[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 147 (Tuesday, September 12, 2017)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1200]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




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

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON

                      of the district of columbia

                    in the house of representatives

                      Tuesday, September 12, 2017

  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to reintroduce the United States 
Commission on an Open Society with Security Act, a bill as timely now 
as it was when I first began working on it. I saw the first signs in 
the closing of parts of our open society after the Oklahoma City 
bombing in 1995, and I saw it again after 9/11. This bill grows even 
more urgent as the country is ensnared in continuing wars that threaten 
our security, causing an increasing variety of security measures to 
proliferate throughout the country without due diligence and deep 
thinking about the effects on common freedoms and ordinary public 
access, and often without guidance from the government or bona fide 
security experts. For example, security in some federal buildings bar 
tourists here for Cherry Blossom season from even use of restrooms or 
cafeterias. The security for some federal buildings has for too long 
been unduly influenced by non-security experts, who happen to work for 
an agency but do not have the expertise to take into account actual 
threats.
  The bill I reintroduce today would begin the systematic investigation 
the nation needs to fully take into account the importance of 
maintaining our democratic traditions while responding adequately to 
the real and substantial threat that terrorism poses. To accomplish its 
difficult mission, the bill authorizes a 21-member commission, with the 
president designating nine members and the House and Senate each 
designating six members, to investigate the balance that should be 
required between openness and security. The commission would be 
composed not only of military and security experts, but, for the first 
time at the same table, also 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 should not alone resolve all the new and unprecedented issues 
raised by terrorism in an open society. In order to strike the 
security/access balance required by our democratic traditions, a 
diverse group of experts needs to be at the same table.
  For years, parts of our open society have gradually been closed down 
because of terrorism and the fear of terrorism, on an often ad hoc 
basis. Some federal buildings such as the U.S. Capitol have been able 
to deal with security issues, and continue their openness to the 
public. Others, like the new Department of Transportation headquarters, 
remain mostly inaccessible to the public. These examples, drawn from 
the nation's capital, are replicated in public buildings throughout the 
United States.
  When we have faced unprecedented and perplexing issues in the past, 
we have had the good sense to investigate them deeply before moving 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, which investigated the riots 
that swept American cities in the 1960s and 1970s. In the aftermath of 
the 2013 Navy Yard shooting, I wrote to then-President Barack Obama 
requesting the establishment of an independent panel to investigate 
issues raised by that tragedy and to evaluate how to secure federal 
employees who work in facilities like the Navy Yard that are a part of 
a residential or business community. However, this bill creates a 
commission that would act not in the wake of a tragedy but before a 
crisis and before 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 measures that 
neither require nor are subject to civilian oversight or an 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 our society is closing 
down, all 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 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 commission of experts from a broad array 
of disciplines to help chart the new course that will be required to 
protect our people and our precious democratic institutions and 
traditions.

                          ____________________