[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 6 (Thursday, January 11, 2007)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E80]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




      IMPLEMENTING THE 9/11 COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS ACT OF 2007

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                        HON. K. MICHAEL CONAWAY

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                        Tuesday, January 9, 2007

  Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I wish to revise and extend my remarks with 
regard to the vote on H.R. 1--Implementing the 9/11 Commission 
Recommendations Act of 2007.
  While I certainly support the goal of this legislation and believe it 
to be imperative that Congress continue to work with the Administration 
to ensure the safety and security of our Nation, I could not in good 
conscience vote in favor of the measure as it was presented. I agree 
there is still work to be done and it would benefit this Congress to 
discuss the continued implementation of the recommendations of the 9/11 
Commission; however, I believe H.R. 1 contained some critical flaws 
that prevent it from being a solution to the security dilemmas that we 
face today.
  First and foremost, I believe this legislation is fiscally 
irresponsible. Not only does it create new government spending without 
providing any offsets, it essentially provides a blank check for these 
unfunded mandates by authorizing ``such sums as may be necessary'' for 
an unspecified number of years. Providing effective and common sense 
security measures is essential; however we cannot do so at the expense 
of fiscal responsibility and subject our Nation to higher government 
spending and a greater Federal deficit.
  Beyond being fiscally irresponsible, I had concerns about the manner 
in which this legislation was considered. Decisions on matters as grave 
and enduring as the security and safety of this Nation should not be 
undertaken hastily or impulsively and should not subvert the normal 
legislative process. This legislation was not afforded the opportunity 
to traverse the regular order and be debated on, amended, or considered 
during the committee process. Further, as no amendments were allowed, 
it cannot be said that the proposal received a fair and open debate.
  Further, the 9/11 Commission Recommendations Act contains a provision 
expressing the Sense of Congress that the Proliferation Security 
Initiative (PSI) should be authorized by the United Nations. I believe 
it presents a dangerous situation to allow the UN control over such an 
important program which restricts the transfer of banned weapons and 
technology, given that the UN membership includes some of the nations 
responsible for the violations that PSI seeks to prevent.
  Finally, I am opposed to the provision that extends collective 
bargaining guarantees to the employees of the Transportation Security 
Administration (TSA). It is important to remember this is an idea that 
was explored during the creation of the TSA as the Homeland Security 
Act of 2002 was considered and at that time, it was determined it was 
not in the best interest of the organization and its mission. 
Unionizing TSA employees would tie the hands of the agency and disallow 
it the flexibility to deploy its workforce and change the nature of 
employees' work and locations in response to national emergencies.
  Again, I want to emphasize for the record that I recognize the 
critical and serious nature of the business of protecting and securing 
our Nation and its citizens. However, as previously explained, I could 
not in good conscience vote for legislation that I do not believe to be 
an effective or responsible means in which to address these important 
Issues.

                          ____________________