[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 27 (Thursday, March 4, 2004)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E311]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 EXTENSION OF NATIONAL COMMISSION ON TERRORIST ATTACKS UPON THE UNITED 
                                 STATES

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                          HON. MARK E. SOUDER

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, March 3, 2004

  Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, I come before you in opposition to the 
extension of the 9/11 Commission. From the outset, I've been opposed to 
the creation of this blue ribbon panel. A year and a half ago I voted 
against the Roemer Amendment which created this panel because I felt 
the panels work would be duplicative to an already established blue 
ribbon panel, the Select Committee on Intelligence.
  Aside from its duplicative nature I was also concerned over the 
political intent behind the creation of the blue ribbon commission. I 
feel that if the panel generates any type of report that focuses on the 
Bush Administration ignoring key pieces of intelligence it can only be 
construed as being political. Given the fact that there were tens of 
thousands of intelligence memos regarding terrorist threats, if this 
panel criticizes a particular Administration for failing to react to 
one briefing memo then their report can only be seen as seen as 
politically driven.
  The panel's recent request for an extension to its pre-established 
May 27th deadline only reinforces my pre-held belief that the panel is 
going to be used as a political vehicle and not serve its original 
intent which was to provide recommendations for guarding against future 
attacks. In my opinion, the panel should have either produced a report 
within the original time constraints or extend the deadline till after 
the November elections so that the findings don't get bogged down in 
election year politics.
  The way in which the House passed the extension yesterday on voice 
vote with no advance notice is also troubling to me. Had the House 
conducted a recorded vote on the extension, I would have voted ``no.''

                          ____________________