Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2004

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2004

Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I thank the Democratic assistant leader for his assistance in this matter.

Madam President, I rise today to express my strong support for the Homeland Security Appropriations Act, which will help us to better protect communities across America.

I congratulate Senator Byrd and Senator Cochran for putting together a bill that fairly balances the many responsibilities of the Department of Homeland Security. I also thank Senator Stevens for his leadership in bringing this legislation to the
Senate floor.

This legislation, I believe, will give Secretary Ridge, State and local officials, and first responders the tools they need to build a more effective homeland security structure.

Protecting this vast and diverse Nation is an enormous task, but our people—from Washington, DC, to the small border communities in northern Maine—have the skills, ingenuity, and the spirit to get the job done.

On March 1 of this year, the foundation for this new structure was laid as 22 separate Federal agencies and Departments
were merged into the new Department of Homeland Security.

Creating a new Department is, however, just a start. Each State has its own security challenges, and every community has its own needs. My home State of Maine must protect a long and remote stretch of our northern border. Our enormous coastline is lined with small harbors, three deep-water cargo ports—one of which is the largest tonnage port in all of New England—and two ports that regularly welcome passengers from around the world. We have two international airports in Maine, one of which played a most unwelcome role in the events of September 11.

This legislation will provide more than $29 billion in fiscal year 2004 to fund the Federal Government security efforts and to help each of our States meet its particular needs. It includes $8.2 billion to protect our Nation's borders, including funding for an additional 600 border agents and the development of innovative new security technologies.

I am pleased that under the leadership of Senator Cochran the Appropriations Committee has provided more than $60 million for the Container Security Initiative. I know from a hearing held by the Governmental Affairs Committee, which I chair, that this partnership between the Department of Homeland Security and our shipping industry to target high-risk containers will help to better protect our ports from terrorist attacks.

The legislation also provides more than $5 billion for the Transportation Security Administration, including $1.8 billion for passenger screening and $150 million for port security grants. These grants provide important security upgrades to help protect an industry that is absolutely vital for our economic prosperity.

I am pleased that Chairman Cochran and Ranking Member Byrd have agreed to many of the suggestions I have forwarded to them for upgrading our Nation's Coast Guard. This legislation provides $6.8 billion for Coast Guard operations, including $702 million for the Integrated Deepwater Systems Program, which is vital to helping the Coast Guard carry out its traditional missions even as it meets its new and enhanced responsibilities for homeland security.

This legislation also maintains our commitment to America's first responders—our police officers, our firefighters, our emergency medical personnel—who are on the front lines of the war against terrorism.

As chairman of the Governmental Affairs Committee, I have made helping first responders a top priority. The needs of our first responders are as varied as the communities they protect. If there is a local emergency, citizens do not call Washington, they call 911. It is our first responders who are truly on the front lines in protecting our communities and in responding to any sort of terrorist attack.

The $3.6 billion for the Office for Domestic Preparedness, including $1.75 billion for State and local homeland security grants and $750 million for fire grants, is vital to the success of our first responders. These programs will provide them with better communications equipment, more firetrucks, and more exercises in training to do what they do best—prevent and respond to terrorist attacks and other emergencies.

But appropriating the funds, while essential, does not complete the job. We must also get these funds where they are needed quickly and efficiently. I have spoken to officials from communities around the State of Maine, to the mayor of Baltimore, and to officials throughout the Nation about the existing grant programs to assist our first responders. They are grateful for the grants, but frustrated by the bureaucracy, the time-consuming, complicated, and rigid application process, and the mountain of paperwork.

After holding several hearings on this topic in the Governmental Affairs Committee, I introduced, with a number of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, the Homeland Security Grant Enhancement Act of 2003. This legislation would provide a steady ongoing stream of funding to each and every State. It will simplify the grant process. It will promote flexibility in the use of homeland security funds so they can be targeted to the greatest need. I urge the Senate to pass this legislation which has been reported unanimously by the committee. This will help us streamline and strengthen the way we provide assistance to those on the front lines.

Finally, I add my strong support for the $3.6 billion included in this legislation for the Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, including $2 billion for disaster relief and $153 million for the Emergency Food and Shelter Program.

