Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Act Of 2009

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

The text of the amendment is as follows:

Amendment No. 8 offered by Mr. McCaul:

Page 76, beginning on line 11, strike the proposed section 2116 and redesignate the proposed sections 2117 through 2120 as sections 2116 through 2119, respectively.

Page 88, in the proposed amendment to the table of contents of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, strike the item relating to section 2116 and redesignate the items relating to sections 2117 through 2120 as items relating to sections 2116 through 2119, respectively.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 885, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. McCAUL. I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment would strike the provision authorizing the Secretary of Homeland Security to be subjected to civil suits by uninjured third parties. If complaints have been made against the Secretary for failing to enforce the law, the inspector general of DHS can already initiate an investigation. If that is insufficient, then Congress can act.

Allowing any third party--anybody--to sue the Secretary is both reckless and unnecessary. This provision would be a boon to trial lawyers and to environmentalists at the expense of the Department of Homeland Security and national security interests. Citizen suits have no place in a national security context, and this would be the very first time that Congress would be authorizing such suits in the homeland security arena.

Environmentalists file hundreds of citizen suits annually, and they consume substantial governmental resources and taxpayer funds. Some agencies expend almost their entire annual budgets simply responding to these lawsuits. For instance, in May of 2008, The Washington Post noted that the Fish and Wildlife Service had been caught in a legal vise that has forced it to spend most of its time responding to lawsuits and following judges' orders while its mission has slowed to a near halt. We cannot afford the same consequence with the Department of Homeland Security. In the meantime, the mission of the agency falls by the wayside.

This bill currently allows a citizen suit by any person. There is no requirement that the person be harmed or that the person be a local resident or even a United States citizen. The Congress has always treated national security as an inherently governmental matter and one in which sensitive security-related information has been rigorously protected. This marks the first time that citizen suits may result in the disclosure of very sensitive chemical facility vulnerability information.

The Department of Homeland Security also opposes the civil suit provisions. Deputy Under Secretary Philip Reitinger, who I had the pleasure to work with at the Department of Justice, testified that it is true that any civil suit provision at least raises a specter of some diversion of resources. As a former longtime litigator in the DOJ, he also testified that, inevitably, there is some risk of disclosure of information, and this information is very sensitive. That means sensitive security information could easily get into the wrong hands. I think yesterday is a reminder that we need to stay vigilant.

Committee staff spoke just this Tuesday with DHS staff to see if their position on this citizen suit provision had changed. It had not. They are still strongly opposed to this provision.

Introducing these provisions in the national security arena has the potential not only to divert DHS from its security-related missions but to also result in the disclosure of protected sensitive information. This entire bill, including the provision I am trying to strike, will inadvertently have an impact on the private sector, on business, and on the overall economy at a time when we can least afford it.

I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source