Pete Hoekstra

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. We will hold a legislative hearing, and we will determine whether there is a consensus in the committee that will enable us to move a bill that would reform FISA and move it to the floor.

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh), a member of the committee.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart).

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Zarqawi's document: However, here in Iraq, time is now beginning to be of service to the American forces, harmful to the resistance, for the following reasons. Time is on our side. We are making progress. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht).

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to our colleague from California, a member of the Intelligence Committee, Mr. Issa.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Florida, the chairman of the defense appropriations subcommittee, Mr. Young.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my colleague from Arizona, a member of the Intelligence Committee, Mr. Renzi.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. I thank my colleague. Reclaiming my time, it is why this resolution is so important, to send a clear signal that we are going to win this global war on terror; that we are going to be successful in Iraq; that we are going to fight the enemy where they are using all of the techniques that they use in an Information Age; and why we need to redouble our efforts to make sure that they cannot attack us; and that we stop the development of homegrown terrorism in this country. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. The historic blunder is that we didn't address this problem in the 1990s when it started rearing its ugly head. I yield to my colleague for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to a colleague from the Intelligence Committee, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Everett).

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt), my colleague from the committee.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to our chairwoman, Mrs. Davis.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. This Congress will not walk away from a mission, it will not walk away from its troops, and it will not walk away from its allies. With that, I would like to yield 3 minutes to my colleague from Michigan (Mr. Rogers).

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Reclaiming my time, I thank the gentlewoman for her comments. A quote from Zawahiri to al Zarqawi in July of 2005: It has always been my belief that the victory of Islam will never take place until a Muslim state is established in the manner of a prophet in the heart of the Islamic world, end of quote. Al Qaeda views Iraq as a central part of this global war on terror. I would like to yield to my colleague from Michigan (Mr. Rogers).

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this resolution in front of us today is about an urgent proposition. We are a nation at war, a nation at war with radical Islamists. The war was not of our choosing, but it is the central struggle of our time, the first major conflict of the Information Age. This debate is a defining one for the House and for our Nation. It is important to begin by explaining that the threats that we face are real. They are serious, and they are ongoing. We must address these threats by continuing to confront them aggressively rather than shying away from them because they are difficult. We begin the debate framing four fundamental issues that define the war with radical Islam. First, our Nation is engaged in a long-term war. That war didn't begin on 9/11. We should maybe look back to 2/26. February 26, 1993, perhaps is when this war really did begin to come into focus. What happened on February 26, 1993? That was when the World Trade Center was attacked for the first time. Second, al Qaeda views Iraq as a central front in its war against Western democracies. Bin Laden's stated goal is to establish a global Muslim caliphate whose historical center includes Iraq, and Zarqawi was operating in Iraq long before American troops entered that country. Third, al Qaeda is a sophisticated enemy in the first war of the Information Age. In a war against terrorism, a critical battle is over intelligence. We must use every means at our disposal to obtain information about our enemies and counter their sophisticated information war. Fourth, our Nation must recognize how this battle is evolving. We need to recognize the threat of home-grown terrorism, home-grown terrorism that has already been experienced in Spain, the United Kingdom, Australia, the Netherlands and, most recently, Canada. We are a nation at war. America has been in an armed struggle with radical Islam for at least 15 years. The first clear declaration was the attack on the World Trade Center, 6 dead, 1,000 wounded. The Khobar Towers were attacked in June of 1996. Our ambassadors were attacked in Kenya and Tanzania in August of 1998 and the USS Cole was attacked in October of 2000. In 1996 bin Laden declared war against the United States in its fatwa. Throughout the 1990s, there were multiple attacks. Almost 300 people were killed, and there was a minimal U.S. response. No one in the 1990s connected the dots. But this war is not just limited to the United States. It is a global war against Western democracies. Our enemies are active across the globe, and they must be countered across the globe, not just by the United States but by our allies. I would like to yield to my colleague from New Mexico, the chairwoman of our Technical and Tactical Intelligence Subcommittee, for a further explanation about the long-term focus of this war.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. I thank my colleague from Michigan for those comments. The other thing that we have learned is that this is the first war in the Information Age. The Information Age provides some unique opportunities to our enemy. As we work to deny the terrorists their physical sanctuary, radical Islamists, using the tools of the Information Age, are working actively to develop a virtual sanctuary on the Internet which enables them to grow their movement around the globe. Some have said, well, this is a battle that should be fought in Afghanistan. This battle is not limited to Afghanistan or Iraq. Tell that to the people in Spain, the Netherlands, the U.K., Canada or Australia that this is really just a battle about Afghanistan. The Information Age is making this a very, very different battle than we have ever fought before. To explain that in more detail is my colleague from Texas (Mr. Thornberry). I yield to Mr. Thornberry.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, this battle continues to evolve. We know that al Qaeda wants to attack us again in our homeland. That is why it is important to stay on the offensive, attacking them where they are and making sure that they do not have a safe haven to plan, to train and to develop the resources to attack us again. But the other thing that they are trying to do is to develop the concept of homegrown terrorism, and it is something that is evolving. I would like to yield to our chairwoman of the committee, Mrs. Davis.

