Conference Report On H.R. 4954, Safe Port Act
CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 4954, SAFE PORT ACT -- (House of Representatives - September 29, 2006)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, once again we are here on the floor debating another security bill that will not fully secure America. This bill does a lot to strengthen port security, but it leaves a number of glaring gaps.
I want to thank Ms. Sanchez and Ms. Harman. They are the chief architects of the best ideas in this bill. They have been true champions on port security since the early days of this committee. I want to thank Mr. Lungren and Mr. King for working with us on this bill on a bipartisan basis, although I was very disappointed that this process broke down in the last few days.
Additionally, Homeland Security staff on both sides of the aisle made sure the process was an inclusive one. We heard positive insight from industry, first responders, port security experts. I appreciate all of them for their help.
But despite all our efforts, at the end of the day this measure falls short. Once again House Republicans have turned their back on everyday working folks who rely on buses and trains to get to work. When offered an opportunity by the Senate to secure our mass transit and rail security, they chose to do nothing.
Quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, this port bill has become just another act in the play the House Republicans have billed as ``homeland security'' month. They could have offered America a star performance, and instead, Mr. Speaker, they delivered mediocrity.
Let me serve as a narrator of this story for a few moments:
Act one, protecting ponies. The week before the fifth anniversary of 9/11, the House leadership was more concerned about protecting horses than protecting our ports.
Act two, border security. Thinking good fences make good neighbors, they squandered the little time we had left in this session to revote a fence bill. As the Senate passes the fence bill tonight, Americans should feel safe in their homes. America will have a 700-mile fence across the U.S.-Mexico border.
Well, Mr. Speaker, not really. The appropriations bill we passed today paid for barely half of that fence. I am sure terrorists and others crossing the border are quivering in their boots at this half-baked half fence.
Let us move to act three, FEMA. The Committee on Homeland Security tried to fix FEMA and give first responders the interoperability they needed. Instead of fully funding the reorganization, Republicans chose to do ``FEMA on the cheap,'' leaving our police, firefighters, and EMTs without the ability to talk to one another.
And here we are at this late hour beginning act four, the closing act in this political comedy, port security. H.R. 4954, as passed by the House, was a good bill overall. The Senate improved upon the bill by, among other things, addressing rail and mass transit security. Unfortunately, this sham conference process denied consideration of the Senate ideas as well as Democratic amendments to better protect our Nation. And that, after this body overwhelmingly approved my motion to instruct the conferees to accept the Senate position on rail and mass transit security, the conference Chair denied the will of this body. Why do not the Republicans want to eliminate this critical vulnerability now? We have the time. So why not now?
The American people would much rather see this body work through the night to get homeland security right than go home to run for reelections. Instead of calling this month Homeland Security Month, we should rename it Amateur Hour Month, because that is all we have seen from this Congress.
While I have enormous issues with the process and the scope of this bill, Mr. Speaker, I still intend to vote for it. I make this pledge. In the next Congress, we will absolutely be back here to finish the job and get homeland security right.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Lungren for the accurate recap of the early parts of the act. But like most early parts of the act, people forget how it ends; and what I am saying to you is, while bipartisanship might be good, the process is incomplete.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman), one of original authors of the bill.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind my chairman that the motion to instruct said to include rail and mass transit to the conferees. That is in response to your response to the gentlewoman from Las Vegas. We more or less said ``do it'' from the House perspective, and it wasn't done.
Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, I was just trying to answer the gentlewoman's question. She thought I was giving her a break.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov/