[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 14]
[House]
[Page 19859]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[[Page 19859]]

  THE IMPORTANCE OF FEDERALIZING THE WORK FORCE FOR AVIATION SECURITY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 3, 2001, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) is recognized 
during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, when the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Stearns) spoke in the well earlier about virtues of a privatized 
aviation security system and the handout of our colleague, the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica), I did not object to it being put in 
the Record. I should have, because it was not written by the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Mica) or his staff; it was written by a former FAA 
senior employee who is now earning hundreds of thousands of dollars 
representing the private security firms, including the private security 
firm currently under indictment and prosecution by the Federal 
Government, Arkenbright. So that is his information, and the veracity 
of it is definitely in question.
  In fact, according to an article in last week's Washington Post, at 
Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam, there are 1,300 police agents to 
supervise 1,500 private screeners, who are much better paid, trained, 
and have higher qualifications than in the United States.
  If that is the route they want to go, we would end up having 
something more expensive than a totally federalized system with one 
Federal law enforcement person to supervise every two private 
employees. It would be bigger. It would be absurdly bigger than what we 
could do with the normal scope of supervision in a Federal agency.
  The issue of private firms in the U.S., we have tried it. It has 
failed miserably. I am glad he had a good experience leaving Florida 
and they found his cuticle scissors, that is great; but they are 
missing other things, like fake hand grenades, fully-assembled weapons, 
knives, bombs, or simulated bombs, which the FAA regularly gets through 
these systems.
  The largest private security firm in the country, previously 
successfully prosecuted by the Federal Government, fined $1.5 million, 
Arkenbright, and put on probation, who still is providing security, is 
now being prosecuted again.
  Under the current system, the Federal Government cannot remove these 
incompetents and criminals from doing the job. This company is still 
employing known criminals, despite its probation. It is still hiring 
known criminals, despite its probation.
  Thirty-two percent of its files include new violations and false 
statements on their employees. Yet, today they are providing security 
at Dulles, Reagan, Logan, LaGuardia, Los Angeles, Trenton, Detroit, 
Phoenix, Las Vegas, Columbus, Dallas, Fort Worth, Seattle and Cedar 
Rapids.
  So my colleague, the gentleman from Florida, in his just visceral 
dislike of Federal employees, and more Federal employees and Federal 
bureaucracy, wants to continue a failing private bureaucracy that is 
not properly protecting the security of the American people.
  Mr. Speaker, when we come through Customs, those are Federal law 
enforcement agents. When we come through INS, they are Federal law 
enforcement agents. If we go to Hawaii, the agriculture agents are 
Federal law enforcement agents. Even the beagles that they use in the 
airport have been deemed to be Federal law enforcement agents.
  But my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, a minority of my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle, just cannot stand the idea 
that the people who are the first line of defense at the airport to 
screen the baggage and the customers might be Federal law enforcement 
agents.
  This is a blinding ideological position to take. After all that has 
happened, after all the documented failures, after the continued 
prosecutions in court, we have given the private firms every 
opportunity and they have failed the American traveling public 
miserably.
  We need legislation, and we should take the legislation up today. But 
instead, today we will take up, and no offense to any of these people, 
they are outstanding people, the Francis Bardanouve United States Post 
Office Building Act; the Earl T. Shinhoster Post Office Designation 
Act; the Congressman Julian C. Dixon, of whom I was a great fan, Post 
Office Building Designation Act; a bill to make permanent the authority 
to redact financial disclosure statements of judicial employees and 
judicial officers, et cetera, et cetera.
  It has been more than a month since the attack by the terrorists, and 
the use of our own civilian aviation as weapons. Yet, not one penny has 
been mandated by the House to change that system. Not one single line 
of statute has been changed.
  The first line of defense is still failing us; the House of 
Representatives must not fail us. The bill should come up today, and if 
they cannot bring it up today, how about tomorrow? They have got an 
alternative, we have got an alternative. Let us have a legislative 
process and see whose alternative wins.
  I do not think they want to do that, because I suspect that they know 
that many of their Members would vote for the more comprehensive 
approach, instead of continuing to buy the worst security we can get on 
the cheap.

                          ____________________
                              {time}  1300