[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 124 (Thursday, September 28, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H7706-H7709]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     SECURE BORDER INITIATIVE FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2006

  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and 
pass the bill (H.R. 6162) to require financial accountability with 
respect to certain contract actions related to the Secure Border 
Initiative of the Department of Homeland Security.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 6162

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Secure Border Initiative 
     Financial Accountability Act of 2006''.

     SEC. 2. SECURE BORDER INITIATIVE FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY.

       (a) In General.--The Inspector General of the Department of 
     Homeland Security shall review each contract action related 
     to the Department's Secure Border Initiative having a value 
     greater than $20,000,000, to determine whether each such 
     action fully complies with applicable cost requirements, 
     performance objectives, program milestones, inclusion of 
     small, minority, and women-owned business, and timelines. The 
     Inspector General shall complete a review under this 
     subsection with respect to a contract action--
       (1) not later than 60 days after the date of the initiation 
     of the action; and
       (2) upon the conclusion of the performance of the contract.
       (b) Report by Inspector General.--Upon completion of each 
     review described in subsection (a), the Inspector General 
     shall submit to the Secretary of Homeland Security a report 
     containing the findings of the review, including findings 
     regarding any cost overruns, significant delays in contract 
     execution, lack of rigorous departmental contract management, 
     insufficient departmental financial oversight, bundling that 
     limits the

[[Page H7707]]

     ability of small business to compete, or other high risk 
     business practices.
       (c) Report by Secretary.--Not later than 30 days after the 
     receipt of each report required under subsection (b), the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to the Committee 
     on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of 
     the Senate a report on the findings of the report by the 
     Inspector General and the steps the Secretary has taken, or 
     plans to take, to address the problems identified in such 
     report.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--In addition to 
     amounts that are otherwise authorized to be appropriated to 
     the Office of the Inspector General, an additional amount 
     equal to at least five percent for fiscal year 2007, at least 
     six percent for fiscal year 2008, and at least seven percent 
     for fiscal year 2009 of the overall budget of the Office for 
     each such fiscal year is authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Office to enable the Office to carry out this section.
       (e) Action by Inspector General.--In the event the 
     Inspector General becomes aware of any improper conduct or 
     wrongdoing in accordance with the contract review required 
     under subsection (a), the Inspector General shall, as 
     expeditiously as practicable, refer information related to 
     such improper conduct or wrongdoing to the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security or other appropriate official in the 
     Department of Homeland Security for purposes of evaluating 
     whether to suspend or debar the contractor.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Alabama (Mr. Rogers) and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alabama.


