[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 76 (Wednesday, May 21, 2003)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1041]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 PORT SECURITY IMPROVEMENTS ACT OF 2003

                                 ______
                                 

                             HON. DOUG OSE

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, May 21, 2003

  Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to introduce a bill entitled the 
``Port Security Improvements Act of 2003.'' I am pleased to have five 
other original co-sponsors of this bi-partisan legislation, including: 
John Tierney, who is the Ranking Member of the Government Reform 
Subcommittee which I chair; Bill Janklow, who is the Vice Chairman of 
my Subcommittee; and Jane Harman, who ably represents the Port of Los 
Angeles.
  The tragic events of September 11, 2001 shook the confidence of the 
U.S. government and its citizens in the Nation's security. On November 
19, 2001, the President signed the Aviation and Transportation Security 
Act. This law established ``emergency procedures'' for the Federal 
Government to issue interim final regulations without the usual 
opportunity for public notice and comment, as provided in the 
Administrative Procedure Act. To ensure Congressional and public input 
into the regulatory decisionmaking process, the Government Reform 
Subcommittee on Energy Policy, Natural Resources and Regulatory 
Affairs, which I chair, held a November 27th hearing entitled ``What 
Regulations are Needed to Ensure Air Security?''
  Congress then turned its attention to port security. On November 25, 
2002, the President signed the Maritime Transportation Security Act. 
This law similarly provided for some interim final regulations without 
any public notice and comment but did not establish deadlines for their 
issuance. To provide Congressional and public input into the regulatory 
decisonmaking process, my Subcommittee held an April 24, 2003, hearing 
entitled ``What Regulations are Needed to Ensure Port Security?''
  The U.S. maritime system includes more than 300 ports with more than 
3,700 cargo and passenger terminals. The vast maritime system is 
particularly susceptible to terrorist attempts to smuggle personnel, 
weapons of mass destruction, or other dangerous materials into the U.S. 
And, terrorists could attack ships in U.S. ports. A large-scale 
terrorist attack at a U.S. port would cause widespread damage and 
seriously affect our economy.
  To date, Congress has provided extensive Federal funding to fully 
ensure air security. In contrast, Congress has not provided sufficient 
Federal funding to fully ensure port security.
  The witnesses at my Subcommittee hearing made several thoughtful 
recommendations, including: (a) the urgency for the Department of 
Homeland Security to issue a regulation governing a standardized 
``smart'' common Transportation Worker Identification Credential; (b) 
the need for some standardization of security requirements for each 
U.S. port, each facility in a U.S. port, and each vessel entering a 
U.S. port; and, (c) the need for an additional significant Federal 
investment in port security. Currently, the U.S. Customs Bureau 
collects $15.6 billion in duties on commodities entering the U.S. 
through marine transportation. My bill directs a portion of these 
duties toward port security enhancements. In addition, my bill sets 
deadlines for issuance of regulations governing transportation security 
cards, and requires regulations that include a national minimum set of 
standard security requirements for ports, facilities, and vessels.
  To understand the logic for dedicating a portion of Customs duties, 
let's look at the Port of Los Angeles. It is the busiest port in the 
U.S. and the seventh busiest in the world. It encompasses 7,500 acres. 
In 2002, Custom duties collected in this port accounted for 32 percent 
of all Customs duties collected in all U.S. seaports. However, since 
passage of the Maritime Transportation Security Act, this port has only 
received a small fraction of what it needs for port security 
enhancements and a substantially inadequate share of the funding 
distributed to date relative to its importance in the commerce of this 
country.
  Since America's ports are crucial to our economic well being, it is 
essential that we find the right balance between increasing port 
security while not impeding the flow of commerce and trade. As a 
Republican, I am sensitive to the costs of excessive government 
regulation. But, in a post September 11th world, I realize that we must 
take additional precautions to protect our fellow citizens and our 
economy. We need to make sure that our ports are safe. I am not 
convinced that they are safe today.
  The Port Security Improvements Act will ensure that America's ports 
receive the security upgrades they need. This legislation links customs 
duties collected in our ports to investments in greater security at 
these ports. All of us recognize the tremendous importance that 
international trade plays in our economy.

                          ____________________