[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 114 (Tuesday, July 17, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H7868-H7871]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




MOTION TO GO TO CONFERENCE ON H.R. 1, IMPROVING AMERICA'S SECURITY ACT 
                                OF 2007

  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 1 of 
rule XXII and by direction of the Committee on Homeland Security, I 
move to take from the Speaker's table the

[[Page H7869]]

bill (H.R. 1) to provide for the implementation of the recommendations 
of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, 
with a Senate amendment thereto, disagree to the Senate amendment, and 
agree to the conference asked by the Senate.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The motion was agreed to.


              Motion to Instruct Offered by Mrs. Blackburn

  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to instruct conferees.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mrs. Blackburn moves that the managers on the part of the 
     House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two 
     Houses on the Senate amendment to the bill H.R. 1 be 
     instructed to agree to section 1455 of the Senate amendment.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Murtha). Pursuant to clause 7 of rule 
XXII, the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn) and the gentleman 
from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Tennessee.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  The motion to instruct would require the Secretary to deny a 
Transportation Worker Identification Credential, a TWIC, to any 
applicant who has been convicted of certain crimes.
  This card is the access card to our Nation's critical and sensitive 
port and maritime facilities. We have over 750,000 workers who access 
our ports daily. TWIC was created to ensure that they are all screened 
and that they pose no threat of terrorism.
  Now, our motion would specify that individuals convicted of certain 
crimes, such as treason, espionage, sedition or murder, would be 
permanently disqualified from receiving a TWIC card. This would further 
specify interim disqualifying crimes, such as smuggling, arson, 
kidnapping or robbery, that would disqualify an individual within a 
certain timeframe of conviction.
  This provision provides the right balance between ensuring that our 
ports are safe while ensuring that we have the workers we need to get 
the job done in a timely manner.
  We all agree that protecting our ports is one of the most critical 
duties that we have. All the guns, all the gates, all the guards in the 
world, every bit of that is useless if we give an individual a TWIC 
card to walk right past them.
  This would ensure that the screening of these individuals is 
thorough, and that it is complete. While some may argue that this will 
unnecessarily disqualify too many individuals, we have already provided 
for an appeal and waiver process elsewhere to ensure that individuals 
can apply for a TWIC despite their past history.
  This section that we are offering today in this motion to instruct 
passed the Senate 94-2. Our motion to instruct would accede to the 
language in the Senate provision.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, as you know, the House has 
passed its own language as it relates to the issuance of the TWIC 
cards. We have negotiated for the last 2 months with our Senate 
colleagues and, for the most part, we have a bipartisan agreement on 
the issuance of the transportation security cards to convicted felons.
  That agreement talks about many of the things my colleague referenced 
in the report. It talks about treason, it talks about sedition, it 
talks about espionage, all those things.
  Therefore, I think carrying it to the level that my colleague would 
want to carry it is not in the spirit of the conference report that we 
are negotiating with our colleagues in the Senate.
  It is bipartisan. We have been meeting for 2 months to craft a 
language. It's good language.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to call to the body's 
attention, we had last week on July 10, a front page article in The 
Hill talking about this.
  The concerns with this clause, I know that this program, TSA is going 
to roll this TWIC card program out on September 1. I would hope that 
our security is of such importance to us that we would not weaken this 
program.
  We know that the security of our ports is important. We want to make 
certain that the workers that we are sending in to these ports have 
gone through the appropriate clearances. We know that these are 
critical and sensitive areas. Why would we want to give a card to 
someone who has been convicted of crimes such as treason, espionage, 
sedition or murder?
  I do not think that the American people want to see those individuals 
inspecting the cargo that's coming into these ports. We hear so much 
about security and food security, the issues that surround that. We are 
hearing about the security of human trafficking that is going through 
our ports. For goodness sakes, we want to be certain that the people 
that are walking into those ports to work every day are not convicted 
of these serious crimes.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1145

  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. I now yield as much time as she may 
consume to the gentlelady from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me thank the distinguished chairman of 
the full committee, and to the Speaker, my good friend from Tennessee, 
we are here on this floor for a very serious deliberation.
  Over the last 10 days we have heard a number of responses from the 
administration; and I have often said that if and when, if and when 
there was a turn of events that would generate a horrific and terrorist 
act against this Nation, it is the Members of the United States 
Congress and committees with names like Homeland Security and Defense 
that would have to be called to the carpet.
  None of us, none of us, Mr. Speaker, have any desire to be on the 
list of those who are derelict in their duties. In fact, Chairman 
Thompson has been enormously zealous in constant oversight of the 
Department of Homeland Security, constant briefings, and I am reminded 
of one that occurred in the last 10 days where the term ``gut feeling'' 
was introduced to us. Out of that particular briefing, many of us 
tightened our belts and began to reflect on the oversight hearings and 
the legislative initiatives that will respond and have responded to 
that gut reaction. So the dilemma, or the discussion today, as we bring 
up the 9/11 bill, may I remind my colleagues, is about terrorism. It is 
about the thought and the fear that Americans have of who lives amongst 
us.
  The TWIC card, as Transportation Security Administration is about to 
issue forward with regulations, is one of the elements to define who is 
in this country that would want to do us harm. Let me say this again, 
Mr. Speaker. It is a card to define who wants to harm us.
  As the chairwoman of the Transportation Security Subcommittee, 
Critical Infrastructure, we live every day with those individuals who 
are receiving identification, those at airports. We have done oversight 
about employees' ingress and egress, about the back side of the 
airport. We are well aware, my colleague Representative Sanchez, 
Loretta Sanchez and her committee, well aware of the massiveness of the 
Nation's ports. We could give you a list of times that we have been to 
look at the intimacies of the port. But what my good friend is speaking 
about clearly has no direct relationship to ensuring America's security 
and releasing or eliminating the fear that Americans have about the 
next-door terrorist cell. This amendment, this motion to instruct is 
not constructive. For what it says is that age-long workers, union 
workers who through an early lifetime had the ups and downs of a 
criminal record, have now been cast as terrorists.
  Mr. Speaker, I am not interested in opening the doors to criminal 
elements. I don't disrespect the fact that we are concerned about 
murderers and others who have done dastardly deeds. But what you are 
talking about is taking an age-old seasoned port worker, union member, 
and eliminate their livelihood by projecting onto them the question of 
whether or not they are in line to perpetrate a terrorist act.
  The TWIC card is an identification document to ensure that those who 
are in possession of that card have no connection to any elements of 
terrorism. It is to safeguard the American public.

[[Page H7870]]

