[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 81 (Tuesday, June 18, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H3644-H3645]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             ISSUES CONCERNING HOMELAND SECURITY DEPARTMENT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the President's homeland 
security bill was delivered today. I am on two committees that have 
been considering homeland security, so I particularly welcome the 
President's work. Some of us have been there for over a year now, even 
a year before September 11.
  All or parts of some agencies are, of course, to go together in a new 
department. When I say ``all or parts,'' I am indicating simply one of 
the details to be decided. The devil may be in the details, but so are 
the angels.
  I would like to tease out three issues that I think can be dealt with 
if we look them squarely in the face and understand they should not be 
barriers.
  First, there is the unfortunate issue of silence or delay on Civil 
Service protection for the thousands of workers that would be coming. 
We could begin by, it seems to me, conceding that wholesale denial of 
Civil Service status would create an unnecessary issue and would be 
very unfortunate.
  We are talking about people who do many different kinds of things, 
most of them not related to anything that could remotely be considered 
the Nation's security. The mantra will be, ``Hey, let's decide all of 
that later.'' That creates needless uncertainty and opposition to this 
bill. Most of these employees will be doing what they have always been 
doing. The few who will be handling truly confidential information 
should be treated accordingly.
  We must not let homeland security become like the use of other 
overbroad terms, like ``executive privilege'' or ``national security.'' 
There ought to be a presumption in favor of Civil Service status for 
these employees. If you can overcome it, that is one thing. Let us not 
begin by saying let us strip these workers of their Civil Service 
status.
  Let me raise two other concerns, District of Columbia concerns. 
Wisely, the District and the President have understood the District of 
Columbia is the first responder for the entire Federal presence, the 
White House, the Congress, many Federal employees, 200,000 of them, all 
of those facilities.
  In one of the bills I was able to place the District at the table so 
that the District can coordinate all that is necessary in order to be a 
first responder. In fact, the Justice Department Terrorism Task Force 
has been working just that closely with the District.
  In the President's bill I will seek to insert such an understanding. 
The President, I think, already understands this. The President has 
asked our own Mayor, Tony Williams, to be a part of his Homeland 
Commission that he just formed this week, so I think he understands 
that the first responder has to be in on the details from the 
beginning.
  Finally, there is the issue of where to locate the Department. The 
troubling word in the Washington Post today is about the possible 
location outside the District of Columbia. It was said this was only in 
the discussion phase. Let it stop there. I bring to the floor not only 
my own parochial concerns, that this is the Nation's Capital, and this 
is where important Cabinet agencies should be. There have executive 
orders for decades now indicating that. But I have a more important 
reason to offer.
  The United States Government owns and controls 180 acres 3 miles from 
the Capitol with all the possibility for the setbacks. We probably only 
need 20 or 30 of those acres. It is the old Saint Elizabeth's Hospital 
campus, with some of the best views in Washington. FEMA is already 
looking at this land for its new headquarters. It is close in. It would 
not cost us any money. If you try to go somewhere outside of 
Washington, you will get wholesale opposition from those communities 
because they do not want their land off the tax rolls. Ours is already 
off. The Federal Government already owns it. The District is making use 
of the east campus for a new public safety communications facility. It 
makes sense for us to look very closely at the Saint Elizabeth's 
campus, this huge campus, if we are talking about placing another huge 
agency under the aegis of our own government.
  These are matters that should not become issues. They will require 
study. They will mean that we have to take our time to get at the 
details, put them on the table and consider all the options, instead of 
jumping to conclusions about where to locate the agency or who to strip 
of his job protection.
  Let us not put unnecessary issues on the table. There will be many 
hard

[[Page H3645]]

issues on the table. The issues I have named, these three issues, where 
to locate, to make sure that the District is included in the bill, and 
to make sure that people are not stripped of their Civil Service 
protection, these should be easy issues if we mean to get this bill out 
by September 11, or certainly by the time we leave to go home at the 
end of this session.

                          ____________________