                             General Leave

  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend 
their remarks on this bill, and to insert extraneous material on the 
bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Alabama?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 6162, the Secure Border 
Initiative Financial Accountability Act of 2006.
  This bipartisan legislation will help to ensure that taxpayer funds 
dedicated to technologies to secure our Nation's borders are spent 
efficiently and effectively.
  The ranking member of the Committee on Homeland Security, Mr. 
Thompson, and I have worked for almost a year on this important bill.
  Last November, I introduced H.R. 4284, the Secure Border Financial 
Accountability Act of 2005. I was pleased that Chairman King and 
Ranking Member Thompson were original cosponsors of that bill.
  We also worked to include the language in the border security bill 
which the Committee on Homeland Security marked up on November 11, 
2005. At that time, Mr. Thompson added a key funding trigger to ensure 
that the Inspector General had the necessary resources to respond 
quickly to major disasters.
  This language ultimately was included in H.R. 4437, the Border 
Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005, 
which passed the House on December 16 of that same year. We again 
worked in a bipartisan manner to include this provision in H.R. 5814, 
the Department of Homeland Security Authorization Act for 2007, which 
the Committee on Homeland Security reported favorably in July of this 
year.
  But, why is this bill so important? The Homeland Security 
Subcommittee on Management, Integration, and Oversight, which I chair, 
has held three hearings over the past year and a half on the existing 
border technology program.
  We found the Integrated Surveillance Intelligence System, ISIS, and 
its remote video surveillance program, was plagued by mismanagement, 
operational problems and financial waste. On June 16, 2005, our 
committee heard from the GSA deputy inspector general that electronic 
surveillance equipment covered only 2 to 4 percent of the border and 
that over $200 million was paid by the Federal Government for poor, 
incomplete and never-delivered goods and services.
  At our second hearing on December 16, 2005, the Department of 
Homeland Security Inspector General testified that cameras and sensors 
were not integrated, oversight of contractor performance was 
ineffective, numerous poles and cameras were never installed along the 
border, and millions of program dollars remained unspent at the GSA.
  Our third hearing on February 16, 2006, examined the disciplinary 
actions taken by the Department against employees responsible for these 
problems at ISIS to ensure that those employees would not be involved 
in any future border technology contracts.
  Last Thursday, Secretary Chertoff announced the contract for the 
technology component of the Secure Border Initiative, known as SBInet. 
This is a 6-year, multi-billion dollar contract, and it is designed to 
establish a virtual fence across 6,000 miles of our borders through a 
mix of poles, cameras, ground-based radar, aircraft and other aerial 
platforms.
  My subcommittee intends to hold a fourth hearing on November 15 to 
review the SBInet contract. The purpose of this bill is to prevent the 
same type of financial mismanagement of ISIS from taking place in 
SBInet.
  Specifically, this bill directs the Inspector General of the 
Department of Homeland Security to review each contract action related 
to the Department's Secure Border Initiative that is a contracting 
amount of $20 million or more. This contract review will determine 
whether each contract action fully complies with cost requirements, 
performance objectives, and timelines.
  The bill further requires that the Homeland Security Inspector 
General report to the Secretary of Homeland Security on cost overruns, 
significant delays in contract execution, lack of rigorous contract 
management, insufficient financial oversight, and other high-risk 
business practices.
  The Secretary of Homeland Security is then required to notify the 
Congress and take immediate steps to rectify the problems within 30 
days.
  To carry out this vigorous oversight, the bill includes a provision 
by Mr. Thompson that would authorize additional funds. SBInet will 
involve numerous large and small Federal contractors to implement the 
technology required to successfully secure our Nation's borders.
  We look forward to working with the chairman of the Committee on 
Government Reform, Mr. Tom Davis, in the coming months to ensure that 
we have the best oversight process in place to ensure SBInet is cost 
effective.
  A ``yes'' vote on this legislation will send a strong message to the 
contractor and to the Department that Congress intends to ``hold their 
feet to the fire'' in fulfilling these contract requirements.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume 
to Mr. Thompson of Mississippi, the ranking member of the Committee on 
Homeland Security.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member 
of the subcommittee for allowing me to speak on this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Mr. Rogers for his commitment to 
stemming waste, fraud and abuse in the Department of Homeland Security.
  This bill, H.R. 6162, would require the Department of Homeland 
Security Inspector General to immediately review any Secure Border 
Initiative contract valued at $20 million or more. By requiring a 
review once this amount has been triggered, the Inspector General can 
immediately review the cost requirement, performance objectives and 
timelines for the SBI project.
  This trigger builds accountability into every contract made for the 
Secure Border Initiative and will provide the American public with some 
certainty about where their money is going. This bill also will allow 
the Inspector General to express its concerns if they find 
unsatisfactory practices early on.

                              {time}  1400

  They will not have to wait until all the money is out the door and 
excuses are being made before they get involved in the oversight of 
this multibillion dollar project.
  Mr. Speaker, I also want to emphasize that this review would include 
the assessment of the inclusion of small, minority, and women-owned 
businesses in any subcontracting plans, an area of constant challenge 
for the Department.

