Alcee Hastings

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop), my good friend, and he is my friend.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. First let me thank my good friend from Sanibel for yielding me the customary time. It is a pleasure to serve with the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) on the Committee on Rules, and I look forward to rejoining him on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in the near future. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule providing for the consideration of H.R. 4628, the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003. The rule is a modified open rule, as Mr. Goss has said, requiring that amendments be preprinted in the Congressional Record. As we all know, the preprinting requirement for the intelligence authorization bill has been the accepted practice of this Chamber for several years because of the sensitive nature of much of the bill and the need to protect classified information. The underlying bill, H.R. 4628, is noncontroversial and it was reported from the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence by a unanimous vote. Members who wish to do so can go to the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence office to examine the classified schedule of authorizations for the programs and activities of the intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the National Intelligence Program. This includes authorizations for the CIA, as well as the foreign intelligence and counterintelligence programs within, among others, the Department of Defense, the National Security Agency, the Departments of State, Treasury and Energy and the FBI. I might add, for Members who have not done so at any point, as a Member having served most recently on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and hoping to rejoin it again in the future, I would urge them to take advantage of the opportunity to review the programs and activities of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Also included in the classified documents are the authorizations for the tactical intelligence and related activities and joint military intelligence program of the Department of Defense. Today, more than ever, we must make the creation of a strong and flexible intelligence apparatus one of the highest priorities of this body. The terrorist attacks of September 11, combined with the continuing threat of further attacks, underscores the importance of this legislation, and I am pleased that it has been brought to the floor before the August recess. Now, Mr. Speaker, while this bill is noncontroversial, it is not closed to improvement. Today is not the first time that I have noted on the floor that experts in the intelligence community continue to argue that our intelligence operations must not only be a strong and flexible intelligence apparatus, but also a diverse one. For the past 15 years, Members of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the directors of our country's largest intelligence agencies have labored to create a more diverse intelligence community. Although their efforts have borne some fruit, much more needs to be done. Later this evening I will be offering two amendments to H.R. 4628, both of which are aimed at increasing diversity in our Nation's intelligence agencies. The first of the two amendments expresses the sense of Congress that the CIA, DIA, NSA and NIMA make minority recruitment a priority in their hiring decisions. Of the 13 agencies that currently make up the U.S. intelligence community, only the DIA boasts a minority population that even comes close to the average percentage of minorities in the Federal workforce. The second amendment instructs the Director of Central Intelligence to issue an annual report to Congress on the hiring and retention of minorities by the intelligence community. Such a report will allow this body to monitor the progress of the intelligence community's efforts to recruit and retain minorities. I do hope that my colleagues will support both of the amendments, and I believe they will be supported, having spoken with the chairman in this regard. Further, I would also like to urge my colleagues to support the amendment which will be offered by my good friend, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer), and he is my good friend. The Roemer amendment establishes an independent commission to examine the events leading up to and ensuing the September 11 attacks. Though later this week the House may pass a bill creating a new Department of Homeland Security, the bill will in no way identify nor fix the problems that currently exist in the United States intelligence community. The Roemer amendment, in examining the intelligence failures of September 11, will provide a comprehensive examination and critique on this issue, and I urge my colleagues to support it. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4628 provides authorizations and appropriations for some of the most important national security programs in this country. Any hesitation by this body in passing it would be a disservice to the American people. I urge my colleagues to support this rule, and I ask that they support my amendments, the Roemer amendment and the underlying bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, at this time in the interest of all the Members tonight, in spite of the fact that I feel I could talk about this matter for a substantial period of time, I would just urge the Members at this time to vote for this good rule and for the underlying bill which serves a great purpose for our Nation. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. General Leave

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I have not heard much that I disagree with. As one of the more recent persons to serve on the Committee on Intelligence, I certainly would not come here to the floor of the House of Representatives and suggest that the joint select committee or the joint committee of the House and Senate that is doing the work now of looking back with reference to what happened on 9-11 will not do a good job. But a good job is not good enough in this particular situation. We need the very best. The fact of the matter is that this group of persons who are doing the work are from inside this body and the other body. We tend to think we know everything, and no one else can tell us that we do not know everything. It is sort of like as an aside and not meant to impugn either of the States, but I lived in New York and California, and I left California thinking that Californians thought they knew everything, but I knew that New Yorkers knew they knew everything. The fact is, we do not. And in this instance when the report is finished, which will be a magnificent work, it can become the starting point for an independent group. Now, let me give my colleagues three things that have taken place in our history in addition to those that have pointed out how swiftly President Roosevelt, after Pearl Harbor, appointed an independent commission. We have had in our lifetimes three significant, and there are others kinds of reports about what happens, in our government. When President Kennedy was killed, we had a select committee to do an investigation. When we found ourselves with President Nixon's problems in Watergate, we had a select committee of the House and Senate. But when we had civil rights disturbances and immense destruction in this country, we went to an independent commission that is called the Kernell Report that all of us that are old enough to remember know as the seminal report on race in America that is still looked to by all intellectuals in academia and otherwise.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I offer two amendments, No. 6 and No. 7, and I ask unanimous consent they be considered en bloc.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, let me join those that have thanked everyone that has been involved in developing this very fine legislative undertaking, and especially thank all of the staff that have worked with all of us in developing this. Specifically I would like to thank Wendy Parker for her efforts in working with my office, as well as other members of the staff and also to thank the court reporters and the desk staff from the Clerk's office and all of those with the Speaker's office who have stayed with us throughout the night. With the permission of the Chair, and with the ranking member designee's permission and the Chair's permission, my understanding is that neither of the amendments that I am offering are likely to be controversial, and in the interest of time, I am placing my full statement in the Record, and allow me, since they know that one of these measures speaks to the subject of diversity and ethnicity and helps to strengthen our ability to achieve that, as has been stated by many in the agencies that they wish to accomplish. The other amendment facilitates the reporting, seguing off of the one that we just finished in an effort to fill some of the community's gaps in language and analytical skills, and I am submitting the statement for the Record. Mr. Chairman, I rise to introduce the second of two amendments I am offering to H.R. 4628. The first calls for increased minority recruitment by the intelligence community, in an effort to fill some of that community's gaps in language and analytical skills. The second amendment facilitates Congressional oversight of that process. Mr. Chairman, the amendment I am offering at the current moment instructs the Director of Central Intelligence to issue an annual report to Congress on the hiring and retention of minorities by the intelligence community. Such a report will allow this body to monitor the progress of the intelligence community's efforts to recruit and retain minorities. Like my previous amendment and the underlying bills, this amendment is non-controversial. After all, intelligence agencies have been providing reports on minority hiring and retention to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence since the early 1990's. My amendment simply makes the unclassified versions of those reports available to the larger Congress. Likewise, this amendment does not in any way jeopardize our national security by revealing the number of individuals working at our various intelligence agencies. Figures published in the report would be percentages, not absolute numbers. This provision is in keeping with current guidelines for maintaining the integrity of classified information. Mr. Chairman, let me reiterate, minority recruitment is critical to the maintenance of our national security. Congress has a role in the maintenance of our intelligence infrastructure. That role is to provide effective oversight. This amendment will allow myself and my colleagues in this body to do just that. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment. Mr. Chairman, it was just 3 years ago that the Director of Central Intelligence, George Tenet, stated, and I quote: To combat the threats our country will be facing in the decades ahead, we will need [intelligence] collectors from diverse Ethnic backgrounds and with a wide range of expertise who can think and communicate like our targets and pierce their human and technical networks. We will also need analysts whose deep knowledge of other societies, cultures and languages can bring important perspectives to intelligence assessments. At the time that Mr. Tenet made this statement, only 11 percent of the case officers at the CIA were racial or ethnic minorities. Tragically, that number has barely changed in the intervening years. Realize, Mr. Chairman, this country is attempting to gather information on a world which is 50 percent non-white with an intelligence apparatus that is barely 11 percent non-white. How can we expect to understand them if we do not talk like them? How can we expect to infiltrate them if we do not look like them? And what has the intelligence community's failure to recruit and retain minorities brought us? Today, Mr. Speaker, there are large areas of this globe where the United States is unable to collect intelligence for want of agents who possess the requisite cultural literacy and language skills. At the FBI, CIA and NSA, untranslated tapes of wiretapped conversations pile up, awaiting analysts with the proper language skills to translate them. Right now, as we sit here in this chamber, the intelligence operation in Guantanamo Bay is bogged down by a lack of translators. This sorry state of affairs must not be allowed to persist. My amendment expresses the sense of Congress that the directors of the CIA, DIA, NIMA and the NSA use every means at their disposal to make minority recruitment and retention a priority in their hiring decisions. The CIA, DIA, NSA, and NIMA all have Undergraduate Training Programs; a minority scholarship program introduced by former Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Louis Stokes, in 1987. My amendment urges the directors of these agencies to use this existing program to increase minority recruitment. Mr. Chairman, make no mistake, minority recruitment is critical to the maintenance of our national security. The passing of this amendment will send a strong message that the House of Representatives supports the goal of increasing minority representation in the intelligence community for the purpose of strengthening our intelligence infrastructure. I urge my colleagues to support this much needed amendment.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman has my assurance that I will do everything I can to strengthen it in the way he has put forward.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as one of the original cosponsors of House Resolution 393, a resolution condemning the rise of anti-Semitism in Europe which has occurred over the past 18 months. The recent rise of anti-Semitism in Europe is an unacceptable development which must be stopped, and European governments must take whatever action is needed to achieve this end. I applaud my friend from New York, Mr. Crowley, for his fight against the abhorrent developments leading up to this resolution Anti-Semitism is a dangerous creature with a long and ignominious history in Europe. It is a particularly virulent form of racism which goes beyond place and time, oversteps borders and languages. It finds a home within the ignorant, dissatisfied and disenfranchised in all parts of the globe. In every era, anti-Semitism finds a new way to manifest itself and a new justification for its presence. Starting in the 12th century, blood libels were levied against the Jews of Europe, citing the fictionist Jewish need for Christian blood as evidence for the accusations. When the bubonic plague struck in the 14th century, Jews were wrongfully blamed for the outbreak of the epidemic and the decimation of the European population. Jews across Europe were murdered by angry mobs as punishment for these alleged crimes. Later, European anti-Semitism took on a scientific justification. In 1899, Houston Stewart Chamberlain published ``The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century.'' He argued that all of the accomplishments of Western civilization resulted from the influence of the superior, Germanic race, while inferior races, like the Jews, impeded progress. His book became the Nazi bible and his arguments were adopted by Adolph Hitler as grounds for the elimination of European Jewry. Today anti- Semitism disguises itself as a political platform, often as opposition to Israeli policies. This rise in anti-Semitism, while despicable in its own right, is indicative of a much greater problem. It is part of an obnoxious rise in racism, intolerance, and widespread xenophobia. Though anti-Semitism today lacks the religious mythology attached to it in the Middle Ages or the scientific theories that fueled it in the first half of the 20th century, it is equally dangerous and terrorizes the Jewish community just as it did 60 years ago. Mr. Speaker, last week, I returned from Berlin where the annual session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, an organization of which I serve as Vice President, was convened. For some of my European colleagues, combating increased anti-Semitism is an issue they are concerned about. For those who were not concerned, it was time to make it clear to them that they need to be. Since the days of President Woodrow Wilson and the League of Nations, we have worked to build a global community. Now, xenophobia threatens to undo over 80 years of progress, to destroy our work and our accomplishments. The spread of discrimination in all of its incarnations, be it anti-Semitism or any other form of bigotry, must be stopped. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with all of my colleagues, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Jewish and otherwise, in support of this resolution, and urge European governments to fight the spread of anti-Semitism within their borders. Frankly, if we do not, then history is bound to repeat itself.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend President Bush on the executive order he signed on July 3, 2001. This executive order speeds up the citizenship proceedings for non-citizens who have been serving in the U.S. military since September 11, 2000. Under current immigration law, non-citizens must serve in the U.S. military for three years before they are even eligible to apply for U.S. citizenship. This executive order is an important first step in acknowledging the dedication of the thousands of non-citizens currently serving in the Armed Forces. I say first step because we have been attempting to rectify this situation with permanent legislation for some time. Although it has the bipartisan support of 42 House Members, H.R. 4575, the Citizenship for America's Troops Act, has languished in the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims since April 24th of this year. H.R. 4575, sponsored by my good friend and colleague Representative Martin Frost, will rectify a variety of barriers faced by U.S. servicemen and women seeking to become naturalized citizens. This legislation reduces the required amount of military service for qualification to apply for citizenship from three years to two years; allows the INS to conduct citizen interviews and oath ceremonies for military personnel overseas, and exempts non-citizen military personnel from paying fees for their naturalization. Over 10,000 servicemen and women will benefit from this legislation. Currently there are 6,000 non-citizen enlisted personnel in the Army, 6,620 in the Marine Corps, 2,901 in the Air Force, and 2,878 in the Navy. These military personnel have demonstrated a willingness to die in defense of this country. Not only is this legislation the very least we can do to show our gratitude, it will have the additional benefit of enhancing recruiting, retention, morale and readiness within the armed services. Again, I congratulate the President on this initiative and urge my colleagues to bring H.R. 4575 to the floor for a vote before the August recess.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to my good friend, the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch).

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, how much time does each side have?

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I would respectfully reserve the balance of my time and ask my colleague if he would use some of the time because of the imbalance of time as it is considered.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Is the gentleman prepared to yield back the balance of his time?

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Reynolds) for yielding me this time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, it is no wonder the American people have such disdain for politicians. The Republican leadership's rule this afternoon is the perfect example of back-room deals gone wrong, legislating under the cloak of darkness, and accountability at its most pernicious. The leadership has brought us a rule that not only structures the terms of debate but actually legislates within the rule. My colleagues will hear from the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means that much of this amendment has already passed the House. That is true, much has, but much has not. What we are being asked to do today is to not only weaken U.S. trade laws, and this clearly does that, but to completely eviscerate the regular order of procedures in this House. At the Committee on Rules last week, not one member there could remember a time when the House had attempted such chicanery. The gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the chairman of the Committee on Rules, said, and I quote, ``It was unusual.'' Even the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, admitted that, quote, ``It was unprecedented.'' So how did we get here? Well, if we are to believe the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, it is because of what the other Chamber has done to our House-passed trade bills. Last week, the chairman accused the other body of all sorts of underhanded legislative witchcraft. And how do we answer that in the House? With our own Harry Potter-like sorcery. If we consider the Senate action, as Chairman Thomas did, as a raw, and I quote him, political power play, then just what is it that we are doing? I mean, give me a break. This is theater of the absurd. It would not have surprised me if this bill was brought to us by Congressman George Orwell: up is down, war is peace. And this is serious legislation? I do not think so. Is the House understanding this? If this rule passes, we will be giving the nine majority members of the Committee on Rules the power to legislate on all matters of jurisdiction within this House without the full House ever truly working its will. They are attempting to add the language of H.R. 3010, relating to the general system of preferences, to this rule, and having it considered as passed. This bill has never passed the House. No matter. If it is an important trade bill that does not require full-House consideration today, why not a prescription drug bill tomorrow? Why not just take a Senate amendment to a House bill, amend it with all sorts of tinsel and ornaments, and bring it back to the House floor along with other legislation that would not have otherwise seen the light of day? This is outrageous. Now, let us look seriously at how the House rule today undermines trade and the American family. First, as it relates to hardworking people who lose their jobs because their job is sent elsewhere or their employer closes the American factory to move to some far-off place, the Senate-passed bill includes much stronger language to help these types of workers. Specifically as it relates to the health care provisions, the House amendment undermine's the Senate Trade Adjustment Act assistance by reducing the level of support from 70 percent to 60 