Pete King

Mr. KING of New York

Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Alabama for yielding. And let me at the outset thank him for the courtesy that he has shown me throughout this process. There were several differences that he and I had regarding what the exact nature of the legislation should be, but that never in any way interfered with either our professional or personal relationship. And I want to thank him for that, for his patience, and for the effort he has put in to bring about this final product. I also want to thank Chairman Frank for, again, being totally bipartisan in trying to move this legislation forward and for always having an open door, and certainly, in my own case, allowing me to be part of the process from the start. Mr. Ackerman has been a stalwart fighter in this issue. And let me identify with certainly the points that Mr. Ackerman was making on this issue. Also, let me thank Adam Paulson on my staff for putting in an extreme amount of time on this, on an issue that can be very mind-bending at times and at the same time is extremely, extremely vital for the rebuilding not just of New York City but for the protection of our entire Nation. So let me say at the outset I support the legislation, and I will vote for it. I am glad that it is moving forward. I am glad we have the 7-year extension. It is certainly far better than what was being spoken of last year, which was either a phasing out all together or perhaps a 2-year extension. Having said that, I agree with Mr. Ackerman that I wish this were for a 15-year term rather than 7, and I wish that the reset provision had not been taken out by the Senate. The 15-year provision in particular I fought for in the committee. It was a hard-fought battle. The vote was 39-30, but everything was on the table. We had the vote. If we had lost it, we would have lost it; but the fact is, we won it. And when the bill itself came to the House floor, it passed by an overwhelming vote. I am not trying to impose our rules on theirs, but I really wish on an issue of this magnitude the Senate would have allowed that full breadth of democracy to play itself out to allow the people to be heard on this issue. Because, as Mr. Ackerman said, this is not a New York issue. It is an American issue; it is a national issue. It is an issue of national security and homeland security. And by making this 7 years rather than 15 years, by eliminating the reset provision, we have put New York in a weakened position, or certainly in not as strong a position as it should be. And by doing that, we are basically telling the terrorists that we will not give the same level of support that we should be giving. We are in effect allowing them to pick the playing field here. And we have to keep in mind that, yes, it was New York on September 11. It could be any other city or State at any time in the future. And as the former chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, as the ranking member of the Homeland Security, Mr. Speaker, I do receive regular briefings. I know how real these threats are. I also know that, no matter what analysis is used, New York is clearly number one on the target list of the Islamic terrorists. So this legislation is vital, and it was so important that the other provisions, the reset and the 15-year time period, be included. They were not. Having said that, this is still significant that we are going forward today. And I would hope that we can revisit it in the future, but again it is important that we pass this before it expires on December 31. It is important, again, for the people of New York, but also for the people of America. And if the rebuilding is to go forward, it is going to be difficult because certain provisions have been eliminated, but, again, we will find a way to go forward. Again, I want to thank Mr. Frank, Mr. Bachus, Mr. Ackerman, all the members of the New York delegation and most of the members of the New Jersey and Connecticut delegations who stood together. Again, somewhat of a victory today, but let's work together in the future to have a total victory that we need, not as New Yorkers but as Americans.

Mr. KING of New York

Mr. KING of New York. Madam Speaker, today I rise to recognize a dedicated public servant who devoted nearly four decades to protecting this great Nation. Vice Admiral John Scott Redd, U.S. Navy (Ret.), retired last week after serving as the first Director of the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC). Admiral Redd's accomplishments are many, having served thirty-six years in the United States Navy, which culminated in his assignment as the Director of Strategic Plans and Policy on the Joint Staff. Retiring from the Navy in 1998, Admiral Redd was again called to serve in 2004, this time as the Deputy Administrator and Chief Operating Officer of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad, Iraq. He went on to serve as the Executive Director of the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction where he influenced Community-wide intelligence reforms and made lasting improvements to America's national security. Under his superior leadership, the National Counterterrorism Center developed into the Nation's premier intelligence and law enforcement fusion center, bridging all elements of the Intelligence Community to develop a national common intelligence picture. Admiral Redd tore down walls between Intelligence Community members and replaced a ``need to know'' philosophy with a ``responsibility to share'' environment. Some of the Intelligence Community's successes are known such as the thwarted terrorist attacks against the Sears Tower, a Chicago-area shopping mall, military forces at Fort Dix, New Jersey, and multiple targets in New York, D.C. and elsewhere. Others remain classified. However, in each instance, the National Counterterrorism Center played a key information sharing role which led to the successful prevention of these attacks against our citizens. Admiral Redd is to be commended for his contributions to the Nation, but such a persevering service is not without a cost. For that I offer my personal thanks to his wife of over 37 years, Donna Redd, and their children Ann, Scott, and Adam, without whose support such service would not have been possible.

