[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 177 (Wednesday, November 1, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H8363-H8365]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]





                  FTO PASSPORT REVOCATION ACT OF 2017

  Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass 
the bill (H.R. 425) to authorize the revocation or denial of passports 
to individuals affiliated with foreign terrorist organizations, and for 
other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                                H.R. 425

       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 ``FTO Passport Revocation Act 
     of 2017''.

     SEC. 2. REVOCATION OR DENIAL OF PASSPORTS TO INDIVIDUALS 
                   AFFILIATED WITH FOREIGN TERRORIST 
                   ORGANIZATIONS.

       The Act entitled ``An Act to regulate the issue and 
     validity of passports, and for other purposes'', approved 
     July 3, 1926 (22 U.S.C. 211a et seq.), commonly known as the 
     ``Passport Act of 1926'', is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 4. AUTHORITY TO DENY OR REVOKE PASSPORT.

       ``(a) Ineligibility.--
       ``(1) Issuance.--Except as provided under subsection (b), 
     the Secretary of State may refuse to issue a passport to any 
     individual whom the Secretary has determined has aided, 
     assisted, abetted, or otherwise helped an organization the 
     Secretary has designated as a foreign terrorist organization 
     pursuant to section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality 
     Act (8 U.S.C. 1189).
       ``(2) Revocation.--The Secretary of State may revoke a 
     passport previously issued to any individual described in 
     paragraph (1).
       ``(b) Right of Review.--Any individual who, in accordance 
     with this section, is denied issuance of a passport by the 
     Secretary of State, or whose passport is revoked by the 
     Secretary, may request a hearing before the Secretary not 
     later than 60 days after receiving notice of such denial or 
     revocation.
       ``(c) Report.--
       ``(1) In general.--If the Secretary of State refuses to 
     issue or revokes a passport pursuant to subsection (a), or 
     if, subsequent to a hearing pursuant to subsection (b), the 
     Secretary issues or cancels a revocation of a passport that 
     was the subject of such a hearing, the Secretary shall, not 
     later than 30 days after such refusal or revocation, or such 
     issuance or cancellation, submit to the Committee on Foreign 
     Affairs of the House of Representatives and the Committee on 
     Foreign Relations of the Senate a report on such refusal, 
     revocation, issuance, or cancellation, as the case may be.
       ``(2) Form.--The report submitted under paragraph (1) may 
     be submitted in classified or unclassified form.
       ``(d) Definition.--In this section, the term `passport' 
     includes a passport card.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Poe) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel) each will 
control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.


                             General Leave

  Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks 
and to include extraneous material on this measure.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the terrorist attack last night in New York City comes 
as a devastating reminder that the enemies of liberty will not cease.
  Eight people were killed and 11 more were injured in what law 
enforcement officials are now calling New York's deadliest terror 
attack since 9/11.
  The perpetrator of this attack was radicalized domestically by ISIS, 
highlighting the grave threat posed by this terrorist propaganda.
  Mr. Speaker, the terrorist last night was an immigrant from 
Uzbekistan, but we know that even within our midst, there are Americans 
who sympathize with those who seek to destroy our freedom.

                              {time}  1830

  As many as 250 American citizens have sought to travel to Syria, and 
more than 100 have joined ISIS' ranks. Many of these individuals have 
received terrorist training while overseas. Some are under the command 
and control of terrorist leaders who have instructed them to attack the 
United States whenever. Others are inspired by the perverted ideology 
of hate that the terrorists post on social media sites. Many of these 
are American social media sites.
  These American citizens are a direct threat to our homeland. 
Unfortunately, our current safeguards are insufficient to protect us 
against such vulnerability.
  In 2014, a 22-year-old Florida native became the first American to 
carry out a suicide bombing in Syria. He had battled hard and been 
trained by al-Qaida's Syrian affiliate for some time. This same 
American was waved through U.S. border inspections when he traveled 
home to Florida a year earlier.
  After spending some time in Florida, the man made his way back to 
Syria to kill in the name of al-Qaida. When he ultimately blew himself 
up in May of 2014, al-Qaida released a video of his last will and 
testament. He said: ``You think you are safe where you are in America. 
You are not safe.''
  Mr. Speaker, today we are at a dangerous crossroad. As ISIS loses 
more territory in its so-called caliphate and it collapses, the threat 
to our homeland will really grow. Americans who have been fighting with 
ISIS will be looking for ways to come home to stage deadly attacks.
  In recent weeks, a man from Alexandria, Virginia, was convicted on 
terrorism charges for joining ISIS. He was sentenced to 20 years in the 
penitentiary. This terrorist traitor to our Nation named four other 
Westerners who had joined ISIS and who left Syria with intentions to do 
harm in their home countries.
  Law enforcement officials and terrorism experts have been warning of 
this foreign fighter threat for years. This is a serious threat, and we 
must address it before it becomes worse.
  Having betrayed our Nation, we must revoke the privileges that come 
with an American passport. That is why my colleague, the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Keating), and I introduced H.R. 425, the Foreign 
Terrorist Organization Passport Revocation Act. It authorizes the 
Secretary of State to revoke passports of those who have joined foreign 
terrorist organizations.
  I might add, Mr. Speaker, this is a legal term, what a foreign 
terrorist organization is. It is only those organizations.
  These individuals are U.S. citizens, but they betray our country. 
They should clearly not be allowed the privilege of international 
travel with an American passport, and they should definitely not be 
able to come back into the United States when they travel overseas, 
such as in Syria. This bipartisan bill will also stop these Benedict 
Arnolds from using their passports to travel to other war zones or 
cross borders to attack any of our allies.
  Mr. Speaker, there is absolutely nothing in current regulations 
specifically to support foreign terrorist organizations. The Secretary 
of State does not have the authority to revoke passports on a broad 
national security basis.
  It is time our laws change and catch up with the modern world and the 
new and real threats to our Nation. Let me be clear, Mr. Speaker. This 
bill would not strip American of their citizenship. It would deny those 
Americans who have sided with foreign terrorist organizations the 
privilege of travel internationally.
  The bill also would not impinge on any American's due process rights 
if they want to appeal the revocation of their passport. Anyone whose 
passport is revoked or denied is eligible for a due process hearing 
within 60 days. The bill would actually increase oversight on this 
process by requiring the State Department to report directly to 
Congress whenever the Secretary moves to revoke or deny an American's 
passport on these grounds.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Massachusetts (Mr. 
Keating) for working with me on this bill. We both sit on the Committee 
on Foreign Affairs' Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and 
Trade as the chair and ranking member. We have both been working on 
this issue of foreign fighter threats for some time, and we believe 
this is a good first step to protect our homeland.
  I also want to thank Chairman Royce for his help in getting this 
important bill passed in the committee, and also Ranking Member Engel 
from New York, where this unfortunate tragic event occurred last night.
  Mr. Speaker, the point is this: the traitors among us who have chosen 
to

[[Page H8364]]

make their allegiance to a murderous ideology instead of the country 
that gave them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness must face 
the consequences. If you take up arms with our enemies, you deserve to 
be treated like one.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, 
and I rise in strong support of this measure.
  Mr. Speaker, as a New Yorker, my heart aches today. The appalling 
loss of life on the streets of Manhattan yesterday is a reminder that 
terrorism remains a threat that demands our focus.
  Confronting violent extremism requires sound, reasoned policies; 
policies proportional to the threat, policies based on good 
intelligence, careful analysis, and a clear understanding of what we 
are up against, not policies based on hysterical reactions or biases 
against certain faiths or nationalities.
  I support this bill because it will ensure that the State Department 
has the tools to prevent American terrorists from traveling abroad or 
returning to our country.
  Under this legislation, the Secretary of State could refuse to issue 
a passport or revoke a passport for any American who has provided 
assistance to foreign terrorist organizations. Importantly, it also 
affords anyone affected the right to an appeals process, helping to 
ensure due process rights.
  This bill is just common sense. It is also a vital aspect of the 
fight against terrorism. We don't want known threats crossing our 
borders or slipping from country to country anywhere in the world.
  The bill we are considering today would not have, obviously, 
prevented yesterday's attack, but this is important. This is just a 
piece of a larger strategy.
  The President yesterday called our judicial system, which would 
prosecute the perpetrator of yesterday's attack, a joke and a laughing 
stock. I beg to disagree. That is our judicial system, which 
successfully prosecuted shoe bomber Richard Reid; Ramzi Yousef, the 
1993 World Trade Center bomber; Faisal Shahzad, the Times Square 
bomber; and Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, Osama Bin Laden's son-in-law, in March 
of 2014.
  Mr. Speaker, the judicial branch has done quite a good job in 
prosecuting terrorists. Let's show them a little confidence and give 
credit where credit is due.
  This is deadly serious. The man suspected in yesterday's attack was 
reportedly radicalized after he arrived in the United States. We have 
seen this before in San Bernardino and Orlando. ISIS inspires its 
adherents from thousands of miles away. That is a problem. And just as 
this bill gets at a narrow, specific potential vulnerability, policies 
to deal with homegrown extremists and terrorists should take a hard 
look at causes and take appropriate action to prevent this sort of 
radicalization on American shores.
  We won't solve this problem by slamming shut America's front door and 
clamping down on immigration. In fact, doing so just contributes to the 
terrorist's ideological ammunition and recruitment efforts. There are 
proven ways to combat terrorism, but demonizing a religion or chipping 
away at constitutional rights won't work. Those approaches play right 
into the tactics terrorists use to radicalize vulnerable Americans, 
making us less safe and less free.
  I want to thank Representatives Poe and Keating, who lead our 
Committee on Foreign Affairs' Subcommittee on Terrorism, 
Nonproliferation, and Trade. Mr. Speaker, this bipartisan bill gets to 
the real concern in the fight against terrorism. I am pleased to 
support it.
  With all due respect to Mr. Poe, that is just the way it is.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Keating), the ranking member of the Terrorism, Nonproliferation, 
and Trade Subcommittee.
  Mr. KEATING. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to 
me.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 425, the Foreign 
Terrorist Organization Passport Revocation Act.
  Mr. Speaker, I can't speak to the subject of terrorism without 
condemning the senseless and heinous attack that took place yesterday 
in New York City. My prayers are with all the individuals and families 
that were affected. My utmost respect goes to the New York City 
community that, once again, stands strong, stands together, 
unintimidated.
  Mr. Speaker, I introduced this important piece of legislation, H.R. 
425, together with Chairman Poe of the Foreign Affairs' Subcommittee on 
Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade.
  As we have discussed, this legislation works to strengthen the tools 
we have at our disposal for combating terrorism. Put simply, the 
Secretary of State can refuse to issue or revoke the passport to any 
individual the Secretary determines is affiliated with or has aided, 
assisted, or abetted a designated foreign terrorist organization.
  The terrorist treats that we face today are complex. Our Federal, 
State, and local agencies are fighting terrorism at a time when ISIS 
and other terrorist organizations are able to use new technologies and 
means of communication to connect with individuals around the globe to 
fund, to direct, and inspire acts of terror.
  Modes of international travel are more accessible and affordable than 
ever, and cross-border flows of people and goods have increased as we 
have become more connected in the global world. While these are very 
positive developments for exchange, competitiveness, and quality of 
life, we also have to be sure we are managing the risks that go along 
with this increased connectivity.
  We have to make it harder for anyone supporting terrorism to benefit 
from the increased ease of global movement. That is why our legislation 
is important. We must ensure that the Secretary of State has the clear 
authority to refuse a passport to anyone affiliated with or supporting 
a designated foreign terrorist organization.
  This legislation provides that specific statutory authority, as well 
as improved congressional oversight, are in place. It is also important 
that there are safeguards in place in order for any law to be 
successful. That is why I am pleased that H.R. 425 also includes a 
right of review for anyone whose passport has been refused or revoked.
  It is absolutely possible to fight terrorism while still upholding 
protections for individuals' rights and the rule of law, and it is 
critical that we do both. In fighting to protect our communities and 
our democracy, we cannot compromise these very things we are fighting 
to protect.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Chairman Poe for joining me in 
introducing H.R. 425, the Foreign Terrorist Organization Passport 
Revocation Act. I would like to also thank Chairman Royce and Ranking 
Member Engel for their support with this bill as well within the 
Foreign Affairs Committee.
  Mr. Speaker, in closing, I urge that all of our colleagues join 
together in support of this important legislation.
  Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, let me thank Chairman Royce from California, 
as well as Representatives Poe and Keating for their remarks.
  This is a good bill. It is a commonsense bill. It is a good example 
of how we need to legislate when it comes to terrorism. We are acting 
out of innovation, out of careful analysis, not out of fear.
  We all feel the sting today of an attack on American soil yesterday. 
As lawmakers, one of our most important jobs is to help keep Americans 
safe, and there is no worse heartbreak than when we see innocent lives 
lost.
  Mr. Speaker, I am glad we are moving this bipartisan measure today. I 
am pleased to support it. I urge all Members to do the same.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1845

  Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I want to emphasize again our prayers for the folks in New York City 
and for the appreciation of our first responders, who are always there, 
as you personally know, Mr. Speaker. And the New York tragedy is an 
example of how they respond and chase and go after terrorists rather 
than run from terror.
  One other thing I want to mention is the Foreign Affairs Committee, 
we work primarily bipartisan, Mr. Speaker. That shocks a lot of folks 
here in Washington, D.C., and it sure shocks a lot of folks back home. 
But most of the

[[Page H8365]]

things that come before the House floor have been bipartisan pieces of 
legislation.
  We spend a lot of time on legislation and almost always come to the 
House floor with unanimous votes, or mostly unanimous votes, on the 
committee level. We work very well on these issues because these are 
not partisan issues; these are American issues that we are talking 
about.
  Mr. Speaker, there are about 61 designated foreign terrorist 
organizations that our State Department has said are foreign terrorist 
organizations and, to prevent individuals in America who side with 
these organizations, who support these organizations, who are part of 
these organizations from traveling around the world and coming back 
home, based upon their activities, this legislation by Mr. Keating is 
introduced. Keep them from traveling, because we know who those people 
are, and keep them, especially, from coming back to the United States.
  So what would happen if a passport is revoked and some American is in 
Syria and is radicalized and he tries to get on a plane? Well, he is 
not allowed to get on the plane. He is stopped, and then he is turned 
over, eventually, to Department of Homeland Security and our Justice 
Department and handled that way.
  Now, there are only a few places under our law where a person's 
passport can be revoked. Not paying your child support, drug 
trafficking, sex tourism--those are three of the examples. So we are 
not talking about a lot of examples, but we are talking about this 
example.
  I am a former judge, and I know Mr. Keating is a former prosecutor. 
Due process for Americans is always important. The Supreme Court has 
already ruled on whether or not passports can be revoked under certain 
circumstances, and they have affirmed the authority of the State 
Department to revoke passports in specific cases based upon national 
security reasons.
  This bill allows for due process of those people who have their 
passports revoked. This is a good step in protecting the United States. 
This is bipartisan legislation. I think it is very important that we 
take this step.
  Once again, my prayers, our prayers, are for those folks in New York. 
But, Mr. Speaker, we are not going to allow terrorists to have their 
day. We are not going to allow them to have their way.
  And that is just the way it is.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 425--
the FTO Passport Revocation Act of 2017--by my friend and colleague 
Chairman Ted Poe. I cannot help but see this measure as a common sense 
tactic to prevent terrorists from entering or re-entering our country. 
However, more needs to be done to build on this useful foundation for 
security from terrorists originating in this country or foreign-based 
terrorists.
  Just yesterday, the streets of New York were the scene of carnage 
caused by a man from Uzbekistan who won a diversity visa lottery to 
enter this country in 2010. He has lived here for seven years before 
going on the murderous rampage that killed 8 people and injured 12 
others. Clearly, we need to look closer at the background of those 
admitted through this lottery as they could eventually obtain a U.S. 
passport. That was the conclusion by the Government Accountability 
Office ten years ago--three years before New York terror suspect 
arrived in this country.
  The GAO report in 2007 called the diversity visa program ``an open 
door'' for terrorists. According to the report 9,800 people from 
countries designated by the State Department as State Sponsors of 
Terrorism had used the program to enter the country. These people could 
eventually qualify for a U.S. passport.
  We also must be more vigilant about people coming from countries not 
designated as State Sponsors of Terrorism. The 9/11 Commission reported 
back in 2004 that as many as six of the hijackers of the three planes--
who were from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, United Arab Emirates and Lebanon--
had used fraudulent or manipulated passports to enter the United 
States. In 2013, a Saudi citizen entering the United States through the 
Detroit airport was detained because he couldn't satisfactorily explain 
why he was carrying a pressure cooker like the one used in the Boston 
marathon bombing. However, upon inspection, his passport suspiciously 
had a missing page. Would that have been caught without the presence of 
the pressure cooker? We are told that even the slightest tweak to a 
passport will be caught, but one failure could result in a terrorist 
entering our country, and they could eventually become terrorist 
sleepers who acquire a U.S. passport.
  Finally, in order for the FTO designation to be effectively used to 
stop terrorists from getting passports or having their passport 
revoked, our government must make that designation in the first place. 
I tried for two years to get the previous administration to designate 
Boko Haram as a terrorist organization. They finally did so in 2013, 
but how many potential terrorists may have gotten through before then 
and acquire sufficient status to receive a U.S. passport? We also need 
to use the FTO designation to identify those giving support to 
terrorist organizations, especially in cases of such support coming 
from those living in the United States who could be or potentially 
could be U.S. passport holders.
  As I said earlier, I consider H.R. 425 a common sense measure on 
which to build, but we must take steps to make this bill as meaningful 
as it must be for our security. I ask my colleagues to approve this 
legislation.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Higgins of Louisiana). The question is 
on the motion offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe) that the 
House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 425, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________