Silvestre Reyes

Mr. REYES

Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 859, I call up the conference report on the bill (H.R. 2082) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2008 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, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining on both sides.

Mr. REYES. With that, I will reserve my time.

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I now yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Ruppersberger), who serves as our subcommittee chairman of our Technical and Tactical Intelligence Subcommittee.

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, it is now my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the majority leader.

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I now yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin). (Mr. LANGEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, can I inquire as to the time left on both sides.

Mr. REYES. With that, I will reserve my time.

Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, it is now my privilege to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt), who serves as the chairman of the Select Intelligence Oversight Panel.

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds to respond to the gentleman. As I said in my opening comments, this is the first time in 3 years that we've had an authorization bill. It's not a perfect bill and I think all of us acknowledge that, but the concept of democracy is that we work together. There are provisions in this bill by both Democrats and Republicans, and just because you don't like every aspect of it, you don't gather up your marbles and go home. It's about protecting our country. That's what we are trying to do. And I urge all Members to support this bill. Mr. Speaker, I now yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman), who is the chairwoman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Intelligence and is the former ranking member of the Intelligence Committee.

Mr. REYES

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I wish to announce to all Members of the House that the conference report to accompany H.R. 2082, the Intelligence Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2008, has been filed in accordance with House rules and that the classified schedule of authorizations and the classified annex of the conference report is available for review by Members at the offices of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in room H-405 of the Capitol. The committee office is open during regular business hours, and this evening during our votes, for the convenience of any Member who wishes to review this material prior to the consideration of the conference report by the House. Members wishing to review this material should contact the committee to arrange a time and a date for that review. In addition to signing the oath for access to classified information specified in clause 13 of rule XXIII of the House of Representatives Rules, committee rules also require that Members agree in writing to a nondisclosure agreement that indicates that the Member has been granted access to the classified schedule of authorizations and classified annex, and that they are familiar with the rules of the House and the committee with respect to the classified nature of that information and the limitations on disclosure of such information.

Mr. REYES

Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, pursuant to clause 1 of rule XXII and by direction of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, I move to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 2082) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2008 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. REYES. Madam Speaker, I rise and yield myself such time as I may consume. Again, unfortunately this motion is not about policy, it is not about priorities, it is not even about earmarks; it is about politics. Using politics, I think, at a time when our intelligence professionals depend on us to provide them the means and the tools and the funds with which to keep us safe is unfortunate. Nonetheless, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this motion. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to instruct, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, this motion is not about policy. It is not even about priorities; it is about politics. This bill that we passed, this bill that passed the House, the bill we are talking about tonight, is legislation that sets unprecedented levels of commitment for our intelligence community, to the professionals who are charged with keeping this country safe. It sets the priorities for human intelligence. It sets record levels and expenditures from the House so that those professionals that are charged with keeping us safe, keeping this Nation secure, have the necessary resources to do that job. This legislation also prioritizes the issue of diversifying the intelligence workforce. This legislation protects this country. This legislation prioritizes those issues that are vitally important that we pass here tonight. So for those reasons and because for the first time in history we have had care and process with this legislation, setting record levels of expenditures for our intelligence community, I urge all my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the motion. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYES

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo), who serves as the chairwoman of our Subcommittee on Intelligence Community Management.

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I yield 10 seconds to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Boswell).

