Congressional Record, Volume 147 Issue 135 (Wednesday, October 10, 2001)

[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 135 (Wednesday, October 10, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10432-S10446]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

AVIATION SECURITY ACT

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

A bill (S. 1447) to improve aviation security and for other
purposes.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.

Amendment No. 1854

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, on behalf of the distinguished Senator
from

[[Page S10433]]

Arizona and myself, Senator Hutchison of Texas, Senator Rockefeller of
West Virginia, and Senator Kerry of Massachusetts, I send the managers'
amendment to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Hollings], for himself
and Mr. McCain, Mrs. Hutchinson, Mr. Rockefeller, and Mr.
Kerry, proposes an amendment numbered 1854.

Mr. HOLLINGS. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be
dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The text of the amendment is printed in today's Record under
``Amendments Submitted.''

Amendment No. 1855

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from South Dakota [Mr. Daschle], for Mrs.
Carnahan, for herself, Mr. Daschle, Mr. Kennedy, Mrs. Murray,
Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Smith of
Oregon, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Dayton, and Mr. Wyden, proposes an
amendment numbered 1855.

Mr. DASCHLE. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be
dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The text of the amendment is printed in today's Record under
``Amendments Submitted.''

CLOTURE MOTION

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I send a cloture motion on the amendment
to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented under
rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

Cloture Motion

We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the provisions of
rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, hereby move to bring to
a close the debate on the Daschle amendment No. 1855 to S. 1447, the
Aviation Security bill.
Harry Reid, Bob Graham, Bob Torricelli, Jean Carnahan,
Jeff Bingaman, Maria Cantwell, Richard J. Durbin, John
Kerry, Jay Rockefeller, Mark Dayton, Ben Nelson of
Nebraska, Evan Bayh, Tim Johnson, Russell Feingold,
Kent Conrad, Tom Daschle, Bill Nelson of Florida,
Edward M. Kennedy, Barbara A. Mikulski, and Paul
Wellstone.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I announce to all our colleagues there
will be no more rollcall votes today. Details about tomorrow's schedule
will be made available a little later in the day.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri is recognized.
Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I spoke yesterday about the need for
the Senate to act on behalf of the workers in the airline industry--
those men and women who lost their jobs as a result of the September 11
attacks. The time to act is here and now.
My amendment is designed to provide assistance to those who were laid
off as a result of the September 11 attacks and the corresponding
reductions in air service. They include employees of the airlines,
airports, aircraft manufacturers, and suppliers to the airlines.
Using the framework of the Trade Adjustment Assistance Act, this
legislation provides income support, job training, and health care
benefits for these laid off workers.
This amendment extends unemployment compensation for 20 weeks, after
eligible employees have exhausted their State's unemployment benefits.
It also provides for job training, so that those unable to return to
the airline industry can acquire new skills.
Many laid-off workers and their families will face the frightening
prospect of losing their health insurance. The legislation that I am
proposing would enable families to continue their health insurance by
reimbursing COBRA premiums for 12 months.
We know that some workers may not be eligible for extended health
coverage through COBRA. Therefore, my proposal also enables States to
provide Medicaid coverage for those workers and their families.
Lastly, my amendment acknowledges that the unemployment compensation
program is imperfect. Many workers who lose their jobs are not eligible
for any assistance under current law.
Under my proposal, those who are ineligible for their State's
unemployment insurance programs would receive 26 weeks of income
support. These payments are designed to mirror unemployment
compensation.
This legislation is not a panacea. It is a first step. We acted
quickly to shore up the airline industry. That was appropriate. But
that legislation did nothing for the 140,000 who are being laid-off
despite the assistance provided in the stabilization package.
There are other Americans who have also lost their jobs due to the
slowing economy. Their needs should be addressed as part of the
economic stimulus package. But, we must act now to assist employees of
the airline industry who have suffered immediate, abrupt layoffs of
enormous proportions.
The amendment I have proposed has broad support. The nation's
Governors have asked Congress to pass it.
The major airlines support this assistance for their former
employees. Republican and Democratic Senators support it.
Now is the time to act. The Senate ought to pass this measure now and
move on to our other pressing business.
I have reached across the aisle in crafting this proposal. The
amendment has three Republican co-sponsors: Senators Brownback,
Fitzgerald, and Gordon Smith.
I have also scaled back my original legislation to make it more
attractive to my colleagues. The total cost is $1.9 billion--half the
cost of the original package.
The amendment includes an offset so this package of benefits is
entirely paid for.
Let me assure my colleagues that it is not my intention to slow
consideration of the important airline security legislation. I am a co-
sponsor of the airline security bill and am eager to see it pass the
Senate. We need to institute permanent security measures and restore
Americans' confidence in the safety of air travel.
I have been ready, and eagerly awaiting the opportunity, to debate
this amendment for the past week. And I am ready to go to a vote right
now.
So for those concerned about delay of the airline security bill I
hope that you agree we should vote on this proposal tonight. I am not
interested in delay. I am interested in helping workers. I would have
liked both the airline safety bill and the worker relief packaged
completed last week instead of being subjected to a filibuster.
I am aware of comments that some believe that this amendment should
not be considered as part of the airline safety bill, but rather should
be considered later, as part of other legislation. But that is
precisely what I was told over two weeks ago. I originally proposed to
provide relief to laid off airline workers at the same time as we
provided relief to the airlines.
I did not offer my amendment then because the leadership of both
houses of Congress had reached agreement on the airline package and we
had to pass the bill immediately.
We all agree that airline security legislation is extremely urgent.
So is relief to airline workers. It is time to show some urgency on
behalf of the men and women in the airline industry.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished chairman of the
committee for the usual cooperation and bipartisanship which he has
displayed on many occasions in the past in his duties as chairman of
the Commerce Committee. It has also been my pleasure to have had the
opportunity to work with him, including on this very important piece of
legislation. Perhaps the distinguished chairman and I have not worked
on a bill that is more important and significant as this one.
This bill would significantly enhance aviation security by making the
Federal Government directly responsible and accountable for the
screening of airline passengers and their baggage. Although there are
many other parts of this bill that are intended to improve security,
the shift in responsibility for passenger screening is the most
profound. But nothing less is required given that the events of
September 11 have forever changed how we view air

[[Page S10434]]

travel. Unfortunately, we have learned a hard lesson that we face an
enemy that is willing to sacrifice itself and thousands of innocents to
obtain its ends. Aviation security has now become a critical element of
national security, and this requires a fundamental change in our
approach. Congress must act to ensure that safety and security remain
our foremost concern.
To handle and coordinate all aviation security matters for the
Federal Government, including the new screening functions, the bill
creates a new, high-level position within the Department of
Transportation (DOT). Nevertheless, there would be close coordination
with other Federal agencies, particularly those involved in law
enforcement, intelligence and national security. Cooperation among
Federal agencies will be just as important to our effort to safeguard
aviation as it will be in our larger battle to root out and destroy
terrorist networks. Accountability is also important, and when it comes
to aviation security, there will not be one Federal official to serve
as the focal point for all our efforts.
This bill includes numerous other provisions designed to improve
aviation security. For example, the Federal air marshal program is
broadly expanded, and airports are required to strengthen control over
access points to secure areas. In addition, cockpit doors must be
strengthened and flight crews would be given up-to-date training on how
to handle hijacking situations. The bill would also take steps to
ensure that our Nation's flight schools are not being used by
terrorists. For the current fiscal year, airports would be given the
flexibility to use Federal airport grants to pay for increased costs
associated with new security mandates.
I know that some of my colleagues may have concerns about the Federal
Government assuming the burden of screening hundreds of millions of
airline passengers each year. As a proud fiscal conservative, I do not
advocate this move lightly. But the attack last month was an act of
war, and we must respond accordingly. As a matter of national security,
passenger screening can no longer be left to the private sector. I am
one of the most ardent proponents of free enterprise and the
entrepreneurial spirit of America. However, this is not an area where
decisions should be driven by the bottom line. The Federal Government
does not contract out the work of Customs agents, the Border Patrol,
the INS, and many other agencies that perform functions similar to the
screening that we are dealing with here. We should not contract out the
screening of airline passengers.
By the way, recently there was a CNN poll taken where people could
instantly respond as to whether screening employees should be done by
Federal employees or contracted out. Eighty-seven percent of the
hundreds of thousands of people who responded to that CNN poll said the
Federal Government should assume that responsibility.
It is also a question about whether the Department of Justice or
Department of Transportation should have the authority in this matter.
In all candor, one of the reasons is because of the lack of success in
the past of some of the programs and implementation of some of the
recommendations that were made by the Department of Transportation
Inspector General, the GAO, and others. That will be a subject of
debate as we consider this legislation.
The present legislation gives DOT the authority to fire or suspend
any screener and prohibit him or her from returning to screening duties
regardless of any civil service employment laws to the contrary.
Furthermore, screeners would also be prohibited from striking. To
offset some of the additional costs to government, airlines would be
charged a security fee based upon the number of passengers they carry.
Because there are many small airports across the country that may not
need a full complement of screeners throughout the day, the Department
of Transportation would have the option of requiring smaller airports
to contract out the screening work to State or local law enforcement
officials. This could only be done if the screening services and
training of local officers are the same and the Federal Government
reimburses the airport. There would also be some flexibility for DOT to
adopt different security measures at smaller airports depending upon
airport conditions and the level of airline activity.
I know that some people may be concerned about the transition period
if we do move to full Federal control over the screening process. Some
believe that screening services may suffer if current employees and
companies know that they will be phased out in the coming months. The
bill addresses this concern by giving DOT the flexibility to make
whatever arrangements are necessary to ensure security in the interim.
For example, DOT could enter into new, short-term contracts with
screening companies that provide for upgraded services while at the
same time compensating the companies, and perhaps employees, for the
temporary nature of the new arrangement.
I would also point out that the average turnover, because of the low
pay in salary and benefits, at major airports is 125 percent per year.
At one airport it is as high as 400 percent per year, but that is
because the people who now are employed as screeners can make more
money by going down and working at a concession at the same airport.
So let's have no doubt about the transience, the documented
transience of these people who work there, who are good and decent,
fine American citizens, but they are low paid, and they are ill-
trained. That is not their fault. I want to make that perfectly clear.
The Commerce Committee has held several aviation security hearings
over the last few years, including one 3 weeks ago. We have repeatedly
been told by the DOT Inspector General, the General Accounting Office,
and many others that there are flaws in our aviation security systems,
especially in the area of passenger and baggage screening. Although we
addressed some of these concerns in legislation enacted last year, we
clearly must go much farther now. Anything approaching the status quo
is no longer acceptable. It is vital that aviation security be provided
by professional individuals who are well paid, well trained, and well
motivated.
The events of the past few days underscore the need for us take
action immediately. Our military strike against terrorist bases
increases the risk of another terrorist attack on our own soil. While
more than aviation is threatened, we know all too well it is an area
that terrorists have targeted before and something they have gone to
great lengths to learn about.
Aviation is more important than ever to our economic and social well-
being. We cannot avoid the tough choices when it comes to security. The
traveling public needs to have its confidence restored in the safety of
flying. Federal control of the passenger screening process and greater
oversight of other aspects of aviation security can get our aviation
industries back on track. Anything less than a full Federal effort
would be an abrogation of our duties as lawmakers.
There was a poll taken yesterday by ABC which I would like to refer
to, ABC News.com. The question was: Are you worried traveling by
airplane because of risk of terrorism? Forty-two percent of the
American people today still are worried about traveling by airplane
because of risk of terrorism.
There was a meeting in New York City the day before yesterday.
According to the Wall Street Journal:

Lawmakers are eager to resolve the dispute partly because
they are being told by business leaders and even Federal
Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan that airline security is
central to restoring consumer confidence and getting the
economy back on track. In a meeting at the New York Stock
Exchange yesterday, about 20 executives urged Mr. Hastert and
House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt of Missouri to take
drastic action quickly. ``The consensus was that the whole
system has to be federalized,'' one House aide said.

It is very clear that we need to act. I am very disappointed it has
taken us a couple weeks before we could get this bill up on the floor
of the Senate.
Senator Hollings and I would be more than happy to consider
amendments, in addition to the present ones. I want to point out that
there would be some added expense associated with increasing security,
but I would also like to point out that security has obviously become
paramount.

[[Page S10435]]

So, Mr. President, I again thank Senator Hollings, the chairman of
the committee.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina, the chairman
of the committee.
Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, the events of September 11 forever
changed how we feel about the security of our world, our Nation, and
our families. We are wrestling with tough issues here: Balancing safety
and security--against convenience and the tradition of our free, open,
and democratic society.
But one thing is clear. We need to make our skies safe. The American
people deserve it--and they demand it.
Securing our skies is becoming a Federal responsibility that needs
the full resources of Federal law enforcement, immigration services,
and intelligence agencies. Making our skies safe is a complicated
endeavor that we cannot leave just to the airlines and the private
sector.
We do not contract out our Nation's defense or law enforcement to
private security guards. Likewise, we must not contract out the
security of our nation's skies or the vulnerable structures and people
on the ground.
The American people are willing to contribute to the cost of making
our skies safe. A recent poll of 900 people found that 68 percent of
Americans are willing to pay $25 per airline ticket to increase
security.
By those standards, airline passengers will find our plan to be quite
a bargain.
I have worked closely with Senators McCain, Rockefeller, Hutchison,
and many others in a bipartisan effort to fix what has been a long-
standing problem in aviation security. I believe the legislation we
developed will close our current vulnerabilities and create new
safeguards to stop those that would harm our American way of life.
Our legislation will professionalize the more than 18,000 screeners
in our Nation's airports who are now employees of the airlines and
private screening companies. We will give the screeners better training
and advanced security equipment.
Our bill will increase the number of Federal Air Marshals on both
international and domestic flights. It will enable the Transportation
Department to deploy Federal Air Marshals on every flight.
Our legislation mandates cockpit doors and locks that cannot be
opened during flight by anyone other than the pilots. The new cockpit
doors will be able to withstand forced entry. With our pilots safe,
they can better keep our nation's passengers safe.
These measures also will help restore Americans' confidence in the
safety of our airlines. When passengers feel safe, they are more likely
to fly, which will revitalize tourism in America--and the local
economies that rely on it.
The terrorist attacks last month demonstrated that airline safety is
an issue of national security. Other countries have had extraordinary
success using the tactics called for in this legislation. Our American
citizens deserve the same.
Mr. President, right to the point, let me thank Senator McCain, our
ranking member, Senator Hutchison of Texas, who is the ranking member
on our Aviation Subcommittee, and Senator Rockefeller. We have banded
together in sort of an emergency situation.
Right to the point, a lot of this could be done, and should be done,
and was to be done under present law. For example, you could get an
order for securing the cockpit. I called the distinguished Secretary of
Transportation 2 days after the 11th--on that Thursday--and I said: I
am going to have a hearing. But do not wait for hearings. Let's secure
that cockpit. You can order that immediately. You can order marshals.
Now, what have we seen? Three weeks after 9-11 we find a plane being
apparently taken over on its way from Los Angeles to Chicago. The
fellow was distraught and upset, mentally sick, but he charged the
cockpit. So the cockpit was opened, and the pilot immediately called
about a hijacking, and the passengers had to overpower him.
First, why weren't there marshals on that plane? We have an authority
right now for marshals. What I am trying to say is, somehow, somewhere
this administration has to work just as diligently--and they are to be
commended on their diligence on correlating a coalition abroad--they
have to correlate a coalition here in the country; and we have not done
that.
This bill, in other words, is absolutely urgent because they
seemingly want to wait for this intramural to work its way out with
respect to the fixing of accountability and authority here. And that is
what we are all for, in a bipartisan fashion agreed upon. We do not
want to just hire a bunch of people. That isn't the problem. The
problem is absolute security.
This war is not a military war. And the headlines are misleading: so
many aircraft carriers; so many B-2 bombers; so many this; so many
helicopters; so many that. The truth is, if you are going after
terrorists who are spread amongst 50 countries--and they are zealots,
they are fanatics--if you are going after them, you have to go on sort
of an individual way; and it is an intelligence war.
Now, No. 1, if we had secured that cockpit, then you save the F-15
that was necessary. Are we going to have F-15s flying all over
everyone's domestic flight; have military flights on top, domestic
flights on the bottom? Is that America? Is that what we are going to
have? Absolutely not.
So how do you forestall that? Secure the cockpit. But they have not
done it. Boeing said within 2 weeks they could retrofit all the doors
in their airplanes, until you get a steel or a kevlar door put on such
as they have in Israel. But they are waiting on studying and studying
and everything else.

Our first conference--I say this advisedly--dismayed me, when we
conferred with the administration authorities on this particular bill.
They were talking about its implementation 9 months to a year--can you
imagine that--literally. That is what has gotten this Senator disturbed
and exercised, along with the Senator from Arizona, about the urgency.
We don't want to have F-15's and everybody in the Guard and everybody
in the Air Force flying over all the domestic flights in America.
So you secure that cockpit and there is one thing they know: They are
not going to run it into a building. And if it is a hijacking, that
pilot doesn't open the door but he calls wherever he is going to land
immediately, and have law enforcement there. You wipe out the expense
and the calling up of the F-15 pilots and the expense of the F-15
planes.
These are the kinds of things that ought to be done immediately, but
they are not being done. I am introducing and pressing for it on this
bill. I don't want to have to agree to any set-aside for another bill.
There is too much procedural intramurals going on. We have been
agreeable, agreeable, agreeable.
And in that context, I guess I have to, with a smile, say I don't
mind being a little disagreeable in order to get this one done.
I emphasize again the intelligence. Suppose you had someone and you
were with the intelligence of one of these Middle East countries, be
they Muslim or not, and you had information, you know it, whatever it
is, but if you finger ``X'' on a watch list and know if it can get
through now, that is the communications, it isn't high tech--high tech,
everybody wants to get bam, bam, bam and you have the computer, and it
immediately goes in. No. You have the Central Intelligence Agency not
telling the FBI because they are afraid of a leak, and it will reveal
their source.
I saw this 40 years ago when I served on the Hoover commission
investigating the Central Intelligence Agency. That is just inherent.
What you want to do is protect your sources. So do you give the
information ahead and give it to unreliable sources and everything?
While the FBI is absolutely reliable, certainly the screeners aren't,
the ones we have. Everybody will agree to that. So you have to have
high-tech personal, professional. It has to be a federalization where
we can check these people, recheck them, not have any labor
difficulties.
I supported President Reagan on the controllers. You can't have them
striking and negotiating and everything else. This is a war of
intelligence. The people at the airports, if they are going to stop
would-be terrorists, have to be positioned to receive that watch list

[[Page S10436]]

information. And they are not going to be giving it to them until our
Government can guarantee they are secure. That is just bluntly put.
In that light, the President of the United States has to get in not
whether we are going to get first the Amtrak, no; we have to do the
seaports, no; we have to do benefits, no; we have to do
counterterrorism and get into all of these procedural things. He has to
tell the country to bug off, relax. You are not going to get a heck of
a lot of information. I am your President. I have a team and we are
working and if we can get this bin Laden fellow, you might know of it
days or weeks afterwards. We might get him but we might not want to
reveal how we got him for a period of time.
That is the kind of war we are in. You don't have to satisfy this
media crowd and everything else like that that wants the story of the
day, the headline. This is a war not to be run on the 7 o'clock news.
They can relax, take weekend leave and everything else of that kind
and, like the President says, go to Disney World. But forget about all
this information to be had.
We need this bill. We can't tarry around. We need professionalism in
it. It is not like the Israelis have, where intelligence is the outer
rim, but it goes all the way down, as I have said before, to the person
vacuuming the carpet in the middle of the aisle of the plane, because
that person, with access to the plane itself, could put in a weapon
like we found a bunch of these cardboard cutters and everything else of
that kind, as we are finding in some other planes now on a diligent
inspection.
My distinguished colleague from Texas is here. I will yield because
she has been a leader for several years on this particular score. I am
grateful for her leadership.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from South
Carolina for all the work he has done. He is chairman of the Commerce
Committee; I am the ranking member of the Aviation Subcommittee. We
have worked very well together and crafted a bipartisan bill that would
address the issues of aviation security.
As Senator McCain said earlier today, the people of our country are
not going back to the airlines. This is causing a rippling effect
throughout our economy. We need to stem the flow of job losses by
getting the airlines back in business so the hotels will fill up,
people will rent cars again and people will be able to go about their
business in as normal a way as possible.
The last thing on Earth we want is to have the economy be so shaky
that we are unable to gear up the national defenses that we know we
need.
We have men and women putting their lives on the line as we speak for
our country, for our freedom. For us not to do the right thing and get
our country back on an even keel after this terrible incident of
September 11 would be unthinkable. That is why all of us are working to
come to an agreement on this bill.
We are 95 percent in agreement. There are a few issues on which we
disagree. Most people know what these are. But what we cannot afford in
this legislation is to put extraneous amendments on it. This is not the
kind of bill that should be a Christmas tree where you have this
amendment and that amendment and somebody's pet project. This is too
important. This is aviation security for our country. It is for the
people who are going to airports, people who are flying. People are
afraid right now. I don't think they should be, because in all the
flying I have done since September 11, and it has been every single
weekend and also flying around during the weekend, I have been on a lot
of flights that are half full. These flights were very safe. People are
going all out to make flying safe.
The bottom line is, the people are not coming back. The planes are
half full. It is going to take aviation security legislation to get us
back on track.
We need to stop the process arguments. We need to stop the extraneous
arguments. We need to say: I understand Senator Carnahan wanting her
bill. I do understand that. It is a very important bill. At some point
in the next few weeks, we will take up her bill. We will take up other
kinds of legislation also. I want to support Amtrak security, but if it
is not going to be agreed to totally, it is not going to go on this
bill. I hope it can. But if it can't, then we are going to complete
aviation security. That is the bottom line.
I am very pleased to work with Senator Hollings, Senator McCain,
Senator Rockefeller, and many others who have taken the position that
we must do aviation security.
What this bill is going to do is give us more air marshals. I
introduced the bill for air marshals the week of September 11, but we
still have not acted on adding air marshals. The President has done it
on his own with emergency powers, but that is not an answer. We want a
long-term solution. We want people to know there is a stable, seamless
aviation security system in our country with air marshals, with
screeners who are qualified, with supervisors who are qualified, all of
which are law enforcement personnel. And we want to reinforce cockpit
doors so that no pilot will have to worry about security in the cabin.
The pilot should be focused on flying the airplane safely. We should
not ask him to do anything else.

