Improving America's Security Act of 2007
IMPROVING AMERICA'S SECURITY ACT OF 2007 -- (Senate - March 01, 2007)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I rise today to speak on an amendment offered by myself and my colleague from New Jersey to deal with 100 percent scanning of containers that enter our ports.
First, I wish to salute my colleague from New Jersey. He has been a stalwart leader on this issue while in the House and now in the Senate. It has been a pleasure to work with him side by side on something people on both sides of the Hudson River care so dearly about.
I rise today to call upon my colleagues to take action against one of the greatest risks that confront the United States. It is one of the very greatest, if not the greatest risk, and that is a nuclear weapon reaching our shores in a shipping container.
More than 11 million cargo containers come into our country's ports each year, but only 5 percent of these containers are thoroughly inspected by Customs agents. That means right now if, God forbid, a nuclear weapon were put in one of these containers, it could have a 1-in-20 chance of being detected. No American, certainly no New Yorker, likes those odds.
It means a terrorist could almost use any cargo container as a ``Trojan horse' to hide a nuclear weapon or radiological material and bring it to the United States. We know terrorists have tried to purchase nuclear weapons and radiological materials on the black market. We also know the United States is a top target.
Let me be clear: a nuclear weapon does not have to enter the United States or leave our ports to cause death and destruction. Our major ports are also our major cities because so many of our cities, similar to New York, were founded and thrive on maritime trading. A terrorist group could simply detonate a nuclear weapon at the port terminal for the ship docks or even as the ship approaches the harbor. The devastation of a terrorist nuclear attack is literally unimaginable. A nuclear explosion in one of our major ports or one of our major inland cities--if such a weapon were smuggled into one of our ports and driven by truck to it, an Omaha or a Chicago or a Saint Louis--would cause enormous loss of life, both immediately and over time. It would inflict huge economic and physical damage, would render parts of the attacked cities unusable and unapproachable for decades, and would dramatically change life in this country forever.
We are also at risk of an attack with a ``dirty bomb' that combines conventional explosives with radiological material. The consequences, while not as severe as a nuclear weapon, would also be horrific.
A nuclear or radiological attack by terrorists in our ports is a scenario that keeps me up at night. I worry about my children, my family, my friends, and then 19 million New Yorkers, and 30 million Americans. But the people running things at the Department of Homeland Security do not seem to be losing a wink of sleep over this. DHS gives us the usual delay and nay-saying that we have seen so often.
I have been talking about this issue for 5 years in this Congress. I have offered amendment after amendment, and every time people come back and say: Forbear. We will get it done. Well, it is now 2007. It is 5 1/2 years after 9/11, and we are not close to doing what we should be doing--not even close.
I am tired of all the excuses and delay and, frankly, lack of focus--proportionate focus. I am tired of the lack of proportionate focus the Department of Homeland Security gives to this issue. If we all agree this is one of the greatest tragedies that could befall us, then how in God's Name do we pay so little attention, put in so few resources to getting this done?
Congress--this new Congress--owes it to the country and to our children and to our families to do better. This amendment will do much better.
The Schumer-Menendez amendment contains the same firm deadlines the House passed in January for DHS to require all containers coming into the United States from foreign ports to be scanned for nuclear and radiological weapons and then sealed with a tamperproof lock.
Within 3 years, 100 percent of containers coming from the largest foreign ports would be scanned and sealed before arriving in the United States.
Within 5 years, 100 percent of all containers from all ports worldwide would be scanned and sealed.
Imagine, on that date, only 5 years from now, Americans could breathe a huge sigh of relief knowing we are safe from the nightmare I described earlier.
Now, I know what the critics say. The critics say 100 percent scanning cannot be done. But the truth is, technology for scanning does exist, and it can be expected to improve steadily, as technology usually does. The
experts are divided. There are some who say it cannot be done, some who say it can be done. I know the shipping industry would rather we not do this, that we slow-walk it. I understand their interest. But our interest is much greater.
We already have advanced scanning equipment that can check for radiation as a moving cargo container passes through a port. That is without dispute. As a part of the same process, we have equipment that can create a detailed image showing the density of the contents of the container, in order to see radioactive material that might be shielded.
In fact, this scanning equipment is already being set up at foreign ports and brought online through DHS's Secure Freight Initiative, which is a pilot project required under last year's SAFE Port Act.
Now, the Secure Freight Initiative is a good start, but it is only a small start. It will only scan between 5 and 10 percent of our incoming cargo for nuclear weapons. We cannot, we must not, and do not have to accept 5 percent security.
The only real barrier to 100 percent scanning is lack of will--lack of will in the administration, which we have seen for 5 1/2 years; lack of will in DHS, which we have seen from its inception; and, frankly, lack of will in this Congress. If we show we are serious about 100 percent scanning, then we will see an end to the administration's and DHS's foot-dragging and a beginning of real security.
Adapting to 100 percent scanning may have some small effect on commerce. It is true, it will affect commerce. But that is far outweighed by the complete shutdown of trade that a successful attack would cause. A nuclear attack in the shipping chain would grind commerce to a halt.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that my colleague from New York, Senator Clinton, be added as a cosponsor of the amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov/