[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 8]
[House]
[Pages 11815-11867]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 382 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 1684.

                              {time}  1322


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 1684) to authorize appropriations for the Department of Homeland 
Security for fiscal year 2008, and for other purposes, with Mr. Cardoza 
in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the 
first time.
  The gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson) and the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. King) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mississippi.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I also yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, today we are considering H.R. 1684. This bill takes 
important steps to build capacity, provide resources, and ensure 
accountability at the Department of Homeland Security.
  H.R. 1684 authorizes $39.8 billion in appropriations for the 
Department. This is $2.1 billion more than the President requested in 
his budget earlier this year. This bill sends a message to the 
President, America's security cannot be done on the cheap. Congress 
will not stand by as he cuts programs that help our hometown heroes 
protect our communities.
  In this bill, we reinstate critical funding for first responder 
programs like the State Homeland Security grant program and FIRE Act 
grants.
  In addition to authorizing funds, H.R. 1684 addresses issues that 
some of the committee's oversight efforts have exposed. For example, it 
has become obvious to us that the Department has no long-term vision. 
We created a Directorate of Policy to do just that. This office will 
also focus on private-sector partnerships, tribal security, and school 
security.
  As another tool to help the Department get its house in order, we 
created a Comprehensive Homeland Security Review. This legislation also 
strengthens interagency coordination and supports integrating DHS at a 
single headquarters.
  The Inspector General, GAO and the committee have all observed that 
DHS is spending a lot of money with little accountability. In the past 
few years, we have seen ice trucks take the scenic routes to disasters, 
trailers rotting in Arkansas, and border cameras packed away in 
warehouses. All of this waste was on the taxpayers' dime. No more. H.R. 
1684 gives the Inspector General sharper teeth to investigate disaster 
response and border security programs.
  The bill strengthens the integrity in the agency's contracting 
practices and promotes small business opportunities. This bill makes 
sure our Homeland Security agency is buying its uniforms and equipment 
here at home from U.S. sources. H.R. 1684 covers numerous other areas, 
including biosecurity, intelligence and cyber security.
  Mr. Chairman, this bill is part of the real deal. It's the sixth 
Homeland Security bill that Democrats have brought to the floor since 
January. Only two bills made it to the floor last year in a Republican-
led House. This Congress, we passed a 9/11 bill; and staff discussions 
have begun in preparation for a Member conference. We also passed bills 
on rail security, Homeland Security technology, international 
cooperation, and employee morale.
  Winston Churchill once said, ``The pessimist sees difficulty in every 
opportunity. The optimist sees opportunity in every difficulty. ``
  In H.R. 1684, we have an opportunity to protect our homeland. We can 
be naysayers and complain about bureaucratic bungling, or we can tackle 
head on the difficult issues of Homeland Security.
  I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill that puts DHS on the 
path to becoming the agency that Congress envisioned and the American 
people deserve.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I recognize myself for as much 
time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, at the outset, let me express my deep admiration for 
Chairman Thompson and for the bipartisan spirit he has shown in his 
running of the committee, both as chairman and during the previous 2 
years as ranking member.
  This is one committee of the House which I believe functions very 
affirmatively in a bipartisan manner because, as Chairman Thompson has 
said, that when the terrorists come, they don't care whether you are 
Democrat or Republican, they want to kill all of us. That's why I 
commend him again for the spirit of bipartisanship.
  It was that spirit of bipartisanship that resulted in H.R. 1684 being 
passed out of committee by a unanimous 26-0 vote. It was a bipartisan 
effort, there was hard work on both sides, there was compromise on both 
sides, innovations on both sides. We came together, I believe, with a 
very strong package.
  I am, however, very concerned about the manager's amendment, which is 
going to be coming up for a vote today, because of the 86 provisions in 
the bill, 42, 49.8 percent, of the provisions of the bill have either 
been eliminated or changed dramatically.
  Some of the key ones on the issue of interoperability, in our 
legislation, the committee legislation, we provided

[[Page 11816]]

that $1 billion in grants for interoperability could be used for 
training exercise, for training as well as for the purchase of 
hardware. This was demanded, strongly requested by local law 
enforcement, local law authorities. It is essential to 
interoperability. Yet that has been stricken from the legislation.

                              {time}  1330

  On the ``sense of Congress'' language which has been so strongly 
recommended by the 9/11 Commission, that the Committee on Homeland 
Security be the focal point for oversight of the Department of Homeland 
Security and for being the central committee on the issue of homeland 
security, just the ``sense of Congress'' language was eliminated from 
the bill. We go down the list, as far as authorization for Secret 
Service, especially considering the increased amount which will be 
necessary in this year to protect Presidential candidates. So many 
other amendments, so much other language, even, for instance, on the 
issue of employees who leave the Department, lobbying restrictions, 
which quite honestly was proposed by a Democratic Congressman, Mr. 
DeFazio, that has been stricken out.
  Now, I realize what has happened here; I went through this during the 
time that I was chairman, but I think we approached it a little 
differently. There are other committees which are objecting to the 
jurisdiction of Homeland Security. There are others which are defying 
the wish of the 9/11 Commission, which is to have power vested in the 
Committee on Homeland Security. And, unfortunately, it appeased it at 
every juncture where objection was raised; those provisions were taken 
out.
  Now, in the last Congress, we adopted the Port Security Bill. That 
was a long, hard fight. We had jurisdictional battles with other 
committees; but we stayed with it, and the final package tremendously 
increased the position of the Committee on Homeland Security and 
resulted in very strong legislation. On the restructuring of FEMA, that 
also caused severe conflicts with other committees of jurisdiction. We 
stayed with it, and the final product enhanced the position of the 
Committee on Homeland Security. On the issue of chemical plants 
security, similarly, there were severe conflicts with other committees. 
We worked with the leadership at the time, Speaker Hastert and Majority 
Leader Boehner, and that resulted also in ultimate legislation which 
significantly enhanced the jurisdiction of the Committee on Homeland 
Security.
  By acquiescing so quickly to the objections or the positions of other 
committees, I think we have weakened our committee. And that to me is 
not a turf battle or not a power struggle; the issue of life and death 
is too important for that. But the fact is, we did not stand firm in 
fighting for jurisdiction of the committee.
  I know the chairman has mentioned that there was not an authorization 
bill passed by the House last year. I agree with that. We did pass one 
out of committee, there was one passed in 2005. The Senate has never 
passed an authorization bill.
  I made the judgment last year that we had an opportunity, a window of 
opportunity to pass significant legislation which could be brought to 
the House floor, which could be brought to the Senate floor, and which 
could pass, and that was port security, chemical plants and FEMA 
restructuring, and we did that. As far as this year now, we do have the 
H.R. 1, which still has not moved; it hasn't even gone to conference 
yet, and we have this legislation today, which was a fine product of 
the committee, but unfortunately, it has been dramatically weakened 
with, I must say, no input at all from the Republican side. And 
considering the extent to which Chairman Thompson does reach out at the 
committee level and there is such a bipartisan level of cooperation at 
the committee level, I would have hoped that we would have at least had 
something to say when it went to the Rules Committee when the manager's 
amendment was being constructed. Instead, this was done totally behind 
closed doors, totally to the exclusion of any Republican input. Again, 
perhaps it would be fine if we were an adversarial type committee, but 
we are not. This is a collegial committee. It is a bipartisan 
committee, and everything we do, every word of every provision both 
during the time when Chairman Cox was chairman, when I was chairman and 
certainly now under Chairman Thompson, it has been bipartisan. I regret 
that has not been the situation in bringing the legislation before the 
House today. So I will be later urging a vote against the manager's 
amendment.
  But I again want to express my regard for Chairman Thompson, and hope 
that when this is over, when this is resolved today or tomorrow or 
whenever the final vote comes, we can go forward from there and work in 
a bipartisan way at the committee level the way we have done for the 
last 3\1/2\ years.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
distinguished gentleman from Maryland, our majority leader, Mr. Hoyer.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the distinguished chairman, and I congratulate him 
for the great work that he is doing. This is a critical bill that we 
consider today. And, as he has pointed out, we have had a number of 
bills dealing with homeland security on the floor.
  I also want to thank the ranking member for his leadership both in 
this Congress and in the past Congress on this issue. I think the 
American people are advantaged by having two people of real substance 
who care about this issue working together, even though from time to 
time, as the gentleman has pointed out, there are disagreements. He had 
the same problems that the chairman is having, and we are trying to 
work through those problems. And I certainly am going to support the 
manager's amendment as he tries to work this.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chairman of the Homeland Security 
Committee, Congressman Thompson, for all his hard work on this very, 
very important authorization bill.
  The highest duty of our government is to protect the American people, 
to secure our homeland and to defend our national security. 
Unfortunately, since the horrific terrorist attacks on our Nation on 
September 11 opened our eyes and exposed our vulnerabilities, we have 
not done enough to protect our homeland. As Tom Kean, the former 
Republican Governor of New Jersey and cochair of the bipartisan 9/11 
Commission stated last August, ``We are not protecting our own people 
in this country. The government is not doing its job.''
  Yesterday's arrest of six men who apparently were plotting to attack 
and kill soldiers in Fort Dix in New Jersey is a stark reminder that we 
cannot, we must not let down our guard; that we must remain vigilant.
  This legislation, which I believe will receive strong bipartisan 
support, is a critical step in the right direction. Among other things, 
this bill authorizes $39.8 billion for the Department of Homeland 
Security for fiscal year 2008, which is $2.1 billion in addition for 
our homeland security that was asked for by the President. It restores 
the President's 52 percent cut to the State Homeland Security Grant 
Program, which helps first responders to prevent, prepare for and 
respond to acts of terrorism. It restores the President's 55 percent 
cut in firefighter assistance grants. It restores the elimination of 
the local law enforcement terrorism prevention program and restores the 
elimination of the SAFER, which is the Staffing for Adequate Fire and 
Emergency Response program. I want to thank the chairman for doing that 
and congratulate him on his leadership because, as the ranking member 
pointed out, this bill was reported out unanimously. It was a joint 
effort and a very important one at that.
  Furthermore, Mr. Chairman, this legislation contains strong 
accountability measures aimed at strengthening and streamlining 
management of the Department of Homeland Security, which has struggled 
with its management challenges; and it includes provisions to improve 
information sharing, to enhance bioterrorism preparedness and to

[[Page 11817]]

eliminate the Department's authority to establish its own personnel 
management system.
  Mr. Chairman, ever since the Department of Homeland Security was 
created, an effort which I opposed because I thought that would create 
a Department too large and too diverse to manage well, frankly, I think 
my concerns have been evidenced. It is the challenge of this committee, 
now that we have created the Department, to ensure that in fact it does 
act in an efficient manner to protect our homeland. But I have been 
concerned about the efficacy of consolidating 22 agencies and 170,000 
people into one Department. However, since the Congress chose to create 
this new Department, it is our duty, as I said, to ensure that it has 
the resources it needs to do its job as effectively as possible and to 
ensure that the Department is well managed.
  This legislation, Mr. Chairman, by focusing on oversight and 
management is a critical response to the issues and problems that have 
been encountered at the Department since its creation.
  I want to again congratulate Mr. Thompson, who is doing such an 
excellent job of leading this committee, and Mr. King, who brings a 
focus for the country as opposed to a partisan focus to this work with 
Mr. Thompson. I want to congratulate them both.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I thank the majority leader for 
his kind words. And would just add that this was genuinely bipartisan, 
and it did increase spending by $2.1 billion more than the President of 
our party was recommending, and yet we as Republicans did that because 
we wanted to act in a bipartisan way, which makes the fact that we were 
shut out of the manager's amendment much more painful.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Daniel E. Lungren).
  Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. I thank the chairman.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the underlying bill, but oppose 
the manager's amendment that will be presented basically as the 
alternative to the bipartisan work product that came out of the 
committee on a 29-0 vote, I believe. Not a single dissenting vote, 
Democrat or Republican, was recorded in the committee after we had gone 
through long debate not only on the base bill as it was presented to 
us, but numerous amendments presented by both Republicans and 
Democrats.
  9/11 is the seminal moment of this century. It changed the world in 
which we live. One would hope that it would change the manner in which 
we work in this House. In many ways, that has occurred with respect to 
the bipartisan approach that has been utilized in the committee itself. 
We recall that in the last Congress, we managed to pass the SAFE Ports 
bill, a bipartisan product, all the way from subcommittee to full 
committee to the floor to working out the conference with the Senate. 
Essentially there wasn't too much to work out; they adopted our 
provisions. And then, on to the President of the United States to sign 
it. That showed that we can work in a changed world with a changed 
approach in this House. That is why today is so disappointing.
  We have a completed product coming out of the committee, a 29-0 vote, 
with numerous amendments adopted after full consideration by both 
Democrats and Republicans, and yet a large portion of that will be 
stripped out with the manager's amendment to be presented by the 
chairman of this committee.
  I do not question the motivation of my chairman. In fact, I want to 
believe in my heart that he would rather not tear his own bill apart. I 
believe he would like to have the whole thing here. Why? Because we 
believe it is a better bill that actually goes further to protect 
America.
  Some heard on this floor Mr. Reichert from our committee, a 
distinguished member of our committee, the former sheriff of King 
County in the State of Washington, concerned about the lack of 
interoperability that reigns across this land. Mr. King has spoken on 
the floor about the tragic consequences of a failure of 
interoperability on 9/11. Others in law enforcement throughout this 
country talked about it. We approved $1 billion a year ago. In this 
bill we actually allow greater flexibility so that first responders can 
utilize this money to make interoperability a fact, and yet that is 
stricken from this bill if we adopt the manager's amendment.
  There are any number of other things that are involved here. One of 
them that seems to me to be extremely important, and we have held 
hearings on this, is strengthening maritime alien smuggling laws by 
denying alien smugglers the use of maritime routes and enhancing 
penalties for alien smuggling; taken out.
  Also, the 9/11 Commission has made it very, very clear that business 
as usual is not acceptable, and that means in this Congress, and 
suggests that we should reorganize ourselves so that we have a prime 
committee that deals with these matters, not because it is a matter of 
jurisdictional pride, but because of a greater efficiency, a greater 
oversight, a greater responsibility, a greater accountability and 
having us mirror the new arrangement that exists in the executive 
branch.
  And so we express a sense of Congress to do this, to carry out that 
important recommendation of the 9/11 Commission; stripped out by the 
manager's amendment. There is no real good argument why it should be 
stripped out except it is.
  There is a pilot program for mobile biometrics identification of 
apprehended aliens at sea and authorizing $10 million for the program. 
We discussed this. There is a need. There is a vulnerability we have 
with respect to aliens at sea, and yet we strip it out of here.

                              {time}  1345

  I don't believe there is any good argument that you're going to hear 
on the floor for adopting the manager's amendment, because they have to 
point to those things that are stripped out to suggest why they're bad, 
why they don't enhance our security.
  I recall when the majority leader came to the floor a year ago, or a 
little over a year ago and congratulated us on our bipartisan approach 
for the SAFE Ports bill. I wish he could come to the floor again. If 
you listened to his words carefully, he said, ``The committee has given 
us a good bipartisan bill.''
  I agree with the majority leader. Let's keep the bipartisan bill. 
Let's pass it. Let's defeat the manager's amendment.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I now recognize the 
gentlelady from California for 2 minutes, Ms. Harman.
  Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, as the majority leader pointed out several 
minutes ago, yesterday the FBI arrested six men following a 15-month 
investigation. The charges are that, inspired by al Qaeda, they were 
bent on taking out as many soldiers as possible at Fort Dix using 
semiautomatic weapons and rocket-propelled grenades. Three of them were 
in this country illegally. The other three were American citizens. All 
lived unremarkable lives and seemed well integrated into their 
communities. Even their next-door neighbors had no reason to suspect 
that they were actually the vanguard of a new breed of terrorist.
  In Torrance, California, in my congressional district, four members 
of a prison-based jihadist cell await trial on charges of conspiring to 
wage war against the U.S. Government through terrorism, kill members of 
the Armed Forces, and murder foreign officials.
  Mr. Chairman, this is our future. Protecting the homeland, preventing 
and disrupting the next terrorist attack is the primary responsibility 
of the Homeland Security Committee, and I congratulate Chairman 
Thompson and Ranking Member King for putting together this 
authorization bill.
  The bill strengthens homeland security by expanding on successful 
ideas like fusion centers and strengthening our infrastructure.
  Many in this Chamber are focused on our broken Iraq policy. So am I. 
But I also worry that, while we are consumed with the Iraq debate, al 
Qaeda and its friends are successfully expanding and adapting in ways 
that are long-term, global and enormously dangerous. Al

[[Page 11818]]

Qaeda has proven that the brand is ``portable.'' Its embrace of low-
tech, unspectacular operations makes it much harder to stop.
  Why haven't we been attacked here? Some say al Qaeda is waiting to 
exceed the lethality of 9/11. But if the U.S. is perceived as weaker 
and bogged down in Iraq and if terrorists are scaling down attacks, an 
attack or series of near-simultaneous attacks here seems inevitable.
  The Homeland Security Subcommittee on Intelligence, which I chair, is 
focused on the threat of homegrown terrorism and improving ways to 
disrupt and prevent the next attack. If the terrorists are here, the 
activities of that subcommittee are critical.
  This bill helps us build our intelligence competence. It strengthens 
parts of the budget that are underfunded and authorizes crucial 
activities. Vote ``aye.''
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, to demonstrate the bipartisanship 
of the committee, I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Cuellar) for the free advice he just gave me.
  With that, I recognize the gentlelady from Florida (Ms. Ginny Brown-
Waite) for 3 minutes.
  Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I reluctantly rise 
today to speak against H.R. 1684, the Department of Homeland Security 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year '08. I say reluctantly because even 
though I was cynical about the campaign promises made by the other side 
to implement the remaining 9/11 Commission reforms, I never dreamed 
that the American people would be betrayed the way I believe they are 
today.
  Mr. Chairman, the majority of members on our committee rolled over 
and played dead, letting their other committee counterparts in the 
House pick this bill clean of many good security measures in a 
manager's amendment that will strip them out and gut the bill. Yet the 
majority has the audacity to come to the floor with this skeleton and 
call it a good bill.
  My constituents will be horrified when I tell them that a provision 
that was worked out in the Homeland Security Committee to include in 
the base bill was stripped out. That language would have required 
employers at critical infrastructure sites to verify Social Security 
numbers of their employees before hiring them.
  Do you know why constituents all around the Nation should be 
outraged? Because 2 years ago, a power plant in Florida unknowingly had 
a painting contractor who hired illegal aliens. Several of them had 
pending criminal charges and had been deported multiple times. These 
workers had access in and around the nuclear power plant. Let me repeat 
that. A nuclear power plant had illegal aliens with criminal records 
wandering around in them. Does that not scare you? It scared me, and 
that's why we added this amendment to fix it.
  I wonder if the majority thought of the residents near any nuclear 
facility and the sheer devastation a criminal or terrorist act in that 
facility might cause. Were they thinking of the children and the 
working families, the people who trust us to keep them safe? Or were 
they thinking of just backroom deals with other committee Chairs?
  I say to the people bent on stripping this bill of the security 
provisions: Stand up for this bill. Stand up for the good we are doing 
to safeguard the American people. Do not offer the manager's amendment 
to strip these provisions out and leave the Nation vulnerable in many 
areas.
  There is no way that this House can possibly justify passing an 
amendment to this bill that will take out provisions like:
  Denying alien smugglers access to maritime routes.
  Tough postemployment lobbying restrictions on Department of Homeland 
Security officials, a Democrat provision being stripped.
  Implementing the 9/11 Commission recommendation for a single 
committee overseeing the Department of Homeland Security.
  Or authorizing better information sharing among Federal, State and 
local law enforcement partners.
  These provisions were all stripped from the bill. There is no way 
that we could support this unless we want to water down homeland 
security.
  We should all be concerned about the things that are not in this 
bill. We could fix the loophole today by giving authorization and 
leaving the bill the same as it was when it left the committee. That's 
an important procedure that would protect America's homeland.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I wish to help the 
gentlelady from Florida. If you will check, the data sharing and the 
child predator requirements are left in the bill. They're not taken 
out. I just want to make sure that you have the latest version of the 
bill in that respect.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from the District 
of Columbia (Ms. Norton).
  Ms. NORTON. I thank the chairman for yielding. I could take a minute 
to thank him for his masterful handling of this bill in a bipartisan 
fashion before this committee.
  I want to strongly thank the chairman for the way in which the 
committee has insisted on endorsing a headquarters for this department, 
because one of the continuing and most sustained criticisms of the 
department has been its management. But how can we expect the 
department to be managed when they are in 60 different places, 80 
different leases?
  The inefficiencies, Mr. Chairman, associated with the dispersal of 
this largest department are incalculable. The great cuts and 
deficiencies we have seen in the Homeland budget pale beside what we 
see in the way in which it is positioned: multiple and redundant 
mailrooms and screening facilities and parking and child care 
facilities and fitness centers; and, above all, shuttles just so that 
one part of the department can get to meet face to face with another 
part. Worst of all, one part that I know will be vacated is the 
Massachusetts Avenue headquarters, and yet they're having to spend $18 
million just to make that livable. They are forced to live by short-
term leases, rollover leases, wasting money.
  We have an opportunity, because to the President's credit, he has put 
money in the appropriation to begin to build a headquarters for this 
department. It was in there last session. It did not get passed. It's 
up to the appropriators, the new appropriators, to make sure we have a 
real department and real headquarters.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I am privileged to recognize for 
4 minutes the gentleman from Florida who has done such an outstanding 
job in a brief time on the committee, Mr. Bilirakis.
  Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 1684, 
the Fiscal Year 2008 Department of Homeland Security Authorization Act, 
a good bill which could be much better. I say that because the 
manager's amendment, if adopted, would strip out many bipartisan 
provisions that would have helped prevent terrorism and strengthen 
immigration enforcement, including one that I authored.
  H.R. 1684 currently includes an amendment I sponsored that was 
adopted during the committee's consideration of this bill which would 
improve maritime immigration enforcement. As a representative from 
Florida, I know how critically important it is to secure our maritime 
borders, as do many of our coastal colleagues.
  Coast Guard RADM David Pekoske testified before our Border, Maritime, 
and Global Counterterrorism Subcommittee in February about the 
challenges of coastal security. During his testimony, he highlighted an 
ongoing partnership with US-VISIT to deploy mobile biometrics 
collection equipment on Coast Guard cutters operating in the Mona Pass 
between the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico, where almost half of 
our maritime migrant apprehensions take place. I was intrigued by the 
possibility of this effort and the promise it may hold for 
strengthening our maritime defenses.
  My amendment, which the manager's amendment removes from this bill, 
would expand this effort into a formal pilot program and require DHS to 
evaluate the results to determine the

[[Page 11819]]

feasibility and appropriateness of expanding such capability to all DHS 
maritime vessels. This capability is critically important since we 
currently do not have the ability to verify the identity of apprehended 
migrants, previous immigration violators, criminals, and possible 
terrorists in the maritime environment. This deficiency allows those 
who seek to break our Nation's immigration laws and those who may wish 
to commit terrorist acts to remain undetected and be repatriated 
without consequence so that they are free to continue their illegal and 
dangerous behavior.
  The biometric identification of interdicted aliens in the maritime 
environment has the potential to greatly improve the security of 
America's coastal borders. Unfortunately, since the majority has 
decided to remove this provision from this bill, we will not realize 
that promise.
  I am extremely disappointed and frustrated at this process. Many of 
the provisions that the manager's amendment strips from this bill were 
supported by every member of the Homeland Security Committee, including 
our chairman, whom I greatly admire and respect. However, I cannot 
understand why we would allow those who do not serve on our committee 
to dictate to us how we should or should not do our jobs. We simply 
should not put political expediency above homeland security.
  Mr. Chairman, I believe that this bill represents a missed 
opportunity to enhance our country's immigration enforcement, help stop 
terrorism, and improve our ability to respond should the unthinkable 
happen again.
  Though I plan to support its final passage here, I implore my friends 
on the other side of the aisle to work with us to move forward on the 
many bipartisan provisions which would have made this bill much better.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining 
on both sides?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Mississippi has 20 minutes. The 
gentleman from New York has 11.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Thank you very much.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the 
Energy and Commerce Committee, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Dingell).

                              {time}  1400

  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, I thank my distinguished friend and 
colleague from Mississippi for the recognition. I recognize that 
securing our homeland is going to take tremendous efforts across the 
agencies and involve government expertise and cooperation throughout 
the government. I want to say that, in this matter, the business of the 
Nation is in good hands in those of my friend from Mississippi.
  I represent Michigan, the State with three of the busiest northern 
border crossings in the United States. Our citizens have long been 
accustomed to an open border in which citizens on both sides were able 
to commute to jobs, visit families, do shopping and visiting across 
international borders.
  With the events of September 11, 2001, our borders were shut. 
Michigan's economy literally ground to a halt. Just in time deliveries 
to Michigan factories and industries were stopped at the border. The 
new security realities threaten to idle factories and to lay off 
workers.
  This bill goes a long way to making sure that we avoid that 
situation, and it will also enable thousands of our citizens on both 
sides of the border, Michiganders and Canadians, the freedom to travel 
when they need to and in ways to which they have grown accustomed.
  With the US-VISIT program properly funded, more inspectors will be 
hired for the border. New technologies will be deployed to help ease 
the traffic and speed processing.
  Under the leadership of my friend, the chairman, Mr. Thompson, the 
bill increases Department of Homeland Security budget by $2 billion 
more than last year, and nearly 8 percent above the President's budget. 
Not only is more being put into the border, but we are also restoring 
funding to our first responders, money that was cut by the President's 
budget. State Homeland Security and Fire Assistance grants are restored 
to appropriate levels.
  As I said before, preparing and preventing another terrorist attack 
is a responsibility for all. As we learned 6 years ago from the anthrax 
attacks here on Capitol Hill, it is important that the Federal 
Government have an intelligent, coordinated, and effective response to 
bioterrorism and to all other acts of terrorism. All Cabinet-level 
departments and the agencies under their purview must work towards 
ensuring our domestic security.
  It is, however, important that as we move forward on this 
legislation, we keep in mind which agencies have the expertise and the 
skill to answer public health emergencies. We must not allow mission 
creep to set in blurring lines of authority and diluting the 
effectiveness of our response effort.
  I also want to point out the strong need for improvements in the 
cybersecurity of our Nation. The Committee on Energy and Commerce has 
long sought to raise the profile of cyber threats within DHS to better 
prepare the Nation for potentially catastrophic cyber disruptions. The 
manager's amendment in this legislation will require DHS to collaborate 
with expert agencies, including the Department of Commerce and the 
Federal Communications Commission. Such collaboration will ensure that 
ongoing efforts will not be interrupted or eroded.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers) who did such an outstanding job as 
chairman of the Oversight Subcommittee in the previous conference.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, as ranking member of the 
Homeland Security Subcommittee on Management, Investigations and 
Oversight, I have worked with my committee colleagues on this 
legislation for some time. I was also an original cosponsor of the 
bill, primarily because of its provisions to improve oversight, 
management and procurement at the Department of Homeland Security.
  On March 28, our committee produced a sound bipartisan bill that the 
committee passed by a vote of 26-0. Unfortunately, as the bill headed 
to the House floor, jurisdictional turf battles took over. At least 16 
important security provisions were dropped, and many more were altered 
without input from our side of the aisle.
  Unfortunately, at least one of the dropped provisions addressed a key 
9/11 Commission recommendation. This feature would centralize 
jurisdiction and oversight for homeland security in one committee, in 
both the House of Representatives and the Senate.
  Last Congress, the Republican leadership in the House heeded this 
recommendation by creating a new standing Committee on Homeland 
Security. This new standing committee was wisely vested with 
substantial jurisdiction over DHS.
  While we recognize that last Congress was an ambitious first step, 
experience has shown that jurisdiction over this department still needs 
further consolidation, not erosion. Far too many committees and 
subcommittees in Congress still exercise control and oversight 
authority over DHS. 88 to be exact. Already this year, DHS officials 
have testified at over 100 congressional hearings.
  It's my hope that leaders on both sides of the aisle can come to an 
understanding to help consolidate authorization jurisdiction under this 
one committee. Had this been the case this year, the bipartisan, well-
reasoned bill that was originally presented to the House would not have 
been carved up by jurisdictional turf battles.
  Until this issue is resolved, the House will not be able to exercise 
the needed oversight over DHS, just as it does with the other 
Departments in the Federal Government. Consequently, I must oppose this 
bare boned bill, and hope that we will address this critical issue of 
jurisdiction in the near future.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I now recognize the 
chairman of the Transportation Subcommittee, Ms. Jackson-Lee, for 2\1/
2\ minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me thank the chairman of the full 
committee, Mr. Thompson, and the ranking

[[Page 11820]]

member. They know that our byline is that we are a bipartisan 
committee. The reason is because entrusted to the Homeland Security 
Committee is the security of the Nation, security of a Nation that we 
love, security of a people that we cherish.
  Whenever we hear of a tragic truck accident in California, explosive 
truck accident, the viciousness of the shooting at Virginia Tech, and 
the bombing, or the threats of such, in the London train system, we 
begin to think of our security. No, maybe those are accidents, maybe 
those are not considered terrorist acts, Virginia Tech or the tragedy 
in California, but it causes America to begin to think about her own 
security.
  That is why H.R. 1684 is a strong reflection of the importance of 
security to this majority leadership. I am very proud that, in the 
early days of our legislation or our time as the majority, we passed 
the 9/11 bill, certainly working with a bipartisan leadership. We have 
moved to ensure that for the first time that we have a strong 
authorization bill on homeland security.
  We have not forgotten the employees, and I was glad to be able to 
offer a particular amendment that addressed the question of the morale 
and the leadership and the training of our employees. That is 
important, for if your employees are not fully functioning, the 
question of security is a question. And so I was delighted to be able 
to incorporate language regarding the CMOs qualifications, to ensure 
that the CMO possess a demonstrated ability and knowledge of treatment 
of illnesses caused by chemical, biological, nuclear and radiological 
agents.
  I am also glad to have developed an amendment which strips the 
Department of the authority to develop a personnel system different 
from the traditional GS schedule Federal model. In a number of critical 
ways the personnel system established by the Homeland Security has been 
a litany of failure.
  The question is, that if we don't order and put in order our homeland 
security function, then we cannot secure America. That is what 1684 
does. And we will address the questions of security, of civil 
liberties, of protecting our highways, of being concerned about rail 
security, we will do it and continue to do it because we believe in 
America.
  H.R. 1684 gives us the perfect road map, the perfect hand print to 
secure this Nation. I ask support for the bill.
  Mr. Chairman, September 11, 2001, is a day that is indelibly etched 
in the psyche of every American and most of the world. Much like the 
unprovoked attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, September 11, is 
a day that will live in infamy. And as much as Pearl Harbor changed the 
course of world history by precipitating the global struggle between 
totalitarian fascism and representative democracy, the transformative 
impact of September 11 in the course of American and human history is 
indelible. September 11 was not only the beginning of the Global War on 
Terror, but moreover, it was the day of innocence lost for a new 
generation of Americans.
  Just like my fellow Americans, I remember September 11 as vividly as 
if it was yesterday. In my mind's eye, I can still remember being 
mesmerized by the television as the two airliners crashed into the Twin 
Towers of the World Trade Center, and I remember the sense of terror we 
experienced when we realized that this was no accident, that we had 
been attacked, and that the world as we know it had changed forever. 
The moment in which the Twin Towers collapsed and the nearly 3,000 
innocent Americans died haunts me until this day.
  At this moment, I decided that the protection of our homeland would 
be at the forefront of my legislative agenda. I knew that all of our 
collective efforts as Americans would all be in vain if we did not 
achieve our most important priority: the security of our nation. 
Accordingly, I became then and continue to this day to be an active and 
engaged Member of the Committee on Homeland Security, and Chairwoman of 
the Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection Subcommittee, 
who considers our national security paramount.
  Our nation's collective response to the tragedy of September 11 
exemplified what has been true of the American people since the 
inception of our Republic--in times of crisis, we come together and 
always persevere. Despite the depths of our anguish on the preceding 
day, on September 12, the American people demonstrated their compassion 
and solidarity for one another as we began the process of response, 
recovery, and rebuilding. We transcended our differences and came 
together to honor the sacrifices and losses sustained by the countless 
victims of September 11. Let us honor their sacrifices by passing H.R. 
1684, which bolsters the efficacy, accountability, and our oversight 
over the Department of Homeland Security.
  This bipartisan bill was reported out of the Homeland Security 
Committee by a unanimous vote and includes many significant provisions 
I ensured were incorporated either into the base bill or through 
amendments at the Full Committee Markup aimed at strengthening and 
streamlining management, organizational, personnel, and procurement 
issues at the Department to facilitate execution of its homeland 
security mission.
  H.R. 1684 authorizes $39.8 billion in appropriations for the 
activities of the Department of Homeland Security for Fiscal Year (FY) 
2008--$2.1 billion over the requested amount of the President's FY 2008 
budget. H.R. 1684 is an oversight and management bill that builds 
capacity, provides resources, and ensures accountability at what GAO 
still views as a high-risk endeavor--the transformation and integration 
of 22 entities into the Department of Homeland Security.
  H.R. 1684 establishes important offices such as the Directorate for 
Policy, the Office of Health Affairs, and the Office of Cybersecurity 
and Communications. Within the Office of Health Affairs, this bill 
creates a Chief Medical Officer, CMO, and I worked with Chairman 
Thompson to incorporate language regarding the CMO's qualifications to 
ensure that the CMO possess a demonstrated ability and knowledge of 
treatment of illnesses caused by chemical, biological, nuclear, and 
radiological agents.
  Moreover, I introduced an amendment which passed during the Committee 
Markup of H.R. 1684 which strips the Department of the authority to 
develop a personnel system different from the traditional GS schedule 
Federal model. In a number of critical ways, the personnel system 
established by the Homeland Security has been a litany of failure.
  The flexibility we originally granted in the Homeland Security Act of 
2002 has not worked. That is why I offered an amendment repealing the 
DHS human resources personnel system.
  The Department has abused the flexibility given by Congress. They 
have created a personnel system that eviscerates employee due process 
rights and puts in serious jeopardy the agency's ability to recruit and 
retain a workforce capable of accomplishing its critical missions.
  We initially believed that the flexibility given the Department would 
allow it to respond better in times of crisis. We know now that nothing 
could be further from the truth. The abysmal response to Hurricane 
Katrina taught us that lesson.
  Despite Court rulings, however, on March 7, 2007, DHS announced that 
it will put into effect portions of the personnel system not 
specifically enjoined by the Court. Just a few weeks earlier, DHS 
outlined plans to move slower on its controversial personnel overhaul, 
formerly known as MaxHR, but now called the Human Capital Operations 
Plan or HCOP.
  Implementing these plans would further undercut the fairness of the 
appeals process for DHS employees by eliminating the Merit Systems 
Protection Board's current authority to modify agency-imposed 
penalties. These regulations would also provide the Secretary sole 
discretion to identify offenses and impose employee penalties as well 
as appoint a panel to decide the employee appeals the Secretary's 
action.
  According to U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer, these regulations 
put the thumbs of the agencies down hard on the scales of justice in 
[the agencies'] favor.
  The Federal Appeals Court agreed with the District Court's basic 
conclusion regarding the lack of fairness of these planned changes in 
adverse action and appeal rights, but ruled that they were not yet ripe 
for a decision since no one has been subject to discipline under them. 
It is clear that another court case will be filed should DHS put these 
provisions into place and an employee is harmed by the new adverse 
actions and appeals procedures.
  Some insisted that employees would be happier and more efficient if 
they were managed more like the private sector. We know now that 
nothing could be further from the truth. The Department's morale 
ratings have consistently been at or near the bottom of all federal 
agencies.
  In February of this year, the Department of Homeland Security 
received the lowest scores of any Federal agency on a Federal survey 
for job satisfaction, leadership and workplace performance. Of the 36 
agencies surveyed: DHS ranked 36th on job satisfaction, 35th on 
leadership and knowledge management, 36th on

[[Page 11821]]

results-oriented performance culture, and 33rd on talent management.
  We know that the Department too often does not listen to their 
employees. In fact, the National Treasury Employees Union, NTEU, sent 
me a letter on behalf of the 15,000 employees of DHS' Bureau of Customs 
and Border Protection thanking me for introducing my amendment 
repealing DHS' failed human resource management system, MaxHR. Despite 
its incredibly low morale, the Department is not changing its plans to 
implement MaxHR. Instead the Department is merely changing the name of 
an unpopular and troubled system. MaxHR will become HCOP.
  With the abysmal morale and extensive recruitment and retention 
challenges at DHS, implementing these personnel changes now will only 
further undermine the agency's employees and mission. From the 
beginning of discussions over personnel regulations with DHS more than 
4 years ago, it was clear that the only system that would work in this 
agency is one that is fair, credible and transparent. These regulations 
promulgated under the statute fail miserably to provide any of those 
critical elements. It is time to end this flawed personnel experiment.
  So it is time for Congress to once again step in. It is time to say 
to the dedicated workers of the Department of Homeland Security that 
they deserve to be treated with the same dignity and respect granted to 
other federal employees. Therefore, I thank my Homeland Security 
colleagues who supported my amendment repealing DHS' failed human 
resource management system because Homeland Security is too important 
to get it wrong again.
  I also worked with Chairman Thompson to incorporate into H.R. 1684 
language authorizing the Citizen Corps and the Metropolitan Medical 
Response System programs to strengthen emergency response and recovery 
efforts.
  The Citizen Corps Program is a critical program within the Department 
of Homeland Security that engages the community to be involved in 
emergency preparedness through public education and outreach, training, 
and volunteer service.
  My language ensured that funding will enable local Citizen Corps 
Councils to more adequately provide education and training for 
populations located around critical infrastructure. These populations 
will have an opportunity to be better prepared to respond to natural 
disasters, acts of terrorism and other man-made disasters.
  In a bipartisan fashion, I also worked with my colleague from Texas, 
Representative McCaul, to draft an amendment regarding CBP officers and 
their policies. My amendment called for the GAO to study the Border 
Patrol's policies on pursuit and the use of lethal and non-lethal 
force.
  Our Border Patrol officers operate in some of the most dangerous 
regions in the country and are often required to use force and pursue 
suspects on a daily basis. An independent evaluation of these practices 
and policies is important so that the Border Patrol knows the 
parameters of its enforcement tactics and has the information necessary 
to assess whether it needs to adopt new policies.
  My amendment also requires GAO to examine the number of incidents 
where force was used and when it has led to penalties against our 
Border Patrol officers, so we have hard data that can guide any 
reassessments that may be necessary.
  Recognizing the problem first is essential to fixing the situation. 
This non-partisan report by GAO will be a major step in evaluating 
these vital Border Patrol policies.
  H.R. 1684 also requires the Department to conduct a Comprehensive 
Homeland Security Review, similar to the Quadrennial Defense Review 
conducted by the Department of Defense. In addition, the bill requires 
pay parity for Customs and Border Protection employees and other border 
personnel enhancements and addresses critical staffing needs by tapping 
into the pool of experienced Federal annuitants.

  In conclusion, I stand here remembering those who still suffer, whose 
hearts still ache over the loss of so many innocent and interrupted 
lives. My prayer is that for those who lost a father, a mother, a 
husband, a wife, a child, or a friend will in the days and years ahead 
take comfort in the certain knowledge that they have gone on to claim 
the greatest prize, a place in the Lord's loving arms. And down here on 
the ground, their memory will never die so long as any of the many of 
us who loved them lives.
  Mr. Chairman, the best way to honor the memory of those lost in the 
inferno of 9/11, is to do all we can to ensure that it never happens 
again. The best way to do that is to bolster the efficacy, 
accountability, and our oversight over the Department of Homeland 
Security, which we created in the aftermath of 9/11 to protect and 
preserve our Nation which we all hold so dear.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I recognize the gentleman from 
Texas, the ranking member of the Emerging Threat Subcommittee, Mr. 
McCaul, for 3 minutes.
  Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise today not in opposition to 
what this legislation stands for, but out of concern for what this 
legislation fails to include.
  Numerous provisions that were part of the authorization bill which 
were approved unanimously and reported by the Committee on Homeland 
Security were removed from the legislation that is before us today. And 
these provisions were largely eliminated without any real policy 
justification for their removal. Never in the history of the Homeland 
Security Committee has such an action been done.
  One of these provisions stripped from the authorization bill before 
us today was based on a piece of legislation I introduced which 
authorizes the National Bio and Agro Facility, or NBAF. The text of 
this legislation was unanimously approved at the Committee on Homeland 
Security authorization bill markup.
  I am at a loss as to why my colleagues across the other side of the 
aisle unilaterally decided to eliminate the NBAF provision from this 
bill, especially when some of my Democratic colleagues on the 
committee, including Chairman Thompson, were original cosponsors of the 
NBAF legislation.
  The need for the NBAF is clear and immediate. Its establishment is 
crucial to defending our Nation from agroterrorism and naturally 
occurring animal diseases. Currently, there's not one Biosafety Level 3 
and BSL 4 livestock laboratory in the United States, and the NBAF 
provision would have authorized a facility to fill that gap.
  DHS is conducting a site selection process right now. Eighteen sites 
have been looked at across the country, one close to my district at 
Texas A&M. They are investing significant resources in the competition.
  I'd also like to note that some of the other sites being considered 
lie in or near districts represented by Democratic colleagues.
  Congress has already provided $46 million for pre-construction NBAF 
activities, and yet, DHS currently does not have the legal authority it 
needs to even procure the land.
  Because the enactment of this legislation is crucial to the 
establishment of the NBAF and to defending the Nation against the 
threats of agroterrorism, and because this legislation was eliminated 
from the authorization bill before us, I urge my colleagues to work to 
move forward in a bipartisan way to help secure our homeland and to 
pass H.R. 1717.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to 
a former member of the committee, who is still very much interested in 
homeland security, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate the chairman for a 
great job and his counterpart, ranking member. There's a lot of work 
that goes into this, a lot of work.
  But just 1 year ago today we were still debating the following: We 
were debating Federal agencies which still tended to spend needless 
energy fighting one another over turf and money issues. And it's always 
been unclear as to who is in charge.
  The basic issues underlined by the 
9/11 Commission and other committees remain unresolved until now. With 
this piece of legislation, 1684, we are going to really jump into the 
middle and the center of the storm. We still have inability of police 
and fire departments to communicate with one another. We still have 
senseless rivalries among our agencies under our jurisdiction, and, 
three, there's still incompatibility in computer systems impeding data 
sharing.
  The institutions that we have oversight over must understand that 
they are the three major areas that they must do something about in a 
positive sense. This legislation before us, 1684, will strengthen the 
Department

[[Page 11822]]

through better management and increased oversight. This finely crafted 
proposal is important to the security of the United States of America.
  So I commend you both. I commend the chairman for his valiant efforts 
to improve national security. As a former member of the committee, I've 
worked closely with him over the years, and can state firmly that no 
one works harder or smarter on issues that affect America's safety than 
the gentleman from Mississippi.
  I also know that working the legislative maze that is Capitol Hill is 
never an easy task, particularly when it comes to the wide array of 
turf battles between the various entities.
  I think the bill we vote on today, which will pass, is a prudent 
course charted to overcome those obstacles.

                              {time}  1415

  Indeed, this bipartisan proposal includes many significant provisions 
aimed at strengthening and streamlining management, organizational 
personnel and procurement issues at the Department to facilitate 
execution of our mission.
  This bill authorizes $39.8 billion in appropriations, $2.1 billion 
needed over the request of the President of the United States. This 
side of the aisle, joined by that side of the aisle, will no longer 
shortchange Homeland Security in the resources and apparatus needed to 
do the job.
  This critical funding will help establish important offices, such as 
the Directorate for Policy, the Office of Health Affairs, and the 
Office of Cybersecurity and Communications. Areas that are crucial in 
homeland security but often are ignored. With this bill we no longer 
ignore the issues that have the potential to cause us severe harm if 
left unattended.
  The security of our homeland is as important as it gets. This bill 
takes this austere responsibility seriously. So I applaud the chairman. 
I applaud the committee and its fantastic staff for crafting sound 
legislation. And I implore the support of all my colleagues.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Dent).
  Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak on the Homeland Security 
authorization bill, H.R. 1684.
  The stated purpose of H.R. 1684 is to enhance homeland security. 
Unfortunately, the restricted rule enacted at the behest of the 
majority excludes certain measures that would have increased our 
domestic security. One such provision is my amendment on the Automated 
Targeting System for Passengers, or ATS-P. ATS-P coordinates 
information already available from sources and allows Customs and 
Border Protection to perform risk assessments of people entering the 
United States. In this way CBP can identify a person of interest and 
question that individual before, let me repeat, before that person 
gains formal admission into this country.
  This amendment would have been a positive step towards improving 
border security.
  ATS-P is a system that is already deployed and that has already had 
some notable successes. It would have fulfilled a 9/11 Commission 
recommendation. And yet the majority remains opposed to it and made 
sure that it was not made in order. The motive behind that exclusion 
remains a mystery.
  The mystery deepens when one considers what was made in order today, 
specifically one portion of the manager's amendment. During committee 
proceedings at my request, we inserted language authorizing funding for 
the United States Secret Service. The Secret Service, once an entity of 
the Treasury Department, now falls within the jurisdiction of the 
Department of Homeland Security. The Secret Service plays an important 
function in safeguarding the citizens of this country. The amendment I 
offered would have fully funded the President's request for the Secret 
Service's protection missions. It also would have provided over $322 
million for Investigations and Field Operations, the unit within the 
Secret Service that investigates and prosecutes counterfeiting, fraud 
and identity theft.
  Mr. Chairman, I will insert a copy of a letter into the Record from 
the National Fraternal Order of Police endorsing the inclusion of 
Secret Service funding within the Homeland Security authorization bill.

                                    Fraternal Order of Police,

                                      Washington, DC, May 8, 2007.
     Hon. Bennie Thompson,
     Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Peter King,
     Ranking Member, Committee on Homeland Security, Washington, 
         DC.
       Dear Chairman Thompson and Ranking Member King: I am 
     writing on behalf of the membership of the Fraternal Order of 
     Police to express our support for H.R. 1684, the ``Department 
     of Homeland Security Authorization Act of 2008.'' We are 
     strongly supportive of sections 501, 502, 504, 505, which 
     would provide law enforcement retirement benefits and improve 
     recruitment and retention for Customs and Border Protection 
     (CBP) officers.
       I also would like to urge the retention of Sections 1101 
     and 1120. Section 1101 allows funding from Department of 
     Homeland Security interoperability grants to procure 
     equipment that conforms to the SAFECOM interoperability 
     continuum. SAFECOM is a communications program of the 
     Department of Homeland Security's Office for Interoperability 
     and Compatibility that, with its Federal partners, provides 
     research, development, testing and evaluation, guidance, 
     tools, and templates on communications-related issues to 
     local, tribal, State, and, Federal emergency response 
     agencies. In developing the continuum, SAFECOM coordinated 
     its efforts with numerous State and local law enforcement and 
     emergency services entities. Interoperable communications are 
     critical in the successful prosecution of law enforcement 
     missions and play a critical role in ensuring officer and 
     civilian safety.
       We are also asking that you support Section 1120, which 
     authorizes $1.64 billion and an additional 122 personnel for 
     the United States Secret Service, an increase of 14 percent 
     over the President's request. The Secret Service is charged 
     with protecting our nation's most important leaders and 
     visiting foreign dignitaries as well as conducting criminal 
     investigations. Since 9/11 the Secret Service's limited 
     assets have been increasingly stretched thin at a time when 
     the number of candidates they protect has increased from 20 
     to 55 and the amount of counterfeit money in circulation has 
     increased by 30 percent.
       This section would also provide additional funding for our 
     overworked and undercompensated Secret Service Uniformed 
     Division. These dedicated men and women work tirelessly to 
     provide protection to an increasing number of visiting 
     officials, as well as protecting foreign embassies in the 
     United States. However, they are experiencing a turnover rate 
     of 20-25 percent a year as officers leave the agency to find 
     better paying jobs with other Federal law enforcement 
     agencies.
       It is important that law enforcement receives the tools and 
     funding needed to fulfill its mission. Sections 1101 and 1120 
     do just that and we urge you to retain them in the final 
     bill. On behalf of the more than 325,000 members of the 
     Fraternal Order of Police, I want to thank you for all of 
     your help on this important issue. Please do not hesitate to 
     contact me, or Executive Director Jim Pasco, through our 
     Washington office if we can be of any further assistance.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Chuck Canterbury,
                                               National President.

  In fulfilling our homeland security mission, this Congress should 
provide oversight of and support for homeland security agencies, one of 
which is now the Secret Service. The FOP endorses this suggestion. So 
do I. I wish that my colleagues on the other side would embrace this 
idea, along with the better security provided by the ATS-P provisions 
as well.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge).
  Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. And 
let me thank the chairman and ranking member for their hard work.
  The Department of Homeland Security is tasked with protecting America 
and its citizens. There is no greater charge. Oversight is critical to 
the Department both to root out waste, fraud and abuse, and to examine 
the effectiveness and to recommend improvements for the Department's 
operations. This bill provides support for the Inspector General's 
Office and creates tools that will enhance transparency for Congress 
and the public.
  To help improve policymaking at the DHS and to promote long-term 
planning, this bill establishes a Directorate

[[Page 11823]]

for Policy to be headed by an undersecretary for policy and requires a 
quadrennial review of the Department's practices and mission.
  This policymaking must address the needs of America's most vulnerable 
citizens: its children. I thank the chairman for including my language 
that requires the Directorate for Policy to address the needs of 
children. That will enable the Department to enhance school 
preparedness and other emergency planning needs of facilities for 
children.
  As a former superintendent of North Carolina's public schools, I know 
how important planning is to preparedness and security for our schools 
and other places that focus on our children. The Department must 
understand the importance of including schools and children in 
emergency planning, and this bill will ensure that it does so.
  I also believe that DHS must prioritize the protection of our 
critical food and agriculture infrastructure to enhance the health and 
security of America. The ongoing melamine crisis only reveals how 
vulnerable we are.
  This bill requires the Department to report on their progress on 
agriculture security in response to issues raised by two critical 
reports on their efforts. That will ensure that DHS is doing 
appropriate planning for agriculture security and give Congress the 
opportunity for oversight. I thank the chairman for including this in 
this bill.
  I am also concerned about the security of sensitive materials used by 
the Department, uniforms, badges, identification cards, and protective 
equipment.
  H.R. 1684 enhances the nation's security by requiring these items, 
subject to practical exceptions, produced domestically when they will 
be used domestically.
  Taken together, the many good provisions in this bill will improve 
the Department's ability to protect our homeland. This is a good, 
bipartisan bill, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to 
the gentleman from south Texas (Mr. Cuellar).
  Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1684, the 
Department of Homeland Security Authorization Act.
  As a cosponsor, I certainly want to thank Chairman Thompson for the 
leadership and the strong support that he has shown in moving this bill 
along, and I also want to thank my friend, Ranking Member King, for his 
bipartisan work and for the hard work that he has provided.
  This particular bill has three provisions that I have added with the 
help of the chairman, the ranking member, my colleagues and the 
committee staff. And I want to thank them for their work.
  The first provision creates a direct line of communications between 
border local elected officials and the private sector and the 
policymakers at the Department through a Border Communities Liaison at 
the DHS Office of Policy. This is important to make sure that we get 
the local input.
  The second provision calls for the evaluation of and emphasis on 
training of Border Patrol agents along the southwest border where many 
of them are going to serve.
  And the third and last provision mandates for the first time a 
comprehensive assessment of the staffing, infrastructure and technology 
resources that are needed to reduce the wait times for pedestrian, 
commercial and noncommercial traffic at the border. We want to have 
border security, but at the same time, we do not want to impede trade 
and tourism.
  I thank Chairman Thompson for his support and ask my colleagues to 
support H.R. 1684.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk).
  Mr. KIRK. Mr. Chairman, I would like to engage in a brief colloquy 
with the chairman about an amendment Mr. Lipinski and I offered in the 
Rules Committee yesterday afternoon regarding airport security badges.
  Dave Savini of CBS TV revealed that, since 2004, 3,760 aviation 
security badges have gone missing at O'Hare. These badges are the only 
identification needed for law enforcement officials, independent 
contractors, baggage handlers, flight attendants and pilots to enter 
the airfield. When an employee is fired, some airport contractors are 
unwilling to reclaim their badges from employees, who retain full 
access to the airport.
  This problem is not isolated at Chicago. In early February, officials 
at Los Angeles International Airport reported 120 missing TSA badges; 
in Oakland, 500 missing badges; in Buffalo, nearly 40 missing badges; 
and 42 missing badges in Dallas.
  Mr. Chairman, the Kirk-Lipinski amendment we offered would require 
airport contractors to make a reasonable effort to retrieve badges from 
employees whose employment has ended and notify the local airport 
authority within 24 hours. Failure to comply would then result in a 
civil fine of up to $10,000 per day. Hitting contractors where it 
hurts, in their pocketbooks, can help make our Nation's airports safer. 
And our amendment will now be included in a freestanding bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank you for engaging in this colloquy on this 
matter and appreciate your support in working with Mr. Lipinski and me 
in a bipartisan manner to address this issue in the future.
  I yield to the chairman.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I thank Mr. Kirk as well 
as Mr. Lipinski for bringing this to the committee's attention. I agree 
with the gentleman that the issue of airport security badges must be 
examined in closer detail.
  I share your commitment to securing our airports and look forward to 
working with you on this issue in the Homeland Security Committee.
  Mr. KIRK. I thank the chairman.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I now yield 2\1/2\ minutes 
to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the Department of 
Homeland Security Authorization Act.
  In 4 years Congress has not been able to successfully pass an 
authorization measure into law. That all changes today, and I want to 
commend the chairman and the ranking member for their leadership in 
bringing the bill to the floor today.
  Today, the Democratic majority is changing paths by making homeland 
security and appropriate oversight a priority for Congress, and under 
the leadership of Chairman Thompson, we will pass the bill this year. 
This bill provides us that opportunity while authorizing an additional 
$2.1 billion for the Department. This is truly an historic moment. 
While I applaud many provisions of this bill, I particularly would like 
to focus on a few key elements that will significantly improve 
America's security.
  As chairman of the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, 
and Science and Technology, I am particularly pleased that this bill 
incorporates legislation I introduced to improve the material threat 
assessment process under Project BioShield. This language requires the 
Secretary to effectively group similar threats together in order to 
move towards a ``one drug, many bugs'' approach to biosecurity that 
will allow us to combat multiple threats simultaneously.
  H.R. 1684 also establishes a National Biosurveillance Integration 
Center based on a measure that I introduced. Biointelligence and 
biosurveillance provide the early warning systems necessary to detect 
the spread of disease, whether natural or intentional. This center will 
integrate data from biosurveillance systems with other intelligence to 
provide a comprehensive and timely picture of existing biological 
threats.
  Lastly, this bill recognizes the importance of investing more in 
cybersecurity, a critical need at this juncture. We authorize an 
additional $50 million for cybersecurity research and development 
activities at DHS, critical resources to address one of our most

[[Page 11824]]

pressing and underfunded needs. We cannot overestimate the importance 
of biosecurity.
  Again, I want to stress the importance of cybersecurity, and we need 
to do more in this area. And I look forward to working with the 
chairman on this and other priorities.
  I want to thank Chairman Thompson for including these and many other 
critical provisions. I am proud that we are well on our way to seeing 
the first ever DHS authorization bill signed into law. And I urge my 
colleagues to join me in supporting this measure.
  Thank you, Chairman Thompson, for your leadership.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I will continue to reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, for the purpose of a 
colloquy, I would like to yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Texas.

