthony were Republican. The first woman elected to this House was Republican. Today marks the birth of Mary Louise Smith in 1914, elected to be the first woman to chair the Republican National Committee. Each day of the year the Republican Freedom Calendar, prepared by the Republican Policy Committee, records an important achievement, an important milestone in the Republican Party's history of advancing the civil rights of every American. The calendar is available at policy.house.gov on the Internet.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, this is the 150th anniversary of the Republican Party's founding. After a century and a half, from the abolition of slavery to the establishment of women's suffrage, to the liberation of millions of people in the Soviet Union, Afghanistan and Iraq, there has not been any question but that the Republican Party is the most effective political organization in the history of the world in advancing the cause of freedom. In 1924, this week, Republicans denounced the Democrats' Presidential nominee William Jennings Bryant for defending the Ku Klux Klan at the Democratic National Convention. It was this week in 1868 that Republicans denounced the Democrats for adopting a national campaign theme, ``This is a White Man's Country, Let White Men Rule.'' Mr. Speaker, each day of the year, the Republican Freedom Calendar highlights a civil rights achievement of this most American of institutions. The calendar is available at www.policy.house.gov.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, this year is the 150th anniversary of the founding of the Republican Party. Over a century and a half, from the abolition of slavery, to the enactment of women's suffrage, to the liberation of millions of people in the Soviet Union, Afghanistan and Iraq, the Republican Party has been the most effective political organization in the history of the world in advancing the cause of freedom. So that all of us can learn more about the achievements of this fundamentally American institution in its 105th anniversary year, the Republican Policy Committee has produced this 2005 Republican Freedom Calendar, each day recording a milestone Republican achievement in advancing the civil rights of every American. This past Sunday, 144 years ago, Republicans honored suffragist leaders Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony for their work in electing Republican candidates. Over Democratic opposition, Republicans in Congress enacted the women's suffrage amendment to the Constitution, giving women the right to vote. And even before voting for women was legalized, Susan B. Anthony cast a ballot, and when she was arrested for voting illegally, she bragged to the press, ``I voted the Republican ticket straight.'' Mr. Speaker, the 2005 Republican Freedom Calendar is available on the Internet at policy.house.gov.

Mr. COX

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, this is the 150th anniversary of the Republican Party. Over a century and a half from the abolition of slavery to the establishment of women's rights to the freeing of millions of people in the Soviet Union, Afghanistan and in Iraq, the Republican Party has been the most effective political organization in the history of the world in advancing the cause of freedom. So that all of us can learn more about the achievements of this fundamentally American institution, the House Republican Policy Committee has published the 2005 Republican Freedom Calendar. Each day, a civil rights milestone in the history of the Republican Party is listed. Yesterday was the anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation. President Lincoln's signing of the Emancipation Proclamation sparked howls of protests from Democrats in Congress and across the country, but it was based on legislation passed in this Congress just 2 months before. Every single Republican voted for freeing the slaves, and every single Democrat voted against it. Mr. Speaker, this is just one of 365 civil rights firsts that can be found in the Republican Freedom Calendar available at policy.house.gov.