[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 92 (Monday, July 11, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7947-S7974]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2006

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the hour of 2 p.m. 
having arrived, the Senate will proceed

[[Page S7948]]

to the consideration of H.R. 2360, which the clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 2360) making appropriations for the Department 
     of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
     2006, and for other purposes.

  The Senate proceeded to consider the bill which had been reported 
from the Committee on Appropriations with an amendment to strike all 
after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof the following:
  (Strike the part shown in black brackets and insert the part shown in 
italic.)

                               H.R. 2360

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,
     [That the following sums are appropriated, out of any money 
     in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the 
     Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 2006, and for other purposes, namely:

            [TITLE I--DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS

           [Office of the Secretary and Executive Management

       [For necessary expenses of the Office of the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security, as authorized by section 102 of the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 112), and executive 
     management of the Department of Homeland Security, as 
     authorized by law, $133,239,000 (reduced by $100,000): 
     Provided, That not to exceed $40,000 shall be for official 
     reception and representation expenses: Provided further, That 
     of the amounts appropriated under this heading, $20,000,000 
     shall not be available for obligation until the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security submits to the Committee on Appropriations 
     of the House of Representatives an immigration enforcement 
     strategy to reduce the number of undocumented aliens, based 
     upon the latest United States Census Bureau data, by 10 
     percent per year: Provided further, That of the amounts 
     appropriated under this heading, $10,000,000 shall not be 
     available for obligation until section 525 of this Act is 
     implemented: Provided further, That the Secretary shall 
     submit all reports requested by the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives for all 
     agencies and components of the Department of Homeland 
     Security, as identified in this Act and the House report 
     accompanying this Act, by the dates specified: Provided 
     further, That the content of all reports shall be in 
     compliance with the direction and instructions included in 
     this Act and the House report accompanying this Act by the 
     dates specified: Provided further, That, of the amounts 
     appropriated under this heading, $20,000,000 may not be 
     obligated until the Committee on Appropriations of the House 
     of Representatives has received all final reports in 
     compliance with such direction and instructions.

             [Office of the Under Secretary for Management

       [For necessary expenses of the Office of the Under 
     Secretary for Management, as authorized by sections 701-705 
     of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 341-345), 
     $146,084,000 (reduced by $26,100,000) (reduced by 
     $50,000,000): Provided, That not to exceed $3,000 shall be 
     for official reception and representation expenses: Provided 
     further, That of the total amount provided, $26,070,000 shall 
     remain available until expended solely for the alteration and 
     improvement of facilities, tenant improvements, and 
     relocation costs to consolidate Department headquarters 
     operations.

                 [Office of the Chief Financial Officer

       [For necessary expenses of the Office of the Chief 
     Financial Officer, as authorized by section 103 of the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 113), $18,505,000.

                [Office of the Chief Information Officer

       [For necessary expenses of the Office of the Chief 
     Information Officer, as authorized by section 103 of the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 113), and Department-
     wide technology investments, $303,700,000; of which 
     $75,756,000 shall be available for salaries and expenses; and 
     of which $227,944,000 shall be available for development and 
     acquisition of information technology equipment, software, 
     services, and related activities for the Department of 
     Homeland Security, and for the costs of conversion to 
     narrowband communications, including the cost for operation 
     of the land mobile radio legacy systems, to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated 
     shall be used to support or supplement the appropriations 
     provided for the United States Visitor and Immigrant Status 
     Indicator Technology project or the Automated Commercial 
     Environment: Provided further, That the Department shall 
     report within 180 days of enactment of this Act on its 
     enterprise architecture and other strategic planning 
     activities in accordance with the terms and conditions 
     specified in the House report accompanying this Act.

                      [Office of Inspector General

       [For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.), $83,017,000, of which not to exceed 
     $100,000 may be used for certain confidential operational 
     expenses, including the payment of informants, to be expended 
     at the direction of the Inspector General.

          [TITLE II--SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND INVESTIGATIONS

                  [BORDER AND TRANSPORTATION SECURITY

 [Office of the Under Secretary for Border and Transportation Security


                         [Salaries and Expenses

       [For necessary expenses of the Office of the Under 
     Secretary for Border and Transportation Security, as 
     authorized by subtitle A of title IV of the Homeland Security 
     Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 201 et seq.), $10,617,000: Provided, 
     That not to exceed $3,000 shall be for official reception and 
     representation expenses.


                       [automation modernization

       [For necessary expenses of the United State Visitor and 
     Immigrant Status Indicator Technology project, as authorized 
     by section 110 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and 
     Immigration Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1221 note) 
     and for the development, deployment, and use of Free and 
     Secure Trade (FAST), NEXUS, and Secure Electronic Network for 
     Traveler's Rapid Inspection (SENTRI), $411,232,000, to remain 
     available until expended, which shall be allocated as 
     follows:
       [(1) $7,000,000 for FAST.
       [(2) $14,000,000 for NEXUS/SENTRI.
       [(3) $390,232,000 for the United States Visitor and 
     Immigrant Status Indicator Technology project: Provided, That 
     of the funds provided for this project, $254,000,000 may not 
     be obligated until the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     Senate and the House of Representatives receive and approve a 
     plan for expenditure prepared by the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security that--
       [(A) meets the capital planning and investment control 
     review requirements established by the Office of Management 
     and Budget, including Circular A-11, part 7;
       [(B) complies with the Department of Homeland Security 
     enterprise information systems architecture;
       [(C) complies with the acquisition rules, requirements, 
     guidelines, and systems acquisition management practices of 
     the Federal Government;
       [(D) is reviewed and approved by the Department of Homeland 
     Security Investment Review Board, the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security, and the Office of Management and Budget; and
       [(E) is reviewed by the Government Accountability Office.

                     [Customs and Border Protection


                         [Salaries and Expenses

       [For necessary expenses for enforcement of laws relating to 
     border security, immigration, customs, and agricultural 
     inspections and regulatory activities related to plant and 
     animal imports; acquisition, lease, maintenance and operation 
     of aircraft; purchase and lease of up to 4,500 (3,935 for 
     replacement only) police-type vehicles; and contracting with 
     individuals for personal services abroad; $4,885,544,000; of 
     which $3,000,000 shall be derived from the Harbor Maintenance 
     Trust Fund for administrative expenses related to the 
     collection of the Harbor Maintenance Fee pursuant to section 
     9505(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and 
     notwithstanding section 1511(e)(1) of the Homeland Security 
     Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 551(e)(1)); of which not to exceed 
     $35,000 shall be for official reception and representation 
     expenses; of which not less than $141,060,000 shall be for 
     Air and Marine Operations; of which not to exceed 
     $174,800,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2007, 
     for inspection and surveillance technology, unmanned aerial 
     vehicles, and replacement aircraft; of which such sums as 
     become available in the Customs User Fee Account, except sums 
     subject to section 13031(f)(3) of the Consolidated Omnibus 
     Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (19 U.S.C. 58c(f)(3)), 
     shall be derived from that account; of which not to exceed 
     $150,000 shall be available for payment for rental space in 
     connection with preclearance operations; of which not to 
     exceed $1,000,000 shall be for awards of compensation to 
     informants, to be accounted for solely under the certificate 
     of the Under Secretary for Border and Transportation 
     Security; and of which not to exceed $5,000,000 shall be 
     available for payments or advances arising out of contractual 
     or reimbursable agreements with State and local law 
     enforcement agencies while engaged in cooperative activities 
     related to immigration: Provided, That for fiscal year 2006, 
     the overtime limitation prescribed in section 5(c)(1) of the 
     Act of February 13, 1911 (19 U.S.C. 267(c)(1)) shall be 
     $35,000; and notwithstanding any other provision of law, none 
     of the funds appropriated in this Act may be available to 
     compensate any employee of the Bureau of Customs and Border 
     Protection for overtime, from whatever source, in an amount 
     that exceeds such limitation, except in individual cases 
     determined by the Under Secretary for Border and 
     Transportation Security, or a designee, to be necessary for 
     national security purposes, to prevent excessive costs, or in 
     cases of immigration emergencies: Provided further, That of 
     the total amount provided, $10,000,000 may not be obligated 
     until the Secretary submits to the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives all required 
     reports related to air and marine operations: Provided 
     further, That of the total amount provided, $2,000,000 may 
     not be obligated until the Secretary submits to the Committee 
     on Appropriations of the House of Representatives a report on 
     the performance of the Immigration Advisory Program as 
     directed in House

[[Page S7949]]

     Report No. 108-541: Provided further, That of the total 
     amount provided, $70,000,000 may not be obligated until the 
     Secretary submits to the Committee on Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives part two of the report on the 
     performance of the Container Security Initiative progam, as 
     directed in House Report 180-541: Provided further, That no 
     funds shall be available for the site acquisition, design, or 
     construction of any Border Patrol checkpoint in the Tucson 
     sector: Provided further, That the Border Patrol shall 
     relocate its checkpoints in the Tucson sector at least once 
     every seven days in a manner designed to prevent persons 
     subject to inspection from predicting the location of any 
     such checkpoint.


                       [Automation Modernization

       [For expenses for customs and border protection automated 
     systems, $458,009,000, to remain available until expended, of 
     which not less than $321,690,000 shall be for the development 
     of the Automated Commercial Environment: Provided, That none 
     of the funds appropriated under this heading may be obligated 
     for the Automated Commercial Environment until the Committees 
     on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives receive and approve a plan for expenditure 
     prepared by the Under Secretary for Border and Transportation 
     Security that--
       [(1) meets the capital planning and investment control 
     review requirements established by the Office of Management 
     and Budget, including Circular A-11, part 7;
       [(2) complies with the Department of Homeland Security's 
     enterprise information systems architecture;
       [(3) complies with the acquisition rules, requirements, 
     guidelines, and systems acquisition management practices of 
     the Federal Government;
       [(4) is reviewed and approved by the Department of Homeland 
     Security Investment Review Board, the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security, and the Office of Management and Budget; and
       [(5) is reviewed by the Government Accountability Office.


 [Air and Marine Interdiction, Operations, Maintenance, and Procurement

       [For necessary expenses for the operations, maintenance, 
     and procurement of marine vessels, aircraft, and other 
     related equipment of the air and marine program, including 
     operational training and mission-related travel, and rental 
     payments for facilities occupied by the air or marine 
     interdiction and demand reduction programs, the operations of 
     which include the following: the interdiction of narcotics 
     and other goods; the provision of support to Federal, State, 
     and local agencies in the enforcement or administration of 
     laws enforced by the Department of Homeland Security; and at 
     the discretion of the Under Secretary for Border and 
     Transportation Security, the provision of assistance to 
     Federal, State, and local agencies in other law enforcement 
     and emergency humanitarian efforts, $347,780,000, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That no aircraft or other 
     related equipment, with the exception of aircraft that are 
     one of a kind and have been identified as excess to Bureau of 
     Customs and Border Protection requirements and aircraft that 
     have been damaged beyond repair, shall be transferred to any 
     other Federal agency, department, or office outside of the 
     Department of Homeland Security during fiscal year 2006 
     without the prior approval of the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives.


                             [Construction

       [For necessary expenses to plan, construct, renovate, 
     equip, and maintain buildings and facilities necessary for 
     the administration and enforcement of the laws relating to 
     customs and immigration, $93,418,000, to remain available 
     until expended.

                  [Immigration and Customs Enforcement


                         [Salaries and Expenses

       [For necessary expenses for enforcement of immigration and 
     customs laws, detention and removals, and investigations; and 
     purchase and lease of up to 2,300 (2,000 for replacement 
     only) police-type vehicles, $3,064,081,000 (reduced by 
     $5,000,000) (increased by $5,000,000), of which not to exceed 
     $10,000,000 shall be available until expended for conducting 
     special operations pursuant to section 3131 of the Customs 
     Enforcement Act of 1986 (19 U.S.C. 2081); of which not to 
     exceed $15,000 shall be for official reception and 
     representation expenses; of which not to exceed $1,000,000 
     shall be for awards of compensation to informants, to be 
     accounted for solely under the certificate of the Under 
     Secretary for Border and Transportation Security; of which 
     not less than $102,000 shall be for promotion of public 
     awareness of the child pornography tipline; of which not less 
     than $203,000 shall be for Project Alert; of which not less 
     than $5,000,000 shall be for costs to implement section 
     287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended; 
     and of which not to exceed $11,216,000 shall be available to 
     fund or reimburse other Federal agencies for the costs 
     associated with the care, maintenance, and repatriation of 
     smuggled illegal aliens: Provided, That none of the funds 
     appropriated shall be available to compensate any employee 
     for overtime in an annual amount in excess of $35,000, except 
     that the Under Secretary for Border and Transportation 
     Security may waive that amount as necessary for national 
     security purposes and in cases of immigration emergencies: 
     Provided further, That of the total amount provided, 
     $3,045,000 shall be for activities to enforce laws against 
     forced child labor in fiscal year 2006, of which not to 
     exceed $2,000,000 shall remain available until expended: 
     Provided further, That of the amounts appropriated, 
     $50,000,000 shall not be available for obligation until the 
     Assistant Secretary of Immigration and Customs Enforcement 
     submits to the Committee on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives a national detention management plan 
     including the use of regional detention contracts and 
     alternatives to detention: Provided further, That the 
     Assistant Secretary of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, 
     with concurrence of the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall 
     submit, by December 1, 2005, to the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives a plan for the 
     expanded use of Immigration Enforcement Agents to enforce 
     administrative violations of United States immigration laws.


                         [Federal Air Marshals

       [For necessary expenses of the Federal Air Marshals, 
     $698,860,000, of which not to exceed $5,000,000 shall remain 
     available until expended.


                      [Federal Protective Service

       [The revenues and collections of security fees credited to 
     this account, not to exceed $487,000,000, shall be available 
     until expended for necessary expenses related to the 
     protection of federally-owned and leased buildings and for 
     the operations of the Federal Protective Service.


                       [Automation Modernization

       [For expenses of immigration and customs enforcement 
     automated systems, $40,150,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated under 
     this heading may be obligated until the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
     receive and approve a plan for expenditure prepared by the 
     Under Secretary for Border and Transportation Security that--
       [(1) meets the capital planning and investment control 
     review requirements established by the Office of Management 
     and Budget, including Circular A-11, part 7;
       [(2) complies with the Department of Homeland Security 
     enterprise information systems architecture;
       [(3) complies with the acquisition rules, requirements, 
     guidelines, and systems acquisition management practices of 
     the Federal Government;
       [(4) is reviewed and approved by the Department of Homeland 
     Security Investment Review Board, the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security, and the Office of Management and Budget; and
       [(5) is reviewed by the Government Accountability Office.


                             [Construction

       [For necessary expenses to plan, construct, renovate, 
     equip, and maintain buildings and facilities necessary for 
     the administration and enforcement of the laws relating to 
     customs and immigration, $26,546,000, to remain available 
     until expended.

                [Transportation Security Administration


                           [Aviation Security

       [For necessary expenses of the Transportation Security 
     Administration related to providing aviation security, 
     $4,591,612,000, to remain available until September 30, 2007, 
     of which not to exceed $3,000 shall be available for official 
     reception and representation expenses: Provided, That of the 
     total amount provided under this heading, not to exceed 
     $3,608,599,000 shall be for screening operations, of which 
     $170,000,000 shall be available only for procurement of 
     checked baggage explosive detection systems and $75,000,000 
     shall be available only for installation of checked baggage 
     explosive detection systems; and not to exceed $983,013,000 
     shall be for aviation security direction and enforcement 
     presence: Provided further, That security service fees 
     authorized under section 44940 of title 49, United States 
     Code, shall be credited to this appropriation as offsetting 
     collections: Provided further, That the sum herein 
     appropriated from the General Fund shall be reduced on a 
     dollar-for-dollar basis as such offsetting collections are 
     received during fiscal year 2006, so as to result in a final 
     fiscal year appropriation from the General Fund estimated at 
     not more than $2,601,612,000: Provided further, That any 
     security service fees collected in excess of the amount 
     appropriated under this heading shall become available during 
     fiscal year 2007: Provided further, That none of the funds in 
     this Act shall be used to recruit or hire personnel into the 
     Transportation Security Administration which would cause the 
     agency to exceed a staffing level of 45,000 full-time 
     equivalent screeners.


                    [surface transportation security

       [For necessary expenses of the Transportation Security 
     Administration related to providing surface transportation 
     security activities, $36,000,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2007.


               [Transportation Vetting and Credentialing

       [For necessary expenses for the development and 
     implementation of screening programs by the Office of 
     Transportation Vetting and Credentialing, $84,294,000.


                    [Transportation Security Support

       [For necessary expenses of the Transportation Security 
     Administration related to providing transportation security 
     support and intelligence activities, $541,008,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2007: Provided, That of the 
     funds appropriated under

[[Page S7950]]

     this heading, $50,000,000 may not be obligated until the 
     Secretary submits to the Committee on Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives: (1) a plan for optimally deploying 
     explosive detection equipment, either in-line or to replace 
     explosive trace detection machines, at the Nation's airports 
     on a priority basis to enhance security, reduce 
     Transportation Security Administration staffing requirements, 
     and long-term costs; and (2) a detailed spend plan for 
     explosive detection systems procurement and installations on 
     an airport-by-airport basis for fiscal year 2006: Provided 
     further, That these plans shall be submitted no later than 60 
     days after enactment of this Act.

                       [United States Coast Guard


                          [Operating Expenses

       [For necessary expenses for the operation and maintenance 
     of the Coast Guard not otherwise provided for, purchase or 
     lease of not to exceed 25 passenger motor vehicles for 
     replacement only, payments pursuant to section 156 of Public 
     Law 97-377 (42 U.S.C. 402 note), and recreation and welfare, 
     $5,500,000,000, of which $1,200,000,000 shall be for defense-
     related activities; of which $24,500,000 shall be derived 
     from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to carry out the 
     purposes of section 1012(a)(5) of the Oil Pollution Act of 
     1990 (33 U.S.C. 2712(a)(5)); and of which not to exceed 
     $3,000 shall be for official reception and representation 
     expenses: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated by 
     this or any other Act shall be available for administrative 
     expenses in connection with shipping commissioners in the 
     United States: Provided further, That none of the funds 
     provided by this Act shall be available for expenses incurred 
     for yacht documentation under section 12109 of title 46, 
     United States Code, except to the extent fees are collected 
     from yacht owners and credited to this appropriation.


               [Environmental Compliance and Restoration

       [For necessary expenses to carry out the Coast Guard's 
     environmental compliance and restoration functions under 
     chapter 19 of title 14, United States Code, $12,000,000, to 
     remain available until expended.


                           [Reserve Training

       [For necessary expenses of the Coast Guard Reserve, as 
     authorized by law; operations and maintenance of the reserve 
     program; personnel and training costs; and equipment and 
     services; $119,000,000.


              [Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements

       [For necessary expenses of acquisition, construction, 
     renovation, and improvement of aids to navigation, shore 
     facilities, vessels, and aircraft, including equipment 
     related thereto; and maintenance, rehabilitation, lease and 
     operation of facilities and equipment, as authorized by law, 
     $798,152,000, of which $20,000,000 shall be derived from the 
     Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to carry out the purposes of 
     section 1012(a)(5) of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 
     U.S.C. 2712(a)(5)); of which $22,000,000 shall be available 
     until September 30, 2010, to acquire, repair, renovate, or 
     improve vessels, small boats, and related equipment; of which 
     $29,902,000 shall be available until September 30, 2010, to 
     increase aviation capability; of which $130,100,000 shall be 
     available until September 30, 2008, for other equipment; of 
     which $39,700,000 shall be available until September 30, 
     2008, for shore facilities and aids to navigation facilities; 
     of which $76,450,000 shall be available for personnel 
     compensation and benefits and related costs; and of which 
     $500,000,000 shall be available until September 30, 2010, for 
     the Integrated Deepwater Systems program: Provided, That the 
     Commandant of the Coast Guard is authorized to dispose of 
     surplus real property, by sale or lease, and the proceeds 
     shall be credited to this appropriation as offsetting 
     collections and shall be available until September 30, 2008, 
     only for Rescue 21: Provided further, That of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading for the Integrated Deepwater 
     System, $50,000,000 may not be obligated until the Committee 
     on Appropriations of the House of Representatives receives 
     from the Secretary of Homeland Security a new Deepwater 
     program baseline that reflects revised, post September 11th 
     operational priorities that includes--
       [(1) a detailed justification for each new Deepwater asset 
     that is determined to be necessary to fulfill homeland and 
     national security functions or multi-agency procurements as 
     identified by the Joint Requirements Council;
       [(2) a comprehensive timeline for the entire Deepwater 
     program, including an asset-by-asset breakdown, aligned with 
     the comprehensive acquisition timeline and revised mission 
     needs statement, that also details the phase-out of legacy 
     assets and the phase-in of new, replacement assets on an 
     annual basis;
       [(3) a comparison of the revised acquisition timeline 
     against the original Deepwater timeline;
       [(4) an aggregate total cost of the program that aligns 
     with the revised mission needs statement, acquisition 
     timeline and asset-by-asset breakdown;
       [(5) a detailed projection of the remaining operational 
     lifespan of every type of legacy cutter and aircraft; and
       [(6) a detailed progress report on command, control, 
     communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and 
     reconnaissance equipment upgrades that includes what has been 
     installed currently on operational assets and when such 
     equipment will be installed on all remaining Deepwater legacy 
     assets: Provided further, That the Secretary shall annually 
     submit to the Committee on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives, at the time that the President's budget is 
     submitted under section 1105(a) of title 31, a future-years 
     capital investment plan for the Coast Guard that identifies 
     for each capital budget line item--
       [(1) the proposed appropriation included in that budget;
       [(2) the total estimated cost of completion;
       [(3) projected funding levels for each fiscal year for the 
     next 5 fiscal years or until project completion, whichever is 
     earlier;
       [(4) an estimated completion date at the projected funding 
     levels; and
       [(5) changes, if any, in the total estimated cost of 
     completion or estimated completion date from previous future-
     years capital investment plans submitted to the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives:
     [Provided further, That the Secretary shall ensure that 
     amounts specified in the future-years capital investment plan 
     are consistent to the maximum extent practicable with 
     proposed appropriations necessary to support the programs, 
     projects, and activities of the Coast Guard in the 
     President's budget as submitted under section 1105(a) of 
     title 31 for that fiscal year: Provided further, That any 
     inconsistencies between the capital investment plan and 
     proposed appropriations shall be identified and justified.


                         [Alteration of Bridges

       [For necessary expenses for alteration or removal of 
     obstructive bridges, $15,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended.


                              [Retired Pay

       [For retired pay, including the payment of obligations 
     otherwise chargeable to lapsed appropriations for this 
     purpose, payments under the Retired Serviceman's Family 
     Protection and Survivor Benefits Plans, payment for career 
     status bonuses, concurrent receipts and combat-related 
     special compensation under the National Defense Authorization 
     Act, and payments for medical care of retired personnel and 
     their dependents under chapter 55 of title 10, United States 
     Code, $1,014,080,000.

                     [United States Secret Service


                         [Salaries and Expenses

       [For necessary expenses of the United States Secret 
     Service, including purchase of not to exceed 614 vehicles for 
     police-type use, which shall be for replacement only, and 
     hire of passenger motor vehicles; purchase of American-made 
     motorcycles; hire of aircraft; services of expert witnesses 
     at such rates as may be determined by the Director; rental of 
     buildings in the District of Columbia, and fencing, lighting, 
     guard booths, and other facilities on private or other 
     property not in Government ownership or control, as may be 
     necessary to perform protective functions; payment of per 
     diem or subsistence allowances to employees where a 
     protective assignment during the actual day or days of the 
     visit of a protectee requires an employee to work 16 hours 
     per day or to remain overnight at his or her post of duty; 
     conduct of and participation in firearms matches; 
     presentation of awards; travel of Secret Service employees on 
     protective missions without regard to the limitations on such 
     expenditures in this or any other Act if approval is obtained 
     in advance from the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     Senate and the House of Representatives; research and 
     development; grants to conduct behavioral research in support 
     of protective research and operations; and payment in advance 
     for commercial accommodations as may be necessary to perform 
     protective functions; $1,228,981,000, of which not to exceed 
     $25,000 shall be for official reception and representation 
     expenses; of which not to exceed $100,000 shall be to provide 
     technical assistance and equipment to foreign law enforcement 
     organizations in counterfeit investigations; of which 
     $2,678,000 shall be for forensic and related support of 
     investigations of missing and exploited children; and of 
     which $5,000,000 shall be a grant for activities related to 
     the investigations of exploited children and shall remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That up to $18,000,000 
     provided for protective travel shall remain available until 
     September 30, 2007: Provided further, That of the total 
     amount appropriated, not less than $10,000,000 shall be 
     available solely for the unanticipated costs related to 
     security operations for National Special Security Events, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2007: Provided further, 
     That the United States Secret Service is authorized to 
     obligate funds in anticipation of reimbursements from 
     agencies and entities, as defined in section 105 of title 5, 
     United States Code, receiving training sponsored by the James 
     J. Rowley Training Center, except that total obligations at 
     the end of the fiscal year shall not exceed total budgetary 
     resources available under this heading at the end of the 
     fiscal year.


