[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 17]
[Senate]
[Pages 23299-23302]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005--CONFERENCE 
                                 REPORT

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
proceed to the consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 
4567, which the clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       Conference report accompanying (H.R. 4567), making 
     appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for 
     the fiscal year ending September 30, 2005.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the vote on the 
motion to invoke cloture is vitiated.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I am pleased to present for the Senate's 
approval today the conference report on H.R. 4567, the fiscal year 2005 
Homeland Security Appropriations Act.
  The conference agreement provides total new budget authority for the 
Department of $33.1 billion. Of the amount provided for fiscal year 
2004, $32 billion is for discretionary programs.
  To further strengthen the capacity of the Nation's first responders 
to prepare for and respond to possible terrorist threats and other 
emergencies, this conference report provides a total of $3.9 billion 
for the Office for State and Local Government Coordination and 
Preparedness, including: $1.1 billion for the State and local formula-
based grant program; $400 million for law enforcement terrorism 
prevention grants; $885 million for high-threat, high-density, urban 
area grants; $150 million for port security grants; $150 million for 
rail and transit security grants; and $715 million for the firefighter 
assistance grant program, of which $65 million is set-aside to begin 
implementing the SAFER Act. The conference report also includes a 
separate appropriation of $180 million for emergency management 
performance grants.
  The conference report includes a total of $5.1 billion for the 
Transportation Security Administration, furthering our commitment to 
secure all modes of transportation. The conference committee made air 
cargo security a priority and provides $115 million for air cargo 
security, an increase of $30 million from the President's request. This 
funding will allow the Department to enhance its efforts to target and 
prohibit the transportation of high-risk cargo on passenger aircraft; 
as well as to advance efforts to research, develop, and procure the 
most effective and efficient air cargo inspection and screening 
systems. In addition, there is a statutory requirement for the tripling 
of cargo inspections on passenger aircraft.
  Additionally, $8.8 billion is provided to secure our Nation's 
borders; $5.5 billion is provided for emergency preparedness and 
response; $7.37 billion for the Coast Guard; and $2 billion for 
research, analysis, and infrastructure protection. To increase rail 
security the conference report provides $172 million for rail 
compliance inspectors; canine explosive detection teams; rail, freight, 
and transit security grants; vulnerability assessments; and research 
and development of technologies to prevent suicide bombers. A total of 
$662 million is provided for the Federal Air Marshals, $50 million more 
than the requested amount.
  A matter of concern to some of my colleagues are the items funded 
through the offset provided by the extension of the customs user fees. 
The largest single item that was funded through this mechanism was 
speeding up the development and deployment of permanent airwings across 
our northern border. Unfortunately, once the customs user fee extension 
was dropped from this bill, we lost the offset available to enhance 
funding for these important items and not exceed the fiscal constraints 
placed on our subcommittee.
  The conference committee met on Thursday, October 7, 2004, and the 
conference report was filed on Saturday, October 9, 2004. It was 
adopted by the House of Representatives later that day by a vote of 368 
yeas to zero nays. Senate passage of this conference report today will 
send this fiscal year 2005 appropriations bill to the President for 
signature into law.
  In closing, I thank the ranking member of the subcommittee, my 
colleague from West Virginia, Senator Byrd; the chairman of the House 
subcommittee, Mr. Rogers; and the ranking member of the House 
subcommittee, Mr. Sabo, for their substantial contributions to this 
bill throughout the year. It has taken many hours of hard work by these 
Members and their staff members to bring this bill to a successful 
conclusion. I would also like to thank the chairmen ranking members of 
the House and Senate full Appropriations Committees and their staff 
members for the assistance and guidance they have provided to us 
throughout the process.
  I recommend the adoption of the conference report.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President. I thank Chairman Thad Cochran, the House 
chairman, Harold Rogers, Representative Martin Sabo, Representative

[[Page 23300]]

David Obey, and all of the House and Senate conferees for their hard 
work on this important legislation. We all share the goal of ensuring 
that the new Department of Homeland Security has the resources it needs 
to secure the homeland.
  I also commend the thousands of men and women who are on the front 
lines of homeland security. While I remain very concerned that we are 
not giving these men and women the tools they need to do their jobs, 
that in no way detracts from their commitment to serve the Nation every 
hour of every day.
  It is particularly appropriate for us to be considering this 
legislation as Congress reviews the recommendations of the 9/11 
Commission. The President, the Vice President, the Attorney General, 
the Secretary of Homeland Security, the FBI Director, and the CIA 
Director invoke the threat of another terrorist attack on an almost 
weekly basis. The 9/11 Commission concluded that on September 11, 2001, 
our government agencies were not prepared to deter or respond to such 
attacks. We are still not prepared to deter or respond to such attacks.
  In light of all of these threats, one might anticipate that the 
President would have amended his anemic 2-percent proposed increase for 
the Department of Homeland Security. One might have anticipated that 
the President, our war President, would have requested increased 
appropriations for securing our mass transit systems, for screening 
airline passengers for explosives, for inspecting more containers 
coming into our ports, for increasing inspections of air cargo, or for 
increasing the number of Federal Air Marshals. Sadly, this President 
talks the talk when it comes to homeland security, but when it comes to 
doing the hard work of making the Nation more secure, the President 
takes a walk.
  The conference report that is before the Senate provides $33.1 
billion, a level that is $896 million above the President's request. 
This is an increase of only 5-percent over the levels approved by 
Congress last year, only 5-percent. At a time when our war time 
President and his entire administration is telling the Nation to expect 
another attack, we are approving what is essentially a status-quo 
homeland security bill.
  The conference report that is before us does make several modest 
improvements to the President's budget. In response to the Madrid 
bombings and threats of similar attacks here at home, we include 
funding for mass transit and rail security. We increase funding for 
port security. We do more to secure air cargo on passenger aircraft. 
The bill begins to invest in technologies to screen airline passengers 
for explosives.
  While these are important improvements, regrettably, the conferees 
were simply not given sufficient resources to address serious gaps in 
our security that we all know exist.
  I am particularly disappointed that the Senate majority leader 
changed his mind and acquiesced to a demand from the Speaker that the 
conferees drop the customs user fee extension and the $784 million of 
homeland security spending that the Senate approved last month. The 
funding that was stripped from the bill is vital to the security of 
this Nation. Not one Senator objected to adding the additional funding 
because it provides needed investments to protect our borders, equip 
first responders, enhance air and rail security, hire more Federal Air 
Marshals, and secure nonprofit institutions that are threatened by 
terrorists.
  The 9/11 Commission report includes recommendations to deploy 
explosives detection equipment at our airports, to address the 
communications interoperability problem, to focus homeland security 
dollars based on the greatest risk, and to secure non-aviation targets. 
This bill simply does not do enough to respond to these 
recommendations.
  Mr. President, time and again, Senators on this side of the aisle 
have tried to plug the holes in our Nation's security. We have worked 
to address some of the most basic, and most dangerous, holes in our 
protections from another terrorist attack. But at virtually every turn, 
the President and the Senate majority tell us no. The American people 
are told no. Why? It costs too much. It costs too much to protect the 
people's lives. It costs too much to close our borders. It costs too 
much to screen cargo on our airplanes and to check passengers for 
explosives. It costs too much to save lives.
  This Administration has repeatedly warned that it isn't a question of 
if another terrorist attack will happen, but when. Unfortunately, I 
think that the Administration has failed to heed its own warning. By 
failing to support a significant investment in homeland security, by 
ignoring the gaps that we all know exist, the White House foolishly is 
gambling with the lives and the safety of the American people.
  However, we have done the best we can with the limited resources that 
have been given to us and I urge Senators to support its passage. 
Finally, I want to thank the staffs of the Homeland Security 
Subcommittee. Both Chairman Cochran's staff and my staff have worked 
diligently this year to produce this important legislation. We had an 
excellent series of hearings this year that I believe helped the 
subcommittee to produce a bill that contains significant improvements 
to the President's request.
  Again, I urge Members to support the conference report.
  Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I rise to state my intention to vote for 
the conference report to the fiscal year 2005 Homeland Security 
Appropriations Act because communities and first responders across our 
Nation desperately need the funds provided in this legislation.
  I want to express my extreme disappointment, however, with many 
provisions in this conference report, and with the decision by the 
Republican leadership in the Senate and House to fail to improve the 
conference report language, and in some cases making it even worse, 
despite having many opportunities to do.
  It is hard to know where to begin, but three aspects of this bill are 
especially egregious; they defy common sense and are simply not in the 
best interest of our Nation's homeland defense.
  First, in outright defiance of recommendations of the National 
Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, the 9/11 
Commission, and of commissions before it, the leadership inserted 
language into this conference report that requires the Department of 
Homeland Security to allocate homeland security formula grant funds, 
such as funds under the State Homeland Security Grant Program and the 
Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Grant Program, on a per capita 
basis. This is directly contrary to the recommendations of the National 
Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, the 9/11 
Commission.
  Specifically, in its report, the 9/11 Commission stated:

       We understand the contention that every state and city 
     needs to have some minimum infrastructure for emergency 
     response. But federal homeland security assistance should not 
     remain a program for general revenue sharing. It should 
     supplement state and local resources based on the risks or 
     vulnerability that merit additional support. Congress should 
     not use this money as a pork barrel.

  The 9/11 Commission also recommended that an advisory committee be 
established to advise the Secretary on any additional factors the 
Secretary should consider, such as benchmarks for evaluating community 
homeland security needs. As to these benchmarks, the Commission stated 
that ``the benchmarks will be imperfect and subjective, they will 
continually evolve. But hard choices must be made. Those who would 
allocate money on a different basis should then defend their view of 
the national interest.''
  In short, the Commission made unequivocally clear that the current 
method of allocating federal homeland security resources, i.e., on a 
per capita basis alone, must be changed.
  Indeed, just a couple of weeks ago, 
9/11 Commission Chairman Kean stated:

       We have recommended very strongly that homeland security 
     funds should be distributed according to assessment of risk, 
     and not simply by population or pork barrel or any other way. 
     Our understanding is that that

[[Page 23301]]

     recommendation, which is a very important one to us, is not 
     moving, and that other people are saying that we should now 
     remove the discretion that Governor Ridge has now over those 
     funds and mandate that it be only by population. That would 
     fly totally in the face of our recommendations. We feel very 
     strongly that the best ways to distribute those funds are by 
     the proper assessments of risk.

  Not only did the 9/11 Commission recommend that such changes be made 
in how Federal homeland security funds are allocated, but commissions 
before it, such as the Homeland Security Independent Task Force of the 
Council on Foreign Relations, chaired by former Senator Warren, have 
strongly recommended it as well. Indeed, the Rudman Commission stated 
more than a year ago that ``Congress should establish a system for 
allocating scarce resources based less on dividing the spoils and more 
on addressing identified threats and vulnerabilities. . . . To do this, 
the federal government should consider such factors as population, 
population density, vulnerability assessment, and presence of critical 
infrastructure within each state.''
  Moreover, the Senate just last week passed landmark legislation, the 
National Intelligence Reform Act, which contains the Homeland Security 
Grant Enhancement Act of 2004, which the Senate passed by voice vote as 
an amendment to the intelligence bill.
  The Homeland Security Grant Enhancement Act of 2004, originally 
introduced by Senate Governmental Affairs Committee Chairwoman Collins, 
contains a number of good provisions, but among the most important is 
one that requires the majority of Federal homeland security grant funds 
intended for State and local governments to be allocated based on 
threat and risk and other factors rather than on the basis of 
population alone.
  This legislation was the result of almost 2 years of work in the 
Senate. Legislation that calls for threat-based funding has also been 
introduced by House Select Committee on Homeland Security Chairman Cox, 
which has been included in the intelligence reform legislation that the 
House of Representatives just passed.
  In short, the language in the conference report to the Fiscal Year 
2005 Homeland Security Appropriations Act reflects an utter disregard 
for the hard work performed over years by members of the Senate and 
House as well as the expert evaluations and recommendations of the 9/11 
and Rudman Commissions.
  For the sake of our Nation's homeland defense, I hope that the 
Congress will soon act on the conference report to the intelligence 
reform legislation that has now initially passed both the Senate and 
House. Both the Senate and House bills direct that homeland security 
funds for States and local communities be allocated based on threat and 
other factors. Then, the tremendous wrong in this conference report 
that was done to our Nation's homeland defense will be made right.
  Second, this conference report actually includes less funding for our 
Nation's first responders for fiscal year 2005 than was appropriated 
for our fire fighters, police officers, EMTs and other first responders 
in fiscal year 2004, less funding for this year than last year, and at 
a time when the threat of terrorist attack against many of our 
communities, especially the City of New York, and our Nation as a whole 
remains.
  This conference report has less funding for the State Homeland 
Security Grant program, less funding for the Law Enforcement Terrorism 
Prevention Grant program, less funding for the FIRE Act, and less 
funding specifically for high-threat urban areas.
  Lastly, much of the improvements that the Senate made to the homeland 
security appropriations bill during the Senate's initial consideration 
of the bill were stripped from the conference report by the House 
Republican leadership. And when the conferees had the opportunity to 
remedy this egregious mistake by supporting an amendment by Senator 
Byrd to restore $784 million in cuts, that amendment was defeated.
  As the conference report itself states, the conference agreement 
deletes section 518 of the Senate-passed bill, which included $200 
million in additional funding for the Northern Border Air Wing, so that 
the air wings across our border can be appropriately operated; $50 
million for nonprofit organizations that are at greater risk of 
terrorist threats; $50 million in additional critical funding for FIRE 
Act grants, and $50 million for Emergency Management Performance 
Grants.
  Though I am disappointed with other provisions either contained in 
this bill, or missing, I am pleased that the conference committee 
included language from an amendment I sponsored to include funding for 
the firefighters and police officers of New York City.
  Specifically, I commend the conferees of both the House and Senate 
for requiring the Federal Emergency Management Agency to provide 
$4,450,000 for Project Liberty pursuant to the request of the Governor 
of New York. We know that $25,000,000 remains unexpended, and 
unobligated, at the Federal Emergency Management Agency and I know they 
will respond to the direction of the Appropriations Committee to speed 
these funds to New York.
  We owe these heroes every penny available for mental health 
counseling. Our firefighters and police officers have been receiving 
this counseling since losing so many of their brothers, sisters, 
friends, and family members in the attacks. Our firefighters and police 
officers have had to cope with the unimaginable and yet they stand 
strong on the front lines to protect the homeland.
  The men and women of the New York City Fire Department and New York 
City Police Department, their families, and retirees, have helped this 
country cope with the tragic losses of that day, and this Congress has 
sent a clear message that we stand with them in helping them cope with 
their own losses.
  I will continue to do whatever I can in my capacity as a Senator from 
New York to make sure our firefighters and police officers receive the 
funding they need not only in the area of mental health counseling but 
in all areas of homeland security.
  (At the request of Mr. Daschle, the following statement was ordered 
to be printed in the Record.)

 Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, the conference report before the 
Senate today includes an important provision that will put a stop to 
the ill-advised attempt by the Department of Homeland Security to 
privatize jobs that are vital to keeping Americans safe. The conference 
report prohibits DHS from spending money to process or approve the 
privatization of Immigration Information Officer, Contact 
Representative, or Investigative Assistant positions. The House voted 
for this exact amendment earlier this year by a vote of 242-163, with 
49 Republicans supporting it. The Senate voted 49-47 for this language. 
During the meeting of the conferees, both the Senate and House 
delegations voted in favor of this language.
  Immigration Information Officers, IIOs, are responsible for screening 
applications for immigration benefits for fraud, and for performing 
criminal background checks on applicants. There are more than 1,200 
IIOs and Contact Representatives around the nation, working for the 
Citizenship and Immigration Services, CIS, branch of DHS. The work they 
do in attempting to discover and prevent immigration fraud--and prevent 
dangerous people from abusing the immigration system--is clearly 
``inherently governmental,'' making them an inappropriate target of a 
privatization effort.
  As our Nation continues to face the threat of terrorism, CIS carries 
a heavy burden in its attempt to process immigration and naturalization 
applications while ensuring that terrorists--along with other 
fraudulent actors--do not abuse our immigration system. Information 
Officers have played a vital role in meeting this burden. Indeed, the 
agency's own job description requires that IIOs have the ``[s]kill to 
identify fraudulent documents in order to prevent persons from 
appealing for benefits for which they are not eligible,'' a skill that 
is obviously all the more important in this era. They are also required 
by DHS to have ``[k]nowledge and skill in interviewing techniques

[[Page 23302]]

and observation of applicants in order to determine if an applicant is 
misrepresenting the facts in order to appear eligible for a benefit.'' 
Weeding out potential fraud in our immigration system must remain a 
responsibility of government employees, especially when the perpetrator 
of the fraud may be a dangerous criminal or terrorist. This conference 
report will ensure that is the case.
  I have a personal interest in this issue because about 100 fine 
Vermonters currently work as IIOs. I know the fine work they do, and I 
know that my staff and indeed all of our staffs rely on them and their 
counterparts throughout the country when we are seeking to help our 
constituents. I know that our Nation will be better off because these 
fine men and women will remain in their current positions.
  Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I am pleased today to support the passage of 
Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill. This bill 
accomplishes in large part what must continue to be this Nation's first 
priority--protecting our country from terrorist attack.
  This bill funds essential national programs which protect our 
borders, our aviation security, our ports, our emergency management 
assistance, and our critical infrastructure, such as nuclear power 
plants. In addition, the bill funds essential programs that do not only 
protect us, but also prepare our States and communities should we be 
faced with an emergency. These grant programs support our firefighters 
and other first responders whom we rely on in times of need.
  The State Homeland Security Grants enable the States to organize 
their first responders and communications systems to respond to a 
terrorist attack. Further, the Urban Area Security Initiative 
recognizes that our largest cities, such as Milwaukee, have special 
needs given their large populations that require more directed 
assistance.
  For all of these reasons, I am pleased to support the Homeland 
Security appropriations bill today and I am encouraged that we are 
doing what we can to protect our Nation.


                   FEMA and faith based organizations

  Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I commend the leadership of the chairman 
on this important disaster relief bill.
  In the context of this Federal Emergency Management Agency FEMA 
disaster assistance bill, I want to express my appreciation for recent 
FEMA policy updates for disaster relief to faith-based organizations. 
These ongoing challenges and tragedies provide FEMA an opportunity to 
make certain that they are implementing these policies in a manner 
consistent with the President's policy which includes faith-based 
organizations among those community-based organizations helping on an 
equal basis in these hurting communities.
  On December 12, 2002, President Bush announced, ``I have directed 
specific action in several Federal agencies with a history of 
discrimination against faith-based groups. FEMA will revise its policy 
on emergency relief so that religious nonprofit groups can qualify for 
assistance after disasters like hurricanes and earthquakes.'' FEMA 
acted quickly to serve eligible religious groups, issuing policy 
statement 9521.3 concerning Private Non-Profit Facility Eligibility to 
provide guidance in delivering future grant awards.
  In the words of the former FEMA Director Joe Albaugh, ``Disasters 
don't discriminate, and neither should our response to them.'' The 
administration recognized this important principle in the case of the 
Seattle Hebrew Academy. The academy's main building was rendered unfit 
after it was damaged in the Nisqually earthquake of 2001, but the 
academy's first application for FEMA relief was denied. After the 
Academy entered a legal challenge, the Office of Legal Counsel at the 
Department of Justice entered an opinion on September 22, 2002, which 
stated, in referring to FEMA's original denial, ``We believe that the 
Acting Regional Director's reading of 44 C.F.R. section 206.221 (e) is 
not the better interpretation of that regulation.'' This is a 
commonsense policy of fair treatment.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I commend the Senator from Pennsylvania 
for highlighting the importance of community-based organizations, 
including faith-based organizations, in disaster assistance efforts. I 
also concur that religious organizations should not be excluded when 
they are victims of disasters. I concur with the Senator that FEMA 
should continue to see that faith-based organizations are treated 
fairly in accordance with the President's policy and for the benefit of 
those in need in times of crisis.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, on behalf of myself and Senator Specter, I 
wish to express my appreciation to Senator Cochran, chairman of the 
Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee, for bringing out of 
conference $25 million in assistance for 501(c)(3) nonprofits 
``determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security to be at high-risk 
of international terrorist attack.'' I know this was difficult to 
achieve because the House bill did not have a similar item and due to 
the loss of the customs users fees as a funding mechanism for our 
Senate provision.
  There are a number of compelling reasons for dedicating homeland 
security funds to nonprofits. First, nonprofits provide vital health, 
social, community, educational, cultural, and other services to 
millions of Americans every day. Second, if nonprofits are forced to 
divert funds to cover the entire cost of security measures, those funds 
will deplete resources for vital human services, including capacity to 
respond to disasters. Third, intelligence reports and the 9-11 
Commission Report indicate some nonprofits are among the most 
vulnerable, highest risk institutions. Fourth, nonprofit institutions 
of all types serve as gathering places for millions of American 
citizens every day of the year, and finally the security needs of the 
nonprofit sector have been largely unmet.
  This assistance is intended for basic security enhancements to 
protect American citizens from car bombs and other lethal terrorist 
attacks. This assistance is not intended for facility construction; 
rather, it is intended to be used for installation of equipment such as 
concrete barriers, blast-proof doors, Mylar window coatings, security 
fences and hardened parking lot gates, as well as associated training.
  The Director of Central Intelligence has stated that al-Qaeda has 
turned its attention to ``soft targets.'' Terrorists' willingness to 
attack soft targets of all types has been made readily apparent with 
attacks in the United States, England, Canada, Israel, Spain, Germany, 
Iraq, Tunisia, Kenya, Morocco, Egypt, and Turkey, including an 
international Red Cross building, synagogues, schools, and cultural and 
community centers.
  It is my intention, as sponsor with Senator Specter of the Senate 
provision, that the Secretary should issue regulations to ensure that 
such funds are disbursed in a manner that ensures basic assistance for 
the maximum number of institutions and are dedicated to protecting 
Americans operating or utilizing nonprofits from international 
terrorist attacks and are not used for other purposes.
  Once again, I commend the distinguished subcommittee chairman, my 
good friend Senator Cochran, and my distinguished colleague Senator 
Specter, on their assistance with this vital initiative to protect our 
Nation's nonprofits.
  The question is on agreeing to the conference report to accompany 
H.R. 4567.
  The conference report was agreed to.

                          ____________________