Pete Hoekstra

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOEKSTRA. I can confirm the chairman's understanding. Neither the responsibilities of NCTC for comprehensive counterterrorism analysis, nor its responsibility for dissemination of information within the Federal Government, will in any way diminish the responsibilities of DHS under the Homeland Security Act, or any other legal mandate.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith). (Mr. SMITH of New Jersey asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 870, I call up the conference report on the Senate bill (S. 2845) to reform the intelligence community and the intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the United States Government, and for other purposes.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on S. 2845.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 4 minutes. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the conference report accompanying S. 2845, the National Intelligence Reform Act of 2004. This conference report is the product of what may go down in the annals of this institution as one of the most difficult and certainly one of the most involved conferences ever. Just over 7 weeks ago, we began to negotiate a compromise solution of two very different bills that were both acting on the recommendations of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, more widely known as the 9/11 Commission. The negotiations have been tough, long and sometimes extremely contentious. Now we have nearly crossed the finish line. We have a conference report that conferees have agreed to, and one that I believe should be enthusiastically supported by the Members of the House. It has been nearly 55 years since we have made such truly substantive improvement to the overall management structure of the Nation's Intelligence Community. This bill creates a Director of National Intelligence, a Director who has dramatically improved authorities and capabilities to manage and coordinate the disparate efforts of the various intelligence components of the United States Government. The bill also creates a National Counterterrorism Center that will coordinate terrorism-related intelligence efforts and provide for strategic operational planning of counterterrorism operations. Mr. Speaker, the various law enforcement and border security provisions in this bill will unquestionably improve domestic security against terrorism. The same is also true for the restructuring of the Intelligence Community. But I need to caution that these reforms will take time to implement and, moreover, for the intended results to be seen. I am not under the false impression that by themselves, these structural changes and enhanced authorities vested in the new Director of National Intelligence will ensure perfect knowledge about our enemies in the future. Those that would do America harm are clever, they are secretive, and the asymmetrical threats that they can both imagine and effect require us to be manyfold better at defense than they need be on offense. Mr. Speaker, before I yield the balance of my time, I want to thank the distinguished ranking member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman). She has been a very good partner in working through this process. We have not always been on the same side of the issues on the work on this bill, but we have been steadfast in support of reforming the Intelligence Community and making America safer. The same can also be said for my colleagues from the Senate, Senators Collins and Lieberman. They have been driving factors in getting this legislation to a vote. Without them, I do not think we could have done this. My whole-hearted congratulations and thanks to them, and also to my colleagues on the House Republican Conference. It has been a difficult time. As I have said earlier, we did not get everything we wanted. I stand with the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) on many issues he brought forward on driver's licenses and immigration and look forward to working with him to move those issues in the next Congress. They are needed to more fully round out this package of what we need to secure America's safety. But that should not stop us from taking the steps that we have today. These are important steps in restructuring the Intelligence Community, in law enforcement, in transportation security and in international affairs. We need to move these forward today and then move forward on the rest of the issues when we get back here in 2005. The staff has worked incredibly hard to make this possible over the last 7 weeks. They have worked long hours every day to get this bill to where we are today. Without them, this simply could not have been possible. Mr. Speaker, the conference report on S. 2845 is a good piece of legislation. It is necessary. We need to support it, and we need our colleagues to vote yes. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), a conferee on the bill.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox), my colleague, the chairman of the Select Committee on Homeland Security.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I am glad to confirm that the understanding that the gentleman has is correct. The information- sharing environment will serve as a means by which individual agencies, including DHS, can meet their statutory information-sharing mandates. It will enable and assist agencies in meeting their information-sharing responsibilities. In particular, I can confirm that the ISE does not supplant or in any way diminish the information-sharing responsibilities of DHS. Indeed, DHS will be an interconnected component of the ISE, which will facilitate the Department's execution of its statutory mission as the primary Federal agency responsible for sharing terrorism-related information with State, local and private sector officials and the public.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham).

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 4548) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2005 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. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 4548) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2005 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, be considered as adopted.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I have a statement which I will submit for the Record. Mr. Speaker, as my colleague from California knows and as we have talked about, this conference report has been agreed upon. We have had it ready for about 3 weeks. We worked through it very much in a bipartisan way through the House and the Senate. We ask for its consideration and to move it forward. I am not going to go through the details of my statement. I hope that clarifies why we are doing it in this fashion tonight.

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit with instructions to strike the text of H.R. 10, as amended, and insert the text of the Maloney substitute. We have heard much about the efforts in the other body which resulted in the passage of the National Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 by a vote of 96 to 2. I have congratulated the sponsors of the bill, Senator Collins, the Chair of the Committee on Government Affairs, and Senator Joe Lieberman, the committee's ranking Democrat member, for their accomplishments. Over 6 days of debate, the other body placed its mark on the Collins- Lieberman bill. As I predicted, that bill has grown in size with the inclusion of scores of amendments becoming more like H.R. 10, not in just title I, but throughout the bill. The House has now spent the better part of 2 days considering H.R. 10. We have put our imprint on the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. We will soon have the opportunity to reconcile the two bills in conference. Lee Hamilton, the 9/11 Commission's vice chairman and a former distinguished chairman of both the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Committee on International Relations, also stated what should be obvious: that as the Senate and House conduct the normal legislative process, each body would refine and put their imprint on the commission's recommendations. He said that at the September 28 press conference, and it is what he is reported to have said on other occasions. The commission's recommendations are not set in stone. That is what the other body has done during its many days of consideration of S. 2845, and it is exactly what the House has done. The motion to recommit represents another attempt to legislate by playing ``follow the other body.'' This process began weeks ago when some said the House should pass the Collins-Lieberman bill, as introduced. Then it was, the House should pass the Collins-Lieberman bill as reported by committee. Yesterday it was, the House should pass a little bit of Collins-Lieberman and a little bit of Lieberman-McCain. And today, what the House should pass is what may be the Senate bill, but this is what it looks like: 300 pages, 400 pages of stuff that has been blacked out, hand-written in, with Senators' names on it. Will those be part of the bill? The House is better than that. While some may have been busy watching the other body, our committees and Members have methodically held hearings, introduced legislation, and amended and improved H.R. 10. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 10 is a comprehensive bill. H.R. 10 effectively implements the framework of recommendations contained in the report of the 9/11 Commission, especially its core recommendations regarding restructuring the intelligence community. H.R. 10 is the work of the House, not following the other body. Mr. Speaker, for these reasons, for the integrity of the House, I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing the motion to recommit and pass H.R. 10.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Could we have a copy, please?

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, is there a motion, or is there a copy of the motion available at the desk?

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Chairman, I think this is a good amendment. I support the amendment. This is an amendment we would like to have in the en bloc amendment. But having this study available for the national capital region is helpful. I think it is the right thing to do, but it is also helpful in determining and developing a case study which could be used in other areas. I support the amendment.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to the unanimous consent agreement, I offer the amendments en bloc.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute. This en bloc amendment has been agreed to in a bipartisan fashion which supports the amendments that have been offered by the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Fossella), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) and the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Shadegg). I encourage my colleagues to support this en bloc amendment and move the process forward. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), a former member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. (Mr. CASTLE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)