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor John ``J.J.'' Bouma for his efforts to raise support and awareness for Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis or ALS. From May 18-24, 2006, John ``J.J.'' Bouma drove, along with 13 other people, from Grand Rapids, Michigan to the Santa Monica pier in California on Route 66 to raise awareness about ALS. While the initial hope was to raise $66,000, Mr. Bouma's efforts have already raised more than $265,000. A photographer accompanied the trip to document it for a book and a traveling photo exhibit, which will be used to further raise awareness of the realities of ALS. ALS, more commonly known as ``Lou Gehrig's Disease,'' is a neurodegenerative disease that attacks nerve cells and pathways connected to the brain and spinal cord. Many patients progress to a point where they become physically paralyzed, but remain cognitively aware. John Bouma's awareness and passion for ALS arose when he was diagnosed with ALS in September of 2005. Approximately 15 people are diagnosed daily with ALS, most of whom have an average life expectancy of 2 to 5 years. Only about 20 percent of those affected will live an additional 5 years. John Bouma's efforts to raise money and awareness about this degenerative disease are to be commended. There have been significant advancements in increasing the independence of those afflicted with the disease although there is still no cure. Mr. Speaker, please let it be known that on this 24th day of May in 2006, that the U.S. House of Representatives acknowledges the contributions and achievements of John ``J.J.'' Bouma and his 13 friends to raise awareness about ALS and wishes them well with their continued efforts.

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that in the engrossment of the bill, H.R. 5020, the Clerk be authorized to make such technical and conforming changes as necessary to reflect the actions of the House.

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Chairman, again, I believe that with some of the dialogue we have had before, we will not oppose the amendment, but I just want to add some clarification. I am very appreciative of the efforts of the gentleman from North Carolina to work closely with the committee to perfect his original amendment. The intent of this amendment, as I understand it, is to improve contractor management, civilian retention, and to eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse across the intelligence community. These are the goals that the Intelligence Committee has embraced and we fully support. The amendment as written requires numerous duplicative and onerous reports that will only increase costs in personnel overhead at the intelligence community agencies, and particularly within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, an issue that the ranking member and I and other members of the committee have been very, very concerned about. As Mr. Cramer has also identified, the Oversight Subcommittee has been working in a way to try to reduce the number of reports. This amendment, we believe, as an example, within 90 days of enactment of the legislation, there would be a requirement for the delivery of a report on hiring, promotion, and retention of all intelligence community professionals. The text does not define intelligence professional; so the amendment basically would ask for this report on every career field within the intelligence community. This may simply not be necessary. It would potentially be overly burdensome. Since it also applies to parts of the Defense Department that are part of the military intelligence program, our friends at the House Armed Services Committee have expressed some concerns about this. But based on the discussions that we had before the amendment came up indicating Mr. Price's willingness to work with us on refining this amendment once we are in conference, we are inclined to accept the amendment and to move on. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Chairman, again I am looking forward to working in conference in a bipartisan way to work out any concerns or any additional issues that may arise with this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague from Arizona. My commitment is to work with the ranking member and with the gentleman from Arizona on making sure that this language, we move it to somewhere that we are all agreeable. I think we can find that common ground. I just want to say I rise to support the gentleman from Arizona's amendment today. We need to set the record straight about our national security. Specifically, Congress must speak with a single voice, clear and unwavering, about the value of our intelligence information and about who makes decisions regarding its use. We need to speak now. This amendment says the right things. We are at war. Every day our Armed Forces and intelligence services do battle with an enemy whose sole purpose is to kill Americans. This point sounds fairly basic. It is. But the point bears repeating as long as some individuals here in Washington behave as if they have forgotten that we are at war. Our government has a vital interest in protecting sensitive national security information during a time of war. The United States Supreme Court has recognized this vital interest in preserving secrecy. This interest is not merely some speculative opinion. It is the law of the land. This amendment makes that point. The Constitution places the responsibility and authority to protect national security with the President of the United States. The President does so as the head of the executive branch and Commander in Chief. The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized this fact as law. The gentleman's amendment again makes that point. Under our system of laws, the President must decide what sensitive national security information can be shared with the public and what must remain closely guarded. The President does not make these decisions lightly. He is elected by the American people to exercise his judgment in this regard and to make such decisions with the best interests of the American people in mind. Ultimately he is accountable to the people at the voting booth. We have worked with the President and disagreed with his opinions and directions, most recently the decision to declassify over 48,000 boxes of documents that were obtained in Iraq. The position of the intelligence community and the executive branch for an extended period of time was to hold that information. After working with the executive branch, that information is now in the process of being declassified and released to the American people. That is a good decision. But we went through a process. Individuals who disclose sensitive national security information without authority undermine the rule of law. These people substitute their judgment for that of the President, and they exercise that authority when legally it does not even belong to them. These individuals may act for self-determined reasons, not in the best interests of the American people, but in their own interests. I think that is what makes it different. Unless they are prosecuted, they remain unaccountable to the American people for their actions.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to the motion to recommit.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Chairman, I would like to claim time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 5020.