It is not, it is not, if you will, the sledgehammer on hardworking, 
taxpaying Americans. And let me be very clear: The TWIC card is no 
wimp. There is a serious review process that goes forward that takes 
into account everyone's record and includes any elements that would 
lead us to believe that this person might perpetrate a terrorist act.
  I respect the gentlelady from Tennessee because I know that she is, 
as we all are, warriors against terrorism, and this Congress has to be 
united on this factor. I would raise the question, however, as to 
whether or not these modifications of a TWIC card that has already been 
vetted directed only at eliminating, firing, and terminating lifelong 
employees with strong records that have shown no inclination and no 
past history to terrorist acts is the appropriate direction to take.
  I hope that we can join in this body, as Chairman Thompson has 
encouraged us as members of his committee, to focus in a bipartisan way 
on solutions to major problems: Critical infrastructure, nuclear and 
biological possibilities, the reconstruction of FEMA, the interests in 
protecting our ports and borders north and south. This is how, an 
intelligence response that shows who is here as it relates to terrorist 
cells and who is here to do damage. These are the key elements, along 
with the 9/11 bill, that lay down the underpinnings, the framework of 
the survival of this Nation. Let us not fall upon divisiveness in the 
redesign of a card that has been fully vetted in its structure, that 
will do what it is intended to do, which is to weed out the terrorists 
and to allow hardworking Americans to continue to work and provide for 
their families. They, too, are patriots. And we as patriots and lovers 
of this country must stand united together in doing the right thing to 
secure America.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Mississippi spoke of 
the compromise language, and the compromise language does not give our 
TSA the tool in its toolbox that it needs. Indeed, the compromise 
language would weaken that tool that they need in that toolbox to be 
certain that they are giving Americans the certainty that they want to 
view our Nation's ports security with. They want to know that certainly 
the people that are coming into those ports have our Nation's best 
interests at heart. And I fully believe that they do not want 
individuals who are convicted of these crimes of treason, espionage, 
sedition, murder and, further, interim disqualifying crimes such as 
smuggling, arson, kidnapping or robbery to be in there watching the 
cargo and the transportation that comes into our ports and maritime 
facilities. Certainly, this is a regulation that TSA uses now with our 
truck drivers who are moving hazardous material. So the compromise 
language would take a tool out of that toolbox that TSA uses to give 
Americans the certainty that they are doing their best.
  Now, with respect to the question from the gentlelady from Texas, and 
I appreciate the hard work that she does at the Homeland Security 
Committee, but this would provide only a 7-year lookback, and I think 
that that is important to note in that screening process. But at the 
same time, Mr. Speaker, we want to be certain that screening is 
thorough, that it is complete, and that there is certainty given to the 
American public.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, for the record, I would 
like to say to my colleague from Tennessee, this bipartisan agreement 
was worked out in the spirit of making sure that those individuals who 
work in various capacities in high-risk areas, that they are, in fact, 
not security risks. So what we have done, we have taken espionage, we 
have taken sedition, we have taken treason, any felony crime of 
terrorism, crime involving a transportation security incident, improper 
transportation of hazardous material, unlawful possession, use, sale, 
distribution, manufacture, purchase, receipt, transfer, shipping, 
transporting, import, export, storage of or dealing with an explosive 
device, we have gone into great detail in defining those disqualifying 
areas.
  In addition to that, we have laid out interim disqualifying criminal 
offenses that go toward unlawful possession, sale, manufacture, 
purchase, distribution of firearms; extortion, bribery, smuggling, 
immigration violations; distribution, possession with intent to 
distribute or importation of controlled substance; arson, kidnapping, 
rape, assault with intent to kill; robbery, conspiracy, fraudulent 
entry into a seaport, a violation of the Racketeering Influence and 
Corrupt Organization Act. Mr. Speaker, we have gone in great detail to 
list as many offenses as we could.
  Now, from what I understand from the gentlelady's motion that we are 
debating, the only issue is that you don't want the Secretary of 
Homeland Security to have the ability to look at these things and say 
whether or not they should be modified. Now, if we are wrong in our 
interpretation, that is fine, but as we look upon what you have before 
us today, that is the only thing.
  If we can't trust the people who run the Department to make certain 
administrative decisions, then who can we trust? And it is in this 
spirit that we left that particular modification language there for the 
Secretary to look at any unforeseen crime that may or may not have been 
excluded in this disqualifying criminal offense.
  So clearly, Mr. Speaker, it was a bipartisan effort, and we wish to 
offer it.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman was just making his point, 
and in part of that he is right, but the important part of this is that 
what we have to do is be certain that a Secretary doesn't delete these 
provisions. And if you are going to give them that flexibility and if 
they delete it, then you have that hole that is there. So, because of 
that, we need it in statute to be sure that it is not altered.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Our Secretary of Homeland Security is 
appointed by the President. I would think that he would appoint the 
best qualified person, someone who would have the interests of this 
country at heart every second that he or she may be in that position. 
So to take the ability of an individual who is running a department 
from making certain decisions is not in our best interests.
  We should not micromanage the Department of Homeland Security. We 
should let the Secretary of Homeland Security run the Department. He 
should have the administrative authority to do it. This would not be in 
the best interests of us. We do not do this in other secretarial 
departments.
  And so, again, Mr. Speaker, in the interest of identifying crimes 
that are disqualifying, but notwithstanding the fact that the Secretary 
should have some discretion over running his or her Department 
regardless of what that Department may be, this is the bipartisan 
spirit in the conference that we reached.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
LaTourette).

                              {time}  1200

  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I speak on this motion with the greatest 
respect for the gentlelady from Tennessee. But I would say that in my 
prior life, before coming to the Congress I was a prosecuting attorney, 
and I was responsible for sending a lot of people to prison.
  I also had a responsibility to go down and visit people that I'd sent 
to prison. And I remember the first visit that I made down to one of 
the prisons in Ohio, and there's these trustees outside the prison 
gates with white stripes on the side, and they were given trusted 
positions within the prison.
  And I said, who are the trustees? How do you get to be qualified to 
be a trustee? And they said, well, they're murderers. And I said, what 
do you mean, they're murderers? They said, they're murderers.
  What we find is that in the crime of murder, most murders in this 
country are committed in crimes of passion, a husband murders a wife, a 
wife murders a husband, a boyfriend and so forth and so on. But they 
are also the least likely people to ever commit crime again.
  And what concerns me about the requirement of receding to the Senate 
provision in this is that it ignores the opportunity for 
rehabilitation. It ignores the opportunity that people

[[Page H7871]]

make mistakes, and they're not a threat to national security, and they 
can be good productive people. They can work in our ports.
  And I am concerned that murder is one of the automatic disqualifiers. 
I am also concerned that the other list of crimes that have waiting 
periods of 5 to 7 years, they have nothing to do, in my mind, with 
terrorism or port security.
  And I am all for a system where the Secretary or even in law the 
Congress of the United States says, you know what, if you committed a 
crime of violence we're going to take an extra look at you; but to be 
automatically disqualified, either forever or for a considerable period 
of time, I think disturbs me.
  I intend to vote against the motion. I respect the gentlelady's 
opinion and why she's brought this motion, but sadly, I can't agree 
with it.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, you know, the appeals and waivers 
process was put in place for a reason, and that is why it is there, and 
that's why you've got the look-back provision and why it is stated as 
such.
  Again, I will reemphasize the point. We don't want to do something 
that is going to weaken a tool that is in the TSA toolbox for being 
certain that we have the necessary security at our ports; that we know 
who is there and we know the reasons they are there, that we know that 
they have the appropriate clearances for being there.
  And with all due respect to the chairman and the chairwoman who have 
worked on this legislation, our wording here, acceding to the language 
that passed over in the Senate, 94-2, would be certain that we have in 
statute something that is going to give our citizens the security that 
we have done our job.
  It is the responsibility of this body to be certain that we have this 
national security interest at heart for the people of this good Nation, 
and certainly this language is one step in so doing.
  And at this time, Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman from Mississippi has 
no further speakers and is ready to yield back, then I will do so. But 
I want to be certain I have the right to close on this.
  Mr. Speaker, I will reserve at this point.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I have one additional 
speaker. I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from Texas (Ms. Jackson-
Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the chairman. To my good friend 
from Tennessee, let us be very clear that homeland security is a 
bipartisan issue.
  What the chairman has indicated is that we are yielding to the 
Secretary of Homeland Security for a slight opportunity to be able to 
modify, if you will, in his reasoned judgment, that deals with securing 
America. We are not ignoring sedition and treason. I want my colleagues 
to know that.
  But the individuals that will now be subjected to the TWIC card, 
which costs 137 dollars and 700,000 people will be processed the first 
year, and 1.5 million persons the second year, these are our neighbors, 
individuals who have been working in this capacity who have nothing in 
their background that would suggest that they are terrorists.
  The gentlelady's motion would literally shut down America's ports. 
Commerce would come to a standstill. As my good friend from Ohio has 
said, people rehabilitate. Give the Secretary the opportunity to use 
his judgment and to use his discretion to be able to secure America on 
the real causes of sedition and treason.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests 
for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to instruct.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to instruct 
offered by the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________