Providing for Consideration of H.R. 4954, Security and Accountability for Every Port Act

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4954, SECURITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR EVERY PORT ACT -- (House of Representatives - May 03, 2006)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for allowing me to speak against this rule.

Mr. Speaker, I do not support this rule as it flies in the face of bipartisanship shown by the Homeland Security Committee. It is inexcusable to not allow an up or down vote on many of the amendments that appeared before the Rules Committee, including my amendment increasing the number of Customs inspectors assigned at seaports, the Nadler-Markey amendment advocating 100 percent phase-in screening of cargo, and the Langevin amendment on radiation portal monitoring.

Silencing debate on port security and not allowing Republican and Democrats of this House to consider those amendments on the floor keep all of us from doing our jobs constituents put us here to do.

If those who refuse to allow these amendments to be considered by the House did so because they were afraid that they were not going to pass, then I ask them to think about this: maybe these amendments would have passed because they are sound policy and the types of things that we need to do, serve and protect the American people.

If they were refused because the majority did not want to take hard votes that their constituents might disagree with, I implore those who make these decisions to put America's safety first before politics. We must remember that homeland security is not a Democratic or Republican issue, it is an American issue; and those in this House must treat it as so.

If our ports are attacked, if a cargo container is blown up, those affected will be all stripes, colors and political affiliations. It is about time this House started legislating as such.

Mr. Speaker, let us look at the amendments the Rules majority refused to give an up or down vote on.

First, my amendment authorized $67 million for 400 Customs and Border Patrol inspectors to be assigned at seaports over the next 4 years. With all of the talk of how we need to shore up our ports here and abroad, why not put our money where our mouth is and get enough people to do the job? One of the major deficiencies of our port security is that we do not have enough inspectors at U.S. and foreign seaports.

Second, the rule rejects Mr. Langevin's amendment which increases radiation portal monitors, increases funding by $117 million. What is the majority afraid of? That the American people may discover that this country spends 57 times the amount of money on a missile defense system that does not work?

Finally, this rule does not include the amendment offered by Representatives NADLER, MARKEY and OBERSTAR, requiring 100 percent container scanning phased in over 5 years. Currently, only about 5 percent of that cargo is screened; 95 percent is not. This amendment would have fixed that.

Let's stop playing politics with America's security. Let's have an open exchange of ideas. It is about time that we stopped hiding behind rules that leave America less secure.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov