Bennie Thompson

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, at this time, I do not have any additional requests for speakers, and I am prepared to close.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Perlmutter), a distinguished member of our committee.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1680, the Secure Handling of Ammonium Nitrate Act of 2007. The committee has worked vigilantly to get this bill to where it is today. In fact, we've been working on this bill in a bipartisan way for two Congresses now. We all know the devastating impact that fertilizer bombs can have. Over 12 years ago, domestic terrorists used an ammonium nitrate-based bomb to blow up the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. That blast had a force equal to that of 4,000 pounds of TNT. It killed 168 people. Since that time, ammonium nitrate-based bombs have repeatedly been used throughout the world. In 2002, a group linked to al Qaeda detonated a bomb outside a night club in Bali, Indonesia, killing 202 people. In 2003, an al Qaeda cell in Istanbul killed 57 people in two separate explosions. Last year, Canadian authorities arrested 17 people in Toronto for plotting to attack targets with ammonium nitrate-based bombs. This threat is real, Madam Speaker. To do nothing about it is unacceptable. However, I have always believed that we must act in a thoughtful manner that recognizes the importance of ammonium nitrate in our agricultural sector. I am proud of the work that the Committee on Homeland Security has done. The committee has worked hard to ensure that H.R. 1680 strikes the right balance between ensuring access to ammonium nitrate for farmers and making it difficult for terrorists to obtain. Specifically, this bill directs DHS, in consultation with State agricultural authorities, to create a registry of facilities that manufacture and sell ammonium nitrate. H.R. 1680 requires the sales of ammonium nitrate to be limited to purchasers who register in advance and that the name, address, telephone number and registration number of the purchaser be recorded. The tracking and registration functions are not new phenomena. The agriculture and fertilizer industry and some States have been engaged in voluntary programs to monitor sale of ammonium nitrate for some time. In fact, Madam Speaker, a handful of States, including New York, California, New Jersey, Nevada, Oklahoma, Missouri, South Carolina, Maryland, Michigan, and Iowa have enacted laws regulating the sale of ammonium nitrate-based fertilizer. The time has come to put Federal rules in place to ensure that terrorists cannot cross State lines to buy ammonium nitrate without being registered or checked against the terrorist watch list. Madam Speaker, I am proud to say that our committee has worked collaboratively with industry stakeholders in the agriculture industry on this legislation. We consulted State and local farm bureaus, fertilizer manufacturers and retail outlets, and mining and explosive makers. It is reassuring to know that we can all come together to come up with a reasonable approach to regulating ammonium nitrate. I have somewhat of a vested interest in getting this right, Madam Speaker. There is an ammonium nitrate plant in my district. The Terra Yazoo City plant has been in operation for more than 50 years. The Terra plant is a major economic engine in our local economy, providing good-paying jobs and stable jobs for the community. The Terra facility and many others like it across the country are committed to safeguarding ammonium nitrate, but they cannot do it alone. The Federal Government needs to show some leadership here. That is why H.R. 1680 directs DHS to take the lead in coming up with an approach to registering ammonium nitrate purchases. I am pleased that through this bipartisan effort we've been able to come up with an approach to tighten control of ammonium nitrate, yet allow it to remain accessible for crop nutrition purposes. This legislation is another of our ongoing homeland security efforts at preventing a future terrorist attack on our Nation. I would like to thank subcommittee Chairman Langevin, Ranking Member King, and others, for their leadership on this critical issue. Each has put their mark on the bill through the committee process. Their efforts, without question, made this a better bill. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1680. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this bill and include therein any extraneous material.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1680) to authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security to regulate the sale of ammonium nitrate to prevent and deter the acquisition of ammonium nitrate by terrorists, as amended.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, in closing, I urge my colleagues to join me in support of H.R. 1955. This vital legislation will put our Nation on the path to addressing an emerging threat, homegrown terrorism. There is general agreement that the threat of foreign-based terrorist groups is real. We, as a Nation, have dedicated a great deal of resources to global counterterrorism. However, in some corners, there has been a kind of mindset about homeland security that believes we will be safe if we get the terrorists there before they get us here. It's the kind of mindset that ignores the fact that there are some would-be terrorists who are born here, raised and educated here, and only have lived here in the United States. For those of us who love this Nation, it is not the kind of thing that we want to acknowledge, but we must. Enactment of H.R. 1955 will put us on a course to understanding homegrown terrorism and coming up with strategies to reduce this major threat to the homeland. Madam Speaker, I, also would like to pay tribute to the chairwoman of the committee for ushering this passage, as well as the ranking member of the committee. But I would also like to acknowledge that Ranking Member King, who had an unfortunate death in his family, is not here. He has been a source of support for this legislation and has helped get us to this point, and I would like to acknowledge that for the record. Madam Speaker, I urge passage of this legislation.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my strong opposition to the nomination of Leslie Southwick, now being considered by the U.S. Senate. In an attempt, yet again, to place someone for a lifetime seat on the Federal bench, which has traditionally been racially ignorant and insensitive towards civil rights, the President has risen to the occasion and nominated Leslie Southwick. This will be his third nomination, of a Mississippian, to the Fifth Circuit since 2001. However, none of his nominations aid in rectifying the egregious problem with the lack of diversity on Mississippi's Federal bench. Mississippi has the highest African-American population, 37 percent, of any state in the country. In spite of the hundreds of African- American lawyers and judges in Mississippi, there has never been an African-American, nor any other minority from Mississippi, appointed to represent Mississippi on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in the history of this country. This is a fight worth having. The Fifth Circuit has the highest percentage of minority residents of any circuit. At the same time, its civil rights jurisprudence is far to the right. The recent events in Jena, LA, show the racism in the criminal justice system within the jurisdiction of the Fifth Circuit. We cannot afford a nominee hostile to civil rights on this or any other Court. There is a history with this seat. The President is intent on placing someone hostile to civil rights in the Mississippi seat on this Court. Charles Pickering and Michael Wallace were nominated but couldn't get confirmed because of their civil rights records. This is the third try by the Administration, and the pattern is very clear. Instead of stepping up to the plate and nominating someone capable of delivering fair and impartial decisions on civil rights, the President has slapped Mississippians in the face with the recent nomination of Southwick. Just look to Southwick's controversial opinions. In Richmond v. MS Dep't of Human Services, a white employee was fired for using the phrase ``good ole nigger'' toward an African-American co- worker. When the white employee was fired, a hearing officer reinstated the employee. In upholding the reinstatement, the majority (which Southwick joined) concluded that using the phrase ``good ole nigger'' was equivalent to calling the other employee her ``teacher's pet.'' This opinion was unanimously reversed by the Mississippi Supreme Court. And this is Bush's No. 1 draft pick? Southwick's rulings on race discrimination in jury selections are equally disturbing. In such cases there is a noticeable pattern of prejudice. Southwick upheld claims that the defense struck white jurors on the basis of their race while rejecting claims that the prosecution was racially motivated in striking African-American jurors. On one hand, Southwick allows prosecutors to strike African-American jurors when the motivation is clearly racial, McWilliams v. Mississippi, or when the prosecution cites non-racial reasons for the strikes, Davis v. Mississippi. Yet, Southwick denies the defenses warranted attempts to strike white jurors even when the defense uses the same non-racial reasons for the strikes, Webb v. Mississippi. And this is the President's No. 1 draft pick? The aforementioned cases exemplify several opportunities Southwick has had to make a judicious decision befitting such a high court but failed to do so. Such views must not be tolerated or encouraged through a nomination to a lifelong post representing the judicial integrity of our nation. By this nomination, the Administration is attempting to reward judicious incompetence and great shortsightedness toward civil rights issues. It's almost as if the President believes that Mississippi does not have any competent African-American lawyers. To think that a state overflowing with highly capable African-American attorneys cannot fill this Mississippi seat is simply preposterous. Again, I express my sincere opposition to the nomination of Leslie Southwick to Mississippi's Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Mississippi needs a nominee who will not look to discourage or impede its growth, but instead, support and empower Mississippi's legacy.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Thank you very much. Mr. Speaker, I join members of the Congressional Black Caucus, who have unanimously opposed the nomination of Leslie Southwick to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. For the record, Mr. Speaker, the Fifth Circuit is composed of Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas. This circuit historically was one of those circuits that moved civil rights and voting rights issues in a manner that allowed all people representation. So what we've seen under the President's administration, we've seen this court move in the opposite direction. As a resident of Mississippi and a representative for the Second Congressional District, we have yet to have a member of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals who is an African American. We have the highest population of any circuit in the State in the circuit; yet we are completely void of representation. I don't have to go through the litany of problems we've had in Mississippi with respect to civil rights. As you know, and as so many know, Mr. Speaker, had it not been for the Federal court system, many of us would not be in elected office. Many of us would not hold positions of higher responsibility because our State denied African Americans, for a number of years, equal representation under law and denied that representation because of color. And so what we have in the Southwick nomination, Mr. Speaker, is a continuing pattern of nominating people who have demonstrated racial insensitivity toward people of color. In the Richmond v. Mississippi Department of Human Services, a white employee was fired for using the phrase ``good ole nigger'' toward an African American coworker. When the white employee was fired, a hearing officer reinstated the employee. In upholding the reinstatement, the majority, Mr. Speaker, which Judge Southwick joined, concluded that using the phrase ``good ole nigger'' was equivalent to calling the other employee her ``teacher's pet''. This opinion, I'm happy to say, Mr. Speaker, was unanimously reversed by the Mississippi Supreme Court. And this is our President's number one nominee for the Fifth Circuit, who says that it's all right to use the ``N'' word when referring to people of color because it's equivalent to being called the ``teacher's pet,'' or as he said in later words, ``a term of endearment.'' That's an insult. But it goes to the crux of the issue of whether or not the temperament of this gentleman, Leslie Southwick, fits promotion to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. In addition to that, on another case, McWilliams v. Mississippi, when a prosecutor cites nonracial readiness for strikes. Davis v. Mississippi is another case. Judge Southwick denied the defense's warranted attempts to strike white jurors, even when the defense used the same nonracial reasons for strikes. Webb v. Mississippi. In other words, it's all right to strike black people from juries for nonracial reasons, but you can't strike white people from juries for nonracial reasons. So, Mr. Speaker, we have a problem. This is the person under consideration this week by the United States Senate. I'm happy to say that the Congressional Black Caucus has taken up a number of issues this session, but the Southwick nomination really goes to the heart of why we are all here. We cannot put people on the bench for a lifetime job who demonstrate this kind of insensitivity. So, Mr. Speaker, I am happy to join my colleagues with the Congressional Black Caucus in unanimously opposing the elevation of Judge Southwick to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. His nomination is not just an affront to people of color, but it is an affront to people of good will. That someone who demonstrated a lack of judicial temperament can actually be nominated and be given serious consideration by the United States Senate is beyond me. But, again, I want to express my sincere opposition to the nomination of Leslie Southwick to the Mississippi Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Mississippi needs a nominee who will not look to discourage or impede its growth, but instead support and empower Mississippi's legacy. I appreciate my colleague from Ohio yielding me the time.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. That's correct.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Well, the record will reflect, Mrs. Tubbs Jones, that at that hearing significant evidence was introduced as to the statistical probability of African Americans being nominated to the court. It was also introduced that the population of African Americans was the greatest in the State of Mississippi, that Mississippi had fewer individuals on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and has never had an African American on a court in its entire history from the State of Mississippi. So this is a golden opportunity, it was a golden opportunity for President Bush to do the right thing. But this was his third nominee for this one judgeship. Each of the other individuals who he has nominated also had that judicial temperament and their qualifications questioned to the point that they were denied. So what we have here is a third bite at an apple that really deserves reconsideration by the President. But since he did not choose to do so, I am committed, like the other members of the Congressional Black Caucus, to make our voices heard this week on the floor of the United States Senate with its colleagues there to say that this is not the America that we all want to be known for. And so that issue, Mrs. Tubbs Jones, was thoroughly aired. I am disappointed that a letter from Judge Southwick swayed one member of the Judiciary Committee to change their vote. You know, we can all write letters. But in the record, we have opposing views from the Magnolia Bar, which is the African American Bar Association in the State of Mississippi, the Mississippi NAACP, a whole host of elected officials and others saying that this is not in the best interests going forth with this nomination. So we believe that the record was complete and that a thorough airing of what is before that Judiciary Committee would have basically provided significant opposition to Judge Southwick. But, you know, this is politics. That letter changed the position of one member on the judiciary who did not talk to anybody from Mississippi, did not talk to anybody from California, did not talk to anybody who had an interest diametrically opposed to the person under consideration. They took a letter, read it into the Record, and made a decision as to a person saying, I will do better now that I understand that it is not proper to use the N word or that it is not proper to deny African Americans positions on juries just because they happen to be black. Well, that is not enough in my book, nor the Congressional Black Caucus's book, to warrant a person being elevated to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Now, the reason I say that, to be honest with you, is that the majority of the voting rights and civil rights legislation that comes before the court generally comes from that circuit. So if you have someone who demonstrates time and time again that they lack the temperament, that they lack the judicial restraint to deal with cases relating to people of color, then that person should not be promoted to that position for which they are not made. So for that reason, I am happy to be here on behalf of those Members who serve the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in the United States House of Representatives. We have, as you know, gone on record many times in writing opposing the nomination. We reiterated that opposition today in a letter when we found out that it would be considered sometime this week. So there is no question that people who represent individuals, more than 700,000 American citizens, in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals district are in opposition to it. And how one can take a letter from the person that is nominated and say that that one letter rises above those hundreds of thousands of people who have sent individuals to represent them here in Washington gets beyond me. But, again, we will continue to press the case. As you know, we are prepared to speak to the leadership before the issue is considered and do other things, because this is too big an issue for us not to give it our maximum effort.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Thank you very much.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 2761, the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) Revision and Extension, as Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security. This bill necessarily reauthorizes TRIA for 15 years--through 2022. At its essence, TRIA provides a Federal backstop to the insurance industry by providing compensation for a portion of insured losses resulting from acts certified by the Federal government as acts of terrorism. Importantly, TRIA has no cost to the taxpayer unless there is a terrorist attack. This program is not an ongoing subsidy to the insurance industry but, instead, an incident-based program that will help to ensure the continuity of our livelihoods and commerce in the wake of a terrorist incident in the United States. Mr. Chairman, history has shown that Al Qaeda and other extremist organizations will explicitly direct acts of terror against American citizens and property in an effort to inflict economic harm upon this country. The Congressional Research Service estimated that insured losses from the attacks on the World Trade Center total around $32 billion. This bill helps build resiliency in our country to respond to the known objectives of our adversaries. As the Committee with oversight of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), our Committee works diligently to ensure that DHS effectively executes and manages its duties. Since its inception, there has been an understandable focus on the protection of the United States against acts of terror. However, as demonstrated in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, I do not believe that there has been an adequate focus on recovering from the aftermath of a catastrophic incident by the Department. I believe that the extension of TRIA demonstrates our nation's necessary commitment to planning for the recovery and resumption of economic activity following an act of terrorism. Whereas we can never take our eyes off of protection and prevention, we must show a commitment to resiliency in the wake of an incident. This bill will help our nation begin its climb back to normality should we ever again be struck on our shores by terrorists. Furthermore, the revision and extension of TRIA represents a vital element of homeland security, particularly in its protection of critical infrastructure: the effective cooperation between the public and private sectors. The Committee on Homeland Security has focused extensively on this necessary partnership and the homeland security solutions that can be achieved by both sectors working together. This necessary partnership will be essential to the successful stabilization of the United States economy at a time of national crisis, should one occur. Last year, I expressed my concern with the TRIA not requiring insurers to