percent. The House provision adds a means-testing requirement based on prior-year income and providing unusable tax credit to retired steelworkers for use in the private insurance market. Under the gentleman from California's (Mr. Thomas) plan, TAA and steelworker health care benefits would be severely limited in availability and cost too much for most workers to afford. Moreover the other body's bill would include other industries besides steelworkers and other suppliers. Farmers, for instance, a very large group in my district in south Florida, would gain from the other body's bill. Fishermen, oil and gas producers, other raw goods suppliers, all good examples of hard-working people that stand to benefit under the compromise reached between the Senate and the Bush administration and all of whom stand to lose under the amendment the House is considering right now. It is just this simple. One had better be the exact right person to get any sort of benefit from this House bill. This is what we are doing to the American people today. I am embarrassed, as rightly all of us should be. Another interesting part of this amendment this afternoon is its inclusion of the so-called DeMint language. I found it passing strange that this language is in here in the first place. Not long ago, the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, objected, and strongly objected, to this language. He said he did not like it and would not defend it, and yet it is here today. Why? Let me borrow another of the chairman's phrases from last week when he was alluding to the other body's actions, but equally useful here, ``It is a raw political power play.'' Rank politics is rank politics. It does not matter if it is in the House, in the other body, or where this rule belongs, somewhere out in the gutter. I urge my colleagues to reject this odious rule. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of our time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means. (Mr. RANGEL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter).

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin). (Mr. LEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend, the gentleman from the east coast, I mean west coast, of Florida, the distinguished chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, for yielding time to me. Since he almost put me in Georgia, I decided to put him on the east coast of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and in support of the underlying bill, the Homeland Security Information Sharing Act. I am proud to have worked with the Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security chairpersons, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Chambliss) and the ranking member, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman), on this bill; and I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this important legislation. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4598 requires Federal intelligence agencies to share relevant homeland security information with designated local police and emergency first response personnel. Furthermore, this bill instructs the Director of Central Intelligence and the Attorney General to draft guidelines for the dissemination of this information. All such information and the systems used to disseminate it are to be open to Federal intelligence, Federal law enforcement, and congressional review. Mr. Speaker, this legislation is timely indeed. At a moment when State and local law enforcement and emergency response personnel are being forced to prepare for unprecedented threats to the safety and security of their communities, they cannot be left in the dark. Local first responders must have access to timely and detailed information about any terrorist threats in order to adequately serve their communities. A footnote right here, and a compliment to the distinguished chairperson of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and, in the other body, the Senator from Florida who chairs the concomitant committee in the Senate, for having sponsored a program in Orlando that I was fortunate enough to attend with both of them that deals specifically in part, or dealt with, in part, the facts having to do with first responders and local communities. I think to the extent that Florida will become a bellwether State, the beacon light was shed by the information that was provided at that conference due to the two chairs of the intelligence community. I, for one, as a Floridian and as a Member of this body, am grateful and indebted to them. Mr. Speaker, while some may be concerned that this legislation greatly widens the pool of people with access to intelligence information, let me note that this bill provides very adequate safeguards to protect the rights of individuals and groups. For example, the bill protects the constitutional and statutory rights of individuals by requiring that any information that is shared must not be used for any unauthorized purpose. Similarly, the information sharing procedures mandated by the bill must ensure the security and confidentiality of information as well as redact or delete obsolete or erroneous information. Last, this legislation, like the PATRIOT Act before it, brings with it new modes of intelligence sharing and new congressional oversight responsibilities. Just as we are compelled to increase our intelligence-sharing capacity in the wake of the tragedy of September 11, so, too, are we compelled to ensure that these new government powers do not erode our precious civil rights and civil liberties. Again, for all of the reasons I have just outlined, I support this bill and I support this fair, open rule which allows its consideration today. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.