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, this bill, the RESTORE Act, is about balance. It is about putting checks and balances back in the process. It puts the FISA Court back in the process of protecting Americans. It corrects unchecked authority that we gave through the Protect America Act. Some would want us to continue to rubber-stamp what the administration wants. The American people deserve better. Mr. Speaker, Halloween is over. Why do our colleagues continue to pull ghouls out of the closet? It is now time to talk turkey. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise once again in support of H.R. 3773, the RESTORE Act. I would also like the Record to reflect that Congressman Baron Hill intended to be listed as a cosponsor of H.R. 3773, and we are certainly grateful for his support. In early September, at the direction of Speaker Pelosi, the Intelligence Committee and the House Judiciary Committee took up the call to improve the Protect America Act, or PAA. Passed in August, the PAA modified FISA and gave sweeping and unprecedented surveillance powers to the executive branch, while requiring minimal oversight and without providing a meaningful judicial check on the President's use of the new powers. While we were charged with undoing the excesses of PAA, we also have the mandate to provide our intelligence professionals the legal authorities required to protect the country from our enemies. Six years after the tragic attacks of 9/11, Osama bin Laden remains at large and America continues to face threats from al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. The war in Iraq continues to act as a recruitment tool for all our enemies. Mindful of these threats, we drafted the RESTORE Act as a bill that we can all support and be proud of. The RESTORE Act arms our intelligence community with powerful new authorities to conduct electronic surveillance of targets outside the United States while maintaining our fundamental liberties. First, it exempts truly foreign- to-foreign communications from any judicial review, even when the communication passes through the United States or the surveillance device is still actually located in the United States. Second, it authorizes the acquisition of foreign intelligence information for all matters of national defense, including information relating to terrorism, espionage, sabotage, and other threats to the national security of our country. Third, the act clarifies that nothing in the act or the amendments to the act shall be construed to prohibit lawful surveillance necessary to prevent Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, or any other terrorist organization from attacking the United States or our allies. But these powerful authorities are subject to the checks and the balances required by our Constitution. The RESTORE Act puts the FISA Court back in business where the rights of Americans are at stake. The RESTORE Act tightens overbroad language in the PAA that authorized physical searches of Americans' homes and offices without a warrant. The RESTORE Act restores meaningful, robust, and continuous oversight by the judicial and legislative branches to ensure that the powerful intelligence-gathering tools authorized by the RESTORE Act are being used effectively and within the boundaries set by our Constitution. In sum, the RESTORE Act provides tools to keep the Nation safe and upholds our constitutional liberties. This debate has gone on long enough, I believe, Mr. Speaker. It has been unnecessarily prolonged bipartisan maneuvering from some in this House. I am sure that we will see more of that partisan gamesmanship tonight. But I urge my colleagues to reject partisan politics in favor of sound policy and support this critically important bill. I urge all my colleagues to vote ``yes'' for the RESTORE Act. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I think we just saw some shrill out of options articulation there. I now yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin). (Mr. LANGEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to our distinguished majority leader, Mr. Hoyer of Maryland.

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I'm concerned about the self-induced confusion on the other side. I now yield 1\3/4\ minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Patrick J. Murphy) who served in Iraq and also serves with me on the Armed Services Committee, as well as our Intelligence Committee.

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I will now yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).

Mr. REYES. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYES

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, this is an incredible turn of events from our colleagues on the other side of the aisle who are now arguing for undocumented people within the confines of this country. Let me start out by making a flat statement. The RESTORE Act confers no additional rights on undocumented aliens beyond those that they already have under the Constitution or current U.S. law. You know, there is an old lawyer's adage, and I am not a lawyer but I am told by my friends who are, when the facts are not on your side, you are taught to argue the law. When the law is not on your side, you are taught to argue the facts. Well, here on the floor like we have in the past, we have our colleagues on the other side of the aisle that are so conflicted as to be humorous if this wasn't such a serious, serious issue for our country and for our national security. When they complain about not having any input, let me just clear the record and for the record state that they filed 12 amendments with our committee, the Intelligence Committee. Yet, when it came time to offer and proffer those amendments, they only had two. One was on immunity which, by the way, we have never been given the documents to review, so we would not have known what we were granting immunity to the telecom companies for. But that one was of their amendments. The second amendment was to substitute the Protect America Act for the RESTORE Act. That gives you a clear indication that, today just as in the previous Congresses, the Congressional Republicans were and are in a rush to rubber-stamp every single thing that the administration wanted. And so now when things have changed and we have checks and balances, we have our colleagues who formerly rushed, rubber-stamped anything and everything that the administration wanted to do, now they are using delaying tactics. And so when it is convenient, they argue the law. When it is convenient, they argue the facts. What is clear, crystal clear, here is that we have to have checks and balances. In order to protect this country, in order to protect our national security, there have to be checks and balances. That's what the RESTORE Act does. And when they complain about the rule, it is a sham argument. When they complain about not having enough input, it is a sham argument. When they argue the facts, it is because the law is not on their side. When they argue the law, it is because the facts are not on their side. So it is not about truth; it is not even about justice. It is about scoring political victories. There is a publication here on the Hill that said FISA is coming back up on the floor and it will determine who can maneuver best. You know what, as an American, I am sick and tired of maneuvering. I am sick and tired of people saying we need to work in a bipartisan manner when they work to undermine the process of checks and balances. The American people are sick and tired. I support this rule. I think we have a great bill here in the RESTORE Act. I think this is something that we need to pass today, take it to conference and start being serious about balancing the tools that our agencies need to protect us with a careful balance of protecting Americans' rights under the Constitution. Vote for this rule.