Now is the time to act. We need to finish this bill. I hope we can go
to cloture right away. If we are going to go to cloture, let's do it
tomorrow, or even tonight. Let's stay and finish all of the extraneous
things and get on with this bill. We have legitimate disagreements.
Let's get on with it and determine how much is going to be federalized.
I have one position, and maybe someone else has a different position.
Those are legitimate. Let's argue it, debate it, vote and go on.
The bottom line is that we are 95 percent in agreement; it is time to
have aviation security for our country, for our citizens, and for our
economy.
I thank the Senator from South Carolina. I yield the floor.
Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may
follow Senator Murray.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Chair recognizes the Senator from Washington.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I thank the chairman of the Commerce
Committee for bringing this bill to the floor. Aviation security is a
critical measure. I agree with the Senator that we have to do this
right and we need to pass this bill. It is critical. It is critical to
the American public that we bring this bill up, move it forward, and
get it passed, and reassure our constituents in the country that air
travel is safe because we have done our part as well.
I have come to the floor to speak on behalf of the more than 100,000
American workers who are now facing layoffs as a result of much of what
has happened in the last month. For weeks, these workers have been
waiting for this Senate to pass a workers assistance package, and today
we finally have an amendment on the floor to help them. I have come to
the floor to speak on behalf of that amendment and encourage its
immediate passage.
For many of our workers, the clock is ticking. In fact, this Friday,
10,000 Boeing workers are going to receive notice that they are going
to lose their jobs. They are very concerned about how they are going to
feed their families, get health care, and how they are going to pay
their mortgages. They need the Senate to take action.
Just look at the layoffs that have been announced so far. On
September 15, United Airlines announced it was laying off 20,000
workers. On the same date, Continental announced it was laying off
12,000 workers. On September 17, US Airways announced it was laying off
11,000 workers. On September 18, the Boeing Company announced up to
30,000 layoffs. On September 19, American Airlines announced 20,000
layoffs. On September 26, Delta announced another 13,000 layoffs. These
aren't just layoffs; these are people--people with families, people who
are in our communities, people who are very frightened and insecure
about their future. They are workers who are losing their jobs every
day, and they need our help.

In my home State of Washington, we are really feeling the impact
because of these layoffs in the aviation and aerospace industry. The
Boeing Company

[[Page S10437]]

plans to lay off 30,000 employees, as I said: That is 30 percent of its
workforce. By the Christmas holiday season, I will have at least 10,000
of my constituents out of work. And it is not just Boeing; hundreds of
suppliers across the Nation will be impacted as well.
The clock is ticking. This Congress has still not passed a workers
assistance package. I urge my colleagues to support the Carnahan
amendment so we can help those workers. Congress, as we all know, has
taken care of the airlines by passing $15 billion in assistance. I
supported that package because it was the right thing to do. Getting
the airlines back up and running quickly helped us avoid further
layoffs.
We have also recognized that we have a responsibility to help the
many workers who are losing their jobs through no fault of their own.
So far, this Congress has not provided any help for the 110,000 airline
workers and their families who will be laid off or the 30,000 Boeing
workers who will be laid off. These workers have to put food on the
table; they need to make car payments and pay their rent or their
mortgage. They are losing their jobs, and they need our help. The
Carnahan amendment will help them.
In fact, these efforts are even more important today given the
underlying problems we are having with the U.S. economy. Before
September 11, our economy was teetering on the edge of recession.
Unemployment is currently at 4.9 percent, and that is the highest level
in over 4 years. Some economists are now predicting that unemployment
will reach 6.5 percent by the middle of next year. Every one of us will
have families in our States who will be impacted by this.
Even worse, these economic problems are affecting workers in all of
the related industries, and we have heard from them--the travel agents,
hotel and restaurant employees, caterers, car rental companies, and
many more; the slide will keep moving. We are now working with the
Senate and the House on a stimulus package that is intended to help our
broader economy. Some predict the pricetag will be as high as $75
billion.
I want to make sure we meet the needs of the men and women, the moms
and dads, who are facing layoffs right now. We need to adopt the
Carnahan amendment to assist our displaced workers.
The amendment will provide an additional 20 weeks of cash payments to
airlines and aircraft manufacturing employees who lost jobs directly as
a result of September 11. For individuals who are laid off but who do
not qualify for State unemployment assistance, our bill will provide
unemployment benefits for 26 weeks. This will mean so much to those who
are very worried about losing their homes and feeding their families in
the coming weeks and months. Our amendment will also provide worker
training benefits for laid-off employees and for those threatened by
layoffs, so that they are better equipped and more confident and can
find a new job as we see the economy and where it develops in coming
years.
Finally, this amendment will provide 12 months of COBRA health
insurance payments for our affected workers. This is really critical
for our families who need to know that their loved ones are not losing
their health care along with their jobs. No one in our country should
live with that fear right now.
I urge my colleagues to adopt this much-needed amendment. The clock
is ticking, and these workers facing layoffs cannot wait. We have to
move forward and get these workers the help and give them the
confidence they need now. I urge our colleagues to vote for this
workers assistance package, to move the underlying bill and do what we
need to do to get this economy back on track so that our country can be
confident again.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senator from
Minnesota is recognized.
Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I will be brief. I feel as though every
day I have been speaking on the same issue. I think I am a cosponsor of
the Hollings airline safety bill. It is a fine bill. I ask unanimous
consent, in case I am not, to be a cosponsor of the Carnahan amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, first of all, I say to Senator Hollings
I can do this in 1, 2, 3 order.
Senator Murray, I appreciate her statement. She has an awful lot of
hard-pressed workers in her State. I appreciate her advocacy for
working families in Washington.
To Senator Hollings, he has given enough speeches to deafen all the
gods about how the industry gets back on its feet when people feel safe
to fly, and aviation safety is the first priority. He is absolutely
right, and this is a critically important piece of legislation. I look
forward to passing it. We will have passed an important piece of
legislation for our country.
Then the third point I want to make is that I heard the Senator from
Texas--and I am sorry she is not here now, so I won't go into big
debate. I heard her talk about the need to not have extraneous
amendments, and then I heard her reference the Carnahan amendment. I
will tell you something. The 4,500 Northwest employees who are out of
work right now believe they are extraneous. They believe they are
central--central to their families, central to our communities, central
to Minnesota, and central to our country.
I would like to say to Senators who are opposed to this amendment or
blocking this amendment, if you were to have a poll--I am just about
positive of this--anywhere in the country and asked whether or not
people think in addition to our helping the industry we ought to help
employees, 90 percent of the people would say, ``Of course.'' Of
course, you should help working families. You helped the industry; now
you should help the employees and, of course, this should be a
priority. As a matter of fact, one of the biggest criticisms--and there
are not a lot of criticisms people have right now about what we are
doing in the Congress--one of the criticisms is how can you bail out
the industry and not help the employees? When I hear my colleagues say
this is an extraneous amendment--tell that to the men, women, and
children who are hurting right now.

We help people when they are flat on their backs. We provide the
support to them. The Carnahan amendment does three things scaled down.
I wish it was even more comprehensive, but it is extremely important.
It extends the unemployment benefits, it provides the job training, and
it provides--the Senator from Massachusetts is always the leader on
health care issues--up to 12 months 100-percent payment of COBRA
payments, which employees cannot afford when they are out of work
otherwise.
This is a lifeline for these employees. It is extremely important. It
is the right thing to do. Frankly, if this is the dividing line between
Democrats and some Republicans, so be it. I would rather there be 100
Senators who are for this. I sure do not mind having a spirited debate
about whether or not we should be helping these employees. I sure do
not mind being on their side. That is what they expect from us.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. KERRY. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, it is somewhat
extraordinary that so many weeks after the events of September 11, in
the immediate days thereafter, almost all of the relevant personnel
within the aviation industry--the people who fly the planes, the
screeners, the people at the airports responsible for security, the
flight attendants--all of them came forward and said we need a Federal
system with Federal employees and Federal standards that guarantees the
safety of our aircraft access and our airways.
Here we are, after this extraordinary outpouring of emotion and
genuine bipartisanship within the Congress that came together to pass
$40 billion immediately, and that united to provide a clear statement
of the will of the American people expressed through the Congress with
regard to our reaction to those events in a series of measures on which
we found the capacity to come to the floor of the Senate and vote as
one, here we are now weeks later still procrastinating over when we are
going to have a final vote, or how we are going to get to a final vote
on the question of aviation security.
It seems to me extraordinary that at a moment when we are trying to
prove to a lot of countries the virtues of democracy we are struggling
in the greatest deliberative body on the face

[[Page S10438]]

of the planet--as we are often referred to or even like to call
ourselves--we are struggling to find the capacity to have a vote, to
let the votes fall where they may. Let them fall where they may.
Some people do not like the Carnahan amendment. I am amazed that they
would call extraneous assistance to people who went to work on one
morning and found out a few hours later their jobs were gone. I wonder
how one can call extraneous a flight attendants who got on a plane
after the events of that day to help people get back to their homes or
locations from where those planes flew, to return them, and then got
home and found after taking that risk they got a pink slip, their job
no longer existed.

Mr. President, 140,000 aviation employees have lost their jobs since
September 11. How anybody can suggest that for those people who did not
have the opportunity to plan for a layoff, for those people who did not
have the savings put away because of these events that clearly altered
their lives in such a dramatic way, that we are not going to find it in
our capacity, even as we bail out the airlines to the tune of billions
of dollars, that we somehow are not prepared to extend health care
benefits to them by paying their COBRA premiums or making training
available to them to find another job or find additional unemployment
compensation once the State unemployment compensation has run out.
That is not extraneous. That is fundamental to who we are as a people
and to the kind of reaction we ought to spontaneously summon as a
consequence of the events that happened.
I also hear my colleagues talking about the need to have some kind of
boost to the economy. We have had a rather sizable tax cut which
enormously benefited those people at the upper end of the income scale,
but for some 28, 29 million Americans who pay most of their taxes
through the payroll tax, they did not get any break.
For a lot of Americans, the best way to begin to bring back the
economy as fast as possible is to give people the ability to spend
money, to give them the ability to pay their bills and do the things
that people do which will have the most profound impact in terms of
stimulus at this point in time.
For those who look at the tax cut side of the ledger--and we have all
embraced those tax cuts over the course of the past months in one form
or another--the fact is certain kinds of business tax incentives and
certain kinds of monetary efforts--for instance, lowering the interest
rates at this point in time--are simply not going to make a difference
in the rapid restoration of the economy. We could lower the interest
rates to zero at this moment and it is not going to affect the creation
of a new plant or the investment in some new business where that
business is already affected by an intense overhang of excess capacity.
For somebody who built their plant in the last year and a half, of
course, that has a negative effect.
What you have to do is use up that capacity. Most of that, most
people would agree, is going to take place on the demand side and the
consumer side, and we have to face that.
It seems to me, both as a matter of fairness and common sense about
how we are going to deal with the economy under these circumstances,
providing assistance under the Carnahan amendment is the proper way to
address the needs of 140,000 people who were summarily thrown out of
work as a direct consequence of the events that took place, and I might
add not just as a direct consequence but also to some degree as a
calculated effort by some of the airlines to position themselves
differently from where they were positioned prior to September 11.
Every one of us on the Commerce Committee and on the Aviation
Subcommittee, those of us who have been following this issue for a
period of time, know the aviation industry was already a significant
percentage off, maybe 30 percent and in some cases more, prior to
September 10. What we are seeing now, even after we have taken taxpayer
dollars and provided billions of dollars to help bail out the airline
industry, they are reducing capacity and adjusting the numbers of
flights and the number of personnel well beyond the impact of September
11.
So if it is okay and appropriate--and many of us believed it was--to
help bail out that industry because of the impact that industry has on
a whole set of other downstream industries: the car rental industry,
the restaurant industry, hotel, entertainment, a lot of things are tied
to getting people back into airplanes, at the same time as the health
and long-term welfare of that industry is being sought, we ought to be
looking at the health and long-term welfare of those employees who have
suffered as a consequence of both of those linked facts.
I think it is critical we pass the Carnahan amendment, as a matter of
fairness to those workers.
Let me also say something about the aviation bill itself. I have
heard from a number of pilots who have privately contacted me in the
course of the last weeks to tell me stories that have not necessarily
reached the public about why it is so critical to have this national
standard applied to our employees. When you walk up to any counter
anywhere in the country and talk to the people who check you in and
talk to them about why they think it is important, you will really gain
a much stronger understanding of the virtue of having this national
system of employees who are accountable to one standard, accountable
across the country to one system, and who work with an esprit de corps
and with an expertise that provides those people flying on our aircraft
the sense of safety they both want and deserve.
I think most of us who have been following this issue for a long time
are convinced it is only when you have that kind of system and not a
sort of disparate, multiheaded effort that stems from the contracting
out of various airports all across the country to the low bidders for
those particular airports, we know that by virtue of the imperatives of
the bottom line and the structure of the airlines themselves and the
way in which that has been managed that there has been an incentive to
find employees that do not cost a lot, that do not require a huge
amount of training, do not require a huge amount of supervision because
that costs a lot more money for airlines that have already been in
difficult straits. Unless we raise the pay level of those employees,
the training level, the supervisory level, and the standards to which
they are supervised and under which they have to work, we are not going
to have that kind of control.

Senator Hollings, again and again, has referred to El Al. El Al is a
classic example of a security system that has escaped the kind of
terror we witnessed on September 11. It does so because of the layered
structure of government input that guarantees a standard which can be
adhered to and which is accountable to those standards.
If we want to get people back in our airplanes to the levels they
were previously and to even greater levels as we go down the road, we
need to make certain we have the highest standards possible, the
greatest accountability possible, and the broadest supervisory
standards, with accountability, that we could put into place. The
American people demand nothing more and they deserve nothing less.
Ultimately, if we are doing less than that, we leave ourselves open
to the possibility that not in the next weeks--I do not believe that
will happen in the next weeks or even the next months--but when people
begin to relax a little bit, as is normal, when you begin to back off
because you have these different companies and you do not have the kind
of standardization that we are seeking, that is when someone will once
again look to find the weakness in the system.
Even as we talk about the airlines, I want to reiterate what a number
of us have said on a number of different occasions. It is not just the
airlines that require standards with respect to security. Our trains
are exposed and our buses, as we have seen, other forms of
transportation. If we are truly in the kind of conflict we have
described to the American people--and we are--and if indeed threats are
possible down the road as we proceed forward--and they are--and all of
us know that, then it behooves us to try to minimize the potential
exposure to the American people with the maximum return in
effectiveness.
We currently have the National Guard, the FBI, marshals. You walk

[[Page S10439]]

into an airport today and you have this conglomerate of people who are
there. Why? Because everybody knows what we have before them in terms
of that screening system is inadequate. What we need to do is guarantee
those marshals can be on the aircraft not waiting at a screening
section; that the Guard can be doing what the Guard may be called on to
do in the course of the next months; that the FBI and the other
personnel can be following up on leads and preventing rather than
guarding our airport entrances, and the only way we will ultimately
have the kind of esprit de corps that we need is to build the
supervisory capacity and supervision and accountability that we have
within the INS, within the Border Patrol, the Coast Guard and all of
those other security measures that we take at other levels.
I hope the Senate, within the next 24 hours, will finally vote on
this legislation. I thank the Senator from Arizona and the Senator from
South Carolina for their leadership on this on the Commerce Committee.
I am pleased to be an original author and cosponsor with them of this
legislation, but I am frustrated we cannot have a series of votes and
let the votes fall where they may. If the Carnahan amendment deserves a
majority of support from the Senate, then it should receive it. If it
does not, then we move on, and we have a final vote on the question of
aviation security. We need to get this done, and we need to get it done
now. We should have had it done previously. I hope in the next hours
the Senate will end this process of procrastination and restore the
sense of unity and purpose and urgency that has guided us to this
moment.
I yield the floor.
Mr. MILLER. Mr. President, I rise in support of Senator Carnahan's
amendment regarding assistance for airline workers. As Senator Carnahan
has described, her amendment would provide much needed help to workers
in the airline industry who have been laid off as a result of the
horrific events of September 11, and such help is desperately needed.
The need to help these workers is an issue that we failed to address
when we gave $15 billion in aid to the airlines. Yet these airline
workers need immediate temporary assistance in order to find new jobs.
Delta Airlines, based in my home State of Georgia, has already cut
13,000 jobs. And this is not the end of the layoffs; many more
Americans are going to be affected.
The approach to this problem outlined in Senator Carnahan's amendment
is a measured and moderate one. It addresses only the most immediate
needs of these workers: The need for unemployment benefits, the need
for continued health insurance coverage, and the need for job training
so that they can begin to again contribute to our Nation's economy. In
addition, the benefits provided in this package are temporary; they in
no way would be taking on permanent responsibility for a new group of
Americans. Finally, the provisions of this amendment are narrowly
crafted to apply only to those workers who lost their jobs as a direct
result of the attacks of September 11 or due to security measures taken
in response to the attacks. We would, therefore, not be providing
assistance to those who are the victims of the general economic
downturn.
In short, this is a sensible, middle-of-the-road approach to one the
most pressing problems we face as a result of the September 11 attacks.
It makes good sense to address this issue now, and I urge my colleagues
to do so.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, the distinguished manager and I have a
couple of amendments, if I could ask the indulgence of the Senator from
Texas.
Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I ask that the pending Hollings-McCain
amendment be considered agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid
upon the table, that the amendment be considered original text for the
purpose of further amendments, and that the Daschle-Carnahan amendment
1855 remain in its current status as a first-degree amendment.
Mr. GRAMM. Reserving the right to object, I'm not sure I understand
the unanimous consent request. Could you repeat it.
Mr. HOLLINGS. I ask consent that the pending managers' amendment, the
Hollings-McCain amendment be considered agreed to and the motion to
reconsider be laid upon the table, that the amendment be considered
original text for the purpose of further amendments and that the
Daschle-Carnahan amendment No. 1855 remain in its current status as a
first-degree amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 1854) was agreed to.

Amendment No. 1857

Mr. HOLLINGS. I have an amendment on behalf of the Senator from
Vermont, Senator Leahy, which I send to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the pending amendment is
laid aside.
The clerk will report the amendment.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Hollings], for Mr.
Leahy, proposes an amendment numbered 1857.

Mr. McCAIN. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be
dispensed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To amend title 49, United States Code)

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

SEC. __. ENCOURAGING AIRLINE EMPLOYEES TO REPORT SUSPICIOUS
ACTIVITIES.

(a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 449 of title 49,
United States Code, is amended by inserting at the end the
following:

``Sec. 44938. Immunity for reporting suspicious activities

``(a) In General.--Any air carrier or foreign air carrier
or any employee of an air carrier or foreign air carrier who
makes a voluntary disclosure of any suspicious transaction
relevant to a possible violation of law or regulation,
relating to air piracy, a threat to aircraft or passenger
safety, or terrorism, as defined by section 3077 of title 18,
United States Code, to any employee or agent of the
Department of Transportation, the Department of Justice, any
Federal, State, or local law enforcement officer, or any
airport or airline security officer shall not be civilly
liable to any person under any law or regulation of the
United States, any constitution, law, or regulation of any
State or political subdivision of any State, for such
disclosure.
``(b) Application.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to--
``(1) any disclosure made with actual knowledge that the
disclosure was false, inaccurate, or misleading; or
``(2) any disclosure made with reckless disregard as to the
truth or falsity of that disclosure.

