[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 123 (Monday, July 30, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10307-S10309]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                    HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS

  Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, last week when the Senate considered the 
Homeland Security Appropriations Bill, I offered an amendment, numbered 
2406, with my good friend and partner from Montana, Jon Tester. Our 
amendment would bar funds appropriated in the Homeland Security 
appropriations bill from being used to establish a national ID card.
  Benjamin Franklin once said, ``They that can give up essential 
liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor 
safety.''
  Generations of Americans have fought for both our liberty and safety.
  America's Founders sought the freedom to lead their lives as they 
chose--freedom of religion, speech, and assembly. Freedom, above all 
other motives, led them to cross the ocean find a new home in America.
  Whether defending our liberty from British colonial governors, Nazi 
aggression, or today's Islamic radicals, Americans have never tired in 
their effort to stand up in defense of our liberty.
  But sometimes the threat to liberty is not as obvious as a red-coated 
army or a German panzer division. Sometimes, the threat is much harder 
to see but just as dangerous.
  The threat I speak of today is a national ID card.
  A national ID card may sound harmless to some. Indeed, a number of 
politicians have called for giving every citizen a national ID card. 
They argue that a national identification card would make it harder for 
terrorists to use fake identification to enter the country.
  But a national ID card has the potential to be abused. Such a card 
could become a system of identity papers, databases, status and 
identity checks, and Federal surveillance used to track and control 
individuals' movements and activities. It could, in effect, create an 
internal U.S. passport.
  Some have argued that a national ID is essential to protecting 
Americans from terrorism. I strongly disagree.
  In response to the 9/11 Commission's recommendations, Congress passed 
the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. This act 
provided a number of improvements to our Nation's driver's licenses.
  I support these reasonable efforts to secure our State driver's 
licenses from terrorists. However, a national ID card would just give 
Government bureaucrats another chance to meddle in the private lives of 
regular law-abiding Americans.
  Just to get on a plane, go in a Federal building, or drive down the 
road, you would have to have the permission of some bureaucrat in 
Washington.
  If a national ID card were established, we would be right back here 
on the Senate floor debating whether citizens would be required to 
carry them at all times or pondering what citizens are allowed to do 
without a national ID card.
  A National ID card would be a terrible loss of freedom in this 
country.
  Foreign countries with the worst civil liberties records in the world 
require their citizens to carry a national ID at all times. They have 
legal punishments for people caught without their IDs.
  Take Zimbabwe, for example. They passed a law in November which 
required all citizens to carry a national ID. Citizens face a fine or 
imprisonment if they refuse to carry the ID.
  History has taught us that national ID cards can lead to dangerous 
and destructive government policies. National ID cards played important 
roles in the genocides of both Nazi Germany and Rwanda.
  The apartheid-era Government of South Africa used national 
identification documents as internal passports to oppress the country's 
native population.
  Clearly, a national ID would be wrong for the United States. I am 
proud to say my home State of Montana would be the first to reject any 
effort to impose this sort of system.
  Montana's leadership has spoken, and I have heard them loud and 
clear; get the Federal Government out of the business of telling the 
States how to produce driver's licenses and ID cards.
  My friend, Montana's Governor Brian Schweitzer, signed a law in April 
that bans Montana's Department of Motor Vehicles from enforcing the 
requirements of the Real ID act. Republicans and Democrats alike in 
Montana's Legislature have voted unanimously to reject Real ID. I am 
proud of Montana's vigilant stand against the Federal Government's 
encroachment.
  It is wrong for politicians in Washington to burden State authorities 
with excessive regulations. We must allow our States to take 
initiatives as well. We should never try to micromanage them. They know 
how to do their job.
  Mr. President this is not a partisan issue. Organizations from the 
left, the ACLU, join hands with groups from the right, the NRA, and 
raise serious concerns about the establishment of a national ID card.

[[Page S10308]]

  I urge my colleagues to join the chorus of Americans and support this 
amendment.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I wish to amplify my brief earlier 
statement regarding my vote against the DeMint amendment No. 2481 to 
the fiscal year 2008 Homeland Security Appropriations Act.
  On February 28, 2007, during Senate consideration of the Improving 
America's Security by Implementing Unfinished Recommendations of the 9/
11 Commission Act of 2007, there were two side-by-side votes on 
amendments related to criminal offenses which disqualify an applicant 
from receiving a transportation worker identification credential.
  The first vote was on an amendment offered by Senator Inouye. This 
amendment, amendment No. 285, specified certain criminal offenses which 
would disqualify an applicant from receiving the transportation worker 
identification credential but gave the U.S. Secretary of Homeland 
Security the authority to add to or modify the listed offenses in a 
rulemaking. I voted in favor of this amendment because I believe the 
Secretary ought to have the authority to modify the existing list of 
crimes when circumstances warrant a regulatory change, and the 
amendment was adopted by a vote of 58 to 37.
  The second vote was on an amendment offered by Senator DeMint. This 
amendment, amendment No. 279, was identical to the previous amendment 
offered by Senator Inouye aside from its omission of Secretarial 
authority to modify the list of existing offenses. Since these 
amendments were in direct contradiction with one another over the issue 
of granting the Secretary authority to modify the existing list, I 
voted against the DeMint amendment. Nevertheless, it was adopted by a 
vote of 94 to 2, with 56 Senators voting to contradict the position 
they had taken on the previous amendment.
  Therefore, when the question came up on the DeMint amendment No. 2481 
to the fiscal year 2008 Homeland Security Appropriations bill, which 
would have prohibited funds provided in the act from being expended by 
the Secretary to remove offenses from the list of criminal offenses 
disqualifying individuals from receiving a transportation worker 
identification credential, I voted against it, not only because I 
believe it is sound public policy to require flexibility on such 
matters but also because it was consistent with my position on the 
Inouye amendment to the Improving America's Security by Implementing 
Unfinished Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007. The 
DeMint amendment No. 2481 was adopted by a vote of 93 to 1 even though 
it was again in direct contradiction to the position taken by the 
Senate when it adopted the Inouye amendment to the Improving America's 
Security by Implementing Unfinished Recommendations of the 9/11 
Commission Act of 2007.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Madam President, I was pleased to support the fiscal 
year 2008 Homeland Security appropriations bill. Our national security 
strategy needs to adapt in order to meet new and emerging threats while 
ensuring those in charge of protecting us have the resources they need. 
I am pleased to support the current Homeland Security appropriations 
bill which includes many important measures to keep our communities 
safe.
  The Senate unanimously accepted my amendment to improve the Safe 
Skies program that I established a few years ago. The amendment will 
encourage the Transportation Security Administration and the airlines 
to better implement legislation I authored that allows first responders 
to volunteer to help flight crews in the event of an onboard emergency.
  The bill would increase funding for State fire fighter and emergency 
management grants. Along with a bipartisan coalition of Senators, I 
wrote to Senate appropriators earlier in the year asking that they 
increase funding for these important grants. The appropriators agreed 
with our recommendations and recommended $700,000,000 for fire fighter 
grants and $300,000,000 for emergency management performance grants. 
These funds will help State and local agencies obtain the equipment and 
training they need to protect us against terrorist incidents and 
natural disasters.
  I was disappointed that an amendment I cosponsored to fund 
decontamination units for the National Guard's Weapons of Mass 
Destruction Civil Support Teams, WMD-CST, did not receive a vote. As a 
result of legislation I authored, every State in this Nation now has a 
functional WMD-CST. The Department of Defense recently announced that 
it will soon finalize the certifications of all of these teams. I will 
continue to work to ensure that the National Guard receives the funds 
it needs to perform its homeland security operations.
  The bill would appropriate the funds needed to hire 3,000 additional 
border patrol agents. This important provision will help us secure our 
borders and restore credibility to our immigration system. While I was 
deeply disappointed that the Senate was unable to reach a bipartisan 
compromise to implement comprehensive immigration reform, I am pleased 
that the bill will help improve our border security. I also supported 
an amendment offered by Senator Graham to appropriate an additional $3 
billion for additional border agents, infrastructure and technology. I 
was concerned that the amendment was not offset and that it authorized 
building 700 miles of fencing, which has not been demonstrated to be a 
realistic or cost-effective method of securing the border. However, I 
supported the amendment because the personnel, infrastructure, and 
technology provisions represent important steps toward border security, 
which is one of our top homeland security priorities.
  The bill would permit States to enact chemical security regulations 
that are stronger than Federal regulations. Chemical security 
regulations are an urgent homeland security priority, and I support the 
ability of the States to set tougher standards.
  Wisconsin residents and Americans across the country are concerned 
about the serious backlog in passport application process. This bill 
would delay the implementation of the Western Hemisphere Travel 
Initiative to keep the backlog from increasing until we have a chance 
to resolve this issue.
  I voted to table an amendment offered by Senator Alexander that would 
have reduced funding for border, port and air security in order to 
provide increased funding for implementation of the REAL ID Act. That 
act is deeply flawed. While I am concerned that it remains an unfunded 
priority, I am also concerned that, if we head down the road of funding 
this misguided policy, the Senate will not take the necessary steps to 
reform the REAL ID Act. Moreover, the National Governors Association 
has estimated that the cost of implementing the REAL ID Act could reach 
$11 billion, which means that the increased funding provided by this 
amendment, $400 million, would do little to address the unfunded 
mandate of REAL ID while taking away money for pressing homeland 
security priorities. I will continue to push for reform of the REAL ID 
Act, to provide for proper funding of any Federal mandate in the 
reformed act, and to ensure that the implementation of the act is not 
rushed.
  We are still spending almost twice as much on Iraq as is allocated 
for homeland security, diplomacy, and international assistance 
combined. The billions we spend each month in Iraq could be better 
invested in the protection of critical infrastructure and our system of 
national preparedness and response that failed in the wake of Hurricane 
Katrina. As we consider the defense appropriation this fall, I 
encourage my colleagues to take a broader view when it comes to our 
national security priorities and make the tradeoffs that must be made.
  This bill would significantly increase spending on homeland security. 
I do not take lightly a decision to vote in favor of spending the 
taxpayers' money. Fiscal responsibility is one of my highest 
priorities, but it is imperative that we provide the resources needed 
to combat al-Qaida and its affiliates and protect the country.
  I am pleased that the bill would appropriate funds to double the 
frequency of spot checks at regulated port facilities across the 
country, to conduct vulnerability assessments at 10 high risk ports, to 
create a radiation detection test center to help scan cargo and to 
purchase and install explosives detection equipment at airports. Much 
more remains to be done. I will continue to work to ensure that our 
national security strategies address the range of

[[Page S10309]]

threats we face and properly prioritizes homeland security.

                          ____________________