[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 159 (Friday, November 16, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11974-S11985]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




      AVIATION AND TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ACT--CONFERENCE REPORT

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Under a unanimous consent agreement, I call up the 
conference report on the bill, S. 1447, and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the 
     two Houses on the amendment of the House to the bill (S. 
     1447), ``to improve aviation security, and for other 
     purposes,'' having met have agreed that the Senate recede 
     from its disagreement to the amendment of the House, and 
     agree to the same with an amendment, signed by a majority of 
     the conferees on the part of both Houses.

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senate will proceed to the 
consideration of the conference report.
  (The report is printed in the House proceedings of the Record of 
November 16, 2001.)
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, there is 
now 90 minutes of debate evenly divided between the chairman and 
ranking member.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I first want to thank Sam Whitehorn, who is now changing clothes to 
come to the Chamber, and Kevin Kayes. Both Sam Whitehorn and Kevin 
Kayes are on my Commerce Committee staff. They have been working hard 
all night

[[Page S11975]]

long, even with the breakdown of the computer at 5 a.m., to get these 
documents ready for consideration. They have been working over the past 
6 weeks, ever since September 11.
  Secondly, I thank the New York Times. The headline today is: 
``Congress Agrees to U.S. Takeover For Air Security.'' In a line, this 
will do more to stimulate air travel and rejuvenate the economy than 
any one single thing, and that is what we have been trying to do as 
well as institute safety.
  I thank my distinguished counterpart, Senator McCain, who has been 
sticking with us. We fought a good fight right down to the wire, and in 
a general sense we prevailed in that it is not a compromise on safety.
  There is an old Roman canon, XII, salus populi suprema lex esto, 
``the safety of the people is the supreme law,'' and that is the way we 
approach this. We were not concerned about contractors; we were not 
concerned about flexibility; we were concerned about accountability; we 
were concerned about safety. There is just no way, and should not be, 
to compromise safety. That was the difficulty of this particular task.
  It has been a long, hard road. I started on this effort over 20 years 
ago, back in the late 1980s with Pan Am 103, TWA 800, and on and again. 
There were commissions, hearings, more hearings and commissions, 
standards, more training, more testing, more oversight, and on 
September 11 we ended up with criminals doing the screening and 5,000 
dead.
  So that sobered us up. Senator McCain and I went right to work. We 
had a full day of hearings. We now have a measure before us in this 
conference report sought for by the airline pilots, the flight 
attendants, the Air Transport Association, the airport managers, the 
Business Airline Coalition, the mayors, the Governors and everyone 
else. The media have been wonderful in that respect because we have the 
people behind us.
  They have said time and again they were willing to pay up to $25 or 
more per ticket to get airline security. This is only $2.50 with a cap 
of $5 on any one flight.
  But I think the people ought to understand what has been going on for 
years on end. The FAA thought its task was in the main to promote air 
travel and, on many occasions, sacrificed safety. For instance, the 
Inspector General attested before Congress the day before yesterday, 
less than 5 percent of the baggage is screened.
  We have seen only today at Logan Airport they had to fire, or 
suspend, I should say, the security contractor because his screener 
went to sleep at the switch and they do not know how many people got 
through during that slumber. They had to call everybody back in from 
the planes and go through security again. Security lapses have 
persisted, but they will not persist any longer because we now have 
federalization.
  At our hearing, we called in El Al. We had testimony from the Israeli 
security agency, the chief pilot of El Al. I can hear that chief pilot. 
He said: Senator, when we secure that cockpit door, and it is a secure-
type door, it is never to be opened in flight.

  He said: Even if my wife is being assaulted in the cabin, I don't 
open the door. I land that plane and law enforcement is there to meet 
me.
  That has stopped hijacking at El Al. They have not had one for 30 
years. All these folks running around hollering about the European 
model--in the last 8 years they have had 20. We didn't model this after 
Europe. We modeled it after El Al.
  You can see the comprehensive nature, when you listen to their 
particular procedure. They not only screen the passengers and screen 
the baggage and everything else, but they have a double-check at the 
time of enplanement. They have a total background check and security of 
the tarmac itself. This approach prevents someone from getting a 
ticket, having their seat assigned and then calling some plant out on 
the tarmac that has been working there and say: Tape a loaded pistol on 
flight so-and-so, and go out there. So you have to use absolute care 
with the caterers, the mechanics, those who have access to the planes, 
and the perimeter of the airport itself. It is a sort of seamless web.
  When the news media talks of compromises between the House and 
Senate--let me put it this way: There is no compromise on safety. That 
is my emphasis now. With respect to the particular items, since others 
want to be addressing the body at this time, I encourage Senators and 
the public to review the content of the conference report in the 
Congressional Record following passage by the House of Representatives.
  Let me just say this. I will never forget it. We were taught at law 
school that Jackson told Marshall: The Court has made its decision. Let 
him enforce it.
  I don't want to sound abrupt, but the Congress has made its decision. 
Now let the administration, the President, enforce it.
  I say that advisedly because our Chief Executive has been all over 
the lot. That is one of the disturbances we had. We were told he would 
sign our bill that passed 100 to 0. Then they put the entire White 
House in behind Mr. Delay, changing the votes, changing the votes over 
here on the Senate side. Although Senators just had voted as a group of 
100, part of that group changed their votes and everything else of that 
kind. We had, momentarily, total chaos. Now the President says he signs 
it.
  Let me make this comment: We can make it work. We are going to have 
oversight. We are going to keep their feet to the fire. But he has to 
put in a hard charger, a Stormin' Norman or somebody as the Deputy 
Secretary of Security for Transportation. If you get a person of that 
ilk, he will come there and he is going to get the job done. But if it 
is going to be business as usual and worrying--as I heard the Secretary 
say in one of the conferences he had--he said: Wait a minute, now, if 
we have that kind of security requirements in Anchorage, we will lose 
the business in Anchorage and they will fly to Vancouver--literally.
  I said: Come on, man, whenever they come to America, whether it is in 
Anchorage or down in Seattle or whatever, they are going to get this 
kind of check.
  But you can see the culture, the mindset. So you have to have someone 
with a strong mindset as the Deputy Secretary of Security in this 
particular department to carry forward this initiative.
  I yield the floor to my distinguished colleague.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Stabenow). The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I thank the distinguished chairman of 
the committee with whom I have worked many years on a broad variety of 
important issues. I have to say, and I think the chairman would agree, 
this is one of the more important issues that we have had the privilege 
of working on together. It has been a very long and difficult process--
a very difficult process.
  My distinguished chairman often quotes Latin. I would like to quote 
one back that would describe what we just went through: ``Illegitimus 
non carborundum,'' which I will not translate for the Record. But the 
fact is, this was a tough process and we did come out with the 
paramount aspect of this challenge of safety being addressed.
  The Senate bill, the major provisions, were adopted. I thank our 
colleagues on the House side who were faced with some very difficult 
pressures, too, who finally came to this agreement.
  Madam President, this legislation will install air marshals where 
needed on airplanes. It will call for reinforced cockpit doors. It will 
authorize pilots to carry guns with the approval of the new Under 
Secretary and the area carriers. It will provide for a new independent 
security agency for all modes of transportation, with significant 
authority to expedite new technology. New technology is going to solve 
a lot of the problems that we have today with delays and problems with 
people being able to get on and off airplanes.
  There will be uniform and rigorous standards. There will be a full 
federalization over 1 year of every airport in America, unless five 
choose to opt out, in five categories in America.
  Law enforcement is a proper function of the Federal Government. Law 
enforcement will be carried out by Federal employees. That is the case 
in these airports.
  What will the signature of the President of the United States do? It 
will do

[[Page S11976]]

two things: No. 1, on the substantive side we will begin a process, 
which will take at least a year, of increasing airport security, of 
putting in place procedures and individuals who will allow Americans 
much greater, dramatically enhanced safety and security in airports and 
on airliners.
  But what else does it do? We all know the reality today is many 
Americans will not get on an airliner because they do not feel any 
confidence that they are safe and secure in doing so. When the 
President of the United States signs this bill and looks the American 
people in the eye and says we are now embarked on an all-out effort to 
do everything your Government can to make you safe and secure, I think 
that will have a major impact on the American people and will move 
forward in restoring the confidence of the American people.
  So I think this legislation is both substantively and from perception 
a very critical piece of legislation. We all know that unless airline 
traffic and passengers are restored to previously levels, our economy 
is going to continue to suffer, not to mention the very vital security 
and safety aspects involved. Not everything that everybody wanted was 
in it, although I would certainly say we got about 95 percent.
  As usually happens, sometimes we add things we should not. I want to 
take a minute to talk about it. There are some liability provisions 
which are put into this bill, some of them perhaps warranted, some 
perhaps not warranted, covering aircraft manufacturers, the World Trade 
Center, some limit on liability in New York City, et cetera. As I say, 
there could be some beneficial aspects of these provisions, but we 
should be addressing liability in its entirety. We should not be 
addressing liability on this issue. We need the appropriate committee--
which I guess is the Judiciary Committee and also to some degree the 
Commerce Committee--to hold a set of hearings so we can address the 
entire liability problem associated with the attacks on September 11, 
rather than a rifleshot approach.
  Do you know why we are using a rifleshot approach? Because people are 
hiring the lobbyists, and campaign money. People are coming into 
Washington; lobbyists are coming in. They bought their access and they 
are exercising their influence.
  That is not a fair way to address the issue of liability, and there 
are legitimate issues. I am sorry those provisions were included in 
this legislation. I don't believe in raising anyone's taxes. I have 
voted literally against every tax increase in the number of years I 
have been a Member of this body and the other body.
  There is an increase in costs associated with this airport security. 
We need to pay for this. The $2.50 may not do it. It may not be enough. 
It may require more. We put a cap of $5 so that someone who gets on an 
airplane that has four stops doesn't have to pay each time. Yes, there 
are remote areas of America. There are remote areas of my State as 
well. There are poor Navajos who want to fly from Window Rock at 
Flagstaff to Phoenix, AZ, and then on to some other place.
  We tried to make this fair. The fact is that everybody has to pay for 
it. It has to be paid for by all Americans. It is a cost for the 
increased security requirements as a result of this new war we are 
fighting.
  I say to the American people and to the passengers that I think this 
is not a high price to pay when you look at the benefits that will 
accrue from the increased security and safety which are absolutely 
vital, as we all know.
  I think we came up with a good piece of legislation. We on the 
Commerce Committee will review this legislation and its impact. It may 
have to be fine tuned in a variety of ways.
  I am very pleased we came together on this issue. We have now done 
something which, unfortunately, took too long. But certainly it is now 
going to be signed into law and will be a very major step forward in 
providing security and safety to Americans, hundreds of millions of 
whom use the airlines every year.
  I again thank Senator Hollings and our staff for the bipartisan way 
in which the Senate acted.
  I also thank Senator Hutchison, the ranking member, as well as 
Senator Rockefeller, chairman of the Aviation Subcommittee, who played 
key and vital roles in the formulation of this legislation.
  This is a new day. We had our differences. It isn't a perfect piece 
of legislation, but it is a landmark piece of legislation. I think, 
since the Congress acted, we should now move forward and try to do the 
best we can to make sure through congressional oversight that the 
intentions and the provisions of this legislation are implemented in as 
efficient and expeditious a manner as possible.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  The Senator from Alaska.
  Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, I would like to address a couple of 
questions to the Senator from South Carolina, if he will yield to me 
for that purpose.
  I would like to ask the Senator from South Carolina: I note on page 
52 that there is a provision regarding screening of small aircraft. It 
says that within 1 year after date of enactment of this act, the Under 
Secretary of Transportation for Security shall transmit a report to the 
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure in the House on 
screening requirements of passengers boarding and baggage carried 
aboard aircraft with 60 seats or fewer used in scheduled passenger 
service, and recommendations for any changes to meet these 
requirements.
  As the Senator from South Carolina knows, my State uses an extensive 
number of small planes. Many of them have nine seats or fewer.
  Can the Senator from South Carolina tell me what provision of this 
bill affects general aviation that is totally intrastate and that seats 
19 or fewer? In the interim of 1 year, what applies to the small planes 
that board passengers only for small distances within a State?
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Generally speaking, none. It does not affect the small 
planes with passengers. We would like to spell that out, but we haven't 
gotten into that thoroughly.
  That is our problem right here, for example, with Reagan National's 
restrictions against private planes coming in, and these other airports 
around the country. We are trying to work that out. But we didn't think 
that was necessarily the particular safety threat at this particular 
time.
  Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, as the Senator knows, our State has 
over 150 small airports, and people go distances of 100 or 200 miles 
and return, or maybe stop in several places along the line. If these 
planes do not interline with intrastate air carriers and are strictly 
local carriers, are they affected by this act?
  Mr. HOLLINGS. I think we are trying to find the final wording because 
most of this was in the House bill. But the answer is, I think on the 
fee you are right; it would be. The FAA safety regulations still apply 
to general aviation. There has been no repeal of that in the takeover 
by the Deputy Secretary of Security. But the general aviation 
regulations are not disturbed here with respect to safety.
  Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, let me say this. I have had extreme 
difficulty in dealing with this bill because I have just read it for 
the first time this morning--and the report. I have extreme difficulty 
interpreting it as it applies to small planes that are carrying mail 
and passengers between two places in Alaska, where they will never 
intersect interstate commerce and where they will never interline with 
anyplace that has any difficulty as far as being a threat to people 
other than people in very small villages going from place to place--
from Bethel to St. Mary's, or from Bethel down to various places in the 
Yukon. I am going to have to go home and tell those people that they 
are affected by this bill.
  I tell my good friend that I can't tell from the way this bill is 
written whether some of the small villages--some of which do not have 
screening devices--that the small commuters fly between have to have 
screening devices. Are they to install screening devices?
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Shalom, peace. Tell them to just calm down for the 
simple reason that this affects the 420 hub airports and the other 
airports connecting with those hub airports. The Senator talks about 
100 or so. I know we have

[[Page S11977]]

nearly 100. When someone gets into a political campaign in Texas or 
South Carolina, you have to travel back and forth on the plane. We 
don't have machines there to test the baggage, or Federal agents.
  I want to answer as appropriately as I can. We are going to continue 
the safety. Small general aviators practice safety because their life 
depends on it. No, there won't be Federal marshals there. There won't 
be Federal screeners in all of those little airports, if that is what 
the Senator wants to get to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, I ask my friend: They are required to 
buy a ticket to get on those commuters, and they pay the $2.50.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. If they come right into that hub.
  Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, I cannot find any exception here for 
those flying between villages and not a hub. They are going to have to 
pay.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. There is language in the bill whereby they do not 
connect with the hub, for example, in Alaska. You can lower that fare 
in those airports.
  Mr. STEVENS. Are the hubs covered named in the bill?
  Mr. HOLLINGS. No.
  Mr. STEVENS. They are named in the Federal Register.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Yes.
  Mr. STEVENS. The current designation is not changed by this bill.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. It is not changed.
  Mr. STEVENS. I thank the Senator. I regret that I did not sign the 
report. I did not have access to this report, nor to the bill.
  I still have to say to the chairman--I have great respect for him--in 
terms of the requirements for safety, that there are a great many 
places in the country, as the Senator from Arizona stated, where 
passengers who are not destined for a hub and are not destined for 
areas where the safety of passengers getting on and off is concerned, 
and baggage is immaterial, and if they are going from Nome to Alakanuk 
or to Shishmaref, or somewhere up in the village country in my State, I 
am afraid someone might interpret this as having them be required to 
pay for security which they don't get, and pay for or be subject to 
these requirements which they don't need.
  I have to tell you, I hope we can review this sometime in the future 
in a way to listen to some of these people who operate commuter 
airlines where they may intersect a hub. We have two or three hubs in 
Alaska defined on the Federal Register today. They may intersect a hub, 
but they do not go through the screening now. And I am not sure this 
bill requires them to go through screening they never had to go through 
before to go from place to place in Alaska.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. It does not require that, and there is no charge there.
  Mr. STEVENS. I thank the Senator and appreciate the courtesy and 
apologize to the Senator from Texas.
  I have no objection to proceeding with the request.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. I yield such time as is necessary to the Senator from 
Texas.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Madam President, I yield up to 5 minutes to the 
Senator from Georgia, who has an airplane to catch, after which I would 
like to claim my time as one of the cosponsors of the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia.
  Mr. CLELAND. I thank the Senator from Texas, and especially thank her 
for the marvelous work on the bill, as well as Senator Hollings and 
Senator McCain and Senator Rockefeller.
  Madam President, this body is about to vote on an historic piece of 
legislation that will put in place new safeguards at airports across 
this land from Savannah to Seattle to Sacramento as families prepare 
for the biggest travel day in the Nation, they can feel assured airport 
security will be strengthened nationwide the very moment President Bush 
signs this landmark legislation into law.
  Aviation security will now be in the hands of the U.S. Department of 
Transportation where it belongs. The Federal Government will 
immediately begin the process to hire, train, and deploy Federal 
screeners, Federal security personnel, and Federal law enforcement--a 
move supported by 80 percent of the American people.
  We will finally have in place strict national standards for the 
hiring and training and job performance of the men and women who are on 
the front lines of ensuring that we have safety in aviation in America.
  Ever since the tragic events of September 11, the American public has 
been crying out for tougher security to ensure that the horrifying 
events of 2 months ago will never again be repeated. This bill is our 
response to that call. It is a comprehensive bill, a tough bill, which 
helps ensure the financial viability of the airline industry and 
enhances America's national security and restores confidence to the 
flying public.
  I am proud to support it. I am proud to be an original cosponsor.
  I yield the floor, Madam President.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Madam President, on September 11, the terrorists 
found loopholes in our homeland security. Four airplanes were used as 
weapons of mass destruction, something we had never seen in our 
country. Now, 2 months later, we are closing these loopholes in our 
homeland security. The bill we are passing today will close the 
loopholes in aviation security so the people of our country, when they 
get on an airplane, will know every conceivable means of securing that 
aircraft are being utilized.
  The bill before us today will create a comprehensive Federal system. 
There will be Federal screeners. There will be Federal supervisors who 
are armed law enforcement personnel. There will be a Federal person in 
charge of every airport in our country to look at the safety system, to 
make sure it works.
  After a 2-year period, we will then have the option for other types 
of security to be offered by an airport and approved by the Secretary. 
So there can be private screeners or local law enforcement people 
working in a security system with the approval of the Under Secretary.
  We will have a pilot program in each of the five major category 
airports: Category X, categories 1, 2, 3, and 4, that will be all 
privatized so we can test that system to see if it works. Then, after 2 
years of the federalized system, perhaps there will be airports that 
would prefer to have some privatization.
  Another element of this bill that closes a loophole is that every 
checked bag will also be required to be screened. As soon as possible, 
but no later than 60 days, by some means, every checked bag will also 
be screened so that if you carry a bag onto the top of the airplane, it 
will be screened, if it goes on the bottom of the airplane it will be 
screened. I think that was an important loophole to close. It was my 
amendment to the bill. I felt very strongly about this.
  We are also asking the Department of Transportation to expedite the 
manufacturing of the highest tech equipment possible for the screening 
of these bags. EDS is the code name for this electronic detection of 
explosives. We are going to make that a priority as well.
  We are reinforcing the cockpit doors. We know the cockpits were 
invaded on September 11. We know that no American pilot would have 
flown an airplane into a building--not one. That is what they are 
trained not to do, and they would never do it, but for being overcome 
and murdered by these terrorists, who did indeed fly into the Pentagon 
and into the World Trade Center.
  So the key elements of this bill are going to greatly strengthen our 
aviation security system in our country. A lot of people have asked me: 
Are we going to see a difference immediately? We already see a 
difference immediately. We are seeing people deployed from other 
agencies, such as the National Guard, who are standing at every 
screening area at every major airport in our country.
  What will happen with the bill before us today is that those National 
Guard units that have been deployed will be substituted with permanent 
personnel, permanent Federal law enforcement personnel, armed Federal 
security supervisors. So we will see an immediate change, but we will 
also see these changes being made permanent.
  As we phase the National Guard out of their temporary locations, we 
will be putting permanent Federal law enforcement personnel in their 
places.

