Charles Dent

Mr. DENT

Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.

Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Macomb County, Michigan (Mrs. Miller).

Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished naval aviator from Sugar Land, Texas (Mr. Olson).

Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time we have remaining?

Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis).

Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to have Mr. McCaul control the balance of my time for our side.

Mr. DENT. I would like to reserve the balance of my time at this time.

Mr. DENT. I would just like at this time to thank Chairman Bennie Thompson, Chairwoman Sheila Jackson-Lee, Pete King, everybody else for their collaboration on this important piece of legislation. It is a good bill. I won't get into some of the deficiencies here right now except to say that we need to deal with the Large Aircraft Security Program. I know the Chair has agreed to holding a committee hearing on that very important issue. It's important that we address that issue. But there are a few things about this bill that are very, very important. It does prohibit tipping off TSA employees of covert testing efforts. I think that's important. This legislation also requires a secure biometrically enhanced system to verify the status of law enforcement officers traveling armed on commercial passenger aircraft. It also authorizes demonstration projects to test technology design to mitigate a terrorist attack against underwater tunnels or open rail lines. It also prohibits the TSA's outsourcing of the terrorist watch list, No Fly List and selectee list verifications to non-governmental entities. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed.

Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, this amendment addresses a number of concerns raised by transit agencies and the GAO in an upcoming report. One of the biggest concerns of stakeholders was that TSA and FEMA were taking too long in distributing grant funding. This amendment requires that applications for grants be made available within 30 days of passage of an appropriations act. It then requires the transit agency to submit an application within 45 days and the Secretary to act within 60 days of receipt. These are the same deadlines that are usually required in any appropriations bills. This amendment also codifies current practice prohibiting cost sharing required for grants. Previously, public transit agencies were required to share up to 25 percent of the cost of a project. Many agencies found this requirement prohibitive, given that they are largely funded by State and local taxpayers and that the costs associated with improving open architecture public transportation systems were considered too expensive. This amendment also establishes a technical assistance pilot program that gives grants to transit agencies to conduct comprehensive risk assessments using approved third parties. The Office of Domestic Preparedness previously provided grants for such assessments, but these ended when ODP was combined with FEMA and Preparedness. Many State and local agencies do not necessarily have the in-house expertise to conduct comprehensive risk assessments and require outside assistance. This amendment requires the GAO to examine the roles of the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Transportation with respect to pipeline security. During a recent release of anhydrous ammonium from a pipeline in Florida, local response personnel were given differing opinions of which Federal agency regulated the security of pipelines. The GAO would examine if current responsibilities for protection against and responding to intentional pipeline breaches are adequately identified in interagency MOUs. The time to identify a lead Federal agency for pipeline security is never after an intentional breach. So, again, I would just like to say I support this manager's amendment. I think it is a good revision to this legislation of which the underlying bill, of course, is a strong bill too. I support it. At this time, I would yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support this amendment by Mr. Bachus. It's a good amendment. Expedited screening services are provided to frequent flier travelers and registered travelers at our Nation's commercial airports all the time. And yet our servicemen and women, many with metal items such as combat boots, medals and badges, often need additional screening when they set off the magnetometer. Our brave servicemen and women are on the front lines in the fight against terrorism. Surely some kind of expedited treatment at an airport checkpoint is the least our country can do for them. Currently there is no formal TSA requirement or process in place to screen our servicemen and women in any expedited fashion. At some airports, Transportation Security Officers may escort members of the Armed Forces to the front of the checkpoint, but at other airports no such special treatment is given. So Mr. Bachus' amendment is an excellent one. It's just common sense that a formal checkpoint screening process should be established for servicemen and women who sacrifice so much for their country. And finally, these men and women place themselves in harm's way to the benefit of our American way of life. The very least we can do is make the airport checkpoint experience as smooth and as pleasurable as possible.

Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition to the amendment, although I'm not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, this amendment requires the TSA to report on the number of claims it receives for lost and damaged property, as well as the value of that property and an estimation on the time and resources necessary to resolve such claims. The men and women of the TSA work hard every day to protect the property entrusted into their care. While the underlying premise is faulty, in that it assumes TSA personnel are to blame for loss or damage associated with baggage, the information gleaned from this report might prove useful in allocating additional resources to manage these claims. The TSA has instituted a process in which a tag is placed inside every bag they open and inspect. This includes bags that are sealed and require a forcible entry. Unfortunately, the traveling public is sometimes quick to blame the TSA for any loss or damage associated with their luggage, as opposed to the air carriers, baggage handlers, or simple errors in bar code scanning. This report may prove useful in identifying any possible improvements to the TSA notification and claims process. So, as I said, I support the amendment. At this time, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DENT. While the Transportation Worker Identification Credential, TWIC, card was intended to be the one security credential required of port workers nationwide, some State governments could not wait for the Federal Government to establish its programs, and they moved forward with their own. Currently, as has been stated, Florida is one State requiring a separate and, some argue, duplicative security background check and card for workers entering port facilities. While it's unfortunate that Florida port employees are required to pay for background checks twice, TSA cannot share the results of its background checks with Florida. Florida State law allows for individuals to be disqualified even if they were found qualified by the TSA due to differences in disqualifying crimes. Perhaps a better amendment would have been to allow TSA to share the results of its TWIC background checks with Florida. I would suggest that as a better amendment than the one currently before us. As written, this amendment would preempt Florida from continuing their security background check program, a program that the Florida State Legislature strongly supports. Additionally, some workers in port facilities receive criminal background checks, drug and alcohol testing, and credit checks as part of their screening process. Many have distinguished this type of employment screening from the security-focused screening of the TWIC program. It is unclear if DHS would see the Waterfront Commission's background check as being preempted under this amendment because it is an employment-safety criminal background check, not a security background check. While the amendment does allow a State to demonstrate a ``compelling homeland security reason'' that a separate background check is warranted, this places an extraordinary burden on a State legislature. State legislatures should have the right to determine what offenses qualify as disqualifying offenses in their ports, and this amendment would preempt that. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).

Mr. DENT. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time, reluctantly, in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. DENT. Just yesterday, I visited Reagan National Airport and took a look at the whole-body imaging machines over there, and I just have to say a couple of things about this. I was impressed by the technology. It seems that we have a great deal of satisfaction from passengers who utilize that type of screening. There are limitations to the magnetometer. A magnetometer can pick up metallic items, like keys, but other prohibited items, like liquids and C4 for potential explosives, will be detected under the whole-body imaging technology but not under a magnetometer. So I do believe that this technology is valid. As for the privacy concerns that have been raised, while I understand them, I think they have been overstated. There are strong, strong restrictions in place to make sure that those individuals, the transportation security officers who actually help the passengers go through the whole-body imaging scanning, are not in contact with the person who is actually viewing the image. Those people are in a separate room, so they're separated. The face of the individual is also blurred, so that's another protection. So I do think that this technology is very valuable. It will help make us safer. Again, I think it is a step in the right direction. So I would reluctantly oppose the amendment. I understand the concerns expressed, but nevertheless, I feel that this technology is valuable and that it enhances security. At this time, I would like to yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren), who previously served as the ranking member on the Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection Subcommittee.

Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment, although I have no real objections to the amendment.

Mr. DENT. First, I would like to say I support the amendment. Guam International Airport does not segregate passengers traveling internationally from those passengers traveling domestically. There is no physical separation by either a separate floor or by a solid wall. Prior to 9/11, the commingling of domestic and international travelers was not a concern. Guam International is concerned about the security implications of the current system and is looking for a long-term solution to prevent the commingling of domestic and international passengers. This amendment would simply require that the TSA review the current procedures in place at the airports of the U.S. territories and make recommendations to the airports on how best to address the commingling of passengers. I have no objections. I support the amendment. I would yield, at this time, to Ms. Jackson-Lee.

Mr. DENT. I yield back.