[[Page H7708]]

  I guess some people would wonder why this kind of oversight is 
necessary or whether we are being fair. Let me tell you why this kind 
of oversight is necessary for a project of this size.
  First of all, SBInet is expected to cost around $2.5 billion. Under 
the predecessors to Secure Border, ISIS and American Shield, we have 
spent over $429 million and protected only 4 percent of the border. 
That is about $100 million for every 1 percent of the border. It is not 
an understatement to say that this has not been a cost-effective use of 
funds.
  The Inspector General has found that the Department's failure in 
these past programs has been due to poor planning, bad equipment 
purchases, and spotty implementation. We are told once again that this 
program will solve the problems of our porous border through the use of 
integrated and coordinated technology and manpower. It seems like I 
have heard this before, Mr. Speaker.
  We have not seen a detailed rendering of the Department's overall 
strategy. And in fact, this procurement allows the industry to pitch 
solutions based not on the Department's objectives. As I have said many 
times, I support the use of technology as a force-multiplier in the 
effort to secure our borders. However, I also support the effective use 
of our taxpayers' money. We all want to see this initiative fare better 
than its failed predecessors, but that will only happen with effective 
oversight and management of this program.
  I commend Mr. Rogers again and I commend my ranking member, Mr. Meek, 
for their support of this legislation. I look forward not only to the 
passage of this legislation, but I look forward to working with both 
these gentlemen to make sure that with any other large contracts we 
provide similar oversight to make sure that the taxpayers' dollars are 
well spent.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I think folks can take from the dialogue here today that this 
committee, this full committee, and particularly this Management 
Subcommittee that the gentleman from Florida and I are the ranking 
member and Chair of, are going to be vigorous in our oversight of these 
contracts going forward to ensure that we do not have future problems 
like we saw with ISIS and American Shield.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 5 minutes to 
the distinguished gentlewoman from the great State of Texas, Ms. Sheila 
Jackson-Lee.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the distinguished 
gentlemen, the ranking member and the chairman of the Management 
Subcommittee on Homeland Security, that deal with these crucial issues.
  I rise to support the Secure Border Initiative Financial 
Accountability Act and offer that there is an overall vision that this 
is a very important component of, and I hope that as we move this 
legislation along we still may have a window of opportunity to ensure 
that the Secure Border Initiative that Secretary Chertoff speaks of, 
that this is a major component of, is in place.
  And I just want to thank both gentlemen for your leadership and 
acknowledge that, even with this Financial Accountability Act, we are 
still missing and need to move forward on: More agents to patrol our 
borders, secure our ports of entry and enforce immigration laws; 
expanded detention and removal capabilities to eliminate ``catch and 
release'' once and for all; a comprehensive and systematic upgrading of 
the technology used in controlling the border, including increased 
manned aerial assets, expanded use of UAVs, and next-generation 
detection technology; increased investment in infrastructure 
improvements at the border, providing additional physical security to 
sharply reduce illegal border crossings; and greatly increased interior 
enforcement of our immigration laws, including more robust work site 
enforcement; and, of course, an earned access to legalization.
  We must not frighten America. Let them know that we are doing the 
job. But we can do both. We can account for everyone that is inside our 
borders, and we can work to protect and secure our northern and 
southern border. This initiative, the Financial Accountability, is 
crucial because it gives the Inspector General oversight and we, as the 
Management Subcommittee of the Homeland Security Committee, have seen 
the fractures in the oversight of spending money. This is an important 
way to provide the Department of Homeland Security's Inspector General 
to immediately review any Secure Border Initiative contract valued at 
$20 million or more.
  Let me thank the two gentlemen, Mr. Rogers and Mr. Meek, who spent 
hours and hours reviewing some of the mishaps that have occurred with 
contracts that have not fulfilled the responsibility of securing 
America, contracts that have violated our trust. They have not had the 
right equipment, the technology. It hasn't worked. They haven't had the 
right staff.
  This way, the Inspector General can make findings, including cost 
overruns, delays in contract execution, lack of rigorous contract 
management, insufficient Department oversight, and limitations on small 
business participation, which now will be able to be reported under 
this particular bill. Within 30 days of receiving the Inspector 
General's report, the Secretary must submit a corrective action plan to 
Congress, and as well we must ensure open opportunity.
  Let me congratulate the ranking member, Mr. Thompson, and I joined 
him on these amendments that will highlight small businesses, 
automatically triggers oversight based on the award of contracts once a 
certain monetary amount has been reached, requires that the Inspector 
General conduct a review during the pendency of the project and 
requires that the Inspector General assess the inclusion of small, 
minority, and women-owned businesses in the SBI subcontracting plans as 
a factor in its review.
  If that is not one of the larger pieces, everywhere we go, as this 
Department grows larger and larger and larger, Homeland Security spends 
more and more money, the question is, why can't the homegrown people do 
the job, the small businesses, the women-owned businesses, the 
minority-owned businesses? And the answer is a blank. We don't have an 
answer.
  This committee has been in the leadership realm, this subcommittee 
with Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Meek. You have been in the 
driver's seat on pushing the Homeland Security Department and our 
subcommittee in ensuring that the little guys get the work.
  We are now suffering in Louisiana and the Gulf Region because the 
little guys have been ignored, and the jurisdictions down there say we 
have got the little guys willing to work but the big guys have thrown 
us out the door and not allowed us to be able to do an efficient, cost-
efficient, good job. It has been the layered contracts with 
multinationals, and it never gets down to small business persons.
  So I rise to support this initiative, the Secure Border Initiative 
Financial Accountability Act, and I want to thank Cherri Branson and 
Rosaline Cohen for their leadership of staff.
  I thank the ranking member for yielding to me, and I ask my 
colleagues to support it. But our work is yet undone until we finish 
comprehensive immigration reform.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 6162, requiring 
financial accountability with respect to certain contract actions 
related to the Secure Border Initiative (SBI) of the Department of 
Homeland Security .
  The Secure Border Initiative, SBI, is a comprehensive multi-year plan 
to secure America's borders and reduce illegal migration.
  Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chert-off has announced an 
overall vision for the SBI which includes: more agents to patrol our 
borders, secure our ports of entry and enforce immigration laws; 
expanded detention and removal capabilities to eliminate ``catch and 
release'' once and for all; a comprehensive and systemic upgrading of 
the technology used in controlling the border, including increased 
manned aerial assets, expanded use of UAVs, and next-generation 
detection technology; increased investment in infrastructure 
improvements at the border--providing additional physical security to 
sharply reduce illegal border crossings; and greatly increased interior 
enforcement of our immigration laws--including more robust work site 
enforcement.

[[Page H7709]]

  Mr. Speaker, an earlier version of this important bill passed the 
House as part of a border security measure in December 2005. 
Furthermore, the language of this bill also appears in fiscal year 2007 
DHS authorization measure that passed the Committee on Homeland 
Security in July 2006.
  This bill requires the DHS's Inspector General to immediately and 
automatically review any Secure Border Initiative contract valued at 
more than $20 million. This review necessarily entails examining the 
cost requirements, performance objectives, and program timelines set by 
the Department for the SBI project and requires an assessment of the 
inclusion of small, minority and women-owned businesses in any 
subcontracting plans.
  The Inspector General's review must be completed within 60 days after 
its initiation and reported to the Secretary of DHS. Within 30 days of 
receiving the Inspector General's report, the Secretary of DHS must 
submit to the Committee on Homeland Security a report on the Inspector 
General's findings and the corrective action plan the Secretary has 
taken and plans to take.
  This automatic triggering of oversight by the Inspector General for 
contracts greater than $20 million is critical to minimize the waste, 
abuse, and fraud, which unfortunately has plagued many of DHS's 
contracts. In addition, this review will occur during the pendency of 
the project rather than at its termination to minimize waste and 
ensure redemptive steps are taken expeditiously. The Inspector 
General's findings will include cost overruns, delays in contract 
execution, lack of rigorous Department contract management, 
insufficient Department financial oversight, limitations on small 
business participation, and other high risk business practices.

