Lamar Smith

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, I appeal the ruling of the Chair.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Yes, I do, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, once again, the Democratic majority is insisting on a procedural objection to block consideration of the Senate-passed FISA modernization bill. This motion to recommit adds the bipartisan bill passed 2 weeks ago by the Senate, 68-29.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the gentleman to withdraw his point of order and allow for an up-or-down vote on the bipartisan Senate reform bill.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the Democratic majority's decision to ignore the requests of our intelligence community has endangered our national security. Why do House Democrats refuse to give the intelligence community the tools they need to protect American lives? A strong bipartisan bill passed the Senate by a vote of 68-29. The bill also was supported by the administration, the intelligence community, as well as the majority of Members of the House. Yet the Democrats' leaders refused to bring the bill up for a vote. Congress has no greater responsibility than to ensure that our intelligence-gathering laws are strong and our Nation is safe from future attacks. Let's hope, for the sake of our country, the Democratic leaders will decide before it's too late to pass the bipartisan Senate bill.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the rule. Yesterday, House Democrats said that Congress does not have enough time to pass critical FISA modernization legislation to keep America safe from foreign terrorists. Today, we are wasting Congress' time on an issue that does nothing to make our Nation safer. Clearly, the Democratic majority is out of touch with the needs of our intelligence community and is placing Americans' lives at risk. On the eve of the expiration of critical intelligence legislation, the House Democratic majority has chosen to put extreme partisanship ahead of our country's safety. Apparently, the Democratic majority cares more about the alleged steroid use of a few baseball players and the personnel decisions of the White House than they do about promoting national security. Last year, Admiral McConnell, the Director of National Intelligence, warned Congress that the intelligence community was missing two-thirds of all overseas terrorist communications, endangering Americans' lives. Congress enacted the Protect America Act to close this terrorist loophole. Now House Democrats are going to let the Protect America Act expire. If the act expires, we will return to the status quo, unable to begin any new foreign intelligence surveillance without a court order and risk losing two-thirds of all foreign intelligence. Today we find ourselves at two very dangerous thresholds: first, expiration of legislation vital to this Nation's national security, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The House Democratic majority has let this legislation lapse without even allowing a straight up-or- down vote on the bipartisan Senate bill approved earlier this week by a vote of 68-29. Instead of reauthorizing FISA, the Democratic majority chooses to take us to another threshold, that of a needless constitutional confrontation in the courts over the dismissal of a handful of United States Attorneys. We know that the President has the authority to dismiss U.S. Attorneys. We know that his executive privilege claims are consistent with those made by previous Presidents for decades. We know that by tilting at the executive privilege windmill we risk severely undermining the very oversight authority we would want to protect. But most of all, we know that reauthorization of FISA is infinitely more important than this spat over executive privilege. Once again, we see why Congress' approval rating is at an historic low. It's because the Democratic majority engages in extreme partisanship and ignores the people's business. I urge my colleagues to oppose this resolution.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), former chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I will reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on each side?

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence), a member of the Judiciary Committee. (Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert), a member of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California, Mr. Lungren, a member of both the Judiciary Committee and the Homeland Security Committee.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to Mr. Saxton.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I strongly oppose H.R. 5349, which extends the Protect America Act for 21 days. Another extension is unacceptable and unnecessary. Last August, Congress enacted the Protect America Act to close a dangerous loophole in our ability to collect foreign intelligence. The Democratic majority insisted on an arbitrary 6-month sunset. But instead of using that time wisely, they ignored the needs of our intelligence community and passed a partisan, unworkable bill, the RESTORE Act. Then, 2 weeks ago, the House Democratic majority insisted on another extension. Again they squandered the last 2 weeks. Now House Democrats want more time. But their time is up. We know from Admiral McConnell, Director of National Intelligence, that before Congress enacted the Protect America Act, the intelligence community was missing two-thirds of all overseas terrorist communications, endangering American lives. Some in Congress are willing to let the Protect America Act expire because ongoing surveillance under the act can continue for up to a year. This might be acceptable if the terrorist threat also expired this weekend, but it doesn't. If the act expires, we will return to the status quo, unable to begin any new foreign intelligence surveillance without a court order, again threatening America's counterterrorism efforts. Another extension represents a failure by the House Democratic majority to protect the American people. The Senate understands this. The intelligence community needs a long-term bill to fix gaps in our intelligence laws, not a 21-day extension. The Senate bill addresses the concerns of our intelligence community and has strong bipartisan support. But House Democrats are at war with themselves and at odds with the American people. House Democrats disagree with the Senate Democrats and House Democrats disagree among themselves. One group wants to approve the bipartisan Senate bill and another opposes it. Americans are tired of this kind of partisanship in Washington. Now we have partisanship within partisanship within the Democratic Party. House Democrats disagree among themselves, disagree with Democrats in the Senate, and oppose a bipartisan bill that passed yesterday with overwhelming support by a vote of 68-29. The House Democratic leadership is like a clock that runs backwards. They keep going in counterclockwise circles to the left. Unfortunately, we can't turn the clock back on terrorists. We must act to gather intelligence on terrorists and prevent another attack. Why do we keep delaying our ability to protect American lives? Another extension represents a failure to act, a failure to lead, and a failure to protect our country. It doesn't take long to do what is right. Let's stop the stalling and pass the bipartisan Senate bill. I urge my colleagues to reject this extension and urge the Democratic leadership to allow the House to consider the bipartisan Senate bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, I move to appeal the Speaker's ruling.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, it is unfortunate that the Democratic majority is insisting on a procedural objection to block consideration of this motion to recommit. This motion substitutes the bipartisan bill passed yesterday by the Senate 68-29 to improve FISA, a bill that would dramatically improve our national security. It is sad to see the Democratic majority put procedure over substance when it comes to protecting Americans from terrorists. There is nothing more germane to the security of the American people than to take up the Senate bill as quickly as possible. Therefore, I would ask the gentleman from Michigan, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, to withdraw his point of order and allow for an up or down vote on the bipartisan Senate reform bill. I hope the gentleman will withdraw his point of order and allow us to take a vote on a bill supported by both parties in the Senate, the administration, and many Democrats in the House. Again, I would like to reiterate my disappointment that the majority has raised a point of order against this motion to recommit. We need to stop playing procedural games with our national security and take a vote now on the Senate-passed bill to improve FISA.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, I wish to be heard on the point of order.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, I am in its current form.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes. Madam Speaker, this extension does nothing more than contribute uncertainty to our intelligence community and put our foreign surveillance activities at risk. We have a bill we can pass right now. Yesterday, the Senate approved its bipartisan FISA bill by an overwhelming majority of 68-29. The Senate bill addresses the concerns of our intelligence community and has strong bipartisan support. The intelligence community needs a long-term fix to gaps in our intelligence laws now, not 21 days from now. What message does it send that we lack confidence in our intelligence community? Why are we making ourselves vulnerable to those who want to hurt us? Spies and terrorists don't operate by deadlines and sunsets. Neither should our intelligence laws. We cannot allow the Protect America Act to expire and return to the status quo, unable to begin any new foreign surveillance. The time to act is now. Another extension represents a failure by the House Democratic majority to protect the American people. We should reject this extension and urge the Democratic leadership to allow the House to consider the Senate bill, which has majority support in the House. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield the balance of my time, 3 minutes, to the gentleman from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren), who has some instructive math to share with us.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra), who is the ranking member of the Select Committee on Intelligence.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my colleague from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) who is the ranking member of the Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee.