[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 83 (Thursday, June 20, 2002)]
[House]
[Page H3751]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            CONSTITUTIONAL DUTIES OF THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Kennedy of Minnesota). Under a previous 
order of the House, the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to 
share with my colleagues concerns that I have with respect to the 
pursuits that we are now engaged in as relates to the issue of homeland 
security as well as the responsibilities of this Congress, and the 
issues that confront us on protecting the homeland and fighting 
terrorism.
  Let me first begin with the understanding of the words from the 
Constitution of the United States of America. It is well known that the 
Founding Fathers, who came to this land to establish this Nation on the 
grounds of seeking relief from persecution, that they wanted a 
democracy. They wanted to have a Nation that would interact and have 
exchange between the people and as well the three branches of 
government. That is why we have the judiciary, the executive, and, of 
course, the Legislature, which is the Congress.
  We do know that the President is perceived and noted to be the 
Commander-in-Chief, and we respect that. After the terrible tragedy of 
September 11, we recognize that we must stand united with the President 
against terrorism.
  But let me share with Members in the Constitution the duties of the 
United States Congress. ``The Congress shall have the power to lay and 
collect taxes, duties, impose excises to pay the debts and provide for 
the common defense and general welfare of the United States.''
  In additional language it says, ``To establish a uniform role of 
naturalization and other laws.''
  I am concerned that this Congress abdicates its responsibilities in 
this enormous responsibility of dealing with peace, dealing with war 
and dealing with fighting terrorism.
  Just a few days ago, in fact over the weekend, there was a 
pronouncement that the President of the United States had signed an 
order of covert action against Saddam Hussein in Iraq. There was no 
debate, no discussion in the United States Congress, no discussion in 
the People's House. No one asked the question whether this was the 
appropriate direction to take this Nation on behalf of our children and 
the safety of this country.
  I would venture to say that we know that there has been no 
documentation or little evidence of Saddam Hussein's involvement in 
September 11, but we know that he is a despot, a dictator, that he is 
doing harm to his people. We also know that he is not allowing the 
inspections to go on pursuant to the United Nations. But we also 
recognize that there is no substance there, as much as it was some 10 
years ago. So is this a valid use of our resources without the debate 
of the United States Congress?
  Why not prioritize the Mideast and establish peace there. Look at the 
tragedies that are occurring in the Mideast, the loss of life. Are we 
going to divert resources to Iraq when we still have a problem in the 
Mideast and most of the Muslim world will not support us in going to 
Iraq?
  What about alternatives? We already know the CIA has failed in some 
of the efforts they have made in Iraq. What about alternatives to going 
in and doing what has been ordered or suggested by the President?
  And who will be with us? This is an important question that I think 
is enormously valuable for us to ask.
  As we ask these questions, we can make a considered decision about 
foreign policy on behalf of the people of the United States. We have 
just found out that we are going to move swiftly on the Homeland 
Security Department. I support that, but I raise the question whether 
we should move swiftly in the body of the House with the committees of 
the House that have jurisdiction, so that when we formulate the 
Homeland Security Department, we have the input of representatives from 
around the Nation.
  I am disturbed that the leadership of this House would narrow the 
initial or the finalizing of homeland security to a nine-person 
committee, although I respect that committee. I believe it is important 
that the committees of jurisdiction have intimate responsibilities in 
dealing with homeland security because we speak for the people of the 
United States.
  So do not narrow it to a committee that is so small. Envision the 
utilization of the committees of jurisdiction, because there are 
particular areas of expertise. What should we do with the Immigration 
and Naturalization Service? We should make sure that we still have a 
body that allows people to access legalization, to be legal, because 
this Nation is still a place where people come for refuge and come for 
opportunity, and we must recognize that every immigrant or immigration 
does not equate to terrorism.
  So when we talk about this Homeland Security Department, which should 
be open to the expertise of this House, we should not narrow and give 
up the responsibilities of Congress that are given in the Constitution, 
and that is, again, to take care of the defense and the general welfare 
of the people of the United States.
  I am concerned, Mr. Speaker, that this Congress is abdicating its 
responsibilities, and I call upon us to immediately get involved in 
creating a Homeland Security Department, but as well to ensure that 
decisions of war are made in this body and not independent of this 
body.




                          ____________________