offer coverage from acts of nuclear, biological, chemical, and radiological (NBCR) terrorism. Studies by numerous entities concluded that the risk of NBCR terrorism is essentially uninsurable unless there is a Federal government backstop. I am pleased that this legislation includes acts of NBCR terrorism in TRIA and, therefore, provides that federal backstop. This provision will hopefully encourage efforts by the insurance industry while providing it with the necessary support that it needs. I am pleased that the bill incorporates the Secretary of DHS, especially relating to the certification of NBCR terrorism. It says that where a certified act of terrorism is carried out by means of an NBCR weapon or instrumentality, the Secretary of the Treasury will certify that act as an act of NBCR terrorism. Importantly, if a certified act of terrorism involves any other ``weapon or instrumentality,'' then the Secretary of the Treasury will consult with the Secretary of Homeland Security, among other officials, to determine whether the act of terrorism meets the definition of NBCR terrorism, as defined by the bill. This language recognizes the ever-changing threat we face as well as the expertise and sophistication of DHS. It is important that this extension of TRIA will be for 15 years. This long-term extension will enhance economic stability--for example, by bringing more stability to the real estate and construction industries so that they can move forward with large-scale building projects in areas considered at high risk for terrorism. After all, TRIA was enacted in 2002 in an attempt to stabilize the economy that was badly disrupted by the events of 9/11 and to spur commercial development, as well as to prevent an industry-wide catastrophe in the event of another terrorist attack. This 15-year extension will create the predictability and confidence that the private sector needs to make investments that help our national economy. This legislation will help our country and its industry spur economic development and, importantly, will provide the necessary economic security in the aftermath of a terrorist event to get our country moving as quickly as possible. In closing, let me thank my colleagues on the Financial Services Committee for their leadership on this legislation, especially my colleagues Chairman Frank as well as Representative Carolyn Maloney of New York. I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker while I commend the work on H.R. 1, I rise today to express my disappointment that the provision to afford our Transportation Security Officers (TSOs) the collective bargaining rights and whistleblower protections they deserve is excluded from the Conference Report. Mr. Speaker, our TSOs are not second class citizens and should not be treated as such. In 2001, when the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) was created, Congress vested power to set TSO compensation, leave, and other basic employment rights with the Secretary of Transportation. When TSA was moved to the Department of Homeland Security, this authority remained. While this authority was helpful in getting TSA up and running, the TSOs now need to be treated like all other TSA employees--fairly and equitably. This provision would have restored the labor rights of approximately 43,000 TSOs and provide them with veterans' preference, anti-discrimination protections, retirement, whistle-blowing, and collective-bargaining rights. Restoring basic employment rights is critical to recruiting and retaining TSOs. We do not need to look far to see what low morale can do to the health, recruitment, and retention of the Department of Homeland Security workforce. According to a GAO report released this month, TSOs account for approximately a third of the total workforce and their attrition rates are higher than normal for the federal government. It is unfortunate that we are failing to provide the most basic labor protections to our front line workers who perform an important job and work to keep us all safe; rights that are afforded to thousands of workers in the federal government. I commit to my colleagues today that as Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security I will continue to work to ensure that our TSOs are afforded the rights and protections they deserve. Additionally, the following individuals did a service to our nation in helping the Conference develop legislation to make America more secure: Michael Stroud, Denise Krepp, Veronique Pluviose-Fenton, Alison Rosso, Jacob Olcott, Chris Beck, Matt Washington, Jeff Greene, Erin Murphy, Michael Beland, Erin Daste, Tamla Scott, Tyrik McKeiver, Stephan Vina, Diane Bean, Brian Turbyfill, and Angela Rye. Lastly, I would like to acknowledge that a lot of staff work went into getting us here today, and I would like to especially thank: My staff director, Jessica Herrera-Flanigan; and my chief counsel, Rosaline Cohen, as well as her predecessor, Todd Gee. I don't mean to brag but I believe I have the best and most diverse professional staff on the Hill. A few of them are here with me on the floor. I also would like to acknowledge: the Committee's very able clerk, Michael Twinchek; Ranking Member King's staff--most especially Rob O'Connor and Michael Power; the folks at Legislative Counsel that brought it all together--Hank Savage and Hadley Ross; Mike Sheehy and Jerry Hartz with the Speaker's office; and Rob Cogorno and Mariah Sixkiller with the Leader.