Porter Goss

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 451 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only on this matter. Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Rules has granted the customary rule for consideration of conference reports to H.R. 2417, the Intelligence Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2004. This is standard procedure. The rule is fair and without controversy as far as I know, and it does allow ample time for consideration of conference matters that have come up. Mr. Speaker, as in past years, we thought it best to allow Members ample opportunity to review the bill and debate the issues they feel are important to our Nation's security. This was certainly exhibited earlier this summer when we passed, with overwhelming bipartisan support, the Intelligence Authorization Act in the House. Our classified annex and staff have been made available to any Member of Congress interested in reviewing the underlying bill and the reports thereto. Today we are at the culmination of this process. The conference report on H.R. 2417 is critical, it is must-do legislation. The bill authorizes appropriations for fiscal year 2004 intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the United States Government, the Community Management Account, and the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement Account and Disability system. In the past 2 years, our country has made very strong steps to improve our Nation's intelligence-gathering capabilities, as well as the analysis of the results of those intelligence-gathering capabilities. With that said, the attacks this morning in Istanbul are yet again a painful reminder that every day, we must not let down our guard. Rather, it emphasizes work that remains to be accomplished. We need to strengthen our intelligence capabilities and align them to deal with the threats that we face today. This legislation convincingly moves us in the right direction by enhancing the depth and the capacity of all facets of our intelligence community. The bill provides for improved intelligence analysis and coordination. It continues the effort to increase our human intelligence resources, an area vital to the security of our Nation during the war on terrorism, as we have seen discussed virtually every day. In addition, H.R. 2417 augments the information shared between Federal, State, and local governments and encourages strong cooperation in the pursuit of joint counterterrorism activities to keep our homeland safe. Mr. Speaker, this bill makes possible the important work performed by dedicated intelligence professionals, people who are out and about right now taking very high risks to get us vital information so the right decisions can be made to nip terrorism in the bud before it strikes us again. It is the product of a bipartisan agreement that we deal with today and, as I stated previously, another prudent step in the right direction for developing our capabilities in the intelligence community. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote in support of this rule that will provide them with a fair forum for debate on this matter. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. GIBBONS), the distinguished chairman of our Subcommittee on Human Intelligence, Analysis and Counterintelligence. (Mr. GIBBONS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I certainly want to associate myself with the remarks of the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt), his remarks about a concern about disenfranchising authorizing committees by the use of supplemental appropriations and other such matters as has sometimes happened. I do believe that the authorizing committees provide a critical contribution, a valuable contribution to the legislation of this institution. And I think it is unfortunate that sometimes in the press of business that we sometimes bypass that wisdom and that contribution because of urgency or other matters, which are understandable, but which should be an aberration rather than the practice. And I can assure the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt) and others who are interested that I am going to be spending some time and, hopefully, get a point or two across on the Committee on Rules that our view is that regular order is a whole lot better than supplemental appropriations. The second thing I wanted to point out, very briefly, I am well aware this is not a perfect bill. The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) and I and the members of the committee have worked very hard. We have excellent staff. This is not a perfect bill. It is a very, very good bill. It deserves the attention of the Members on the floor today. Certainly the rule is appropriate to bring it forward. I think I can promise on behalf of the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) and all the Members that the minute this authorization bill passes we start on the next authorization bill. And there is plenty to be done. There are a number of things we will hear about in the debate later today. These are things that we already have taken aboard, and we will be pushing hard on. So I am convinced that from the legislative perspective we are doing the job that the people of this country have asked us to take on in the oversight, and I am very proud to be part of that effort. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Gibbons), the chairman of our Subcommittee on Human Intelligence, Analysis and Counterintelligence, and a man who has carried some of the more difficult projects that we have had to deal with in this bill. (Mr. GIBBONS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood) who is the chairman of our Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security. And that subcommittee has, indeed, been hard at work. (Mr. LaHOOD asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks, and include extraneous material.)

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), the vice chairman of the committee. (Mr. BEREUTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Otter). (Mr. OTTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the conference report. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 2417) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2004 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the United States Government, the Community Management Account, and the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System, and for other purposes, with a Senate amendment thereto, disagree to the Senate amendment, and agree to the conference asked by the Senate.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I appreciate the gentlewoman's comments and, of course, all the extraordinary hard work that she has put in on her side with her staff and her members. It clearly has been a good exercise in bipartisanship which I think distinguishes this House very well on an extremely important subject. The subject that the gentlewoman has brought up is one of great concern to us. A report on lessons learned from the military operations in Iraq has a place in the bill, much deserved because it is important, and the language that is in there that her proposed instruction goes to in terms of the scope of the conference, for Members' benefit, says a report not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this act shall be made on lessons learned, and we put that kind of a time requirement in, I think, because this is an issue we wanted to keep the pressure up on. I think that it is pretty obvious that the type of combat that we have in Iraq is not what one would call conventional warfare. I do not know whether the words low-intensity conflict, low-intensity lethal conflict, what the right designation of words are, but it is something different, and there is no question that we are making adjustments as we go along not only with our military, but in our intelligence. Adjustments have, in fact, been made because of lessons learned, some of which have been very painful, some of which have not been so painful. Adjustments are going to continue to be made, and I know that our people are going to do that there because they are very interested in making sure that we minimize our casualties, that we enhance our advantages in every way possible in this lower-intensity type of conflict we are dealing with on a global basis with terrorism, not only in Iraq but elsewhere as well. I think that it is, as I have said, an important part of the bill to learn and adjust and respond under lessons learned or whatever designation we wish to make. The gentlewoman has suggested that Defense people are talking about March of next year. I am a little wary of assigning any arbitrary dates. I do not think that serves us well because I have a very strong conviction that lessons learned are not going to end on an arbitrary date. I think that they are things that we are going to have to deal with as long as we are in Iraq, and I am not even so sure that we have it right in our report that 1 year from now, we are still not going to be in a position to having lessons learned and made adjustments accordingly. So I find myself in a position of very much supporting the gentlewoman's idea of making sure that we keep the pressure on, and within the scope of the conference, I think that saying that within this year, hopefully as soon as possible, is a good idea. But I do not wish to suggest in any way, shape, or form by that formulation I have made that this is a one-time deal. I believe that we will be doing lessons learned forever. I note that we are about to have an anniversary of a great tragic event in our country which was the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. I also note that there is new evidence coming out that says perhaps we have not learned all we should have learned from that tragic event even 40 years later. So in the spirit of the authorization bill, which is for a year, and for the spirit of keeping the pressure on lessons learned and doing the right thing, I am prepared to accept the gentlewoman's amendment in the context of the comments I have made. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to respond to the gentlewoman. The number of requests I have had has been very minimal at this point. I do not know whether that will continue or not.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), the distinguished vice chairman of the committee. (Mr. BEREUTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Gibbons), distinguished subcommittee chairman of a critical part of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence which does bring out the point of question of human assets and what most people understand about intelligence, and it is a people business. He is our subcommittee chairman of the committee that is responsible for worrying about those areas of intelligence, and has obviously got a critical role to play. In addition, the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Gibbons) has led the charge on some of the programs and projects that have been particularly difficult. And I am much indebted for the work he has done on this bill. (Mr. GIBBONS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood) who is the chairman of the Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security, which is rather relevant to this subject.

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) again for bringing this forward. I think we focused on an important part of what we are about and finding out what went wrong to make sure that it is fixed, helping those involved in the executive branch to do the best job they can and reduce the risk to the greatest degree possible in what is a very dangerous business. That is a worthy effort. I want to point out I certainly agree with the motion. Obviously, I did not agree with all of the statements that were made in support of the motion. That would not be my job, or relevant, any way. I think that Members have heard today that the themes of the bill that we have passed, the intelligence authorization bill that the House passed, have come out a number of times. Yes, there were gaps in the information that we were able through our intelligence community to provide with specificity to our decisionmakers. I think that is called the fog of war. It is also called intelligence. If we knew everything, we probably would not need to have an intelligence organization. We certainly would not need to have analysts. The fact is we do not know everything. We try to get as much as we can. We try and analyze it as well as we can. We try to get the value added to it. As the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood) has so eloquently said, there are a lot of people taking a lot of risk out there in very unpleasant circumstances, as we stand here this evening, who deserve an awful lot of credit to get the best we can. If there are gaps in it, we will try to provide more resources and a different mix of capabilities to reduce those gaps. We have had some very good commentary by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert) in the committee, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt) echoing it here today about language problems. We have had public hearings about lack of necessary capabilities, whether we call them insufficiencies, or whatever word. No question, we have got to do some different things and more of them so our decision-makers have an easier time of it and can be more convinced that what they are doing is on hard fact to the greatest degree possible. I think that it is important that Members know that our inquiry is ongoing. We have not reached conclusions as was stated. We are in the process of reaching conclusions. Our oversight will continue, and we will be going about our business. We will get the authorization bill conference back as quickly as we can, I hope, and get that matter under way. And then we will be right back to business doing our oversight and advocacy on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence as we do every day, working all together. I thank all the members of the committee and all the staff, both sides of the aisle and those in the middle as well. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall Nos. 613, 614, and 615, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on all 3 motions.

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 25th Anniversary of the Nations Association Charities of Fort Myers, Florida. This grass roots organization has been successfully meeting the needs of the poor and destitute in Southwest Florida, and for that we are grateful. I have personally supported and followed the development of the Nations Association since its founding in 1978 by the Reverend Doctor Israel Suarez, his wife Ruth, and a small group of dedicated citizens. Israel and Ruth have unselfishly committed their lives to this labor of love, reaching out to the less fortunate in our area. They have touched hundreds of people with their kindness and caring, and they have inspired countless others to become involved in ministering to the poor. The Nations Association provides emergency food, hundreds of hot holiday meals at Thanksgiving and Christmas for the homeless, free furniture for families in crisis, job placement services, Survival English classes, free immigration law services, and recreational activities for disadvantaged youth and many more services too numerous to name. The Nations Association has touched the lives of over 11 thousand individuals with only a small paid staff and 144 volunteers who provide over 7000 hours of service annually to the community. In 1990 the Association was deservedly named the 276th Point of Light by President George H. W. Bush. After 25 years, the Nations Association is going strong--its energies dedicated to making a real difference in the lives of hundreds of families and individuals everyday. I pay tribute today to the tremendous work of Israel and Ruth Suarez and the staff and volunteers of the Nations Association. Theirs is a shining example of the true American spirit of helping others.

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, we in Florida are deeply troubled by the OCS inventory language currently under consideration in the energy bill conference. This language was already firmly rejected once by this body, and I believe we should make it well known that we will reject it again if it returns to this Chamber. The prospect of an ``inventory'' of OCS resources, specifically in the Gulf of Mexico, poses a direct and detrimental threat to our coastal areas in Florida. It looks like a badly disguised attempt to re-open our coastal waters to drilling. In fact, it is the latest move in a long series of clever distractions that try to mask what it really is: a relentless effort to undermine the long-standing OCS moratorium and expose our coastal communities to the dangerous and disastrous repercussions that oil drilling can often bring. This is an insult to the Members of Congress who voted the inventory language out of the House version, as well as to our constituents in Florida. In our State, we have a particularly strong interest in protecting our shores and beaches from unnecessary threat. We are blessed with beautiful beaches and coastal areas that provide extraordinary benefits to Floridians and millions of other Americans who visit. Over 80 percent of our State's population lives in coastal communities. These beaches and coastal areas are an indispensable part of the great character and quality of life we have in Florida. Almost two-thirds of all economic activity in the State occurs in coastal counties; much of that is tied to tourism, which is a vital part of the Florida economy. Our fight for a moratorium on offshore drilling in our part of the Gulf of Mexico has offered protection for over two decades. We are firmly committed to maintaining that protection. The OCS moratorium enjoys broad support, both in Florida and throughout the country, and since the moratorium cannot be overturned outright, opponents look for other, more subtle ways to overcome it. This inventory proposal is a perfect example of that strategy. I believe we must strongly defend and preserve the moratorium on offshore drilling by rejecting all attempts to weaken it. It is a top priority for Florida, as well as other coastal States. I urge my colleagues to support this motion to instruct, to reject this transparent attempt to circumvent the protections we have worked hard to set and keep in place.

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support, and I wish to escalate and join in the very deep appreciation to the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Young) and the gentleman from Kentucky (Chairman Rogers) for the remarkable job they have done on a huge task in a very tough time constraint situation. This is a remarkable piece of legislation in what it accomplishes. There is an awful lot of attention being paid to first responders in this legislation, and rightly so. That is a good thing. However, we need to make sure it is not done at the expense of good information acquisition, analysis, dissemination in a timely manner to people on the front lines, because this is our best weapon, preventing tragic terrorist attacks and the attendant tragedy that happens to Americans at home and abroad. Good information, good information will keep our first responders out of harm's way, in fact, and reduce the chances that we will actually need to call into action. I would like to hope that the day will come when our first responders should be treated the same way as the Maytag men and women of our country. We do not have to call them because we have good information to head off trouble before it starts. Getting good intelligence is a low-cost, high-return investment, and that is a piece that we have not completed yet. We have a foreign intelligence program. It is against the law to use it domestically. Americans do not spy on Americans. We have a new Department of Homeland Security, which this bill does a remarkable job of providing for. We now need a policy and implementing mechanics and funding to how best to deal with domestic intelligence information. That is a task that is now, it is urgent, it is for the future, it has got to be done. I commit the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence to work with the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers) and others who are interested in this task. If we do not do this, we are going to have a problem. I certainly agree that the people who are dealing with the prevention and defense part of this are excellent, extraordinary Americans taking huge risks. If we can give them good information, we reduce their risk and allow them to have a higher success rate. That is worth the investment. I appreciate the time.

Mr. GOSS

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I would like to thank him for that, for the opportunity to speak today and for the extraordinary good work he is doing to get this bill moving.