Don Young

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, no, we know we are on the right side and we are not doing some of the other things that are being done. The gentleman knows what I am talking about. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I sometimes wonder what it is on that side of the aisle that everybody has to yell. That disturbs me. Is there a microphone breakdown somewhere?

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. No, I will not yield. Mr. Speaker, I cannot understand it because I can hear them perfectly well, and I think they can hear me. Maybe sometimes when there is a lot of noise, maybe there is, what I call a cumulation of facts. Our bill says nothing, nothing about keeping the same contractors. Our bill sets high standards. Our bill requires new standards. Our bill requires federalization. I just do not quite understand why people will not accept that fact. If one truly has read the bill that was proposed last year and some would suggest we accept; and one truly believes that will give you security, then God bless you. If one looks at what the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) and I have been able to do, and the work product we put together, that will give us good security. I even got my voice a little high this time. It must be the microphones. That is all I can suggest. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the House insist on its amendment to the Senate bill, S. 1447, and request a conference with the Senate thereon.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I appreciate the words of the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) and his role and his dedication to security. I too want to move this legislation as quickly as possible. I do compliment him on the motion to instruct, because we all want to get this job done. Unfortunately, I cannot control everything that happens in this House, although I would like to. I will tell my colleagues that up front. I cannot control what the other body does. But I intend myself, personally, to see if we cannot expedite this process, and that means going to conference and working with the Senate conferees, with them hopefully having an open mind to the proposal which passed this House overwhelmingly last week. I am confident that that can occur. I hope it will occur very rapidly. It is our intent to draft the perfect legislation for the security of the traveling public in the United States. Again, we are doing what we can do in this House. I cannot speak for the other body, but we will do our job. With the working relationship I believe we have, we will be able to accomplish that. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the Senate bill (S. 1447) to improve aviation security, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. In somewhat of a response, let us keep in mind that, unfortunately, we keep talking about the past. We all admit, including Secretary Mineta, President Bush, and myself, the chairman of the subcommittee, that the existing system does not work. What we are trying to do is pass the best system that will work. I said it last week and I will say it this week: if I thought for one moment that the so-called bill from the other body, I am not going to say whatever it was, if I thought it would do a better job than what we have been able to put together, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) and myself, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica), then I would have been supporting the other bill. It is that simple. I hope we keep this on a level playing field tonight. In fact, what we are trying to do, and why I support the motion, is we are trying to expedite the process and send a message to the Senate to get off what they had, because in my heart, it will never happen on my watch, 100 percent their bill, because it does not do the job. I want good security. We have a good product. We will go to conference. If they can improve it for better security, then I will support it. But I am not in this business just to make the talk shows on Sunday. A lot of that has been going on. I think that is not good for either body. Let us get the security that is necessary for the traveling public. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. May I inquire of the gentleman if he has any other speakers, other than himself? I know he has the right to close.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have left?

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay).

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to suggest that we go to conference. We should be talking about this motion. It is a good motion. It will expedite the process. I would also like to suggest that the product we put together covers more than just airport security. The other body's bill is just airport security. We have ports, we have railroads, we have bridges, and we have pipelines. We have all forms of transportation that we have to make sure are secure. I believe very strongly that the product that we voted on last week, 269 votes in favor of, does that job. Our job is to go to conference and see whether we can meld with what the other body wishes to do together into a comprehensive bill. I urge my colleagues to consider that. This is about working together and being able to compromise and understanding that we are all seeking the same thing, and that is a secure way of all forms of travel in the United States. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, how many minutes do I have left?

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan). (Mr. DUNCAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I have a long prepared statement which I will submit for the Record, but I would ask my colleagues today to think about this legislation very strongly. I have talked privately with the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski), and they say that the bill that they are proposing does not do the job. That tells me one thing: the bill that they are promoting does not do the job, and this bill does. We worked very closely to get a bill and came very nearly to having a bill. Some people did not see it that way. But my main goal was to have the best security bill for our people. I believe my bill does that. It is not perfect, but I can tell my colleagues the Senate bill is nowhere as near as my bill. If my colleagues vote for the substitute, which some of my colleagues are planning on doing, they are not going to have a conference. That has already been decided. It will be on the President's desk, and the American people will be told by certain people that they will be secure in their airports, but we will have the exact same system that is in place right now, which has failed miserably. All of my colleagues know that. This has become a political football, and I stayed out of that, because I want the best security for the people of America. I want to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica), who has done an outstanding job, and the staff has done a good job on this issue and, yes, the President of the United States. All he is asking us to do and what my bill does is give him some flexibility. My bill does not federalize, it does not nationalize, it is not a total requirement. But it is a brand new era, a time where we need good security. In all good conscience, there is no way that a substitute is going to be offered that I could even vote for that legislation, because we are kidding the American public. The Senate keeps referring to a 100 to zero vote. I have had Senate Democrats and Republicans come to me and say, my God, we have to go to conference. And I have had a few people say to me, we will have to straighten this out later on. That is not good legislation. This is the House of the people, not the Senate. To have to accept a Senate bill to me is deplorable. It is beneath us. It is the wrong thing to do. I do not believe there is a fairer person in this Congress than myself working with each individual. My heart is very deeply in the idea of security. If we do not pass this bill today of mine and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica), we are doing a great disservice to the American people, because they will go to the airport and say, oh, my God, we are now safe because we have passed a bill, and in reality there is no safety in the substitute. Mr. Chairman, it disturbs me how this thing got so far out of hand that we cannot solve the problem correctly. We must go to conference. We can solve it in conference where the problems are different, but if we do not go to conference, we have nothing and we have kidded the public. I am not about to, and I was accused today of not being a statesman because I said I probably will not review this issue again because my colleagues have made the decision if I lose that they have a safe bill and the people of America are safe. I can tell my colleagues from the bottom of my heart, my colleagues know they are not, and I will not be a part of kidding the American public about how secure they will be if we adopt the substitute. We have to accept the Young-Mica bill for the best for the people of America. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 3150, the Secure Transportation for America Act of 2001. H.R. 3150 is the result of a great deal of hard work by our aviation subcommittee and its chairman, John Mica. I want to take this opportunity to express my appreciation for his efforts and the hard work of the aviation subcommittee on this issue. Chairman Mica and the members of the aviation subcommittee held hearings and conducted extensive research to find out which system of security would work best for our aviation transportation needs. The American people have every right to be concerned and worried about the inadequate level of security provided at our airports. This bill will dramatically increase the level of security and will dramatically change the way the system has operated at our airports. Under the current system, the airlines hire the security screeners at the airports using low cost, low bid security companies. The airlines in the past have worked to reduce their costs by driving down the cost of airline security. Unfortunately, this has resulted in a low paid, poorly trained and poorly motivated workforce. I want to make it abundantly clear. This bill changes all of that. Low paid, poorly trained and poorly motivated screeners in charge of our nation's air security is simply unacceptable. Under our bill, H.R. 3150, the federal government will take over the job of screening passengers and their baggage at our airports. It will become a federal government responsibility. Where we differ with some of our colleagues is how do we best achieve the goal of a truly secure federally controlled aviation screening process. We do it by insuring that it is the federal government that will set the compensation for the screeners. It is the federal government that mandates the level of competency and training for the screeners. It is the government that runs the background checks and works with other agencies to insure that these screeners have a clean record. And if the screeners don't do their job and perform well, under our bill they can be removed, their certificates can be revoked, and the entire company can be fired and fined for any violations of the rules or regulations. Our bill gives the President the tools he needs to insure the best possible security for our country. H.R. 3150 however, does more than just improve airport screening. It establishes broad authority to deal with threats to all transportation modes, by setting up a new Transportation Security Administration within the Department of Transportation. The new administration will be headed by an undersecretary whose only job will be to protect our transportation system from terrorists threats. H.R. 3150 requires the undersecretary of the Transportation Security Administration to assume all responsibility for aviation security within 3 months of final passage of the bill. Under our bill the undersecretary could assume responsibility even earlier if the transition can be worked out with the airlines. Unlike the Senate bill and the amendment to be offered, H.R. 3150 does not tie the President's hands by requiring that airport security screeners be 100 percent federal employees. However, let me make it clear. Our bill federalizes the screening process. However, the issue is not federal versus non-federal employees conducting the screening of passengers and their bags. The real issue is how to achieve the highest level of security for the traveling public, particularly within the next few months while we are at war against the terrorists who used our air transportation system to attack us. Locking in a system that prohibits the use of any private contract workers at all leaves the air transportation system vulnerable to disruption and reduced security. There is no guarantee that federal employees will do a better job than private employees, but that is not the real issue. The real issue is giving the President the flexibility and the money to get the job done. I also want to make it clear that this issue is not about whether screeners will be unionized. They are unionized now and under my bill can continue to be members of union and to bargain collectively. However, they cannot go on strike under my bill. H.R. 3150, the Secure Transportation for America Act, addresses all these security issues to achieve a workable system that provides for real security as quickly as possible. I urge support of H.R. 3150, which is to bring real security to the traveling public in as short a period of time as possible. Section-by-Section Summary--Secure Transportation for America Act of 2001--H.R. 3150 Section 1 is the short title. section 2--transportation security administration Subsection (a) adds a new section 114 to Chapter 1 of title 49 of the U.S. Code creating the new Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Subsection (a) of this new section 114 states that the new TSA shall be an Administration in the Department of Transportation (DOT). Subsection (b) creates the new position of Under Secretary to head this new Administration. Paragraph (1) states that this Under Secretary shall be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. Paragraph (2) states that the Under Secretary must be a U.S. citizen and have had prior experience in transportation or security. Paragraph (3) gives the Under Secretary a 5-year term. Subsection (c) prohibits the Under Secretary from having an interest in a transportation or a security company or a company that makes security equipment. Subsection (d) describes the functions of the Under Secretary. Paragraph (1) states that the Under Secretary will be responsible for security in all modes of transportation. This involves the assumption of the powers now exercised by the Associate FAA Administrator of Civil Aviation Security and the DOT Director of Intelligence and Security as well as the security functions of other Administrations within DOT. It does not involve the Coast Guard. The bill does not explicitly assign the hazmat function leaving that up to DOT to decide whether to move that into the new Administration or keep it in FAA. Paragraph (2) requires a schedule to be developed for the transfer of the security functions in consultation with the affected carriers. Paragraph (3), in the meantime, allows airlines to assign their contracts with private security companies to the Under Secretary. Subsection (e) lists in more detail the duties and powers of the Under Secretary. These duties and powers are-- (1) Receiving, assessing, and distributing intelligence information to the appropriate people in the transportation community. (2) Assessing threats to transportation. (3) Developing policies to deal with these threats. (4) Coordinating with other agencies. (5) Serve as the liaison with the intelligence community. (6) Supervising airport security using Federal uniformed personnel. (7) Manage the Federal security personnel in the field. (8) Enforce security regulations. (9) Undertake research to improve security. (10) Inspect, maintain, and test security equipment. (11) Ensure that adequate security is provided for the transportation of cargo, including cargo as defined in section 40102(a)(12). (12) Oversee the security at airports and other transportation facilities. (13) Perform background checks on screeners and those who work at airports. (14) Develop standards for the hiring and firing of screeners. (15) Train and test screeners. (16) Carry out other duties and powers authorized by law. Subsection (f) gives the Under Secretary the same powers to acquire and maintain property as the FAA. Subsection (g) allows the Under Secretary to accept transfers of funds. Subsection (h) allows the Under Secretary, if the situation warrants, to issue a security rule on an expedited basis without Secretarial or OMB review and without notice and comment as would otherwise be required by the Administrative Procedure Act. Such a rule would be in effect for 30 days and would remain in effect unless disapproved by the Oversight Board established in section 13. Subsection (i) gives the Under Secretary the same authority over personnel and services as the FAA. This includes the authority to contract for services such as the screening service. Subsection (j) allows the new Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to set up its own personnel system. Subsection (k) allows the new TSA to set up its own procurement system. Subsection (l) makes clear that the DOT Inspector General can investigate the TSA in the same way that he can investigate other Administrations within DOT. Subsection (c) establishes the compensation for the Under Secretary. Subsection (d) allows other agencies to provide personnel, such as sky marshals, to the FAA and the TSA. Subsection (e) transfers responsibility for security research from the FAA to the TSA. Subsection (f) changes statutory references from the FAA and the Administrator to the TSA and the Under Secretary to reflect the transfer of functions. Section 3--Screening of passengers and property This section requires the Federal government to take over responsibility for the screening of passengers and property (both checked and carry-on baggage) on passenger aircraft in the United States. The Federal government could do this either by hiring Federal employees to do the screening or by contracting with a security company to perform this task with Federal oversight. All screening must be supervised by uniformed Federal employees of the TSA. A supervisor can order the dismissal of a screener who is not performing adequately. Screeners are prohibited from striking. Section 4--Security programs This section requires that there be a law enforcement or military presence at each screening checkpoint, not merely at each airport. The law enforcement presence could be either Federal, State, or local officials. Section 5--Employement standards and training Strengthens the employment and training standards for those who screen passengers and property. Subsection (a) requires that screeners be U.S. citizens. It permits the Under Secretary to establish minimum pay levels. Veterans should be given preference in the hiring of screeners. The veterans preference was a suggestion of Congressman Duncan. Subsection (b) requires the final rule of the certification of screening companies to be issued within 6 months of the date of enactment of this Act. Subsection (c) establishes the training standards for screeners and requires all screeners to be in uniform. Subsection (d) establishes the minimum employment standards for screeners (which were taken largely from the FAA's proposed rule at 65 FR 560, January 5, 2000). These shall remain in effect until the final rule for the certification of screening companies is issued as required by subsection (b). section 6--deployment of federal air marshals Requires the deployment, at no cost to the government, of sky marshals on flights of U.S. airlines. This section is based on H.R. 2906 introduced by Congressman Baker. section 7--enhanced security measures Subsection (a) requires the Under Secretary to address the following issues: (1) Develop procedures (such as barrel roles or depressurizing the aircraft) and authorize equipment (such as lethal or non-lethal weapons) to help the pilot defend the aircraft against hijackers; (2) After consultation with the FAA, find ways to-- (A) limit access to the cockpit; (B) strengthen cockpit doors; (C) use video cameras to alert pilots to problems in the passenger cabin without having to open the cockpit door; (D) ensure that the aircraft transponder cannot be turned off in flight. (3) Impose standards for the screening or inspection of vehicles and employees of aircraft fuelers, caterers, cleaners, and others who have access to aircraft and secure areas of airports; (4) Require airlines to provide emergency call capability from aircraft and trains (This was suggested by Congressman Kirk); (5) Use various technologies, such as voice stress analysis, to prevent a dangerous person from boarding a plane; (6) Develop certification standards for individual screeners; (7) Use Threat Image Projection (TIP) or similar devices to test whether screeners are meeting those standards; (8) Develop ways for airlines to have access to law enforcement and immigration data bases to ensure that dangerous people do not board their planes; (9) Use the profiling system known as CAPS to not only give special scrutiny to selected checked baggage but also to the passengers who fit the profile and their carry-on baggage; (10) Use technology to ensure that airport and airline employees and law enforcement officers are who they claim to be; (11) Install switches in the passenger cabin so that flight attendants can discreetly notify a pilot if there is a problem; (12) Change the training of airline personnel in light of the change in the methods and goals of hijackers as evidenced by the attack of September 11th; (13) Provide for background checks for those seeking flying lessons on large aircraft or flight simulators of such aircraft. (14) Enter into agreements allowing trained law enforcement personnel of other agencies to travel with guns in order to assist a sky marshal. (This was suggested by Congressman Cooksey). (15) Perform more thorough background checks of airport screeners, student pilots, and others who have unescorted access to secure areas of the airport. This should include more than merely a fingerprint check. It should also include examination of other agency databases to determine whether the individual may be a terrorist or a threat to civil aviation. Subsection (b) prohibits the Under Secretary from taking one of the actions listed above if the FAA believes it might adversely affect the safety of the aircraft unless the Secretary approves the action. Subsection (c) requires the Under Secretary to consult with the NTSB on safety issues. Subsection (d) requires the Under Secretary to do bag matching, screen 100% of checked bags, or take some other action to minimize the risk of explosives in checked luggage. Paragraph (2) requires the Under Secretary to ensure that explosive detection equipment already at airports is fully utilized. Subseciton (e) requires the Secretary to permit pilots to carry guns in the cockpit if the airline permits its pilots to carry guns and the pilot has completed an appropriate training program. Subscetion (f) requires the Under Secretary to report 6 months after the date of enactment on the progress being made in implementing the above items. A similar report would have to be submitted each year thereafter until all the items had either been implemented or rejected. An existing security report is repealed. section 8--criminal history record check for screeners and others Authorizes airports to begin fingerprint checks before the deadline now in the law. section 9--passenger and baggage screening fee Requires the imposition of a security fee on passengers to pay up to 100 percent of the cost of the screening passengers. These costs include the salaries and training costs of screeners and the cost of the equipment they use. The fee could not be used to defray the general operating costs of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). The per passenger fee must be based on the cost of providing the screening service but could not be more than $2.50 per passenger. The fee that is set would be based on the total costs of screening passengers and property, not on the specific costs associated with each airport, and therefore the fee would be the same for every passenger. The fee would be assessed on a one-way flight rather than on an enplanement as the one-way trip most closely related to the way screening services are provided to passengers. Full year revenue for fiscal year 2002 is estimated to amount to about $900 million for domestic departures and about $100 million for international departures. Future year revenue could be higher when air travel reverts to the levels prior to September 11, 2001. Any additional money required to pay the costs of screening not covered by the passenger fee may be raised by a fee assessed directly on the airlines or could be appropriated under the authority provided by section 10(a). Passengers using airports in Alaska where screening is not required could be exempted from the fee. It is Congress' intent that the Undersecretary be able to impose this fee as expeditiously as possible to begin to recover the costs of the functions assumed by the Federal government. To ensure that the Undersecretary is able to begin collecting the fee within 60 days, the Undersecretary is exempted from section 9701 of title 31, United States Code, related to general requirements related to fees and from section 553 of title 5, United States Code, related to rulemaking. The Undersecretary is authorized to publish a notice in the Federal Register to set and impose the fee. The calculation of costs of the functions and the fees to be imposed is left to be determined at the discretion of the Undersecretary. section 10--authorizations of appropriations Subsection (a) authorizes appropriations to operate the new TSA and to pay for any screening costs not covered by the fee. Subsection (b) authorizes the Secretary to utilize $500 million of the emergency supplemental (Public Law 107-38) to make grants to U.S. airlines to help them strengthen their cockpit doors, install video monitors, or modify their aircraft transponders so that they cannot be turned off in flight. Subsection (c) authorizes $1.5 billion to help airports defray the cost of new security requirements imposed after