[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 27 (Thursday, February 13, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2487-S2488]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. EDWARDS:
  S. 410. A bill to establish the Homeland Intelligence Agency, and for 
other purposes; to the Select Committee on Intelligence.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. President, I have previously given a statement and a 
speech on the floor of the Senate with regard to Mr. Estrada's 
nomination. I voted against him in the Judiciary Committee. The 
concerns I had included his not answering questions that were put to 
him, serious questions, in my judgment--issues about his record and his 
temperament.
  Today, I wish to talk about homeland security. First, I will talk 
about the serious shortcomings in the administration's response, and 
then I will talk about six bills I have introduced in this Congress to 
improve our homeland security, including a bill today to overhaul the 
way we do intelligence work here at home.
  The first responsibility of any government is to protect its people. 
Yet we live in a time when Americans feel extraordinary insecurity. We 
are at an elevated level of threat warning. The CIA Director says al-
Qaida is ``resuming the offensive.'' The FBI Director says there are 
``al-Qaida cells in the United States that we have not yet been able to 
identify.''
  In other words, al-Qaida cells are operating here, but we do not know 
who they are, where they are, or what they are doing.
  Americans are buying plastic sheeting and duct tape in record 
amounts. While they are doing everything they can to protect 
themselves, they have a right to know that those of us in Government 
are doing everything we can to protect them, their homes, their 
families, and their children. This is a dangerous time.
  But a dangerous time calls for an honest response: This President is 
failing the test on homeland security. Homeland security has yielded to 
chemical companies that are holding back commonsense steps to secure 
chemical plants against horrific explosions. Homeland security is 
yielding to bureaucratic inertia that is defending old and outworn ways 
of fighting terror.
  Today there are huge holes in our borders--one guard for every 5 
miles on the Canadian border. There are huge holes at our ports--we are 
still inspecting only a fraction of all shipments into the United 
States, shipments that could carry nuclear or biological weapons. There 
are huge holes in our hometowns--where cops and firefighters do not 
have the equipment or the training that they need.
  For all these holes, this President has vetoed billions for homeland 
security, he is withholding funds that first responders need today, and 
he has proposed funding homeland security this year at a level that 
even Republican experts like Warren Rudman say is totally inadequate.
  We cannot cover the holes in our borders with plastic sheeting. Our 
cops and firefighters need reinforcements and new gear, not canned 
goods.
  In 2000, the President's team talked about the dangers of a hollow 
military. At a time when the greatest dangers we face are here at home, 
this administration risks creating a hollow homeland defense.
  This is happening for a very simple reason. The bare minimum of 
homeland security improvements we need--$10 billion more this year--
costs less than half of President Bush's tax cut just for 226,000 
millionaires.
  I believe it is time to say to this President: Mr. President, please 
put our security first. Please set aside $20 billion in tax breaks for 
226,000 millionaires, and put homeland security for 290 million 
Americans first.
  Let me talk a little bit about my work on homeland security since 
Congress came back into session. Back in December, I laid out a 
comprehensive plan for strengthening our domestic security, from 
stopping ID fraud to sharing more information with local police to 
improving our cybersecurity. And in the 6 weeks Congress has been in 
session so far, I have introduced six bills to strengthen our homeland 
security. Each of these bills would make a concrete, tangible 
difference in people's lives.
  Two bills are focused on empowering people to play a greater role in 
homeland security.
  First, until this week, most Americans have no better idea how to 
respond to a terrorist attack than on September 11. Now the 
administration has begun giving out useful information, but we still 
don't have enough. We are not being told, for example, how to respond 
to chemical or biological attacks. In addition, there is still a 
serious question whether people will get the information they need when 
they need it, particularly when they are sleeping. Obviously TV and 
radio won't help if you are asleep. So I have a bill, which I wrote 
with Senator Fritz Hollings, that will create an emergency warning 
system to reach everyone--for example, using special phone rings that 
could wake people up in the middle of the night.
  Second, we want to encourage more people to contribute. People want 
to serve, but they feel like they haven't been asked. We should ask. 
One way is through the Neighborhood Watch program. Neighborhood Watches 
help prevent both terrorism and ordinary crime. We are going to 
increase support for these, encourage folks to get involved, with the 
goal--the realistic goal--of tripling the number of neighborhood 
watches.
  Next, I have introduced two bills focused on hardening vulnerable 
targets--in other words, taking those targets we know terrorists want 
to attack, and transforming them so they will be less vulnerable.
  One bill is to do research to enhance building security, to improve 
the quality of private security guards and make buildings more 
resistant to attack. We know that at the Oklahoma City bombing, 85 
percent of the lives might have been saved if the building had been 
built with better materials, in a better way. We are still learning 
about the World Trade Center collapse. We know we need better 
construction and better security around buildings across America.
  A fourth bill would require the Government to improve its 
cybersecurity. A few weeks ago, we had an attack that crippled a lot of 
Government computer systems. There are simple tests we could be doing 
to block computer attacks that we are not doing: to ``patch'' holes in 
the systems. We need to make that happen.
  Fifth, I have introduced a bill to help local law enforcement by 
requiring the Government to give security clearances to more police 
officers, firefighters, and health officials. They need information to 
keep us safe, but too often they are not getting it. This bill would 
help make sure they do.