As with any appropriations bill, one can argue about funding levels or that a certain program deserves more money than another. That is also true with this legislation. For example, I would like to have seen more funding for first responders and port security. But given the constraints on the Federal budget, I believe the managers of this bill, the chairman and ranking member, have done an extraordinary job. This legislation spends homeland security dollars in an effective, efficient manner.
By providing more training and equipment to our first responders, more equipment and funding to secure our ports, and additional resources to protect our borders, this legislation gets the maximum benefit out of the Federal budget, out of the Federal resources available with the constraints under which we are operating.

Again, I congratulate the chairman, Senator Cochran, and the ranking member for putting together an excellent piece of legislation that fairly addresses the diverse needs of our States and communities. I urge quick passage of the legislation so that the Department of Homeland Security and those throughout our homeland can continue to work together more effectively on the crucial tasks that lie ahead as we seek to better secure our Nation.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise to comment on the sense-of-the-Senate amendment offered by the distinguished
Senator from New York today. The Senator's amendment is on a subject of great importance to each and every Senator, and that is how best to divide up the homeland security funds to ensure we get the most from the resources we are investing. It is a subject that falls within the jurisdiction of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, which I am privileged to chair.

The committee held three hearings on this topic. We have heard from firefighters, police officers, mayors, Governors, State emergency management directors, county officials, and from Secretary Ridge. As a result of these hearings, I developed bipartisan legislation, which the committee has unanimously approved. That legislation is cosponsored by Senators CARPER, ROCKEFELLER, VOINOVICH, FEINGOLD, SUNUNU, COLEMAN, PRYOR, ALLARD, AKAKA, HAGEL, BURNS, CHAFEE, ROBERTS, DORGAN, CHAMBLISS, and BEN NELSON. In other words, it has widespread support.

Dealing with formula issues is very difficult. They are not easy. They affect us all and we want to make sure we get it right.

The legislation we reported last month addresses the very issues the Senator from New York has brought up and is seeking to address on the appropriations bill. There is much I agree with in the amendment of the Senator from New York. I don't agree with her treatment of small States, because although she keeps the small-State minimum, as I read the language, she would treat the current .75 allocation as a ceiling. That is not the way it would be done under the legislation I have authored, nor is that the way that small States are handled under current law.

But there is much I agree with in the Senator's approach. We need to identify high-threat areas and we need to do vulnerability assessments. That means looking at military installations, ports, and looking at whether the State is a border State. There are many issues that need to be considered.

Our legislation carefully crafts a formula and fills out the outlines of the homeland security grants, which were treated only in a single paragraph in the original legislation creating the Department of Homeland Security. We have made sure the money is passed on quickly, for example, from States to local governments and to the first responders. We have simplified the application process from 12 steps to 2. We have done away with a mountain of the paperwork and bureaucracy that has frustrated our State and local governments. And, yes, we call for an allocation right off the top for high-threat areas and for vulnerability assessments.

Any modifications to the formulas for homeland security grants should be considered in a comprehensive, careful manner, as the committee has done. If the committee had not acted on this important issue, I would be more sympathetic to the arguments made by the Senator from New York. But, in fact, the committee has acted. We have held several hearings. We have reported legislation, which is pending for consideration by the full Senate.

If we attempt to change the formula on an ad hoc basis, we may end up with unintended consequences and a State may end up with insufficient homeland security resources. We obviously are very stressed because of budget constraints. We need to make sure the formula is carefully done. I believe the appropriations bill is not the right vehicle to pass important authorizing legislation affecting the allocation of funds. For this reason, I have not sought to attach my own bill to the appropriations vehicle, nor pieces of it, tempted though I am. Nor do I think the well-intentioned amendment of the Senator from New York, which calls for a change in the funding formula, which is directly in the jurisdiction of my committee, should be adopted on this appropriations bill.

I want to make an offer to the Senator from New York to work closely with her. New York obviously has challenges that are enormous when it comes to homeland security. I am very sympathetic to what a high-risk, high-vulnerability State the Senator so ably represents. So I want to work with her further on this as we bring our legislation to the floor. But I am reluctantly going to oppose the sense-of-the-Senate amendment of the Senator from New York because, frankly, it doesn't belong on this bill, particularly when the committee of jurisdiction has acted to bring forth carefully crafted, bipartisan legislation to deal with this very issue.