[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 83 (Friday, June 23, 2006)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1255]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2007

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                         HON. JAMES R. LANGEVIN

                            of rhode island

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, June 20, 2006

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 5631) making 
     appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal 
     year ending September 30, 2007, and for other purposes:

  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, on Tuesday night, the House passed H.R. 
5631, the Defense Appropriations Act for FY2007. I commend Chairman 
Young and Ranking Member Murtha for crafting an important piece of 
legislation that will provide our men and women in uniform with the 
resources they need to continue their excellent record of service to 
the Nation. I was proud to vote for that measure, which passed by an 
overwhelming vote of 407-19.
  However, I am disappointed that the House did not pass a very 
important amendment offered by Congressman Schiff to block funding for 
any surveillance program that does not comply with the safeguards in 
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. I have been deeply disturbed 
by the President's decision to expand domestic surveillance of U.S. 
citizens beyond what is permitted under existing law. As a member of 
the House Armed Services and Homeland Security Committees, I am fully 
aware of the dangers posed by those who wish to harm Americans, and I 
have strongly supported efforts to make our Nation safer. However, 
President Bush has not yet explained to my satisfaction why powers 
available to him under existing law cannot meet the needs of the war on 
terrorism. For example, the Foreign Intelligence Service Act (FISA) 
already permits the warrantless surveillance of communications by U.S. 
citizens under certain limited circumstances. Nevertheless, the Bush 
Administration did not use those emergency powers and instead chose to 
expand the authority of the National Security Agency (NSA).
  As I have said before, if President Bush believes that FISA needs to 
be altered or updated to address new threats, he should make his case 
to Congress and propose legislative changes. The President's decision 
to expand domestic surveillance while notifying only a handful of 
legislators does not constitute Congressional consent and is a danger 
to our established Constitutional system of checks and balances. While 
Americans may disagree about the merits of broadening the government's 
authority to combat terrorism, it is in all of our interests that such 
important decisions should be made publicly, as they affect the very 
values of freedom and liberty on which the Nation was founded.
  Opponents of the Schiff amendment argued that we shouldn't be 
considering such a significant change in a spending bill. Under normal 
circumstances, I would agree with that assessment. However, because the 
House has neglected to consider any legislation to address the serious 
issue of domestic surveillance, we are left with no other choice.
  We cannot continue to shirk our Constitutional responsibility to 
conduct oversight of the executive branch and its activities. We must 
hold hearings and consider legislation to ensure that our efforts to 
protect our nation are done consistent with the civil liberties that we 
hold dear and comply with the Constitution--the supreme law of the 
land.

                          ____________________