  Moreover, this bill requires that the Inspector General assess the 
inclusion of small, minority and women-owned businesses in the SBI 
subcontracting plans as a factor in its review. Historically, small, 
minority and women-owned businesses have been disadvantaged in seeking 
and winning these types of contracts. There may be inherent 
disadvantages for these businesses, but it is clear their potential is 
tremendous. It is critical that DHS ensures that these businesses have 
the ability to compete fairly for these lucrative opportunities.
  I am very proud that my district, Harris County and Houston ranks 
sixth and Texas ranks fifth in the country for the largest number of 
African-American owned firms, following New York, California, Florida, 
and Georgia. Minority and women-owned businesses across the country 
will appreciate the effort to preserve their opportunity to compete for 
these contracts. I encourage my colleagues to remember that there are a 
great many barriers to minority and women business professionals, and 
provisions such as these preserve equal access and open opportunities.
  In the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma, small, 
minority and disadvantaged businesses from the region were shut out of 
disaster-related contracts because goals and preferences were not in 
place. Since the late 1960s, it has been the policy of the Federal 
Government to assist small businesses owned by minorities and women to 
become fully competitive, viable business concerns. As a result, the 
Small Business Administration has set forth government-wide goals to 
level the playing field for small and minority businesses seeking 
Federal Government contracts. Leveling the playing field continues to 
be a central concern for me and should continue to be a central concern 
for this Congress.
  The oversight required in this bill is integral because SBlnet is 
expected to be a $2.5 billion procurement and the contracts allocated 
through SBI will be substantial. For example, last week, DHS awarded a 
contract valued at $80 million to a team led by Boeing under the SBInet 
program. Furthermore, the predecessors to SBI--ISIS and American 
Shield--fell far short of expectations. The Department spent over $429 
million and protected 4 percent of the border, which is about $100 
million for every 1 percent of the border.
  Similarly, the Inspector General has found that the Department's 
failure in these past programs has been due to poor planning, lax 
program management, inappropriate equipment purchases and spotty 
implementation.
  This bill is the first step in requiring effective oversight. 
Realistically, effective oversight cannot be the sole province of 
Inspectors General. It is Congress's constitutional duty to conduct 
systematic oversight of the programs and activities of the executive 
branch. Just as the Department cannot contract out its 
responsibilities, neither can we.
  Consequently, I urge my colleagues to support this important bill.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I think we have identified the true essence of this 
bill; and I think also that it is very, very important. I want to take 
from not only Ms. Jackson-Lee but also Mr. Rogers and Ranking Member 
Bennie Thompson in saying in this area, when we look at management and 
oversight of one of the fastest-growing Departments and the largest 
Department in the history of the world, that we have to put these 
parameters in place because we have the responsibility of article I, 
section 1 of the U.S. Constitution to make sure that we have the level 
of oversight that is needed.
  I think the record reflects for itself that when oversight is not 
paramount the taxpayers lose; and I hope, like Mr. Thompson said, that 
we can expand this kind of theme throughout other programs in the 
Department of Homeland Security.
  Now, the people that are happy today are members on this committee 
and, hopefully, the Members when they vote for this piece of 
legislation. But the Inspector General is very happy because the 
Inspector General, especially in the Department of Homeland Security, 
writes these reports, submits them to Congress, and then there is a 
foot-dragging process at the Department of Homeland Security.
  Within this piece of legislation within 30 days they have to respond 
as it relates to corrective action. And it would hopefully bring about 
the kind of accountability not only that we look for on the economic 
side, Mr. Speaker, but also look for as it relates to protecting our 
borders. Two programs before this program, well over $400 million, $429 
million, was spent. We are going back again with a contract with a 
different company that would take us to $2.5 billion. We had the 
Secretary before the full committee just yesterday, or the day before 
last, and this was the line of my questioning. Because we do not want 
to be after the fact; we want to be before it.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I encourage the Members to vote an affirmative on 
this very good piece of legislation; and hopefully, just hopefully, Mr. 
Speaker, we could head further into other contracting matters not only 
within the Department of Homeland Security but I would also add the 
Department of Defense and other departments like it so we can do away 
with waste and having individuals watching over the shoulders of 
individuals that may not hold the taxpayers' dollars as high as we do 
as it relates to accountability.
  Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my 
time.
  I would like to sum up by emphasizing that it is critically important 
for the Members to recognize that we need to put these kinds of 
accountability measures in place so that we can ensure that as we go 
forward with the massive expenditures we are going to make to secure 
our borders that we don't have a repeat of the waste, fraud, and abuse 
that we have seen in the past.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge an ``aye'' vote for H.R. 6162.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 6162.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________