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Kingston amendment. I understand the arguments in favor of importation, but I don't believe that the remedy to solve these problems is to open up our Nation's pharmaceutical supply and distribution system to potentially counterfeit drugs. Now is simply not the time to open U.S. borders to counterfeit prescription medicines. A new report by the Center for Medicines in the Public Interest scheduled to be released September 30, 2007, projects counterfeit drug sales to reach $75 billion in 2010, a shocking 92 percent increase from 2005. According to Peter Pitts, senior fellow for health care studies at the Pacific Research Institute and Director of the Center for Medicines in the Public Interest, ``The business of selling fake prescription drugs to unsuspecting consumers is burgeoning, and is a global industry. This underground industry represents a major public health risk for citizens of the world.'' The new report estimates counterfeit drug sales will grow 13 percent annually through 2010, compared to just 7.5 percent estimated annual growth for global pharmaceutical commerce. This amendment is a first step towards opening wide the doors at our borders to drug imports--and thus to counterfeit and adulterated medicines that will jeopardize Americans' health and safety. We should not compromise the public's faith in the quality and safety of our Nation's pharmaceuticals by opening our borders, dramatically increasing the availability of counterfeit medicines. Mr. Chairman, I urge strong support for this motion.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, I stand in support of H.R. 2722 because I recognize the importance of the Integrated Deepwater Systems (Deepwater) program to our National security. We need to replace our aging ships and aircraft that operate offshore to protect our borders. While this program has come under much scrutiny for being more expensive than previously thought and taking more time to complete, it is still a worthwhile endeavor. Everyday, valiant members of the U.S. Coast Guard risk their lives to rescue and protect Americans. The continued success of this mission is dependent upon Coast Guard assets which are aging by the day. In the mid-1990s, the Coast Guard decided to replace all of these assets in a single procurement program--the Integrated Deepwater System program, typically referred to as Deepwater. The Coast Guard's plan was to set forth broad mission requirements and then rely on private contractors to determine the mix of assets necessary to carry out those missions. Ultimately, the contract went to ``Integrated Coast Guard System'' (ICGS), a consortium headed by Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman. Deepwater was intended to replace or modernize the approximately 90 ships and 200 Coast Guard aircraft used for missions taking place more than 50 miles offshore. The primary missions carried out in this ``deepwater'' zone are drug and migrant interdiction operations, search and rescue, homeland security, and fisheries law enforcement. Unfortunately, this program has been beset with problems. One part of the ICGS's Deepwater plan was to lengthen the Coast Guard's existing 110 foot patrol boats by 113 feet. Shortly after the first extended boat was delivered, cracks were found in its hull. The Coast Guard dry- docked the boats in December 2006 due to the lack of operational capacity in heavy seas. On February 14, 2007, the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General released a report concerning whistleblower allegations made against the 123-foot Coast Guard cutter program. The report found that aspects of the C4ISR (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance) equipment installed aboard the 123- foot cutters do not meet the design standards set forth in the Deepwater contract. Specifically, the contractor did not install low smoke cabling aboard the 123-foot cutter, despite a Deepwater contract requirement. The intent of this requirement was to eliminate the polyvinyl chloride jacket encasing the cables, which for years produced toxic fumes and dense smoke during shipboard fire. Additionally, the contractor installed C4ISR topside equipment aboard both the 123-foot cutters and prosecutors, which either did not comply or was not tested to ensure compliance with specific environmental performance requirements outlined in the Deepwater contract. On April 17, 2007, the Commandant of the Coast Guard announced the decommissioning of the entire 123-foot fleet. Similarly, there are problems with the National Security Cutter. On January 23, 2007, the Department of Homeland Security Inspector General's Office released a report stating that ``the National Security Cutter, as designed and constructed, would not meet the performance specifications described in the original Deepwater contract.'' The report also states that ``The National Security Cutter's design and performance deficiencies are fundamentally the result of the Coast Guard's failure to exercise technical oversight over the design and construction of its Deepwater assets.'' Furthermore, the Inspector General's Office found that ``since the deepwater contract was signed in June 2002, the combined cost of National Security Cutters 1 and 2 has increased from $517 million to approximately $775 million.'' The $775 estimate does not include costs to correct or mitigate the National Security Cutter's structural design