[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 97 (Tuesday, June 26, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H4009-H4011]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
GAUGING AMERICAN PORT SECURITY ACT
Mr. KING of New York. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and
pass the bill (H.R. 4005) to direct the Secretary of Homeland Security
to conduct a study and report to Congress on gaps in port security in
the United States and a plan to address them, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 4005
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Gauging American Port
Security Act'' or the ``GAPS Act''.
SEC. 2. STUDY, REPORT, AND PLAN TO ADDRESS GAPS IN PORT
SECURITY.
(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act the Secretary of Homeland Security
shall--
(1) conduct a study of, and submit to the Congress a report
on, remaining gaps in port security in the United States; and
(2) include in such report a prioritization of such gaps
and a plan for addressing them.
(b) Form.--The report required under subsection (a) shall
be submitted in classified form but shall contain an
unclassified annex.
SEC. 3. INFORMATION SHARING.
The Secretary of Homeland Security shall, in accordance
with rules for the handling of classified information, share,
as appropriate, with designated points of contact from
Federal agencies and State, local, or tribal governments, and
port system owners and operators, relevant information
regarding remaining gaps in port security of the United
States, prioritization of such gaps, and a plan for
addressing such gaps. In the event that a designated point of
contact does not have the necessary security clearance to
receive such information, the Secretary shall help expedite
the clearance process, as appropriate.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New
York (Mr. King) and the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
General Leave
Mr. KING of New York. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks and include any extraneous material on the bill under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New York?
There was no objection.
Mr. KING of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
H.R. 4005, the Gauging American Port Security Act, or GAPS Act, is a
commonsense bill that requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to
determine if appropriate security measures to protect the Nation's
ports are in place or if gaps in the security of U.S. ports exist. A
lot of emphasis and attention is focused on our northern and southern
land borders; however, it is important not to forget our largest
border, the maritime border.
While DHS employs a layered approach to maritime and port security
based on risk, it is important to examine whether gaps in the current
risk-based approach exist which may have a detrimental impact on the
security of our Nation's ports and global supply chain.
While DHS has come a long way in articulating the need for greater
maritime cooperation through its Maritime Operations Coordination Plan
and similar Interagency Operations Centers and other regional
operational centers, this bill will ensure that gaps in port security
are identified, allowing DHS to better execute its risk-based approach
to maritime and port security.
I would like to especially thank Congresswoman Janice Hahn for her
work on this bill. I would also like to thank the contributions of the
committee, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time
as I may consume.
I rise in support of H.R. 4005, the Gauging American Port Security
Act.
This bill, authored by Representative Janice Hahn, who is a member of
the Committee on Homeland Security, would require the Secretary of
Homeland Security to conduct a study of the gaps in port security in
the United States. The study, which will be submitted to Congress, must
set forth the prioritization of those security gaps and a plan for
addressing them.
Finally, the bill would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to
share relevant port security information, as appropriate, with Federal,
State and local government partners, as well as with those port owners
and operators who are involved in protecting ports.
Given the importance of America's ports and waterways to our Nation
and its economy, they are an attractive target for terrorists and
criminals. The
[[Page H4010]]
impact of a terrorist attack on a major port would be catastrophic--
with massive economic losses in addition to the probable loss of life.
By requiring a comprehensive assessment of port security
vulnerabilities and a plan for addressing them, we will be one step
closer to making our ports and our Nation more secure.
With that, Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KING of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe), who is co-chair of the Port Security
Caucus, along with Congresswoman Hahn.
Mr. POE of Texas. I thank the gentleman from New York for yielding
and for his work on this legislation.
I also want to thank subcommittee Chairwoman Miller for her work on
this legislation. Both see the need to fix the gaps that are in our
port security.
I want to thank the gentlelady from California (Ms. Hahn), who
introduced this legislation. We are both alumni from the same school.
I'm sure you've heard of it, Abilene Christian University in West
Texas. The closest port to Abilene, I guess, is a boat dock at Fort
Phantom Lake, if you want to call that a port.
But anyway, this bill is a good example of bipartisan work--of both
sides of the House--on an issue that is important to all of us:
security. This means national security and port security.
Congresswoman Hahn and I recently founded the Congressional Ports
Caucus to raise awareness about ports in Congress and in our Nation.
She represents west coast ports, and I represent ports in southeast
Texas, on the gulf coast. We saw a need for a national discussion about
ports because of their importance to the Nation and to our economy.
Since we both have ports in our backyards, that is the reason the
caucus was formed. We have over 65 Members in both parties from all
regions across the United States. Some Members don't even have ports in
their districts, but all see that ports are a national security issue.