Mr. DENT

Mr. DENT. Mr. Chair, I rise to claim time in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. DENT. I do support this amendment. It's a good amendment. I appreciate the gentleman offering it. New advances in biometric identifications make this technology an exciting new possibility for rapidly identifying individuals approaching a security checkpoint. Imagine if someone with a want or a warrant or a fleeing felon would approach a security checkpoint and be identified as a threat before entering the sterile area of an airport. We may be years away from any real breakthroughs in this technology, but it certainly does hold some real promise. Some would argue that this technology goes too far or invades one's privacy, but every individual approaching a TSA checkpoint must already provide a valid form of identification. This system, if proven effective, could ensure that documentation provided at the checkpoint is, in fact, authentic. For all those reasons, I would urge my colleagues to support this Butterfield amendment. It makes sense, and I strongly urge its adoption. At this time I would yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DENT

Mr. DENT. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor my constituent, Patty Carlis, as a community leader in the arts and interfaith understanding. At the 25th annual Wallenberg Tribute Dinner on Sunday, April 19, 2009 Patty was recognized as this year's Wallenberg Tribute Honoree. The award, given by the Institute for Jewish Christian Understanding (IJCU) at Muhlenberg College, is named for Raoul Wallenberg, a Swedish diplomat who saved tens of thousands of Hungarian Jews from the Nazis during the Second World War. He was taken into Soviet custody just days after Budapest was liberated and was never again accounted for by Western sources. Each year since 1989, the Wallenberg Tribute has honored one or more local individuals who are recognized for their courageous moral action on behalf of others. Patty's lifetime of work makes her truly deserving of such an honor. Patty served as the IJCU's Schools Program Coordinator from 2000-2006 and before that was responsible for creating the Youth and Prejudice Conference in 1995. The conference, held each spring on Muhlenberg College's Campus in Allentown, has reached over 15,000 students in the Lehigh Valley. Students are able to be a part of a live theatrical performance while learning valuable lessons about interfaith and cultural tolerance. By meeting with Holocaust survivors and relatives of survivors they learn firsthand about prejudice and bigotry. The conference teaches students valuable lessons about human rights and that their own dignity and that of others depends on the choices they make each day. Throughout her career, Patty has been able to combine her commitment to tolerance and interfaith understanding with her passion for the arts and education. Since 2000 she has been part of the theatre faculty of Muhlenberg College and each year leads her students in the production of the play The Library: the story of a Jewish girl in Nazi Germany. This play, which puts a human face on the history of the Holocaust, is performed at elementary schools across the Lehigh Valley each spring. Most recently, Patty has implemented after-school drama programs in the Allentown School District. Now students who attend Roosevelt Elementary, Central Elementary, and Trexler Middle School have had the opportunity to explore and express themselves through the arts under the guidance and supervision of Muhlenberg theatre, music and dance majors. Patty is passionate about the power of the arts to spark imaginations, motivate learning and develop life skills. Madam Speaker, in closing, I would like to offer my sincere gratitude to Patty Carlis for all her work to build bridges and connect communities through the arts in the Lehigh Valley, the United States, and the world. She has made our community extremely proud.

Mr. DENT

Mr. DENT. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the National Association of Letter Carriers and the Second Harvest Food Bank of the Lehigh Valley and Northeast Pennsylvania for their continued efforts in the battle against hunger. On May 9th, letter carriers and postal customers across the country joined forces to ``stamp out hunger'' in the nation's largest single- day food drive for the 17th consecutive year. This also marked the 16th year that Second Harvest of the Lehigh Valley and Northeast PA took part in this extremely important event. Last year this food drive collected over 143,000 pounds of food to help struggling families in Lehigh, Northampton, Pike, Wayne, Monroe and Carbon counties. The local effort helped the National Association of Letter Carriers set a new record of 73.1 million pounds of food collected in 2008 in the ``Stamp it out'' drive. Food banks like Second Harvest of the Lehigh Valley are even more important during economic downturns like the one we are currently facing. Second Harvest of the Lehigh Valley and Northeast Pennsylvania has seen the demand for assistance rise dramatically in the past year and has been able to help 64,000 people so far in 2009, up from 50,000 in 2008. Thankfully, the generosity and compassion of their neighbors in the Lehigh Valley and Northeast PA showed again this year as they donated over 155,000 pounds of food exceeding last year's total. I believe that programs like this by the National Association of Letter Carriers and the Second Harvest Food Bank of the Lehigh Valley and Northeast Pennsylvania bring us closer to achieving the goal of eradicating hunger in our communities. Once again, I would like to thank these organizations for their continued efforts.