  Finally, there is the bill I have introduced today, and that I want 
to talk about in some detail. This bill will make fundamental changes 
in the way

[[Page S2488]]

we protect Americans against international terrorists operating within 
our borders. This bill takes away from the FBI the responsibility to 
collect intelligence on foreign terrorist groups operating in America. 
And this bill gives that responsibility to a new Homeland Intelligence 
Agency. I believe this agency will do a better job protecting our 
safety and our basic freedoms. Let me briefly explain why.
  There is no question that the FBI is full of dedicated professionals 
who are patriots, who serve their country with courage and conviction, 
who do all of us proud.
  But there is also no question that the FBI made many serious mistakes 
before September 11. There was the Phoenix memorandum, a memorandum 
about suspicious behavior at flight schools that the FBI did not follow 
up on. There was the Moussaoui case, where the FBI had in its 
possession a computer full of critical information, yet did not access 
the information there. There were even two hijackers who the FBI knew 
were threats but did not track and stop.
  It is true all this was before September 11. The other day, Director 
Mueller told me that my criticisms understated the extent of the FBI's 
reforms. Well, I respect Director Mueller, and I look forward to 
continuing to talk with him about FBI reform. I have only the best 
wishes for his reform efforts.
  At the same time, it would be hard to understate the seriousness of 
the problems we have seen.
  This is not just my view; it is the view of every objective panel to 
look at this issue. These panels have raised serious questions about 
the FBI's response to terrorism, and in some instances, about the FBI's 
capacity to respond to terrorism.
  The Markle Task Force commented: ``. . . there is a resistance 
ingrained in the FBI ranks to sharing counter-terrorism information . . 
. the FBI has not prioritized intelligence analysis in the areas of 
counter-terrorism.''
  The Joint Congressional Inquiry noted: The FBI has a ``history of 
repeated shortcomings within its current responsibility for domestic 
intelligence. . . .''
  The Brookings Institution went further, stating that ``there are 
strong reasons to question whether the FBI is the right agency to 
conduct domestic intelligence collection and analysis.''
  And finally, the Gilmore Commission recently said: ``the Bureau's 
long standing tradition and organizational culture persuade us that, 
even with the best of intentions, the FBI cannot soon be made over into 
an organization dedicated to detecting and preventing attacks rather 
than one dedicated to punishing them.''
  I believe the Gilmore Commission reached the right conclusion.
  Part of the problem is bureaucratic resistance at the FBI. The FBI is 
full of superb public servants. But the reality is that the FBI is also 
a bureaucracy, and it is the nature of a bureaucracy to resist change. 
That is just the reality. It was only in November that the New York 
Times reported the FBI's No. 2 official was ``amazed and astounded'' by 
the FBI's sluggish response to the terrorist threat.
  Beyond the problem of bureaucratic resistance, there is a more 
fundamental problem with the FBI. That problem is the conflict at the 
base of the FBI's mission, which is a conflict between law enforcement 
and intelligence. These are fundamentally different functions.
  Law enforcement is about building criminal cases and putting people 
in jail. Intelligence isn't about building a case; it is about 
gathering information and putting it together into a bigger picture.
  The FBI has never been built for intelligence. It has always been an 
agency that hires people who want to be law enforcement officers, 
trains them to be law enforcement officers, and promotes them for 
succeeding as law enforcement officers.
  Cases have been run by field offices with little of the central 
coordination that is essential to combat national networks of 
terrorists. The FBI has regularly kept intelligence within the agency's 
walls rather than sharing it with other key players.
  Now, the FBI says all this is changing. But with all due respect, the 
FBI's reforms are too little and too late. They are not enough, and 
because of the nature of the FBI, they cannot ever be enough.
  That is why I propose today to create a Homeland Intelligence Agency, 
one that would be responsible for collecting foreign intelligence 
inside the United States, analyzing that intelligence, and getting it 
to the policymakers or first responders who need it. This entity isn't 
in the new Department of Homeland Security. It isn't in the newly 
announced ``Terrorist Threat Integration Center.'' That's just about 
analysis. This is about collection, gathering the intelligence 
information to begin with.
  I believe this agency will do a better job fighting terrorism because 
its sole focus will be intelligence gathering. The inherent conflict 
between law enforcement and intelligence will not get in the way of its 
work.
  I also believe it will do a better job protecting our civil 
liberties. While we will not give the new agency any new authorities, 
we will place new checks on its ability to collect information about 
innocent people. Time and again, we have seen this administration 
overreach when it comes to civil liberties. That should stop, and this 
proposal will help stop it.
  We will require judicial approval before the most secretive and 
invasive investigations of religious and political groups. We will 
require greater public reporting and more internal auditing. We will 
establish a new and independent office of civil liberties within the 
new agency that is dedicated to protecting the constitutional rights of 
innocent Americans. So at the end of the day, we will help to fulfill 
America's promise--that we are safe and free at the same time.
  I believe this bill is an important step to making America safer, and 
I look forward to working on it with colleagues on both sides of the 
aisle in getting this legislation passed.
                                 ______