Mr. KING of New York

Mr. KING of New York. Madam Speaker, due to the recent passing of my mother, I did not return to Washington until yesterday afternoon. However, if I had been present yesterday morning, this is how I would have voted on the rollcall vote I missed: rollcall No. 986--on motion to table the resolution, ``no.''

Mr. KING of New York

Mr. KING of New York. Madam Speaker, due to the recent passing of my mother, I have been absent in Washington since Thursday, October 18 and have missed a number of votes. However, if I had been present, this is how I would have voted on each rollcall: Rollcall No. 981: On Approving the Journal, ``aye''. Rollcall No. 982: Passage, Objections of the President Notwithstanding of the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act, ``aye''. Rollcall No. 983: On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as amended, the Paterson Great Falls National Historic Parks Act, ``aye''. Rollcall No. 984: On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended, the Douglas County, Washington, PUD Conveyance Act, ``aye''. Rollcall No. 985: On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree to Supporting the Goals of National Bullying Prevention Awareness Week, ``aye''.

Mr. KING of New York

Mr. KING of New York. Madam Speaker, due to the sudden circumstances regarding my mother's health, I will not be present during today's rollcall vote on the override of the Presidential veto of the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (H.R. 976). If I were present, I would vote ``yea.''

Mr. KING of New York

Mr. KING of New York. I thank the ranking member for yielding and, Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this legislation. Mr. Speaker, the United States has been at war with Islamic terrorism since September 11, 2001. This is a war which threatens our survival as a civilization, and it is a war where it is essential that we maximize the use of electronic surveillance which is one of the strongest weapons in our arsenal. It is a weapon which should not be trivialized, nor should the struggle be trivialized by using such terms as ``spying'' and ``snooping.'' It is important we keep in mind who the real enemy is. The real enemy is al Qaeda and Islamic terrorism, not the men and women of our own government who are working so hard to protect us. Mr. Speaker, the Protect America Act, which was passed less than 3 months ago, updated FISA and struck the appropriate balance between protecting our citizens from terrorist attacks and protecting our civil liberties. Tragically, today's bill, the RESTORE Act, marks an undeniable retreat in the war against Islamic terrorism. It limits the type of foreign intelligence information that may be acquired and actually gives foreign targets more protections than Americans get in criminal cases here at home. By sunsetting this legislation in 2 years, the RESTORE Act fails to provide permanency and guidance to the intelligence community. The RESTORE Act also fails to provide legal protection and immunity to those American companies who answered the call of this administration and also answered the call of an administration which believed that this policy was legal, and not only this administration, but high- ranking officials from previous administrations, Democrat and Republican, who believed that these policies were legal and constitutional. There was no personal gain for these companies. To allow them to be subjected to lawsuits for answering the Nation's call in time of great peril is mean-spirited, vindictive and shortsighted. Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge defeat of this misguided legislation.