``Sec. 44939. Sharing security risk information

``The Attorney General, in consultation with the Deputy
Secretary for Transportation Security and the Director of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, shall establish procedures
for notifying the Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration, and airport or airline security officers, of
the identity of persons known or suspected by the Attorney
General to pose a risk of air piracy or terrorism or a threat
to airline or passenger safety.''.
(b) Report.--Not later than 120 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall report to
the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, the
House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and the
Judiciary Committees of the Senate and the House of
Representatives on the implementation of the procedures
required under section 44939 of title 49, United States Code,
as added by this section.
(c) Chapter Analysis.--The chapter analysis for chapter 449
of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting at
the end the following:

``44938. Immunity for reporting suspicious activities.
``44939. Sharing security risk information.''.

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am pleased that the Senate will accept my
amendment to improve aircraft and passenger safety by encouraging
airlines and airline employees to report suspicious activities to the
proper authorities.
In addition, this amendment requires the Department of Justice and
the Federal Bureau of Investigation to share security risk information
with the Federal Aviation Administration and airport or airline
security officers.
I want to commend Senator Hollings and Senator McCain for their good
work on this airport security legislation. I support the Hollings-
McCain Aviation Security Act and believe this amendment improves an
already excellent bill.
The Leahy amendment provides civil immunity for airlines and airline
employees who report information on potential violations of law
relating to air piracy, threats to aircraft or passenger safety, or
terrorism to the Department

[[Page S10440]]

of Justice, Department of Transportation, a law enforcement officer, or
an airline or airport security officer.
This civil immunity would not apply to any disclosure made with
actual knowledge that the disclosure was false, inaccurate or
misleading or any disclosure made with reckless disregard as to its
truth or falsity.
In other words, this amendment would not protect bad actors.
According to press reports, two of the suspected September 11, 2001,
terrorists were on an FBI watch list. Both the Secretary of
Transportation and the Attorney General, however, testified before
Congress that the FBI, the INS, and the Department of Justice do not
currently supply these watch lists to the FAA or to the Nation's
airline carriers to match up passenger lists with potential threat
lists.
It is time for that policy to change. This amendment requires the
Attorney General to establish procedures for notifying the FAA of the
identity of known or suspected terrorists.
Monday's Wall Street Journal reported that the National Commission on
Terrorism has stressed the importance of more effective coordination
and dissemination of security information including the FBI's watch
list of potential terrorists and their associates.
Indeed, the Wall Street Journal reported:

My amendment will put those needed procedures into place by requiring
the Attorney General, in consultation with the Deputy Secretary for
Transportation Security, which is created in the underlying bill, and
the Director of the FBI, to establish procedures to notify the FAA and
airport or airline security officers, of the identity of persons known
or suspected to pose a risk of air piracy or terrorism or a threat to
airline or passenger safety.
Finally, the amendment requires the Attorney General to report to
Congress on the implementation of the procedures to identify these
suspected or known hijackers or terrorists.
I believe the Leahy amendment will improve aircraft and passenger
safety and provide the flying public with greater security. Indeed,
this amendment has the support of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce among
others.
I thank Senator Hollings and Senator McCain for accepting this
amendment.
I ask unanimous consent that this article from the Wall Street
Journal, entitled, ``U.S. Task Force Proposes Ways For Sharing
Security-Risk Data With Airlines, Airports,'' be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

[From the Wall Street Journal, Oct. 8, 2001]

U.S. Task Force Proposes Ways for Sharing Security-Risk Data With
Airlines, Airports

(By Andy Pasztor)

A government-created task force recommended ways to plug
what historically has been one of the most glaring loopholes
in aviation security: a lack of clear-cut procedures to
circulate timely information about potential threats to
airlines and airports.
The recommendations submitted to Transportation Secretary
Norman Mineta urge, among other things, creation of a
``federal security agency'' that would ``fundamentally''
improve integration of ``law enforcement and national
security intelligence data.''
The proposed entity, supported in concept by the White
House as well as congressional leaders, would be responsible
for directly passing on such threat information to senior
security personnel at each airline and airport. Officials of
the Federal Aviation Administration have acknowledged that
they only received partial information from the Federal
Bureau of Investigation.
``We have access to the names that the FBI gives us,'' but
don't ``normally have access'' to the full ``watch list'' of
potential terrorists or their associates assembled by the
bureau, U.S. immigration officials and other law enforcement
agencies, Monte Belger, the FAA's acting deputy
administrator, told lawmakers last month.
Despite extensive debate over giving the FAA access to
certain intelligence data, there was no resolution of that
issue prior to Sept. 11. After the attacks, the FAA
instituted some makeshift security procedures. Before any
commercial jetliner can take off, airlines must check the
names of all passengers against a lengthy and continuously
updated ``watch list'' of names supplies by the FBI.
Paul Bremer, chairman of a blue-ribbon government panel
called the National Commission on Terrorism, has stressed the
importance of more effective coordination and dissemination
of security information.
Since the FBI ``is in charge of catching criminals and
prosecuting them,'' historically it has had some reluctance
to quickly pass on potential evidence to the FAA or airlines.
``Part of the problem in the FBI is a cultural one,'' Mr.
Bremer has said, adding ``we need to find a way [such
information] can be disseminated'' more rapidly and
predictably.
But in certain of its conclusions, the task force also
appears to have been keenly interested in trying to minimize
delays.
Citing ``an urgent need'' to find more efficient methods of
moving people through the security system as passenger volume
ramps up, the panel recommended ``a nationwide program for
the voluntary prescreening of passengers.'' By issuing
frequent travelers special credentials or checking their
identities and backgrounds before they arrive at the airport,
such travelers would be subjected to less scrutiny. That
would allow security personnel to focus extra attention on
other passengers. Meanwhile, a companion task force appointed
by Mr. Mineta to recommend changes in onboard security
systems stopped short of supporting some concepts previously
proposed by the White House.
Members of this task force said ``while there may be
value'' in installing video cameras designed to show pilots'
activity in the cabin, ``we have no consensus on whether to
proceed with this technology.'' The panel concluded that
calls by President Bush to install double doors to cockpits
were premature. Such a ``design will have limited
applicability to most aircraft in the U.S. fleet'' partly
because there isn't enough room between the current door and
the flight deck to accommodate such a system, the task force
concluded.

Mr. HOLLINGS. The amendment is agreed to on both sides.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment
of the Senator from Vermont, Mr. Leahy.
The amendment (No. 1857) was agreed to.

Amendment No. 1858

Mr. HOLLINGS. On behalf of the distinguished Senator from Nevada,
Senator Ensign, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its
immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Hollings], for Mr.
Ensign, proposes an amendment numbered 1858.

Mr. McCAIN. I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be
dispensed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To permit the Secretary of Transportation to appoint retired
law enforcement officers to serve as air marshals)

At the appropriate place in the section relating to air
marshals, insert the following subsection:
( ) Authority To Appoint Retired Law Enforcement
Officers.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Secretary of Transportation may appoint an individual who is
a retired law enforcement officer or a retired member of the
Armed Forces as a Federal air marshal, regardless of age, if
the individual otherwise meets the background and fitness
qualifications required for Federal air marshals.

Mr. HOLLINGS. We agree with the amendment.
Mr. McCAIN. If we could withhold for 30 seconds to describe the
amendment of Senator Ensign, it allows retired law enforcement officers
or retired armed forces personnel to serve as Federal air marshals if
the individual meets the background and fitness qualifications. I think
this is a good amendment that will provide some highly qualified,
trained and experienced individuals. I urge its adoption.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 1858) was agreed to.
Mr. McCAIN. I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was
agreed to.
Mr. HOLLINGS. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. GRAMM. Mr. President, it is my understanding, we now have of the
underlying bill the Carnahan amendment, which is a first-degree
amendment; is that correct?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas is correct.

[[Page S10441]]

Amendment No. 1859 to Amendment No. 1855

Mr. GRAMM. I send a second-degree amendment to the desk and ask for
its consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Texas [Mr. Gramm] proposes an amendment
numbered 1859 to amendment No. 1855.

Mr. GRAMM. I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be
dispensed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(The text of the amendment is printed in today's Record under
``Amendments Submitted.)
Mr. GRAMM. I'm not going to spend a lot of time tonight talking about
this amendment. We will have an opportunity to talk about it tomorrow.
However, I do want to try to make a couple of points tonight.
First, I want to make a point we are trying to pass a bill on
aviation security. In my opinion, this bill is far from perfect. It
seems to me there are 100 Members in the Senate who believe we need to
do everything we can do to act quickly and act efficiently in making
air transportation safe again. We want the American people to be and
feel secure and we want to get planes flying. Our economy is very much
affected by the ability of Americans to travel, and in the process, to
go about their business, because the business of America is business.

We now have a pending amendment, the Carnahan amendment, that has
nothing to do with aviation security. I know some of my colleagues will
argue that the amendment is meritorious. I have been somewhat amazed by
the argument that we took action to ``bail out'' the airlines, and now
it is time we do something for the employees of the airlines. I beg to
differ. For the last 140 years, the distribution of resources in the
American economy has been roughly 80 percent for labor and 20 percent
for capital. There is no reason to believe that of the $5 billion of
assistance we provided to give emergency relief for the limitations
placed on the airlines on the 11th and the ensuing weeks, that
approximately 80 percent of that money did not go directly to the
benefit of people who worked for the airlines. In fact, the whole
purpose of the funding was to prevent weak airlines from going broke
and to try to stabilize the situation.
Now to come back and say we need another bill dealing with special
benefits for people who work for airlines, it seems to me, approaches
piling on. Quite frankly, I don't understand the logic that if you work
for an airline, and I work for a travel agent, and we are both out of
work, why you are more deserving of Federal benefits than I am. I don't
understand the logic that treats people differently in unemployment
compensation, and to carry over their benefits based on who they work
for. That system makes no sense whatever to me.
I think it is important to note that the Carnahan amendment, at least
by my rough and rugged calculations, would cost $95 billion a year if
the same benefits were applied to everybody in the American economy,
rather than simply being applied to people who work for airlines.
To sum up the points I want to make about the Carnahan amendment:
One, people who work for airlines were the principle beneficiary of the
$5 billion of direct aid and the $10 billion of loan guarantees. The
whole objective was to try to keep airlines operating so they could
provide service and so that employees would not be dislocated
economically by losing their jobs. I don't understand the logic of an
amendment that treats people who work for one private employer
differently than people who work for other private employers, even
though both may have lost their job as a result of what happened on the
11th.
I am not for the Carnahan amendment. I don't make any excuses for
being opposed to it. I think it is bad policy. And quite frankly in
this era of bipartisanship it looks awfully partisan to me. It seems to
me since the decision has been made that we are going to offer
extraneous amendments on the Aviation Security Act, both sides can play
that game. My amendment is a straightforward amendment that opens up
2,000 acres of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil and gas
production. In the process, it adds more oil reserves to America's
proven reserves than 30 years of supply from Saudi Arabia. It would
require the use of the best available technology for environmental
protection. The provision has been adopted by a fairly substantial
bipartisan vote in the House of Representatives.
One might ask, what does energy security have to do with the Aviation
Security Act? My answer is it has a lot more to do with the Aviation
Security Act than the Carnahan amendment. If we are going to vote on
extraneous amendments that our Democrat colleagues want to vote on,
then I want to vote on amendments that I think will benefit the
country.
Quite frankly, I think nothing could do more to immediately bolster
national security than enabling us to produce more oil and gas here at
home at a price consumers can afford to pay to turn the wheels of
energy and agriculture. So I wanted to come over today and offer this
amendment.
Finally, let me reiterate, before I yield the floor and let our
colleagues speak, my concerns about the Aviation Security Act. I think
100 Members are in favor of doing something here. But I think we should
be trying to do something within two constraints: No. 1, how can we
provide additional airport and aviation security in a way that will
minimize the amount of time it takes to put it in place? And, No. 2,
how can we do it in such a way as to maximize the effectiveness of the
security we provide?
I personally believe we would have been well advised and the country
would have been well served if we had allowed the President, in
implementing this program, to decide when to use Government employees
and when to use employees from the private sector and to pick and
choose in such a way as to implement a program as quickly as possible
that would be as effective as possible.
I think we have made a mistake by mandating that the people who are
employed under this act in our major airports all be Federal employees.
It seems to me that will add to the amount of time it takes to put the
program in effect, and I think it is highly questionable that that kind
of binding constraint on the executive branch of Government is aimed at
making the system the most efficient possible.
I think we could have written a better bill had we allowed the
President to do this within the two constraints of doing it as quickly
as possible and having a system that is as effective as possible. The
decision was made not to do that, to move ahead even though the
President expressed a preference to have flexibility. The decision was
made to move ahead by mandating Government employees.
I think that is not good public policy. I am not saying we would not
be better off having a bill that is non-optimal than not having a bill.
But I am simply saying, in this spirit of bipartisanship, it seems to
me that the right way to have done this would have been to trust the
President and give him the flexibility. That the bill did not do.
So in yielding the floor, let me reiterate where we are. We now have
the underlying substitute as the pending bill. We have a first-degree
amendment, the Carnahan amendment, and we have a second-degree
amendment which would open a very limited area of ANWR, 2,000 acres. It
would add to the oil reserves of the country the equivalent of 30 years
of Saudi Arabian imports. And it would require that this oil and gas be
produced with the best available technology.
I am sure Senator Murkowski will speak about why this is something we
should do, as the former chairman of the Energy Committee, if we are in
fact going to consider the Carnahan amendment. Let me say if we simply
decide to focus, as I believe we should, on aviation security, if we
should decide to drop the Carnahan amendment, I would be willing to
pull down this amendment. But if we are going to deal with extraneous
matters, then we ought to be dealing with extraneous matters, in my
opinion, that are more related to the crisis we face than is the
Carnahan amendment.
So if we are going to press ahead with that amendment, then I am
going to press ahead with voting on ANWR. I understand the rules of the
Senate. The majority leader has filed cloture on the Carnahan
amendment. I will vote against cloture. I hope cloture will be

[[Page S10442]]

denied. But if cloture is adopted, then my amendment to the Carnahan
amendment will fall. But I will offer it again as a first-degree
amendment.
I want to reiterate, if we are going to get in this business of
dealing with extraneous amendments, which I think is a mistake--I think
under the circumstances that, on a united basis, we ought to move ahead
with aviation security--but if we are going to get into these
extraneous amendments, then I think everybody ought to have the right
to get into them. I cannot imagine anything that would be more
important that we could do tomorrow on the floor of the Senate than to
adopt a House-passed provision that, on a very limited basis, would
open ANWR and would add more proven oil reserves to the Nation than 30
years' supply from Saudi Arabia.
I appreciate the Chair's indulgence and I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I welcome the opportunity to join with
Senator Carnahan in urging the Senate to provide some important relief
for workers and workers' families whose loss of jobs were directly
related to the terrible terrorist attacks which took place here earlier
in September.
I think all Americans have been struck by a variety of different
emotions in these recent weeks. I absolutely found them inspiring,
almost beyond description in so many different ways. Obviously, the
extraordinary loss of life was breathtaking in its scope and its impact
on so many families. But we saw absolutely extraordinary heroism by
many individuals who never, probably, considered themselves to be
heroes or heroines. I think that has been emblazoned on the minds of
people all over this country, and really all over this world. It will
be a proud part of our Nation's character and history.
Something else we have seen is extraordinary acts of generosity
towards our fellow citizens. Americans are a generous people. I think
all of us have seen, in small, personal ways as well as in large ways,
the scope of these contributions to the Red Cross, the contributions of
blood, doctors running down to hospitals--so many different acts of
generosity. That really is the background of the time we are meeting.
It is true of the time we are meeting here this evening.
In the immediate wake of the tragedy, this institution responded to
the challenge to our transportation system, our airline transportation
system. In a very short period of time, because of the nature of the
emergency, because there had been direct governmental intervention,
where airlines were closed down, we took action in order to try to
provide some relief to that industry. We took those steps, and we are
very hopeful they will be enough to make sure that industry will
continue to play an important role in our national economy.
Now we took care of management during those actions. They are going
to make sure their salaries are going to be paid. The management of the
airline industry was taken care of, some of them in extremely generous
ways. But we believed at the time we had to take that kind of action.
Now what are we being asked to do under the Carnahan amendment? All
we are saying is, fair is fair. We have taken care of the management in
the airline industry, we have taken care of the airline industry, now
we are talking about being fair to the workers in the industry. Fair is
fair. The American people understand fairness. That is what the
Carnahan amendment is basically all about. It is reflected in
unemployment insurance, COBRA assistance and training. But it is about
fairness.
Those workers include the reservation personnel, customer service
personnel, flight attendants, baggage handlers, mechanics who fix the
planes, the workers who clean the planes, the food service workers, the
shuttle drivers--you could go on and on.
One hundred and twenty thousand of them have been thrown out of
work--not because of their failure to perform good services, not
because they were not working hard, and not because they weren't
producing, but because of terrorist acts. On the one hand, we have
taken care of management. The Carnahan amendment says we are now going
to try to take care of the limited group, the workers. Fair is fair.
Americans understand it. We are using the first vehicle to be able to
do it. Some of us would have preferred that we did it at the time of
the airline action, but so many of the voices that are opposed to this
tonight said: Oh, no. We can't do that now. We shouldn't do that at
this moment. We have to look out for the airlines. When we bring it up,
they say: No. It is an extraneous matter.
Americans understand what is happening. More than 120,000 of these
workers expect someone to speak for them. And the someone who is
speaking for them will be the Members of Congress, the Senate, in a
bipartisan way, I might add, with this amendment. In a bipartisan way
we are going to speak for those workers.
That is what this debate and discussion is all about. Let us get to
the business of voting on this measure. Let's get to the business of
completing the action on airport security. Then let us go ahead and
deal finally, hopefully, in the next 2 weeks with the economic package
to look after other workers who are also suffering.
I am always interested when I listen to voices on the other side
complain about unemployment insurance. We should really understand that
workers have already indirectly paid into the unemployment
compensation. Do we understand that? Workers pay into unemployment
compensation. I am not sure how much management paid in and how much
they paid at the time that we took care of the airline industry. And I
voted for it and I support it. But we are talking about a major aspect
of this program being extended unemployment compensation. Workers pay
into unemployment compensation over a long period of time. Because we
have been blessed with a strong economy, with strong price stability,
economic growth, and low inflation, there has not been the necessity
for unemployment compensation. But it is part of the safety net that
has been accepted and supported in our society.
I know there are people who are opposed to that in this body as well,
and continue to be opposed to it. But it is there. Workers pay into it.
They need it. They need it at a time such as this when they have lost
their jobs. This is a very modest program. It is unemployment
compensation where workers receive a small percentage of what they
otherwise would have received had they been able to retain their jobs.
It helps them to maintain health insurance.
All of us understand the dangers. Every family understands the
dangers if they lose their health insurance and what kind of additional
pressure that puts on the families. For lower income families, it helps
them in terms of buying into Medicaid--a very modest program in terms
of the training for those who understand, as the persons did whom I
talked with last night in Boston. They had been laid off when Eastern
Airlines collapsed. They are now laid off by US Airways. They said they
were going to try as people in their middle years to take the training
programs that are out there to try to find a different sector. They
just believe they have to start in a new area and a new career.
I look forward to the vote. The American people know this is
relevant. It is absolutely essential. They can understand when you take
care of the management, as we have, and take care of the industry, that
workers have been a part of that whole process. If it had not been for
those terrorist attacks, probably 95 percent of those workers would
have been working either today, tonight, or tomorrow. As a direct
result of that attack, these individuals have lost their livelihood.
The question is whether we are going to be responsive in a measured,
modest way that will permit them to at least hold their families
together for a short period of time until they can either find the
training or be recalled to work. That is the least we can do for
working families in this country.
I hope cloture will be obtained on this particular amendment.
The airline industry suffered enormously in the September 11
terrorist attacks. Congress has already made billions of dollars in
federal relief available to the airlines. And now it is time for us to
give urgently needed relief to the thousands of airline workers who
have also been financially devastated by this tragedy.

[[Page S10443]]

The men and women who worked for the airlines and airports deserve
our help today. We know that layoffs in the airline industry alone are
expected to total about 120,000 workers. American Airlines and United
have each announced layoffs of 20,000 workers. Continental, Delta,
Northwest, and US Airways have each announced layoffs of more than
10,000 workers. Workers with smaller airlines have been hit even
harder. Spirit has laid off 30 percent of its workforce while ATA is
laying off about 20 percent of its workers.
We need to do more for workers like Penny Bloomquist of Minnesota.
She was just laid off from her dream job as a flight attendant for
Northwest Airlines. After working a range of different jobs while
raising her children, Ms. Bloomquist sacrificed mightily to enroll in
Northwest's six-day a week training program. Instead of living her
dream today, she is instead selling off many of her belongings.
The Carnahan-Kennedy amendment will provide much-needed relief for
Ms. Bloomquist and thousands of workers like her. Extended unemployment
insurance benefits, job training benefits, and health care coverage
will be available to airline workers, for workers who build our
airplanes, and for airport workers, including airline food service
employees. Only those workers who lost their jobs as a direct result of
the attacks of September 11 or security measures taken in response to
the attacks will be eligible for these benefits.
Fair is fair. Congress treated the airlines fairly, and now we must
treat the workers fairly. Tens of thousands of other airline employees
deserve unemployment insurance benefits. They deserve job training
assistance. They deserve fair health care coverage, and they deserve it
as soon as possible.
Under our amendment, workers who have exhausted their 26-week
eligibility for state unemployment insurance would be eligible for
additional weeks of cash payments funded entirely by the federal
government.
This amendment will also provide unemployment insurance benefits to
airline workers who are not currently eligible for state unemployment
benefits. Workers who do not meet their State's requirements for
unemployment insurance would receive 26 weeks of federally financed
unemployment insurance.
The amendment will provide job training benefits to get people back
to work. Workers who are not expected to return to their jobs in the
airline industry will be eligible for retraining benefits. Other
workers who are not expected to return to their original jobs, but who
may find some alternative job in the airline industry, will be eligible
for training to upgrade their skills.
Our amendment will also provide health care benefits to laid off
airline and airport workers. Too often families cannot afford to pay to
continue their health coverage after layoffs. They are forced to choose
between health care and other basic family needs. In fact, almost 60
percent of the uninsured today have lost their job in the past year.
For airline workers who are currently covered under their employer's
health plan, the federal government will reimburse 100 percent of their
COBRA health care premiums. Workers who did not receive health care
through their employers will be eligible for Medicaid, with the federal
government covering 100 percent of the premiums.
We also need to do more for workers in other industries--especially
the travel, tourism, hospitality, and restaurant industries that have
been hit so hard. Last week, the Labor Department announced that
unemployment claims climbed to the highest level in nine years. New
claims for unemployment increased by 71,000 to a total of more than
528,000 in just one week.

Relief for these workers must be a significant part of the economic
stimulus legislation that Congress will soon take up. These workers
have lost their jobs with little, if any, severance pay, and little, if
any, health insurance. We cannot abandon these workers and their
families.
These attacks have also jeopardized the nation's overall economic
health. In New York City alone, the overall cost of the World Trade
Center attack could be as much as $105 billion over the next two years.
Nationally, the Department of Commerce recently reported our worst
quarter of economic growth in over 8 years.
Expanding Unemployment Insurance is one of the most effective ways to
get our economy moving again. Unemployed workers have to spend every
penny just to feed their families and pay their rent. So, for every
dollar we give to unemployed workers, we expand the economy by more
than $2.15. We must do all that we can to strengthen our economy.
Helping workers during a slowing economy is good economic policy. The
unemployment insurance system will be critical to the nation's recovery
and economic strength.
Historically, Congress has ensured extended benefits for each
recession since the 1950s. Surely as we face this national crisis we
should do the same for today's workers. If we act soon to provide
extended benefits nationally, we will avoid the mistakes of the early
1990s. At that time, we waited the better part of a year to act. At the
same time, hundreds of thousands of workers exhausted their benefits.
This time must be different. We need to act now. Not only will
millions of workers be directly helped financially, but according to a
recent study commissioned by the Department of Labor, unemployment
insurance with the federally extended benefits reduces the number of
workers who become unemployed. By improving and extending unemployment
insurance, history shows that we will have a shorter, less severe
recession.
Good unemployment benefits will help workers bridge the gap between
jobs, and put money in their hands. Unemployed workers will spend these
unemployment benefits, rather than save them. If fact, the DOL study
concluded that unemployment insurance, with its extended benefits,
mitigates 15 percent of the loss of GDP that otherwise would occur
during a recession. We need this stimulus for the economy.
Every day we delay, more workers suffer. Working men and women are
waiting for this help. We owe it to them to act, and we will have the
chance to do just that one the economic stimulus legislation that we
soon take up.
The issue before us now is relief for airlines workers. A strong
airline industry is critical to the national economy. We need to keep
the airlines flying--but we also must provide critical assistance for
the airline workers who lost their jobs, and now is the time to do
that.
I urge my colleagues to stand up for airline workers by passing the
Carnahan-Kennedy amendment to give these workers the genuine relief
they need.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington is recognized.
Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I came down to the floor this evening to
reiterate the comments of my friend from Missouri, Senator Carnahan,
and the comments that the Senator from Massachusetts, Mr. Kennedy, made
in expressing the frustration about the lack of progress on the
aviation security bill and the need to immediately consider worker
assistance in this amendment.
We have spent a week now simply on the motion to proceed to
consideration of one of the most important bills that we need to pass
this year. Every day that we wait, critical measures to enhance the
American public's confidence in the aviation system are not enacted--
and, thus, economic activity dependent on this sector is not generated.
We have no time to waste. The issues that divide us are not terribly
far apart. Like my colleague from Missouri, I don't want to slow this
bill down. I had wanted to see both the security provisions and the
worker assistance dealt with during the consideration of the airline
assistance package that we passed several weeks ago. But people told us
to wait, and do it after we pass that package.
So I think it's time that we all step back and reflect on the
importance of these measures. I call on my colleagues to reconsider
these differences that remain and get down to actual consideration of
this bill, and the Carnahan amendment.
I would like to thank Senators Hollings and McCain for putting
together an aviation security measure that will give this country the
confidence to fly again. In the wake of the September 11 attacks,
Senators Hollings and McCain began to work on this package immediately.

[[Page S10444]]

The package they put together I call on my colleagues to support:
First, it expands the air marshal program, improves passenger-
screening requirements in our airports, and provides for hijacking
training of flight crews.
It requires more background checks for flight school students,
strengthens cockput security, and increases perimeter security at our
Nation's airports.
And, it will bring the passenger screening function under Federal
control, something I believe is a necessity for restoring public
confidence that a well trained, well paid, and more integrated security
workforce is on duty at airports in every corner of this Nation.
We have a long way to go in bringing the passengers back, but I am
confident they will come back.
I would like to thank Senators Carnahan, Kennedy, and Majority Leader
Daschle for their hard work on this legislation, particularly their
effort to include airline worker assistance. It is a strong first step
in easing the blow to workers in the aviation industry who will be
greatly impacted.
I appreciate my colleagues' leadership on this issue and their
willingness to include aircraft manufacturing workers who are about to
suffer the severe impacts of others in the industry. We should have
done this 2 weeks ago. That is why we cannot afford to wait.
The Carnahan amendment will help thousands of families who are facing
economic turmoil. These are people who are suddenly left holding
numerous household bills that they will soon be unable to pay. They
have mortgages, car payments, credit card debt, utility bills, and
school loans. What thousands of them won't have much longer is a job.
Major U.S. airlines expect to cut more than 100,000 jobs this year
alone and tens of thousands have already received pink slips. The
September 11 attacks affected all of us very deeply. We should think
about the individuals who have directly lost their economic security as
a result of these events.

In my State, the Boeing Company recently announced it will be forced
to lay off 20,000 to 30,000 workers by the end of 2002. Those are just
numbers of direct jobs that will be lost in the airline and aircraft
manufacturing industries. The overall economic toll will be far
greater.
For Boeing workers, notices will be sent on October 12--just 2 days
from now--to inform them that in 60 days they will be out of a job. So
that means that on December 14--less than 2 weeks before Christmas--a
significant number of workers in my State are going to be jobless.
While dealing with how to meet their bills, the average Boeing worker
who elects to continue to try to cover their health care coverage--
their family medical and dental--will have to pay nearly $850 per
month. That is $850 a month on top of other bills that unemployed
workers are going to have to face.
These layoffs will certainly mean hardship for thousands of
individual families, but they will also create a serious economic
ripple effect in my State--the State of Washington--and nationwide.
The Seattle Times recently reported that the Boeing layoffs alone
will take $1.76 billion out of the economy in regions of the country
where the layoffs occur. More than 70 percent of those layoffs are
expected to happen in Washington, which means a loss of $1.29 billion
to our region's economy.
The economy is already reacting with uncertainty resulting from the
many layoffs and the fear of layoffs. Consumer spending currently
accounts for two-thirds of our economy. Yet consumer confidence in
September fell to its lowest level since January of 1996. We can take a
step--a giant step--in shoring up consumer confidence if we let the
workers in the most impacted sector know, by passing this legislation,
that they will not fall through the cracks.
The fact is, unless we do something to instill greater consumer
confidence in the aviation system, it will be difficult to sustain our
larger economic growth. That is why it is so important that we act now.
Our economy works best when people are working. When they lose their
jobs, they need help to manage their unemployment, train for new jobs,
and make an easy transition to new careers. This amendment will provide
the financial assistance, job training, and health care coverage for
thousands of workers in the airline and aircraft manufacturing
industries--workers who are losing their jobs as a result of terrorism.
The time to provide the workers relief is now, and in this bill. We
have already provided, as many of my colleagues have said, the airline
industry with billions of dollars to keep them flying. That was the
right thing to do to bolster the economy and to maintain as many jobs
as possible, but the workers who are the heart of the industry deserve
equal treatment, and that includes the workers in the airline
manufacturing industry.
We cannot take care of the corporate needs and shareholder needs and
not the needs of American workers who are the backbone of our economy.
Our economy was built by their muscle and their minds, and it is a
product of their hard work and creativity that continues to drive us.
We cannot allow terrorism to transform our economy from a rising tide
that can lift all boats into a rising storm that threatens to capsize
American workers. We need to provide them with a lifeline to health
care coverage, unemployment benefits, and job training.

Again, I call on my colleagues to support the Carnahan amendment and
the overall airline security legislation. America is watching us and
asking us to act now on both of these measures.
I yield the floor, Mr. President.
Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the
quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the
pending Carnahan amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.

Amendment No. 1860

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf
of Senator Snowe of Maine and ask for its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
The senior assistant bill clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Arizona [Mr. McCain], for Ms. Snowe,
proposes an amendment numbered 1860.

