Intelligence Committee Reorganization - Continued

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
SENATE
Oct. 9, 2004

INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE REORGANIZATION-CONTINUED

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today the Senate adopted S. Res. 445, the Senate Intelligence and Homeland Security Oversight Reform resolution. This resolution will combine the oversight of most Department of Homeland Security functions and will provide jurisdiction over those functions to the Committee on Governmental Affairs, which will be renamed the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

I will vote in favor of S. Res. 445. This resolution will help advance the U.S. war on terror by consolidating and streamlining Senate oversight over the Department of Homeland Security. I'm confident that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs will serve an important role in promoting the safety and security of the people of the United States.

As originally introduced, the resolution provided that the Committee on Homeland Security and governmental Affairs would not have jurisdiction over customs revenue functions. Instead, the drafters recognized that, going forward, it's important to keep the jurisdiction over customs revenue functions within the Finance Committee, the committee that has exercised jurisdiction over these issues for the past 188 years. Moreover, with the United States collecting over $23 billion annually in duties and trade related fees, the drafters realized that it's important that the U.S. customs agencies be able to perform their revenue functions efficiently. Retention of Finance Committee jurisdiction over these functions will greatly facilitate this objective.

Senator BAUCUS and I introduced an amendment during debate on S. Res. 445 that clarified the language concerning customs revenue functions contained in the managers' resolution. Specifically, our amendment stated that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs will not have jurisdiction over the following functions performed by any employee of the Department of Homeland Security: any customs revenue function including any function provided for in section 415 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002; any commercial function or commercial operation of the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection or the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, including matters related to trade facilitation and trade regulation; or any other function related to those that I just mentioned that was exercised by the U.S. Customs Service on the day before the effective date of the Homeland Security Act of 2002. In a colloquy between Senator BAUCUS and me on October 7, we more fully spelled out what is covered by our amendment and the reasons why our amendment was necessary.

The Grassley-Baucus amendment was needed to elucidate non-security functions of the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection and the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement that necessarily should remain within the jurisdiction of the Finance Committee. Our amendment passed by voice vote on October 7.

A transfer of customs revenue and commercial functions to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs would detract from that committee's main focus. Moreover, the removal of customs revenue and commercial functions from the jurisdiction of the Finance Committee would be disruptive to our efforts to advance a comprehensive international trade agenda for the United States. In adopting our amendment, the Senate wisely avoided both of these outcomes. agenda for the United States. In adopting our amendment, the Senate wisely avoided both of these outcomes.

With passage of our amendment, the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs will be better able to focus on its core objective, the protection of the United States from terrorist attacks. The staff of the new committee should be expected to be experts in the field of national security. They will work day-in and day-out to keep terrorists away from our shores and to protect Americans from attack. With their focus on national security concerns, it would be unrealistic to expect them to learn the technical details of our country's customs laws relating to revenue and commercial functions. The addition of customs revenue and commercial functions to their committee's agenda would only distract them from their central focus, national security. If that were to occur, Senate oversight of both the national security and international trade agendas of the United States would suffer.

Our amendment also recognizes that removal of customs revenue and commercial functions from the jurisdiction of the Finance Committee would be disruptive to U.S. businesses, and thus harmful to U.S. economic interests. The Finance Committee has a long history-of some 188 years-of exercising jurisdiction over tariffs and trade. This long history, and the technical expertise it has helped engender within the committee, provides the Finance Committee with an exceptional ability to provide sound oversight in the Congress over our government's customs revenue and commercial functions. Not surprisingly, the U.S. business community has developed strong confidence in the workings of this committee. Moreover, these same businessmen and women have doubts as to whether the committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs-with its focus on national security-would pay sufficient attention to trade compliance and revenue functions.

The U.S. business community acted, and quickly, this week upon hearing rumors of possible legislation to strip jurisdiction over customs revenue and commercial functions from the Finance Committee. Let me read to you excerpts from letters sent to me this week on this issue.

The National Retail Federation wrote that "NRF's members are deeply concerned that moving jurisdiction for duty collection process issues from the Finance Committee would serve to reduce U.S. interest in preserving trade revenues, and require members of those committees to spend a great deal of time on revenue issues that are not central to the Government Affairs Committee's main jurisdictional interests. Of equal importance, the Senators who have served on Finance have developed expertise in these complex revenue issues that many members of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee do not possess and would have to develop."

In another letter, the National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America stated that "protecting our borders is vital. As we take measures to enhance security at our borders, however, we must also carefully weigh the consequences to the flow of international trade. . . . The Senate Finance Committee possesses the knowledge and expertise necessary to provide effective oversight over Customs' business facilitation issues. For over 200 years, the Finance Committee has been involved in the details of customs processing and their role is significant in assuring that the Senate gives due consideration to the practical consequences of security measures."

The Business Coalition for Customs Modernization, which is composed of 24 major companies operating in the United States, voiced similar concerns. It wrote that "granting jurisdiction over the business facilitation functions of the Customs Service to the Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs-a committee concerned primarily with security-will lead inevitably to commercial considerations being discounted heavily in the name of security, without thought about the effects on America's consumers. That will hurt the U.S. economy and undermine our strength and standard of living in the long run."

As pointed out in these letters, as we move forward in enhancing our border security efforts, it is important to keep in mind that a large part of homeland security is economic security. And international trade is a critical component of our economic security. Exports alone accounted for 25 percent of U.S. economic growth from 1990-2000. Exports alone support an estimated 12 million jobs. Trade also promotes more competitive businesses-as well as more choices of goods and inputs at lower prices for U.S. consumers. If we impede trade, we impede our own economic growth and our own future well-being.

A concrete example can be found by looking at one sector of the economy immediately following the events of September 11. Just 36 hours after the attacks, Daimler-Chrysler announced that it would close one of its assembly plants because it could not get the parts it needed to continue operations from Canada. Similar circumstances caused Ford to lay idle five of its assembly plants-each producing an average of one million dollars worth of cars per hour-for a week.

Events like this make it clear that the United States must be at the forefront in developing the border technologies and enforcement, methodologies which will enable our economy to prosper and grow in the post September 11 world. We cannot afford to do any less. The Finance Committee has the experience and expertise to appropriately meet this challenge. And I'm pleased that the resolution we passed today acknowledges the unique role of the Committee.

Finally, it only makes practical sense for the Finance Committee to retain jurisdiction over customs revenue and commercial functions. Rule XXV of the Standing Rules of the Senate provides that the Finance Committee is the committee to which shall be referred all proposed legislation, messages, petitions, memorials, and all other matters relating to reciprocal trade agreements and tariffs. It also provides that the Finance Committee has jurisdiction over customs. The reason that the Finance Committee has jurisdiction over reciprocal trade agreements, tariffs, and customs is precisely because all of these trade issues are all interrelated. Trade agreements set tariff levels, and customs personnel administer the U.S. laws relating to these tariffs. Therefore, as long as the Finance Committee has jurisdiction over reciprocal trade agreements and tariffs, this committee almost by necessity must have jurisdiction over customs revenue and commercial functions.

For these reasons, I'm very pleased that the Senate voted this week for the Finance Committee to retain jurisdiction over customs revenue and commercial functions. In doing so, the Senate permitted the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs to focus on its core objective of national security, and prevented a disruption to U.S. businesses that could result if such jurisdiction were removed from the Finance Committee. In addition, given the Finance Committee's jurisdiction over reciprocal trade agreements and tariffs, it only makes sense for this committee also to maintain its jurisdiction over customs revenue and commercial functions of the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection and the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, even though these agencies are now housed in the Department of Homeland Security.