Mr. KING of New York

Mr. KING of New York. Madam Speaker, today I rise as a proud alumnus of the University of Notre Dame law school and ask my colleagues to join me in supporting H. Res. 687, recognizing Reverend Theodore M. Hesburgh, C.S.C., for his contributions to the civil rights movement in the United States, his tireless work to reduce the threat of nuclear conflict, and his efforts to secure the peaceful resolution of international conflicts. As president of Notre Dame, Father Hesburgh worked to bring the university to the forefront of American institutions of higher education. Over the 35 years that he served as president, the university's enrollment, degrees awarded and the size of the faculty all greatly increased. Additionally, under Father Hesburgh's tenure, women were first admitted to the undergraduate program in 1972. Father Hesburgh is known as one of the 20th century's most influential figures in higher education. He served on many commissions and study groups, including serving as chairman of the International Federation of Catholic Universities from 1963 to 1970. In this capacity, he led a movement to redefine the nature and mission of the contemporary Catholic university, drawing trom his experiences in American Catholic universities. Father Hesburgh's accomplishments, however, are not limited to higher education. Throughout his distinguished career, Father Hesburgh has devoted himself to the cause of justice and human rights throughout the world. He has held 16 Presidential appointments for 10 presidents-- President Eisenhower through the current President Bush. In these positions, Father Hesburgh was involved in shaping policy on major social issues including civil rights, peaceful uses of atomic energy, campus unrest and treatment of Vietnam offenders. Furthermore, Father Hesburgh served four Popes, three as permanent Vatican City representative to the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna from 1956 to 1970. He was a charter member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, created in 1957, and he chaired the Commission from 1969 to 1972. In 1971, he joined the board of the Overseas Development Council, a private organization supporting interests of the underdeveloped world, and chaired it until 1982. During the 1980s he was involved in a private initiative that sought to unite scientists and religious leaders in condemning nuclear weapons. In 1982, he helped organize a meeting in Vatican City of 58 scientists who called for the elimination of nuclear weapons and then brought together six spiritual leaders who endorsed this view. In recognition of his many efforts in America and throughout the world, Father Hesburgh was awarded the Congressional Gold Medal in 2000 and the Medal of Freedom in 1964, the Nation's highest civilian honor. His service to his country is an inspiration to all and it has been my honor to know him. Father Hesburgh once said, ``My basic principle is that you don't make decisions because they are easy . . . you make them because they're right.'' He has certainly lived his life by those words and it is an honor to be recognizing today the outstanding life of this great man.

Mr. KING of New York

Mr. KING of New York. Madam Speaker, I am proud to stand today in support of H. Con. Res. 200. Let me thank at the outset Mr. Smith for the work he has done for so many years for the cause of human rights in so many countries, often at great risk to himself. I thank him for that, and we all admire him for his tenacity. I have a special regard for the chairman of the committee, Mr. Lantos, who is cosponsoring this resolution with me and has been such an outspoken advocate of freedom and human rights in Burma for so many years. Even when it is not on the television screens and the eyes of the world are not watching, Mr. Lantos has been there, dedicating himself to this issue; and I have been privileged to be able to work with him on this. Madam Speaker, as terrible as the atrocities have been in Burma over the past 6 to 7 weeks, the fact is this is unfortunately merely an extension of the type of tyrannical behavior which has characterized the junta in Burma for almost two decades now. This is a junta which tramples upon human rights. They use rape and torture and murder as an instrument of policy. When we see the hundreds of innocent, freedom-loving people who have been murdered over the past several weeks, who have been tortured and arrested and abused, when we see the innocent Buddhist monks who have been shot down, when we see that communication into and out of Burma has been shut off by the junta, we can only assume the worst. That is why it is incumbent upon the international community to speak with one voice, as we are speaking with one voice here in Congress. This is not a Republican or Democratic issue, or majority or minority issue. It is a world issue, an issue of human rights. For all of these years Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has been in prison or under house arrest and now imprisoned again, she has become a symbol of that fight. When we talk about symbols, often we forget these are real human beings who are paying the price for being symbols of freedom and justice and who are willing to put their lives and their freedom on the line. That is why this resolution calls for her release and the release of all of the political prisoners and an end to the repressive actions of the Burmese junta. In saying this, as Mr. Lantos and Mr. Smith have said, yes, the United States has been at the forefront of this. But it is so important for neighboring countries now to step forward, especially China and India. When we think of China, which is going to be hosting the Olympic Games and is trying to clean up its image in the eyes of the world, is attempting to project itself as a true country on the world scene, the fact is if China continues in any way to support Burma, to be silent in the face of what the junta is doing, it really puts a cloud and a tarnish over whatever image China is attempting to establish for itself. And that will be kept in mind by world governments as we approach the Olympic Games next year. So it is essential that China step forward and work with the world community, work with the United States, work with the United Nations, work with countries in the region to put pressure on the junta in Burma to ease, stop and, end its oppressive tactics. As Mr. Lantos said, we are also sending a very clear signal to the military leaders, the officers, in Burma who are part of this junta, telling them that the world will hold them responsible for what they do. The world will hold them accountable. As Mr. Lantos knows better than anyone in this House, we saw what happened when military leaders in Germany felt they could go forward and do what they were ordered to do and carry out those atrocities against innocent people. Nuremburg showed that is not a permissible defense. Similarly, it will not be a permissible and acceptable defense for the military leaders in Burma who continue to carry out these atrocities. They just can't say, We were following orders. So our message to Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is that we stand with you. Our message to the Buddhist monks is we stand with you. Our message to the oppressed people of Burma is that we stand with you. And our message to the Government of China is we are watching what you are going to do as far as putting pressure on the junta. And our message to the military leaders in Burma is the world is watching you and will hold you accountable and will know what you did. You will face justice when this is over, depending on whether you did the right or you continued to carry out the atrocities ordered upon you. So with that, I strongly urge the adoption of H. Con. Res. 200. I applaud the fact that the House of Representatives is speaking with one voice. We have put partisanship aside. We stand as one and have put differences aside. I thank Mr. Lantos and Mr. Smith for the leadership they have shown over the years. I urge adoption of the concurrent resolution.

