[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 4]
[Senate]
[Pages 5825-5827]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      IMPROVING AMERICA'S SECURITY

  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, we are on a very important piece of 
legislation, as we all know, the unfinished work of the recommendations 
of the 
9/11 Commission. We have been on this bill now for almost 2 full weeks, 
but we have been unsuccessful so far in being able to get votes on key 
amendments, which I do believe would fill a significant gap in the 
protections that are available to the American people in the post-9/11 
world.
  We yesterday offered a package of amendments which actually 
represents a consolidation of previously filed amendments I want to 
discuss briefly, which I think fulfills that important role of gap-
filling in the unfinished work from the 9/11 Commission 
recommendations.
  Last night, Senator McConnell, the Republican leader, filed cloture 
on amendment No. 312, as modified. It is my hope, when we have that 
vote tomorrow--as currently scheduled under the regular order--we will 
have an up-or-down vote on provisions critical to addressing threats 
that terrorists employ in the United States and on U.S. citizens.
  This amendment contains five critical homeland security tools. It is 
imperative we include this legislation to give the appropriate Federal 
agencies the authority, No. 1, to punish those who recruit terrorists; 
No. 2, to revoke the visas of terrorists; No. 3, to allow the U.S. 
Government to detain dangerous aliens; No. 4, to punish those who 
provide material support--in other words, financial inducement--or I 
should say support to families of those who engage in terrorist acts; 
and, No. 5, to protect families of soldiers from terrorist hoaxes.
  These are all contained in amendment No. 312, on which a cloture 
motion has been filed, and upon which we will vote tomorrow, if not 
before by agreement.
  I want to explain these important tools so Members understand what is 
at stake.
  The first of these provisions is to provide the Federal Government, 
for the first time in our Nation's history, the ability to punish those 
who actually recruit terrorists. We know from intelligence products 
gained from--and now public--Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the mastermind of 
9/11, they were actively engaged in recruiting terrorists within the 
United States--in our prisons, in some mosques, and elsewhere--with the 
idea of having a terrorist who could act within this country and who 
would, therefore, not be stopped by the various protective mechanisms 
we put in place, whether it be the Transportation Security 
Administration, improvement of our intelligence gathering and sharing 
to prevent dangerous aliens from entering the country and committing 
terrorists acts.
  The whole concept behind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed's efforts was to 
recruit people domestically, people who would not meet sort of the 
typical description some would anticipate or the profiles the 
intelligence officials might have of the type of person who would be 
logically suspect for terrorist activities. So what this part of the 
amendment would do would be to punish recruitment of terrorists within 
the United States. This is a gap in our laws that needs to be filled.
  Senator Grassley had previously filed an amendment which is now 
included in this consolidation. This has to do with revoking the visas 
of terrorists. Under current law, visas approved or denied by consular 
officials are nonreviewable. That is overseas. If somebody applies for 
a visa, and they do not get it, then those are not reviewable. In other 
words, there is not a stream of litigation or successive appeals they 
can go through in order to challenge the denial of their visa.
  However, if a visa is approved but later revoked and that individual 
is on U.S. soil, the decision by the consular officer is reviewable in 
U.S. courts. This amendment makes these revocations nonreviewable.
  This is both a practical problem and is actually a huge difficulty, 
identified by the Government Accountability Office in 2003. They said 
that even if an alien's visa is revoked on terrorism grounds after the 
alien reaches the United States, it is almost impossible to deport the 
suspected terrorist because persons with a revoked visa can stay in the 
United States and have a right to successive appeals of a consular 
officer's decision.
  Moreover, allowing the review of these revoked visas, especially on 
terrorism grounds, jeopardizes the classified intelligence that may 
have led to the revocation in the first place and makes the FBI and CIA 
hesitant to share the information. We can see how that standoff would 
occur. They are hesitant to share the information; therefore, visas of 
dangerous persons are not revoked.
  So due to the practical delay caused by review, we would suggest--
this amendment suggests--we treat the visas exactly the same whether 
they are denied outside of the country or revoked inside of the country 
based on terrorism grounds.
  Also included in this package is an amendment that has to do with the 
detention of individuals who have entered our country illegally and are 
subject to being repatriated, particularly criminal aliens. This grows 
out of a Supreme Court decision in 2001, where the Supreme Court held, 
in the Zabidah case, the Department of Homeland Security could not 
detain a person longer than 6 months. In this case, for someone with a 
criminal record, who could not legally stay in the United States, they 
could not detain them more than 6 months. Unless they were successful 
in getting them repatriated or returned to their country of origin, the 
only thing the Department of Homeland Security could do is release them 
into the general population of the United States. That is simply an 
unacceptable result.
  What this amendment would do is change the statutory law of the 
United States, as invited by the U.S. Supreme Court, to authorize the 
Department of Homeland Security to detain dangerous aliens longer than 
6 months if, in fact, there is a reasonable expectation that individual 
will be repatriated to their country of origin.
  For example, the Government had to release Carlos Rojas Fritze, who 
sodomized, raped, beat, and robbed a stranger in a public restroom and 
then called it, bizarrely, ``an act of love,'' and Tuan Thai, who 
repeatedly raped, tortured, and terrorized women and vowed to repeat 
his crimes. These are just two individuals who, under the Supreme Court 
decision, had to be released into the American public--obviously a 
great danger to the American people. We need to act to fix this gap, as 
invited by the U.S. Supreme Court, so dangerous aliens like these 
individuals can be detained and so the American people can be 
protected.
  One other element of this package of amendments is punishing those 
who provide material support for terrorists. We recall that Saddam 
Hussein was providing $25,000 for the families of Palestinians who 
engaged in terrorist attacks in Israel. The fact is, there is a 
practice in some quarters of providing financial support for families 
as an inducement to terrorists so they know that if they commit 
terrorist acts, at least their families will be financially provided 
for. Well, this provision of this amendment would punish material 
support for terrorists, and I think the reasons for doing that are 
self-evident.
  The provision will expand the section of the U.S. Criminal Code which 
punishes murder or assault of U.S. nationals overseas for terrorist 
purposes, so that it equally punishes attempts and conspiracies to 
murder U.S. nationals for terrorist purposes.
  Finally, protecting families of soldiers from terrorist hoaxes. The 
last provision necessary for the safety and security of all citizens is 
establishing the right of the American Government to protect the 
families of soldiers from terrorist hoaxes.

[[Page 5826]]

  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to speak for 
2 more minutes in our morning business allocation.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. CORNYN. This last provision provides the right of the American 
Government to protect families of soldiers from terrorist hoaxes. For 
example, this provision would increase the penalties for perpetrating a 
hoax about the death, injury, or capture of a U.S. soldier during 
wartime.
  I think we would all agree that a hoax about the death of a U.S. 
soldier is a serious offense that should be made a crime and can result 
in devastating consequences to the family that is the subject of a 
hoax. In one such incident involving a soldier from Flagstaff, AZ, who 
was serving in Iraq, the Army sent the soldier a satellite phone so he 
could call home from Iraq to reassure them that he was, in fact, alive 
and uninjured. Unfortunately, another soldier was killed in the process 
of trying to deliver the satellite phone to the soldier so he could 
reassure his own family, and the message did not get through on a 
timely basis.
  I think we would all agree this is simply unacceptable. Our military 
personnel put their lives on the line every day for our freedom and our 
families who support them. One of the most important things we can do 
is make sure they are protected against those who would perpetrate 
these kinds of cruel hoaxes on them and take advantage of their 
concerns and natural anxiety for the welfare of their loved ones 
serving us abroad.
  So I hope our colleagues will vote for cloture on this important 
package of amendments, and we will have that opportunity tomorrow, if 
not sooner.
  Mr. President, I know I have other colleagues, my two colleagues from 
Georgia, who are here to speak in our portion of morning business, and 
I will yield the floor at this time to them.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The senior Senator from Georgia is 
recognized.
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, may I inquire as to how much time is 
remaining on our side?
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Seventeen minutes 50 seconds.
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to 
support the amendment proposed by the Senator from Texas, Mr. Cornyn. 
It has been 5\1/2\ years since the horrendous terrorist attacks against 
the United States on September 11, 2001. Since that attack, many 
improvements have been made in the way law enforcement communities 
around the country are combating terrorism, but it is very important 
that we continue to give our law enforcement community every tool they 
need to protect Americans. Americans expect Congress to do everything 
possible to improve the Nation's security, and Senator Cornyn's 
amendment adds to the important and necessary tools needed by law 
enforcement to prosecute the war against terrorism.
  I would like to take just a few minutes to touch on some of the 
important provisions that are included in this amendment. The first 
issue I would like to talk about is punishing those who recruit or 
assist terrorists.
  For the first time, we will be able to target terrorist recruiters--
those who seek out and try to persuade individuals to commit terrorist 
acts against the United States and our allies.
  It is no secret that al-Qaida attempts to seek out individuals living 
within the United States who can operate freely here and who do not 
necessarily fit the profile of those who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks 
to join their cadre of jihadists. Even the 9/11 Commission Report 
discusses al-Qaida's ability to recruit:

       Mosques, schools, and boarding houses served as recruiting 
     stations in many parts of the world, including the United 
     States.

  For example, an early bin Laden organization, al-Khifa, recruited 
American Muslims to fight in Afghanistan. Al-Khifa had offices in my 
own State of Georgia as well as Chicago, New York, Boston, Pittsburgh, 
and Tucson.
  The amendment also creates a new offense for aiding the family or 
associates of a terrorist in order to target those who give money to 
families of suicide bombers after such bombings. Any person convicted 
of doing any of these things should face severe punishment. This is not 
uncommon. We saw Saddam Hussein offering up to $25,000 to the families 
of suicide bombers in Palestine as a reward for their sons' and 
daughters' terrorist attacks. This type of support promotes and 
encourages suicide bombers and simply cannot be tolerated. The American 
people are probably shocked that these offenses are not already on the 
books. Support for this amendment will send a strong message that this 
country has not forgotten how September 11, 2001, changed this world 
and that we will do everything in our power to prosecute terrorists and 
those who support them.
  A second key provision in this amendment deals with closing a 
loophole in the law that allows suspected terrorists to stay in the 
United States after their visas have been revoked on terrorist grounds.
  In June of 2003, a GAO report revealed that suspected terrorists can 
and, in fact, do stay in the United States after their visas have been 
revoked because they are suspected of terrorist activity. After the 
loophole came to light, the GAO found that more than 100 people were 
granted visas that were later revoked because there was suspected 
terrorist activity.
  Under current law, decisions to approve or deny visas by consular 
officers are nonreviewable and deemed final. However, if a visa is 
approved and the individual enters the United States and then the visa 
is revoked while that person is still in the United States, the 
revocation decision is reviewed by the U.S. courts. Giving an alien on 
U.S. soil the ability to appeal a revocation decision when it is based 
on terrorist-suspected grounds virtually annihilates the effectiveness 
of this antiterrorism tool.
  To begin, visa revocations are not taken lightly, according to the 
State Department. A State Department spokesman made this comment:

       A consular officer does not have the authority to revoke a 
     visa based on suspected ineligibility, or based on derogatory 
     information that is insufficient to support an ineligibility 
     finding. A consular revocation must be based on an actual 
     finding that the alien is ineligible for a visa.

  In addition, each alien gets the opportunity to explain their case, 
so once a consular officer notifies an alien of his intent to revoke, 
the consular officer must give the alien the opportunity to show why 
the visa should not be revoked.
  I ask my colleagues to recall the 9/11 Commission Report's finding on 
our flawed visa policies. We know that the 19 hijackers used 364 
aliases and lied on their visa applications when they applied for 23 
and obtained 22 visas. Allowing aliens to remain on U.S. soil with 
revoked visas is a national security concern, and this amendment will 
close this loophole in the law so they cannot do it again.
  A third issue this amendment deals with is the detention of 
deportable aliens. The Supreme Court has limited the period of 
detention of deportable aliens to 6 months after a final order of 
removal is issued. As a result, when the difficulty in removing an 
alien lasts up to 6 months, the U.S. Government has to release the 
alien into the public. We have all heard the deplorable stories of some 
of the horrific acts committed by deportable aliens who were released 
into the United States after they were not removed from the country 
within the 6-month limit. This amendment would allow the Government to 
keep these aliens in custody until they can be removed and prevent them 
from harming American citizens.
  I want to close by thanking my colleague from Texas for the work he 
has done on this amendment and his effort in making our country safer. 
This is what the American people want, expect, and deserve. This is the 
right thing to do, and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The junior Senator from Georgia is 
recognized.
  Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I appreciate my colleague, Senator 
Chambliss from Georgia, and his excellent remarks. I stand today 
shoulder to

[[Page 5827]]

shoulder with him in endorsing Senator Cornyn in what he has brought 
forward to the Senate. Notwithstanding one's position on the debate of 
the last 3 days, I think it is ironic that we spent the last 72 hours 
debating whether we should give collective bargaining rights to TSA 
employees after we debated this 5 years ago and decided not to do that 
and after having spent very little time talking about 9/11 and the 
security of the United States of America.
  What Senator Cornyn has done is taken the ideas of Senator Kyl, 
Senator Grassley, Senator Cornyn, and others and brought forward 
meaningful amendments that ought to be on a 9/11 bill. I sincerely hope 
that my colleagues, when the cloture vote comes forward tomorrow, will 
vote to invoke cloture so we can bring these amendments to the floor 
and have a meaningful addition to the 9/11 bill.
  I wish to talk about three of these amendments for just a second and 
talk about why they are so important.
  No. 1 is on recruiting. It is always good when you can tell a real 
life story and not just a hypothetical. About a year ago, in my 
hometown of Atlanta, GA, there was an announcement by the U.S. Secret 
Service, the CIA, and international intelligence agencies that two 
young men at Georgia Tech--the Georgia Institute of Technology--had 
been taken into custody under suspicion of terrorism. As it turns out, 
both of these two young men, using the library computers at Georgia 
Tech, were in a terrorist cell that was born in Pakistan, organized in 
Toronto, and was recruiting in Atlanta, GA.
  Now, not because we overlooked it but because nobody ever thought 
about it, we have never had a statute to punish someone for recruiting 
terrorism. So right in my own home State of Georgia, right in my own 
hometown, two 21-year-old students at Georgia Tech were recruited and, 
fortunately, caught and, fortunately--because of the PATRIOT Act, I 
might add--intercepted because of the watching and the maintenance of 
those computers. But this was a terrorist cell, and these individuals 
were recruited. There is no punishment for recruiting those folks.
  Al-Qaida has demonstrated and the 
9/11 Commission told us that recruitment is the main source or resource 
of human beings for suicide bombers, for airplane hijackers, and others 
who would carry out the acts of al-Qaida. So, first of all, Senator 
Cornyn bringing this forward is absolutely appropriate.
  Secondly, and briefly, Senator Grassley's amendment with regard to 
the reviewability of the revocation of a visa is included in this 
package. Paint this picture for a second: All 19 of the hijackers on 9/
11 got into the United States in a legal way. Most of them had 
overstayed their visas. But just think for a second. Had they been 
caught, had they been suspected of a terrorist act when they were about 
to commit it, and had their visa been revoked, they would have had the 
right to stay in this country and judicially appeal that revocation, 
which meant they could have stayed here even after being identified and 
quite possibly still carried out a terrorist attack.
  To let you know how important this amendment is, I have an 
interesting fact for everybody to take in and digest for just a second. 
In 1986, when we reformed immigration in this country, we granted 
amnesty and created a number of legal citizens and legal visas in the 
United States. We also created a mechanism for judicial review. There 
are still two cases from the 1986 Immigration Reform Act under judicial 
review 21 years later. Those individuals still remain in the United 
States of America.
  If we capture somebody for suspected terrorism and, under the 
disciplines we use, revoke that visa, it only stands to reason that 
they should not be reviewable and should be returned to the country 
from which they came.
  Otherwise, we would be knowingly and willingly harboring someone we 
suspect would cause harm to the United States of America and commit a 
terrorist act.
  Mr. President, I appreciate the time that has been afforded me. I 
stand in full support of the Cornyn amendment and in a sincere hope 
that my colleagues will vote for the motion to invoke cloture and pass 
this very important amendment for the safety and security of the United 
States of America and its people.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Obama). The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Illinois is recognized.
  Mr. DURBIN. I thank the Chair.
  (The remarks of Mr. Durbin pertaining to the introduction of S. 831 
are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills 
and Joint Resolutions.'')
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, 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. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________