[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 127 (Thursday, September 10, 2009)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2243]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   INTRODUCTION OF UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON AN OPEN SOCIETY WITH 
                          SECURITY ACT OF 2009

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON

                      of the district of columbia

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, September 10, 2009

  Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, today, I introduce the United States 
Commission on an Open Society with Security Act which expresses an idea 
I began working on when the first signs of the closing of parts of our 
open society appeared after the Oklahoma City bombing tragedy, well 
before 9/11. I introduce this bill on the eighth anniversary of 9/11 
because this bill grows more urgent as an increasing variety of 
security measures proliferate throughout the country without any 
thought about their effect on common freedoms and ordinary access, and 
without any guidance from the government or elsewhere. The introduction 
of this bill also precedes my upcoming September 22nd hearing on 
federal building security, which has gotten so out of control that a 
tourist passing by a federal building cannot even get in to use the 
restroom or enjoy the many restaurant facilities located in areas 
otherwise bereft of such opportunities. The security in federal 
buildings has too long resided only in the hands of non-security 
experts who do not take into account actual threats, and as a result, 
spend lavish amounts on needless security procedures. For example, the 
Government Accountability Office completed sting operations this year, 
carrying bomb making materials into 10 high-security federal buildings 
and assembling them in the bathrooms. This scandal shines a light on 
the failure to use risk-based assessments in allocations of resources.
  The bill I introduce today would begin a systematic investigation 
that takes full account of the importance of maintaining our democratic 
traditions while responding adequately to the real and substantial 
threats terrorism poses. To accomplish its difficult mission, the 
Commission created by this bill would be composed not only of military 
and security experts, but for the first time, they would be at the same 
table with experts from such fields as business, architecture, 
technology, law, city planning, art, engineering, philosophy, history, 
sociology, and psychology. To date, questions of security most often 
have been left almost exclusively to security and military experts. 
They are indispensable participants, but these experts cannot alone 
resolve all the new and unprecedented issues raised by terrorism in an 
open society. In order to strike the balance required by our democratic 
traditions, a diverse group of experts needs to be working together at 
the same table.
  For years before our eyes, parts of our open society have gradually 
been closed down because of terrorism and the fear of terrorism--
whether checkpoints on streets near the Capitol even when there were no 
alerts, to applications of technology without regard to their effects 
on privacy. We have also seen heightened controversy, litigation, 
hearings, legislation and court decisions because of the use of 
technology that intercepts terrorist communications but also covers 
communications among Americans.
  Following the unprecedented terrorist attack on our country on 9/11, 
Americans expected additional and increased security adequate to 
protect citizens against this frightening threat. However, in our 
country, people also expect government to be committed and smart enough 
to undertake this awesome new responsibility without depriving them of 
their personal liberty. These years in our history will long be 
remembered by the rise of terrorism in the world and in this country 
and the unprecedented challenges they have brought. We must provide 
ever-higher levels of security for our people and public spaces while 
maintaining a free and open democratic society. Yet, this is no 
ordinary war that we expect to be over in a matter of years. The end 
point could be generations from now. The indeterminate nature of the 
threat adds to the necessity of putting aside ad hoc approaches to 
security developed in isolation from the goal of maintaining an open 
society.
  When we have faced unprecedented and perplexing issues in the past, 
we have had the good sense to investigate them deeply and to move to 
resolve them. Examples include the National Commission on Terrorist 
Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the 9/11 Commission), the 
Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States 
Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction (also known as the Silberman-Robb 
Commission) and the Kerner Commission that investigated the riotous 
uprisings that swept American cities in the 1960s and 1970s. The 
important difference in this bill is that the Commission seeks to act 
before a crisis-level erosion of basic freedoms takes hold and becomes 
entrenched. Because global terrorism is likely to be long lasting, we 
cannot afford to allow the proliferation of security that neither 
requires nor is subject to advance civilian oversight or analysis of 
alternatives and repercussions on freedom and commerce.
  With no vehicles for leadership on issues of security and openness, 
we have been left to muddle through, using blunt 19th century 
approaches, such as crude blockades, unsightly barriers around 
beautiful monuments and other signals that the society is closing down, 
without appropriate exploration of possible alternatives. The threat of 
terrorism to an open society is too serious to be left to ad hoc 
problem-solving. Such approaches are often as inadequate as they are 
menacing.
  We can do better, but only if we recognize and then come to grips 
with the complexities associated with maintaining a society of free and 
open access in a world characterized by unprecedented terrorism. The 
place to begin is with a high-level presidential commission of experts 
in a broad spectrum of disciplines who can help chart the new course 
that will be required to protect our people and our precious democratic 
institutions and traditions.

                          ____________________