     [Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses

       [For necessary expenses for acquisition, construction, 
     repair, alteration, and improvement of facilities, 
     $3,699,000, to remain available until expended.

[[Page S7951]]

                 [TITLE III--PREPAREDNESS AND RECOVERY

  [Office of State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness


                     [Management and Administration

       [For necessary expenses for the Office of State and Local 
     Government Coordination and Preparedness, $3,546,000: 
     Provided, That not to exceed $2,000 shall be for official 
     reception and representation expenses.


                       [State and Local Programs

       [For grants, contracts, cooperative agreements, and other 
     activities, including grants to State and local governments 
     for terrorism prevention activities, notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, $2,781,300,000 (increased by 
     $100,000) (increased by $50,000,000), which shall be 
     allocated as follows:
       [(1) $750,000,000 for formula-based grants and $400,000,000 
     for law enforcement terrorism prevention grants pursuant to 
     section 1014 of the USA PATRIOT ACT (42 U.S.C. 3714): 
     Provided, That the application for grants shall be made 
     available to States within 45 days after enactment of this 
     Act; that States shall submit applications within 90 days 
     after the grant announcement; and that the Office of State 
     and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness shall act 
     within 90 days after receipt of an application: Provided 
     further, That no less than 80 percent of any grant under this 
     paragraph to a State shall be made available by the State to 
     local governments within 60 days after the receipt of the 
     funds.
       [(2) $1,215,000,000 for discretionary grants, as determined 
     by the Secretary of Homeland Security, of which--
       [(A) $850,000,000 shall be for use in high-threat, high-
     density urban areas;
       [(B) $150,000,000 shall be for port security grants, which 
     shall be distributed based on risks and vulnerabilities: 
     Provided, That the Office of State and Local Government 
     Coordination and Preparedness shall work with the Information 
     Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Directorate to assess 
     the risk associated with each port and with the Coast Guard 
     to evaluate the vulnerability of each port: Provided further, 
     That funding may only be made available to those projects 
     recommended by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port;
       [(C) $5,000,000 shall be for trucking industry security 
     grants;
       [(D) $10,000,000 shall be for intercity bus security 
     grants;
       [(E) $150,000,000 shall be for intercity passenger rail 
     transportation (as defined in section 24102 of title 49, 
     United States Code), freight rail, and transit security 
     grants; and
       [(F) $50,000,000 shall be for buffer zone protection 
     grants:
     [Provided, That for grants under subparagraph (A), the 
     application for grants shall be made available to States 
     within 45 days after enactment of this Act; that States shall 
     submit applications within 90 days after the grant 
     announcement; and that the Office of State and Local 
     Government Coordination and Preparedness shall act within 90 
     days after receipt of an application: Provided further,  That 
     no less than 80 percent of any grant under this paragraph to 
     a State shall be made available by the State to local 
     governments within 60 days after the receipt of the funds.
       [(3) $50,000,000 shall be available for the Commercial 
     Equipment Direct Assistance Program.
       [(4) $366,300,000 for training, exercises, technical 
     assistance, and other programs:
     [Provided, That none of the grants provided under this 
     heading shall be used for the construction or renovation of 
     facilities; for minor perimeter security projects, not to 
     exceed $1,000,000, as determined necessary by the Secretary 
     of Homeland Security: Provided further, That the proceeding 
     proviso shall not apply to grants under subparagraphs (B) and 
     (E) of paragraph (2) of this heading: Provided further, That 
     grantees shall provide additional reports on their use of 
     funds, as determined necessary by the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security: Provided further, That funds appropriated for law 
     enforcement terrorism prevention grants under paragraph (1) 
     and discretionary grants under paragraph (2)(A) of this 
     heading shall be available for operational costs, to include 
     personnel overtime and overtime associated with Office of 
     State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness 
     certified training, as needed: Provided further, That in 
     accordance with the Department's implementation plan for 
     Homeland Security Presidential Directive 8, the Office of 
     State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness 
     shall issue the final National Preparedness Goal no later 
     than October 1, 2005; and no funds provided under paragraphs 
     (1) and (2)(A) shall be awarded to States that have not 
     submitted to the Office of State and Local Government 
     Coordination and Preparedness an updated State homeland 
     strategy based on the interim National Preparedness Goal, 
     dated March 31, 2005.


                     [Firefighter Assistance Grants

       [For necessary expenses for programs authorized by the 
     Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 
     2201 et seq.), $600,000,000 (increased by $50,000,000), of 
     which $550,000,000 (increased by $25,000,000) shall be 
     available to carry out section 33 (15 U.S.C. 2229) and 
     $50,000,000 (increased by $25,000,000) shall be available to 
     carry out section 34 (15 U.S.C. 2229a) of the Act, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2007: Provided, That not to 
     exceed 5 percent of this amount shall be available for 
     program administration.


                [emergency management performance grants

       [For necessary expenses for emergency management 
     performance grants, as authorized by the National Flood 
     Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.), the Robert T. 
     Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), the Earthquake Hazards Reductions Act 
     of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.), and Reorganization Plan No. 
     3 of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.), $180,000,000: Provided, That total 
     administrative costs shall not exceed 3 percent of the total 
     appropriation.

                         [Counterterrorism Fund

       [For necessary expenses, as determined by the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security, to reimburse any Federal agency for the 
     costs of providing support to counter, investigate, or 
     respond to unexpected threats or acts of terrorism, including 
     payment of rewards in connection with these activities, 
     $10,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That the Secretary shall notify the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
     15 days prior to the obligation of any amount of these funds 
     in accordance with section 503 of this Act.

                  [Emergency Preparedness and Response


 [Office of the Under Secretary for Emergency Preparedness and Response

       [For necessary expenses for the Office of the Under 
     Secretary for Emergency Preparedness and Response, as 
     authorized by section 502 of the Homeland Security Act of 
     2002 (6 U.S.C. 312), $2,306,000.


           [Preparedness, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery

       [For necessary expenses for preparedness, mitigation, 
     response, and recovery activities of the Directorate of 
     Emergency Preparedness and Response, $249,499,000, including 
     activities authorized by the National Flood Insurance Act of 
     1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.), the Robert T. Stafford 
     Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 
     et seq.), the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 
     U.S.C. 7701 et seq.), the Federal Fire Prevention and Control 
     Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2201 et seq.), the Defense Production 
     Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. App. 2061 et seq.), sections 107 and 
     303 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 404, 
     405), Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.), and 
     the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.).


                [Administrative and Regional Operations

       [For necessary expenses for administrative and regional 
     operations of the Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and 
     Response, $225,441,000, including activities authorized by 
     the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et 
     seq.), the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
     Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), the Earthquake 
     Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.), the 
     Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 
     2201 et seq.), the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 
     App. 2061 et seq.), sections 107 and 303 of the National 
     Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 404, 405), Reorganization 
     Plan No. 3 of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.), and the Homeland Security 
     Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.): Provided, That not to 
     exceed $3,000 shall be for official reception and 
     representation expenses.


                        [Public Health Programs

       [For necessary expenses for countering potential 
     biological, disease, and chemical threats to civilian 
     populations, $34,000,000.


              [Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program

       [The aggregate charges assessed during fiscal year 2006, as 
     authorized in title III of the Departments of Veterans 
     Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent 
     Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999 (42 U.S.C. 5196e), shall 
     not be less than 100 percent of the amounts anticipated by 
     the Department of Homeland Security necessary for its 
     radiological emergency preparedness program for the next 
     fiscal year: Provided, That the methodology for assessment 
     and collection of fees shall be fair and equitable and shall 
     reflect costs of providing such services, including 
     administrative costs of collecting such fees: Provided 
     further, That fees received under this heading shall be 
     deposited in this account as offsetting collections and will 
     become available for authorized purposes on October 1, 2006, 
     and remain available until expended.


                            [Disaster Relief

       [For necessary expenses in carrying out the Robert T. 
     Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), $2,023,900,000 (reduced by 
     $23,900,000), to remain available until expended.


            [Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program Account

       [For administrative expenses to carry out the direct loan 
     program, as authorized by section 319 of the Robert T. 
     Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5162), $567,000: Provided, That gross obligations for 
     the principal amount of direct loans shall not exceed 
     $25,000,000: Provided further, That the cost of modifying 
     such loans shall be as defined in section 502 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 661a).


                     [Flood Map Modernization Fund

       [For necessary expenses pursuant to section 1360 of the 
     National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4101), 
     $200,000,000, and such additional sums as may be provided by 
     State

[[Page S7952]]

     and local governments or other political subdivisions for 
     cost-shared mapping activities under section 1360(f)(2) of 
     such Act, to remain available until expended: Provided, That 
     total administrative costs shall not exceed 3 percent of the 
     total appropriation.


                     [National Flood Insurance Fund

                     [(including transfer of funds)

       [For activities under the National Flood Insurance Act of 
     1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.), not to exceed $36,496,000 for 
     salaries and expenses associated with flood mitigation and 
     flood insurance operations; not to exceed $40,000,000 for 
     financial assistance under section 1361A of such Act to 
     States and communities for taking actions under such section 
     with respect to severe repetitive loss properties, to remain 
     available until expended; not to exceed $10,000,000 for 
     mitigation actions under section 1323 of such Act; and not to 
     exceed $99,358,000 for flood hazard mitigation, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2007, including up to 
     $40,000,000 for expenses under section 1366 of the National 
     Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4104c), which amount 
     shall be available for transfer to the National Flood 
     Mitigation Fund until September 30, 2007, and which amount 
     shall be derived from offsetting collections assessed and 
     collected pursuant to section 1307 of that Act (42 U.S.C. 
     4014), and shall be retained and used for necessary expenses 
     under this heading: Provided, That in fiscal year 2006, no 
     funds in excess of: (1) $55,000,000 for operating expenses; 
     (2) $660,148,000 for agents' commissions and taxes; and (3) 
     $30,000,000 for interest on Treasury borrowings shall be 
     available from the National Flood Insurance Fund.


                    [National Flood Mitigation Fund

       [Notwithstanding subparagraphs (B) and (C) of subsection 
     (b)(3), and subsection (f), of section 1366 of the National 
     Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4104c), $40,000,000, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2007, for activities 
     designed to reduce the risk of flood damage to structures 
     pursuant to such Act, of which $40,000,000 shall be derived 
     from the National Flood Insurance Fund.


                 [National Pre-disaster Mitigation Fund

       [For a pre-disaster mitigation grant program pursuant to 
     title II of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and 
     Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5131 et seq.), 
     $150,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That grants made for pre-disaster mitigation shall be awarded 
     on a competitive basis subject to the criteria in section 
     203(g) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 5133(g)): Provided further, 
     That total administrative costs shall not exceed 3 percent of 
     the total appropriation.


                      [Emergency Food and Shelter

       [To carry out an emergency food and shelter program 
     pursuant to title III of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless 
     Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11331 et seq.), $153,000,000, to 
     remain available until expended: Provided, That total 
     administrative costs shall not exceed 3.5 percent of the 
     total appropriation.

    [TITLE IV--RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, ASSESSMENTS, AND 
                                SERVICES

                 [Citizenship and Immigration Services

       [For necessary expenses for citizenship and immigration 
     services, $120,000,000: Provided, That the Director of United 
     States Citizenship and Immigration Services shall submit to 
     the Committee on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives a report on its information technology 
     transformation efforts and how these efforts align with the 
     enterprise architecture standards of the Department of 
     Homeland Security within 90 days of enactment of this Act.

                [Federal Law Enforcement Training Center


                         [Salaries and Expenses

       [For necessary expenses of the Federal Law Enforcement 
     Training Center, including materials and support costs of 
     Federal law enforcement basic training; purchase of not to 
     exceed 117 vehicles for police-type use and hire of passenger 
     motor vehicles; expenses for student athletic and related 
     activities; the conduct of and participation in firearms 
     matches and presentation of awards; public awareness and 
     enhancement of community support of law enforcement training; 
     room and board for student interns; a flat monthly 
     reimbursement to employees authorized to use personal mobile 
     phones for official duties; and services as authorized by 
     section 3109 of title 5, United States Code; $194,000,000, of 
     which up to $36,174,000 for materials and support costs of 
     Federal law enforcement basic training shall remain available 
     until September 30, 2007; and of which not to exceed $12,000 
     shall be for official reception and representation expenses: 
     Provided, That the Center is authorized to obligate funds in 
     anticipation of reimbursements from agencies receiving 
     training sponsored by the Center, except that total 
     obligations at the end of the fiscal year shall not exceed 
     total budgetary resources available at the end of the fiscal 
     year: Provided further, That in fiscal year 2006 and 
     thereafter, the Center is authorized to assess pecuniary 
     liability against Center employees and students for losses or 
     destruction of government property due to gross negligence or 
     willful misconduct and to set off any resulting debts due the 
     United States by Center employees and students, without their 
     consent, against current payments due the employees and 
     students for their services.


    [Acquisitions, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses

       [For acquisition of necessary additional real property and 
     facilities, construction, and ongoing maintenance, facility 
     improvements, and related expenses of the Federal Law 
     Enforcement Training Center, $64,743,000, to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That the Center is authorized to 
     accept reimbursement to this appropriation from government 
     agencies requesting the construction of special use 
     facilities.

          [Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection


                     [Management and Administration

       [For salaries and expenses of the immediate Office of the 
     Under Secretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure 
     Protection and for management and administration of programs 
     and activities, as authorized by title II of the Homeland 
     Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 121 et seq.), $198,200,000: 
     Provided, That not to exceed $5,000 shall be for official 
     reception and representation expenses.


                      [Assessments and Evaluations

       [For necessary expenses for information analysis and 
     infrastructure protection as authorized by title II of the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 121 et seq.), 
     $663,240,000, to remain available until September 30, 2007.

                        [Science and Technology


                     [Management and Administration

       [For salaries and expenses of the immediate Office of the 
     Under Secretary for Science and Technology and for management 
     and administration of programs and activities, as authorized 
     by title III of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 
     181 et seq.), $81,399,000: Provided, That not to exceed 
     $3,000 shall be for official reception and representation 
     expenses.


           [Research, Development, Acquisition and Operations

       [For necessary expenses for science and technology 
     research, including advanced research projects; development; 
     test and evaluation; acquisition; and operations; as 
     authorized by title III of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 
     (6 U.S.C. 181 et seq.), $1,258,597,000, to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That of the total amount provided 
     under this heading, $23,000,000 is available to find an 
     alternative site for the National Bio and Agrodefense 
     Laboratory and other pre-construction activities to establish 
     research labs to protect animal and public health from high 
     consequence animal and zoonotic diseases, in support of the 
     requirements of Homeland Security Presidential Directives 9 
     and 10: Provided further, That of the total amount provided 
     under this heading, $10,000,000 shall be used to enhance 
     activities toward implementation of section 313 of the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 193).

                      [TITLE V--GENERAL PROVISIONS


                    [(including rescission of funds)

       [Sec. 501. No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current 
     fiscal year unless expressly so provided herein.
       [Sec. 502. Subject to the requirements of section 503 of 
     this Act, the unexpended balances of prior appropriations 
     provided for activities in this Act may be transferred to 
     appropriation accounts for such activities established 
     pursuant to this Act: Provided, That balances so transferred 
     may be merged with funds in the applicable established 
     accounts and thereafter may be accounted for as one fund for 
     the same time period as originally enacted.
       [Sec. 503. (a) None of the funds provided by this Act, 
     provided by previous appropriations Acts to the agencies in 
     or transferred to the Department of Homeland Security that 
     remain available for obligation or expenditure in fiscal year 
     2006, or provided from any accounts in the Treasury of the 
     United States derived by the collection of fees available to 
     the agencies funded by this Act, shall be available for 
     obligation or expenditure through a reprogramming of funds 
     that: (1) creates a new program; (2) eliminates a program, 
     project, or activity; (3) increases funds for any program, 
     project, or activity for which funds have been denied or 
     restricted by the Congress; (4) proposes to use funds 
     directed for a specific activity by either the House or 
     Senate Committees on Appropriations for a different purpose; 
     or (5) contracts out any functions or activities for which 
     funds have been appropriated for Federal full-time equivalent 
     positions; unless the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     Senate and the House of Representatives are notified 15 days 
     in advance of such reprogramming of funds.
       [(b) None of the funds provided by this Act, provided by 
     previous appropriation Acts to the agencies in or transferred 
     to the Department of Homeland Security that remain available 
     for obligation or expenditure in fiscal year 2006, or 
     provided from any accounts in the Treasury of the United 
     States derived by the collection of fees available to the 
     agencies funded by this Act, shall be available for 
     obligation or expenditure for programs, projects, or 
     activities through a reprogramming of funds in excess of 
     $5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less, that: (1) 
     augments existing programs, projects, or activities; (2) 
     reduces by 10 percent funding for any existing program, 
     project, or activity, or numbers of personnel by 10 percent 
     as approved by the Congress; or (3) results from

[[Page S7953]]

     any general savings from a reduction in personnel that would 
     result in a change in existing programs, projects, or 
     activities as approved by the Congress; unless the Committees 
     on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives are notified 15 days in advance of such 
     reprogramming of funds.
       [(c) Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made 
     available for the current fiscal year for the Department of 
     Homeland Security by this Act or provided by previous 
     appropriations Acts may be transferred between such 
     appropriations, but no such appropriations, except as 
     otherwise specifically provided, shall be increased by more 
     than 10 percent by such transfers: Provided, That any 
     transfer under this subsection shall be treated as a 
     reprogramming of funds under subsection (b) of this section 
     and shall not be available for obligation unless the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives are notified 15 days in advance of such 
     transfer.
       [(d) The Department shall submit all notifications pursuant 
     to subsections (a), (b), and (c) of this section no later 
     than June 30, except in extraordinary circumstances which 
     imminently threaten the safety of human life or the 
     protection of property.
       [Sec. 504. Except as otherwise specifically provided by 
     law, not to exceed 50 percent of unobligated balances 
     remaining available at the end of fiscal year 2006 from 
     appropriations for salaries and expenses for fiscal year 2006 
     in this Act shall remain available through September 30, 
     2007, in the account and for the purposes for which the 
     appropriations were provided: Provided, That prior to the 
     obligation of such funds, a request shall be submitted to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives for approval in accordance with section 503 
     of this Act.
       [Sec. 505. Funds made available by this Act for 
     intelligence activities are deemed to be specifically 
     authorized by the Congress for purposes of section 504 of the 
     National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 414) during fiscal 
     year 2006 until the enactment of an Act authorizing 
     intelligence activities for fiscal year 2006.
       [Sec. 506. The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center 
     shall establish an accrediting body, to include 
     representatives from the Federal law enforcement community 
     and non-Federal accreditation experts involved in law 
     enforcement training, to establish standards for measuring 
     and assessing the quality and effectiveness of Federal law 
     enforcement training programs, facilities, and instructors.
       [Sec. 507. None of the funds in this Act may be used to 
     make a grant allocation, discretionary grant award, 
     discretionary contract award, or to issue a letter of intent 
     totaling in excess of $1,000,000 unless the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security notifies the Committees on Appropriations 
     of the Senate and House of Representatives at least 3 full 
     business days in advance: Provided, That no notification 
     shall involve funds that are not available for obligation.
       [Sec. 508. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no 
     agency shall purchase, construct, or lease any additional 
     facilities, except within or contiguous to existing 
     locations, to be used for the purpose of conducting Federal 
     law enforcement training without the advance approval of the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives, except that the Federal Law Enforcement 
     Training Center is authorized to obtain the temporary use of 
     additional facilities by lease, contract, or other agreement 
     for training which cannot be accommodated in existing Center 
     facilities.
       [Sec. 509. The Director of the Federal Law Enforcement 
     Training Center (FLETC) shall schedule basic and/or advanced 
     law enforcement training at all four training facilities 
     under FLETC's control to ensure that these training centers 
     are operated at the highest capacity throughout the fiscal 
     year.
       [Sec. 510. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this Act may be used for expenses of any 
     construction, repair, alteration, or acquisition project for 
     which a prospectus, if required by the Public Buildings Act 
     of 1959, has not been approved, except that necessary funds 
     may be expended for each project for required expenses for 
     the development of a proposed prospectus.
       [Sec. 511. None of the funds in this Act may be used in 
     contravention of the applicable provisions of the Buy 
     American Act (41 U.S.C. 10a et seq.).
       [Sec. 512. Funding for the Transportation Security 
     Administration's Office of Transportation Security Support, 
     Office of the Administrator, shall be reduced by $100,000 per 
     day for each day after enactment of this Act that the second 
     proviso of section 513 of Public Law 108-334 has not been 
     implemented.
       [Sec. 513. The Commandant of the Coast Guard shall provide 
     to the Committee on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives each year, at the time that the President's 
     budget is submitted under section 1105(a) of title 31, United 
     States Code, a list of approved but unfunded Coast Guard 
     priorities and the funds needed for each such priority in the 
     same manner and with the same contents as the unfunded 
     priorities lists submitted by the chiefs of other Armed 
     Services.
       [Sec. 514. Notwithstanding section 3302 of title 31, United 
     States Code, beginning in fiscal year 2006 and thereafter, 
     the Administrator of the Transportation Security 
     Administration may impose a reasonable charge for the lease 
     of real and personal property to Transportation Security 
     Administration employees and for use by Transportation 
     Security Administration employees and may credit amounts 
     received to the appropriation or fund initially charged for 
     operating and maintaining the property, which amounts shall 
     be available, without fiscal year limitation, for expenditure 
     for property management, operation, protection, construction, 
     repair, alteration, and related activities.
       [Sec. 515. Beginning in fiscal year 2006 and thereafter, 
     the acquisition management system of the Transportation 
     Security Administration shall apply to the acquisition of 
     services, as well as equipment, supplies, and materials.
       [Sec. 516. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     authority of the Office of Personnel Management to conduct 
     personnel security and suitability background investigations, 
     update investigations, and periodic reinvestigations of 
     applicants for, or appointees in, positions in the Office of 
     the Secretary and Executive Management, the Office of the 
     Under Secretary for Management, the Bureau of Immigration and 
     Customs Enforcement, the Directorate of Science and 
     Technology, and the Directorate of Information Analysis and 
     Infrastructure Protection of the Department of Homeland 
     Security is transferred to the Department of Homeland 
     Security: Provided, That on request of the Department of 
     Homeland Security, the Office of Personnel Management shall 
     cooperate with and assist the Department in any investigation 
     or reinvestigation under this section: Provided further, That 
     this section shall cease to be effective at such time as the 
     President has selected a single agency to conduct security 
     clearance investigations pursuant to section 3001(c) of the 
     Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 
     (Public Law 108-458; 50 U.S.C. 435b) and the entity selected 
     under section 3001(b) of such Act has reported to Congress 
     that the agency selected pursuant to such section 3001(c) is 
     capable of conducting all necessary investigations in a 
     timely manner or has authorized the entities within the 
     Department of Homeland Security covered by this section to 
     conduct their own investigations pursuant to section 3001 of 
     such Act.
       [Sec. 517. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     funds appropriated under paragraphs (1) and (2) of the State 
     and Local Programs heading under title III of this Act are 
     exempt from section 6503(a) of title 31, United States Code.
       [Sec. 518. (a) None of the funds provided by this or 
     previous appropriations Acts may be obligated for deployment 
     or implementation, on other than a test basis, of the Secure 
     Flight program or any other follow on or successor passenger 
     prescreening programs, until the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security certifies, and the Government Accountability Office 
     (GAO) reports, to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     Senate and the House of Representatives, that all ten of the 
     elements contained in paragraphs (1) through (10) of section 
     522(a) of Public Law 108-334 have been successfully met.
       [(b) The report required by subsection (a) shall be 
     submitted within 90 days after the certification required by 
     such subsection is provided, and periodically thereafter, if 
     necessary, until the Government Accountability Office 
     confirms that all ten elements have been successfully met.
       [(c) During the testing phase permitted by subsection (a), 
     no information gathered from passengers, foreign or domestic 
     air carriers, or reservation systems may be used to screen 
     aviation passengers, or delay or deny boarding to such 
     passengers, except in instances where passenger names are 
     matched to a government watch list.
       [(d) None of the funds provided in this or any previous 
     appropriations Act may be utilized to develop or test 
     algorithms assigning risk to passengers whose names are not 
     on government watch lists.
       [(e) None of the funds provided in this appropriations Act 
     may be utilized for a database that is obtained from or 
     remains under the control of a non-Federal entity.
       [Sec. 519. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to amend the oath of allegiance required by section 
     337 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1448).
       [Sec. 520. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may 
     be used to process or approve a competition under Office of 
     Management and Budget Circular A-76 for services provided as 
     of June 1, 2004, by employees (including employees serving on 
     a temporary or term basis) of Citizenship and Immigration 
     Services of the Department of Homeland Security who are known 
     as of that date as Immigration Information Officers, Contact 
     Representatives, or Investigative Assistants.
       [Sec. 521. None of the funds available in this Act or 
     provided hereafter shall be available to maintain the United 
     States Secret Service as anything but a distinct entity 
     within the Department of Homeland Security and shall not be 
     used to merge the United States Secret Service with any other 
     department function, cause any personnel and operational 
     elements of the United States Secret Service to report to an 
     individual other than the Director of the United States 
     Secret Service, or cause the Director to report directly to 
     any individual other than the Secretary of Homeland Security.
       [Sec. 522. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall develop 
     screening standards and protocols to more thoroughly screen 
     all types of air cargo on passenger and cargo aircraft by 
     March 1, 2006: Provided, That

