[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 137 (Monday, December 6, 2004)]
[House]
[Page H10921]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




      WHY IS IT SO URGENT THAT WE PASS AN INTELLIGENCE REFORM BILL

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. 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, there are few times when a 
bipartisan bill--of such substance and urgency, comes to the House that 
will truly benefit the safety and security of the American people as we 
have in this instance. The intelligence bill that is sitting in our 
Chambers, H.R. 10/S. 2845, must be passed before we close for 2004.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in urging our colleagues to pass this 
bill and avoid imminent dereliction of duty.
  This week may be our last chance this year to consider and pass this 
overwhelmingly popular bipartisan measure. This sweeping bill includes 
the creation of a national intelligence director to oversee the Central 
Intelligence Agency, a plan with which even our President agrees.
  Given the recent vulnerabilities that we have experienced in 
bioterrorism defense with the shortage of flu vaccinations and the 
recent discovery that 380 tons of explosive material in Iraq remains 
unaccounted for, it is more than critical for this body to pass the 
intelligence reform legislation now--while we have an opportunity. The 
families of the fallen victims are looking to us for leadership and 
responsible action.
  This bill would pass easily in the House of Representatives if our 
Speaker would overrule its opponents and schedule a vote. Furthermore, 
the companion Senate measure has sufficient support for passage.
  I believe very strongly that immigration does not equate with 
terrorism. Nevertheless, we continue to look to the enforcement of our 
immigration laws as a way to protect our country from terrorist 
attacks, and this did not begin with the terrorist attack on September 
11, 2001. Serious efforts in this regard were going on long before that 
happened. For instance, partly in response to the 1993 World Trade 
Center bombing, Congress strengthened the anti-terrorism provisions in 
the Immigration and Nationality Act, the INA, and passed provisions 
that were expected to ramp up enforcement activities, notably in the 
Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, IIRIRA, of 
1996, Public Law 104-208, and the Antiterrorism and Effective Death 
Penalty Act, Public Law 104-132.
  The INA gives the government broad authority to arrest and detain 
aliens in the United States who are suspected terrorists or who are 
suspected of supporting terrorist organizations, as well as aliens who 
have violated other provisions of immigration law. This was augmented 
by a mandatory detention provision that we added with the U.S. PATRIOT 
Act.
  More than 1,200 people reportedly were detained after September 11. 
Some experts support a broadening of the authority to arrest and detain 
aliens in the United States who are suspected terrorists or who are 
suspected of supporting terrorist organizations.
  I believe that current law will be adequate with minimal changes. I 
am concerned that further expansion may erode individual rights and 
that, as a result, innocent foreign nationals may be detained and 
deported.
  Unfortunately, the House bill to implement the Commission's 
recommendations included a number of extraneous provisions that dealt 
with immigration reform issues rather than with the need to secure our 
country against further terrorist attacks.
  For instance, it included court stripping provisions to reduce access 
to Federal court review from adverse decisions in immigration removal 
proceedings. It had a provision to take away the power of a Federal 
court judge to stay an alien appellant's removal pending the outcome of 
his appeal proceedings. It provided for greatly expanding the use of 
expedited removal proceedings, which would have enabled the Government 
to remove thousands of undocumented aliens without hearings or due 
process of any kind. It even had a provision permitting the government 
to deport aliens to countries where they would be tortured--in direct 
violation of the Convention Against Torture.
  This troubled the 9/11 Commissioners to the point where they wrote 
letters to the Congress encouraging us to put these contentious issues 
aside so that we could move forward with the serious business of 
implementing their recommendations.
  I am pleased that bipartisanship and a sense of responsibility 
prevailed in the end as far as the joint conference is concerned. The 
extraneous provisions I just mentioned have been removed from the bill. 
The final product is worthy of the outstanding effort that the 
Commission put into analyzing the horrific events of September 11, 
2001. While I recognize that it does not fully implement the 
recommendations of the Commission in every respect, it is a major 
effort to move forward with the essential elements of the Commission's 
recommendations. We must consider and pass this legislation now.




                          ____________________