[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 83 (Thursday, June 4, 2009)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1314]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        H.R. 2703 AND H.R. 2704

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. JANE HARMAN

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                         Thursday, June 4, 2009

  Ms. HARMAN. Madam Speaker, some of the most powerful military and 
intelligence satellites in the world are designed and produced in my 
Congressional District. They are remarkably formidable tools that daily 
assist our troops in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere, and are 
indispensable in learning and thwarting the plans of those who would do 
us harm.
  But imagine, for a moment, what it would be like if one of these 
satellites were directed on your neighborhood or home, a school or 
place or worship--and without an adequate legal framework or operating 
procedures in place for regulating their use. I daresay the reaction 
might be that Big Brother has finally arrived and the black helicopters 
can't be far behind.
  Yet this is precisely what the Department of Homeland Security 
proposes to do in standing up the benign-sounding National Applications 
Office, or NAO.
  Despite objections by the civil liberties community, a series of 
letters sent by Members of Congress, an established record of 
opposition by the House Homeland Security Committee and the prior 
fencing of funds, the DHS has requested funding in the classified annex 
to its FY2010 budget for the NAO.
  The Appropriations Committee has repeatedly expressed skepticism 
about the need for the NAO, and fenced funding for the office last 
year. I understand that the Committee intends to send a strong message 
again this year. I introduce two bills today to stop the Department of 
Homeland Security from moving ahead with the misguided National 
Applications Office.
  The first bill, introduced with Representative Norm Dicks, prohibits 
DHS from expending any funds on this office. The second bill de-
authorizes the NAO, requiring the Secretary of Homeland Security to 
close the office immediately.
  As proposed, the NAO, housed in the DHS Office of Intelligence & 
Analysis, the NAO would manage the tasking of military intelligence 
satellites over the United States--despite the absence a of clear legal 
framework, legitimate Posse Comitatus concerns, and even though the 
Interior Department already has existing circumscribed authority to 
deploy satellites over large-scale public events or natural disasters.
  In its current form, the NAO would enable a group of undefined law 
enforcement and homeland security ``users'' greater access to imagery 
collection capabilities of the intelligence community--purportedly to 
supplement data already available during disasters or to aid in 
``investigations.'' It would serve as a clearinghouse for requests by 
law enforcement, border security, and other domestic homeland security 
agencies to access real-time, high-quality feeds from spy satellites. 
Except law enforcement officials haven't asked for the additional 
capability and major law enforcement organizations do not believe it is 
necessary.
  The new DHS leadership has assured me in my role as the Chair of the 
Homeland Security Subcommittee on Intelligence and Terrorism Risk 
Assessment that the issue is under review. Although Congress last year 
withheld most funding for the NAO, the Department has again budgeted 
for the office (the exact amount is classified) without prior 
notification of the relevant congressional committees.
  Well, not if we can help it.
  Today, we introduce legislation to shut down the NAO--period.

                          ____________________