September 11, 2001. section 11--limitation on liability for acts to thwart criminal violence or aircraft piracy Protects passengers and crew from liability for any injury they cause a person who they, in good faith, believe is hijacking or about to hijack an aircraft. section 12--passenger manifests Requires U.S. and foreign airlines to provide information to the U.S. government about their passengers and crew on international flights before they land in the U.S. section 13--transportation security oversight board Creates the new Transportation Security Oversight Board. It will be composed of the Secretaries of Transportation, Treasury, and Defense (or their designees), the Attorney General (or his designee), and a person appointed by the President from either the National Security Council or the new Office of Homeland Security. The DOT Secretary or his designee will be the Chairman. The Board's duties include reviewing the Under Secretary's emergency regulations and other actions of the TSA. This section also creates an advisory council composed of industry representatives to advise the Under Secretary on transportation security issues. section 14--airport improvement program Section 12 makes changes to the airport improvement program (AIP) and the passenger facility charge (PFC) related to security. Subsection (a) excuses an airport from having to submit a competition plan in fiscal year 2002 for AIP grants or PFC approvals that will be used to improve security. Subsection (b) allows AIP or PFC money to be used at small airports to pay the cost of law enforcement personnel required by section 4. It also allows AIP money to be used to pay for any expense in fiscal year 2002 at a general aviation airport that was effectively shut down as a result of the restrictions on VFR flight in enhanced Class B airspace. It also allows AIP and PFC money to be used for debt service in order to prevent the airport from defaulting on a bond. Subsection (c) allows AIP money to be used for the costs described in subsection (b) even if that cost was incurred before the grant was issued. Subsection (d) waives the local share for the costs described in subsection (b). section 15--technical correction Subsection (a) changes the due date of a report from February 1 of this year to February 1 of next year. Subsection (b) makes a change in the war risk improvement program. Subsection (c) corrects a misspelled word. section 16--alcohol and controlled substance testing Transfers responsibility for drug and alcohol testing of security personnel from the FAA to the new Transportation Security Administration. Section 17--conforming amendments to subtitle vii This section makes technical changes. Subsection (a) retains responsibility for the Pilot Records Improvements Act in the FAA. Subsection (b) moves certain civil penalty responsibilities to the new Administration. Subsection (c) and (d) make similar administrative changes. Section 18--Savings provision This section ensures that there is a seamless transition of responsibilities from the FAA to the new Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Section 19--Budget Submissions Requires budget submissions to list the budget of the TSA separately. Section 20--Aircraft operations in Enhanced Class B airspace Lists the restrictions on general aviation flights in Enhanced Class B airspace (the airspace near major cities) unless a notice is published in the Federal Register explaining the rationale for those restrictions. Section 21--waivers for certain isolated communities Subsection (a) allows the Under Secretary to grant waivers for certain essential flights to communities in Alaska, Hawaii, and others far from a big city. Subsection (b) allows the Transportation Security Oversight Board to rescind these waivers. Subsection (c) allows the Board to impose limitations on the waivers. Section 22--Assessments of Threats to Airports This section allows airports to rescind the current restriction that prohibits cars from parking within 300 feet of an airport terminal if the airport and local law enforcement certify that there are safeguards in place to sufficiently protect public safety.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, there are no provisions in this bill that prevent the FAA from taking up the idea of separate entrances for pilots in airliners. That idea could be a solution to some of our air security problems, and deserves serious consideration and study at the FAA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster), newly elected, and I hope he will be reelected.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Ballenger). (Mr. Ballenger asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, this is especially for a point of clarification. The gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) was asked a question about section 108, and the implication was that only passengers and bags would be screened. Section 108 in the gentleman's substitute requires screening of all cargo and also the mail. Also in section 131 on page 75, that section requires private plane owners to screen their passengers and bags if the plane is more than 12,500 pounds. So I just want to make it perfectly clear for the record that the answer the gentleman from Minnesota gave to the gentleman who asked it was incorrect.