  We have now detailed air marshals from other agencies. We have FBI

[[Page S11978]]

agents. We have Border Patrol agents. Other detailees from other 
Departments are now acting as sky marshals. We will start replacing 
them with permanent replacements so there will be more sky marshals on 
more flights throughout our country and on international flights into 
and out of our country. They will be permanent Federal law enforcement 
personnel that will be replacing the people who have been borrowed from 
other agencies.
  So we are going to see immediate changes. We are going to see changes 
made through the next few weeks, through the next few months, to make 
permanent these people who have come from other agencies to lend a 
hand, to add to the security on an immediate basis. We have also added 
to what is going to be screened.
  Another component of our bill is to require that everybody who has 
access to an aircraft will have a security clearance. There will be a 
criminal background check required for every person who has access to 
an airplane. Whether it is a mechanic, whether it is a person doing 
food service, regardless of their mission on that airplane, they will 
have to have a security clearance. That is another very important 
feature of this bill.
  So I think we have made great progress. I thank Senator Hollings, 
Senator McCain, Senator Rockefeller, and others who helped--Senator 
Burns, Senator Kerry--for coming together and working through this very 
difficult piece of legislation.
  I thank Chairman Young on the House side, and the chairman of the 
subcommittee, Chairman Mica; and Mr. Oberstar. These are people who 
contributed greatly to coming together and getting something that I 
believe is going to significantly improve the security of the flying 
passengers in our country.
  I think it is going to tighten many of the loopholes that we had in 
our system before September 11. No longer is the American flying public 
going to rely on the honesty of every person who gets on an airplane. I 
think we have had to become a little less optimistic in our outlook, 
and now we have to provide for concrete solutions. We cannot just rely 
on the good will of every person in the world. We are going to have to 
protect our people. That is what homeland security is, and that is the 
function of the U.S. Congress.
  In the Constitution of our country, we are required to provide for 
the security of our country.
  Security is not something you can contract out to the lowest bidder. 
Security is not something you can take a chance and hope that maybe we 
can devise a system that we can maybe make work. That is not an option 
for the Congress.
  We have one option. We have one responsibility. That is to provide 
the security to the people of this country who are flying in airplanes 
and believing that everything has been done to make them safe.
  The bill before us today, that we will pass very shortly, is a bill 
that is going to secure the people to every human extent possible 
against the kind of terrorist attack we saw on September 11 or other 
terrorist attacks that could be made in other ways. We are securing the 
top of the airplane. We are securing the bottom of the airplane. We are 
securing the cockpit of the airplane. We are securing the airports 
through which people go.
  We are going to beat the terrorists. We are going to secure the 
people of our country so we can travel in freedom. That is our 
responsibility. We are doing it today.
  I thank Chairman Hollings once again and Senator McCain, all those 
who came together, along with my staff, Joe Mondello, who contributed 
greatly, to the staff who stayed up all night last night who could 
barely even make it here this morning because they were taking a shower 
after trying to make sure that this bill was written.
  I thank everyone who contributed so much to doing this for the 
American people, something they deserve and something we are giving 
them today when we pass this bill to the President of the United 
States.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Montana.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, we will agree to the conference report to 
accompany the airport security bill in a few moments. It is a terrible 
thing; I lost my voice. That is fatal for auctioneers and for those of 
us who try to make a living in the cave of the winds, which is this 
Chamber, but I will try to get through. I will make my points as 
quickly as I can.
  We had an opportunity to pass a good bill, and I think we have a 
bill. I will pledge to my colleagues in this Senate and also to the 
flying public that I will do everything I can to make it work because 
we have spoken.
  If we really wanted to maximize security at airport facilities across 
the Nation, we took a wrong turn in this bill. That is what we do. I 
offered an amendment to allow the bright line of accountability, 
authority, and responsibility of jurisdiction of enforcement of those 
laws to reside with the Department of Justice. When I offered that 
amendment, it was immediately accepted by a voice vote. No debate was 
held on that part of the bill. Some of that was my fault because we 
were trying to deal with the bill and move it through the Senate.
  As we consider this legislation, I ask the question: Whom are we 
trying to protect? I will tell you whom we protect more than anything 
else. We protect Government jobs. We are building up a bureaucracy 
within the Department of Transportation to which even the Congressional 
Budget Office cannot put a figure. We do not know what this is going to 
cost yet.
  What happens after we pass this bill today? The rules of 
administration will be written. That will take considerable time. Those 
of us who are concerned about this bill were told we had to pass 
something before Thanksgiving because Thanksgiving is the most highly 
traveled time of the year. I suggest we are not going to have any more 
protection this Thanksgiving, and I am not sure we are going to have 
the protections in place next Thanksgiving.
  If we try, as a legislative body, to suggest to the rule writers how 
we want the bill to work, we will be given the old story of separation 
of powers, that we cannot do that. So now it goes into the hands of the 
bureaucrats who have a habit of writing the rules for their benefit and 
sometimes disregarding the real reason why we passed the legislation.
  Every time one flies, they are going to be charged to pay for this 
big bureaucracy, and every taxpayer in this country will also be paying 
for it.
  Why did I decide the Department of Justice is better than the DOT in 
the areas of enforcement? I will say why. It is enforcement. Before we 
can expect load factors to go up and return to the levels prior to 11 
September, the flying public must feel secure and safe. Symbolically, 
for no other reason, I suggest the Department of Justice do that.
  Let us take a look at the areas of responsibilities and the 
challenges ahead of us: passenger lists, intelligence, baggage and 
cargo, check-in areas, boarding areas and, yes, the security of the 
aircraft. All personnel who have anything to do with maintenance, 
cleaning, fueling, or catering must be screened.
  These are challenges of great dimension, and it is a big job ahead. 
Yes, we are asking to build a new bureaucracy in order to take care of 
this. Who is best equipped to handle that challenge? I suggest the 
Department of Justice because they have the intelligence in front of 
them and they know how to handle secured areas.
  Who deals with security every day and has the experience to do it? 
Who can best be put to work the quickest and have people on the ground 
doing the business the fastest, without creating a new bureaucracy? The 
model is in front of us.
  As we discussed, this was not allowed to be discussed in conference, 
either. There was no debate so the American people were not given a 
real choice between a new bureaucracy and a bureaucracy that is already 
in place.
  How are we going to pay for it? I will leave with this thought. 
Again, I will pledge my support to make sure this law works. It would 
be unwise to be any other way.
  We have come through the World Series, a great World Series, and we 
watch football almost every day on our television sets. Do you know 
what makes that game a great game and why it garners all the 
spectators? It is because we do not let the teams referee their own 
games. In football, there are 22 men on the field, the most heavily 
armored, mobile, hostile, bent on killing one another, and 6 old men in