[[Page S7954]]

     these screening standards and protocols shall be developed in 
     consultation with the industry stakeholders: Provided 
     further, That these screening standards and protocols shall 
     be developed in conjunction with the research and development 
     of technologies that will permit screening of all high-risk 
     air cargo: Provided further, That of the amounts appropriated 
     in this Act for the ``Office of the Secretary and Executive 
     Management'', $10,000,000 shall not be available for 
     obligation until new air cargo screening standards and 
     protocols are implemented.
       [Sec. 523. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) 
     shall utilize existing checked baggage explosive detection 
     equipment and screeners to screen cargo carried on passenger 
     aircraft to the greatest extent practicable at each airport: 
     Provided, That beginning with November 2005, TSA shall 
     provide a monthly report to the Committee on Appropriations 
     of the House of Representatives detailing, by airport, the 
     amount of cargo carried on passenger aircraft that was 
     screened by TSA in August 2005 and each month thereafter.
       [Sec. 524. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     implement a security plan to permit general aviation aircraft 
     to land and take off at Ronald Reagan Washington National 
     Airport 90 days after enactment of this Act.
       [Sec. 525. None of the funds available for obligation for 
     the transportation worker identification credential program 
     shall be used to develop a personalization system that is 
     decentralized or a card production capability that does not 
     utilize an existing government card production facility: 
     Provided, That no funding can be obligated for the next phase 
     of production until the Committee on Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives has been fully briefed on the 
     results of the prototype phase and agrees that the program 
     should move forward.
       [Sec. 526. (a) From the unexpended balances of the United 
     States Coast Guard ``Acquisition, Construction and 
     Improvements'' account specifically identified in statement 
     of managers language for Integrated Deepwater System patrol 
     boats 110- to 123-foot conversion in fiscal years 2004 and 
     2005, $83,999,942 are rescinded.
       [(b) For the necessary expenses of the United States Coast 
     Guard for ``Acquisition, Construction and Improvements'', 
     $83,999,942 is made available to procure new 110-foot patrol 
     boats or for major maintenance availability for the current 
     110-foot patrol boat fleet: Provided, That such funds shall 
     remain available until expended.
       [Sec. 527. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall utilize 
     the Transportation Security Clearinghouse as the central 
     identity management system for the deployment and operation 
     of the registered traveler program, the transportation worker 
     identification credential program, and other applicable 
     programs for the purposes of collecting and aggregating 
     biometric data necessary for background vetting; providing 
     all associated record-keeping, customer service, and related 
     functions; ensuring interoperability between different 
     airports and vendors; and acting as a central activation, 
     revocation, and transaction hub for participating airports, 
     ports, and other points of presence.
       [Sec. 528. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used by any person other than the privacy officer 
     appointed pursuant to section 222 of the Homeland Security 
     Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 142) to alter, direct that changes be 
     made to, delay or prohibit the transmission to Congress of, 
     any report prepared pursuant to paragraph (5) of such 
     section.
       [Sec. 529. No funding provided in this or previous 
     appropriations Acts shall be available to pay the salary of 
     any employee serving as a contracting officer's technical 
     representative (COTR) who has not received COTR training.
       [Sec. 530. Except as provided in section 44945 of title 49, 
     United States Code, funds appropriated or transferred to the 
     Transportation Security Administration in fiscal years 2002 
     and 2003, and to the Transportation Security Administration, 
     ``Aviation Security'' and ``Administration'' in fiscal years 
     2004 and 2005, that are recovered or deobligated shall be 
     available only for procurement and installation of explosive 
     detection systems.
       [Sec. 531. From the unobligated balances available in the 
     ``Department of Homeland Security Working Capital Fund'' 
     established by section 506 of Public Law 108-90, $7,000,000 
     are hereby rescinded.
       [Sec. 532. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Committee withholds from obligation $25,000,000 from the 
     Directorate of Emergency Preparedness and Response, 
     Administrative and Regional Operations, until the direction 
     in the statement of managers accompanying Public Law 108-324 
     and House Report 108-541 is completed.
       [Sec. 533. None of the funds appropriated under this Act or 
     any other Act shall be available for processing petitions 
     under section 214(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
     relating to nonimmigrant status under section 
     101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of such Act until the authority provided 
     in section 214(g)(5)(C) of such Act is being implemented such 
     that, in any fiscal year in which the total number of aliens 
     who are issued visas or otherwise provided nonimmigrant 
     status subject to the numerical limitation under section 
     101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of such Act reaches the numerical 
     limitation contained in section 214(g)(1)(A) of such Act,, up 
     to 20,000 additional aliens who have earned a master's or 
     higher degree from an institution of higher education (as 
     defined in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 
     (20 U.S.C. 1001(a))) may be issued visas or otherwise 
     provided nonimmigrant status under section 
     101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
       [Sec. 534. None of the funds provided in this Act shall be 
     used to pay the salaries of more than sixty Transportation 
     Security Administration employees who have the authority to 
     designate documents as Sensitive Security Information (SSI). 
     In addition, $10,000,000 is not available for the Department-
     wide Office of Security until the Secretary submits to the 
     Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives: 
     (1) the titles of all documents currently designated as SSI; 
     (2) Department-wide policies on SSI designation; (3) 
     Department-wide SSI designation auditing policies and 
     procedures; and (4) the total number of staff and offices 
     authorized to designate SSI documents within the Department.
       [Sec. 535. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may 
     be used to change the name of the Coast Guard Station ``Group 
     St. Petersburg''.
       [Sec. 536. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this Act may be used to patrol the border of the 
     United States except as authorized by law.
       [Sec. 537. For the Secretary of Homeland Security to make 
     grants pursuant to section 204 of the REAL ID Act of 2005 
     (Public Law 109-13, division B) to assist States in 
     conforming with minimum drivers' license standards there is 
     hereby appropriated; and the amounts otherwise provided by 
     this Act for ``Office of the Secretary and Executive 
     Management'', ``Office of the Under Secretary for 
     Management'', ``Office of the Under Secretary for Border and 
     Transportation Security--Salaries and Expenses'', 
     ``Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection--
     Management and Administration'', and ``Science and 
     Technology--Research, Development, Acquisition and 
     Operations'', are hereby reduced by: $100,000,000, 
     $20,000,000, $20,000,000, $2,000,000, $8,000,000, and 
     $50,000,000, respectively.
       [This Act may be cited as the ``Department of Homeland 
     Security Appropriations Act, 2006''.]
     That the following sums are appropriated, out of any money in 
     the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the Department 
     of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
     2006, and for other purposes, namely:

            TITLE I--DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS

            Office of the Secretary and Executive Management

       For necessary expenses of the Office of the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security, as authorized by section 102 of the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 112), and executive 
     management of the Department of Homeland Security, as 
     authorized by law, $124,620,000: Provided, That not to exceed 
     $40,000 shall be for official reception and representation 
     expenses.

              Office of the Under Secretary for Management

       For necessary expenses of the Office of the Under Secretary 
     for Management, as authorized by sections 701-705 of the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 341-345), 
     $146,322,000: Provided, That not to exceed $3,000 shall be 
     for official reception and representation expenses: Provided 
     further, That of the total amount provided, $26,070,000 shall 
     remain available until expended solely for the alteration and 
     improvement of facilities, tenant improvements, and 
     relocation costs to consolidate Department headquarters 
     operations.

          Department of Homeland Security Working Capital Fund


                         (rescission of funds)

       Of the unobligated balances available in the ``Department 
     of Homeland Security Working Capital Fund'', $12,000,000 are 
     rescinded.

                 Office of the Chief Financial Officer

       For necessary expenses of the Office of the Chief Financial 
     Officer, as authorized by section 103 of the Homeland 
     Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 113), $18,325,000.

                Office of the Chief Information Officer

       For necessary expenses of the Office of the Chief 
     Information Officer, as authorized by section 103 of the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 113), and Department-
     wide technology investments, $286,540,000; of which 
     $75,756,000 shall be available for salaries and expenses; and 
     of which $210,784,000 shall be available for development and 
     acquisition of information technology equipment, software, 
     services, and related activities for the Department of 
     Homeland Security, and for the costs of conversion to 
     narrowband communications, including the cost for operation 
     of the land mobile radio legacy systems, to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That of the funds made available 
     until expended under this heading, no more than $33,029,000 
     shall be for the Homeland Secure Data Network: Provided 
     further, That none of the funds appropriated shall be used to 
     support or supplement the appropriations provided for the 
     United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator 
     Technology project or the Automated Commercial Environment: 
     Provided further, That the Chief Information Officer shall 
     submit to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and 
     the House of Representatives, not more than 60 days after 
     enactment of the Act, an expenditure plan for all information 
     technology projects that: (1) are funded by the ``Office of 
     the Chief Information Officer'', or (2) are funded by 
     multiple components of the Department of Homeland Security

[[Page S7955]]

     through reimbursable agreements: Provided further, That such 
     expenditure plan shall include each specific project funded, 
     key milestones, all funding sources for each project, details 
     of annual and lifecycle costs, and projected cost savings or 
     cost avoidance to be achieved by the project: Provided 
     further, That the expenditure plan shall include a complete 
     list of all legacy systems operational as of March 1, 2003; 
     the current operational status of each system; and the plan 
     for continued operation or termination of each system.

                      Office of Inspector General

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.), $83,017,000, of which not to exceed 
     $100,000 may be used for certain confidential operational 
     expenses, including the payment of informants, to be expended 
     at the direction of the Inspector General.

          TITLE II--SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND INVESTIGATIONS

                   BORDER AND TRANSPORTATION SECURITY

  Office of the Under Secretary for Border and Transportation Security


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Office of the Under Secretary 
     for Border and Transportation Security, as authorized by 
     subtitle A of title IV of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 
     (6 U.S.C. 201 et seq.), $9,617,000: Provided, That not to 
     exceed $3,000 shall be for official reception and 
     representation expenses.


    United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology

       For necessary expenses for the development of the United 
     States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology 
     project, as authorized by section 110 of the Illegal 
     Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act of 1996 
     (8 U.S.C. 1221 note), $340,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That of the total amount made available 
     under this heading, $159,658,000 may not be obligated for the 
     United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator 
     Technology project until the Committees on Appropriations of 
     the Senate and the House of Representatives receive and 
     approve a plan for expenditure prepared by the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security that:
       (1) meets the capital planning and investment control 
     review requirements established by the Office of Management 
     and Budget, including Circular A-11, part 7;
       (2) complies with the Department of Homeland Security 
     enterprise information systems architecture;
       (3) complies with the acquisition rules, requirements, 
     guidelines, and systems acquisition management practices of 
     the Federal Government;
       (4) includes a certification by the Chief Information 
     Officer of the Department of Homeland Security that an 
     independent verification and validation agent is currently 
     under contract for the project;
       (5) is reviewed and approved by the Department of Homeland 
     Security Investment Review Board, the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security, and the Office of Management and Budget; and
       (6) is reviewed by the Government Accountability Office.

                     Customs and Border Protection


                         Salaries and Expenses

                    (including rescission of funds)

       For necessary expenses for enforcement of laws relating to 
     border security, immigration, customs, and agricultural 
     inspections and regulatory activities related to plant and 
     animal imports; acquisition, lease, maintenance and operation 
     of aircraft; purchase and lease of up to 4,500 (3,935 for 
     replacement only) police-type vehicles; and contracting with 
     individuals for personal services abroad; $4,922,600,000; of 
     which $3,000,000 shall be derived from the Harbor Maintenance 
     Trust Fund for administrative expenses related to the 
     collection of the Harbor Maintenance Fee pursuant to section 
     9505(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 
     9505(c)(3)) and notwithstanding section 1511(e)(1) of the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 551(e)(1)); of which 
     not to exceed $35,000 shall be for official reception and 
     representation expenses; of which not less than $146,560,000 
     shall be for Air and Marine Operations; of which not to 
     exceed $49,980,000 shall remain available until September 30, 
     2007, for inspection and surveillance technology, unmanned 
     aerial vehicles, and replacement aircraft; of which such sums 
     as become available in the Customs User Fee Account, except 
     sums subject to section 13031(f)(3) of the Consolidated 
     Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (19 U.S.C. 
     58c(f)(3)), shall be derived from that account; of which not 
     to exceed $150,000 shall be available for payment for rental 
     space in connection with preclearance operations; of which 
     not to exceed $1,000,000 shall be for awards of compensation 
     to informants, to be accounted for solely under the 
     certificate of the Secretary of Homeland Security; and of 
     which not to exceed $5,000,000 shall be available for 
     payments or advances arising out of contractual or 
     reimbursable agreements with State and local law enforcement 
     agencies while engaged in cooperative activities related to 
     immigration: Provided, That for fiscal year 2006, the 
     overtime limitation prescribed in section 5(c)(1) of the Act 
     of February 13, 1911 (19 U.S.C. 267(c)(1)) shall be $35,000; 
     and notwithstanding any other provision of law, none of the 
     funds appropriated in this Act may be available to compensate 
     any employee of United States Customs and Border Protection 
     for overtime, from whatever source, in an amount that exceeds 
     such limitation, except in individual cases determined by the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security, or the designee of the 
     Secretary, to be necessary for national security purposes, to 
     prevent excessive costs, or in cases of immigration 
     emergencies.
       In addition, of the funds appropriated under the heading 
     ``Customs and Border Protection'' in chapter 6 of title I of 
     Public Law 108-11 (117 Stat. 581), $14,400,000 are rescinded.


                        Automation Modernization

       For expenses for customs and border protection automated 
     systems, $458,009,000, to remain available until expended, of 
     which not less than $321,690,000 shall be for the development 
     of the Automated Commercial Environment: Provided, That none 
     of the funds made available under this heading may be 
     obligated for the Automated Commercial Environment until the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives receive and approve a plan for expenditure 
     prepared by the Secretary of Homeland Security that:
       (1) meets the capital planning and investment control 
     review requirements established by the Office of Management 
     and Budget, including Circular A-11, part 7;
       (2) complies with the Department of Homeland Security's 
     enterprise information systems architecture;
       (3) complies with the acquisition rules, requirements, 
     guidelines, and systems acquisition management practices of 
     the Federal Government;
       (4) includes a certification by the Chief Information 
     Officer of the Department of Homeland Security that an 
     independent verification and validation agent is currently 
     under contract for the project;
       (5) is reviewed and approved by the Department of Homeland 
     Security Investment Review Board, the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security, and the Office of Management and Budget; and
       (6) is reviewed by the Government Accountability Office.


 Air and Marine Interdiction, Operations, Maintenance, and Procurement

       For necessary expenses for the operations, maintenance, and 
     procurement of marine vessels, aircraft, and other related 
     equipment of the air and marine program, including 
     operational training and mission-related travel, and rental 
     payments for facilities occupied by the air or marine 
     interdiction and demand reduction programs, the operations of 
     which include the following: the interdiction of narcotics 
     and other goods; the provision of support to Federal, State, 
     and local agencies in the enforcement or administration of 
     laws enforced by the Department of Homeland Security; and at 
     the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security, the 
     provision of assistance to Federal, State, and local agencies 
     in other law enforcement and emergency humanitarian efforts, 
     $320,580,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That no aircraft or other related equipment, with the 
     exception of aircraft that are one of a kind and have been 
     identified as excess to United States Customs and Border 
     Protection requirements and aircraft that have been damaged 
     beyond repair, shall be transferred to any other Federal 
     agency, department, or office outside of the Department of 
     Homeland Security during fiscal year 2006 without the prior 
     approval of the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate 
     and the House of Representatives.


                              Construction

       For necessary expenses to plan, construct, renovate, equip, 
     and maintain buildings and facilities necessary for the 
     administration and enforcement of the laws relating to 
     customs and immigration, $311,381,000, to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That of the total amount provided 
     under this heading, $55,000,000 shall be available solely for 
     the completion of the San Diego Sector fence and $55,000,000 
     shall be available solely for Tuscon sector tactical 
     infrastructure.

                  Immigration and Customs Enforcement


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses for enforcement of immigration and 
     customs laws, detention and removals, and investigations; and 
     purchase and lease of up to 2,300 (2,000 for replacement 
     only) police-type vehicles, $3,050,416,000, of which not to 
     exceed $5,000,000 shall be available until expended for 
     conducting special operations pursuant to section 3131 of the 
     Customs Enforcement Act of 1986 (19 U.S.C. 2081); of which 
     not to exceed $15,000 shall be for official reception and 
     representation expenses; of which not to exceed $1,000,000 
     shall be for awards of compensation to informants, to be 
     accounted for solely under the certificate of the Secretary 
     of Homeland Security; of which not less than $102,000 shall 
     be for promotion of public awareness of the child pornography 
     tipline; of which not less than $203,000 shall be for Project 
     Alert; and of which not to exceed $11,216,000 shall be 
     available to fund or reimburse other Federal agencies for the 
     costs associated with the care, maintenance, and repatriation 
     of smuggled illegal aliens: Provided, That none of the funds 
     made available under this heading shall be available to 
     compensate any employee for overtime in an annual amount in 
     excess of $35,000, except that the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security, or the designee of the Secretary, may waive that 
     amount as necessary for national security purposes and in 
     cases of immigration emergencies: Provided further, That of 
     the total amount provided, $15,770,000 shall be for 
     activities to enforce laws against forced child labor in 
     fiscal year 2006, of which not to exceed $6,000,000 shall 
     remain available until expended.


                          Federal Air Marshals

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Air Marshals, 
     $678,994,000.


                       Federal Protective Service

       The revenues and collections of security fees credited to 
     this account, not to exceed

[[Page S7956]]

     $487,000,000, shall be available until expended for necessary 
     expenses related to the protection of federally-owned and 
     leased buildings and for the operations of the Federal 
     Protective Service.


                        Automation Modernization

       For expenses of immigration and customs enforcement 
     automated systems, $50,150,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That none of the funds made available 
     under this heading may be obligated until the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
     receive and approve a plan for expenditure prepared by the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security that:
       (1) meets the capital planning and investment control 
     review requirements established by the Office of Management 
     and Budget, including Circular A-11, part 7;
       (2) complies with the Department of Homeland Security 
     enterprise information systems architecture;
       (3) complies with the acquisition rules, requirements, 
     guidelines, and systems acquisition management practices of 
     the Federal Government;
       (4) includes a certification by the Chief Information 
     Officer of the Department of Homeland Security that an 
     independent verification and validation agent is currently 
     under contract for the project;
       (5) is reviewed and approved by the Department of Homeland 
     Security Investment Review Board, the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security, and the Office of Management and Budget; and
       (6) is reviewed by the Government Accountability Office.


                              Construction

       For necessary expenses to plan, construct, renovate, equip, 
     and maintain buildings and facilities necessary for the 
     administration and enforcement of the laws relating to 
     customs and immigration, $26,546,000, to remain available 
     until expended.

                 Transportation Security Administration


                           Aviation Security

       For necessary expenses of the Transportation Security 
     Administration related to providing civil aviation security 
     services pursuant to the Aviation and Transportation Security 
     Act (Public Law 107-71; 115 Stat. 597; 49 U.S.C. 40101 note), 
     $4,452,318,000, to remain available until September 30, 2007, 
     of which not to exceed $3,000 shall be for official reception 
     and representation expenses: Provided, That of the total 
     amount made available under this heading, not to exceed 
     $3,391,948,000 shall be for screening operations, of which 
     $180,000,000 shall be available only for procurement of 
     checked baggage explosive detection systems and $14,000,000 
     shall be available only for installation of checked baggage 
     explosive detection systems; and not to exceed $1,060,370,000 
     shall be for aviation security direction and enforcement 
     presence: Provided further, That security service fees 
     authorized under section 44940 of title 49, United States 
     Code, shall be credited to this appropriation as offsetting 
     collections: Provided further, That the sum herein 
     appropriated from the General Fund shall be reduced on a 
     dollar-for-dollar basis as such offsetting collections are 
     received during fiscal year 2006, so as to result in a final 
     fiscal year appropriation from the General Fund estimated at 
     not more than $2,462,318,000: Provided further, That any 
     security service fees collected in excess of the amount made 
     available under this heading shall become available during 
     fiscal year 2007: Provided further, That if the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security exercises discretion to set the fee under 
     44940(a)(2) of title 49 United States Code, such 
     determination shall not be subject to judicial review: 
     Provided further, That notwithstanding section 503 of this 
     Act, the Transportation Security Administration may 
     reallocate funding provided under this heading from passenger 
     and baggage screener pay, compensation, and benefits to 
     procurement and installation of screening technology with 
     fifteen days advance notification to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and House of Representatives: 
     Provided further, That notwithstanding section 44923 of title 
     49, United States Code, the share of the cost of the Federal 
     Government for a project under any letter of intent shall be 
     75 percent for any medium or large hub airport: Provided 
     further, That heads of Federal agencies and commissions shall 
     not be exempt from Federal passenger and baggage screening: 
     Provided further, That reimbursement for security services 
     and related equipment and supplies provided in support of 
     general aviation access to the Ronald Reagan Washington 
     National Airport shall be credited to this appropriation and 
     shall be available until expended solely for these purposes.


                    Surface Transportation Security

       For necessary expenses of the Transportation Security 
     Administration related to providing surface transportation 
     activities, $36,000,000.


                Transportation Vetting and Credentialing

       For necessary expenses for the development and 
     implementation of screening programs by the Office of 
     Transportation Vetting and Credentialing, $74,996,000.


                    Transportation Security Support

       For necessary expenses of the Transportation Security 
     Administration related to providing security support and 
     intelligence pursuant to the Aviation and Transportation 
     Security Act (Public Law 107-71; 115 Stat. 597; 49 U.S.C. 
     40101 note), $491,873,000.

                       United States Coast Guard


                           Operating Expenses

                    (including rescission of funds)

       For necessary expenses for the operation and maintenance of 
     the United States Coast Guard not otherwise provided for, 
     purchase or lease of not to exceed 25 passenger motor 
     vehicles for replacement only, payments pursuant to section 
     156 of Public Law 97-377 (42 U.S.C. 402 note) and recreation 
     and welfare, $5,476,046,000, of which $1,200,000,000 shall be 
     for defense-related activities; of which $24,500,000 shall be 
     derived from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to carry out 
     the purposes of section 1012(a)(5) of the Oil Pollution Act 
     of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2712(a)(5)); and of which not to exceed 
     $3,000 shall be for official reception and representation 
     expenses: Provided, That none of the funds made available by 
     this or any other Act shall be available for administrative 
     expenses in connection with shipping commissioners in the 
     United States: Provided further, That none of the funds made 
     available by this Act shall be for expenses incurred for 
     yacht documentation under section 12109 of title 46, United 
     States Code, except to the extent fees are collected from 
     yacht owners and credited to this appropriation.
       In addition, of the funds appropriated under this heading 
     in Public Law 108-11 (117 Stat. 583), $16,800,000 are 
     rescinded.


                Environmental Compliance and Restoration

       For necessary expenses to carry out the environmental 
     compliance and restoration functions of the United States 
     Coast Guard under chapter 19 of title 14, United States Code, 
     $12,000,000, to remain available until expended.


                            Reserve Training

       For necessary expenses of the Coast Guard Reserve, as 
     authorized by law; operations and maintenance of the reserve 
     program; personnel and training costs; and equipment and 
     services; $119,000,000.


              Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements

                    (including rescissions of funds)

       For necessary expenses of acquisition, construction, 
     renovation, and improvement of aids to navigation, shore 
     facilities, vessels, and aircraft, including equipment 
     related thereto; and maintenance, rehabilitation, lease and 
     operation of facilities and equipment, as authorized by law, 
     $1,224,800,000, of which $20,000,000 shall be derived from 
     the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to carry out the purposes 
     of section 1012(a)(5) of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 
     U.S.C. 2712(a)(5)); of which $18,500,000 shall be available 
     until September 30, 2010, to acquire, repair, renovate, or 
     improve vessels, small boats, and related equipment; of which 
     $105,000,000 shall be available until September 30, 2008, for 
     other equipment; of which $39,700,000 shall be available 
     until September 30, 2008, for shore facilities and aids to 
     navigation facilities; of which $73,000,000 shall be 
     available for personnel compensation and benefits and related 
     costs; and of which $988,600,000 shall be available until 
     September 30, 2010, for the Integrated Deepwater Systems 
     program: Provided, That the Commandant of the Coast Guard is 
     authorized to dispose of surplus real property, by sale or 
     lease, and the proceeds shall be credited to this 
     appropriation as offsetting collections and shall be 
     available until September 30, 2008.
       In addition, of the funds made available under this heading 
     in Public Law 108-334 (118 Stat. 1306) for covert aircraft, 
     $13,999,000 are rescinded; and of the funds appropriated 
     under this heading in Public Laws 108-334 (118 Stat. 1306) 
     and 108-90 (117 Stat. 1143) for patrol boat (110 foot to 123 
     foot conversion) and Fast Response Cutter/110-123 foot patrol 
     boat conversion, $68,999,000 are rescinded.


                         Alteration of Bridges

       For necessary expenses for alteration or removal of 
     obstructive bridges as authorized by section 6 of the Truman-
     Hobbs Act (33 U.S.C. 516), $15,000,000, to remain available 
     until expended.


              Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation

       For necessary expenses for applied scientific research, 
     development, test, and evaluation, and for maintenance, 
     rehabilitation, lease and operation of facilities and 
     equipment, as authorized by law, $18,500,000, to remain 
     available until expended, of which $2,000,000 shall be 
     derived from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to carry out 
     the purposes of section 1012(a)(5) of the Oil Pollution Act 
     of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2712(a)(5)): Provided, That there may be 
     credited to and used for the purposes of this appropriation 
     funds received from State and local governments, other public 
     authorities, private sources, and foreign countries, for 
     expenses incurred for research, development, testing, and 
     evaluation.


                              Retired Pay

       For retired pay, including the payment of obligations 
     otherwise chargeable to lapsed appropriations for this 
     purpose, payments under the Retired Serviceman's Family 
     Protection and Survivor Benefits Plans, payment for career 
     status bonuses, concurrent receipts and combat-related 
     special compensation under the National Defense Authorization 
     Act, and payments for medical care of retired personnel and 
     their dependents under chapter 55 of title 10, United States 
     Code, $1,014,080,000.

                      United States Secret Service


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the United States Secret Service, 
     including purchase of not to exceed 614 vehicles for police-
     type use, which shall be for replacement only, and hire of 
     passenger motor vehicles; purchase of American-made 
     motorcycles; hire of aircraft; services of expert witnesses 
     at such rates as may be determined by the Director of the 
     Secret Service; rental of buildings in the District of 
     Columbia, and fencing, lighting, guard booths, and other 
     facilities on private or other property not in Government 
     ownership or control, as may be necessary to perform 
     protective functions; payment of per diem or subsistence 
     allowances to employees where a protective assignment during 
     the actual day or days of the visit of a protectee requires 
     an employee to work 16 hours per day or to remain overnight 
     at a post of duty; conduct of and participation in firearms 
     matches; presentation of awards; travel of Secret Service 
     employees on protective missions without regard to

[[Page S7957]]

     the limitations on such expenditures in this or any other Act 
     if approval is obtained in advance from the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives; research and development; grants to conduct 
     behavioral research in support of protective research and 
     operations; and payment in advance for commercial 
     accommodations as may be necessary to perform protective 
     functions; $1,188,638,000, of which not to exceed $25,000 
     shall be for official reception and representation expenses; 
     of which not to exceed $100,000 shall be to provide technical 
     assistance and equipment to foreign law enforcement 
     organizations in counterfeit investigations; of which 
     $2,100,000 shall be for forensic and related support of 
     investigations of missing and exploited children; and of 
     which $5,000,000 shall be a grant for activities related to 
     the investigations of missing and exploited children and 
     shall remain available until expended: Provided, That up to 
     $18,000,000 provided for protective travel shall remain 
     available until September 30, 2007: Provided further, That 
     the United States Secret Service is authorized to obligate 
     funds in anticipation of reimbursements from Federal agencies 
     and entities, as defined in section 105 of title 5, United 
     States Code, receiving training sponsored by the James J. 
     Rowley Training Center, except that total obligations at the 
     end of the fiscal year shall not exceed total budgetary 
     resources available under this heading at the end of the 
     fiscal year.


     Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses

       For necessary expenses for acquisition, construction, 
     repair, alteration, and improvement of facilities, 
     $3,699,000, to remain available until expended.

                  TITLE III--PREPAREDNESS AND RECOVERY

   Office of State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness


                     Management and Administration

       For necessary expenses for the Office of State and Local 
     Government Coordination and Preparedness, $3,546,000: 
     Provided, That not to exceed $2,000 shall be for official 
     reception and representation expenses.


                        State and Local Programs

       For grants, contracts, cooperative agreements, and other 
     activities, including grants to State and local governments 
     for terrorism prevention activities, notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, $2,694,300,000, which shall be 
     allocated as follows:
       (1) $1,518,000,000 for State and local grants, of which 
     $425,000,000 shall be allocated such that each State and 
     territory shall receive the same dollar amount for the State 
     minimum as was distributed in fiscal year 2005 for formula-
     based grants: Provided, That the balance shall be allocated 
     by the Secretary of Homeland Security to States, urban areas, 
     or regions based on risks; threats; vulnerabilities; and 
     unmet essential capabilities pursuant to Homeland Security 
     Presidential Directive 8 (HSPD-8).
       (2) $400,000,000 for law enforcement terrorism prevention 
     grants, of which $155,000,000 shall be allocated such that 
     each State and territory shall receive the same dollar amount 
     for the State minimum as was distributed in fiscal year 2005 
     for law enforcement terrorism prevention grants: Provided, 
     That the balance shall be allocated by the Secretary to 
     States based on risks; threats; vulnerabilities; and unmet 
     essential capabilities pursuant to HSPD-8.
       (3) $365,000,000 for discretionary transportation and 
     infrastructure grants, as determined by the Secretary, of 
     which--
       (A) $200,000,000 shall be for port security grants pursuant 
     to the purposes of 46 United States Code 70107(a) through 
     (h), which shall be awarded based on threat notwithstanding 
     subsection (a), for eligible costs as defined in subsections 
     (b)(2)-(4);
       (B) $5,000,000 shall be for trucking industry security 
     grants;
       (C) $10,000,000 shall be for intercity bus security grants;
       (D) $100,000,000 shall be for intercity passenger rail 
     transportation (as defined in section 24102 of title 49, 
     United States Code), freight rail, and transit security 
     grants; and
       (E) $50,000,000 shall be for buffer zone protection plan 
     grants.
       (4) $50,000,000 for the technology transfer program.
       (5) $40,000,000 for State grants pursuant to section 204(a) 
     of the REAL ID Act of 2005 (Division B of Public Law 109-13), 
     to remain available until expended, as determined by the 
     Secretary: Provided, That none of the funds made available 
     under this paragraph may be obligated or allocated for grants 
     until the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the 
     House of Representatives receive and approve an 
     implementation plan for the responsibilities of the 
     Department of Homeland Security under the REAL ID Act of 2005 
     (Division B of Public Law 109-13), including the proposed 
     uses of the grant monies.
       (6) $321,300,000 for training, exercises, technical 
     assistance, and other programs:
     Provided, That not to exceed 3 percent of the amounts 
     provided for grants under this heading shall be available for 
     program administration: Provided further, That the Government 
     Accountability Office shall review the validity of the threat 
     and risk factors used by the Secretary for the purposes of 
     allocating discretionary grants funded under this heading, 
     and the application of those factors in the allocation of 
     funds prior to the Department making final grant 
     determinations: Provided further, That the Government 
     Accountability Office shall have 20 days to complete its 
     review after it is notified by the Secretary that preliminary 
     determinations have been made, and the Government 
     Accountability Office shall report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
     on the findings of its review prior to the Department making 
     final grant determinations: Provided further, That none of 
     the grants provided under this heading shall be used for 
     construction or renovation of facilities, except for a minor 
     perimeter security project, not to exceed $1,000,000, as 
     determined necessary by the Secretary: Provided further, That 
     the preceding proviso shall not apply to grants under 
     subparagraphs (A), (D), and (E) of paragraph (3) under this 
     heading: Provided further, That grantees shall provide 
     additional reports on their use of funds, as determined 
     necessary by the Secretary: Provided further, That funds 
     appropriated for discretionary grants under paragraph (1) and 
     law enforcement terrorism prevention grants under paragraph 
     (2) of this heading shall be available for operational costs, 
     to include personnel overtime and overtime associated with 
     Office of State and Local Government Coordination and 
     Preparedness certified training, as needed: Provided further, 
     That notwithstanding any other provision of law, funds 
     appropriated under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of this 
     heading are exempt from section 6503(a) of title 31, United 
     States Code: Provided further, That of the funds provided 
     under paragraph (1) of this heading, $25,000,000 shall be 
     available until expended for assistance to organizations (as 
     described under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 and exempt from tax section 501(a) of such Code) 
     determined by the Secretary to be at high-risk of 
     international terrorist attack, and that these determinations 
     shall not be delegated to any Federal, State, or local 
     government official: Provided further, That the Secretary 
     shall certify to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     Senate and the House of Representatives the threat to each 
     designated tax exempt grantee at least 3 full business days 
     in advance of the announcement of any grant award.


                     Firefighter Assistance Grants

       For necessary expenses for programs authorized by the 
     Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 
     2201 et seq.), $615,000,000, of which $550,000,000 shall be 
     available to carry out section 33 (15 U.S.C. 2229) and 
     $65,000,000 shall be available to carry out section 34 (15 
     U.S.C. 2229a) of such Act, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2007: Provided, That not to exceed 5 percent of 
     this amount shall be available for program administration.


                Emergency Management Performance Grants

       For necessary expenses for emergency management performance 
     grants, as authorized by the National Flood Insurance Act of 
     1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.), the Robert T. Stafford 
     Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 
     et seq.), the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 
     U.S.C. 7701 et seq.), and Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978 
     (5 U.S.C. App.), $180,000,000: Provided, That total 
     administrative costs shall not exceed 3 percent of the total 
     appropriation.

                         Counterterrorism Fund

       For necessary expenses, as determined by the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security, to reimburse any Federal agency for the 
     costs of providing support to counter, investigate, or 
     respond to unexpected threats or acts of terrorism, including 
     payment of rewards in connection with these activities, 
     $5,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That the Secretary shall notify the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
     15 days prior to the obligation of any amount of these funds 
     in accordance with section 503 of this Act.

                  EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE

 Office of the Under Secretary for Emergency Preparedness and Response

       For necessary expenses for the Office of the Under 
     Secretary for Emergency Preparedness and Response, as 
     authorized by section 502 of the Homeland Security Act of 
     2002 (6 U.S.C. 312), $4,306,000.


            Preparedness, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery

                    (including rescission of funds)

       For necessary expenses for preparedness, mitigation, 
     response, and recovery activities of Emergency Preparedness 
     and Response, $203,499,000, including activities authorized 
     by the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 
     et seq.), the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and 
     Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), the 
     Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7701 et 
     seq.), the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 
     (15 U.S.C. 2201 et seq.), the Defense Production Act of 1950 
     (50 U.S.C. App. 2061 et seq.), sections 107 and 303 of the 
     National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 404, 405), 
     Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.), and the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.): 
     Provided, That of the total amount made available under this 
     heading, $30,000,000 shall be for Urban Search and Rescue 
     Teams, of which not to exceed $1,600,000 may be made 
     available for administrative costs.
       In addition, of the funds appropriated under this heading 
     in Public Law 108-334 (118 Stat. 1311), $9,600,000 are 
     rescinded.


                 Administrative and Regional Operations

       For necessary expenses for administrative and regional 
     operations of Emergency Preparedness and Response, 
     $216,441,000, including activities authorized by the National 
     Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.), the 
     Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), the Earthquake Hazards 
     Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.), the Federal 
     Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2201 et 
     seq.), the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. App. 
     2061 et

[[Page S7958]]

     seq.), sections 107 and 303 of the National Security Act of 
     1947 (50 U.S.C. 404, 405), Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978 
     (5 U.S.C. App.), and the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 
     U.S.C. 101 et seq.): Provided, That not to exceed $3,000 
     shall be for official reception and representation expenses.


                         Public Health Programs

       For necessary expenses for countering potential biological, 
     disease, and chemical threats to civilian populations, 
     $34,000,000.


              Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program

       The aggregate charges assessed during fiscal year 2006, as 
     authorized in title III of the Departments of Veterans 
     Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent 
     Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999 (42 U.S.C. 5196e), shall 
     not be less than 100 percent of the amounts anticipated by 
     the Department of Homeland Security necessary for its 
     radiological emergency preparedness program for the next 
     fiscal year: Provided, That the methodology for assessment 
     and collection of fees shall be fair and equitable and shall 
     reflect costs of providing such services, including 
     administrative costs of collecting such fees: Provided 
     further, That fees received under this heading shall be 
     deposited in this account as offsetting collections and will 
     become available for authorized purposes on October 1, 2006, 
     and remain available until expended.


                            Disaster Relief

       For necessary expenses in carrying out the Robert T. 
     Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), $2,000,000,000, to remain available 
     until expended.


            Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program Account

       For administrative expenses to carry out the direct loan 
     program, as authorized by section 319 of the Robert T. 
     Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5162), $567,000: Provided, That gross obligations for 
     the principal amount of direct loans shall not exceed 
     $25,000,000: Provided further, That the cost of modifying 
     such loans shall be as defined in section 502 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 661a).


                      Flood Map Modernization Fund

       For necessary expenses pursuant to section 1360 of the 
     National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4101), 
     $200,000,000, and such additional sums as may be provided by 
     State and local governments or other political subdivisions 
     for cost-shared mapping activities under section 1360(f)(2) 
     of such Act, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That total administrative costs shall not exceed 3 percent of 
     the total appropriation.


                     National Flood Insurance Fund

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For activities under the National Flood Insurance Act of 
     1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.), not to exceed $36,496,000 for 
     salaries and expenses associated with flood mitigation and 
     flood insurance operations; and not to exceed $87,358,000 for 
     flood hazard mitigation, to remain available until September 
     30, 2007, including up to $28,000,000 for expenses under 
     section 1366 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 
     U.S.C. 4104c), which amount shall be available for transfer 
     to the National Flood Mitigation Fund until September 30, 
     2007, and which amount shall be derived from offsetting 
     collections assessed and collected pursuant to section 1307 
     of that Act (42 U.S.C. 4014), and shall be retained and used 
     for necessary expenses under this heading: Provided, That in 
     fiscal year 2006, no funds in excess of: (1) $55,000,000 for 
     operating expenses; (2) $660,148,000 for commissions and 
     taxes of agents; and (3) $30,000,000 for interest on Treasury 
     borrowings shall be available from the National Flood 
     Insurance Fund.


                     National Flood Mitigation Fund

       Notwithstanding subparagraphs (B) and (C) of subsection 
     (b)(3), and subsection (f), of section 1366 of the National 
     Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4104c), $28,000,000, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2007, for activities 
     designed to reduce the risk of flood damage to structures 
     pursuant to such Act, of which $28,000,000 shall be derived 
     from the National Flood Insurance Fund.


                  National Predisaster Mitigation Fund

       For a predisaster mitigation grant program under title II 
     of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
     Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5131 et seq.), $37,000,000, to 
     remain available until expended: Provided, That grants made 
     for predisaster mitigation shall be awarded on a competitive 
     basis subject to the criteria in section 203(g) of such Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 5133(g)), and notwithstanding section 203(f) of 
     such Act, shall be made without reference to State 
     allocations, quotas, or other formula-based allocation of 
     funds: Provided further, That total administrative costs 
     shall not exceed 3 percent of the total appropriation.


                       Emergency Food and Shelter

       To carry out an emergency food and shelter program pursuant 
     to title III of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 11331 et seq.), $153,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That total administrative 
     costs shall not exceed 3.5 percent of the total 
     appropriation.

TITLE IV--RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, TRAINING, ASSESSMENTS, AND SERVICES

           United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

       For necessary expenses for citizenship and immigration 
     services, $80,000,000.

                Federal Law Enforcement Training Center


                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Law Enforcement 
     Training Center, including materials and support costs of 
     Federal law enforcement basic training; purchase of not to 
     exceed 117 vehicles for police-type use and hire of passenger 
     motor vehicles; expenses for student athletic and related 
     activities; the conduct of and participation in firearms 
     matches and presentation of awards; public awareness and 
     enhancement of community support of law enforcement training; 
     room and board for student interns; a flat monthly 
     reimbursement to employees authorized to use personal mobile 
     phones for official duties; and services as authorized by 
     section 3109 of title 5, United States Code; $194,000,000, of 
     which up to $36,174,000 for materials and support costs of 
     Federal law enforcement basic training shall remain available 
     until September 30, 2007; and of which not to exceed $12,000 
     shall be for official reception and representation expenses: 
     Provided, That the Center is authorized to obligate funds in 
     anticipation of reimbursements from agencies receiving 
     training sponsored by the Center, except that total 
     obligations at the end of the fiscal year shall not exceed 
     total budgetary resources available at the end of the fiscal 
     year: Provided further, That in fiscal year 2006 and 
     thereafter, the Director of the Federal Law Enforcement 
     Training Center is authorized to assess pecuniary liability 
     against Center employees and students for losses or 
     destruction of Government property due to gross negligence or 
     willful misconduct and to set off any resulting debts due the 
     United States by Center employees and students, without their 
     consent, against current payments due the employees and 
     students for their services.


     Acquisitions, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses

       For acquisition of necessary additional real property and 
     facilities, construction, and ongoing maintenance, facility 
     improvements, and related expenses of the Federal Law 
     Enforcement Training Center, $88,358,000, to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That the Center is authorized to 
     accept reimbursement to this appropriation from Government 
     agencies requesting the construction of special use 
     facilities.

           Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection


                     Management and Administration

       For salaries and expenses of the immediate Office of the 
     Under Secretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure 
     Protection and for management and administration of programs 
     and activities, as authorized by title II of the Homeland 
     Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 121 et seq.), $168,769,000: 
     Provided, That not to exceed $5,000 shall be for official 
     reception and representation expenses.


                      Assessments and Evaluations

       For necessary expenses for information analysis and 
     infrastructure protection as authorized by title II of the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 121 et seq.), 
     $701,793,000, to remain available until September 30, 2007.

                         Science and Technology


                     Management and Administration

       For salaries and expenses of the immediate Office of the 
     Under Secretary for Science and Technology and for management 
     and administration of programs and activities, as authorized 
     by title III of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 
     181 et seq.), $81,099,000: Provided, That not to exceed 
     $3,000 shall be for official reception and representation 
     expenses.


           Research, Development, Acquisition, and Operations

       For necessary expenses for science and technology research, 
     including advanced research projects; development; test and 
     evaluation; acquisition; and operations; as authorized by 
     title III of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 181 
     et seq.), $1,372,399,000, to remain available until expended: 
     Provided, That of the total amount made available under this 
     heading, $127,314,000 shall be for the Domestic Nuclear 
     Detection Office, of which $112,314,000 shall not be 
     available for obligation until the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security submits a staffing and management plan and an 
     expenditure plan for the office and the global systems 
     architecture, to include multi-year costs, that has been 
     reviewed by the Government Accountability Office and approved 
     by the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the 
     House of Representatives: Provided further, That of the total 
     funds made available under this heading, $125,000,000 is 
     solely for the purchase and deployment of radiation portal 
     monitors for United States ports-of-entry and may not be 
     transferred or reprogrammed.

                      TITLE V--GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Sec. 501. No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current 
     fiscal year unless expressly so provided herein.
       Sec. 502. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available to the Department of Homeland Security may be used 
     to make payments to the ``Department of Homeland Security 
     Working Capital Fund'', except for the activities and amounts 
     allowed in section 6024 of Public Law 109-13, excluding the 
     Homeland Secure Data Network: Provided, That any additional 
     activities and amounts must be approved by the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
     30 days in advance of obligation.
       Sec. 503. (a) None of the funds provided by this Act, 
     provided by previous appropriations Acts to the agencies in 
     or transferred to the Department of Homeland Security that 
     remain available for obligation or expenditure in fiscal year 
     2006, or provided from any accounts in the Treasury of the 
     United States derived by the collection of fees available to 
     the agencies funded by this Act, shall be available for 
     obligation or expenditure through a reprogramming of funds 
     that: (1) creates a new program; (2) eliminates a program, 
     project, or activity; (3) increases funds for any program, 
     project, or activity for which funds have been denied or 
     restricted by the Congress; (4) proposes to use

[[Page S7959]]

     funds directed for a specific activity by either of the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the Senate or House of 
     Representatives for a different purpose; or (5) contracts out 
     any functions or activities for which funds have been 
     appropriated for Federal full-time equivalent positions; 
     unless the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the 
     House of Representatives are notified 15 days in advance of 
     such reprogramming of funds.
       (b) None of the funds provided by this Act, provided by 
     previous appropriations Acts to the agencies in or 
     transferred to the Department of Homeland Security that 
     remain available for obligation or expenditure in fiscal year 
     2006, or provided from any accounts in the Treasury of the 
     United States derived by the collection of fees available to 
     the agencies funded by this Act, shall be available for 
     obligation or expenditure for programs, projects, or 
     activities through a reprogramming of funds in excess of 
     $5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less, that: (1) 
     augments existing programs, projects, or activities; (2) 
     reduces by 10 percent funding for any existing program, 
     project, or activity, or numbers of personnel by 10 percent 
     as approved by the Congress; or (3) results from any general 
     savings from a reduction in personnel that would result in a 
     change in existing programs, projects, or activities as 
     approved by the Congress; unless the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
     are notified 15 days in advance of such reprogramming of 
     funds.
       (c) Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made 
     available for the current fiscal year for the Department of 
     Homeland Security by this Act or provided by previous 
     appropriations Acts may be transferred between such 
     appropriations, but no such appropriations, except as 
     otherwise specifically provided, shall be increased by more 
     than 10 percent by such transfers: Provided, That any 
     transfer under this section shall be treated as a 
     reprogramming of funds under subsection (b) of this section 
     and shall not be available for obligation unless the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives are notified 15 days in advance of such 
     transfer.
       (d) Notwithstanding subsections (a), (b), and (c) of this 
     section, no funds shall be reprogrammed within or transferred 
     between appropriations after June 30, except in extraordinary 
     circumstances which imminently threaten the safety of human 
     life or the protection of property.
       (e) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     notifications pursuant to this section or any other authority 
     for reprogramming or transfer of funds shall be made solely 
     to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the 
     House of Representatives.
       Sec. 504. Except as otherwise specifically provided by law, 
     not to exceed 50 percent of unobligated balances remaining 
     available at the end of fiscal year 2006 from appropriations 
     for salaries and expenses for fiscal year 2006 in this Act 
     shall remain available through September 30, 2007, in the 
     account and for the purposes for which the appropriations 
     were provided: Provided, That prior to the obligation of such 
     funds, a request shall be submitted to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
     for approval in accordance with section 503 of this Act.
       Sec. 505. Funds made available by this Act for intelligence 
     activities are deemed to be specifically authorized by the 
     Congress for purposes of section 504 of the National Security 
     Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 414) during fiscal year 2006 until the 
     enactment of an Act authorizing intelligence activities for 
     fiscal year 2006.
       Sec. 506. None of the funds in this Act may be used to make 
     a grant allocation, discretionary grant award, discretionary 
     contract award, or to issue a letter of intent totaling in 
     excess of $1,000,000, or to announce publicly the intention 
     to make such an award, unless the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security notifies the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     Senate and the House of Representatives at least 3 full 
     business days in advance: Provided, That no notification 
     shall involve funds that are not available for obligation.
       Sec. 507. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no 
     agency shall purchase, construct, or lease any additional 
     facilities, except within or contiguous to existing 
     locations, to be used for the purpose of conducting Federal 
     law enforcement training without the advance approval of the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives, except that the Federal Law Enforcement 
     Training Center is authorized to obtain the temporary use of 
     additional facilities by lease, contract, or other agreement 
     for training which cannot be accommodated in existing Center 
     facilities.
       Sec. 508. The Director of the Federal Law Enforcement 
     Training Center shall schedule basic and/or advanced law 
     enforcement training at all four training facilities under 
     the control of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center to 
     ensure that these training centers are operated at the 
     highest capacity throughout the fiscal year.
       Sec. 509. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this Act may be used for expenses of any 
     construction, repair, alteration, or acquisition project for 
     which a prospectus, if required by the Public Buildings Act 
     of 1959 (40 U.S.C. 3301), has not been approved, except that 
     necessary funds may be expended for each project for required 
     expenses for the development of a proposed prospectus.
       Sec. 510. None of the funds in this Act may be used in 
     contravention of the applicable provisions of the Buy 
     American Act (41 U.S.C. 10a et seq.).
       Sec. 511. The Secretary of Homeland Security is directed to 
     research, develop, and procure certified systems to inspect 
     and screen air cargo on passenger aircraft at the earliest 
     date possible: Provided, That until such technology is 
     procured and installed, the Secretary shall take all possible 
     actions to enhance the known shipper program to prohibit 
     high-risk cargo from being transported on passenger aircraft 
     and continue to increase the level of air cargo that is 
     inspected beyond the level mandated in section 513 of Public 
     Law 108-334.
       Sec. 512. Notwithstanding section 3302 of title 31, United 
     States Code, for fiscal year 2006 and thereafter, the 
     Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration 
     may impose a reasonable charge for the lease of real and 
     personal property to Transportation Security Administration 
     employees and for use by Transportation Security 
     Administration employees and may credit amounts received to 
     the appropriation or fund initially charged for operating and 
     maintaining the property, which amounts shall be available, 
     without fiscal year limitation, for expenditure for property 
     management, operation, protection, construction, repair, 
     alteration, and related activities.
       Sec. 513. For fiscal year 2006 and thereafter, the 
     acquisition management system of the Transportation Security 
     Administration shall apply to the acquisition of services, as 
     well as equipment, supplies, and materials.
       Sec. 514. (a) None of the funds provided by this or 
     previous appropriations Acts may be obligated for deployment 
     or implementation, on other than a test basis, of the Secure 
     Flight program or any other follow on or successor passenger 
     prescreening programs, until the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security certifies, and the Government Accountability Office 
     reports, to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate 
     and the House of Representatives, that all ten of the 
     elements contained in paragraphs (1) through (10) of section 
     522(a) of Public Law 108-334 (118 Stat. 1319) have been 
     successfully met.
       (b) The report required by subsection (a) shall be 
     submitted within 90 days after the certification required by 
     such subsection is provided, and periodically thereafter, if 
     necessary, until the Government Accountability Office 
     confirms that all ten elements have been successfully met.
       (c) During the testing phase permitted by subsection (a), 
     no information gathered from passengers, foreign or domestic 
     air carriers, or reservation systems may be used to screen 
     aviation passengers, or delay or deny boarding to such 
     passengers, except in instances where passenger names are 
     matched to a Government watch list.
       (d) None of the funds provided in this or previous 
     appropriations Acts may be utilized to develop or test 
     algorithms assigning risk to passengers whose names are not 
     on Government watch lists.
       (e) None of the funds provided in this or previous 
     appropriations Acts may be utilized for a database that is 
     obtained from or remains under the control of a non-Federal 
     entity.
       Sec. 515. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to amend the oath of allegiance required by section 
     337 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1448).
       Sec. 516. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may be 
     used to process or approve a competition under Office of 
     Management and Budget Circular A-76 for services provided as 
     of June 1, 2004, by employees (including employees serving on 
     a temporary or term basis) of United States Citizenship and 
     Immigration Services of the Department of Homeland Security 
     who are known as of that date as Immigration Information 
     Officers, Contact Representatives, or Investigative 
     Assistants.
       Sec. 517. None of the funds appropriated to the United 
     States Secret Service by this Act or by previous 
     appropriations Acts may be made available for the protection 
     of the head of a Federal agency other than the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security: Provided, That the Director of the United 
     States Secret Service may enter into an agreement to perform 
     such service on a fully reimbursable basis.
       Sec. 518. The Department of Homeland Security processing 
     and data storage facilities at the John C. Stennis Space 
     Center shall hereafter be known as the ``National Center for 
     Critical Information Processing and Storage''.
       This Act may be cited as the ``Department of Homeland 
     Security Appropriations Act, 2006''.

  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following 
Appropriations Committee staff members and interns be granted the 
privilege of the floor during the consideration of the fiscal year 2006 
Homeland Security appropriations bill and any votes that may occur in 
relation thereto: Shannon O'Keefe, Carol Cribbs, Kimberly Nelson, James 
Hayes, Avery Forbes, Carolina Poarch, Pete Flynn, Jonathan Cahoon, and 
Will Post.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Under the previous order, the committee substitute is agreed to and 
considered as original text for the purpose of amendment.
  The committee amendment, in the nature of a substitute, was agreed 
to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, we turn now to the Homeland Security bill. 
This is obviously a timely period for taking up this legislation in 
light of what has happened in London. We recognize, once again, as a 
result of the heinous crimes that were committed in London that there 
are people out there who totally disregard innocent life and who are 
willing to kill innocent individuals simply for the purpose of making a 
political statement as to what

[[Page S7960]]

their cause is or what their presumed cause may be.
  Of course, we were, unfortunately, focused on this fact by 9/11, but 
maybe over the last 2 or 3 years the success of our Nation in resisting 
attacks has caused a touch of complacency in this area. However, London 
has to clearly remind us that complacency cannot be tolerated when it 
comes to fighting these people who call themselves Islamic 
fundamentalists and who are essentially killers, terrorists, murderers 
without any moral creed or cause, and whose actions are totally 
unjustified in any form of civilized society.
  The Department of Homeland Security was set up in the post-9/11 world 
in order to try as a nation to get our arms around the issue of how we 
can best protect us in the United States of America. It was set up in 
the context of other agencies that have responsibility for other areas 
of protecting us relative to this war on terrorism.
  Of course, we have our Defense Department which is, through its 
extraordinary men and women, pursuing the fight against terrorism in 
Afghanistan and in Iraq. We also have agencies, such as the Central 
Intelligence Agency, the FBI, and the Justice Department, that are 
committed to making sure they obtain the intelligence necessary to 
protect us. But within this umbrella of agencies which are trying to 
pursue this war on terrorism, there is included, of course, the 
Department of Homeland Security.
  The Department of Homeland Security was put together as an 
amalgamation of different agencies. I think there were 22 initially 
that were thrown together. Some of those agencies, when they were put 
into the Department of Homeland Security, were already functioning 
extraordinarily well and had a track record of success. Some of the 
other agencies had a spotty track record. Regrettably, some of the 
agencies did not have a very good track record at all. But they were 
brought together for the purposes of trying to involve a coordinated 
effort in the area of fighting terrorism.
  I believe we have to recognize, as we pursue this fight on terrorism, 
that the people we are fighting are driven by a philosophy which we as 
a rational society, especially as a Western society, find hard to 
fathom. The concept that you would kill innocent civilians simply for 
the purpose of making a point is something which we find repugnant and 
almost incomprehensible. But that is the nature of the people we fight. 
We have to understand their purpose is not necessarily to win a global 
war in the sense it has historically been perceived, such as World War 
I or World War II, or even the Cold War. Their purpose essentially is 
to assert their culture in a way that destroys any culture which they 
perceive as alien to it, to assert their religion in a way in which 
they perceive destroys any religion which they see as alien to it, or 
any group of states which they see as alien to it. They are willing to 
pursue this with fanaticism which allows them to develop individuals 
and attitudes where people will strap bombs to themselves and attack us 
or where they attack innocent individuals, as they did in London. And 
thus, the threat is a threat of immense proportion, and it is a threat 
which we have to pursue in a different way than we have pursued other 
threats that have confronted our Nation.
  We all understand this, but executing it has become difficult. I 
believe we have not yet grasped as a nation how we execute in defending 
ourselves from this type of threat. What we know is this, and our 
approach must be tempered by it: We know we can order the priority of 
the threats as they reflect relative to us. We know, for example, if 
these individuals get their hands on a weapon of mass destruction--
chemical, biological or, God forbid, a nuclear-capable weapon--that 
they will use that weapon. They will use it in a way which kills tens 
of thousands, essentially hundreds of thousands of innocent 
individuals. So we know that is the No. 1 threat we must confront.
  We know also that as a nation, because we are a democracy and because 
we are an open nation and because we seek to participate in the world 
in an open and vibrant way, our borders are porous and that access into 
this country is easy, and that represents, regrettably now, a threat to 
us.
  We know also that because we are such an open society and because we 
are a society which is built around the concept of individual 
responsibility and people being able to go out in the world and 
participate in activities, that we have innumerable areas of 
infrastructure, areas of individual participation and activity which 
are open to attack, such as occurred in London. And that is an issue of 
threat.

  What we have attempted to do in this bill is take the resources we 
have and focus them on a threat-based approach so that we basically 
focus the most resources on the area where we see the greatest threat. 
The way we structured this bill is that we are focusing most of the 
energy of this bill, most of dollars in this bill, in two primary 
areas, as far as new dollars are concerned. We are still spending a lot 
of dollars in a lot of different places, but the new initiatives in 
this bill are focused on trying to better get a handle on defending 
ourselves from an attack by a weapon of mass destruction and, secondly, 
making our borders, which are inordinately porous, less porous and 
having better accountability as to who is coming into this country and 
what their purposes are.
  We moved a fair amount of money in this bill to try to accomplish 
those two basic philosophical goals of addressing those two items of 
threat. That does not mean we underfunded anything in this bill that 
was already on the board. But it does mean we tried to focus this bill 
a little bit better.
  Within this legislation there are a lot of different agencies. As I 
mentioned earlier, some of them are functioning extraordinarily well, 
some are functioning in between, and some simply are not doing as good 
a job as we hoped they could do. Regrettably, this agency, even though 
it has only been around for 2 years, has had over 486 reports written 
about it by either the inspector general, the CRS, or the GAO. I 
brought them with me because I think they are so staggering in their 
proportions it is worth looking at in physical proportions the number 
of reports. There are three piles. If we take one pile, which I 
probably cannot pick up, and put it on top of another pile--it will all 
fall over, unfortunately--we end up with almost 3 feet 9 inches of 
reports about things not going that well at the Homeland Security 
Department. Each one of these reports is substantive. Each one of these 
reports is worth review and requires action. They reflect the fact that 
almost 3 years after this Department was put together, the Department 
has some very serious problems, and they need to be addressed.
  I congratulate the new Secretary, Mr. Chertoff, for his approach to 
trying to get a handle on some of these problems. He is going to report 
to us Wednesday or Thursday on what his second stage review is. He put 
a lot of time into this, but I think his approach will probably be 
based on the concept that we have to have, first, a policy-driven 
approach and, second, it has to be systemwide. Today, there is too much 
anecdotal reaction in the Department, there is too much haphazard 
reaction, there is too much reaction to the crisis of the day. I think 
his approach is going to be to put in place a much more systematized 
approach. But that is not going to immediately resolve the problem. 
Hopefully, it will begin the process of resolving the problems of this 
Department, which are many and acute.
  This bill does put in place a large number of what, for lack of a 
better word, we in the Congress call fences, where we essentially say 
to the Department: Before you get this money, you have to show us you 
are going to do this effectively. It is not something I like to do. I 
am a legislator; I am not a manager. I used to be a manager. I used to 
be a Governor of a State. That is a management position. But when we 
see a department which has as many functions as this Department and it 
is not functioning correctly, regrettably, I do think it is the 
responsibility of the Congress and especially the Appropriations 
Committee, which has a unique oversight role, to step in and say before 
we give you more money to do this, we want to make sure that money is 
not going to be wasted, mismanaged, misplaced, or misappropriated, so 
we are going to require you to do something else. So this bill has in 
it a lot of what I would call fences.
  The purpose of the bill, as I mentioned, is to fund more aggressively 
those areas which we see as threats.

[[Page S7961]]

Obviously, after London, many people are going to feel that a threat 
which needs to receive more attention is the question of how we handle 
mass transit. I could not agree more. There is no question but in light 
of the London attack--and we knew long before this with the Madrid 
attack and before that with the Israeli situation--this is a clear area 
where terrorists, who have no regard for human life, tend to focus 
their heinous activity. We know mass transit is an issue, but the 
question becomes how do we best protect mass transit.
  We have put in this bill over the last few years literally tens of 
millions, now hundreds of millions of dollars which is available for 
upgrading security, for upgrading electronic surveillance, for 
upgrading bomb dog activity, for upgrading the number of police 
officers on mass transit. There is pending, in fact, within the Federal 
Treasury about $115 million to $150 million that has not been spent. 
There has been so much money put into this so quickly, it simply has 
not been spent, and it is still available.
  On top of that, there is the $7 billion which we have put into first 
responder money which, if States want to reallocate some of that toward 
mass transit protection, they can. That has not been spent. So there is 
a lot of money sitting there for the purpose of helping mass transit.
  If you talk with people who run mass transit, they say it is not 
enough. But as a practical matter, it has not been spent yet. So 
whether it is enough is clearly irrelevant because until it gets spent, 
it is clearly enough.
  Independent of that, however--the fact that there is still 
significant dollars in the stream of things--we have the issue of how 
to effectively defend mass transit. We all know mass transit is such a 
huge enterprise where millions of people, on a daily basis--tens of 
millions if you take all the transit systems in this country--are 
moving in and out of different transit modes, whether it is trains, 
buses, or ferries, and are moving in and out of these on a constantly 
churning basis. The opportunities to attack this type of a system are 
almost endless.
  A professional terrorist--and clearly these people are professional. 
They train for the purpose of killing people, using terrorist weapons. 
The professional terrorist is always--almost always going to be able to 
find, in a nation our size, with a transportation system of this size, 
going to be able to find a point of attack that is not secure unless--I 
doubt that we could spend anywhere near enough money. We have enough 
money to spend to fully secure mass transit, and if we did we would 
probably make mass transit nonfunctional.
  Yes, we can raise the visibility by putting more officers on trains, 
more bomb dogs and surveillance agents, and we should do that, but as a 
practical matter the way you protect your mass transit system is the 
same way you protect your other infrastructure systems. It is through 
aggressive and robust intelligence. You have to know who these people 
are before they attack you. That is the key to this exercise--robust 
intelligence capability. And there is some irony because to accomplish 
robust intelligence capability you have to go where the people come 
from. Where do they come from? They come from the Middle East. We are 
fighting them in the Middle East. Yet people who have concerns about 
that want to put dramatically new dollars into the mass transit system.
  Well, the best place to get intelligence, quite honestly, is the 
breeding ground of these terrorists: Iraq, Afghanistan. And so that war 
in Iraq and Afghanistan is, as the President has pointed out a number 
of times, taking the war to them to find them before they can find us. 
Then, once you capture the people, you have to get the intelligence 
from them. That is why Guantanamo Bay is such an important part of 
intelligence of our country and why people come down to the floor and 
compare it to a Nazi concentration camp is such a gross misstatement of 
our purpose there and the actual action there. It is totally 
irresponsible to make statements such as that. No one has ever lost 
their life at Guantanamo Bay, and the interrogations which occur there 
occur under strict regimes. They are constantly monitored and meet all 
the necessary responsibilities of legal and humane rights.
  But we get vast amounts of information as a result of moving very bad 
people from the Iraq and Afghanistan arena over to Guantanamo Bay. We 
get a vast amount of information from those individuals which gives us 
the intelligence we need.
  Then, of course, you have the issue of profiling. Clearly, if you are 
going to stop these people, you are going to have to profile. That is 
being resisted. And then, of course, you have the issue of the PATRIOT 
Act. Clearly, if you are going to stop these people, you have to know 
what they are doing, and the way to do it is through electronic 
interdiction of their activities to a large degree. Yet you have people 
resisting.
  Intelligence is the key to defending mass transit. Yet within this 
body, regrettably, there is a lot of resistance to those elements of 
our efforts which are necessary in order to effectively pursue strong 
intelligence. But that is not an issue for this bill. The homeland 
security intelligence role is not at the margin, but it is certainly 
not at the center of the effort to gather intelligence. That is done by 
other agencies--the Defense Department, CIA, and FBI. However, I 
certainly am willing to entertain moving more money into mass transit. 
We could probably do another $100 million in mass transit and not 
affect this bill substantially. But once you get beyond that, you are 
going to have to take it out of the deficit or someplace like that. But 
will you buy more security with those dollars? Not a great deal, I 
don't think, because the people you are dealing with know how to get 
around those types of security initiatives however well you may create 
a better sense of security.
  This bill will, I suspect, over the next few days come under 
amendment in the area of how better to protect our borders. Maybe we 
will get better border security. The other part of the equation is how 
you let people into this country who legitimately want to come to work 
and are not seeking to do us harm but seeking to improve their 
livelihood. The Guest Worker Program, maybe we will get into that 
program, and certainly how best to address mass transit protection in 
light of London. I am open to all of that. I am flexible. Our purpose 
here is to make this agency work better.
  In that context, I congratulate the Senator from West Virginia, my 
ranking member, and who has joined us on the floor. He has been a 
partner in putting this effort together. He is totally committed to 
trying to make sure we have a much safer country and a stronger 
Department of Homeland Security. He has done a great job of putting 
forward his ideas, many of which I totally agree with, some of which I 
may not agree with, but most of which I do agree with. I respect 
immensely his years of service to this Nation, which have been 
extraordinary, and his counsel, which is exceptional. I thank him and 
his staff for the generous and extraordinary way they approach 
everything, but especially this bill. As we move forward, I am sure he 
will have some additional ideas of how we can improve it on the floor, 
and I look forward to hearing those thoughts and ideas and I continue 
to look forward as we move this bill down the road to passage sooner 
rather than later because the Nation does need a Homeland Security 
bill.

  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I have listened intently to the remarks of 
the very distinguished Senator as the chairman of this appropriations 
subcommittee, and I have been very impressed by his remarks. But prior 
to that, over a long period of time I have been very impressed with his 
dedication to the service of the people he represents here and his 
dedication to the Nation. He is an extremely able chairman. He has 
experience in the executive field, as he has alluded to, and he has 
experience in the committee system. He is preeminently fair in his work 
on the subcommittee, very fair, always willing to listen, and most 
charitable, may I say, toward me.
  I am the ranking member on the subcommittee and on the full 
committee. But I could never wish for anyone to be more fair, more 
knowledgeable, or anyone whom I would respect more than this man from 
the mountains of his

[[Page S7962]]

great State, and I have a tremendous admiration for him and a great 
deal of fondness for him. He is a chairman sui generis and a gentleman 
along with it. I like that part, too, especially.
  Now, Mr. President, the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee 
has outlined the threat, and he has done so very well. I can't tell you 
how much I have admired the way he has striven to put together this 
bill and utilized the limited amount of moneys that are available to us 
and do it in a way that will reach those areas that are in most need of 
funding. I am immensely pleased with the work he has done. His work is 
the foremost work, of course. As the ranking member, I try to help. I 
do have a very able staff that works with the staff of the 
distinguished chairman, and it is through this staff that I am able to 
keep abreast of things and also to make my feelings known as well.
  Mr. President, the Senate, then, has before it this bill for fiscal 
year 2006 Homeland Security appropriations. I cannot commend too much 
the distinguished chairman, as I have already indicated, and his staff, 
for their work on this legislation. I also commend the thousands of men 
and women who are on the front lines of America's homeland security. 
They serve the Nation every hour of every day.
  I welcome Chairman Gregg to his new duties as chairman of the 
Homeland Security Subcommittee. He comes to it, needless to say, very 
well prepared. He has a wealth of experience, a wealth of expertise. 
The chairman targets limited resources--and I emphasize the word 
``limited''--on future threats, not simply the threats posed by the 
attacks of September 11. For the most part, the chairman has attempted 
to allocate resources to those threats that represent the greatest risk 
to the American people. In doing so he has, with my support, included a 
number of improvements to the President's budget particularly with 
regard to border security, air cargo security, funds for States to 
implement the driver's license provisions of the REAL ID Act, as well 
as funding to protect the ``all-hazards'' Emergency Management 
Performance Grant Program.
  The committee bill builds on the bipartisan border security 
initiative that I offered along with Senator Craig to the 2005 
emergency supplemental. Between the emergency supplemental enacted in 
May and this bill Congress will have increased the number of Border 
Patrol agents by 1,500, provided funds to train and house these agents, 
increased the number of immigration investigators, the number of agents 
and detention officers by 817, and increased the number of detention 
beds by 4,190.
  The chairman has to be commended for this, and I am profuse in my 
admiration and my support for what he has done.
  In addition, the bill contains an important protection for the 
privacy rights of Americans. We need always to keep these rights in 
mind. I thank Chairman Gregg for his support of language that I 
recommended concerning secure flight, the Department's proposed new 
airline passenger profiling system. The language would prohibit the use 
of commercial databases for confirming the identity of airline 
passengers. Such commercial databases are unreliable and potentially 
invade people's privacy.

  The bill before the Senate provides $30.8 billion for discretionary 
programs, an increase of 4.6 percent. This is a very lean bill. The 
committee was put in a difficult position as a result of the 
administration's proposal to have the Appropriations Committee increase 
the fees paid by airline passengers, a proposal that would have raised 
$1.68 billion. The Appropriations Committee does not have jurisdiction 
over airline fees and therefore could not approve the proposal. As a 
result, the committee was forced to reduce spending below the 
President's request by $389 million.
  So the low subcommittee allocation and the fee proposal resulted in 
cuts in firefighter grants, first responder grants, rail and mass 
transit security grants, Coast Guard operations, and in the number of 
Transportation Security Administration screeners. These cuts are very 
unfortunate. It is regrettable that the administration's apparent lack 
of understanding of the legislative process will have such a direct 
impact on programs that are so important, that are important elements 
of our homeland security strategy.
  As the Senate considers this bill, I hope the Senators will look 
favorably on amendments to restore the cuts in firefighter grants, 
first responder grants, and mass transit and rail security grants. The 
utterly tragic events in London last week remind all of us of the 
imminent threat--the imminent threat, may I say--to the American people 
that is posed by terrorist attacks here at home--here at home.
  We have heard it said it is better to fight these terrorists in Iraq 
than it is to fight them in New York City or in Washington. Of course 
that is true. Nobody doubts that. But don't let anybody be fooled. 
Don't let anybody be fooled. Fighting them in Iraq is not going to make 
us secure from having to fight them here at home in Washington, New 
York, Tampa, FL--wherever. Don't fall for that malarkey. That is pure 
bunk. Of course we know what that is all about. But it has happened in 
London. It happened before that in Madrid, and before that in Japan, 
and it can happen here. No amount of argument, debate, or plain old 
malarkey should convince anyone that it can't happen here. In my 
judgment, it will. It is coming. These people take their time. They are 
patient. They are not in a big hurry. And it is coming here. It is 
coming here. The thing about it is these people know when and where and 
how the attack will be made. We do not. So they have the advantages.
  Let's just put that bunk to the side; forget it for now. There is 
nothing to it. We are in jeopardy. The American people are in jeopardy 
and we ought to understand that. Last Thursday, when asked if 
additional funding was needed to secure our mass transit system, 
Secretary Chertoff said, ``I would not make a policy decision driven by 
a single event.''
  I have a great deal of respect for the Secretary. He was down in my 
office just this morning, outlining something with respect to the 
surveys which he has been making and on which he intends to report 
publicly, and also outlining his plans for the agency. I must say he 
has a real grasp, a real feel of the full scope of the problems. I have 
to compliment him for that.
  But with all due respect for the Secretary, the alarm bells just 
didn't start ringing last week. The alarm bells have been ringing for 
years. There have been 16 bombings worldwide linked to al-Qaida. The 
Senate should not be reducing our commitment to firefighters and first 
responders, or to securing our mass transit and rail system. I am 
pleased that the chairman has included my recommendation to direct the 
Department to expedite its grantmaking process. All too often--I made 
mention of this in a meeting with Secretary Chertoff in my office 
earlier today--all too often, funds that were approved by Congress last 
October will not be given to Federal, State, and local agencies until 
this September, nearly a full year later. Americans are not made safer 
by having funding for border security, port security, rail security, 
and for hiring firefighters sit--where? In the U.S. Treasury.
  On June 13, almost a month ago, I wrote a letter to Secretary 
Chertoff, calling on him to focus on this problem as part of his review 
of agency operations. I will not ask now, but I will later, that that 
letter be made part of the Record.
  Unfortunately, the Secretary has not seen fit to respond to my 
letter. That is not worthy of a great deal of comment, but it is worthy 
of some comment. I hope the Secretary's delay in responding is not 
indicative of the administration's intent to continue leaving homeland 
security dollars gathering dust in the Treasury in Washington, DC.
  I said this to the Secretary this morning. I am particularly appalled 
that the $150 million that Congress approved last October for mass 
transit and rail security is still sitting in the Treasury. What in the 
world? Why in the world hasn't this money gone out? What is it doing 
sitting here in the Treasury? What in the world is wrong? I said it in 
just about that fashion--perhaps not quite that loudly this morning in 
my office, but I said it, nevertheless. I am appalled by this. What in 
the world are we waiting on? The Department did not even announce until 
April how rail and transit systems could apply for the funds, wasting

[[Page S7963]]

a full 6 months that the rail and transit systems could have used to 
prepare for or to prevent a future attack.

  Time and time again, the administration has talked a good game on 
homeland security. Man, I will tell you, you just listen to the game 
they talk and you feel, ``I can sleep better tonight. I will go home 
now. I will watch the information about who is ahead in this game or 
that game--I will just forget about all this other stuff.'' But it has 
not followed through. The administration has not followed through with 
a sustained commitment of resources and ideas. So I fear the 
administration believes that it fulfills its commitment to securing the 
homeland by creating the Department of Homeland Security.
  I voted against that, to start with, because I foresaw this. I don't 
claim to have great powers along these lines. But with all my 
experience--and I have had some. I have been around here quite a while, 
longer than anybody else on this Hill--anybody: Anybody sitting in the 
gallery, anybody out there in the offices, anybody downtown, or anybody 
else. I have been around here longer in this Government, yes, indeed. 
Well, so much for that. But that is some experience. I have had time to 
see some things and to lament some things. And I have been critical of 
both parties, both administrations, Democratic and Republican, over the 
years. So I think I have some basis for saying the things I am saying.
  Mr. President, America is not made safer by simply reorganizing boxes 
on an organizational chart. Repeatedly, the energy, the initiative, the 
resources, and the leadership for homeland security efforts have come 
from--where? Guess where. From Congress, the people's branch.
  In December of 2004, Congress authorized the hiring of 2,000 new 
Border Patrol agents per year for 5 years; the hiring of an additional 
800 Immigration investigators per year for 5 years to enforce our 
immigration laws, and the funding of 8,000 new detention beds for the 
holding of illegal aliens. But despite statements by Secretary of State 
Rice and statements by former Homeland Security Deputy Secretary Loy 
that al-Qaida is a threat on our porous borders, there was virtually 
nothing in the President's budget to provide these additional resources 
for border security--virtually nothing.
  The bill that is before the Senate today commits real resources to 
securing our border with regard to transit and rail security.
  When terrorists blew up trains last year in Madrid, Spain, the 
administration had no plan for securing transit and rail systems. The 
horrific bombings last week in London have raised the same questions 
that we raised last year. Could it happen here? Are we prepared? 
According to the RAND Corporation, between 1998 and 2003, there were 
approximately--I don't know why we say approximately 181, but there 
were 181 terrorist attacks on rail targets worldwide. Get that: 
According to the Congressional Research Service, rail systems in the 
United States carry about five times--now, get that. According to the 
Congressional Research Service, passenger rail systems such as Amtrak 
in the United States carry about five times as many passengers each day 
as do airlines.
  Since 2001 I have offered seven different amendments to fund rail and 
transit security and all of them, all seven, were opposed by the 
administration and defeated: seven times.
  Remember Robert Bruce? He was lying up there in the loft of that barn 
and he had lost six times. He was about to give up until he saw that 
spider try to swing his web from this corner to that corner. He watched 
it six times and it failed. On the seventh time, lo and behold, that 
spider made it. So Robert Bruce decided he would try it one more time; 
seven times he tried it, he made it.
  That number reminds me of that number seven again. Jacob liked Rachel 
and he spoke to the old man--I refer to her father as the old man--
about that beautiful daughter. The old man decided he would drive a 
bargain. He said, You can have her, but you work 7 years for her. So 
Jacob worked 7 years. At the end of the seventh year he went to say to 
the prospective father-in-law, How about it? Now I have worked my 7 
years, I have carried out my part of the bargain, how about this nice 
girl you have? I have come to get her.
  The old man said, No, not yet. You work 7 more. I will give you Leah, 
Rachel's sister. You can't have Rachel. The Bible says that Leah was 
weak eyed. So all to his disgust, consternation, and sorrow, old Jacob 
had to work 7 more years for Rachel.
  Here we are talking about seven times. Since 2001 I have offered 
seven different amendments to fund rail and transit security and all 
seven, all of them, were opposed by the administration and defeated. 
Despite opposition from the administration, it was the Congress that 
created the Rail and Transit Security Grant Program that was first 
funded in fiscal year 2005, and that is funded in this bill today.
  I call on the administration to explain to the American people why 
the $150 million that Congress appropriated last year has not been 
given to rail and transit agencies to invest in more cameras, more 
locks, more canine teams, more training. I ask the Senate to approve 
additional funding for such grants for fiscal year 2006. The $100 
million included in the bill is $50 million below last year. It is $1.6 
billion below the level authorized for 2006 in bills that passed the 
Senate last year.

  While this administration has been focussing on the last attack 
carried out by hijackers, not one of whom was from Iraq, very little 
attention has been given to other vulnerabilities in aviation security. 
While the Transportation Security Administration examines 100 percent 
of checked baggage, most of the cargo that is stored in the same 
passenger aircraft and on cargo planes is not inspected. The threat of 
a bomb on an aircraft is not new. In 1988, 259 passengers aboard a Pan 
Am flight over Lockerbie, Scotland, perished when a terrorist-placed 
bomb exploded while the aircraft was 31,000 feet in the sky. Three and 
a half years ago, Richard Reid, the so-called shoe bomber, tried to 
blow up an aircraft in flight over the ocean with explosives he carried 
onto the aircraft.
  Yet, for 3 straight fiscal years, it has been Congress, this body and 
the other body across the other end of the Capitol, that committed 
resources to address this problem. Since fiscal year 2004, Congress has 
added $85 million above the President's request to hire air cargo 
inspectors and to advance research of innovative technologies to detect 
explosives in air cargo.
  What has the administration done with that funding? It has let $106 
million sit in the Treasury. Six months after this fiscal year began, 
less than 12 percent of the funding appropriated for air cargo has been 
spent. I said this to the Secretary this morning. He will do better, he 
says. It is taking him a while to get his arms around this. I believe 
he will do better. Six months after this fiscal year began, less than 
12 percent of the funding appropriated for air cargo has been spent. To 
make matters worse, the President's budget request for air cargo 
research and development in fiscal year 2006 was slashed in half.
  The bill before the Senate continues the commitment to increasing the 
inspection of air cargo. I commend Chairman Gregg for that decision. 
Let me say it again: The bill before the Senate today, in this year of 
our Lord, this bill continues the commitment to increasing the 
inspection of air cargo. I commend Chairman Gregg for that decision.
  When it comes to securing the Nation's chemical plant's--and I have 
lots of them down in the Kanawha Valley and Kanawha County, southern 
West Virginia when it comes to securing the Nation's chemical plants--I 
imagine we probably have maybe the second largest, if not the largest, 
concentration of chemical plants in the Northern Hemisphere right in 
Kanawha County or in West Virginia. When it comes to securing the 
Nation's chemical plants, the administration has been stuck in 
quicksand. We know the threat is real. The FBI has warned us about the 
threat. We know an attack at a chemical plant could cost millions of 
lives. The Environmental Protection Agency has reported that 123 
chemical facilities, if attacked, could threaten the lives of millions 
of people. My staff person says it would threaten the lives of over 1 
million people. That is a lot of people.
  For years, the administration has dragged its feet on securing our 
chemical facilities. For years, many in the Senate have pressed the 
administration

[[Page S7964]]

to do more, to show leadership. In response to my request, the 
Government Accountability Office, the GAO--I don't much like that 
second most recent name, the Government Accountability Office--the old 
GAO recently released a report concluding that of the 15,000 chemical 
facilities in the country, only 1,100 have complied with voluntary 
security standards. It has been more than 2 years since the GAO urged 
the EPA and DHS to develop a comprehensive strategy for the protection 
of our chemical plants.
  Last month, the administration finally changed direction on the need 
to provide security standards to the chemical industry. However, the 
administration has not yet proposed a specific plan or identified 
resources to implement such standards.
  This bill before the Senate includes two important directives related 
to the protection of our chemical facilities. First, it requires the 
Department to provide the committee the estimates of the resources 
needed to implement mandatory security requirements for the Nation's 
chemical sector. Second, it directs the Department to begin 
vulnerability assessments of the Nation's highest risk chemical 
facilities. I look forward to the administration following through with 
a specific plan.
  The bill before the Senate today includes $200 million for port 
security grants, $50 million above the amount provided in fiscal year 
2005. Once again, the administration's request was woefully inadequate. 
It is the Congress that has taken the lead, the people's branch.
  With the $200 million included in this bill, Congress will have 
funded $843 million for port security grants since September 11. How 
much has the administration requested over that time? Hear me, hear me 
now. How much money has the administration requested over that time? A 
measly little $46 million. Can you believe it? With the $200 million 
included in this bill, Congress will have funded $843 million for port 
security grants since September 11. How much has the administration 
requested over that time, I ask again? A measly $46 million.
  To make matters worse, the fiscal year 2006 request by the White 
House included a proposal to have ports compete against other 
nonaviation modes of transportation by lumping them together in a 
limited pot of funding.
  More than 9 million cargo containers enter U.S. ports annually but 
only 18 percent are inspected. All it takes is a dirty bomb stuffed 
into one of those 9 million containers to cripple our economy. The $150 
million Congress approved last October is still sitting in the 
Treasury. Why this administration continues to ignore the threat facing 
our seaports is mind-boggling. We cannot afford to wait for the next 
attack.
  For each of the threats I have discussed today, the bill that is 
before the Senate continues congressional initiatives to secure our 
homeland.
  Again and again, and I don't get tired of saying it, I commend 
Senator Cochran, the first chairman of the Subcommittee on Homeland 
Security, for his leadership in 2003 and 2004. I again commend our new 
committee chairman, Senator Judd Gregg, for giving clear direction to 
the Department in the bill before the Senate. With the resources that 
have been made available to the committee, Chairman Gregg has produced 
a good bill. Regrettably, as a result of the President's proposal to 
increase airline passenger fees which the Appropriations Committee 
lacks the authority to approve, this bill does not have all of the 
resources it needs to meet known vulnerabilities. It is essential that 
the Department of Homeland Security be responsive, not bureaucratic, 
while the threat we face is massive, and it is clear our response to 
dealing with it is tepid and unfocused. It will take a commitment of 
energy, imagination, and, yes, more funding, to better secure our 
homeland. Again, I thank my chairman and the members of the staff on 
both sides for their excellent work and long hours, weekends, they have 
spent.
  Mr. President, I referred to a letter which I had written to the 
Honorable Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland 
Security, on June 13 of this year. I ask unanimous consent that letter 
be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                      U.S. Senate,


                                  Committee on Appropriations,

                                    Washington, DC, June 13, 2005.
     Hon. Michael Chertoff,
     Secretary, Department of Homeland Security,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Secretary: You are to be commended for ordering a 
     review of the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) 
     organization, processes, and procedures. As you assess how to 
     improve agency operations, I encourage you to focus on a 
     matter that has been a continuing frustration since the 
     Department was established. Letting Federal dollars sit in 
     the Treasury in Washington, DC, does not make America safer. 
     There is no excuse for the appallingly slow pace of making 
     Department of Homeland Security funds available to Federal, 
     State, regional, and local agencies that are responsible for 
     actually making America safer.
       Americans are made safer when our State and local police, 
     firefighters, and other security agencies hire, train, and 
     equip first responders, and when funds are made available for 
     border security and other law enforcement personnel. Yet, all 
     too often, the Department is slow to announce how State and 
     local agencies can apply for funds; and, all too often, DHS 
     agencies are slow to spend money. Congress approved funding 
     for Fiscal Year 2005 on October 11, 2004. Yet, most 
     application kits were not released by the Department until 
     April 2005, six months later. By the time applications are 
     prepared and reviewed and the money is awarded, it will be 
     the end of the fiscal year. This is time wasted that could 
     have been spent investing in our security.
       Regrettably, there has been a consistent pattern of delay 
     at the Department.
       Since October 2004, $65 million has been available under 
     the SAFER Act to hire local firefighters. Seven months later, 
     on May 30, 2005, the Department finally announced how our 
     local fire departments can apply for these funds. Funds are 
     not expected to be given to fire departments to hire 
     firefighters until the end of the fiscal year. Every day, our 
     1.1 million firefighters are prepared to put their lives on 
     the line. I do not understand why the Department waited so 
     long to issue a grant announcement.
       Since October 2004, $150 million has been available to meet 
     the $6 billion estimated cost of securing our mass transit 
     systems. Over 9.6 billion transit trips are taken annually on 
     the various modes of transit service by Americans. Just a 
     little over a year ago, terrorists struck in Madrid, killing 
     190 and injuring 1,800 after setting off explosives on 
     commuter trains at rush hour. As the Madrid bombing proved, 
     the threat to transit systems is real. It is simply 
     unacceptable that the Department waited until April 5, 2005, 
     to announce how transit agencies could apply for the funds.
       In October 2004, Congress approved $150 million for port 
     security to protect not only citizens' lives but also our 
     economy. The U.S. Coast Guard has estimated that a major port 
     closure for one month due to a maritime terrorist act could 
     cost up to $60 billion in economic loss to the United States. 
     I do not understand why the Department waited until May 11, 
     2005, to announce how our ports could apply for those funds. 
     As a result, it will be the end of the fiscal year before 
     taxpayers' dollars will be used to make our ports safer.
       In October 2004, bus security funds were approved by 
     Congress to put preventative measures in place on our buses. 
     It took six months for the Department to put out a notice of 
     how to apply for the funds.
       Over the last three years, Congress has approved $400 
     million for the Pre-disaster Mitigation Program to reduce 
     risks and mitigate damage before disasters occur. According 
     to the most recent DHS expenditure plan, 95.5 percent of 
     those funds have not yet been spent, including $31 million 
     approved by the Congress in Fiscal Year 2003 and $136 million 
     approved in Fiscal Year 2004. Those funds could have been 
     spent to prevent loss of property and life; but, instead, the 
     money sits in the Treasury in Washington, DC., while local 
     communities battle a complicated application form and 
     bureaucratic procedures. Natural disasters do not wait for 
     the government to get it right.
       The Flood Map Modernization Program was funded by Congress 
     to provide resources to update maps across the nation. Flood-
     prone areas, particularly, need the maps to prevent damage to 
     property and to protect citizens' lives. Of the over $215 
     million available in the current fiscal year, on1y $3 million 
     has been obligated, slowing down this important process.
       In July 2002, Congress approved an emergency supplemental 
     appropriation for PortSTEP, a port security table-top 
     exercise program. It took two-and-a-half years for the 
     Transportation Security Administration to launch the $20 
     million program.
       In April 2003, Congress enacted $38 million through an 
     emergency appropriation for the Coast Guard to complete port 
     security assessments at tier-one strategic ports, our highest 
     priority ports. Two years later $16.8 million of the $38 
     million is currently unobligated.
       Congress included funding in Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005 to 
     hire air cargo inspectors, addressing glaring security 
     vulnerabilities in the shipping of explosives on passenger 
     and cargo aircraft. As of March 31,2005, less than 12 percent 
     of the funding that Congress appropriated for additional air 
     cargo security measures has been obligated.

[[Page S7965]]

       In 2001, Congress approved $21.6 million for the Customs 
     Service for improving security on the Northern border. In 
     2003, $14.4 million. was added. Despite the fact that we have 
     137 fewer border patrol agents than we had just seven months 
     ago, this money continues to sit in the Treasury in 
     Washington, DC.
       As you complete your review of agency operations, I 
     encourage you to expedite the expenditure of homeland 
     security dollars. There is no reason for these funds to sit 
     in the Treasury. There is no evidence that the delay will 
     result in the funds being better spent when they are finally 
     made available to Federal, state, regional, and local 
     agencies. The longer we wait to tighten security, the greater 
     the opportunity for terrorists to strike.
       Please let me know why it is taking so long to get money 
     out the door, and what specific systems will be put in place 
     to make sure that this irresponsible bureaucratic delay does 
     not continue.
       With kind regards, I am
           Sincerely yours,
                                                   Robert C. Byrd,
                                                   Ranking Member.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Vitter). The Senator from New Hampshire.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from West Virginia. He 
always brings a great deal of substance and thought to whatever issue 
he decides to pursue on the Senate floor. Once again, in the opening 
statement, he reflected that. He does outline many of the issues which 
need to be addressed. He outlines them well and makes very strong 
points. It is a result of a cooperative effort between his staff, my 
staff, himself, and myself that we have gotten this bill to this point. 
As he said, the purpose of this bill is to address the threats. That is 
our goal.
  Obviously, there is going to need to be, in light of the London 
event, some adjustment in the accounts relative to mass transit, and 
there may be other areas where the Senate wishes to work its will.
  The basic goal of this bill, as the Senator from West Virginia has 
said, and in which he played a major part, is to address the real 
problems, the real threats that face this Nation. I continue to try to 
do that, working with the Senator from West Virginia. I appreciate all 
his cooperation and his effort.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader.
  Mr. REID. What is the matter now before the Senate?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. H.R. 2360.
  Mr. REID. I first express my admiration for the two managers of this 
bill. Of course, Senator Byrd is a legend, having held every leadership 
position, sometimes more than once. I enjoyed very much serving in the 
House with my friend from New Hampshire, and I recognize his stellar 
career as a Governor of his State and now as chairman of the Committee 
on the Budget and also the chairman of his subcommittee.


                           Amendment No. 1129

  I send to the desk an amendment on behalf of Senator Patty Murray, 
Senator Akaka, and Senator Byrd.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Nevada [Mr. Reid], for himself, Mrs. 
     Murray, Mr. Byrd, and Mr. Akaka, proposes an amendment 
     numbered 1129.

  Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of the 
amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

     SECTION 1. VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION.

       (a) In General.--From any money in the Treasury not 
     otherwise obligated or appropriated, there are appropriated 
     to the Department of Veterans Affairs $1,500,000,000 for the 
     fiscal year ending September 30, 2005, for medical services 
     provided by the Veterans Health Administration, which shall 
     remain available until expended.
       (b) Emergency Designation.--The amount appropriated under 
     subsection (a) is designated as an emergency requirement 
     pursuant to section 402 of H. Con. Res. 95 (109th Congress).
       (c) This section shall take effect on the date of enactment 
     of this Act.

  Mr. REID. I appreciate the managers of the bill allowing me to offer 
this amendment at this time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, the tragic bombings in London are a sober 
reminder of how vulnerable America and our allies remain to terrorism. 
What happened in London last week is likely to be tragically replicated 
if our country does not act boldly to reduce what ought to be called a 
terror tax now imposed on the American people.
  I call it a terror tax because when we pull up to the corner gas 
station and pay $2.40 a gallon or so for gas, the reality is a portion 
of that money is then turned over to foreign governments that ``back 
door'' it over to Islamist extremists who use that money to perpetuate 
terrorism and hate.
  What I call the terror tax is not posted as a price at our gas pump. 
We do not see it in our pay stub. It is not calculated in our balance 
of payments to foreign governments. It is a tax measured not in dollars 
and cents but in risk and insecurity to the American people. It is as 
real as everything else the American people put their money toward each 
week.
  Of the 20 million barrels of oil Americans consume each day, almost 
12 million barrels of it is imported. That percentage, now nearly 60 
percent, is growing. It was only about 33 percent at the time of the 
Arab oil embargo years ago. Our addiction to foreign oil has nearly 
doubled in what amounts to just a few years.
  In the next few weeks, the House and Senate will be sitting down as 
part of an effort to write an Energy bill that must take as its 
priority helping to shake us free of this addiction to foreign oil.
  I voted against the Energy bill in the Senate because I felt it did 
not do enough to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, but I hope, 
especially at this critical time, on a bipartisan basis during this 
conference it will be possible to make this legislation better.
  I believe it is important to do as much as possible to reduce the 
terror tax that comes with our dependence on foreign oil. It is not 
good enough to accept business as usual when our citizens pay record 
prices at the gas pump, only to see foreign governments wink and nod 
while terrorist groups make off with substantial amounts of money and 
use those funds to target the United States. In my view, there is an 
indisputable link not only between the American dependence on foreign 
oil and the price our citizens pay at the pump, but between our oil 
addiction and our vulnerability to attack here at home.
  For this reason, as the House and Senate get together to look at a 
strategy to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, I intend to propose 
five concrete steps to reduce the terror tax.
  First, I want the State Department to publish each year for the next 
10 years a report on the flow of money paid by Americans at the gas 
pump to foreign governments that ends up in the hands of Islamic 
extremists who target America with acts of terror.
  Second, since most foreign oil goes to the transportation sector, I 
want the American automobile industry to be required to increase auto 
efficiency by just 1 mile per gallon each year for the next 10 years. 
Think about what a modest step that is--just 1 mile per gallon. 
Otherwise, the auto industry ought to explain to the American people 
why they cannot meet this objective that I am calling for that is so 
important to the national security of our people.
  Third, for each of the next 10 years, the Energy Department should 
publish a list of the most energy-efficient cars in each of the major 
types of vehicles so the auto industry would have to compete on the 
basis of the most fuel-efficient automobiles.
  Fourth, to increase the responsible production of oil in America, not 
overseas, companies that increase oil production at existing wells 
shall receive a 2-percent annual increase in their tax writeoffs for 
this production for each of the next 10 years that the company 
increases production from existing wells in the United States.
  Finally, this bill must promote new alternatives to oil. I have 
proposed a no-risk way to kick-start efforts to get hydrogen fuel cell 
vehicles on the road within the decade. By creating incentives for 
selling hydrogen vehicles and fuels, we would pay only for performance. 
Only actions that put hydrogen vehicles on the road or provide stations 
to fuel up would qualify for the incentives.
  In the nearer term, other alternatives would become readily 
available. They include cellulosic ethanol made from plant materials 
grown by American farmers as well as electricity

[[Page S7966]]

produced by flexible fuel hybrid electric vehicles that can be plugged 
in as well as refueled at the pump.
  Getting a fair energy bill that reduces our dependence on foreign oil 
is just about the most red, white, and blue step this Congress could 
take. It is absolutely critical if we are to do everything possible to 
ensure our national security. Experts from a range of political stripes 
agree that the single most important step Congress can take to make 
America more secure is to reduce our dangerous dependence on foreign 
oil.
  As a member of the conference committee on the energy bill, I look 
forward to working with my colleagues to secure these commonsense steps 
to end the terror tax brought about as a result of our addiction to 
foreign oil. Doing so is simply a matter of life and death for the 
citizens we respect so much here at home.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, there is now pending on this bill an 
amendment offered by the Democratic leader, Senator Reid, relative to 
the Veterans' Administration. I am not sure how that is going to be 
handled, but clearly the bill becomes tied up in that issue for a 
while. I am not sure whether people are even going to come down and 
debate that amendment, as it was offered last week to the Interior 
bill. I am not really involved in that skirmish, but I do want to bring 
us back to the essence of this bill and the purpose of this bill and 
return to the fact that from my standpoint the biggest concern we have 
to address is weapons of mass destruction. The second biggest concern 
is border security.
  I wish to talk a little bit about border security because I do 
believe this is where the Homeland Security agency can make the largest 
contribution toward trying to make our Nation more secure.
  I know there is a lot of concern out there today about what happened 
in England. But you have to remember that the people who probably 
committed that act in England came from outside of England. They came 
into England with evil intent. In fact, I have seen some early news 
reports which have implied the detonating mechanisms used were of a 
type you could not acquire in England; therefore, it is presumed that 
the people who committed this act came from outside of England. I think 
one can safely assume that, especially in light of 9/11 where the 
people who attacked us came from outside our country, although in some 
instances they came with legal visas.
  So it is critical we get control of our borders. Last year, over 3 
million people came into this country illegally--3 million people. The 
estimate is somewhere between 11 and 15 million people are in this 
country illegally. We know that a large percentage of those people, 
especially people coming across our border with Mexico, are coming here 
because they have a legitimate desire to work in America. They are 
seeking jobs. I guess it is a reflection of the strength of our economy 
and the strength of our Nation that people seek to come to America in 
order to get a better livelihood and to give their families a better 
chance of having a better livelihood.
  Those people are not threats. Those people are here to put in a hard 
day's work and make enough money to have a decent living. In many 
cases, they are doing jobs Americans are unwilling to do. There ought 
to be a way to address that concern, and it ought to be some sort of 
guest worker program. Hopefully, we will address that as a Congress. We 
should address that. I consider it to be one of the primary needs we 
have to address.
  In the context of homeland security, if we could in some way identify 
effectively people who are coming across our borders who are coming not 
with the purpose of ill-intent but with the purpose of having a decent 
job, that would significantly reduce the number of people we would have 
to focus on relative to the threat they present. So a decent and 
intelligent immigration policy in this country, with an effective guest 
worker program, is critical to our national security.
  But that is not the responsibility of the Homeland Security agency. 
The Homeland Security agency's purpose is to actually have the physical 
people on the border who check the people who come across the border 
and stop the people coming across the border illegally. The pile of 
reports I referred to before--the actual plurality of them if not the 
majority of them--reflect the failures of our ability to adequately 
monitor our borders. We have found we are not doing a very good job on 
our borders.

  As I said, 3 million people are coming into the country illegally 
every year--that is the estimate--and over 10 million people who are 
probably here illegally already. A fair percentage of those folks are 
not Mexican. They are coming from another country, but they are coming 
across the Mexican border. And those people may very well represent 
legitimate threats to our country. So we need to do something to 
address this issue.
  There are different levels where we need to address this issue. I 
mentioned the guest worker program would be a major effort in this 
area, but in the area of just plain security, there are initiatives 
that need to be pursued. So what we did was we looked at what was 
happening with our border security effort and concluded there were 
certain programs on the border that needed really significant increase 
in resources in order to be effective.
  Some of them, unfortunately, could not take as much resources as we 
would like to have given them because they simply could not handle it 
effectively. The first was just simply feet on the ground. We need more 
Border Patrol agents on the ground, especially on the southern border. 
That is a feet-on-the-ground issue. Unfortunately, because of the 
training capacity and because of the ability to hire people who want to 
go into the Border Patrol as a career, we cannot add as many people as 
we would like to add.
  As was mentioned by the Senator from West Virginia, there was, 3 or 4 
years ago, a proposal to hire 2,000 a year. What we found was the 
Border Patrol simply could not find the people. And then they could not 
train the people when they did find them. However, we decided a 
significant increase was important. Working with the Senator from West 
Virginia again, in the supplemental, we added 500 new Border Patrol 
agents this year. We have now added another 1,000 agents with this 
bill, for an additional 1,500 agents. So that is actually a little bit 
outside the envelope of what the Border Patrol can effectively train.
  We are also significantly increasing the commitment to the training 
facilities so we can increase training capacity so that next year, when 
we have this bill, it is my intention to add more than 1,500. I hope to 
get up to 2,000 next year. The year after that, I hope to get to 2,500. 
The goal is to get to 10,000 new Border Patrol agents within 5 years. 
Whether we can reach it, I do not know. But if we can get the training 
facilities up, get the infrastructure up that supports these people, 
and get the Border Patrol agents up, then maybe we can do it 
effectively. But the first step is to add these additional 1,500 
agents.
  Now, once you have the Border Patrol physically on the ground, they 
are going to catch people. That is their job. The problem today is that 
when they catch people they have to let them go. They send them over to 
the court, and the court sends them out on their own recognizance. They 
are supposed to return for a court date, and they never return. About 
85 percent of the people who are asked to return do not return. Well, 
that is not too surprising, really. They came here illegally. Why are 
they going to return when they are told they can go away and come back 
on a different date for their court appearance?
  We need better and more capacity in the area of detention. So this 
bill, working with the supplemental, again working with the Senator 
from West Virginia, adds about 4,000 new detention beds. Again, our 
goal is, within a limited period of time--hopefully not 5 years in this 
case, hopefully even less--to be able to detain effectively anybody who 
is caught who is other than a Mexican citizen coming across our border 
with Mexico, to be able to detain that person as long as it is 
necessary to make sure they are not a threat to us. It is something we 
cannot do today. But this bill moves in that direction by adding 4,000 
new beds in this area.

[[Page S7967]]

  We also have the unmanned vehicle program. This program, which is an 
important element of the surveillance of our borders, has fallen on 
hard times. In fact, the vehicles were basically stopped about a year 
and a half ago. They just stopped running them because they were not 
working. They started again, and this bill attempts to get the unmanned 
vehicle program running at a much more aggressive level. This is a 
tremendous opportunity for us to survey the border using fewer 
personnel more efficiently.
  In addition, we have technology on the borders, the video and the 
other types of sensor capability. Again, we have run into major 
technology problems. Contracts were let that should not have been or 
were let ineffectually. One more time we got a bunch of reports on this 
one. While the program has been restarted, this bill tries to make sure 
the program goes forward effectively. This is a fencing issue here. We 
are saying we were going to give you a lot more funds, but we want to 
make sure the funds are spent effectively.

  Also in the area of people coming into this country legitimately who 
actually are going through our immigration entrance system, we have 
very significant issues of being able to track who they are and when 
they come in and when they leave. In order to address that, we are 
trying to set something up called US-VISIT which is a major new 
technology initiative of extreme complexity. Therefore, I recognize it 
is not going to come on line maybe in a perfect way.
  What we are concerned about, speaking for the Senate and for the 
subcommittee, is that the US-VISIT Program, which is going to purchase 
massive amounts of software and hardware capability to go into the 
immigration system, that that program not end up being like the 
programs we have had in other major Federal agencies which have 
initiated major complex IT initiatives, such as the Trilogy Program at 
the FBI, that we not end up being halfway down the road, hundreds of 
millions of dollars having been spent, and we realize we have a program 
that doesn't work. This bill attempts to make sure that the US-VISIT 
Program is being brought on line in a way that we have benchmarks and 
we know the software is meeting the criteria and the regimes that are 
appropriate to that type of software and that the hardware can 
interface with it effectively.
  This bill makes a major initiative in the area of basically putting 
emphasis on the borders, both with the feet-on-the-ground issue, with 
the technology issue, and with the capital infrastructure issue in the 
area of border facilities and detention facilities. Therefore, I think 
it is the right approach. Is it going to get our borders secure 
unilaterally by this effort? Obviously not. But it is a step in the 
right direction and part of the formula that should lead us to borders 
which are more secure.
  The simple fact is, as a nation, we are not going to be able to 
protect ourselves from the significant threat of these individuals who 
will come here for the purposes of killing Americans, and for no other 
purpose, until we get effective control over the borders and know who 
is coming in and why they are coming and make sure we do not allow or 
are able to stop people who are coming into this country whose purpose 
is to commit acts which will harm Americans. This bill is an attempt to 
step down that road in a much more aggressive way.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 1133

  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for 
its consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to setting the pending 
amendment aside?
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending 
amendment be set aside.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Gregg] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 1133.

  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the 
amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

        (Purpose: To increase funding for Firefighter Staffing)

       On page 81, line 22, strike ``For necessary'' down through 
     and including ``tion.'' on line 4, page 82, and insert the 
     following:
       ``For necessary expenses for programs authorized by the 
     Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 
     2201 et seq.), $615,000,000, of which $500,000,000 shall be 
     available to carry out section 33 (15 U.S.C. 2229) and 
     $115,000,000 shall be available to carry out section 34 (15 
     U.S.C. 2229a) of such Act, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2007: Provided, That not to exceed 5 percent of 
     this amount shall be available for program administration.''

  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment 
be agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I will not object to the chairman's 
amendment. We need additional funds for the SAFER Firefighter Hiring 
Program. But this amendment leaves the program to equip and train 
firefighters $150 million below fiscal year 2005. Last year the 
Department received $2.76 billion of eligible applications and could 
only approve 25 percent of the applications. In response to this 
incredible demand for firefighting funds, the bill will cut firefighter 
equipment and training grants from $650 million to $500 million. So 
while I don't oppose the chairman's amendment, I put the Senate on 
notice that I will offer an amendment to restore the cuts in equipment 
and training for our firefighters. I hope the Senate will agree to the 
pending amendment.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I understand the Senator's point. My 
purpose here is to recognize the fact that we put over $2 billion into 
equipment, and we need to start focusing on training. This will move 
$50 million over to the training side and still leave in the pipeline a 
dramatic amount of money for equipment. We can address that issue down 
the road, as the Senator from West Virginia represents he may wish to 
do, but at this point I think this reallocation of funds is a statement 
of policy that is appropriate.
  I again ask unanimous consent that the amendment be agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. BYRD. No objection.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 1133) was agreed to.
  Mr. GREGG. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business for 10 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I will speak at a later point about the 
underlying bill, the Homeland Security appropriations bill. It is an 
important piece of legislation. I say to the manager that I just 
checked with the cloakrooms, and there is nobody coming to speak, so I 
wanted to speak in morning business. I will have an amendment dealing 
with the proposed passport requirements between the United States and 
Canada, and I will address that later.
  (The remarks of Mr. Dorgan are printed in today's Record under 
``Morning Business.'')
  Mr. DORGAN. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

[[Page S7968]]

  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 5:30 this 
afternoon, the Senate proceed to a vote on the adoption of a resolution 
which is at the desk and relates to the recent bombings in London; 
provided further that no amendments be in order to the resolution or 
preamble. I further ask that there be a moment of silence prior to the 
vote on the resolution.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I understand from my colleague from New 
Hampshire that we will be voting on a resolution at 5:30 this evening, 
expressing our condolences to our allies and friends who had to bear 
the brunt of a terrorist attack, an aggressive terrorist attack, in 
London. It is heartbreaking to see the results of these horrible 
attacks against innocent people committed by terrorists who apparently 
are determined to kill innocent people, as many as is possible, to make 
their point, whatever their point is.
  That attack reminds all of us again of how vulnerable we are and how 
important homeland security is, and I think it underscores the 
importance of this appropriations bill. Homeland security is critically 
important. It means we have to have reasonable border security. It 
means we have to have port security and a range of other issues. I want 
to mention two things.
  We have spent a lot of money and a lot of time dealing with security 
of air travel, particularly commercial airlines. Now when you go 
through the lines at the airports, they are searching for tweezers and 
all those items that might be used as weapons. Sometimes there are long 
lines. I know it is frustrating. We have devoted a lot of time and 
effort in this country dealing with the last terror attack in which 15 
of the 19 terrorists were Saudi citizens. Nineteen terrorists drove jet 
airplanes loaded with fuel into buildings to be used as missiles, and 
we are dealing with that a lot. We are spending a lot of money dealing 
with this issue of airport security and aviation security.
  My colleagues, and particularly one of my colleagues who departed the 
Senate, Senator Hollings, have talked a lot about port security. We 
have about 9 million containers coming in on container ships in this 
country in a year--9 million containers in a year. A relatively small 
percentage of those containers are inspected. If, God forbid, 
terrorists should get a hold of a small nuclear weapon, the size of a 
grapefruit or a basketball, and detonate a small nuclear weapon at one 
of our docks in a container on a container ship, it could obliterate an 
American city. Yet we have not spent nearly as much time dealing with 
port security or, for that matter, rail security as we have dealing 
with the issue of security at airports and security in commercial air 
travel. We must do a much better job with respect to ports.
  When we have that many containers coming into our ports with so few 
being inspected, it leaves our country vulnerable.
  I recall visiting a port one day. I come from a State without ports. 
We do not have a water boundary. I was interested so I toured a port in 
a major city. I asked: What is in that container on that ship?
  That is frozen broccoli, they said.
  Is it full of bags of frozen broccoli?
  Yes, it is full of 100-pound bags of frozen broccoli.
  How do you know that? Do you know what is in the middle of that big 
old container?
  No, we just know that is what it says on the bill of lading, frozen 
broccoli.
  What if, God forbid, somehow terrorists acquire a nuclear weapon and 
put that in a refrigerated container on a container ship or any 
container on a container ship destined for one of our country's major 
port cities and detonate that nuclear weapon at the docks in the middle 
of one of America's port cities?
  We must find ways to address those issues, and we have not spent 
nearly the resources necessary to give us adequate security at 
America's ports. We have not spent nearly the resources necessary to 
provide the security with this country's rail system.
  We haul every day, all across this country, toxic material, dangerous 
material all across America. If terrorists were to find a way to deal 
with that and manipulate a terrorist attack in our rail system with the 
kinds of materials that move on our rail system, we would be in a very 
difficult situation.
  As we review this legislation today and tomorrow, we need to continue 
to rethink how do we improve, how do we make the adjustments necessary 
to devote more resources for port security, especially port security 
and rail security.
  I did indicate we do need to control our borders. There is no 
question we need to do that. But I think even the President expressed 
surprise at the suggestion of the Department of Homeland Security that 
with regard to the 4,000-plus-mile common border with Canada, we are 
going to require every person moving back and forth through that common 
border to have a passport.
  In my judgment, that is an impractical way to provide security at 
America's borders. As the President suggested, I hope the Homeland 
Security Agency will rethink that. In our part of the country we have a 
long and common border with Canada. Every day there is a substantial 
amount of commerce coming back and forth. People farm on both sides. 
People work on both sides, do business on both sides. To require a 
passport in both directions would make no sense at all.
  When I began talking about this before 9/11/2001, we had ports of 
entry at the northern border ports that when they closed in the evening 
security consisted only of an orange rubber cone put in the middle of 
the road. The polite ones actually stopped and removed the cone before 
they came across the border. Those who were not so polite would run 
over it at 60 miles an hour.
  So we have made improvements in those areas but much remains to be 
done. I hope as we construct, talk about, and consider amendments to 
this bill, we will finally understand that security means security in 
every area, not just in aviation or commercial airports. The tragic 
attack in London tells us once again how vulnerable some of these areas 
are and I mentioned two today: our rail system, No. 1, and especially 
No. 2, our port system, which renders much of our major and largest 
port cities in this country very vulnerable to a devastating terrorist 
attack. We must and we can and we will do better.
  I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Burr). The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Reid 
amendment be temporarily set aside for the purpose of offering an 
amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 1142

   (Purpose: To provide for homeland security grant coordination and 
                simplification, and for other purposes)

  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I have an amendment at the desk. I call 
up the amendment No. 1142.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Maine [Ms. Collins], for herself and Mr. 
     Lieberman, Mr. DeWine, Mr. Coburn, Mr. Akaka, Mr. Carper, Mr. 
     Salazar, Mr. Coleman, and Mr. Voinovich, proposes an 
     amendment numbered 1142.

  Ms. COLLINS. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be 
dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of 
Amendments.'')
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today with my good friend, Senator 
Lieberman, to offer an amendment to the Homeland Security 
appropriations bill. Let me note at the outset my appreciation for the 
work that Senator

[[Page S7969]]

Lieberman has done on this issue. He and I have worked together with 
members of the Homeland Security Subcommittee for the past 3 years on 
this authorization to develop an improved homeland security funding 
approach based on extensive hearings we have held, much consultation, 
and hard work by our committee.
  We are pleased to be joined by several cosponsors, including Senators 
Carper, Coleman, Akaka, Voinovich, DeWine, Bingaman, and Salazar.
  The amendment we offer would for the first time authorize a framework 
for the billions of dollars the Department of Homeland Security 
allocates each year to assist first responders and State and local 
officials in helping to prevent terrorism and to prepare for an attack. 
That important point bears repeating. The more than $8 billion that 
Congress has appropriated for grants to States and localities for 
terrorism prevention and response since 9/11 has never been 
definitively authorized.
  This is not a matter of an authorization having expired, which 
happens quite frequently around here, but rather of a multibillion-
dollar program that has never been authorized. This is highly unusual. 
In fact, my staff checked with CRS, which went back a decade and could 
not find a single other grant program over $1 billion that has never 
been authorized. Sure the appropriators have borrowed a funding formula 
from the PATRIOT Act, although the bill before us does not use that 
formula, but in truth the appropriators have had to legislate the 
details of the Homeland Security Grant Program year after year. So, for 
example, the House-passed version of this year's Homeland Security 
appropriations bill determines the minimum allocation that each State 
is to receive, establishes a strict timeframe for applications to be 
submitted and for the Department to act on them, requires 80 percent of 
the grants to be passed on by States to local governments within 60 
days, determines for what funds can and cannot be used, and requires 
grantees to submit reports on their use of funds. That is a lot of 
legislative language on the House-passed appropriations bills, and 
indeed the Senate version before us contains similar legislative 
provisions.
  These are the kinds of programmatic decisions that Congress is 
supposed to determine through authorization bills, not each year anew 
on an appropriations bill. What Senator Lieberman and I are offering 
today is the specific, detailed authorization bill that this program 
has never had. Frankly, we would prefer not to do this, not to offer it 
to the appropriations bill. We believe our legislation, S. 21, which is 
the product of numerous legislative hearings, two markups, and input 
from countless interested parties and many homeland security experts, 
should be considered by the full Senate on its own. The House recently 
passed a companion measure. S. 21 is on the Senate calendar, having 
been reported by the Homeland Security Subcommittee without dissent on 
April 13. But there are no assurances that it will be brought to the 
Senate floor. So we are offering our authorization bill as an amendment 
to this appropriations measure.
  Although Senate rule XVI generally prohibits authorizing on an 
appropriations bill, ironically there is an exception when the House 
has, in essence, opened the door by legislating on the matter in its 
own bill. That is what has happened here, so we believe that rule XVI 
is not implicated.

  Mr. President, you may be saying, Why does this really matter? What 
is important about this bill that it should be brought up rather than 
allowing the situation to continue with slight tweaks and variations 
and new legislative language on the appropriations bill, year after 
year? Let me talk about the amendment, which is the text of S. 21 as 
reported, with a few changes.
  The amendment establishes a new formula for distributing homeland 
security grant dollars. It determines how funds are to be allocated, 
sets criteria to ensure that the funds are spent in ways that help 
States and communities develop essential capabilities to prevent and 
respond to terrorism, and it holds grantees responsible for achieving 
results.
  Perhaps the amendment's most important provisions are those that 
inject needed accountability measures into the grants process. We have 
all heard the horror stories about inappropriate spending of homeland 
security funds. This waste is intolerable, but particularly so when 
there are so many unmet needs that are scrambling for funds--needs 
where the funding simply is not available. Our amendment will put into 
place tough new standards to ensure that homeland security funds are 
spent wisely and in ways that will help us better prepare for, or 
respond to, or prevent a terrorist attack.
  Let me refer to this chart which summarizes the accountability 
measures that are included in the Collins-Lieberman provisions. The 
first is tying spending to standards. This amendment requires that 
States distribute and spend homeland security funds only in ways that 
measurably help them meet preparedness standards and achieve essential 
capabilities to be determined by the Department of Homeland Security. 
In other words, no more spending homeland security dollars on leather 
jackets in the District of Columbia or air-conditioned garbage trucks 
in New Jersey. For that matter, even purchases of perfectly appropriate 
items such as hazmat suits must be tied to achieving essential 
capabilities set by the Department. This safeguard is designed to 
prevent a community from purchasing equipment that it has no reasonable 
expectation of needing. I know this is an issue with which the chairman 
of the subcommittee, Senator Gregg, has been particularly concerned.
  The second accountability measure is a thorough annual audit by the 
General Accounting Office to ensure that funds are not being wasted and 
that the program is working as intended.
  Third is greater coordination among the many grant programs that fund 
prevention and response efforts. Our amendment would create a Federal 
interagency committee to promote coordination of homeland security 
grants throughout the Federal Government. In particular, this committee 
would focus on eliminating redundant application, planning, and 
reporting requirements faced by States, local governments, and first 
responders in applying for and executing different Federal homeland 
security-related grants.
  Fourth are robust reporting requirements. These are the means by 
which accountability can be enforced. The amendment requires grant 
recipients to submit annual reports on their specific uses of grant 
funds and their progress in achieving essential capabilities. These 
reports would be submitted to the Secretary. The Secretary, in turn, 
would be required to submit an annual report to Congress, providing an 
accounting of how grants to States and communities are spent and an 
evaluation of their progress.
  Fifth are the remedies for noncompliance, what I call the enforcement 
mechanisms. The amendment empowers the Secretary to terminate or reduce 
grant payments if a State or locality fails to comply with all the 
requirements of the grant.
  In addition to these tough new accountability measures, our amendment 
authorizes a funding amount that is adequate and a distribution formula 
that is fair. This legislation dramatically increases the funds that 
would be distributed based on threat, risk, and consequences. It also 
maintains a meaningful level of funding for each State. Much of the 
frontline responsibility for homeland security has fallen squarely on 
the shoulders of our State and local officials and our Nation's more 
than 9 million first responders. Communities across America have risen 
to this challenge and developed scores of innovative homeland security 
strategies. For these strategies to be implemented, however, all States 
must achieve a baseline level of essential capabilities. At the same 
time, we must direct resources toward locations and facilities that are 
at higher levels of risk and vulnerability.
  Both of these goals--helping each and every State come up to a 
minimum level of preparedness and targeting funds to those areas and 
facilities at greatest risk--require an adequate, steady, and 
predictable stream of Federal funding. Absent that stream, we find 
ourselves in an escalating argument over whether these resources are 
being allocated and spent properly.
  Unfortunately, this argument increasingly pits our urban centers 
against our rural regions. We believe the bill that we have carefully 
crafted strikes the right balance.

[[Page S7970]]

  Let me acknowledge the hard work of Senators Gregg and Byrd in 
putting together this appropriations bill. We share with them the goal 
of a fair formula for allocating funds to States while increasing the 
proportion of funds that would be distributed based on risk, but the 
problem is unpredictability. We ask States to prepare multiyear plans 
for improving their homeland security capabilities and yet each year we 
threaten to develop a new formula for distributing Homeland Security 
grant dollars. That is why in supporting our legislation, S 21, the 
National Governors Association underscored the need for the 
predictability that our amendment would provide.

  On the chart behind me is a quotation from the Governor's letter. It 
reads as follows:

       To effectively protect our states and territories from 
     potential terrorists events, all sectors of government must 
     be part of an integrated plan to prevent, deter, respond to 
     and recover from a terrorist act. For the plan to work, it is 
     essential that it be funded through a predictable and 
     sustainable mechanism both during its development, and in its 
     implementation. A minimum allocation to each state and 
     multiyear authorization levels of funding will provide the 
     predictability necessary to implement statewide plans that 
     will assist governors in securing our nation.

  This is, after all, a partnership with first responders, with local 
governments, and with State governments.
  Our amendment would provide the predictability States need to protect 
our Nation. First, our amendment authorized a sufficient level to 
reverse the trend of declining Homeland Security funding by authorizing 
the program at the fiscal year 2004 level of $2.9 billion. As the chart 
behind me demonstrates, funding for first responders is on the decline 
by $900 million from 2004 to the level proposed in the President's 
budget. We were reminded just last week that the war against terrorism 
has not been won. The battle continues. It is our first responders who 
are on the front lines. Do we truly believe that now, during a period 
of heightened alert, is the time to scale back our efforts in 
preventing and responding to terrorist attacks? I think not.
  Our amendment also incorporates a balanced formula. Each State would 
be guaranteed a minimum allocation of .55 percent of the total funds 
appropriated for State and urban area grants. The minimum, however, is 
scaled so that States with larger populations and higher population 
densities would receive additional funds. We call this a sliding scale 
baseline. It will promote a level of preparedness and provide 
predictability. The remainder of the total funds would be distributed 
to States and regions based on the Secretary's determination of risk 
and threat.
  As this chart shows, the amendment makes a grant investment in 
threat-based funding. It increases the proportion of risk-based funding 
by more than 60 percent. Moreover, under our sliding scale distribution 
using factors the Department of Homeland Security employs now in its 
risk-based approach, another 10.7 percent of appropriated funds would 
be allocated only to the most populous and most densely populated 
States.
  These are important steps toward bridging that urban-rural divide, 
and they balance the need for predictability for bringing each State up 
to a minimum level of preparedness with a heightened emphasis on 
allocating funds based on threat, risk, and consequences.
  As the ranking member on our committee well knows, since he has 
joined with me in all of these investigations, the choice must not be 
between protecting skyscrapers or farms and feedlots that provide our 
food supply, or chemical plants and industrial zones versus the rural 
communities that trucks and trains carrying those hazardous chemicals 
pass through. All funds beyond those necessary to cover the baseline 
allocations, more than 60 percent of the total, would be distributed 
based on the relative threat, vulnerability, and consequences faced by 
an area from a terrorist attack. From this funding pool, the Secretary 
would make threat-based grants to both States and metropolitan regions.
  My colleague from Connecticut feels strongly about taking a regional 
approach to homeland security. In allocating the risk-based formula, 
the Secretary would prioritize grants with consideration given to such 
factors as population, population density, critical infrastructure, 
coastlines, international borders, previous terrorist attacks, elevated 
threat levels higher than the rest of the Nation, as well as other 
factors he deems appropriate.
  While allowing judgment on the part of the Secretary, we specifically 
delineated some of the critical factors--the ones I just read--that the 
Department must take into account. In doing so, we take some of the 
mystery out of the black box from which DHS now seems to generate some 
of its funding decisions, decisions that result, for example, in 
Minneapolis receiving funding but not St. Paul.
  One of the most disturbing aspects of the urban-rural argument is the 
assertion often made that locations outside of our largest cities have 
no significant homeland security needs. This is demonstrably untrue. It 
ignores a great deal of expertise. It ignores our history.

  A recent study conducted by the Harvard School for Public Health, 
with coleadership by the Maine Department of Health and Human Services 
and participation by 26 States, shows that rural areas face unique and 
profound homeland security challenges. A great many power and water 
supplies as well as virtually our entire food supply are located 
outside of urban areas. Work our committee has done on agro-terrorism 
shows the potential threat to our food supply. In addition, rural areas 
have far less capacity to deal with a terrorist attack or a public 
health crisis.
  In a letter describing its commercial equipment direct assistance 
program, the Department of Homeland Security itself wrote:

       When they face the common threat of terrorism, the needs of 
     smaller jurisdictions are very different from the needs of 
     larger metropolitan areas. Smaller agencies confront threats 
     to the transportation infrastructure, agriculture, water 
     supplies, power grids and other critical items spread out 
     over a wide geographic area.