Mr. KING of New York

Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding. I rise in strong support of the underlying legislation and certainly with very strong questions and reservations about the rule. Like Mr. Ackerman, I certainly came to the floor intending to oppose the rule. I will study the letter which Mr. Ackerman obtained from the majority leader. I agree with Mr. Sessions that this is a very uncertain way to proceed, relying on a promise from a letter. Not that I, in any way, question the intent to follow through on the promise, but again, how that could be interpreted, what the final language will be, does raise serious issues. Having said that, I commend Mr. Ackerman for his efforts. I do believe it is important that this process continue to go forward. The reason I support the underlying legislation, Mr. Speaker, is that this is not a New York issue, even though it is often focused that way because of the fact that there have been two major terrorist attacks on New York City, but it truly is a national issue. I want to commend Chairman Frank for his efforts at the committee level. I also want to emphasize that this was a bipartisan vote which voted this bill out of committee. I particularly appreciate the fact that, in the committee, an amendment was offered by myself and Mr. Ackerman which extends TRIA 15 years, passed by a bipartisan vote. I know that, certainly on my side of the aisle, a number of Members are concerned about the reason that the 15-year term is essential. The fact is that any significant project is going to be of 15 years' duration. Both the preliminary work and the construction itself is going to go to 15 years. The insurance money, for instance, in New York, where they are attempting to rebuild Ground Zero, would not be available at this time unless TRIA is extended. And also the insurers have the certainty that TRIA will be there for the 15 years, for the duration of the project. I have to emphasize that there will be not one nickel spent of this money unless New York or Chicago or Los Angeles or any other city in the country is attacked by terrorists. So if any city were attacked, we know the government would step in. Why not have that precaution now? Why not give the insurers the certainty, and the municipalities the certainty, so they can go forward with this development? Otherwise, we are allowing the terrorists to set the terms and conditions. We are letting them determine what is going to be built and not rebuilt. If this 15-year extension does not go forward, if TRIA is not extended, the reality is that there will not be a rebuilding of Ground Zero. If Ground Zero is not rebuilt, then this is a magnificent victory for a horrible, horrible force, Islamic terrorism. So we should be the ones determining what our economic security is and what our homeland security is. Passage of TRIA is an essential component of that. As the former chairman of the Homeland Security Committee and its ranking member, Mr. Speaker, I am very much aware how New York and other cities in other parts of our country are in the crosshairs of Islamic terrorism. We know that attacks are inevitable. Whether or not they are successful is another story, but certainly attempted attacks are inevitable. I believe it is essential that no matter what part of the country you are from, you have the assurance that if, God forbid, you are attacked, that there will be insurance in place for you to rebuild. Because otherwise, you are not going to find insurers stepping forward. Places like New York, which was attacked, will not receive insurance that it needs to go forward. And the terrorists will have scored and attained not just the victory they attained on September 11 where almost 3,000 people were murdered, but they will have the additional victory in that the area that they attacked will not be rebuilt. It could be New York. As I said, it was New York in 1993. It was New York in 2001. It could be any one of a number of other cities in the future. So let us protect ourselves in the ultimate essence of homeland security and have a complete component of security, and TRIA is essential to that. Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the underlying legislation. I look forward to examining the letter which Mr. Ackerman procured and see what that signifies for the future. But the reality is that we have to have the absolute assurance. We cannot be relying on a vote sometime in the future. The government itself could be attacked. The Capitol may not be here. There may not be a quorum of Members attainable. We have to have that absolute assurance in place now. With that, again, I thank Chairman Frank. I thank, certainly, Mr. Sessions for his courtesy. I thank Mr. Ackerman for his efforts. I also thank Ranking Member Bachus for his cooperation and courtesy throughout this hearing.