[[Page S11979]]

striped shirts have very few problems. Why? One, because there is only 
one rule book, and No. 2, we do not allow them to referee their own 
games.
  I contend we are making a big mistake. I did not sign the conference 
report, but I will pledge to make sure the law works. I also warn my 
colleagues we will be back in less than a year to deal with this 
problem again.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. I yield to the distinguished Senator from North Dakota.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. DORGAN. Madam President, I add my appreciation for the work of 
the Senator from South Carolina and Senator McCain of Arizona. As 
chairman and ranking member of the Commerce Committee representing our 
side on this issue, they did outstanding work.
  We do big and small things in the Congress. This is a big thing. This 
isn't testing the water. This is making waves. This is really a 
profound change in many ways with respect to security on airlines that 
serve our country.
  I rise to talk a bit about some of the things we are doing and why.
  First the why. We know that September 11 caused great concern among 
the American people about the risks of taking airplane flights. They 
saw jetliners used as bombs, as missiles full of fuel, taking down two 
of the largest buildings in our country.
  The site of that kind of tragedy, that act of mass murder, that 
terrorism has persuaded many Americans to feel queasy and jittery about 
flying. What kind of security exists with respect to the airlines?
  Then they read in the newspaper in recent weeks stories about a 
person who comes to an airport in Chicago and is screened. They 
discover two knives on the person. They send the person to the boarding 
gate, and they do an enhanced screening there. He has seven more 
knives, a stun gun, and a can of mace. People ask: How can this happen? 
It further erodes the confidence of the American people with respect to 
security.
  In the last couple days, a fellow with two meat cleavers gets through 
a screening process. Here we have nine knives, two meat cleavers, a can 
of mace, and a stun gun. The other day a woman is discovered to have a 
.22-caliber pistol in her purse. After she gets through the screening 
process, she says: I don't understand that. I got it through when I 
took other flights. She is walking through screening in other 
circumstances with a loaded .22-caliber pistol.
  Does it give people pause? Of course, it does. The screening that has 
existed by some of the companies has not been good at all. One of the 
companies named Argenbright was fined by the U.S. Government $1.5 
million, put on probation and then violated their probation, hired 
people with criminal backgrounds, didn't train them properly, certified 
to the Federal Government false documents. It does not work. We know 
that.
  The question confronting Congress is, What do we do to give people 
some confidence about the system? The answer is obvious: improve 
security. How do we do that? This legislation puts sky marshals on 
airplanes in significant quantity. That gives people some confidence. 
It strengthens the cockpit doors, requiring airlines to take action to 
do so. That will give people some confidence, especially with respect 
to baggage screening, airport perimeter security, and a range of other 
things.
  This legislation says what we have been doing has not worked and we 
will do it differently. This establishes a process by which we have 
uniform standards. We will hire Federal screeners at airports. They 
will be managed and trained effectively and consistently. They will 
provide a level of security the country deserves and needs.
  Let me mention that in this legislation is a provision I added which 
I have been trying to add for some long while. It will finally become 
law with the President's signature. It deals with something called the 
advanced passenger information system. I have added it to three bills 
in the Senate. It has been kicked out because of jurisdictional 
disputes with one of the committees of the House of Representatives. I 
put it in this bill, and it will be signed by the President. It is 
going to get done.
  What does that mean? It means that airlines bringing people into this 
country as guests of ours with visas must provide us advanced passenger 
lists of who is coming so we can run those lists of passenger names 
against the FBI list, against the Customs list, and 21 Federal agencies 
that have lists about people that we don't want coming into this 
country, those who are terrorists, known or suspected, that we don't 
want to allow into this country.
  We have had, since 1988, something called the advanced passenger 
information system. Most airlines around the world comply with it. When 
they land in the United States prior to coming here, they have given us 
an advanced list of who they are bringing to the United States as 
guests with a visa.
  Some airlines have refused to comply. Some airlines refuse to comply 
with this voluntary system. Let me share which airlines: airlines from 
Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait. Do we want to know the 
names of passengers coming from those countries? You bet your life we 
do.
  I have proposed an amendment that is now in this legislation that 
will require the advanced passenger lists be sent to this country. Our 
message is very simple: Do what all the other airlines have voluntarily 
done since 1988 or land somewhere else. Don't land in the United 
States. If you want to land here, send us the advanced passenger list 
of who is on the airplane so we can run them against the 21 Federal law 
enforcement agencies to see whether there is a passenger on this flight 
or that flight that is a known or suspected terrorist or someone who 
associates with terrorists who we have decided we will now not allow to 
visit the country.
  It is sensible. It should have been done before. It was not. As I 
said, this is the third time I have put it in legislation, and I put it 
on two other appropriations bills.
  This bill is going to get signed by the President of the United 
States. Finally, this will be done. It is not a small matter. It is a 
big issue and an important piece of adding security with respect to 
this legislation.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Madam President, I particularly thank the Senator from 
North Dakota and his staff. They worked with us around the clock. That 
is why we are here today.
  I yield to the distinguished Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. WARNER. Madam President, great credit goes to our distinguished 
colleague from South Carolina for his chairmanship and leadership to 
get this piece of legislation through, as well as our distinguished 
ranking member, Senator McCain, and Senator Hutchison, who have worked 
hard to get this done.
  I want to make two points. Virginia was struck in this tragic episode 
on what is referred to as 9-11, September 11. As a consequence, 
National Airport was closed down and still is operating at less than 
half capacity. The economic consequences to our area in Northern 
Virginia has been very substantial.
  Senator Allen and I, together with other members of the Virginia 
delegation, are working to do our very best to provide funding for the 
people who have suffered as a consequence of closing the airports down. 
I have followed this debate and I, again, congratulate our chairman for 
the manner in which he and others conducted that debate on the floor of 
the Senate, and for the strong vote they had for their bill, and for 
the fact that much of the Senate bill has survived this important 
conference. But in the course of this debate, I think mainly in the 
other body, there were inferences raised that Government employees were 
perhaps not first-class citizens but second-class citizens. I resented 
that. I am privileged to represent many of them, and I myself have had 
about eight or nine different Government positions in my lifetime.
  I have often said I am privileged to be a Senator because of the 
training and so forth I received from many of my supervisors in the 
course of long Government service. The Federal employees are a very 
valuable asset to the United States of America. Now this piece of 
legislation even trusts to them the safety of our passengers. I believe 
they will live up to this challenge and that there will be no basis for 
ever saying that Government employees are

[[Page S11980]]

second-class citizens. They are first class just like the rest of us.
  Again, I am talking about any number of Federal people who are 
working throughout our system, whether it is the FBI, U.S. Marshals 
Service, and all types of people who have provided security.
  I am very pleased House and Senate negotiators have reached agreement 
on an airline security package to fully federalize security at every 
airport in the United States.
  By approving this conference report today, the Senate is saying to 
the American people that the Federal Government is doing everything in 
its power to protect them when they travel by air.
  While this agreement is not a total solution to our aviation security 
problems, it is a strong first step.
  The problems with the current private security system are well 
documented and I will not repeat them here.
  Suffice it to say the current system is not giving the American 
people the protection they need in this era of terrorist threats, and I 
believe the action the Senate is taking today is the type of bold 
action necessary in these times of uncertainty.
  In every area except passenger and baggage screening at airports, 
protecting the public is performed by sworn law enforcement officers. 
Local police and sheriffs protect our cities and neighborhoods, State 
troopers patrol our highways, the FBI fights crime and prevents 
terrorism nationwide and the U.S. Border Patrol guards our borders. Why 
should passenger security at airports be a glaring exception to this 
rule?
  Federal Air Marshals are protecting passengers in the air.
  U.S. Customs agents conduct passenger and baggage screening for 
international flights to prevent contraband from entering or leaving 
the country.
  U.S. Department of Agriculture agents inspect baggage for dangerous 
plants and animals at our airports.
  U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service agents monitor foreign 
nationals entering the United States at our airports.
  U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency agents search for illegal drugs at our 
airports.
  Why shouldn't Federal law enforcement perform other security 
functions at our Nation's airports?
  With the economy potentially heading for recession and the airline 
industry on the verge of bankruptcy, the U.S. Government must do all it 
can to revive the air transportation system.
  We have already passed the Air Transportation Safety and System 
Stabilization Act. This important legislation provided $5 billion in 
capital and $10 billion in loan guarantees to keep the airlines 
financially viable.
  Now we are taking the next step which is to restore public confidence 
in the security of our aviation system.
  I thank the chairman and ranking member and others for this 
opportunity.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. I rise to support the conference committee report on 
aviation security and, particularly, to congratulate the chairman, 
Senator Hollings, the ranking member, Senator McCain, and all of the 
members of the committee and their staffs who have worked so hard to 
bring about this very critical result today.
  Since September 11, when we saw the worst of human nature in those 
who attacked us, I think here in America we have seen the best of human 
nature. That is particularly so in the unity that we have all felt 
among the American people and that unity that has been reflected in the 
Congress of the United States as we have worked with more 
nonpartisanship over a sustained period than I have seen in the 13 
years I have been privileged to be a Senator.
  Until this morning, the one unfortunate exception to that was the 
critical area of aviation security, where the Senate, I am proud to 
say, acted more than a month ago and stood shoulder to shoulder in, 
again, a nonpartisan fashion to adopt 100 to 0 a strong aviation 
security bill. Of course, what followed was a different approach in the 
House. Time went on, and now more than 2 months ago our aviation system 
was used by terrorists to strike a terrible blow at our people. But, 
happily, the gap that existed between the Senate and the House has now 
been closed in a most positive fashion.
  I cannot thank the chairman of the committee, Senator Hollings, and 
all who are on it, enough for the persistence to principle and what 
would be effective here when there could have been compromises that 
would have gotten a bill passed earlier, but really would not have done 
what the American people want us to do, which is to make flying just as 
safe as it can possibly be.
  I say to Senator Hollings, who has had an extraordinary career in the 
Senate, I think this is one of the high points today. It is something 
that will not only protect the traveling public for years and years to 
come, and protect literally the lives of the American people, but also 
at this moment in our economic history, when our economy is certainly 
sliding in recession, he has brought to the Senate and helped us to 
pass today a bill that will probably do as much to stimulate our 
economy as most parts of that economic stimulus plan that we haven't 
quite yet agreed on--maybe more than all of them--because air travel is 
so critically important to our commerce and particularly important in 
the areas of the country that rely on tourists.
  I congratulate the leaders of the committee and say just a few words 
about the bill and why I think it is so critically important. The 
Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, which I am privileged to chair, 
has held two oversight hearings on aviation security since September 
11. One was on September 25, and the other was on this past Wednesday, 
November 14. The picture that emerges is that for too long, and with 
too many warnings from the GAO, from the inspector general at the 
Department of Transportation, from Members of Congress and committees 
of Congress, we lowered our guard; we allowed such weaknesses to 
persist in our aviation security system that created the 
vulnerabilities that the terrorists took advantage of, with the 
dreadful consequences on September 11.
  The measures that have since been taken have definitely improved the 
situation. The measures that are called for by this legislation we 
passed today will not only make aviation security so much stronger, but 
as I look back, and considering the two oversight hearings our 
committee has held, I would say that if this legislation had been in 
effect before, it would have been very hard for the terrorists to have 
done what they did on September 11.

  Let me mention a few of the weaknesses in the system that our 
hearings showed. This one struck me. It just came out 2 days ago at the 
hearing. We asked about the bomb detection equipment that is in some of 
our airports, how much of the baggage that is checked on to the planes 
is scanned for bombs. The inspector general, Mr. Mead, of the 
Department of Transportation stunned me by saying that today, 13 years 
after Lockerbie, and more than that after the earlier hijackings, less 
than 10 percent of checked baggage nationwide is being screened for 
explosives prior to being loaded on the aircraft. Of course, we all 
know and have heard screeners are underpaid, overworked, and 
undertrained. Screening, therefore, has been haphazard.
  The technologies being used for the screening and other 
identification functions at the airports are outdated. Some machines--
bomb scanning particularly--are sitting idle at airports. In one test 
done about a year ago by the inspector general of the Department of 
Transportation to see how secure the allegedly security areas of the 
airports were, more than 80 percent of his testers got through to the 
behind the scenes parts of the airports, where they were not authorized 
to be, and where so much critical to the security of the planes goes 
on. Obviously, the cockpits were unsecured. Database connections 
between law enforcement agencies, the FAA, and the airlines were 
minimal or nonexistent.
  A recent spot check just last weekend, Veterans Day weekend, of bomb 
inspection machines at selected airports in the country, found that 
fewer than 30 percent of the machines were in continuous use, despite 
an FAA directive ordering more usage.
  Again, just last weekend, more than 2 months after September 11, 
screeners at passenger checkpoints were observed leaving their 
checkpoints while passengers were passing through. The system was 
plagued--and, unfortunately,

[[Page S11981]]

still is--by tremendous inconsistencies in the level of scrutiny across 
airports and even within airports.
  Every one of these problems can be, and I believe will be, solved by 
the legislation we will adopt today. I particularly thank Senator 
Hollings and the Commerce Committee for the accepting two amendments 
offered by three members of the Governmental Affairs Committee.
  Senator Durbin and I offered an amendment that, among other things, 
provides $50 million a year for the next 5 years to speed up research 
and development of airport technology so that the public can be better 
protected. It creates a 6-month effectiveness assessment and a 12-month 
deployment of improvements to methods of preventing unauthorized access 
to sterile areas of the airports--that is, those areas the public is 
not supposed to go--including biometrics, increased surveillance, 
airport exit systems, and prevention of so-called piggybacking.
  It expands the use of computer-assisted passenger prescreening to 
trigger additional screening of passengers and their carry-on items.
  It adds $20 million for long-term research and development.
  That is the amendment Senator Durbin and I offered.
  Senator Thompson offered an amendment which was accepted by the 
committee that deals with performance standards being regularly applied 
to aviation security. It is up to us to pay attention to the 
application of these standards, and the Department of Transportation 
will report to us how well the airports and airlines are achieving what 
we want them to achieve and what is expressed in this legislation. This 
is an extraordinary step forward. It shows that we have learned the 
lessons of September 11.
  Finally, this bill sets a standard for us as to what we must do 
regarding other parts of our critical infrastructure. We naturally have 
focused on the aviation system because that is where we were hit and 
hurt so badly on September 11. But I fear that similar vulnerabilities 
which we found in aviation security will be found in other forms of our 
transportation system or hubs in other forms of transportation, 
utilities, communications, cyberspace, and financial systems on which 
we all depend. I could go on and on.
  Basically, this is the urgent work with which Governor Ridge and the 
Office of Homeland Security has to deal, with the help of Congress.
  A high standard of public service and public protection has been 
achieved in this conference committee report. Again, I extend my 
sincere thanks to Senator Hollings, Senator McCain, and all who worked 
to make this happen. They have advanced the security of the American 
people and the well-being of the American economy. I thank them, and I 
thank the Chair. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. There are very important inclusions in this airport 
security bill. They were made, in essence, by the distinguished Senator 
from Connecticut. The Governmental Affairs Committee worked with our 
committee, and we were glad to have his leadership in this regard. I 
thank him publicly for his good leadership which helped us get to this 
point.


          Technical Corrections to the Aviation Security Bill

  Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, as is understood, we had a computer 
crash early this morning, the result of which was that a significant 
amount of agreed to text in this bill was lost. In order to meet filing 
requirements, the staff was forced to work quickly to reconstruct 
portions of the bill that had been carefully negotiated. Unfortunately, 
some mistakes were made in this process. In particular, I am referring 
to Section 145 of the bill, entitled ``Air Carriers Required to Honor 
Tickets for Suspended Service.''
  It had been agreed to by all parties that the conditions under which 
air carriers would be required, to the extent practicable, to honor the 
tickets of passengers who had purchased tickets on other airlines would 
be: ``Acts of war, terrorism, insolvency, or bankruptcy.''
  Unfortunately, in a drafting error, the language neglected to include 
the conditions for acts of war or terrorism.
  I want to make clear, now, that I will ensure that these conditions 
will be included as part of a technical corrections bill before the end 
of the first session of this Congress.
  I ask my colleague from South Carolina, will he join me in making 
this commitment?
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Yes, I join the Senator in committing to ensuring that 
these changes will be included as part of a technical corrections bill 
before the end of the first session of this Congress.


            Ensuring Cockpit Safety During Smoke Emergencies

  Mr. INOUYE. Madam President, Senators Hollings and McCain have done 
an outstanding job of bringing this important legislation to a final 
conclusion. Hopefully, this measure will help fully restore consumer 
confidence in air travel and prevent any future use of airplanes as 
weapons of mass destruction.
  This measure includes critical provisions to ensure cockpit security. 
In addition to the specific measures identified, this measure also 
authorizes the Federal Aviation Administration to take additional 
action as may be necessary to ensure the safety and security of the 
aircraft.
  One additional safety concern that I wish to raise relates to 
potential threats caused by smoke in the aircraft, including smoke 
resulting from small incendiary devices which could affect the cockpit 
crew's ability to see and operate essential instruments to safely 
control and land airplanes.
  I would like to take this opportunity to ask Chairman Hollings 
whether the language in section 104(a)(1)(B) will authorize the FAA 
Administrator to consider whether safety and security procedures may be 
necessary to ensure the integrity of the flight deck during smoke 
emergencies.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I, too am concerned about aircraft safety 
during smoke emergencies and join him in his question.
  In addition, I also commend Senators Hollings and McCain for their 
efforts to complete this important legislation and believe that this 
measure will help to restore confidence in air travel.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. I thank the Senators from Hawaii for raising this 
important concern. Section 104(a)(1)(B) would authorize the FAA 
Administrator to take action as may be necessary to ensure the safety 
and security of the aircraft from smoke emergencies.
  Mr. KOHL. Madam President, more than 2 months ago we witnessed the 
worst ever terrorist attack on American soil. The horrific sights of 
September 11, 2001, will be with us forever. Our Nation has come 
together during this difficult time and we will continue to strengthen 
our resolve in the days to come.
  I am pleased that Senator Hollings through his leadership and the 
hard work of his staff is able to present to the Senate this very 
important Aviation Security Act. Thanksgiving is just a few days away 
and millions of Americans will be traveling to visit family and 
friends. I am proud that we are able to return home and report to our 
constituents on the progress we have made in regards to strengthening 
our aviation security system.
  The conference report before the Senate brings a safer and more 
secure aviation network for the thousands of Americans who fly every 
day. Tougher safety standards, federalization of screening of 
passengers and their luggage, increased presence of sky marshals on 
flights and strengthening of cockpit doors are just a few of the 
important measures that take us in the direction of a new Federal and 
comprehensive safety network for our airports. I am also pleased that 
all who have access to aircrafts will be required to pass a background 
check. We have reached this very important agreement and now these new 
regulations and safety standards must be implemented fairly and 
consistently.
  Again, I congratulate Chairman Hollings and Senator McCain on their 
leadership on this issue and strongly support the conference report.
  Mr. ROCKFELLER. Madam President, more than 2 months have passed since 
the horrific events of September 11, when we watched as our Nation's 
aircraft were hijacked and used against us as weapons of mass 
destruction. More than a month has passed since the United States 
Senate stood together and unanimously passed an aggressive, 
comprehensive Aviation Security Act, solemnly resolving that we

[[Page S11982]]

must never again see a day like the 11th because of inadequate security 
measures at our Nation's airports.
  Today we keep that promise made to the American people: This aviation 
security bill is simply a huge win for passenger safety, in every part 
of the Nation.
  The legislation we approve today will require numerous new security 
features, including full Federal law enforcement at all airports, 
expansion of the Federal Air Marshal program, and screening of all 
passengers, baggage, and employees.
  This bill will revolutionize security at our airports and in our 
skies. Every person and every bag, at every airport, big and small, 
will be screened by Federal law enforcement personnel, no exceptions.
  The traveling public want and deserve safe and secure airports and 
airplanes, and this legislation gives them the confidence they need to 
keep flying.
  As we learned after the attacks on September 11, we can no longer 
ignore the security needs at our Nation's airports. We can no longer 
allow the lives of our citizens to be placed into the hands of private 
companies. Airport security is no longer just a transportation issue, 
it is a national security concern, and the Federal Government will now 
take on this critical responsibility.
  Additionally, the bill requires dramatic security increases in and 
around airplanes. This includes the securing of all cockpit doors; 
screening of everything that is put on an airplane including 
(beverages, food, mail, etc.); background checks of every employee that 
services the flight, including catering company workers; and anti-
hijack training for pilots and flight attendants.
  I am extremely pleased to join in bringing to the Senate floor a 
final conference report that will so dramatically improve the safety of 
our Nation's skies. The road to final legislation has been harder and 
longer than the unanimous Senate vote may have led some to predict. 
That is, as we all know, because the House of Representatives passed an 
aviation security bill far different from our own, particularly on the 
question of whether screeners on the front lines of national security 
should be Federal law enforcement officers or private companies.
  This final conference report resolves that issue firmly on the side 
of Federal law enforcement and represents a great victory for passenger 
safety. The American people deserve to be safe and to feel safe when 
traveling in our skies. Now more than ever, aviation security is 
national security, plain and simple. Like all other aspects of national 
security, it must be entrusted to Federal law enforcement personnel.
  The House and Senate bills both contained a number of important 
provisions that we were able to quickly agree upon. As I stated 
earlier, we will now move to fortify cockpits, dramatically expand the 
sky marshal program, provide flight crews with the best anti-hijack 
training possible, and ensure that every single bag, every person, and 
every item boarding a plane is screened. These steps alone offer an 
enormous improvement in aviation security.
  In addition, we have agreed on a bipartisan and bicameral basis to 
``federalize'' airport screeners and reorganize the Department of 
Transportation around security priorities. Federalization of the 
screening process is a necessary step in strengthening the flying 
public's faith in our Nation's air transport system. In many ways, the 
American people have shown their clear preference that the screening of 
passengers and bags become a Federal law enforcement responsibility. 
This conference report answers their demands and ensures that the 
safety of our skies is given the same priority as the safety of our 
streets and borders.
  The Federal Government will implement a program to place law 
enforcement officers at every single airport screening station in 
America. These men and women will be public servants of the highest 
quality, having been subject to background checks, skill assessments, 
and intensive training in classrooms and on the job.
  The 2 years after the screening system has been fully upgraded 
nationwide, the conference report provides airports the flexibility to 
consider bids from private screening companies. If an airport believes, 
and the Secretary of Transportation agrees, that a private company can 
offer security equivalent to that provided by Federal law enforcement, 
then they can choose that approach. Certainly, this will be a high 
hurdle, as well it should be. But this compromise represents the best 
of what America has to offer, the unquestionable competency and 
professionalism of our Federal law enforcement and the ability for 
individual airports to be responsible for meeting tough Federal 
standards by an alternative means.
  In addition, we will allow the Department of Transportation to 
initiate a pilot program for privatizing screeners at no more than five 
airports, each in a different size category. Importantly, those 
airports must themselves seek to be part of this pilot program, the DOT 
cannot force a private company approach on anyone. This will give us a 
chance to evaluate and reevaluate what works and what does not. I 
welcome the opportunity to engage in a continuing review process, 
adjusting our original plan as necessary to make sure it works as well 
in the real world as we believe it will today. It certainly will not 
matter who manages security at our Nation's airports if we are not 
vigilant in maintaining the quality of the program once in place.
  As chairman of the Aviation Subcommittee, I take real pride in the 
work of the conferees to reach a final agreement on aviation security. 
I must also say, however, that I was disappointed that some of my House 
colleagues tried to turn this into an anti-government and anti-union 
debate. This bill is about safety, plain and simple. It has nothing to 
do with the size of government or unionization of workers.
  In the end, national security prevailed, but the misplaced focus on 
unionization meant that the House would not yield on including the most 
basic rights of Federal workers: health care, worker's compensation, 
and civil rights and whistleblower protection. These critical matters 
are left to the discretion of the Department of Transportation, and it 
is my hope and expectation that the Secretary will have no choice but 
to offer a good package to fill so many positions so quickly. In fact, 
DOT has assured us that they will offer rights and benefits at least as 
good as those afforded other Federal workers, and I intend to hold them 
to that promise.
  Finally, I want to emphasize that much of my effort on this bill, 
like all of the aviation bills I work on, was aimed at ensuring that 
rural communities have the best possible options for security and 
service. In the face of so may House proposals to federalize only at 
the large airports, and privatize only at the small airports, I held 
firm to the principle that small airports must be served by true law 
enforcement. Now, within a matter of months, all West Virginia 
travelers will have the security of Federal screeners, Federal 
supervisors, and Federal and local law enforcement on hand to protect 
them.
  I urge all parties, public and private, to move swiftly to implement 
the new security measures as soon as the President has lifted his 
signature pen from the paper. The sooner the actual provisions of the 
law are implemented, the sooner the public's confidence will be 
restored. When Americans once again feel safe in the sky, we will have 
claimed a major victory in our war against terror.
  Mr. KERRY. Madam President, I would like to be among the first to 
congratulate Senators Hollings and McCain for their leadership in 
getting us to this point. Without their leadership we would not have a 
conference report, so I thank them for their fine work.
  The conference report that we have signed off on, and to which the 
full Senate is about to agree, is historic legislation. Our legislation 
will immediately put an end to the unacceptable state of airport 
security. Everyone knows the technical aspects of the bill by now. But 
our bill will, for the first time, guarantee uniformity in our Nation's 
aviation security. The bill creates a seamless web of improved 
security, so that passengers boarding a plane in Worcester will have 
the same level of heightened security as someone boarding a plane in 
Chicago. This

[[Page S11983]]

is critical to Americans in places where small airports are the norm. 
It would have been unacceptable to create a two-tiered system of 
security.
  Our bill also provides accountability in aviation security. For too 
long the FAA, airports, airlines and private security companies have 
been able to point fingers at one another without any real improvements 
being made in security. The Congress has passed law upon law designed 
to improve things, but these laws never seemed to be fully implemented. 
That all ends with the passage of this legislation. It is my hope that 
a message has been delivered clearly to anyone with any security 
responsibilities at our airports. The Congress has empowered the 
Federal Government to make serious and lasting improvements in airport 
security. We have provided all the necessary tools to improve the 
screening of people and their bags. We must now use those tools to make 
the American people as safe as possible when they fly.
  We have also placed, through passage of this bill, a renewed 
confidence in the Federal Government to perform vital national security 
functions. No one questions the superior job that the 36,000 men and 
women of the Coast Guard do in protecting our ports. No one doubts that 
the Customs Bureau does a fine job of inspecting trucks, planes and 
ships that unload cargo in the United States. But many people will be 
watching closely as Federal managers, supervisors and, ultimately, 
screeners, begin to protect our airports. They must know that the 
flying public will be watching them closely, and they must not fail.
  Equally important as improving the quality of screeners, we recognize 
the need to improve the technology used in airport security. Technology 
can be a great ally to us, and this legislation places a great emphasis 
on investing in research and development. We authorize grants for the 
development of new technology to improve security. With new 
technologies, we enhance our ability to authenticate passenger and 
employee identification, our ability to control access to secure areas 
and the way we screen checked baggage.
  Our bill dramatically improves the screening of checked baggage. We 
currently only screen about 3 percent of all baggage that goes into the 
belly of a plane. Our legislation will take immediate steps to screen 
all baggage for explosives, ultimately ensuring that all baggage is 
screened with the most sophisticated technology available. During 
debate on the Senate bill, I filed an amendment that would have 
required the screening of all checked baggage by 2005. This bill sets 
the deadline a year earlier. I believe that this is an extremely 
ambitious target, but it is one that we must be prepared to meet. The 
Congress must follow through by providing critical financial resources 
to help acquire and deploy explosive detection systems so that the 
Department of Transportation can meet this deadline.
  Finally, I thank our House colleagues who were invaluable in 
brokering this deal. Chairman Don Young and Ranking Member Jim Oberstar 
were key players in this process and the entire Senate must owe them 
our gratitude.
  Ms. SNOWE. Madam President, I rise today in support of the 
legislation before the Senate which is designed to overhaul aviation 
security in this Nation.
  This is an issue of vital national importance in the wake of the 
September 11 tragedy. As a member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation, and a conferee on the aviation security 
conference, I fought for the strongest possible enhancements to our 
existing system. I believe we succeeded in this endeavor.
  Going into the conference, I felt we needed to confront the issue of 
federalization head-on, and I believe we have done that. We needed to 
send an unequivocal message to the American people that the government 
is taking control of security, and it is safe to fly. I believe we have 
accomplished that. When this bill is signed into law, the status quo is 
history.
  The agreement before us will federalize virtually all security 
screeners. The Federal Government will take immediate control of the 
system. Once the Federal system has been imposed and we have had a 
chance to evaluate it, individual airports that meet strict federal 
standards will have the flexibility to deploy law enforcement personnel 
or contract screeners. This is very similar to an approach I had 
suggested to the conference committee leadership, under which all 
screeners would be Federal employees, and then after 4 years, a review 
of the system could be done.
  The Federal Government will provide direct management and oversight, 
set strict new standards, ensure that they are followed, and will have 
the power to fire screeners who don't measure up to the standards. We 
won't have a system where anybody's financial ``bottom line'' is a 
competing priority with protecting the flying public. We will have a 
reliable, professional force of security screeners. This is what 
Americans have been calling for in airport after airport. And it is 
what they are going to get.
  The system will be seamless. There will be no gaps in control or 
oversight. It will be uniform. The Senate version of the bill would 
have transferred control of the screening system to the Department of 
Justice. The conference agreement gives control to a new Transportation 
Security Under Secretary. I would have preferred that we vest this 
critical security responsibility with an agency with a historic law 
enforcement function. Nonetheless, passengers will know that they can 
count on the same level of security throughout the system, whether they 
are boarding at LAX, Chicago O'Hare, or the Portland, ME, Jetport. 
There will be no question about who is accountable. And it won't be a 
private for-profit company--it will be the Federal Government.
  Furthermore, this package meets the critical goal of addressing the 
interlocking rings of aviation security, from the perimeter to the 
airport to on-board security, because ultimately, the system is only as 
strong as its weakest link. It will address the gamut of critical 
issues, including baggage screening, additional air marshals, and 
cockpit security.

  In addition to imposing Federal control on security screening 
operations, there are a number of provisions in the bill that I worked 
hard to secure. For example, the bill will ensure the screening of all 
checked baggage within 60 days, and all checked bags will be screened 
with highly sophisticated explosives detection equipment by the end of 
next year under the deadline set forth in the agreement, a top priority 
of mine.
  The legislation will increase the number of air marshals as well. 
Shortly after the tragic attacks in September, I cosponsored 
legislation by Senator Hutchison to boost the Air Marshal Program, and 
I believe this is a critical step. It will ensure that any potential 
terrorist will know they could be flying with one or more armed 
marshals, trained to take control in the event of an attempted 
hijacking.
  The bill provides for background checks for students enrolled in 
flight training. I introduced legislation to require background checks 
for foreign nationals seeking such training. A background check 
provision was included in the Senate bill, and a similar provision is 
included in the conference agreement. This will ensure that federal law 
enforcement authorities are alerted in the event that an individual 
with known ties to terrorist groups attempts to obtain flight training.
  The bill also includes provisions I worked for directing the new 
Transportation Security Under Secretary, created in this measure, to 
focus on the critical mission of better coordinating all modes of 
transportation nationwide particularly in preparation for emergencies 
such as the events that unfolded on September 11. And I would like to 
thank Senators Hollings and McCain, in particular, for working with me 
and for their support on this important issue.
  I am very pleased we were able to come together in a bipartisan way 
to send a comprehensive package to the President that will restore the 
confidence of the American people. Because the images of the 
unspeakable horrors of the recent terrorist attacks will be etched in 
our minds forever. When the ``devil incarnate'' hit the United States, 
he attacked not only America, but freedom-loving nations everywhere. We 
are going to need the resources of the United States coupled with the 
cooperation of our global neighbors in order to wage the fight against 
terrorism. For it is a fight we must win, and will win.

[[Page S11984]]

