[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 15]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 21609]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



             SECURE TRANSPORTATION FOR AMERICA ACT OF 2001

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                        HON. ALBERT RUSSELL WYNN

                              of maryland

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, November 1, 2001

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 3150) to 
     improve aviation security, and for other purposes:

  Mr. WYNN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose H.R. 3150, the Secure 
Transportation for America Act, and express my strong support for the 
Democratic alternative.
  Today, we face a critical choice in aviation security--private profit 
versus public safety. Private airport security firms failed the 
American people on September 11th and continue to fail to provide 
adequate security for our nation's airports. For instance, on Tuesday 
October 23rd, a 68-year-old man departing from the New Orleans airport 
was able to carry a gun onto an airplane without setting off alarms. 
Similarly, in late September, a 63-year-old man made it through a 
checkpoint with a pistol in his pocket. This is unacceptable!
  Private airport security companies are concerned with profits. They 
have cut corners and hired the least qualified workers as cost-saving 
measures. Subsequently, private firms have failed to conduct background 
checks and have hired felons. In the face of this crisis, we do not 
have the time, nor the luxury, of ``monitoring'' a failed private 
system.
  Some argue that we should follow the ``effective'' European model of 
airport security that consists of private contractors. Our system has 
more than 400 airports and requires 20-30,000 screeners. In contrast, a 
typical European country has only three or four airports with no 
uniform security standards from country to country. Moreover, people 
who argue that the European system works well are wrong. Reports 
indicate that last month, a nine-inch knife, a sharp metal nail file, 
and even a 12-inch knitting needle bypassed security and were taken on 
British Airways flights.
  Similarly, people argue that we should follow the Israeli model of 
airport security, which consists mainly of public security and some 
private security. The Israeli model, however, is effective because 
nearly all of its security personnel, public and private, served in the 
Israeli Defense Force and are well oriented and trained in security 
issues. In contrast, our general workforce proportionally does not 
contain as many workers with rich security backgrounds.
  Nearly all, 82 percent, favor the federalization of airport security, 
while at the same time, the United States Senate voted 100-0 to 
federalize airport security. The choice before us is obvious--
federalize the workers.
  Our economy is failing in large part because people are not flying. 
People are not flying because they are not confident in our airport 
security. And, people are not confident in our airport security because 
of significant security lapses on and since September 11th.
  Americans understand that in order to fully restore consumer 
confidence in air travel, we must restore consumer confidence in the 
security system that protects them. Today, we face a critical decision. 
We must opt for a public system that works. Federalize our nation's 
airport security and protect the American people.

                          ____________________