Mr. KING of New York

Mr. KING of New York. Madam Speaker, today I rise to recognize the remarkable and significant career of the distinguished British Ambassador to the United States, Sir David Geoffrey Manning. Ambassador Manning is stepping down from his post after 4 years of devoted service and I would like to commend him on his long service to the British Government and his vital contributions to the enduring relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom. Ambassador Manning began his career as a civil servant in the Foreign and Commonwealth office in 1972, where he was posted in the Mexico/ Central America Department. He then served in posts in Warsaw, New Delhi, and Paris. It was in 1990 that Sir David was appointed to the senior position of Counselor, Head of Chancery in Moscow. Ambassador Manning held this post from 1990 to 1993, during which time the fall of communism and the break-up of the former Soviet Union occurred. In 1995, Ambassador Manning was named British Ambassador to Israel during the difficult period after the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. He served in that post with distinction throughout his 3 years of service. In 2001, Sir David was appointed to head the UK delegation to NATO in Brussels, a post he held for 8 months until he was designated by Prime Minister Tony Blair to serve as his chief foreign policy adviser. It was in this capacity that he worked closely for Prime Minister Blair in the aftermath of September 11, 2001, and for the 2 years that followed. It was in this position that Ambassador Manning also developed a close working relationship with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who at that time was serving as President Bush's national security adviser. In September 2003, Ambassador Manning was appointed by Prime Minister Blair to be the British ambassador to the United States, the 40th ambassador to hold this post. In this position, Sir David has played an invaluable role in strengthening the uniquely close U.S.-UK alliance. Now after four years of service, he is leaving Washington and I want to take this opportunity to thank him for his distinguished service to the United Kingdom and for the friendship he has consistently shown toward the United States. I have appreciated my dealings with Ambassador Manning on a range of issues including the war against terrorism and the fulfillment of the Irish Peace Process. And on a personal level, my wife Rosemary and I have thoroughly enjoyed our relationship with Ambassador Manning and his wife Catherine. Sir David, thank you for your impressive service and I wish you and Lady Catherine the best in all your future endeavors.

Mr. KING of New York

Mr. KING of New York. Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Long Island Blue Demons for their 6-0 win in the 2007 Babe Ruth World Series tournament on August 24. The Blue Demons are comprised of players from the Merrick PAL, which is located in the 3rd Congressional District on Long Island. The Blue Demons' win is of particular significance. This is the first time that a Long Island team has won the age 13-15 bracket. I want to applaud the Demons' athleticism and dedication to our national pastime. These players worked hard all season. To advance to the World Series in Andalusia, Alabama, they had to win the State championship in Queens and the regional championships in Pennsylvania--which they did. They won 18 tournament games in a row, including a 6-0 victory in the championship game over a team from Henderson, Kentucky, on August 24. This win has been more than just an athletic victory for the Blue Demons. These players from Long Island had the opportunity to stay with host families in the gracious Alabama town of Andalusia, where they warmed the hearts of their hosts with their positive attitudes and dedication to our great American pastime. I am proud that the Blue Demons had such a rewarding experience and I again congratulate them on their World Series victory.