deficiencies, additional labor and materials costs resulting from the effects of Hurricane Katrina, and the final costs of a $302 million Request for Equitable Adjustment (REA) that the Coast Guard is currently negotiating with the contractor. Finally, the report states that the Inspector General's Office ``encountered resistance'' from the Coast Guard and the contractor in its efforts to evaluate the structural design and performance issues associated with the cutter. The IG's findings are very serious and I am deeply concerned about the Coast Guard's ability to manage the Deepwater program. Strict Congressional oversight on the part of the new Democratic Congress has forced the Coast Guard to make several significant changes to this much-needed program and continued oversight is needed. The Homeland Security Committee has already held one hearing on the Deepwater Program this year, and more are planned. H.R. 2722 makes improvements to the Deepwater program that will refine the process and make it effective for protecting the homeland for decades to come. For instance this bill creates a process for the Coast Guard to become the lead systems integrator for the program, it opens up competition for procurements, requires the Coast Guard to provide life-cycle cost estimates, requires the appointment of a Chief Acquisitions Officer, establishes testing and certification requirements for Deepwater assets, provides design criteria for the National Security Cutter, and allows the Department of Homeland Security to work with the United States Navy. These changes to the program are necessary to make Deepwater an effective homeland security program.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin). (Mr. LANGEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green), a member of the committee.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, it is quite clear that there is substantial support for the bill as well as substantial support to get on the vote for the bill. I would like to thank my colleague, Ranking Member King, for his support as well as his staff. They have been very good. I would like to recognize the Democratic staff: Jessica Flanigan, Rosaline Cohen, Michael Stroud, everybody. I have something to insert in the Record to recognize their value. Mr. Speaker, it is quite clear that this is a good bill. It is in the best interest of the country. It is completion of the 9/11 vulnerability report. I urge its adoption. Mr. Speaker, while I commend the work on H.R. 1, I rise today to express my disappointment that the provision to afford our Transportation Security Officers, TSOs, the collective bargaining rights and whistleblower protections they deserve is excluded from the Conference Report. Mr. Speaker, our TSOs are not second class citizens and should not be treated as such. In 2001, when the Transportation Safety Administration, TSA, was created, Congress vested power to set TSO compensation, leave, and other basic employment rights with the Secretary of Transportation. When TSA was moved to the Department of Homeland Security, this authority remained. While this authority was helpful in getting TSA up and running, the TSOs now need to be treated like all other TSA employees--fairly and equitably. This provision would have restored the labor rights of approximately 43,000 TSOs and provided them with veterans' preference, anti-discrimination protections, retirement, whistle-blowing, and collective bargaining rights. Restoring basic employment rights is critical to recruiting and retaining TSOs. We do not need to look far to see what low morale can do to the health, recruitment, and retention of the Department of Homeland Security workforce. According to a GAO report released this month, TSOs account for approximately a third of the total workforce and their attrition rates are higher than the normal for the Federal Government. It is unfortunate that we are failing to provide the most basic labor protections to our front line workers who perform an important job and work to keep us all safe; rights that are afforded to thousands of workers in the Federal Government. I commit to my colleagues today that as Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security I will continue work to ensure that our TSOs are afforded the rights and protections they deserve. Additionally, Mr. Speaker, let the record reflect that in addition to the staff that I recognized earlier, the following individuals did a service to our Nation in helping the Conference develop legislation to make America more secure. Michael Stroud Denise Krepp Craig Sharman Tom Finan Veronique Pluviose-Fenton Alison Rosso Jacob Olcott Chris Beck Matt Washington Jeff Greene Erin Murphy Michael Beland Erin Daste Tamla Scott Tyrik McKeiver Stephan Vina Diane Bean Brian Turbyfill Angela Rye Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for affording me the opportunity to recognize the good work of Majority staff of the Committee on Homeland Security.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/4\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), who is a member of the committee. (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks).

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton), a member of the Homeland Security Committee.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I'm proud to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), who's also a member of the Homeland Security Committee.