  But there should be no mistake, victory will not come overnight. We 
are voting on this bill today because, as we continue to mourn the 
tremendous loss of life both of those in the air and on the ground, we 
also know that our transportation system must endure and must be secure 
if we are to move the Nation forward, and also ensure that we are in a 
position of strength to be able to wage the kind of war necessary to 
eradicate terrorism. And we cannot remain strong if we cannot remain 
mobile.
  Our goal was to restore the confidence of the American people in the 
aviation security system. I believe the measure before us will 
accomplish that goal. The fact of the matter is, if the flying public 
does not have confidence in the security, they will remain reluctant to 
fly, with severe long-term repercussions in the aviation sector and in 
our economy. Imposing stringent Federal control and oversight over 
airport security will go a long way to helping instill confidence in 
the flying public, and will enable the government to exercise much 
greater control over the quality of screening.
  We found common ground on a very complex issue, and I am pleased that 
both sides were able to come to agreement so quickly in the name of 
safety, to ensure that Americans have complete confidence in the men 
and women who form the last line of defense.
  In the end, we did come together--as we did on a resolution 
supporting the use of force to combat terrorism, as we did on 
legislation providing emergency funding for the recovery and relief 
effort after the September 11 attacks, as we did on a financial relief 
package for the airline industry, as we did on counter-terrorism 
legislation--to develop an agreement to address the gaps in aviation 
security and restore the confidence of the American people in our 
aviation system. So I urge all my colleagues to offer a strong show of 
support for this important legislation.
  Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire. Madam President, the Senate passed an 
amendment by myself and Senator Conrad Burns of Montana to allow for 
armed pilots as the first line of deterrence and the last line of 
defense for cockpit security.
  The first line of deterrence because terrorists will know that armed 
pilots will be able to defend the cockpit and defend the aircraft from 
a hijacking.
  The last line of defense, because, when all else fails, including the 
armed air marshals and the reinforced cockpit door, an armed pilot will 
be in the cockpit to defend the cockpit from terrorist hijackers.
  The pilots support this amendment. The Bob Smith/Conrad Burns 
amendment had the endorsement of the Airline Pilots Association and the 
Allied Pilots Association. In addition, The National Rifle Association 
and Gun Owners of America supported the amendment. And most importantly 
the American people supported our efforts.
  According to a draft provided to myself, section 125 of this 
conference report, titled flight deck security provides that the pilot 
of a passenger aircraft is authorized to carry a firearm if four 
conditions are met.
  First, ``the Undersecretary of Transportation for Transportation 
Security approves.''
  The will of the Congress is clear that the Department of 
Transportation should approve a reasonable program to arm pilots.
  Second, ``the air carrier approves.'' The air carriers should not use 
this provision as a veto to prevent properly trained pilots from using 
firearms to protect themselves and the aircraft from terrorism, that 
would be a mistake and would adversely affect air safety.
  Third, ``the firearm is approved by the Under Secretary.'' It should 
be clear from this language that the Under Secretary of Transportation 
should approve a firearm, not a stun gun, not a taser, a firearm with 
approved ammunition that would not compromise the integrity of the 
aircraft.
  The final provision of this section provides that ``the pilot has 
received proper training for the use of the firearm, as determined by 
the Secretary.''
  The Smith/Burns amendment provided that the agency ``shall establish 
a voluntary program to train'' and ``make available appropriate 
training'' for pilots.
  I hope the Department of Transportation will utilize the many private 
organizations that provide excellent training in the proper use of a 
firearm.
  My home State of New Hampshire has the Manchester International 
Airport and I know the passengers and pilots of New Hampshire are 
listening to this debate today.
  On September 27, 2001, I met with New Hampshire pilots from United 
Airlines, Northwest Airlines, American Airlines, and Continental 
Airlines. Those pilots reinforced my belief that a firearm is 
appropriate to protect a commercial aircraft from terrorism. Airline 
pilots are crying out for guns to protect themselves, the plane and the 
passengers.
  The Department of Transportation and the air carriers must be 
reasonable about this new law or Congress will speak again on the issue 
of armed pilots.
  This legislation is a good first step and it is my hope and desire 
that the Department of Transportation will work with the air carriers 
to provide pilots with training to possess a firearm in the cockpit of 
commercial aircraft.
  Please remember that we arm our Capitol Police with firearms, we arm 
our FBI and DEA with firearms, we arm our Air Marshals with firearms.
  We also need to arm our commercial pilots with firearms. Armed pilots 
are a first line of deterrence and the last line of defense against 
terrorist hijackers.
  We trust our commercial pilots to fly commercial aircraft, please 
give our pilots the tools to protect the cockpit of these aircraft from 
any future act of terrorism.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, I rise today to address an issue of the 
utmost importance. While I am deeply committed to increased safety and 
security at our Nation's airports and on airplanes, I am greatly 
concerned about how that security is paid for in this bill.
  While I commend Senators Hollings and McCain for this much-awaited, 
much-needed piece of legislation, I disapprove of putting the burden of 
this increased security on the passenger.
  It's critical to our Nation's economy that we restore the flying 
public's confidence in the safety of the aviation system. We need to 
get more planes in the air and we need to make sure they're full. 
Legislation that improves and expands security at our airports and on 
planes is essential to getting citizens back in the air.
  As chairman of the Senate Finance Committee I am deeply concerned 
about restoring our underwhelmed economy. And securing our flying 
public is a giant step closer to securing our economy.
  As important as that is, I am very unhappy to say that this otherwise 
excellent security bill as a ticket tax levied on airline passengers. A 
new tax.
  I don't believe that this is the time to raise taxes. Consumers need 
tax relief--not more taxes. We're trying to pass an economic stimulus 
bill. I note that we don't raise taxes in that bill, we give folks tax 
relief. We're taking one step forward and two steps back in this 
Congress.
  I enthusiastically supported the airline relief package Congress 
passed several weeks ago. We needed to assist the airlines for the good 
of our traveling public and the good of our economy.
  But relief to the airlines won't do anyone any good, if they don't 
have passengers to fly in their planes. Raising ticket prices surely 
won't help get people to fly.
  In my State of Montana, people believe they pay enough to fly around 
the country. Since we are relieving the airlines of the security 
responsibilities, if makes perfect sense that the $2.50 per passenger 
user fee be assessed to the airlines, not the passengers.
  I'd like to close by once again voicing my concern about how we pay 
for this much-needed security bill. We need increased security in our 
aviation system. That is clear. What we don't need is increased costs 
for our flying public.
  Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, I am pleased that Congress has finally 
acted on this extremely important issue.
  Even if the terrible plane crash earlier this week wasn't necessarily 
terrorism, everyone in Congress had to feel in the pit of their 
stomachs that tomorrow it could be a bomb. Congress needed to act to 
ensure the American public that our Nation's aviation security system 
will be the best it can be or Americans will not fly.

[[Page S11985]]

  On September 11, our Nation's aviation system was transformed into a 
terrorist weapon. The United States was caught off-guard. Sadly, with 
aviation security, we should not have been. That is why we needed to 
pass this legislation.
  All four planes hijacked were headed for my State of California. 
Consequently, many Californians who were simply trying to make their 
way home lost their lives in these attacks.
  That is why I am particularly pleased that this legislation will 
ensure that all high risk flights will have air marshals aboard them. 
And, the Secretary of Transportation is to give priority to long-
distance flights--such as those targeted on September 11. That is 
extremely important for Californians.
  I am also pleased that this legislation will allow airports to be 
reimbursed and to use grant funds to pay for security costs. Our 
airports have been hit hard to meet new Federal security standards. For 
example, between September 11 and the end of October, Los Angeles 
International Airport spent $15.3 million on increased security costs. 
The funds in this bill will allow our airports to continue to operate 
our aviation infrastructure while providing the highest levels of 
security.
  This bill also makes a significant improvement in passenger 
screeners. Federal law enforcement personnel will conduct passenger 
screening, instead of private low-paid workers. We could not allow the 
same companies to continue to be in charge of passenger screening.
  This bill makes great strides forward in making our skies more secure 
and ensuring that the events of September 11 never happen again.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I would like to take this opportunity 
to elaborate upon the air travel security compromise reached yesterday 
by Congress--particularly the provisions in the bill that incorporate 
the amendment authored by Senator Durbin and myself.
  Consistent with the recommendations we made, the bill calls for the 
individual named to the newly established position of Under Secretary 
of Transportation for Security to, within 6 months, review and 
determine which immediately available new technologies can be used to 
more effectively restrict access to sensitive areas of our airports, 
including the tarmac, maintenance facilities, baggage handling centers 
and catering facilities. Such technologies may include biometrics, card 
or keypad-based access systems, and increased monitoring of emergency 
exit systems. The Under Secretary is directed to outline a strategy for 
deploying these technologies within 12 months at all major airports.
  The bill strengthens our recommendation to ensure that all checked 
baggage is screened for explosives by requiring that, within 60 days, 
all bags be either checked or matched to a boarded passenger and that, 
by the end of 2002, airports deploy equipment to detect explosives in 
all checked baggage.
  To meet new and unprecedented threats without delay, we must as a 
nation harness the power of innovation to improve transportation 
security. That's why I was also pleased to see included in the 
compromise our recommended authorization of $50 million in each of the 
next 5 years for the public and private sectors to accelerate 
development and testing of new aviation security technologies--
including faster, better, and cheaper passenger and baggage screening 
equipment; systems capable of detecting components of weapons of mass 
destruction; systems for screening catering and cargo items; advances 
in training of security personnel; and new methods of ``hardening'' the 
aircraft in the event of an in-flight explosion.
  As called for by Senator Durbin and myself, the compromise also 
includes $20 million for longer term research into state-of-the-art 
weapons detection systems, advanced biometrics, secure networking for 
sharing of threat information, and other groundbreaking technologies to 
prevent acts of terrorism in aviation.
  I am also pleased to see included in the final bill my provision 
requiring criminal background checks of all currently employed airport 
security personnel. Given recent breaches of security and growing 
anxiety about the baggage screening process, Americans deserve every 
reassurance that screeners will be reliable and trustworthy.
  I hope these measures and others begin to make the urgent and 
immediate improvements necessary to secure our skies for the American 
traveling public. With the holidays coming and the economy moving 
toward recession, this legislation could not come at a better time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Madam President, we are trying to get the bill over to 
the House as promptly as we can. I am prepared to yield back our time, 
if the Senator from Texas as well is willing.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Madam President, our side yields back all time.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. I yield back our time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the conference 
report.
  The conference report was agreed to.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. I thank the staff and the distinguished Chair and wish 
all a happy Thanksgiving.

                          ____________________