One discussion we hope to continue through the caucus is the need to
ensure that our ports are safe and secure. In meeting with industry
groups and administration officials, it became evident to us that an
updated plan on how ports should remain operational in the event of an
attack really doesn't exist. There are gaps in our port security. The
GAPS Act is an important step in addressing this existing problem in
port security.
Any attack on our Nation's ports would be detrimental to the economy
because ports play a large role in facilitating the flow of commerce.
Most of the products in our stores arrive through ports and then are
transported by other means to stores throughout the Nation. A crisis
event causing a port to shut down would greatly affect our national
commerce--money would be lost; businesses would lose revenue; and
people would be out of work.
{time} 1640
Both the chairman and ranking member of the Homeland Security
Committee support this legislation, and I'm grateful for that. I urge
all of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this
legislation. Port security is not a partisan issue; it's a national
security issue that we all should be concerned about.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as she
may consume to the gentlewoman from California, a member of the
Committee on Homeland Security and the original sponsor of H.R. 4005,
Ms. Hahn.
Ms. HAHN. Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by recognizing and
thanking Chairman King and Ranking Member Thompson for their continued
leadership on this incredibly important issue.
The lessons of 9/11 have taught us we must be continuously vigilant
and proactive in seeking out and preventing our country's most pressing
threats. That's why, after 9/11, this Congress strengthened what proved
to be one of our Nation's biggest security threats up to that point:
aviation security. And while I applaud the great strides we've made in
aviation security, we have not made the same level of improvements in
port security.
This was such a priority for me when I came to Congress last summer
that, at my very first Homeland Security hearing focusing on the 9/11
Commission's recommendations to Congress, I asked Lee Hamilton, the
vice chairman of the 9/11 Commission, What should Congress be doing to
improve security at our Nation's ports? He responded by saying, My
judgment would be that we have not focused enough on ports.
This lack of focus on our ports not only jeopardizes our national
security, but our economic security as well. The U.S. ports remain one
of our country's greatest economic resources, as they provide our
Nation with the link to the rest of the world and the global economy.
Each day, U.S. ports move both imports and exports, totaling some $3.8
billion worth of goods, through all 50 States. Additionally, ports move
99 percent of overseas cargo volume by weight and generate $3.95
trillion in international trade.
However, port security does much more than protect American commerce;
it also protects American jobs. According to the American Association
of Port Authorities, the U.S. port industry supports 13.3 million jobs
and accounts for more than $649 billion in personal income. That's why
I was pleased to cofound the bipartisan Congressional PORTS Caucus with
my good friend and fellow alumnus, Ted Poe, in order to ensure that
Congress recognizes the vital role ports play in our national economy
and the importance of keeping them competitive and secure.
Despite all this, ports have failed to garner the attention I think
they deserve. For instance, in the U.S., tens of thousands of ships
each year make over 50,000 calls on U.S. ports. The volume of traffic
gives terrorists opportunities to smuggle themselves or their weapons
into the United States with little risk of detection. According to a
recent CRS report, a 10- to 20-kiloton weapon detonated in a major
seaport would kill 50,000 to 1 million people and would result in
direct property damage of $50 billion to $500 billion, losses due to
trade disruption of $100 billion to $200 billion, and indirect costs of
$300 billion to $1.2 trillion.
Congress attempted to address this issue by passing the SAFE Port Act
in 2006 and the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007, which specifically
required that 100 percent of the cargo coming into our ports be scanned
by this summer. Unfortunately, DHS has made little progress in
achieving this goal and does not plan to implement it. In fact, we've
recently learned that DHS has only been scanning about 3 percent to 5
percent of all the cargo imported into our United States.
Now, while the feasibility of scanning 100 percent of incoming cargo
may be a legitimate concern, there certainly needs to be improvement
from where we are now. Whether it's increasing the number of Customs
and Border Protection officers or investing in proven cargo scanning
technology, there needs to be a plan for effectively and efficiently
scanning our Nation's cargo.
Another major vulnerability is the threat posed to vessels during
their voyage at sea. For example, cargo is often checked either before
it's shipped or after it reaches our shore. However, there has not been
much light shed on the specific threats that exist between a vessel's
point of origin and its point of destination.
We also need to know more information about how fast a port could
recover in the event of a terrorist attack or a national disaster if
that did occur at one of our ports.
Without resolving these issues, we risk putting our economy and the
safety of the American people at risk.
As a Member whose district borders one of the largest port complexes
in the country, I understand the unique security challenges that ports
pose to our economic and national security. My district borders the
port complex of Los Angeles-Long Beach, which is responsible for
approximately 44 percent of all the goods that flow into this country
and 20 percent of the Nation's GDP.
During a 10-day lockout in 2002, which arose because of a dispute
between labor and management officials, closure of the west coast ports
cost the United States between $1 billion to $2 billion a day. If an
attack were to occur there, it would be economically debilitating not
only for my district, but for the entire country, as well.
While DHS has made a number of positive steps in strengthening port
security and resiliency, the lack of attention on these vital issues
creates a
[[Page H4011]]
huge problem for securing our ports. We cannot begin to come up with an
effective solution without first knowing the extent of the actual
problem.
The economic importance of our Nation's ports, combined with the
existing port security loopholes, is why I introduced the GAPS Act.
This bill will require the Secretary of the Department of Homeland
Security to conduct a classified study of the potential gaps in port
security and ensure that the Department develops a comprehensive plan
for addressing these vulnerabilities. By focusing on the specific
dangers that threaten our port security, we can begin, I believe, to
develop effective solutions to ensure that our Nation is prepared.
Again, I want to thank Chairman King and Ranking Member Thompson for
their leadership on this issue, my Congressional PORTS Caucus
cofounder, Ted Poe, for recognizing the importance of our ports.
I would like to point out that this bill went through regular order
and is supported by both Democrats and Republicans on an issue that I
know we all care about. I urge my colleagues to support this important
bipartisan legislation.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I have no more speakers. If
the gentleman from New York has no more speakers, then I am prepared to
close.
Mr. KING of New York. This bipartisan bill is a good bill. I urge my
colleagues to support it. It builds very strongly on the initial port
security bill of 2006 that was sponsored by Mr. Lungren, who is here
today, and Jane Harman, who was also in Congress at that time. It was a
very good bill. This adds to it, improves on it, and it keeps up with
the changes in the times.
I urge its adoption, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, our Nation's ports are as
diverse as the people they serve. The importance of this infrastructure
to the global supply chain cannot be overstated.
Enactment of H.R. 4005 will help ensure that our limited security
resources can be targeted to those threats that put our ports at the
greatest risk.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge the passage of H.R. 4005, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support H.R.
4005, the ``Gauging American Port Security'' or GAPS Act. This act will
direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to conduct a study and report
to Congress on gaps in port security in the United States as well as
provide plans to address them.
As a senior Member of the Homeland Security Committee, I know that
the threats against the nation are constantly changing and ever
present. Ensuring the safety and security of our ports is a measure
that will directly address some of these threats and maintain the
economic well-being of our port system.
Over 11 million cargo containers arrive in our ports each year,
bringing in imports from across the world. By placing these additional
measures on the Department of Homeland Security, we are enabling ports
to conduct business without fear that these daily imports are a threat
to national security. As a representative from the 18th Congressional
District of Houston, I represent one of the world's busiest ports.
Houston is linked to 1,053 ports in 203 countries through about 100
steamship lines. The ship channel is a part of the Gulf Intracoastal
Waterway, which is a very busy barge traffic lane. Houston is also one
of only eight U.S. cities to have a regional office of the U.S. Export-
Import Bank.
The Port of Houston is essential to regional economic stability. A
2012 study by Martin Associates reports the port helps provide
1,026,820 jobs throughout Texas, which is an increase of 785,000 jobs
in its 2007 study. The port brings in more than $178.5 billion a year,
including over $4.5 billion in state and local tax revenues.
In addition, the Port of Houston also boasts the nation's largest
petrochemical complex. Houston is known as a gateway for cargo
traveling to the West and Midwest regions of our nation.
Although the Port is integral to Houston's development, as well as to
the nation's economic development, its financial strength is not
possible without strong security measures in place.
The heavy traffic flow of imports and exports that come through the
port each day can leave room for drug trafficking and terrorists
activities to take place. Although the Port of Houston, and ports
across the U.S. boasts that they are secure and in line with nationally
mandated security measures, it is my hope that the GAPS act will
address any and all individual security shortcoming that each port may
face that make them vulnerable to attacks against the Homeland.
The Port of Houston and the majority of ports across the nation have
a remarkable track record of accomplishments that I hope to see
continue. But their economic success and efficiency will only be
hindered without additional security measures in place. This is why I
urge my colleagues to support the provisions of H.R. 4005.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Fitzpatrick). The question is on the
motion offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. King) that the House
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 4005, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground
that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum
is not present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.
The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.
____________________