[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 86 (Monday, June 17, 2013)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E900-E902]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                               H.R. 2217

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. ALAN GRAYSON

                               of florida

                    in the house of representatives

                         Monday, June 17, 2013

  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to extend my earlier remarks 
describing the intent of Congress with regard to H. AMDT. 124 to H.R. 
2217, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2014. My 
amendment reads as follows: ``None of the funds made available by this 
Act may be used in contravention of the First, Second, or Fourth 
Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.''
  The Department of Homeland Security, all of its officials, and all 
contractors and subcontractors working on its behalf or operating under 
inherently governmental functions shall respect anonymous speech. No 
funds shall be used to attempt the unmasking of anonymous speakers, 
unless two conditions are met. One, there must be probable cause that 
an anonymous speaker is engaged in criminal activities and two, a 
warrant from a court with jurisdiction over domestic matters must be 
issued. Warrants from the FISA court do not serve this purpose, as 
those courts have jurisdiction over foreign and not domestic matters.
  It is the intent of Congress that the Department of Homeland 
Security, all of its officials, and all contractors and subcontractors 
working on its behalf or operating under inherently governmental 
functions respect the freedom of the press, defining press as ``every 
sort of publication which affords a vehicle of information and 
opinion'' (per Justice Charles Evans Hughes). In any granting of press 
privileges, DHS is prohibited from distinguishing between media 
businesses with established track records and citizen publishing 
vehicles or blogs with partisan, noncommercial, or advocacy missions. 
DHS shall under no circumstances engage in prior restraint and shall 
respect the precedential value of New York Times Co. v. United States 
(1971). No citizen exercising first amendment rights shall be 
prohibited from publishing information by the use of funds appropriated 
in this bill.
  It is the intent of Congress that a search under the Fourth Amendment 
is neither reasonable nor constitutional if, as the Supreme Court noted 
in Katz v. United States, (1) a person expects privacy in the thing 
searched and (2) society believes that expectation is reasonable. 
Considering the advances in electronic storage and retrieval 
technology, as well as the general trail of electronic residue left by 
any citizen using email, search engines, most forms of banking and 
commerce, VoIP, or use of the internet or mobile phones, it is the 
intent of Congress that the Department of Homeland Security, all of its 
officials, and all contractors and subcontractors working on its behalf 
or operating under inherently governmental functions should go beyond 
the so-called ``third party doctrine'' in protecting fourth amendment 
rights. Any examination without a person's consent to the Government 
(not a private party) of search engine records, e-mail, internet 
records, phone records, or information produced in the course of 
ordinary business is considered a search of that person's ``papers and 
effects.'' The Department of Homeland Security, all of its officials, 
and all contractors and subcontractors working on its behalf or 
operating under inherently governmental functions are prohibited from 
using appropriated funds to engage in such searches.
  It is not the intent of Congress that every form of surveillance that 
is technically feasible should be performed. Nor is it the intent of 
Congress that every form of surveillance that is somehow arguably 
within court precedent or some strained interpretation of a relevant 
statute should be performed. On the contrary, statutory authority for 
surveillance is to be construed narrowly, because all forms of 
government surveillance implicate and potentially impair or even 
destroy our privacy rights. It is never the intention of Congress that 
security concerns override constitutional rights--on the contrary, we 
take an oath of office to defend those rights. The Fourth Amendment 
makes it clear, not only by its wording but by its very existence, that 
the right to privacy is a fundamental part of the American experience. 
We cannot protect our liberty by snuffing it out--we cannot destroy our 
village in order to save it.

                   HONORING CAPTAIN WILLIAM J. MILNE

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. ROBERT J. WITTMAN

                              of virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                         Monday, June 17, 2013

  Mr. WITTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a true leader for 
his extraordinary service in the United States Coast Guard, Captain 
William J. Milne. Captain Milne served his country for 38 years in the 
Coast Guard and on June 14, he will retire as the Director of Law 
Enforcement, Maritime Security, and Defense Operations Policy at Coast 
Guard Headquarters in Washington DC. We all owe him a debt of gratitude 
for his commitment to service and to our country.
   A native of Seattle, WA, Captain Milne graduated from Coast Guard 
Recruit Basic Training in 1975. His first assignment was as a Search 
and Rescue communications watchstander at Coast Guard Station Umpqua 
River in Winchester Bay, OR. During this assignment, he not only earned 
the distinguished SURFMAN designation, but was quickly promoted to 
Boatswain's Mate First Class in the Coast Guard and assumed the duties 
as Executive Petty Officer of the Station. Continuing his rapid 
promotion through the ranks, CAPT Milne was commissioned as an Ensign 
after completing Officer Candidate School in 1986.
   As an officer, Captain Milne served on six Coast Guard cutters 
including serving as the commanding officer of the cutters Cape Corwin, 
Redwood and Juniper. He also served in numerous shore-based leadership 
positions including Coast Guard Liaison to the United States House of 
Representatives, and commanding officer of one of the Coast Guard's 
largest training commands in Yorktown, Virginia. In addition to 
completing some of the most challenging and demanding assignments in 
the Coast Guard, Captain Milne also earned a Bachelor of Arts in 
Business Administration, an MBA and a Masters Degree in National 
Security and Strategic Studies.
   Captain Milne is finishing his distinguished career as the Director 
of Law Enforcement, Maritime Security, and Defense Operations Policy. 
In this assignment, as well as his previous position as the Program 
Director for Maritime Counter-Terrorism, Captain Milne oversaw the 
development of Coast Guard strategic and operational policy vital to 
our Nation's maritime safety and security. In addition, he was a key 
leader in the development and management of the Coast Guard's 
Deployable Specialized Forces. His foresight, experience and judgment 
ensured these highly specialized forces were not only ready to deploy 
in response to national security threats, but were also prepared to 
protect the environment and provide humanitarian assistance to those in 
need. Most recently, CAPT Milne led the Coast Guard's response to the 
tragic terrorist bombings at the Boston Marathon, ensuring the Port of 
Boston was well-protected during the vulnerable days following the 
attack.
   A highly decorated officer, Captain Milne's awards include the 
Legion of Merit, three Meritorious Service Medals, five Coast Guard 
Commendation Medals, the Department of Transportation 9/11 Medal for 
his service in New York City in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 
attacks, and several other personal and unit awards.
   Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my constituents and a grateful Nation, I 
ask all my distinguished colleagues to join me in recognizing the 
extraordinary career of Captain William J. Milne. There are few 
opportunities for us to recognize the accomplishments of those who 
selflessly dedicate their lives to the service of our country, and I 
cannot thank Captain Milne, his wife Martina, their two children, Dean 
and Lacey, and their eight grandchildren, with

[[Page E901]]

three more on the way, enough for everything they have done and 
sacrificed to protect our Nation.

                   THE TRUE COST OF COAL ACT OF 2013

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. JIM McDERMOTT

                             of washington

                    in the house of representatives

                         Monday, June 17, 2013

  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to re-introduce the True 
Cost of Coal Act, a bill that would address the negative impacts of 
coal transportation on both the local communities and American 
taxpayers.
   Currently, plans are underway to develop coal export facilities in 
the Pacific Northwest that would exponentially increase the volume of 
coal being exported out of the region. The three proposed terminals--
Gateway Pacific and Millennium Bulk Terminals in Washington and Morrow 
Pacific Project in Oregon--would export over 100 million tons of 
additional coal per year. For a sense of scale, the U.S. coal exports 
in their entirety totaled 125 million tons in 2012. The new terminals 
would nearly double that total.
   With these new plans come considerable burdens on the rail 
communities through which the coal would be transported, including 
environmental and public health considerations, worsening traffic 
congestion, and noise pollution, among others. However, without 
legislation like this, the taxpayers will be largely responsible for 
these costs. After all, coal and train companies are currently under no 
obligation to pay for mitigating the effects of transporting coal. 
That's why I am once again introducing legislation to hold them 
accountable for the costs that their activities incur.
   According to the U.S. Energy Information Agency (EIA), the average 
price per ton of coal exports in 2012 was $118 per ton; the EIA also 
estimates that in 2012 the cost to ship coal from the Powder River 
Basin to the Pacific Northwest was only about $20 per ton.
   The True Cost of Coal Act of 2013 will impose a 10 dollar per ton 
excise tax on all extracted coal. This money will be used to mitigate 
the negative impacts of coal transportation and ensure the true cost of 
coal is paid for by the responsible parties--not the local communities 
and American taxpayers. The money is allocated to the affected States, 
who are in the best position to determine how best to use their funds. 
The Act also requires that trains transporting coal be covered or 
treated to ensure that no coal dust is released during transportation.
   I have long been a champion of preserving the clean air and water 
that Washingtonians cherish. I am pleased to be continuing that work 
and hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this legislation.
    

[[Page E902]]



                          ____________________