[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 17]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 23506]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                9/11 RECOMMENDATIONS IMPLEMENTATION ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                            HON. MARK UDALL

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                        Friday, October 8, 2004

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 10) to 
     provide for reform of the intelligence community, terrorism 
     prevention and prosecution, border security, and 
     international cooperation and coordination, and for other 
     purposes:

  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, after the horrific attacks of 
September 11, Americans understand the significance and seriousness of 
the 9/11 Commission's recommendations. Developed in a bipartisan manner 
after long study and debate, the recommendations (if implemented) would 
radically reorganize the intelligence community and unify government 
efforts to prevent future terrorist attacks. Of course, once the depth 
of the failure of our intelligence agencies became clear after 9/11, 
many of us recognized the need for such reform. The question Congress 
asked the 9/11 Commission to answer was--how?
  We got an answer in the form of the 9/11 Commission report. The 
Commission put forth forty-one in depth recommendations to serve as a 
proposed blueprint for intelligence reform. While I believe Congress 
should not necessarily rubber-stamp the Commission's work, I also 
believe that we should honor the bipartisan spirit of the Commission by 
working in a similarly bipartisan way to reach agreement on the best 
way to implement the recommendations.
  That is what has been so deeply disappointing about the process in 
the House. While the Senate--through an open and deliberative process--
reached agreement on a substantive bill that reflects the views of both 
parties, the Commission, and the families of 9/11 victims, the House 
has played shameful politics with intelligence reform.
  The Republican bill (H.R. 10) only fully implements eleven of the 41 
recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, while it ignores some of the 
most important Commission recommendations. For instance, it fails to 
give the National Intelligence Director sufficient authority over the 
budgets and personnel of intelligence agencies. It fails to include a 
strong National Counterterrorism Center. It fails to strengthen the 
Nunn-Lugar programs and other nonproliferation programs to secure 
nuclear materials around the world. It fails to create an integrated 
border screening system to improve security at our borders. It fails to 
improve communications for first responders. It fails to create a 
government-wide Civil Liberties Oversight Board to review the use of 
intelligence powers and address civil liberties concerns. The list goes 
on.
  Meanwhile, the bill includes dozens of extraneous provisions that the 
Commission did not recommend and that are opposed by the Commission, 
families of 9/11 victims, human rights and civil liberties groups, and 
some by the White House itself. The provisions include new authority 
allowing the President to completely undo the intelligence reforms 
passed by Congress, expedited removal of undocumented immigrants 
without judicial review, revocation of visas, exceptions to the UN 
Convention Against Torture, and allowing the U.S. government to spy on 
individuals without proving they are connected to a foreign government 
or terrorist group, among others.
  These extraneous provisions aren't just objectionable because of 
their content--they are objectionable because at a time when we most 
need to think of country before politics, to find ways to come together 
to make our country safer, not ways to further divide us, the 
Republican leadership is more interested in scoring political points 
than in passing responsible legislation.
  Even so, I am voting for H.R. 10 today because I believe that we need 
intelligence reform. This bill does not go far enough to protect the 
American people, but it is better than no reform at all. The good news 
is that the Senate--by a 96-2 vote--produced a bipartisan bill that 
should help strengthen the Senate's hand (and the voice of reason) in 
the conference committee. With the President supporting the Senate bill 
and every Republican in the Senate voting for it, it seems to me that 
House Republicans' misguided criticisms of the bill in conference won't 
carry much weight.
  I am optimistic that the conference report will more closely reflect 
the Senate bill. As 
9/11 Commissioners Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton wrote in the Washington 
Post last month, ``We should not wait until another [intelligence] 
failure takes place, until another commission has a task as somber as 
ours. We welcome refinements to our recommendations through the 
legislative process. But the time has come to act.''
  H.R. 10 is not the legislative refinement Commissioners Kean and 
Hamilton had in mind, nor is it mine. But it is a start. As the 
legislative process continues, I will do all I can to help move the 
bill in the right direction. I hope my colleagues across the aisle will 
do the same. At a time when our security is at risk, Congress must set 
politics aside and pass intelligence reform legislation that will truly 
make America safer.

                          ____________________