Mr. KING of New York

Mr. KING of New York. Madam Speaker, today I rise to honor Lewis J. Bazakos, a constituent of mine and the outgoing chairman of the American Chiropractic Association (ACA)--the Nation's largest professional association for doctors of chiropractic medicine. Dr. Bazakos, a 1978 graduate of the New York Chiropractic College has practiced chiropractics for more than 25 years. He was elected chairman of the Board of Governors during the ACA's 43rd Annual Business Meeting on September 22, 2005. In addition, Dr. Bazakos serves as chairman of the New York Chiropractic College Board of Trustees. Dr. Bazakos has been elected or appointed to numerous leadership positions within the chiropractic profession. Prior to his election as chairman, Dr. Bazakos served on the ACA Board of Governors since 2000 and on its executive committee since 2003. In addition, Dr. Bazakos has served as the ACA's New York-Metro Delegate and was chairman of the Finance Committee. On the state level, Dr. Bazakos has a long-time affiliation with the New York State Chiropractic Association (NYSCA). He is past president of the NYSCA and served as its legislative chairman for 15 years. Throughout his career, Dr. Bazakos has been recognized for his commitment and service to the chiropractic profession. In 1991, he was named as Chiropractor of the Year by the NYSCA and also received the NYSCA's prestigious ``Ernest G. Napolitano Award,'' an honor presented to a doctor in recognition of his selfless contributions to the NYSCA and the chiropractic profession. In addition to his doctor of chiropractics degree, Dr. Bazakos holds a master's degree in clinical nutrition from the University of Bridgeport. Currently, he is involved in clinical private practice at Nassau County Pain Management & Rehabilitation and Medical Offices located in Valley Stream, NY. Madam Speaker, I am proud to have Dr. Bazakos as a constituent and even prouder of his more than 25 years of service to patients throughout the Empire State.

Mr. KING of New York

Mr. KING of New York. Madam Speaker, today I rise to honor the employees of the Transportation Security Administration. When Congress created the TSA, we intended to form a security force that could quickly adapt and respond to crises in order to protect our nation's transportation system. On August 10, 2006, TSA demonstrated that it can perform its mission admirably. As we now know, 21 terrorists from London were conspiring to detonate liquid explosives aboard transatlantic flights bound for the United States. They wanted to create a catastrophe that could have rivaled the horror of September 11th. Though their plot was foiled, the event should serve to remind us that we must remain vigilant in the ongoing war against terror. The TSA's response to this imminent threat helped guide our nation through that crisis. In the evening hours of August 9, 2006, TSA quickly responded. As British authorities began arresting the terrorist suspects, TSA altered its screening to ensure that the plot would be foiled. Within four hours--before the first flight took off on August 10th-- TSA implemented new security procedures, trained and deployed more than 43,000 Transportation Security Officers to execute these new procedures, and deployed Federal Air Marshals to multiple locations overseas. The dedication that the employees of TSA demonstrated in response to this terrorist plot should not be forgotten. Notably, the work attendance for Transportation Security Officers on August l0th was an all-time high in the history of TSA. As one Federal Security Director recalled, ``All our security officers came in; every single one of them. Anytime something happens . . . you have to fight them off. Mission is never our problem.'' On this anniversary of that failed attempt of terror, I want to thank the employees of the Transportation Security Administration. We owe them great gratitude.

Mr. KING of New York

Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Dent).

Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California, the former Attorney General of California, a man who came back to Congress to combat terrorism, Mr. Lungren.

Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I applaud the bipartisan nature of the majority leader's remarks. I thank him personally. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite).

Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul) a former member of the Joint Terrorism Task Force.

Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, at the outset, let me commend all the members of the Homeland Security Committee, especially Chairman Thompson, for the spirit of bipartisanship which did bring the floor to this moment right now, this conference report. Having said that, I must take exception to a number of the statements that have been made here today, especially by the gentleman from Florida and his statements implying somehow that there has not been a significant amount of accomplishments since September 11, 2001. Let me just recount some of them that were done prior to this. The enactment of the PATRIOT Act; the reauthorizing of the PATRIOT Act; the Intelligence Reform Act, which created the Director of National Intelligence; just last year, the adoption of the first-ever port security act; chemical plant security; restructuring FEMA; $1 billion for interoperability. I really don't think it serves a purpose to somehow be suggesting that the Republicans, or any Member of this body for that matter, is holding back or in any way not doing all that is possible to protect our Nation against the threat of Islamic terrorism. For instance, the National Intelligence Estimate, when it was released last week, made a point of stressing that the greatly increased counterterrorism efforts over the past 5 years have constrained the ability of al Qaeda to attack the United States' homeland again and have led terrorist groups to perceive the homeland as a harder target to strike than on 9/11. These measures have helped disrupt known plots against the United States since 9/11. So, Mr. Speaker, I don't think it does any purpose at all to downgrade the efforts made by this Congress and this administration. This should be a bipartisan effort, and I think a lot of the rhetoric today undermines that. Having said that, I will be supporting this bill because, on balance, I believe there have been significant improvements made. I hope that next year and the year after and the year after that we continue to make improvements. Now, there have been some failures. One of the main requirements, main recommendations of the 9/11 Commission was that jurisdiction be consolidated in one committee. That was not done. In fact, anyone who went to the first meeting of the conference committee, it was like the Tower of Babel. We had subcommittees and committees, and ranking members and committee chairmen. I think there were about over 60 people at a conference committee when there should have been four. Having said that, I believe that this is something to work toward in the future. And I would hope that the Democrats, during the time that they still retain the majority, will work to consolidate that jurisdiction. But some of the positive steps, on grant reform, I certainly agree with the gentleman from Mississippi on this, and I commend him for this. We did have long, involved preconferencing negotiations. And he worked with me and Senator Lieberman and Senator Collins to come up with a grant formula which is far more based on risk than it was before. It's still not perfect, it was still a minimum that's going to be in there, but having said that, it's a significant advance over what we've had in the past, and I applaud him for that. I applaud the other members of the conference committee, and the bipartisan membership of our committee which passed similar legislation in 2005 and 2006, and now it has been brought to fruition. And I give Chairman Thompson credit for that. Also, on another issue, which I'm very pleased is in this bill, and that's upon the issue of giving immunity to those who come forward and report suspicious activity. I want to thank my good friend, Mr. Pearce, the gentleman from New Mexico who is here today, who was the first to initiate this legislation. Then we passed it here on the House floor in March. And so long as we're in a partisan mood today, I point out that a majority of Democrats voted against that. And last week, a majority of Democrats voted against it in the Senate. And to me it was unfortunate that we had to have 5 or 6 days of intense negotiations before the Democratic leadership finally intervened and brought about the insertion of that language into the conference report. But it is there; it gives immunity to those people who come forward and report what they see on good faith. And we learned on September 11, if you see something, say something. We know that you cannot have enough FBI agents, you cannot have enough police officers to monitor the actions of Islamic terrorists. We need the eyes and the ears of millions of good Americans, and that's what this language protects. Before I slow myself down, let me just say that at the conference committee from the other side, I want to commend Senator Lieberman and Senator Collins. This was a true bicameral effort. And again, Chairman Thompson, we went through a number of, over a period of weeks, preconference negotiations, all of which were conducted in good faith. And I think the product today, again, while not perfect, is another step in the right direction, building on the steps of the previous 5\1/ 2\ years. With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger).

Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time. And let me thank, again, Chairman Thompson for his bipartisan effort, thank Senator Lieberman, Senator Collins. Let me thank the Republican staff members, Matt McCabe, Kerry Kinirons, Sterling Marchand, Heather Hogg, Mike Power. A special thanks to Mark Klaassen who unfortunately is going to be leaving the committee, but he has been a tremendous asset. Chad Scarborough, Joe Vealencis, Deron McElroy, Adam Paulson and Lauren Wenger of my staff. Mr. Speaker, this is a good conference report. I urge its adoption. And, again, I thank the chairman for his cooperation and assistance. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce) who is the initial author of the John Doe immunity legislation.

Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays), a member of the committee and an outstanding spokesman on this issue.

Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Staten Island, Brooklyn, who lost more residents than any other Member in Congress on September 11.

Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, could I inquire as to how much time remains.