DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2007
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment to ensure the rapid deployment of the ``next generation'' Radiation Portal Monitors at our Nation's ports. This bill prohibits the agency from spending funds on this critical port security program. My amendment would strike that prohibition.
Earlier this month the House passed the SAFE Port Act to enhance security at United States ports. During consideration of that bill, I tried to offer an amendment to require that every single container be scanned for radiation and density before it is loaded onto a ship bound for the United States. The Republican leadership opposed that effort. One of the main claims made by my friends on the other side of the aisle was that the technology did not exist to adequately scan containers and that current radiation portal monitors create too many false alarms.
Imagine my surprise to discover that the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office at the Department of Homeland Security has, in fact, already developed the ``next generation'' Radiation Portal Monitors. These new Advanced Spectroscopic Portal, ASP, monitors use sodium-iodide crystals to detect the unique signature of materials inside a container. They give us more accurate information about what is in the box. They can tell us exactly what is causing the radiation alarm to go off, whether it is a false alarm or not. Port security officials can know if radiation is coming from kitty litter or from construction material or from a real threat, and they will not have to shut down the entire port of New York or Long Beach whenever an alarm goes off.
But there is a catch. Only one company, a French company, currently produces sodium-iodide crystals. So DHS plans to spend about $20 million to encourage more companies to increase domestic production of these crystals. This makes perfects sense. DHS needs to do this to assure that full-scale production of ASP monitors can begin next year and to get them installed at our ports as quickly as possible, and we should not be beholden in any event to one foreign company for a product that is so critical to our national security.
Shockingly, however, this bill contains language prohibiting DHS from taking steps to increase the domestic production of sodium-iodide crystals until the agency can prove that ASP monitors meet certain criteria, certain extraneous criteria. This delay makes no sense.
The Republicans in particular should love these ASP monitors. They were developed by the Bush administration. They reduce false alarms. And if they are really concerned about the cost of these scanners, they should support increasing domestic production of sodium-iodide crystals so that the one French company that makes this material cannot control the cost.
We are, after all, at war with the terrorists. We have serious loopholes in our port security system, and we know that terrorists could use shipping containers to bring nuclear bombs into American cities. We must act with urgency to get better container scanning equipment in place, and we must stop creating roadblocks to scanning the containers.
Democrats have consistently supported scanning every container to make sure that terrorists do not use them to bring nuclear bombs into American cities. We have tried on several occasions to force the Bush administration and the Republicans in Congress to scan every container. The Republicans claim the technology didn't exist. That is untrue. DHS now says they have the technology. This provision that my amendment would eliminate would stop DHS from deploying the best container scanning equipment to port security officials around the country.
We must not tolerate and we must not create any delays in protecting the American people from a terrorist attack. So I urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment that would permit the spending of the money to deploy the sodium-iodide crystals and the scanning equipment so that we can get this container scanning equipment to our ports as fast as possible.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment does not require DHS to deploy this equipment. If it is not better, I wonder why we spend half a billion dollars developing it. This lets the DHS make the decision. If they decide this equipment is better, they can deploy it. If they decide it is not better, they do not have to.
All this says is that we are not going to put language in the bill that will prevent DHS from using its own judgment to deploy it until they can demonstrate that it would significantly speed commerce and do various other things. If this will significantly improve the protection of our people, we ought to deploy it, but my amendment would leave that decision to the Bush administration.
Do they not trust the Bush administration to make the best decision on this? Why should we tie their hands? That is what this amendment says.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov