[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 18580-18581]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                            AIRPORT SECURITY

  Mr. TORRICELLI. Madam President, I thank my colleague and friend from 
Florida. Indeed, it was a pleasure to hear his remarks.
  In my service in the Congress through these years, I have rarely--
indeed, I have never--witnessed the solidarity of the membership, the 
focus of purpose that has been evident since the tragedy of September 
11. Partisan differences, differences of region and philosophy have 
been impossible to discern in the debates on the Senate floor.
  Tomorrow the Senate resumes debate on legislation to deal with 
airline and airport security. There may be a slight fissure in this 
wall of solidarity. I rise to address it this evening.
  It is not necessarily a difference of party affiliation or of 
philosophy, but it does have some regional implications where people of 
goodwill can differ because of different experiences. It needs to be 
put in perspective, but it is still important.
  This body is right, indeed; the Senate has no choice but to deal with 
the issue of airport security. Our national economy has taken a 
terrible toll in the loss of employment and income. Lives have been 
lost. Families have been broken. Confidence in the freedom to travel in 
America has been shaken--all because of the acts of terrorists who 
hijacked planes and killed our citizens.
  To the cynic, our legislation represents closing the barn door. The 
cynics may be right. But that does not mean the Senate has a choice. 
Whether it is providing armed marshals on aircraft or federalizing the 
check-in system, changing cockpit doors, it may be too late for 
thousands, but it is still not too late for our country. It is a 
responsibility we owe to the American people. It must be done, and it 
must be done quickly. We can lament that we did not forecast the 
problem, but we are left with the reality of dealing with it.
  This, however, invites the question of whether the obligation of the 
Senate is simply to deal with the problem that is now before us, a 
problem made clear by the terrorists themselves in the means by which 
they hijacked these planes, their mode of operation, or whether our 
responsibility is to anticipate.
  On September 11, it was the hijacking of aircraft. There was no 
reason to believe that would be the mode of operation in a future 
attack.
  In some areas of the country, transportation is simply defined. It is 
either aircraft or it is driving automobiles. In our great metropolitan 
areas, it is far more complex. More people use trains every day, I 
suspect, in New York and Boston and Philadelphia and Chicago, perhaps 
in St. Louis or Miami or Los Angeles, perhaps in these places, but I 
can assure you certainly in the State of New Jersey more people ride on 
commuter rail, on Amtrak, than ride on every airliner combined. It is 
another spot of vulnerability. So are our reservoirs, our powerplants. 
All these are places of vulnerability that must be addressed.
  If the Senate tomorrow is to address safety in transportation, that 
debate cannot be complete if we secure aircraft without dealing with 
railroads because they are equally vulnerable.
  Indeed, every Metroliner that leaves New York for Boston or 
Washington potentially can hold up to 2,000 people. Every train 
represents three 747s with average loads. Under any time in a tunnel 
along the Northeast corridor where two trains pass, 3,000 or 4,000 
people can be vulnerable at an instant.
  Indeed, long before this tragedy occurred, the Senate was put on 
notice by Amtrak that its tunnels were aging and had safety 
difficulties. Indeed, the six tunnels leading to Penn Station in New 
York under the Hudson River were built between 1911 and 1920. The 
Senate has been told they do not have ventilation. They do not have 
standing firehoses, and they do not have escape routes.
  The Senate would like to deal with transportation safety by securing 
airplanes. If only life were so easy. It is

[[Page 18581]]

more complex because transportation in our country is more complex.
  Imagine the scenes of people attempting to escape the World Trade 
Center. You can get a concept of what it would be like for people 
trying to get from under the Baltimore tunnels or the Hudson River 
tunnels, if there were a fire or other emergency. Five hundred or 1,000 
people under Penn Station alone would have to climb up nine stories of 
spiral staircases, which is also the only route for firefighters to 
gain access.
  It is not just the New York tunnels. The tunnels in Baltimore were 
built in 1877. The engineering was done by the Army Corps of Engineers 
during the Civil War. They still operate. High-speed railroads 
purchased by this Senate at the cost of billions of dollars, which 
operate at 150 miles per hour, slow to 30 miles per hour in these 
tunnels to navigate their Civil War engineering. One hundred sixty 
trains carrying thousands and thousands of passengers go through each 
of these tunnels every day in New York, Philadelphia, Boston, 
Baltimore, and, indeed, Washington, DC, itself.
  The tunnels to Union Station in Washington that travel alongside the 
Supreme Court annex building were built in 1907 and service up to 60 
trains every single day and have the same difficulties.
  This is not a new problem. It has been coming for years. It is a 
problem in efficiency. It is an economic problem. But what looms most 
large today is it is an enormous safety problem. All of us must do 
everything possible to secure air safety, but if this Senate acts upon 
air safety without dealing with these Amtrak and commuter trains, we 
have not fully met our responsibility. Closing the barn door is not 
good enough when we can see open doors all around us that are other 
invitations for attack.
  Amtrak has proposed a $3.2 billion program to enhance safety: One, a 
$471 million security plan to assure that there are police in proximity 
to trains, bomb-sniffing dogs, and bomb detection equipment for 
luggage--uncompromisable, logical, and essential--two, a command center 
and new communications equipment to ensure that the police are in 
contact with all trains, all police units at all times, including a 
hazmat detection and response system and fencing to assure that access 
to stations and trains can be controlled; third, $1 billion in safety 
and structural improvements for tunnels in New York, New Jersey, 
Baltimore, and Washington, as I have outlined, for fire and escape, and 
a billion dollars in capacity enhancement for rail, bridges, and 
switching stations along the Northeast corridor to deal with what has 
been a 40- to 50-percent increase in ridership since the September 11 
attacks. This is necessitated by the need to have 608 additional seats 
from 18 Metroliners and Acela trains to deal with this demand, and to 
assure that the Nation has at least a duplicity of service for our 
major northeastern metropolitan regions, so if air travel is 
interrupted again, or lost, there is some means of commerce, travel, 
and communication.
  But indeed, while it is much of the Northeast, it is not entirely the 
Northeast. Amtrak trains, in a national emergency, could be the only 
communication with the South, great Western cities, and, most 
obviously, in the Midwest. This is a danger that confronts all 
Americans. But, frankly, if it only concerns a single city in a single 
State in a great Union, when our citizens are in danger and the Nation 
has been attacked, and a program of security and safety is required, we 
should deal with those safety requirements that affect all States, as 
with our airliners. But even the least among us should be part of that 
program--to assure that their unique transportation needs are safe and 
secure.
  This debate will be held tomorrow. I know some people would like to 
avoid it entirely. It is unpleasant to have any differences. We all 
want to agree on everything. In this instance, it may not be necessary. 
But some of us have raised this issue of expanded rail capacity and 
rail safety not for months but for years. Forgive me, but across my 
State there are 3,000 families who have lost a son, or a daughter, or a 
mother, or a father--not to injury but to death. This is not a 
theoretical problem. Terrorism has struck my State, as it struck 
Washington and New York--only it may have consumed even more of our 
lives. While it is every American's loss, you can understand we feel it 
most acutely. For me, responding to the attack will never be enough. 
Our responsibility is to forecast the next problem and assure that it 
never happens. We are grateful for resources for the victims, but our 
duty is to assure that there are no more victims. That is what Amtrak 
and rail safety is all about. This debate will be had tomorrow. It is 
one we dare not lose.
  I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that 
notwithstanding the previous order entered, I be allowed to speak for 
up to 5 minutes, and then have the Senate adjourn at that point.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________