  I will highlight the next statement because the events preceding 
September 11 show it is so true:

       Terrorists may live and train in rural communities. Targets 
     such as pipelines and nuclear power plants are typically 
     located in smaller jurisdictions.

  Indeed, among the most striking aspects of the report of the 9/11 
Commission is the extent to which the terrorists did live, organize, 
and train in America's smaller communities. The contacts they had with 
smaller law enforcement agencies before the September 11 attacks are 
striking, as well.
  As the committee reconstituted the movements of the terrorists after 
they arrived in the United States, the trail led to such places as 
Venice and Coral Springs, FL, Norman, OK, Falls Church, VA, 
Lawrenceville and Stone Mountain, GA and, of course, most personal to 
me, Portland, ME. It was Portland, ME from which two of the hijackers, 
including the ringleader, began their journey of death and destruction 
on September 11. It is not just the large cities that attract those who 
would do us harm. Indeed, often they feel more secure in hiding in our 
smaller cities and communities.
  As we seek to ensure that our communities, large and small, are 
prepared to respond to a terrorist attack, we must not lose sight of 
the need for prevention. Our amendment ensures that the prevention of 
terrorist attacks, not just response efforts, receives a significant 
share of Homeland Security funds. This is an area that law enforcement 
groups tell us over and over again has been neglected.
  Our amendment ensures that the prevention of terrorist attacks 
receives significant funds. It would for the first time authorize the 
Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program which funds prevention 
activities by State and local law enforcement. Under the amendment, 25 
percent of Homeland Security grant funding would be used for law 
enforcement terrorism prevention, including information sharing, target 
hardening, threat recognition, terrorist intervention activities, 
interoperable communication, and overtime expenses incurred in support 
of Federal homeland security efforts.
  The International Association of Chiefs of Police recently released a 
report that put it very well. They warned:


[[Page S7971]]


       In our national efforts to develop the capacity to respond 
     to and recover from a terrorist attack we have failed to 
     focus on the importance of building our capacity to prevent a 
     terrorist attack in the first place.

  We are never going to be able to protect every single target in this 
country. That is why we have to pay attention to the prevention, the 
detection, the law enforcement side, as well as the response side.
  Because of our bill's emphasis on terrorism prevention, it has been 
endorsed by the National Association of Police Organizations, the 
International Association of Chiefs Of Police, the International Union 
of Police Associations, the National Troopers Coalition, the United 
Federation of Police Officers, the International Brotherhood of Police 
Officers, the Fraternal Order of Police, and the National Organization 
of Black Law Enforcement Executives among others.
  NAPO is the strongest voice supporting law enforcement officers in 
the United States, representing more than 236,000 sworn law enforcement 
officers as well as retired officers, and 100,000 citizens who share a 
common dedication to fair and effective crime control and law 
enforcement. They, too, have pointed out in a letter to Senator 
Lieberman and me that we need to be sure State and local law 
enforcement are properly supported, trained, and equipped to prevent 
terrorism before it occurs.
  I do not believe we can allocate Homeland Security dollars 
effectively and efficiently unless we listen to and learn from the 
advice of our law enforcement officers and other first responders. 
Guided by a task force of first responders, the Secretary would 
establish the essential capabilities I referred to earlier to ensure 
that first responders have the support they need.
  Preventing and responding to terrorism is a national challenge, but 
preventing and responding to specific acts of terrorism in the urgency 
of the moment is a regional challenge. We saw this after the September 
11 attack on the Pentagon and in New York City when first responders 
from outlying communities rushed in to make invaluable and heroic 
contributions to the rescue operation.

  We saw it again in simulation at the TOPOFF 3 exercise I observed 
earlier this year with Senator Lieberman. This incident was a simulated 
explosion and chemical attack at a waterfront festival in New London, 
CT. The contributions by first responders from the outlying smaller 
communities were enormous, but their efforts were hampered by a lack of 
interoperable communications equipment.
  Senator Lieberman and I saw some first responders who were carrying 
as many as three emergency radios, which slowed the evacuation of those 
who were playing the injured parties to hospitals throughout the 
region. In a real attack, these delays--that incompatibility of 
equipment--would have had devastating consequences.
  Regional planning and coordination are essential, and our amendment 
would shift the focus of local funding from individual cities to 
metropolitan regions. Unlike the current Urban Area Security Initiative 
under which DHS simply announces a list of cities it has selected to 
fund, our amendment would establish an application process for 
metropolitan region funding.
  In applying for funding, communities would be given considerable 
flexibility in forming regions that would make the most sense locally. 
Our amendment provides that the regions within the 100 largest 
metropolitan statistical areas would automatically be eligible to 
apply, with additional regions eligible under certain circumstances.
  Our amendment would also allow for regional coalitions--even those 
spanning multiple States--to apply for grant funding together to 
address common needs. I think this would lead to real breakthroughs in 
strategy.
  Let me give you a concrete example. Several Midwestern States are 
joining together to take steps to prevent and, if necessary, respond to 
acts of agroterrorism. That is exactly the kind of project that our 
amendment would provide for and fund. Under current law, these States 
could not seek funds as a group despite the common threats they face 
and the common solutions they seek. Our amendment breaks out of this 
rigid mold to allow States, counties, cities, tribes, and other 
governmental units to think regionally and creatively as they seek to 
prevent and prepare for terrorist attacks.
  Our amendment would also put the State and local homeland security 
planning process where it belongs, on the front end. This legislation 
requires State and local jurisdictions to plan for how funds will be 
spent before the funds arrive. Currently, much of the deliberative 
planning on how funds will be spent is done on the back end, only after 
DHS has allocated grants to States and urban areas.
  Moreover--and this actually is another safeguard--our bill would 
require States to spend money according to State plans approved by the 
Department of Homeland Security. More advanced funding means funds will 
be spent more quickly and according to a coherent strategy.
  Whenever I meet with first responders, whether it is in my home State 
of Maine or elsewhere, I am always struck by the fact that very few of 
these brave, dedicated men and women first went into law enforcement, 
firefighting, or emergency medical services ever thinking they would 
end up on the front lines of a war against terrorism. They have been 
handed an unprecedented and unimaginable challenge, and they have 
accepted it bravely and willingly. They deserve the equipment, 
training, planning, input, accountability, and stability that our 
amendment would provide. They deserve to have this critical program 
that is so essential to the security of our Nation properly authorized, 
funded, and designed.
  Thank you, Mr. President.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I am proud to be a cosponsor with 
Chairman Collins of this amendment. I want to speak on its behalf.


                       Thanking Senate Colleagues

  Mr. President, I do want to say on a personal matter, very briefly, 
this is the first day I have returned to the Senate since my mother, 
Marcia Manger Lieberman, left this Earth on June 26. The following week 
I was observing a period of mourning.
  We were blessed to have Mom live to the age of 90. She taught us a 
lot of lessons throughout life: how faith and family and community 
matter most. We are going to miss her, of course. But I want to take 
this moment to thank all my colleagues who reached out to me and my 
family, including the occupant of the chair, the Senator from North 
Carolina, Mr. Burr, and my friend and colleague from Maine, Senator 
Collins.
  I thank you and everyone else for your calls and your letters and 
flowers and baskets of food, all of which were a source of great 
strength and comfort to my family, my sisters and me, and honor the 
memory of the great lady I was blessed to have as my mom. So I thank 
you all for that.


                           Amendment No. 1142

  Mr. President, Mom, most of all, would say: Life goes on. Every day 
get up and make the most of it. So I am very honored to have the 
opportunity on this day to join with Senator Collins in offering this 
amendment.
  This amendment tracks S. 21, the Homeland Security Grants Enhancement 
Act, which was reported out of the Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs Committee in April with strong bipartisan support. Senator 
Collins and I believe that the ideas the committee endorsed represent 
the most balanced, constructive approach to supporting those all across 
America whom we ask to protect the rest of us from harm.
  This amendment accomplishes many things, including the doubling of 
the amount of money that will be delivered to States and localities 
most at risk. It reduces the potential for waste. It authorizes 
adequate funding for our Nation's first responders whom the Senator 
from Maine has spoken of so eloquently. It establishes, for the first 
time, a comprehensive framework for supporting homeland security 
efforts by fully authorizing the essential grants programs that each 
year have, unfortunately, been left to the whims of the appropriations 
process and have left people all across America uncertain.

  These are essential reforms to our grants process, made even more 
compelling by the knowledge--underscored by last week's bombing in 
London--that terrorists are out there, that they

[[Page S7972]]

will strike, and that we are involved in a world war. It is not like 
any world war before. But this enemy has a mission. It is to destroy as 
many of us as they can. And they will choose the battlefields, where 
they will choose them.
  This amendment responds to that threat in a most direct and sensible 
way. We direct more money to the places that are at greatest risk of 
terrorist attack, that are most vulnerable, and where the consequences 
of an attack would be, obviously, disruptive to the people, to our 
economic well-being, and to our very way of life. In other words, the 
terrorists obviously strike without regard to the loss of life, 
innocent life, but they also want to disrupt our society and create 
fear.
  This amendment responds to that threat in two ways: First, by 
guaranteeing a higher baseline level of funding to the largest and most 
densely populated States, States that are likely to be at more risk of 
attack and to suffer greater consequences if they are attacked and, 
second, by substantially increasing the funds we entrust to the 
Homeland Security Secretary's discretion to allocate based on an 
assessment of risk.
  A key part of this amendment is also a desire to balance support for 
those cities and States at high risk without sacrificing the security 
of locations that may not be on the top of a target list today but 
could very well be in the future. That is because this amendment 
recognizes what I said a moment ago, that the terrorists aim to break 
our confidence, to create panic, to take advantage of the openness of 
our society. This is a big country. As a result, no matter how good our 
intelligence is, we cannot be certain that in every case--maybe even in 
most cases--we will be on notice about where the terrorists might 
strike next.
  This amendment recognizes the fact that terrorists alter their 
methods of destruction, of murder, that one day they may strike 
fortified targets such as military facilities, as they have in Iraq and 
in Lebanon, and the next day they may strike soft targets, as they have 
and did when they blew up a discotheque in Indonesia or took hostages 
and brought an end to life at a school in Beslan, Russia.
  Common sense, therefore, requires us to continue to build basic 
capacity to prevent and respond to attacks wherever they may occur in 
this country. And that means everywhere in this country. To build that 
capacity over time, State and local officials need some predictability 
of funding. They need to know when and how much assistance they are 
likely to receive from year to year if they are to do what their 
citizens expect them to do: to plan and carry out the best possible 
homeland security throughout America. This is a difficult balance to 
reach. But I feel confident that the Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs Committee has achieved that balance in this amendment.
  First, we double the amount of dollars over current levels for grants 
based on risk. I want to emphasize that because some have criticized 
the committee action, saying we do not pay attention to the experts' 
predictions of risk. The fact is, we set aside over 60 percent of the 
total amount authorized in this measure to distribute to States and 
cities considered to be most vulnerable to a terrorist attack.
  The rest of the money would be used to guarantee a minimum level of 
preparedness in every State, although more highly or densely populated 
States would get more money. So each State would be guaranteed a 
minimum of 0.55 percent of the total amount appropriated. The high- and 
dense-population States get a little bit more.
  Beyond these formula changes, the amendment would streamline the 
State homeland security grant process, require better planning and 
therefore better spending, and add a dose of reality to the grants 
distribution process. Unlike the Department's current opaque and 
changeable approach for distributing the so-called Urban Area Security 
Initiative grants, this amendment, the Collins-Lieberman amendment, 
would allow metropolitan regions to apply for funding. The 100 largest 
metropolitan areas could apply. They enter automatically this pool of 
eligibles. And others could submit applications with the consent of 
their Governor and the Homeland Security Secretary.
  Each applicant would have an opportunity to make its own case based 
on its specific risks, vulnerabilities, and needs. The Department of 
Homeland Security would award the grants based on merit. There would be 
no arbitrary limits on funding to areas that demonstrate they are at 
risk, such as the population cutoff the Department instituted this past 
year, saying that if you are not larger than a certain number of people 
you cannot qualify for the Urban Area Security Initiative, even if you 
have uniquely vulnerable assets, facilities in that area that in the 
normal course of exercise of due diligence would require extra support.
  Our amendment would encourage cooperative planning and execution 
across jurisdictional lines by allowing at least two contiguous 
jurisdictions to submit a regional application. In addition to 
dedicating funding for the largest metropolitan areas in the country, 
our amendment would, for the first time, allow States to apply for 
risk-based funding and to make the case to the Secretary that there are 
threats to their jurisdiction that require additional grant money to 
address.
  Another critical element of our amendment would be to require the 
Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, in consultation with 
a task force of State and local first responders, to establish what we 
call essential capabilities--in other words, targets for the levels and 
quality of planning, people, and equipment different types of 
communities need to prevent, prepare for, and respond to acts of 
terrorism and other catastrophic events.
  These essential capabilities will provide guidance to States and 
localities, but they also provide benchmarks for measuring State and 
national progress in achieving preparedness. Other accountability 
measures--because we are authorizing a lot of money to be spent here 
for a good reason, but we are requiring accountability as to how it is 
spent--include, for instance, an annual GAO audit and new, more robust 
reporting requirements for grant recipients and for the Department of 
Homeland Security. This amendment would also give the Secretary the 
authority to terminate or revoke grants if a recipient doesn't comply 
with the accompanying requirements.
  We honor the old proverb that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound 
of cure. That is why, in the very contemporary context of the threat of 
terrorism, our amendment dedicates 25 percent of authorized funds to 
strengthen law enforcement efforts that are made to prevent attacks 
before they occur. We have 700,000 pairs of eyes and ears on the ground 
in every community across this Nation. What am I speaking about? Local 
law enforcement officers. They are our foot soldiers, our boots on the 
ground in the war on terrorism. But too often, up until now, they have 
been left on the sidelines. The brake that stops that next attack on 
New York, Washington, Los Angeles or any small or mid-size community 
across America may well come from the alert work of a police officer 
many thousands of miles away.
  Senator Collins mentioned some of the small communities across 
America that tragically played critical roles, inadvertently, in all 
the activity that led up to the September 11 attacks against us. We 
quite simply cannot afford to waste the talents of any law enforcement 
officer in America. So we have to do what we can to facilitate, 
encourage, and support their vigilance on our behalf.
  Finally, our amendment authorizes $2.9 billion in funding for fiscal 
years 2006 and 2007. That is the same level--not higher--as provided in 
fiscal year 2004. Unfortunately, the trend for State homeland security 
funding is pointing down, not up, even as we understand that the threat 
remains at least as great as it has been up until now, perhaps even 
greater. But at least a $2.9 billion authorization will send a strong 
message that we will provide reliable and consistent funding to get the 
job done at the local level and the State level, that we will not begin 
to chip away at the funds that our allies at the State and local level 
can expect from the Federal Government.
  Our amendment improves upon the current approach and upon the 
approach spelled out--I say with respect--in the underlying 
appropriations bill. That is why the Collins-

[[Page S7973]]

Lieberman amendment has received support, for which the Senator from 
Maine and I are grateful and honored, from the National Association of 
Police Organizations, the International Association of Chiefs of 
Police, the International Union of Police Associations, the National 
Troopers Coalition, the National Fire Protection Association, the 
National Association of Development Organizations, and many others--all 
support this amendment. This is an expression of support. Indeed, I 
think it should be taken as a plea for support by these organizations 
that represent a broad swath of law enforcement officers at the State 
and local level across America.
  This amendment is a considered approach to the administration and 
distribution of homeland security grants. We believe it strikes the 
right balance between not only risk and population, high-risk areas, 
according to the experts, and other areas that may well be at risk as 
we go forward, but also risks between providing flexibility and 
ensuring accountability. Most importantly, it provides our Nation's 
first responders, who are also first preventers in our war against 
terrorism, with a solid, long-term platform of support.
  It has, once again, been a great pleasure to work with my friend and 
colleague, Senator Collins of Maine, chairman of our committee. We were 
grateful for the overwhelming bipartisan support of the committee for 
this measure when it came out of committee as S. 21. We thank our 
colleagues for that.
  I thank the Chair and yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maine.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I thank my friend and colleague from 
Connecticut for his excellent statement. We have worked very hard on 
this issue for the past 3 years. It is my hope that our colleagues will 
recognize the work that has gone into this measure, whether it is 
coming up with a fair and balanced--I guess that phrase maybe has 
weight toward it--carefully crafted formula or whether it is the 
accountability measures that are in the bill that I also believe are so 
important. Another member of our committee who has been a stalwart 
supporter of the bill and has worked very hard in shaping many of its 
provisions from his perspective as a former mayor of a major city is 
our colleague from Minnesota, Senator Coleman. I am very pleased he is 
here to speak on behalf of the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
  Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues, the chairman from 
Maine and the ranking member from Connecticut, for the hard work they 
have done in working in a bipartisan way and coming up with important, 
practical, commonsense ways to deal with the threats to homeland 
security that deal with the threats to major urban centers, that deal 
with the opportunity--I want to talk about this a little bit today--and 
the importance of working on a regional basis.
  As a Senator from Minnesota, I represent the Twin Cities. I will talk 
a little bit about the Twin Cities, Minneapolis and St. Paul, the 
experience they had dealing with the urban area security initiatives 
under the present system. The system needs improvement.
  I rise today to offer my support for the bipartisan amendment offered 
by Senator Collins and Senator Lieberman that will streamline and 
rationalize the State homeland security grant process. My State has a 
wide range of homeland security interests. We share an international 
border with Canada. We have two major cities in Minneapolis and St. 
Paul. We have two nuclear reactors in Red Wing and Monticello. We have 
a major port in the city of Duluth on Lake Superior, connected through 
the Great Lakes system to the St. Lawrence Seaway and the Atlantic 
Ocean.
  Unfortunately, Minnesota witnessed an average 48-percent reduction in 
the allocation of Federal homeland security dollars for this year. In 
addition, when the urban security initiative grants were first 
announced, Minneapolis's funding was cut from $12.2 million to $5.7 
million, and St. Paul's funding was completely eliminated. I am not 
here to complain about cuts in funding. I am here to raise concerns 
about the present system, as my colleague from Connecticut discussed, 
how opaque and changeable it is, and the difficulty of urban centers in 
planning to meet homeland security needs.
  As my colleague from Maine indicated, I am a former mayor. I had 
hands-on involvement in this process. You need a greater measure of 
certainty. When you talk about communities such as Minneapolis-St. 
Paul, it is important to understand that you are dealing with regional 
concerns, that you cannot cut out one city because it is slightly 
smaller in size than the other city. I grew up on the east coast. I 
moved to the Midwest 31 years ago. When I moved to the Midwest, when I 
moved to St. Paul 1976, my mom, who was still in Brooklyn, thought the 
Twin Cities were Minneapolis and Indianapolis. She didn't realize it 
was Minneapolis and St. Paul. I excuse my mom. She didn't spend a lot 
of time out of Brooklyn in those days. But I expect more from the 
Department of Homeland Security. And in 2004 and 2005, anyone who looks 
at a map knows the Twin Cities and understands they work hand in hand. 
They are regional centers. They are divided by the Mississippi River, 
but they are connected essentially. They share a bus system, an 
airport, a land grant university. They both have significant major fire 
departments that coordinate with each other, particularly in dealing 
with issues of hazardous materials. The two cities work together on 
responses for infectious disease outbreaks and other public health 
threats.
  Fortunately, the Department of Homeland Security, after much concern 
was raised by the process this year, granted St. Paul eligibility to 
share in Minneapolis's funding for this year. I don't think you can 
have effective homeland security when cities endure wild fluctuations 
in funding such as the 71-percent reduction the Twin Cities face this 
year. So the Collins-Lieberman amendment makes common sense, practical 
changes to the homeland security grant process to ensure continuity and 
accountability in terms of money distributed to States and cities.
  Again, you can't do homeland security well if you are involved in a 
process that is opaque, that is changeable, that is prone to the wild 
fluctuations. This amendment wisely encourages regional cooperation by 
moving the focus of local funding from individual cities to 
metropolitan regions. Again, the Twin Cities are an ideal example of 
that. The reality is that, God forbid we faced a major terrorist attack 
in the Twin Cities or in one of the surrounding suburban areas, the 
Mall of America, one of the largest tourist attractions in the United 
States, 35 million people a year right outside the Twin Cities, if that 
were ever subject to a terrorist attack, clearly the departments of 
Minneapolis and St. Paul would be responding to those concerns. That is 
the world in which we live. We cannot isolate ourselves and live in 
little bubbles anymore. So the importance of focusing on the regional 
level reflects the reality of the world in which we live and the 
geographical reality, and it simply makes sense.
  Under the new formula, communities are given considerable flexibility 
in forming regions that make the most sense locally. I would encourage 
other areas such as Minneapolis-St. Paul to do that, to understand that 
it is important to be able to combine resources, to maximize resources 
to deal with common threats to the region. Within the amendment, a 
region must be made up of two or more neighboring municipalities, 
counties, parishes or Indian tribes and must include the largest city 
in the metropolitan area. This will enable cities such as Minneapolis 
and St. Paul to be considered as one region rather than separate 
entities and benefit from the same funding stream. This makes sense.
  For our Nation to be prepared, all States must be able to meet a 
basic level of preparedness. This amendment will double the funds that 
would be distributed based on threat, risk, and need while maintaining 
a predictable and meaningful level of funding for each State.
  A predictable stream of funding is critical for States and local and 
tribal jurisdictions to embark on a long-term strategy of preparedness. 
That is the path we are on in a world in which we are so much more 
vulnerable. We need to plan as well as we can--plan for the long term--
and to have a strategy of

[[Page S7974]]

preparedness and to encourage cities and municipalities, counties, 
parishes, and Indian tribes to work together to meet the threats that 
are out there.
  We currently require States to submit 3-year plans to the Department 
of Homeland Security and it is unrealistic to expect States to 
effectively plan ahead without providing some certainty on the funding 
they should expect to receive.
  This amendment also creates new audit provisions, requires mandatory 
reporting, coordination among grant programs at different Federal 
agencies, and that individual expenditures be tied to achieving 
nationally established essential capabilities. So we are tying funding 
to meeting needs that are out there, tying funding to maximizing 
coordination, tying funding to achieving certain levels of 
preparedness. Tying spending to achieving national preparedness goals 
and holding States accountable to how funds are spent will prevent 
wasteful expenditures on other items that are not needed. Homeland 
security funding is not simply about getting more equipment in a 
Federal agency; it is not a Christmas tree; it is meeting needs. What 
we have in this amendment is to measure and make sure spending is tied 
to meeting the levels of preparedness and effectiveness. Requiring 
coordination among different Federal grant programs for first 
responders will prevent recipients from purchasing duplicative or 
incompatible equipment or training. The bottom line is that homeland 
security dollars will be spent more wisely and effectively, and that is 
what we should be doing.
  This amendment is a great step forward in terms of contributing funds 
on a regional basis and ensuring that communities have the tools they 
need to work together to provide greater security for their residents. 
I look forward to supporting this amendment today and I urge my 
colleagues to support it as well.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the amendment 
offered by Senators Collins and Lieberman that would provide for 
homeland security grant coordination and simplification. I wish to 
thank them both for working with me and the other Members of the Senate 
Committee on Indian Affairs to include a provision in their amendment 
that is very important to Indian Country.
  This amendment is based on S. 21, the Homeland Security Grant 
Enhancement Act, a bill that was reported out of the Homeland Security 
and Governmental Affairs Committee favorably and of which I am an 
original cosponsor. S. 21 recognizes that no State is immune to 
terrorist attack by requiring that each State receive at minimum .55 
percent of appropriated funding. This is important to States like 
Hawaii that are smaller in population, but still have critical assets 
that need to be protected.
  The Collins-Lieberman amendment also ensures that Indian tribes have 
access to homeland security funding. With more than 50 million acres of 
land comprising Indian Country, which includes dams, hydroelectric 
facilities, nuclear power generating plants, oil and gas pipelines, 
transportation corridors of railroad and highway systems, and 
communications towers, tribal governments need to have funds to protect 
and respond to threats of terrorism. Although the Homeland Security Act 
of 2002 included tribal governments in the definition of ``local 
governments,'' this distinction has not guaranteed that tribal 
governments are consulted or involved in the protection of the United 
States. Nor does the act ensure that Indian Country will receive 
critical information regarding potential terrorist threats, and more 
importantly, the act does not give tribal governments the authority to 
detain potential terrorists who are found in Indian Country.
  While the amendment does not fully address the homeland security 
problems that some tribal governments are experiencing, it is a 
bipartisan compromise that at the very least will ensure that Indian 
tribes with critical homeland security needs will be able to apply 
directly to the Department of Homeland Security for risk-based homeland 
security grants.
  I am pleased that my colleagues recognize that tribes should have the 
same access to homeland security funding as the rest of the country. 
This is an important first step for Indian Country to address homeland 
security issues.
  Again, I thank Senator Collins and Senator Lieberman for their work 
on this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maine is recognized.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________