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the
amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To authorize national emergency powers of the Deputy
Secretary for Transportation Security)

On page 5, line 13, strike the closing quotation marks and
the second period.
On page 5, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
``(3) National emergency responsibilities.--Subject to the
direction and control of the Secretary, the Deputy Secretary
shall have the following responsibilities:
``(A) To coordinate domestic transportation during a
national emergency, including aviation, rail, and other
surface transportation, and maritime transportation
(including port security).
``(B) To coordinate and oversee during a national emergency
the transportation-related responsibilities of other
departments and agencies of the Federal Government other than
the Department of Defense and the military departments.
``(C) To establish uniform national standards and practices
for transportation during a national emergency.
``(D) To coordinate and provide notice to other departments
and agencies of the Federal Government, and appropriate
agencies of State and local governments, including
departments and agencies for transportation, law enforcement,
and border control, about threats to transportation during a
national emergency.
``(E) To carry out such other duties, and exercise such
other powers, relating to transportation during a national
emergency as the Secretary of Transportation shall prescribe.
``(4) Relationship to other transportation authority.--The
authority of the Deputy Secretary under paragraph (3) to
coordinate and oversee transportation and transportation-
related responsibilities during a national emergency shall
not supersede the authority of any other department or agency
of the Federal Government under law with respect to
transportation or transportation-related matters, whether or
not during a national emergency.

[[Page S10445]]

``(5) Annual report.--The Deputy Secretary shall submit to
the Congress on an annual basis a report on the activities of
the Deputy Secretary under paragraph (3) during the preceding
year.
``(6) National emergency.--The Secretary of Transportation
shall prescribe the circumstances constituting a national
emergency for purposes of paragraph (3).''.

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, this is a national emergency
responsibilities amendment, where the Deputy Secretary will have
responsibilities for coordination amongst various agencies. I think it
is a good amendment, and I urge its adoption.
Mr. HOLLINGS. I urge the adoption of the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate?
Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
The amendment (No. 1860) was agreed to.
Mr. McCAIN. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. HOLLINGS. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I do not see any more pending business, so
pending the appearance of the majority leader or the whip, I suggest
the absence of a quorum.
Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, will the Senator withhold suggesting the
absence of a quorum?
Mr. McCAIN. I withhold.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina is recognized.
Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I ask colleagues to find out the
disposition of the leadership and how they want to wrap up because we
are ready to go. But pending that, I will say a word about another
concern I have.
(The remarks of Mr. Hollings are printed in today's Record under
``Morning Business.'')
Mr. HOLLINGS. I see the distinguished Senator from New York is here.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.
Mrs. CLINTON. I thank the chairman of the committee who has done such
a tremendous job of leadership in the wake of the terrible attacks of
September 11. I commend him and the ranking member, the distinguished
Senator from Arizona, and thank them for their tireless work and their
constant reminders of the challenges we face and the sacrifices that
are needed.
I rise in support of the chairman's hard work on behalf of this bill,
and I particularly appreciate the inclusion of the clear understanding
that we have to face a direct threat to our national security and we
have to do it by joining together and establishing a commonsense set of
solutions to the problems now before us.
The Aviation Security Act the chairman has worked so hard on is the
result of many years of his labors and understanding of the
difficulties we confront. I certainly commend him and thank him for his
hard work.
I also rise as a cosponsor of the Carnahan amendment to provide
critical assistance to airline workers and those in aviation-related
industries who were laid off as a direct result of the terrorist
attacks.
At the time we considered the so-called airline bailout bill, many of
us made very clear in our statements on the floor that we were
disappointed that some concerns for the workers who were going to lose
their jobs were not included in the bailout bill. We come today to
reinforce our deep concern and to ask our colleagues to support the
Carnahan amendment.
The numbers are overwhelming. We know that 100,000 workers have been
laid off in the airline industry. At least 30,000 more have been laid
off in airline manufacturing. We are concerned that if the American
traveling public and visitors from overseas don't resume flying, as I
urge everyone to do--I have flown numerous times already, and I
encourage everyone to begin again to travel for business and pleasure--
if for whatever reason that return to the air is delayed, then the
numbers will undoubtedly grow.
Many of these airline workers are based in New York. They have been
supporting our air transportation system out of JFK and LaGuardia. They
have been literally handling some of the busiest air traffic corridors
in the world. We know that reductions in flight schedules at both of
these airports have put thousands of New Yorkers out of work: pilots
and flight attendants, baggage and passenger service representatives.
This has had a ripple effect throughout New York.
For example, in Syracuse, in upstate New York, a call center for US
Airways that had been there for many years was shut down, throwing more
than 400 employees out of work.
These airline and aviation-related industry layoffs are not just
numbers. They represent the lives and livelihoods of hard-working
Americans. I have heard many stories, as my colleagues have, of the
hardships that are being imposed because out of the skies on September
11 came these dreadful, horrible acts of terrorism, where people who
were willing to commit suicide brought about the deaths of thousands
and thousands of our fellow citizens and people from all over the world
and also wreaked havoc on our airline industry and the economy in
general.
I hope as we consider this Aviation Security Act, for which I support
and again thank the chairman and the ranking member, we will also
support Senator Carnahan's amendment. Her aid package for dislocated
workers is modeled after the successful trade adjustment assistance. It
will allow airline workers to extend their unemployment insurance while
they receive needed job training and support services or while,
hopefully, they wait to be called back to work because we will all
start flying again.
This amendment will also enable families to receive health care
benefits as they go through this difficult period.
No story more sums up the anguish and pain of the losses we are
discussing and the need to improve security than one that comes out of
JFK. A TWA flight attendant at that airport received her furlough
notice while awaiting news of her husband, a New York City firefighter
missing at the World Trade Center. New Yorkers and Americans have paid
a very heavy price. We are summoning our resolve. We are preparing our
responses individually and throughout our Nation. We are following the
leadership of our President. We are supporting our men and women in
uniform.
I urge my colleagues to support the act that Chairman Hollings and
Senator McCain have crafted and support the Carnahan amendment on which
she has worked so hard to pay some attention and provide assistance to
those Americans who woke up on September 11 thinking that it was any
other workday and went to bed on that terrible day knowing that they
might lose their jobs as a result of this horrific attack.
I thank my colleagues and yield back the remainder of my time.
Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, nearly one month has passed since the
ferocious attacks of September 11th. Words remain inadequate to
describe or define the event. Analysts are beginning to assess the
immediate costs in economic terms. Someday, perhaps, historians will
succeed in cataloguing, analyzing and calculating the losses. But some
losses--families torn apart, communities devastated--will remain
forever beyond calculation.
However, the tragic events of September 11th leave no question that
our airport security system is in need of reformation. The ability of
hijackers to ease through our Nation's airport screeners has created
fear among the American public about flying and has led to a
significant downturn in the travel and tourism industry. Around the
country, air travelers now patiently wait in long lines after emergency
security procedures have been instituted to prevent further tragedies.
Thousands of employees, not only from the airline industry, but also
well beyond it, have lost their jobs. During these difficult times, it
is imperative that Congress act to protect Americans from future
terrorism and to provide economic assistance to those left unemployed
because of the horrendous acts of September 11th. I strongly support S.
1447 because it takes vital steps to strengthen our Nation's airport
security system, to ensure safety for crews and passengers, and to
bolster our economy.
Among the most important provisions in this bill is the
federalization of airport security personnel. I support this plan
because it is a clear solution to one of the most troublesome aspects
of our current airport security operations: the failure of screeners to
detect dangerous objects. The atrocities

[[Page S10446]]

of the recent terrorist attacks highlight the inadequacies of the
current screening system. Under the system, airlines, subject to
Federal Aviation Administration requirements, are responsible for
administering screening of passengers and their carry-on luggage.
Airlines generally contract out their screening responsibility to
private security companies, often awarding contracts based upon the
lowest bid rather than superior security systems. Allowing airlines
such authority has resulted in a system that too often promotes lower
costs over the safety of passengers.
Recent separate studies by the GAO and the DOJ's Inspector General
revealed the serious inadequacies of the current screening system and
causes for its failures. Among the problems noted by the IG report was
the frequent failure of the airlines to conduct background checks of
employees with access to secure areas and the ability of IG personnel
to access secure areas without being challenged by security 68 percent
of the time. The GAO report which concluded that screener performance
in major U.S. airports was unsatisfactory, attributed the poor
performance of security screeners to a high employee turnover rate,
more than 100 percent per year at many airports--low wages,
insufficient training, and inadequate monitoring of screeners.
Federalizing security operations throughout U.S. airports is the best
answer for improving screener performance. It would raise wages, lower
employee turnover, promote career loyalty among screeners, create
uniform training among security personnel, and, as a result, strengthen
the performance of screeners to discover dangerous objects. Once the
Federal government ensures that screeners are performing their duties
in strict adherence to the highest safety standards, the public will
gain greater confidence in airport security. In light of the current
campaign against terrorism, now is the time to incorporate this change.
As a recent New York Times editorial stated, ``airports are a front
line in the struggle against terrorism, and it no longer makes sense to
delegate their policing to the private sector, which emphasizes low
cost as opposed to security.'' I agree with this assessment.
I also want to underscore my support for Senator Carnahan's amendment
to provide much-needed relief for the thousands of hard-working
employees in the airline industry who have lost their jobs as a result
of the horrific attack on our Nation on September 11th. This amendment
will provide unemployment benefits, health care and training to airline
industry employees who have been laid off due to the marked decrease in
air travel in this country.
The airline industry has been most directly affected in the aftermath
of the attack, but the ripple effect of the attacks is being felt
throughout other industries as well. Hotel, travel, and tourism
employees, who number in the hundreds of thousands, are at risk of
losing their jobs due to the nationwide decrease in travel. In
Maryland, tourism is a $7.7 billion industry. It means jobs for our
people and revenues for our State and local programs. While we are
moving vigorously to encourage travelers to come to Maryland this fall,
a decrease in tourism is expected in the State, as it is nationwide.
While it is crucial that we provide support to airline workers at this
time, we should also remember the plight of the hundreds of thousands
of other workers across the State of Maryland and the country whose
livelihood may be affected.
The terrorist attacks of September 11th were intended to create fear
in Americans and our way of life, including air travel. This
legislation will help to ease fears about air travel and the state of
our economy by strengthening our airport security system. In this
regard, I urge the Senate to pass this legislation expeditiously.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Miller). Without objection, it is so
ordered.

____________________