                              {time}  1430

  Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you for this time 
and for your willingness to work with me on issues that are important 
to my district and to the State and the country as a whole.
  As you know, I represent one of the longest stretches of the southern 
border with Mexico, my congressional district, the 23rd. Eleven 
counties in my district are on the Mexican border, and a variety of 
others are 20 miles away from the Mexican border.
  As I travel throughout my district, one of the most common concerns 
is the lack of resources rural law enforcement officers have on the 
border. These departments often have just a few officers on the entire 
force, and they have to handle the same drug cases and human smuggling 
cases that large cities do. Except processing these cases in small 
communities means taking half or, in some cases, all of the staff in 
those particular communities.
  I had planned to offer an amendment that would have provided 
necessary additional resources for the border to local police 
departments as well as the sheriff's departments to hire and equip and 
train additional officers. I have withdrawn that amendment with the 
hopes of being able to work with the chairman and this committee to 
bring this critical aid to our local law enforcement on the Mexican 
border.
  Mr. Chairman, once again, I thank you; and I would ask for your help 
and your assistance.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez) for his willingness to work with 
the committee. I know very well how important border security is to his 
constituents and how hard he has worked since returning to Congress to 
keep his community safe and bring the necessary resources to Federal, 
State and local law enforcement on the border. I certainly appreciate 
his expertise on border security issues. I look forward to working with 
him to ensure that our brave law enforcement men and women receive the 
assistance they need to keep border communities in our Nation safe and 
secure.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I will 
insert into the Record letters from the American Federation of 
Government Employees and The National Treasury Employees Union in 
support of this legislation.
                                            American Federation of


                                Government Employees, AFL-CIO,

                                      Washington, DC, May 7, 2007.
       Dear Representative: On behalf of the American Federation 
     of Government Employees (AFGE), which represents 26,000 
     Department of Homeland Security (DHS) workers, I strongly 
     urge you to vote in support of passage of H.R. 1684, the 
     Department of Homeland Security Authorization Act for Fiscal 
     Year 2008. The legislation responds to many issues AFGE has 
     raised on behalf of the Border Patrol Agents, Customs and 
     Border Protection Officers, Transportation Security Officers, 
     Federal Protective Service Officers and other workers 
     important to the agency's mission of keeping our country 
     safe.
       H.R. 1684 supports DHS workers by repealing the portion of 
     MAXHR (the agency's flawed attempt to re-make civil service 
     rules and protections) relating to employee appeal rights and 
     performance management goals. The repeal of these provisions 
     is of great importance because DHS has stated its intention 
     to implement MAXHR regulations on employee appeal rights and 
     performance management goals despite the likelihood that they 
     will be overturned in federal court. The legislation also 
     restores statutory authority for collective bargaining rights 
     for DHS workers because the DHS regulations establishing a 
     new collective bargaining system have been overturned by the 
     courts. The reinstatement of fairness in DHS workplace rules 
     and procedures is vitally important to keeping the expertise 
     of highly trained, committed homeland security professionals 
     at the agency.
       H.R. 1684 recognizes the legitimate law enforcement 
     responsibilities of Customs and Border Patrol Officers by 
     including them in the federal Law Enforcement Retirement 
     System, and strengthens Border Patrol Officer recruitment and 
     retention measures, which will ensure that there are adequate 
     personnel available to patrol our borders. The legislation 
     also includes provisions that will prevent Immigration and 
     Customs Enforcement from implementing its unsound plan to 
     eliminate police officers and special agents at the Federal 
     Protective Service. H.R. 1684 recognizes that worker security 
     in the DHS workplace facilitates greater homeland security 
     for us all.
       The workers at DHS have performed above and beyond the call 
     of duty, even with bad workplace rules and policies. H.R. 
     1684 recognizes the contribution of the men and women on the 
     front lines of security and provides them with the resources 
     necessary to ensure that they continue to provide the best 
     security in the world today. AFGE again strongly urges you to 
     vote in support of H.R. 1684.
           Sincerely,
                                                       Beth Moten,
     Legislative and Political Director.
                                  ____

                                             The National Treasury


                                              Employees Union,

                                      Washington, DC, May 7, 2007.
     Re Vote Yes on H.R. 1684, FY 2008 Department of Homeland 
         Security Authorization Act
       Dear Representative: I am writing on behalf of the 150,000 
     members of the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) 
     including 15,000 employees at the Department of Homeland 
     Security's (DHS) U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to 
     urge you to vote for passage of H.R. 1684, a bill to 
     authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2008 for DHS.
       H.R. 1684 includes many provisions that will enhance DHS's 
     national security mission. Of particular importance is 
     Section 512 a provision that repeals the failed DHS human 
     resource management system established by the Homeland 
     Security Act of 2002 and the subsequent regulations issued by 
     DHS.
       In February of this year, DHS received the lowest scores of 
     any federal agency on a federal survey for job satisfaction, 
     leadership and workplace performance. Of the 36 agencies 
     surveyed, DHS ranked 36th on job satisfaction, 35th on 
     leadership and knowledge management, 36th of results-oriented 
     performance culture, and 33rd on talent management. As I have 
     stated previously, widespread dissatisfaction with DHS 
     management and leadership creates a morale problem that 
     affects the safety of this nation.
       The four-year DHS personnel experiment has been a litany of 
     failure because the law and the regulations effectively gut 
     employee due process rights and put in serious jeopardy the 
     agency's ability to recruit and retain a workforce capable of 
     accomplishing its critical missions. When Congress passed the 
     Homeland Security Act in 2002, it granted the new department 
     very broad discretion to create new personnel rules. It 
     basically said that DHS could come up with new systems as 
     long as employees were treated fairly and continued to be 
     able to organize and bargain collectively.
       The regulations DHS came up with did not even comply with 
     these two very minimal and basic requirements and subsequent 
     court rulings confirmed this truth. It should be clear to 
     Congress that DHS has learned little from these court losses 
     and repeated survey results and will continue to overreach in 
     its attempts to implement the personnel provisions included 
     in the Homeland Security Act of 2002. On March 7,2007, DHS 
     announced that it will implement portions these compromised 
     personnel regulations that were not explicitly ruled illegal 
     by the courts.
       With the abysmal morale and extensive recruitment and 
     retention challenges at DHS, implementing these personnel 
     changes now will only further undermine the agency's 
     employees and mission. From the beginning of discussions over 
     personnel regulations with DHS more than four years ago, it 
     was clear that the only system that would work in this agency 
     is one that is fair, credible and transparent. These 
     regulations promulgated under the statute fail miserably to 
     provide by of those critical elements. It is time to end this 
     flawed personnel experiment Passage of H.R. 1684 will 
     accomplish this.
       Also included in this legislation is Section 501, a 
     provision that finally recognizes the Law Enforcement Officer 
     (LEO) status of CBP Officers (CBPOs). Section 501 grants 
     prospective LEO status and benefits to CBPOs as of March 
     2003. NTEU recognizes Section 501 as a significant 
     breakthrough in achieving LEO status for those CBPOs on the 
     frontlines protecting our nation's sea, air,

[[Page 11825]]

     and land ports. NTEU members appreciate this significant 
     first step and vows to work with Congress to assure 
     comprehensive coverage of all CBPOs.
       NTEU strongly supports H.R. 1684 and urges you to vote to 
     approve the bill this week on the House floor and oppose any 
     amendments that would weaken the above-mentioned provisions.
       For more information or if you have any questions, please 
     contact Jean Hutter with the NTEU Legislation Department.
           Sincerely,
                                                Colleen M. Kelley,
                                               National President.

  I now recognize the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Al Green) for 1 minute.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I compliment you for the 
outstanding job that you have done in bringing this bill to the floor. 
I also thank the ranking member for the support that has been shown.
  Mr. Chairman, this bill contains $39.8 billion for Homeland Security. 
It is worthy of noting that this is $2.1 billion more than the 
President has requested and that it restores some of the numerous cuts 
made by the President.
  This bill provides accountability. This bill has a strong means by 
which our homeland will begin to move in the direction of getting the 
kind of support that it needs to be secure.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, as we leave general debate and 
begin to debate the amendments, I would again say I commend the 
gentleman from Mississippi, the chairman, for the bill that was put 
forth in the committee which came out of the committee.
  I am, again, disappointed by the product that came here today. I 
understand the realities of politics and the realities of governing, 
but I just wish we could have made more of an effort to move the 
committee product further along, rather than make the concessions that 
were made. There are just so many important matters that were either 
dramatically revised or eliminated, which weakens the thrust of where 
we're going.
  We will be debating amendments for the next several hours. The debate 
will be in good faith, just as our efforts on the committee are in good 
faith, but I just wish the leadership of the House would do more to 
improve and to enhance and to further the position of the Homeland 
Security Committee so we can do the job that we have been chartered to 
do and we can do the job the 
9/11 Commission wants us to do, to do the job that the 9/11 families 
want us to do, and do the job that the memory of those who were 
murdered on 9/11 really command that we do.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to the upcoming debate. I am 
disappointed in the product that is before us. Having said that, I 
remain enthusiastic about the job that we as a committee can do under 
the chairmanship of Chairman Thompson and with the strong cooperation 
from the minority on the committee.
  Mr. Chairman, with that, I yield back the balance of my time
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance 
of the time for closing.
  First of all, let me pay tribute to my colleague from New York, 
Ranking Member King. We have worked very well on this bill. This is the 
first time that we have done an authorization bill before an 
appropriation bill. We are trying to establish jurisdiction for this 
committee going forward. This is the first Democratic effort in that 
direction.
  Some of us would have preferred a broader bill, but my colleague 
understands that, given the nature of Congress and the nature of how we 
do business, sometimes that's not practical.
  What I did was brought, through this manager's amendment, which you 
will see after this debate, a bill that we all have agreement on, even 
the chairmen of the various communities of jurisdiction. So I am 
committed, just like the ranking member and most Members in Congress, 
to support the Department of Homeland Security, to make sure that we 
defend ourselves against terrorists abroad as well as terrorists at 
home, to make sure that we respond to disasters regardless of what 
nature they come in. But in order to do that, we need a robust 
organization. We need someone with accountability. This bill, H.R. 
1684, builds on that.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``aye'' on H.R. 1684.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of ``H.R. 1684, the 
Department of Homeland Security Authorization Act of 2008.'' One of our 
greatest responsibilities is the protection and security of our 
citizens and they deserve a vigorous and accountable homeland security 
policy. H.R. 1684 will now provide just such a policy that will allow 
us to address the weaknesses that were apparent in the administration's 
previous attempts at providing Homeland Security.
  This legislation, which was developed through bipartisan support, is 
a proactive step in making our country a much safer place to live, work 
and play. The bill authorizes $39.8 billion for the Department of 
Homeland Security for Fiscal Year 2008--which is $2.1 billion more than 
President Bush requested in his budget and funds many much needed 
programs to keep America safe.
  The bill restores funding to the State Homeland Security Grant 
Program, which supports first responders in their mission to prevent, 
prepare for and respond to acts of terrorism. This bill also restores 
the President's 55-percent cut in firefighter assistance grants and 
restores the elimination of the Local Law Enforcement Terrorism 
Prevention Program. H.R. 1684 will also provide funding for vital first 
responder programs and provide resources for a number of other critical 
homeland security activities that were reduced in the President's 
budget.
  The Department of Homeland Security has been faced with management 
and oversight issues since its inception. A July 27, 2006 article by 
the Washington Post stated that, ``The multibillion-dollar surge in 
Federal contracting to bolster the Nation's domestic defenses in the 
wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks has been marred by extensive waste 
and misspent funds, according to a new bipartisan congressional 
report.'' This bill will help to refocus and provide the necessary 
training and resources to help the Agency achieve its goals and address 
mismanagement issues. H.R. 1684 will require the Department of Homeland 
Security to consider past performance of a firm before deciding whether 
to award a new contract. As a part of a contract bid, each firm seeking 
the contract must submit information regarding its past performance of 
Federal, State, local, and private sector contracts.
  I am committed to ensuring that we are prepared to protect our 
families, our homes, and our Nation against any and all terrorist 
threats. So, I am honored to support this legislation.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the 
Department of Homeland Security Authorization Act. In 4 years, Congress 
has not been able to successfully pass an authorization measure into 
law. Today the Democratic majority is changing paths by making homeland 
security and appropriate oversight a priority for Congress, and under 
the leadership of Chairman Thompson, we will pass a bill this year. 
This bill provides us that opportunity, while authorizing an additional 
$2.1 billion for the Department. While I applaud many provisions of 
this bill, I would like to focus on a few key elements that will 
significantly improve America's security.
  As Chairman of the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity 
and Science and Technology, I am pleased that this bill incorporates 
legislation I introduced to improve the material threat assessment 
process under Project BioShield. This language requires the Secretary 
to effectively group similar threats together in order to move towards 
a ``one drug, many bugs'' approach to biosecurity that will allow us to 
combat multiple threats simultaneously.
  H.R. 1684 also establishes a National Biosurveillance Integration 
Center based on a measure I introduced. Biointelligence and 
biosurveillance provide the early warning systems necessary to detect 
the spread of disease, whether natural or intentional. This Center will 
integrate data from biosurveillance systems with other intelligence to 
provide a comprehensive and timely picture of existing biological 
threats.
  This legislation also incorporates the SAFETY Reform Act of 2007, a 
measure I introduced to help ensure that safe and effective anti-
terrorism technologies are being deployed by the Department of Homeland 
Security. The provision will increase personnel trained to apply 
economic, legal and risk analyses involved in the review of anti-
terrorism technologies, which will streamline the application process 
and encourage participation in this program across all levels of 
government and the private sector.
  Lastly, this bill recognizes the importance of investing more in 
cybersecurity. We authorize an additional $50 million for cybersecurity 
research and development activities at DHS,

[[Page 11826]]

critical resources to address one of our most pressing and under-funded 
needs.
  I thank Chairman Thompson for including these and many other critical 
provisions. I am proud that we are well on our way to seeing the first-
ever DHS Authorization bill signed into law, and I urge my colleagues 
to join me in supporting this measure.
  Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of 
H.R. 1684, the Department of Homeland Security Fiscal Year 2008 
Authorization bill.
  As the Vice Chair of the Homeland Security Committee I am proud to be 
an original cosponsor of this important, bipartisan authorization bill 
that will provide much needed guidance to and oversight of the 
Department of Homeland Security, and will be the first DHS 
Authorization bill voted on by the House.
  H.R. 1684 contains many key provisions that will improve the 
Department's long range planning, accountability, personnel 
development. It will also provide long-neglected authorization for 
critical programs at the Department.
  This legislation authorizes an Undersecretary for Policy and a 
Comprehensive Homeland Security Review at the start of each new 
Presidential Administration.
  These provisions will help ensure that the Department is looking 
beyond the crisis at hand, planning for the future, and keeping its 
resources aligned with its mission and the National Strategy for 
Homeland Security.
  In addition, I am pleased that this legislation includes a sense of 
the Congress that the consolidation of the Department's headquarters on 
the West campus of St. Elizabeth's Hospital should move forward 
rapidly.
  I believe the establishment of this headquarters will have a positive 
effect on the efficiency, operations, and morale of the Department.
  In terms of accountability, H.R. 1684 requires enhanced oversight of 
large contracts under the Department's Secure Border Initiative.
  Personnel development is a major issue for the Department. This 
legislation authorizes expanded procurement training for acquisition 
employees; and enhanced incentives for the recruitment and retention of 
Border Patrol agents.
  The bill also addresses several key policy areas. These include 
requiring the Department to plan for the implementation of the 
biometric exit component of the US-VISIT program.
  This is an essential border security issue that will enable us to 
know who is in the country, and to better track people overstaying 
their visas.
  In addition this legislation provides five year authorization of the 
Metropolitan Medical Response System, a critical program to ensure 
response capabilities for all-hazards mass casualty events.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1684, and in 
working together to have a Homeland Security Authorization bill signed 
into law this year for the first time ever.
  Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of 
H.R. 1684, the Department of Homeland Security Authorization Act of 
2008. I would like to commend Chairman Thompson and Ranking Member King 
for their diligent leadership in bringing this bill to the floor today. 
I would also like to acknowledge the work of my colleagues on the 
committee and commend our leadership for the improved dialogue with 
Secretary Chertoff and other DHS officials.
  The Department of Homeland Security's primary mission is to help 
prevent, protect against and respond to acts of terrorism on U.S. soil. 
On March 1, 2003, it united 22 agencies with more than 87,000 different 
governmental jurisdictions at the Federal, State and local levels 
having homeland security responsibilities. The agency has been in 
existence for 4 years and, although it has responded to an 
unprecedented number of terrorist threats and national emergencies, 
there remain many managerial, technical, and policy issues that prevent 
the agency from optimally functioning--and the whole world has 
witnessed some of these deficiencies.
  H.R. 1684 addresses the department's current shortfalls by, among 
other things, providing for policy, management and integration 
improvements, oversight improvements, much needed integrity and 
enhanced accountability in the contracting process, workforce and 
training improvements, and grants and training to improve emergency 
response among other provisions. As a physician and Chair of the 
Congressional Black Caucus Health Braintrust, I am especially 
supportive of the provisions that will authorize the Chief Medical 
Office to serve as the Department's lead authority on matters relating 
to all aspects of health and creating an Office of Health Affairs to be 
headed by the CMO. This would give the CMO more autonomy in having 
oversight and regulating the agency's role in Bioshield--a program that 
itself has not functioned as envisioned or needed.
  I am also very glad to see the increased funding in Customs and 
Border Protection. Our Nation's borders, including those in my 
district--the U.S. Virgin Islands, are major points of illegal entry to 
the United States and renders it vulnerable to terrorist attack. I am 
pleased to say that U.S. Border Patrol's Ramey Sector has begun 
detailing Border Patrol Agents to St. Thomas and also plan on detailing 
Agents to St. Croix. But our goal is to have a border patrol unit and 
we will work to see that this provision enables us to do that.
  Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1684 is the product of numerous hours of oversight 
hearings to address the many issues that plague DHS. Not only does the 
bill address management issues but it will restore funding for vital 
first responder programs and provide resources for a number of critical 
homeland security activities. Today, we have the opportunity to show 
our Nation that its security is our priority. I urge my colleagues to 
support its passage.
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, congratulations to 
Chairman Bennie Thompson for getting the DHS Authorization bill to the 
floor for the first time in 2 years.
  This authorization bill is the result of countless hours of 
negotiation and I would like to recognize Chairman Thompson and his 
staff for all their hard work.
  H.R. 1684 addresses the difficulties the Department of Homeland 
Security has faced in contracting, procurement, the morale of 
employees, management, and oversight.
  We cannot continue to sit idly by while the Department which is 
charged with leading the unified national effort to secure America is 
not operating effectively.
  Again, congratulations to my good friend Chairman Thompson on this 
accomplishment.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this authorization 
bill, and I commend Chairman Thompson for his hard work in shepherding 
this important bill to the Floor today. Today is a monumental moment 
for the Homeland Security Committee and for this House, as we bring 
forward an authorization bill to the floor--which our Committee was 
unable to do during the last Congress.
  I am proud that the bill we are considering today to authorize the 
operations of the Department of Homeland Security for Fiscal Year 2008 
includes a vital first responder provision on the Metropolitan Medical 
Response System--or MMRS. I'd like to thank Chairman Thompson for his 
leadership and also recognize the work of Subcommittee Chair Sanchez 
and Ranking Member King on this important program.
  Despite the Bush administration's repeated efforts to eliminate this 
unique and effective program, Congress has wisely and consistently 
appropriated funds for MMRS over the years, providing $33 million for 
the program this year. While preservation of the MMRS program is 
paramount, new duties and responsibilities assigned to MMRS--such as 
response to an avian flu pandemic--require additional funding. That is 
why I am pleased that the authorization bill contains funding at the 
$63 million level per year for fiscal year 2008 through 2011.
  The authorization bill also resolves programmatic problems that MMRS 
responders have faced as they work to perform their difficult jobs.
  Specifically, the bill clarifies that the cap on personnel expenses, 
which had been set at 15 percent of the grant funding a jurisdiction 
receives, is lifted. This change will ensure that jurisdictions have 
the resources--if needed--to hire and retain experienced and talented 
personnel. The bill we are considering today also makes clear that MMRS 
jurisdictions should have the authority they need to come to the aid of 
neighboring jurisdictions in emergencies--even if they are located 
across State lines--without being impeded by unnecessary bureaucratic 
restrictions. And the bill directs the Assistant Secretary of Health 
Affairs to conduct a review of the MMRS program and report to Congress 
on the several issues that could further strengthen the program, such 
as whether MMRS would be more effective if it were once again managed 
through a contractual agreement with the Federal Government rather than 
through the current process, which requires Federal funding to be 
passed through State administrative offices before the funds can be 
released to the MMRS jurisdictions.
  Mr. Chairman, as you know, the MMRS program is the only Federal 
program that helps first responders, medical personnel, emergency 
management workers, and businesses develop effective, integrated 
capabilities to minimize casualties in the event of a terrorist attack 
using a weapon of mass destruction, a natural disaster such as a 
hurricane, or a public health emergency including an avian flu 
outbreak.

[[Page 11827]]

  As demonstrated by the Bush administration's failed response to 
Hurricane Katrina, our country has a dangerous ``Preparedness Gap''. 
Established after the Oklahoma City bombing, the MMRS program is 
designed to increase our Nation's preparedness capabilities through 
grants that currently provide funding to 125 jurisdictions in 43 
States.
  The MMRS program helps local first responder and ``first receivers'' 
such as doctors, emergency medical technicians and public health 
officials buy the specialized equipment and get the training needed to 
act in a coordinated fashion that will save lives in the event of a 
mass casualty event--whether it's a terrorist attack or a natural 
disaster.
  In the post 9/11 era, there can be no doubt that Al Qaeda is willing 
and capable of launching attacks on the United States. Moreover, the 
ongoing potential for severe hurricanes and flooding remind us of the 
urgent need to be prepared to respond in an organized, effective way to 
all hazards. The MMRS program is an essential part of our preparedness 
capability.
  Our MMRS personnel across the Nation are hometown heroes. But even 
heroes need help. Thank you, Chairman Thompson, for your help and 
support of this program, and I urge my colleagues to support the 
authorization bill.
  I would also like to note the strong need for this bill's cyber-
security improvements. The Subcommittee on Telecommunications and 
Internet, which I chair, and full Energy and Commerce Committee under 
the leadership of Chairman Dingell, have worked on a bipartisan basis, 
with Ranking Members Upton and Barton, to address cyber threats within 
the Department of Homeland Security in order to ensure that our country 
is adequately prepared for massive disruptions from cyber attacks.
  This measure provides needed guidance to DHS on these Congressional 
expectations. Moreover, this legislation will require the Assistant 
Secretary for Cybersecurity and Communications at DHS to collaborate 
with the Department of Commerce and the Federal Communications 
Commission--agencies that have established roles in protecting vital 
telecommunications and cyber assets. Such collaboration will ensure 
that ongoing efforts will not be interrupted or wastefully duplicated 
at the Department of Homeland Security. For example, NTIA's organizing 
statute establishes the head of NTIA as the President's principal 
adviser on telecommunications issues. In addition, the agency is 
compelled by the same law to pursue policies to foster national safety 
and security, to promote efficient use of Federal spectrum, to 
coordinate Federal telecommunications assistance to State and local 
governments, and to coordinate the Executive Branch's 
telecommunications activities, including the formulation of policies 
and standards for interoperability, security, and emergency readiness 
and ongoing review of management of the Internet domain name system.
  The FCC also protects telecommunications and cybersecurity, and under 
the Communications Act is responsible for assuring rapid and efficient 
communication services with adequate facilities for the purpose of the 
national defense and promotion of the safety of life and property.
  I also support amending this important legislation in order to 
address the pressing need to improve interoperable communications among 
first responders. This is something that we have been working on for 
several years. Representatives Cardoza's expected amendment does not 
limit interoperability efforts to a single technology or solution. This 
is vitally important, especially given the history at DHS with grant 
programs for these efforts. Last year, Congress established a $1 
billion interoperability grant program at the Department of Commerce, 
distinct from DHS's efforts, so that the Commerce Department could draw 
upon its spectrum and telecommunications expertise. In their respective 
programs, both DHS and the Department of Commerce should include 
methodologies to better ensure that funds for interoperability are 
being used effectively. DHS would do well to implement all of the 
recommendations of the GAO suggested in its recent report. There is a 
significant amount of work that DHS must perform in order to improve 
its interoperability efforts and we will be watching such efforts 
closely.
  Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Chairman, I regret that I could not be 
present today because of a family medical situation and I would like to 
submit this statement for the record in support of H.R. 1684, the 
Department of Homeland Security Authorization for Fiscal Year 2008.
  Since its creation in 2003, the Department of Homeland Security has 
been one of the most mismanaged departments in the Federal Government. 
Failing to learn from the severe preparedness gaps exposed by the 
failed response to Hurricane Katrina, the Administration has proposed 
deep cuts to vital, core programs that assist local communities in 
responding to disasters. For example, the Administration requested a 52 
percent funding cut for the State Homeland Security Grant Program and 
no funding for the Metropolitan Medical Response System, MMRS, 
program--the only Federal program that helps first responders, medical 
personnel, emergency rmnagement workers, business and other 
stakeholders develop effective, integrated capabilities to minimize 
causalities in the event of a terrorist attack using a weapon of mass 
destruction, natural disaster, or public health emergency. Eliminating 
funding for MMRS would have grave implications for 125 municipal 
authorities, in 43 States, including Connecticut.
  In comparison, the Democratic-led House has put forth a bill that 
invests in securing the homeland and ensures accountability within the 
Department of Homeland Security. The bill authorizes $39.8 billion for 
the Department of Homeland Security for fiscal year 2008. This funding 
would provide our local communities with the tools to respond to 
terrorist attacks and natural disasters and improve the Government's 
ability to prevent terrorist attacks through greater information 
sharing. The bill also authorizes $63 million annually for the MMRS 
program through fiscal year 2011. Most importantly, the bill includes 
accountability provisions and provisions to strengthen and streamline 
management of the Department.
  We must remain vigilant in protecting the American people and in 
preparing to respond to terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other 
emergencies. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the 
underlying bill.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this bill. If 
enacted, it will spur needed improvements in a critical Federal 
department that is clearly struggling in many areas.
  Earlier this year, the Department tried to put the best face on a 
devastating poll of Federal agencies in which DHS was ranked worst 
among places to work in the executive branch. Poor morale has led to 
significant turnover throughout the various agencies that comprise DHS, 
and inequitable pay scales have contributed to this problem. This bill 
corrects one of those inequities: the bill strips the Department of the 
authority to develop a personnel system different from the traditional 
GS schedule Federal model. Workers who perform largely the same tasks 
at DHS that are performed at other agencies should not be paid less for 
doing the same work. This is a basic issue of fairness, and I'm glad 
the bill addresses this issue.
  I'm also pleased that the bill requires pay parity for Customs and 
Border Protection employees. Our CBP officers often have some of the 
most dangerous and thankless jobs in the Federal Government. The fact 
that in the past they have not been compensated at the same rate as 
other Federal law enforcement officers is an injustice that this bill 
remedies. Recruiting and retaining CBP officers who are skilled at 
managing the complex and sometimes dangerous task of protecting our 
borders must be a national priority. This provision reaffirms that 
fact.
  This bill also seeks to strengthen and formalize the Department's 
roles and relationships with State and local fusion centers. If there 
is one complaint I think every member of Congress receives from their 
local first responders, it's that information they receive from DHS is 
either late in getting to them, irrelevant to their needs, or both. I 
have spoken to DHS's Chief Intelligence Officer, Charlie Allen, about 
this ongoing problem. He knows there is much more that needs to be done 
to improve the information sharing process. What is unclear to me is 
whether the Department's senior leadership recognizes the problem.
  What DHS needs--but still lacks--is a common intelligence database 
that is accessible to State and local law enforcement officials who are 
cleared to receive such information. Posting more DHS personnel to 
State and local fusion centers will improve the security of localities 
in States only if the information being provided through such liaison 
officers is timely and relevant.
  Finally, I am concerned that DHS continues to flounder in its efforts 
to prioritize its science and technology needs.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, Representative Cardoza will highlight the 
importance of communications interoperability for our Nation's first 
responders, and the urgent need for cost-effective and forward-looking 
technology solutions. Last year, Congress established an 
interoperability grant program at the Department of Commerce to draw 
upon its spectrum and telecommunications expertise. This program is 
distinct from efforts by DHS, which, as evidenced by a recent report of 
the Government Accountability Office, still need much

[[Page 11828]]

work to achieve full interoperability across our Nation.
  I did not support the creation of this Cabinet level Department, but 
I applaud Chairman Thompson for his efforts in this reauthorization. 
Coordination is the goal, not confusion of authority.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, as Congress passes the Homeland Security 
Department Authorization bill, I must register my deep concerns with 
the recent operations of one branch of the Homeland Security 
Department, ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement).
  I have very serious reservations with the immigration raids on local 
communities in my District--both the manner in which they were 
conducted and their lasting effects on our community. No one, 
especially our children, should have to live in fear. Nor should they 
have to live in ignorance of their basic rights in this country.
  I have been working closely with local organizations and officials 
trying to convince ICE to mitigate its heavy-handed tactics and the 
ways they hurt our local immigrant communities. For instance, since ICE 
agents have been announcing themselves as ``police,'' local governments 
are still struggling to regain the trust that they had worked for years 
to develop in order to combat crime in their jurisdictions. The 
responses from ICE officials regarding their policies and procedures--
and their lack of concern for the ramifications their actions have on 
children and families in my community--are troubling.
  As one example of the way these actions are terrorizing our 
communities, ICE officials held 7-year-old Kebin Reyes in jail with his 
father with only bread and water for about 10 hours. Allegedly, ICE 
officials repeatedly denied his father's requests to find alternative 
care for Kebin, and the child continues to suffer lasting trauma as a 
result of his detainment. So egregious was this detention that the 
American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit on Kebin's behalf. ICE's 
apathetic response to incidents such as these demonstrates their lack 
of concern for respecting the people in our communities as they carry 
out their duties.
  As Congress reauthorizes Homeland Security, we must strike a careful 
balance between keeping America safe and respecting the human and civil 
rights of our local immigrant families. Protecting our borders cannot 
come at the expense of people's dignity.
  Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Chairman, since the Department of Homeland Security 
was initially created in 2003, Congress has been unable to pass a 
single authorization bill for the Department. Today marks an important 
accomplishment, as the 110th Democratic Congress will pass a bill that 
finally brings much-needed accountability to DHS.
  Along with containing provisions to ensure full funding of security 
grants that go to our Nation's first responders; and to restore rights 
to DHS workers, providing them with the same protections received by 
employees of every other department and agency within our government; I 
am pleased to see this bill contain a provision requiring stronger 
oversight of the US-VISIT program.
  Although Congress mandated this border management tool 11 years ago, 
US-VISIT is a completely broken program at DHS because there have been 
few attempts to develop an exit component and complete this important 
program.
  Instead, DHS appears to be using the funds to create a vast and 
unauthorized database of personal information about every visitor to 
this country.
  As the representative from one of the most highly diverse districts 
in America--a district that is both a home and a popular destination 
for many thousands of people originally from other countries--I am 
highly concerned about this program. Congress intended to create a 
border management tool, not a massive list of personal information 
about law-abiding visitors.
  Again, I am pleased to see that this bill imposes greater oversight 
of this and other ineffective programs at DHS.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Ross). All time for general debate has 
expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the amendment in the nature of a substitute 
printed in the bill shall be considered as an original bill for the 
purpose of amendment under the 5-minute rule and shall be considered 
read.
  The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as 
follows:

                               H.R. 1684

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Department of Homeland 
     Security Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008''.

     SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       The table of contents for this Act is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title.
Sec. 2. Table of contents.

                TITLE I--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

Sec. 101. Department of Homeland Security.

              TITLE II--POLICY AND MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENTS

Sec. 201. Establishment of Directorate for Policy.
Sec. 202. Direct line authority for Chief Operating Officers.
Sec. 203. Comprehensive Homeland Security Review.
Sec. 204. Qualifications for the Under Secretary for Management.
Sec. 205. Sense of Congress regarding consolidation of Department 
              headquarters.
Sec. 206. Required budget line item for office of counternarcotics 
              enforcement.
Sec. 207. Designation of Office of Counternarcotics Enforcement as 
              primary Department counternarcotics enforcement 
              representative.
Sec. 208. Granting line authority to the Assistant Secretary for 
              Legislative Affairs.

                   TITLE III--OVERSIGHT IMPROVEMENTS

Sec. 301. Secure border initiative financial accountability.
Sec. 302. Authorization Liaison Officer.
Sec. 303. Office of the Inspector General.
Sec. 304. Congressional notification requirement.
Sec. 305. Sense of Congress regarding oversight of homeland security.

        TITLE IV--PROCUREMENT POLICY AND RESOURCES IMPROVEMENTS

Sec. 401. Homeland security procurement training.
Sec. 402. Authority to appoint and maintain a cadre of Federal 
              annuitants for procurement offices.
Sec. 403. Additional requirement to review past performance of 
              contractors.
Sec. 404. Requirement to disclose foreign ownership or control of 
              contractors and subcontractors.
Sec. 405. Integrity in contracting.
Sec. 406. Small business utilization report.
Sec. 407. Requirement that uniforms, protective gear, badges, and 
              identification cards of Homeland Security personnel be 
              manufactured in the United States.
Sec. 408. Department of Homeland Security Mentor-Protege Program.
Sec. 409. Prohibition on award of contracts and grants to educational 
              institutions not supporting Coast Guard efforts.
Sec. 410. Report on source of shortfalls at Federal Protective Service.

              TITLE V--WORKFORCE AND TRAINING IMPROVEMENTS

Sec. 501. Customs and Border Protection Officer pay equity.
Sec. 502. Plan to improve representation of minorities in various 
              categories of employment.
Sec. 503. Continuation of authority for Federal law enforcement 
              training center to appoint and maintain a cadre of 
              Federal annuitants.
Sec. 504. Authority to appoint and maintain a cadre of Federal 
              annuitants for Customs and Border Protection.
Sec. 505. Strengthening Border Patrol recruitment and retention.
Sec. 506. Limitation on reimbursements relating to certain detailees.
Sec. 507. Integrity in post-employment.
Sec. 508. Increased security screening of Homeland Security Officials.
Sec. 509. Authorities of Chief Security Officer.
Sec. 510. Departmental culture improvement.
Sec. 511. Homeland security education program enhancements.
Sec. 512. Repeal of chapter 97 of title 5, United States Code.
Sec. 513. Utilization of non-law enforcement Federal employees as 
              instructors for non-law enforcement classes at the Border 
              Patrol Training Academy.

                 TITLE VI--BIOPREPAREDNESS IMPROVEMENTS

Sec. 601. Chief Medical Officer and Office of Health Affairs.
Sec. 602. Improving the material threats process.
Sec. 603. Study on national biodefense training.
Sec. 604. National Biosurveillance Integration Center.
Sec. 605. Risk analysis process and integrated CBRN risk assessment.
Sec. 606. National Bio and Agro-defense Facility.

        TITLE VII--HOMELAND SECURITY CYBERSECURITY IMPROVEMENTS

Sec. 701. Cybersecurity and Communications.
Sec. 702. Cybersecurity research and development.

            TITLE VIII--SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY IMPROVEMENTS

Sec. 801. Report to Congress on strategic plan.
Sec. 802. Centers of Excellence Program.
Sec. 803. National research council study of university programs.

[[Page 11829]]

Sec. 804. Streamlining of SAFETY Act and antiterrorism technology 
              procurement processes.
Sec. 805. Promoting antiterrorism through International Cooperation 
              Act.

                 TITLE IX--BORDER SECURITY IMPROVEMENTS

Sec. 901. US-VISIT.
Sec. 902. Shadow Wolves program.
Sec. 903. Cost-effective training for border patrol agents.
Sec. 904. Student and Exchange Visitor Program.
Sec. 905. Assessment of resources necessary to reduce crossing times at 
              land ports of entry.
Sec. 906. Biometric identification of unauthorized aliens.
Sec. 907. Report by Government Accountability Office regarding policies 
              and procedures of the Border Patrol.

               TITLE X--INFORMATION SHARING IMPROVEMENTS

Sec. 1001. State and local fusion center program.
Sec. 1002. Fusion Center Privacy and Civil Liberties Training Program.
Sec. 1003. Authority to appoint and maintain a cadre of Federal 
              annuitants for the Office of Information Analysis.

                   TITLE XI--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

Sec. 1101. Eligible uses for interoperability grants.
Sec. 1102. Rural homeland security training initiative.
Sec. 1103. Critical infrastructure study.
Sec. 1104. Terrorist watch list and immigration status review at high-
              risk critical infrastructure.
Sec. 1105. Authorized use of surplus military vehicles.
Sec. 1106. Computer capabilities to support real-time incident 
              management.
Sec. 1107. Expenditure reports as a condition of homeland security 
              grants.
Sec. 1108. Encouraging use of computerized training aids.
Sec. 1109. Protection of name, initials, insignia, and departmental 
              seal.
Sec. 1110. Report on United States Secret Service approach to sharing 
              unclassified, law enforcement sensitive information with 
              Federal, State, and local partners.
Sec. 1111. Report on United States Secret Service James J. Rowley 
              Training Center.
Sec. 1112. Metropolitan Medical Response System Program.
Sec. 1113. Identity fraud prevention grant program.
Sec. 1114. Technical corrections.
Sec. 1115. Citizen Corps.
Sec. 1116. Report regarding Department of Homeland Security 
              implementation of Comptroller General and Inspector 
              General recommendations regarding protection of 
              agriculture.
Sec. 1117. Report regarding levee system.
Sec. 1118. Report on Force Multiplier Program.
Sec. 1119. Eligibility of State judicial facilities for State homeland 
              security grants.
Sec. 1120. Authorization of Homeland Security Functions of the United 
              States Secret Service.
Sec. 1121. Data sharing.

                  TITLE XII--MARITIME ALIEN SMUGGLING

Sec. 1201. Short title.
Sec. 1202. Congressional declaration of findings.
Sec. 1203. Definitions.
Sec. 1204. Maritime alien smuggling.
Sec. 1205. Seizure or forfeiture of property.

                TITLE I--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

     SEC. 101. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY.

       There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security for the necessary expenses of the 
     Department of Homeland Security for fiscal year 2008, 
     $39,863,000,000.

              TITLE II--POLICY AND MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENTS

     SEC. 201. ESTABLISHMENT OF DIRECTORATE FOR POLICY.

       (a) In General.--The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 
     U.S.C. 101 et seq.) is amended by striking sections 401 
     through 403 and inserting the following:

     ``SEC. 401. DIRECTORATE FOR POLICY.

       ``(a) Establishment.--There is in the Department a 
     Directorate for Policy. The Directorate for Policy shall 
     contain each of the following:
       ``(1) The Office of the Private Sector, which shall be 
     administered by an Assistant Secretary for the Private 
     Sector.
       ``(2) The Victim Assistance Officer.
       ``(3) The Tribal Security Officer.
       ``(4) The Border Community Liaison Officer.
       ``(5) Such other offices as considered necessary by the 
     Under Secretary for Policy.
       ``(b) Under Secretary for Policy.--
       ``(1) In general.--The head of the Directorate is the Under 
     Secretary for Policy, who shall be appointed by the 
     President, with the advice and consent of the Senate.
       ``(2) Qualifications.--No individual shall be appointed to 
     the position of Under Secretary for Policy under paragraph 
     (1) unless the individual has, by education and experience, 
     demonstrated knowledge, ability, and skill in the fields of 
     policy and strategic planning.
       ``(3) Responsibilities.--Subject to the direction and 
     control of the Secretary, the responsibilities of the Under 
     Secretary for Policy shall be as follows:
       ``(A) To serve as the principal policy advisor to the 
     Secretary.
       ``(B) To provide overall direction and supervision of 
     policy development for the programs, offices, and activities 
     of the Department.
       ``(C) To ensure that the budget of the Department 
     (including the development of future year budgets and 
     interaction with the Office of Management and Budget and with 
     Congress) is compatible with the statutory and regulatory 
     responsibilities of the Department and with the Secretary's 
     priorities, strategic plans, and policies.
       ``(D) To conduct long-range, strategic planning for the 
     Department, including overseeing the Comprehensive Homeland 
     Security Review established in section 203.
       ``(E) To carry out such other responsibilities as the 
     Secretary may determine are appropriate.''.
       (b) Ensuring Consideration of the Needs of Children.--
       (1) In general.--The Under Secretary for Policy of the 
     Department of Homeland Security, acting through the Assistant 
     Secretary for the Office of Policy and Development, shall 
     ensure that all departmental policies, programs, and 
     activities appropriately consider the needs of and impact 
     upon children.
       (2) Specific functions.--The Under Secretary for Policy 
     shall--
       (A) coordinate with other Federal Departments and agencies 
     to ensure that the needs of children, schools, and other 
     child-centered facilities are sufficiently understood and 
     incorporated into Federal, State, local, and tribal 
     preparedness, response, and recovery plans and activities for 
     terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies 
     (including those involving chemical, biological, 
     radiological, nuclear, or other explosive weapons), or other 
     manmade disasters;
       (B) coordinate with the Office of Grants within the Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency to monitor the use of homeland 
     securtity grants by State, local, or tribal agencies to 
     support emergency preparedness activities for children, 
     schools, and other child-centered facilities, and make 
     recommendations to improve the effectiveness of such funding;
       (C) review public awareness programs and screening policies 
     by departmental entities, including security screening at 
     airports, and ensure that such policies consider the needs 
     and well-being of children; and
       (D) ensure that all other departmental activities that 
     affect children include consideration of the needs of 
     children and that relevant agencies of the Department 
     coordinate on this matter where appropriate.
       (3) Report to congress.--One year after the date of the 
     enactment of this subsection and on an annual basis 
     thereafter, the Under Secretary for Policy shall report to 
     the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of 
     Representatives and to the Committee on Homeland Security and 
     Governmental Affairs of the Senate on activities undertaken 
     pursuant to this subsection and the resulting improvement in 
     security for children, schools, and other child-centered 
     facilities.
       (c) Conforming Amendments.--Such Act is further amended--
       (1) by striking the heading for title IV and inserting the 
     following:

                 ``TITLE IV--DIRECTORATE FOR POLICY'';

       (2) by striking the heading for subtitle A of title IV and 
     inserting the following:

              ``Subtitle A--Under Secretary for Policy'';

       (3) in section 103(a)(3), by striking ``for Border and 
     Transportation Security'' and inserting ``for Policy'';
       (4) in section 102(f)(9), by striking ``the Directorate of 
     Border and Transportation Security'' and inserting ``United 
     States Customs and Border Protection'';
       (5) in section 411(a), by striking ``under the authority of 
     the Under Secretary for Border and Transportation 
     Security,'';
       (6) in section 430--
       (A) in subsection (a)--
       (i) by striking ``The'' and inserting ``There is in the 
     Department an''; and
       (ii) by striking ``shall be'' and all that follows through 
     ``Security'';
       (B) in subsection (b), by striking the second sentence; and
       (C) by striking subsection (d).
       (7) in section 441, by striking ``Under Secretary for 
     Border and Transportation Security'' and inserting 
     ``Secretary'';
       (8) in section 442(a)--
       (A) in paragraph (2), by striking
     ``who--'' and all that follows through ``(B) shall'' and 
     inserting ``who shall''; and
       (B) in paragraph (3)--
       (i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``Under Secretary for 
     Border and Transportation Security'' each place it appears 
     and inserting ``Secretary''; and
       (ii) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``Border and 
     Transportation Security'' and inserting ``Policy'';
       (9) in section 443, by striking ``The Under Secretary for 
     Border and Transportation Security'' and inserting ``Subject 
     to the direction and control of the Secretary, the Deputy 
     Secretary'';
       (10) in section 444, by striking ``The Under Secretary for 
     Border and Transportation Security'' and inserting ``Subject 
     to the direction and control of the Secretary, the Deputy 
     Secretary'';

[[Page 11830]]

       (11) in section 472(e), by striking ``or the Under 
     Secretary for Border and Transportation Security''; and
       (12) in section 878(e), by striking ``the Directorate of 
     Border and Transportation Security'' and inserting ``United 
     States Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs 
     Enforcement''.
       (d) Clerical Amendments.--The table of contents in section 
     1(b) of such Act is amended--
       (1) by striking the item relating to title IV and inserting 
     the following:

                 ``TITLE IV--DIRECTORATE FOR POLICY'';

     and
       (2) by striking the items relating to subtitle A of title 
     IV and inserting the following:

                ``Subtitle A--Under Secretary for Policy

``Sec. 401. Directorate for Policy.''.

     SEC. 202. DIRECT LINE AUTHORITY FOR CHIEF OPERATING OFFICERS.

       (a) In General.--Title VII of the Homeland Security Act of 
     2002 (6 U.S.C. 341 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new section:

     ``SEC. 707. CHIEF OPERATING OFFICERS.

       ``(a) In General.--The Chief Operating Officers of the 
     Department include the following officials of the Department:
       ``(1) The Chief Financial Officer.
       ``(2) The Chief Procurement Officer.
       ``(3) The Chief Information Officer.
       ``(4) The Chief Human Capital Officer.
       ``(5) The Chief Administrative Officer.
       ``(6) The Chief Security Officer.
       ``(b) Delegation.--The Secretary shall delegate to each 
     Chief Operating Officer direct authority over that Officer's 
     counterparts in component agencies to ensure that the 
     component agencies adhere to the laws, rules, regulations, 
     and departmental policies for which such Officer is 
     responsible for implementing. In coordination with the head 
     of the relevant component agency, such authorities shall 
     include, with respect to the Officer's counterparts within 
     component agencies of the Department, the following:
       ``(1) The authority to direct the activities of personnel.
       ``(2) The authority to direct planning, operations, and 
     training.
       ``(3) The authority to direct the budget and other 
     financial resources.
       ``(c) Coordination With Heads of Component Agencies.--In 
     reporting to a Chief Operating Officer of the Department as 
     required under subsection (b), a Chief Operating Officer of a 
     component agency shall coordinate with the head of that 
     component agency.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 
     1(b) of such Act is amended by inserting after the item 
     relating to section 706 the following:

``Sec. 707. Chief Operating Officers.''.

     SEC. 203. COMPREHENSIVE HOMELAND SECURITY REVIEW.

       (a) Comprehensive Homeland Security Review.--Subtitle A of 
     title IV of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 is further 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 402. COMPREHENSIVE HOMELAND SECURITY REVIEW.

       ``(a) Requirement To Conduct Reviews.--The Secretary, 
     acting through the Under Secretary for Policy, shall conduct 
     a comprehensive examination of the Department, to be known as 
     the Comprehensive Homeland Security Review. The Secretary 
     shall conduct the first such review in fiscal year 2009, and 
     shall conduct a subsequent review in the first fiscal year in 
     which there begins the first presidential term of a new 
     presidential administration.
       ``(b) Purpose of Review.--In each Comprehensive Homeland 
     Security Review, the Secretary shall--
       ``(1) include a Department of Homeland Security Strategy 
     that is consistent with the most recent National Strategy for 
     Homeland Security prescribed by the President;
       ``(2) define sufficient personnel and appropriate 
     organizational structure and other requirements necessary for 
     the successful execution of the full range of missions called 
     for in the Department of Homeland Security Strategy; and
       ``(3) identify a budget plan, acquisition strategy, 
     procurement process, and any other resources, that are 
     necessary to provide sufficient resources for the successful 
     execution of the full range of missions called for in the 
     Department of Homeland Security Strategy.
       ``(c) Conduct of Review.--
       ``(1) Consultation required.--The Secretary shall conduct 
     each review required under subsection (a) in consultation 
     with key officials of the Department, including the Assistant 
     Secretary of the Transportation Security Administration, the 
     Commissioner of United States Customs and Border Protection, 
     the Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration 
     Services, the Assistant Secretary for Immigration and Customs 
     Enforcement, the Director of the United States Secret 
     Service, the Administrator of the Federal Emergency 
     Management Agency, the Director of the Federal Law 
     Enforcement Training Center, and the Commandant of the Coast 
     Guard.
       ``(2) Relationship with future years homeland security 
     program.--The Secretary shall ensure that each review 
     conducted under this section is consistent with the Future 
     Years Homeland Security Program required under section 874.
       ``(d) Report to Congress and the President.--
       ``(1) Report.--The Secretary shall submit to the Committee 
     on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives, to the 
     Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of 
     the Senate, and to the President a report on each 
     Comprehensive Homeland Security Review. Each such report 
     shall be submitted during the fiscal year following the 
     fiscal year in which the review is conducted, but not later 
     than the date on which the President submits to Congress the 
     budget under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, 
     for the fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the 
     report is to be submitted.
       ``(2) Contents.--Each such report shall include the 
     following, with a focus on reducing and managing risk and in 
     preparing for, mitigating against, responding to, and 
     recovering from terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other 
     emergencies:
       ``(A) A comprehensive assessment of the level of alignment 
     between the Department of Homeland Security Strategy and the 
     human resources, infrastructure, assets, and organizational 
     structure of the Department.
       ``(B) An explanation of any and all underlying assumptions 
     used in conducting the Review.
       ``(C) The human resources requirements and response 
     capabilities of the Department as they relate to the risks of 
     terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies.
       ``(D) The strategic and tactical air, border sea, and land 
     capabilities and requirements to support the Department of 
     Homeland Security Strategy.
       ``(E) The nature and appropriateness of homeland security 
     operational capabilities, including operational scientific 
     and technical resources and capabilities and the anticipated 
     effects on the human resources capabilities, costs, 
     efficiencies, resources, and planning of the Department of 
     any technology or operational capabilities anticipated to be 
     available during the years subsequent to the Review.
       ``(F) Any other matter the Secretary considers appropriate 
     to include in the Review.
       ``(3) Deadline for initial report.--Notwithstanding 
     paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit the first Report 
     required under subsection (a) not later than September 30, 
     2010.
       ``(e) Preparations for Fiscal Year 2008 Review.--In fiscal 
     year 2008, the Under Secretary for Policy shall make all 
     preparations for the conduct of the first Comprehensive 
     Homeland Security Review in fiscal year 2009, including--
       ``(1) determining the tasks to be performed;
       ``(2) estimating the human, financial, and other resources 
     required to perform each task;
       ``(3) establishing the schedule for the execution of all 
     project tasks;
       ``(4) ensuring that these resources will be available as 
     needed; and
       ``(5) all other preparations considered necessary by the 
     Under Secretary.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 
     1(b) of such Act is amended by inserting after the item 
     relating to section 401 the following:

``Sec. 402. Comprehensive Homeland Security Review.''.

     SEC. 204. QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR 
                   MANAGEMENT.

       (a) Qualifications.--Section 701 of the Homeland Security 
     Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 341) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(c) Qualifications.--The Under Secretary for Management 
     shall have all of the following qualifications:
       ``(1) Extensive executive level leadership and management 
     experience in the public or private sector.
       ``(2) Strong leadership skills.
       ``(3) A demonstrated ability to manage large and complex 
     organizations.
       ``(4) A proven record of achieving positive operational 
     results.''.
       (b) Deadline for Appointment; Incumbent.--Not later than 90 
     days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security shall name an individual who 
     meets the qualifications of section 701 of the Homeland 
     Security Act (6 U.S.C. 341), as amended by subsection (a), to 
     serve as the Under Secretary for Management. The Secretary 
     may submit the name of the individual who serves in the 
     position of Under Secretary for Management of the Department 
     of Homeland Security on the date of enactment of this Act 
     together with a statement the informs the Congress that the 
     individual meets the qualifications of such section as so 
     amended.

     SEC. 205. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING CONSOLIDATION OF 
                   DEPARTMENT HEADQUARTERS.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) the Department of Homeland Security and its component 
     headquarters facilities are currently scattered widely 
     throughout the National Capital Region (NCR);
       (2) this geographic dispersal disrupts the Department's 
     ability to operate in an efficient manner, and could impair 
     its ability to prevent, deter, prepare for, and respond to a 
     terrorist attack, major disaster, or other emergencies;
       (3) the Government Accountability Office continues to list 
     ``Implementing and Transforming the Department of Homeland 
     Security'' on its ``High Risk list'';
       (4) consolidating the Department's headquarters and 
     component facilities, to the greatest extent practicable, 
     would be an important step in facilitating the transformation 
     and integration of the Department; and
       (5) the President has provided funding for Department 
     consolidation in the fiscal year 2008 budget, and has 
     determined that the only site under the control of the 
     Federal Government and in the NCR with the size, capacity, 
     and security features to meet the Department of Homeland 
     Security's minimum consolidation needs as

[[Page 11831]]

     identified in the Department of Homeland Security NCR Housing 
     Master Plan submitted to Congress on October 24, 2006, is the 
     West Campus of St. Elizabeths Hospital in the District of 
     Columbia.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     the consolidation of the Department and its key component 
     headquarters on the West Campus of St. Elizabeths Hospital, 
     to the maximum extent practicable consistent with the 
     Department's Housing Plan as submitted to Congress in October 
     2006, should move forward as expeditiously as possible with 
     all the agencies involved in this effort bearing those costs 
     for which they are responsible.

     SEC. 206. REQUIRED BUDGET LINE ITEM FOR OFFICE OF 
                   COUNTERNARCOTICS ENFORCEMENT.

       In each fiscal year budget request for the Department of 
     Homeland Security, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     include a separate line item for the fiscal year for 
     expenditures by the Office of Counternarcotics Enforcement of 
     the Department of Homeland Security.

     SEC. 207. DESIGNATION OF OFFICE OF COUNTERNARCOTICS 
                   ENFORCEMENT AS PRIMARY DEPARTMENT 
                   COUNTERNARCOTICS ENFORCEMENT REPRESENTATIVE.

        Section 878(d)(5) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 
     U.S.C. 458(d)(5)) is amended by striking ``to be a 
     representative'' and inserting ``to be the primary 
     representative''.

     SEC. 208. GRANTING LINE AUTHORITY TO THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY 
                   FOR LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS.

       Section 701 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 
     341) is further amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) Authority of the Assistant Secretary for Legislative 
     Affairs Over Departmental Counterparts.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary for the Department shall 
     ensure that the Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs 
     has adequate authority over his or her respective 
     counterparts in component agencies of the Department to 
     ensure that such component agencies adhere to the laws, 
     rules, regulations, and departmental policies that the 
     Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs is responsible 
     for implementing.
       ``(2) Included authorities.--The authorities of the 
     Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs shall include, 
     with respect to the counterparts in component agencies of the 
     Department, the following:
       ``(A) The authority to direct the activities of personnel 
     responsible for any of the following:
       ``(i) Making recommendations regarding the hiring, 
     termination, and reassignment of individuals.
       ``(ii) Developing performance measures.
       ``(iii) Submitting written performance evaluations during 
     the performance evaluation process that shall be considered 
     in performance reviews, including recommendations for 
     bonuses, pay raises, and promotions.
       ``(iv) Withholding funds from the relevant component agency 
     that would otherwise be available for a particular purpose 
     until the relevant component agency complies with the 
     directions of the Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs 
     or makes substantial progress towards meeting the specified 
     goal.
       ``(B) The authority to direct planning, operations, and 
     training.
       ``(C) The authority to direct the budget and other 
     financial resources.''.

                   TITLE III--OVERSIGHT IMPROVEMENTS

     SEC. 301. SECURE BORDER INITIATIVE FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY.

       (a) In General.--The Inspector General of the Department of 
     Homeland Security shall review each contract action related 
     to the Department's Secure Border Initiative having a value 
     greater than $20,000,000, to determine whether each such 
     action fully complies with applicable cost requirements, 
     performance objectives, program milestones, inclusion of 
     small, minority, and women-owned business, and timelines. The 
     Inspector General shall complete a review under this 
     subsection with respect to a contract action--
       (1) not later than 60 days after the date of the initiation 
     of the action; and
       (2) upon the conclusion of the performance of the contract.
       (b) Report by Inspector General.--Upon completion of each 
     review required under subsection (a), the Inspector General 
     shall submit to the Secretary of Homeland Security a report 
     containing the findings of the review, including findings 
     regarding any cost overruns, significant delays in contract 
     execution, lack of rigorous departmental contract management, 
     insufficient departmental financial oversight, bundling that 
     limits the ability of small business to compete, or other 
     high risk business practices.
       (c) Report by Secretary.--Not later than 30 days after the 
     receipt of each report required under subsection (b), the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to the Committee 
     on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of 
     the Senate a report on the findings of the report by the 
     Inspector General and the steps the Secretary has taken, or 
     plans to take, to address the findings in such report.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated for the Office of the Inspector General of 
     the Department of Homeland Security to carry out enhanced 
     oversight of the Secure Border Initiative--
       (1) for fiscal year 2008, of the amount authorized by 
     section 101 and in addition to the amount authorized by 
     section 303, $5,500,000;
       (2) for fiscal year 2009, at least 6 percent of the overall 
     budget of the Office for that fiscal year; and
       (3) for fiscal year 2010, at least 7 percent of the overall 
     budget of the Office for that fiscal year.
       (e) Action by Inspector General.--In the event the 
     Inspector General becomes aware of any improper conduct or 
     wrongdoing in accordance with the contract review required 
     under subsection (a), the Inspector General shall, as 
     expeditiously as practicable, refer to the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security or other appropriate official in the 
     Department of Homeland Security information related to such 
     improper conduct or wrongdoing for purposes of evaluating 
     whether to suspend or debar the contractor.

     SEC. 302. AUTHORIZATION LIAISON OFFICER.

       Section 702 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 
     342) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) Authorization Liaison Officer.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Chief Financial Officer shall 
     establish the position of Authorization Liaison Officer to 
     provide timely budget and other financial information to the 
     Committee on Homeland Security of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and 
     Governmental Affairs of the Senate. The Authorization Liaison 
     Officer shall report directly to the Chief Financial Officer.
       ``(2) Submission of reports to congress.--The Authorization 
     Liaison Officer shall coordinate with the Appropriations 
     Liaison Officer within the Office of the Chief Financial 
     Officer to ensure, to the greatest extent possible, that all 
     reports prepared for the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives and the Senate are submitted 
     concurrently to the Committee on Homeland Security of the 
     House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland 
     Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate.''.

     SEC. 303. OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL.

       Of the amount authorized by section 101, there is 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security $108,500,000 for fiscal year 2008 for operations of 
     the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of 
     Homeland Security.

     SEC. 304. CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.

       (a) In General.--Title I of the Homeland Security Act of 
     2002 (6 U.S.C. 111 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:

     ``SEC. 104. CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall actively consult 
     with the congressional homeland security committees, and 
     shall keep such committees fully and currently informed with 
     respect to all activities and responsibilities within the 
     jurisdictions of these committees.
       ``(b) Relationship to Other Law.--Nothing in this section 
     affects the requirements of section 872. The requirements of 
     this section supplement, and do not replace, the requirements 
     of that section.
       ``(c) Classified Notification.--The Secretary may submit 
     any information required by this section in classified form 
     if the information is classified pursuant to applicable 
     national security standards.
       ``(d) Savings Clause.--This section shall not be construed 
     to limit or otherwise affect the congressional notification 
     requirements of title V of the National Security Act of 1947 
     (50 U.S.C. 413 et seq.), insofar as they apply to the 
     Department.
       ``(e) Definition.--As used in this section, the term 
     `congressional homeland security committees' means the 
     Committee on Homeland Security and the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and 
     the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of contents in section 
     1(b) of such Act is amended by adding at the end of the items 
     relating to such title the following:

``Sec. 104. Congressional notification.''.
       (c) Coast Guard Mission Review Report.--Section 888(f)(2) 
     of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 468(f)(2)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) through (E) as 
     subparagraphs (C) through (F) respectively; and
       (2) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(A) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
     Affairs of the Senate;
       ``(B) the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of 
     Representatives;''.

     SEC. 305. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING OVERSIGHT OF HOMELAND 
                   SECURITY.

       It is the sense of the Congress that the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate should implement the 
     recommendation of the National Commission on Terrorist 
     Attacks Upon the United States to designate a committee in 
     each body to serve as the single, principal point of 
     oversight and review for homeland security and to authorize 
     the activities of the Department of Homeland Security.

        TITLE IV--PROCUREMENT POLICY AND RESOURCES IMPROVEMENTS

     SEC. 401. HOMELAND SECURITY PROCUREMENT TRAINING.

       (a) In General.--Subtitle D of title VIII of the Homeland 
     Security Act of 2002 is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

[[Page 11832]]



     ``SEC. 836. HOMELAND SECURITY PROCUREMENT TRAINING.

       ``(a) Provision of Training.--The Chief Procurement Officer 
     shall provide homeland security procurement training to 
     acquisition employees.
       ``(b) Responsibilities of Chief Procurement Officer.--The 
     Chief Procurement Officer shall carry out the following 
     responsibilities:
       ``(1) Establish objectives to achieve the efficient and 
     effective use of available acquisition resources by 
     coordinating the acquisition education and training programs 
     of the Department and tailoring them to support the careers 
     of acquisition employees.
       ``(2) Develop, in consultation with the Council on 
     Procurement Training established under subsection (d), the 
     curriculum of the homeland security procurement training to 
     be provided.
       ``(3) Establish, in consultation with the Council on 
     Procurement Training, training standards, requirements, and 
     courses to be required for acquisition employees.
       ``(4) Establish an appropriate centralized mechanism to 
     control the allocation of resources for conducting such 
     required courses and other training and education.
       ``(5) Select course providers and certify courses to ensure 
     that the procurement training curriculum supports a coherent 
     framework for the educational development of acquisition 
     employees, including the provision of basic, intermediate, 
     and advanced courses.
       ``(6) Publish an annual catalog that includes a list of the 
     acquisition education and training courses.
       ``(7) Develop a system of maintaining records of student 
     enrollment, and other data related to students and courses 
     conducted pursuant to this section.
       ``(c) Eligibility for Training.--An acquisition employee of 
     any entity under subsection (d)(3) may receive training 
     provided under this section. The appropriate member of the 
     Council on Procurement Training may direct such an employee 
     to receive procurement training.
       ``(d) Council on Procurement Training.--
       ``(1) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a 
     Council on Procurement Training to advise and make policy and 
     curriculum recommendations to the Chief Procurement Officer.
       ``(2) Chair of council.--The chair of the Council on 
     Procurement Training shall be the Deputy Chief Procurement 
     Officer.
       ``(3) Members.--The members of the Council on Procurement 
     Training are the chief procurement officers of each of the 
     following:
       ``(A) United States Customs and Border Protection.
       ``(B) The Transportation Security Administration.
       ``(C) The Office of Procurement Operations.
       ``(D) The Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
       ``(E) The Federal Emergency Management Agency.
       ``(F) The Coast Guard.
       ``(G) The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center.
       ``(H) The United States Secret Service.
       ``(I) Such other entity as the Secretary determines 
     appropriate.
       ``(e) Acquisition Employee Defined.--For purposes of this 
     section, the term `acquisition employee' means an employee 
     serving under a career or career-conditional appointment in 
     the competitive service or appointment of equivalent tenure 
     in the excepted service of the Federal Government, at least 
     50 percent of whose assigned duties include acquisitions, 
     procurement-related program management, or procurement-
     related oversight functions.
       ``(f) Report Required.--Not later than March 1 of each 
     year, the Chief Procurement Officer shall submit to the 
     Secretary a report on the procurement training provided under 
     this section, which shall include information about student 
     enrollment, students who enroll but do not attend courses, 
     graduates, certifications, and other relevant information.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 
     1(b) of such Act is amended by adding at the end of the items 
     relating to such subtitle the following:

``Sec. 836. Homeland security procurement training.''.

     SEC. 402. AUTHORITY TO APPOINT AND MAINTAIN A CADRE OF 
                   FEDERAL ANNUITANTS FOR PROCUREMENT OFFICES.

       (a) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       (1) the term ``procurement office'' means the Office of 
     Procurement Operations and any other procurement office 
     within any agency or other component of the Department;
       (2) the term ``annuitant'' means an annuitant under a 
     Government retirement system;
       (3) the term ``Government retirement system'' has the 
     meaning given such term by section 501(a); and
       (4) the term ``employee'' has the meaning given such term 
     by section 2105 of title 5, United States Code.
       (b) Appointment Authority.--The Secretary (acting through 
     the Chief Procurement Officer) may, for the purpose of 
     supporting the Department's acquisition capabilities and 
     enhancing contract management throughout the Department, 
     appoint annuitants to positions in procurement offices in 
     accordance with succeeding provisions of this section.
       (c) Noncompetitive Procedures; Exemption From Offset.--An 
     appointment made under subsection (b) shall not be subject to 
     the provisions of title 5, United States Code, governing 
     appointments in the competitive service, and any annuitant 
     serving pursuant to such an appointment shall be exempt from 
     sections 8344 and 8468 of such title 5 (relating to annuities 
     and pay on reemployment) and any other similar provision of 
     law under a Government retirement system.
       (d) Limitations.--No appointment under subsection (b) may 
     be made if such appointment would result in the displacement 
     of any employee or would cause the total number of positions 
     filled by annuitants appointed under such subsection to 
     exceed 250 as of any time (determined on a full-time 
     equivalent basis).
       (e) Rule of Construction.--An annuitant as to whom an 
     exemption under subsection (c) is in effect shall not be 
     considered an employee for purposes of any Government 
     retirement system.
       (f) Termination.--Upon the expiration of the 5-year period 
     beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act--
       (1) any authority to make appointments under subsection (b) 
     shall cease to be available; and
       (2) all exemptions under subsection (c) shall cease to be 
     effective.

     SEC. 403. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT TO REVIEW PAST PERFORMANCE 
                   OF CONTRACTORS.

       (a) In General.--Such subtitle is further amended by adding 
     at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 837. REVIEW OF CONTRACTOR PAST PERFORMANCE.

       ``(a) Consideration of Contractor Past Performance.--In 
     awarding a contract to a contractor, the Secretary shall 
     consider the past performance of that contractor based on the 
     review conducted under subsection (b).
       ``(b) Review Required.--Before awarding to a contractor 
     (including a contractor that has previously provided goods or 
     services to the Department) a contract to provide goods or 
     services to the Department, the Secretary, acting through the 
     appropriate contracting officer of the Department, shall 
     require the contractor to submit information regarding the 
     contractor's performance of Federal, State, and local 
     government and private sector contracts.
       ``(c) Contact of Relevant Officials.--As part of any review 
     of a contractor conducted under subsection (b), the 
     Secretary, acting through an appropriate contracting officer 
     of the Department, shall contact the relevant official who 
     administered or oversaw each contract performed by that 
     contractor during the five-year period preceding the date on 
     which the review begins.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 
     1(b) of such Act is amended by adding at the end of the items 
     relating to such subtitle the following:

``Sec. 837. Review of contractor past performance.''.

     SEC. 404. REQUIREMENT TO DISCLOSE FOREIGN OWNERSHIP OR 
                   CONTROL OF CONTRACTORS AND SUBCONTRACTORS.

       (a) Compliance With Buy American Act.--With respect to any 
     procurement of goods or services by the Department of 
     Homeland Security, the Chief Procurement Officer of the 
     Department shall conduct an independent review of the 
     procurement to ensure that it complies with all relevant 
     provisions of the Buy American Act (41 U.S.C. 10a et seq.).
       (b) Foreign Ownership or Control of Contractors and 
     Subcontractors.--
       (1) Disclosure of information.--With respect to any 
     procurement of goods or services by the Department of 
     Homeland Security, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     require an offeror or prospective offeror to disclose whether 
     the offeror or any prospective subcontractor (at any tier) is 
     owned or controlled by a foreign person. The Secretary shall 
     require all offerors, prospective offerors, and contractors 
     to update the disclosure at any time before award of the 
     contract or during performance of the contract, if the 
     information provided becomes incorrect because of a change of 
     ownership, a change in subcontractors, or for any other 
     reason.
       (2) Foreign ownership or control.--In this subsection:
       (A) The term ``owned or controlled by a foreign person'', 
     with respect to an offeror, contractor, or subcontractor, 
     means that a foreign person owns or controls, directly or 
     indirectly, 50 percent or more of the voting stock or other 
     ownership interest in the offeror, contractor, or 
     subcontractor.
       (B) The term ``foreign person'' means any of the following:
       (i) A foreign government.
       (ii) A corporation organized under the laws of a foreign 
     country.
       (iii) An individual who is not a citizen of the United 
     States.
       (3) Regulations.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security 
     shall promulgate regulations to carry out this subsection.

     SEC. 405. INTEGRITY IN CONTRACTING.

       (a) In General.--Subtitle D of title VIII of the Homeland 
     Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 391 et seq.) is further 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 838. INTEGRITY IN CONTRACTING.

       ``(a) Attestation Required.--The Secretary shall require 
     any offeror for any contract to provide goods or services to 
     the Department to submit as part of the offeror's bid for 
     such contract an attestation that affirmatively discloses any 
     substantial role the offeror, the employees of the offeror, 
     or any corporate parent or subsidiary of the offeror may have 
     played in creating a solicitation, request for proposal, 
     statement of work, or statement of objectives (as those terms 
     are defined in the Federal Acquisition Regulation) for the 
     Department.

[[Page 11833]]

       ``(b) Additional Requirements for Certain Offerors.--If an 
     offeror submits an attestation under subsection (a) that 
     discloses that the offeror, an employee of the offeror, or 
     any corporate parent or subsidiary of the offeror played a 
     substantial role in creating a solicitation, request for 
     proposal, statement of work, or statement of objectives for 
     the Department, the Secretary shall require the offeror to 
     submit to the Secretary a description of the safeguards used 
     to ensure that precautions were in place to prevent the 
     offeror from receiving information through such role that 
     could be used to provide the offeror an undue advantage in 
     submitting an offer for a contract.
       ``(c) Certification Requirements.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall require any offeror 
     for any contract to provide goods or services to the 
     Department to submit to the Secretary as part of the 
     offeror's bid for such contract a certification in writing 
     whether, as of the date on which the certification is 
     submitted, the offeror--
       ``(A) is in default on any payment of any tax to the 
     Federal Government; or
       ``(B) owes the Federal Government for any payment of any 
     delinquent tax.
       ``(2) Failure of certification.--Nothing in this section 
     shall prevent the Department from awarding a contract to an 
     offeror based solely on the offeror's certification.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 
     1(b) of such Act is further amended by adding at the end of 
     the items relating to such subtitle the following:

``Sec. 838. Integrity in contracting.''.

     SEC. 406. SMALL BUSINESS UTILIZATION REPORT.

       (a) Report.--Not later than 360 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Chief Procurement Officer of the 
     Department of Homeland Security shall submit to the Secretary 
     of Homeland Security, the Committee on Homeland Security of 
     the House of Representatives, and the Committee on Homeland 
     Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate a report 
     that--
       (1) identifies each component of the Department for which 
     the aggregate value of contracts awarded in fiscal year 2006 
     by the component to qualified HUBZone small business concerns 
     and small business concerns owned and controlled by service-
     disabled veterans was less than 3 percent of the total value 
     of all contracts awarded under the component for that fiscal 
     year; and
       (2) identifies each component of the Department for which 
     the aggregate value of contracts awarded in fiscal year 2006 
     by the component to socially or economically disadvantaged 
     small business concerns, including 8(a) small business 
     concerns, and small business concerns owned and controlled by 
     women was less than 5 percent of the total value of all 
     contracts awarded by the component for that fiscal year.
       (b) Action Plan.--
       (1) Action plan required.--Not later than 90 days after the 
     date of the submission of the report required under 
     subsection (a), the Chief Procurement Officer, in 
     consultation with Office of Small and Disadvantaged 
     Businesses Utilization of the Department, shall for each 
     component identified under subsection (a)(1) and (a)(2), 
     develop, submit to the Committees referred to in subsection 
     (a), and begin implementing an action plan for achieving the 
     objective described in subsection (b)(2). An action plan is 
     not required if the component meets or exceeds the objective 
     described in subsection (b)(2).
       (2) Identification of barriers.--Each action plan shall 
     identify and describe any barriers to achieving the 
     objectives of awarding by the component, for a fiscal year, 
     contracts having an aggregate value of at least 3 percent of 
     the total value of all contracts awarded by the component for 
     the fiscal year to small business concerns identified under 
     subsection (a)(1) and 5 percent of the total value of all 
     contracts awarded by the component for the fiscal year to 
     small business concerns identified under subsection (a)(2).
       (3) Performance measures and timetable.--Each action plan 
     submitted under paragraph (1) shall include performance 
     measures and a timetable for compliance and achievement of 
     the objectives described in paragraph (2).
       (c) Priority Consideration.--
       (1) In general.--The Chief Procurement Officer may give 
     priority consideration to small business concerns for all 
     open market procurements exceeding the simplified acquisition 
     threshold prior to initiating full and open, or unrestricted, 
     competition.
       (2) Order of priority.--In proceeding with priority 
     consideration under paragraph (1), the Chief Procurement 
     Officer shall consider contracting proposals in the following 
     order:
       (A) Proposals submitted by 8(a) small business concerns or 
     HUBZone small business concerns; service-disabled veteran 
     owned small business concerns; or women owned small business 
     concerns.
       (B) Proposals submitted by other small business concerns.
       (C) Proposals submitted under full and open competition.
       (3) For purposes of carrying out paragraph (2) with respect 
     to proposals submitted by small business concerns described 
     in the same subparagraph of paragraph (2), the Chief 
     Procurement Officer shall select the appropriate category of 
     concern based on market research, historical data, and 
     progress toward achieving the objective described in 
     subsection (b)(2).
       (d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section, the terms 
     ``small business concern'', ``socially or economically 
     disadvantaged small business concern'', ``women owned small 
     business concern'', ``small business concern owned and 
     controlled by service-disabled veterans'', ``8(a) small 
     business concerns'', and ``qualified HUBZone small business 
     concern'' have the meanings given such terms under the Small 
     Business Act (15 U.S.C. 631 et seq.).

     SEC. 407. REQUIREMENT THAT UNIFORMS, PROTECTIVE GEAR, BADGES, 
                   AND IDENTIFICATION CARDS OF HOMELAND SECURITY 
                   PERSONNEL BE MANUFACTURED IN THE UNITED STATES.

       (a) In General.--Subtitle D of title VIII of the Homeland 
     Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 391 et seq.) is further 
     amended by adding at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 839. REQUIREMENT THAT CERTAIN ARTICLES PROCURED FOR 
                   DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL BE MANUFACTURED IN THE 
                   UNITED STATES.

       ``(a) Requirement.--Except as provided in section (c), 
     funds appropriated or otherwise available to the Department 
     may not be used for the procurement of an article described 
     in section (b) if the item is not manufactured in the United 
     States.
       ``(b) Covered Articles.--An article referred to in 
     subsection (a) is any of the following articles procured for 
     personnel of the Department:
       ``(1) Uniforms.
       ``(2) Protective gear.
       ``(3) Badges or other insignia indicating the rank, office, 
     or position of personnel.
       ``(4) Identification cards.
       ``(c) Availability Exception.--Subsection (a) does not 
     apply to the extent that the Secretary determines that 
     satisfactory quality and sufficient quantity of the article 
     cannot be procured as and when needed at United States market 
     prices. If such a determination is made with respect to an 
     article, the Secretary shall--
       ``(1) notify the Committee on Homeland Security of the 
     House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland 
     Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate within 7 days 
     after making the determination; and
       ``(2) include in that notification a certification that 
     manufacturing the article outside the United States does not 
     pose a risk to the national security of the United States, as 
     well as a detailed explanation of the steps any facility 
     outside the United States that is manufacturing the article 
     will be required to take to ensure that the materials, 
     patterns, logos, designs, or any other element used in or for 
     the article are not misappropriated.
       ``(d) Other Exceptions.--Subsection (a) does not apply--
       ``(1) to acquisitions at or below the micro-purchase 
     threshold (as defined in section 32 of the Office of Federal 
     Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 428)); and
       ``(2) to acquisitions outside the United States for use 
     outside of the United States.
       ``(e) Use of Domestic Textiles.--For fiscal year 2008 and 
     each subsequent fiscal year, the Secretary shall take all 
     available steps to ensure that, to the maximum extent 
     practicable, the items described in subsection (b) procured 
     by the Department are manufactured using domestic textiles.
       ``(f) Relationship to Waiver Under Trade Agreements Act of 
     1979.--Subsection (a) shall apply notwithstanding any waiver 
     under section 301 of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (19 
     U.S.C. 2511).''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of contents in section 
     1(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 is amended by 
     adding at the end of the items relating to such subtitle the 
     following new item:

``Sec. 839. Requirement that certain articles procured for Department 
              personnel be manufactured in the United States.''.
       (c) Applicability.--The amendments made by this section 
     take effect 120 days after the date of the enactment of this 
     Act and apply to any contract entered into on or after that 
     date for the procurement of items to which such amendments 
     apply.

     SEC. 408. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY MENTOR-PROTEGE 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Establishment.--The Secretary of Homeland Security 
     shall establish within the Department of Homeland Security's 
     Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization a 
     Mentor-Protege Program, which shall motivate and encourage 
     prime contractors that are large businesses to provide 
     developmental assistance to small business concerns, small 
     business concerns owned and controlled by veterans, small 
     business concerns owned and controlled by service-disabled 
     veterans, HUBZone small business concerns, small business 
     concerns owned by socially and economically disadvantaged 
     individuals, and small business concerns owned and controlled 
     by women.
       (b) Participation by Contractors and Offerors.--The 
     Secretary shall take affirmative steps to publicize and to 
     ensure that Department contractors and offerors are fully 
     aware of and are participating in the Mentor-Protege Program, 
     including that their efforts to seek and develop a formal 
     Mentor-Protege relationship will be a factor in the 
     evaluation of bids or offers for Department contracts.
       (c) Factor in Evaluation of Offers.--When evaluating the 
     offer of a contractor, the Department of Homeland Security 
     shall consider that offeror's efforts to seek and develop a 
     formal Mentor-Protege relationship under the Mentor-Protege 
     Program.
       (d) Review by Inspector General.--The Inspector General of 
     the Department of Homeland Security shall conduct a review of 
     the Mentor-Protege Program. Such review shall include--

[[Page 11834]]

       (1) an assessment of the program's effectiveness;
       (2) identification of any barriers that restrict 
     contractors from participating in the program;
       (3) a comparison of the program with the Department of 
     Defense Mentor-Protege Program; and
       (4) development of recommendations to strengthen the 
     program to include the maximum number of contractors as 
     possible.

     SEC. 409. PROHIBITION ON AWARD OF CONTRACTS AND GRANTS TO 
                   EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS NOT SUPPORTING COAST 
                   GUARD EFFORTS.

       (a) Prohibition.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may 
     not award a contract or grant to an institution of higher 
     education (including any subelement of that institution) if 
     that institution (or any subelement of that institution) has 
     a policy or practice (regardless of when implemented) that 
     prohibits, or in effect prevents, the Commandant of the Coast 
     Guard from gaining access to campuses of the institution, or 
     access to students (who are 17 years of age or older) on such 
     campuses, for purposes of recruiting, in a manner that is at 
     least equal in quality and scope to the access to campuses 
     and to students that is provided to any other employer.
       (b) Institution of Higher Education Defined.--For purposes 
     of this section, the term ``institution of higher education'' 
     has the meaning provided in section 101 of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001).
       (c) Limitation on Application.--The prohibition in this 
     section shall not apply to an institution of higher education 
     (or any subelement of that institution) if the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security determines that the institution of higher 
     education has a longstanding policy of pacifism based on 
     historical religious affiliation.

     SEC. 410. REPORT ON SOURCE OF SHORTFALLS AT FEDERAL 
                   PROTECTIVE SERVICE.

       The Secretary of Homeland Security may not conduct a 
     reduction in force or furlough of the workforce of the 
     Federal Protective Service until--
       (1) the Comptroller General of the United States submits to 
     the Committees on Homeland Security and Transportation and 
     Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of 
     the Senate the report on the source of shortfalls at the 
     Federal Protective Service that was requested by the 
     Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of 
     the Senate; and
       (2) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
     Affairs of the Senate and the Committees on Homeland Security 
     and Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives have conducted hearings on such report.

              TITLE V--WORKFORCE AND TRAINING IMPROVEMENTS

     SEC. 501. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION OFFICER PAY EQUITY.

       (a) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
       (1) The term ``Government retirement system'' means a 
     retirement system established by law for employees of the 
     Government of the United States.
       (2) The term ``Customs and Border Protection Officer 
     position'' refers to any Customs and Border Protection 
     Officer position--
       (A) which is within the Department of Homeland Security, 
     and
       (B) the primary duties of which consist of enforcing the 
     border, customs, or agriculture laws of the United States;
     such term includes a supervisory or administrative position 
     within the Department of Homeland Security to which an 
     individual transfers directly from a position described in 
     the preceding provisions of this paragraph in which such 
     individual served for at least three years.
       (3) The term ``law enforcement officer'' has the meaning 
     given such term under the Government retirement system 
     involved.
       (4) The term ``Executive agency'' or ``agency'' has the 
     meaning given under section 105 of title 5, United States 
     Code.
       (5) The term ``prior qualified service'' means service as a 
     Customs and Border Protection Officer within the Department 
     of Homeland Security, since its establishment in March 2003.
       (b) Treatment as a Law Enforcement Officer.--In the 
     administration of any Government retirement system, service 
     in a Customs and Border Protection Officer position shall be 
     treated in the same way as service performed in a law 
     enforcement officer position, subject to succeeding 
     provisions of this section.
       (c) Applicability.--Subsection (b) shall apply in the case 
     of--
       (1) any individual first appointed to a Customs and Border 
     Protection Officer position on or after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act; and
       (2) any individual who--
       (A) holds a Customs and Border Protection Officer position 
     on the date of the enactment of this Act pursuant to an 
     appointment made before such date; and
       (B) who submits to the agency administering the retirement 
     system involved an appropriate election under this section, 
     not later than five years after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act or before separation from Government service, 
     whichever is earlier.
       (d) Individual Contributions for Prior Qualified Service.--
       (1) In general.--An individual described in subsection 
     (c)(2)(B) may, with respect to prior qualified service 
     performed by such individual, contribute to the Government 
     retirement system by which such individual is covered (for 
     deposit in the appropriate fund within the Treasury) the 
     difference between the individual contributions that were 
     actually made for such service and the individual 
     contributions that should have been made for such service if 
     subsection (b) had then been in effect (with interest).
       (2) Effect of not contributing.--If less than the full 
     contribution under paragraph (1) is made, all prior qualified 
     service of the individual shall remain fully creditable as 
     law enforcement officer service, but the resulting annuity 
     (before cost-of-living adjustments) shall be reduced in a 
     manner such that, when combined with the unpaid amount, would 
     result in the present value of the total being actuarially 
     equivalent to the present value of the annuity that would 
     otherwise have been payable if the full contribution had been 
     made.
       (e) Government Contributions for Prior Qualified Service.--
       (1) In general.--If an individual makes an election under 
     subsection (c)(2)(B), the Department of Homeland Security 
     shall remit, with respect to any prior qualified service, the 
     total amount of additional Government contributions that 
     would have been required for such service under the 
     retirement system involved if subsection (b) had then been in 
     effect (with interest).
       (2) Contributions to be made ratably.--Government 
     contributions under this subsection on behalf of an 
     individual shall be made ratably (on at least an annual 
     basis) over the ten-year period beginning on the date an 
     individual's retirement deductions begin to be made.
       (f) Exemption From Mandatory Separation.--Effective during 
     the three-year period beginning on the date of the enactment 
     of this Act, nothing in this section shall result in any 
     individual being involuntarily separated on account of the 
     provisions of any retirement system relating to the mandatory 
     separation of a law enforcement officer on account of age or 
     age and service combined.
       (g) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     considered to apply in the case of a reemployed annuitant.
       (h) Regulations.--Any regulations necessary to carry out 
     this section shall be prescribed in consultation with the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security.

     SEC. 502. PLAN TO IMPROVE REPRESENTATION OF MINORITIES IN 
                   VARIOUS CATEGORIES OF EMPLOYMENT.

       (a) Plan for Improving Representation of Minorities.--Not 
     later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this 
     Act, the Chief Human Capital Officer of the Department of 
     Homeland Security shall prepare and transmit to the Committee 
     on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives, the 
     Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of 
     the Senate, and the Comptroller General of the United States 
     a plan to achieve the objective of addressing any under 
     representation of minorities in the various categories of 
     civil service employment within such Department. Such plan 
     shall identify and describe any barriers to achieving the 
     objective described in the preceding sentence and the 
     strategies and measures included in the plan to overcome 
     them.
       (b) Assessments.--Not later than 1 year after receiving the 
     plan, the Comptroller General of the United States shall 
     assess--
       (1) any programs and other measures currently being 
     implemented to achieve the objective described in the first 
     sentence of subsection (a); and
       (2) the likelihood that the plan will allow the Department 
     to achieve such objective.
       (c) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       (1) the term ``under representation'' means when the 
     members of a minority group within a category of Federal 
     civil service employment constitute a lower percentage of the 
     total number of employees within the employment category than 
     the percentage that the minority constitutes within the labor 
     force of the Federal Government, according to statistics 
     issued by the Office of Personnel Management;
       (2) the term ``minority groups'' or ``minorities'' means--
       (A) racial and ethnic minorities;
       (B) women; and
       (C) individuals with disabilities; and
       (3) the term ``category of civil service employment'' 
     means--
       (A) each pay grade, pay band, or other classification of 
     every pay schedule and all other levels of pay applicable to 
     the Department of Homeland Security; and
       (B) such occupational, professional, or other groupings 
     (including occupational series) as the Chief Human Capital 
     Officer of the Department of Homeland Security may specify, 
     in the plan described in subsection (a), in order to carry 
     out the purposes of this section.

     SEC. 503. CONTINUATION OF AUTHORITY FOR FEDERAL LAW 
                   ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER TO APPOINT AND 
                   MAINTAIN A CADRE OF FEDERAL ANNUITANTS.

       Section 1202(a) of the 2002 Supplemental Appropriations Act 
     for Further Recovery From and Response To Terrorist Attacks 
     on the United States (42 U.S.C. 3771 note) is amended in the 
     first sentence by striking ``December 31, 2007'' and 
     inserting ``December 31, 2008''.

     SEC. 504. AUTHORITY TO APPOINT AND MAINTAIN A CADRE OF 
                   FEDERAL ANNUITANTS FOR CUSTOMS AND BORDER 
                   PROTECTION.

       (a) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       (1) the term ``CBP'' means the United States Customs and 
     Border Protection;

[[Page 11835]]

       (2) the term ``annuitant'' means an annuitant under a 
     Government retirement system;
       (3) the term ``Government retirement system'' has the 
     meaning given such term by section 501(a); and
       (4) the term ``employee'' has the meaning given such term 
     by section 2105 of title 5, United States Code.
       (b) Appointment Authority.--The Secretary (acting through 
     the Commissioner of the United States Customs and Border 
     Protection) may, for the purpose of accelerating the ability 
     of the CBP to secure the borders of the United States, 
     appoint annuitants to positions in the CBP in accordance with 
     succeeding provisions of this section.
       (c) Noncompetitive Procedures; Exemption From Offset.--An 
     appointment made under subsection (b) shall not be subject to 
     the provisions of title 5, United States Code, governing 
     appointments in the competitive service, and any annuitant 
     serving pursuant to such an appointment shall be exempt from 
     sections 8344 and 8468 of such title 5 (relating to annuities 
     and pay on reemployment) and any other similar provision of 
     law under a Government retirement system.
       (d) Limitations.--No appointment under subsection (b) may 
     be made if such appointment would result in the displacement 
     of any employee or would cause the total number of positions 
     filled by annuitants appointed under such subsection to 
     exceed 500 as of any time (determined on a full-time 
     equivalent basis).
       (e) Rule of Construction.--An annuitant as to whom an 
     exemption under subsection (c) is in effect shall not be 
     considered an employee for purposes of any Government 
     retirement system.
       (f) Termination.--Upon the expiration of the 5-year period 
     beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act--
       (1) any authority to make appointments under subsection (b) 
     shall cease to be available; and
       (2) all exemptions under subsection (c) shall cease to be 
     effective.

     SEC. 505. STRENGTHENING BORDER PATROL RECRUITMENT AND 
                   RETENTION.

       (a) In General.--In order to address the recruitment and 
     retention challenges faced by United States Customs and 
     Border Protection, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     establish a plan, consistent with existing Federal statutes 
     applicable to pay, recruitment, relocation, and retention of 
     Federal law enforcement officers. Such plan shall include the 
     following components:
       (1) The establishment of a recruitment incentive for Border 
     Patrol agents, including the establishment of a foreign 
     language incentive award.
       (2) The establishment of a retention plan, including the 
     payment of bonuses to Border Patrol agents for every year of 
     service after the first two years of service.
       (3) An increase in the pay percentage differentials to 
     Border Patrol agents in certain high-cost areas, as 
     determined by the Secretary, consistent with entry-level pay 
     to other Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies.
       (4) The establishment of a mechanism whereby Border Patrol 
     agents can transfer from one location to another after the 
     first two years of service in their initial duty location.
       (5) The establishment of quarterly goals for the 
     recruitment of new Border Patrol agents, including goals for 
     the number of recruits entering Border Patrol training, and 
     the number of recruits who successfully complete such 
     training and become Border Patrol agents.
       (b) Report.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than the first calendar quarter 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act and every 
     calendar quarter thereafter, the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security 
     of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland 
     Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate a report 
     identifying whether the quarterly goals for the recruitment 
     of new Border Patrol agents established under subsection 
     (a)(5) were met, and an update on the status of recruitment 
     efforts and attrition rates among Border Patrol agents.
       (2) Contents of report.--The report required under 
     paragraph (1) shall contain, at a minimum, the following with 
     respect to each calendar quarter:
       (A) The number of recruits who enter Border Patrol 
     training.
       (B) The number of recruits who successfully complete such 
     training and become Border Patrol agents.
       (C) The number of Border Patrol agents who are lost to 
     attrition.

     SEC. 506. LIMITATION ON REIMBURSEMENTS RELATING TO CERTAIN 
                   DETAILEES.

       In the case of an individual assigned to the Department of 
     Homeland Security as a detailee under an arrangement 
     described in subchapter VI of chapter 33 of title 5, United 
     States Code, the maximum reimbursement by the Department of 
     Homeland Security which may be made under section 3374(c) of 
     such title with respect to such individual for the period of 
     the assignment (including for any employee benefits) may not 
     exceed the total amount of basic pay that would have been 
     payable for such period if such individual had been paid, at 
     the highest rate allowable under section 5382 of such title, 
     as a member of the Senior Executive Service.

     SEC. 507. INTEGRITY IN POST-EMPLOYMENT.

       (a) Designations as Separate Agencies and Bureaus Barred.--
     No agency, bureau, or other entity of the Department of 
     Homeland Security may be designated under section 207(h)(1) 
     of title 18, United States Code, as a separate agency or 
     bureau.
       (b) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--This section takes effect on the later 
     of--
       (A) June 6, 2007; or
       (B) the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (2) Applicability to designations.--The following shall 
     cease to be effective on the date this section takes effect 
     under paragraph (1):
       (A) Any waiver of restrictions made under section 
     207(c)(2)(C) of title 18, United States Code, before the 
     enactment of this Act, with respect to any position, or 
     category of positions, in the Department of Homeland 
     Security.
       (B) Any designation of an agency, bureau, or other entity 
     in the Department of Homeland Security, before the enactment 
     of this Act, under section 207(h)(1) of title 18, United 
     States Code, as a separate agency or bureau.

     SEC. 508. INCREASED SECURITY SCREENING OF HOMELAND SECURITY 
                   OFFICIALS.

       (a) Review Required.--Not later than 90 days after the date 
     of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security 
     shall conduct a Department-wide review of the Department of 
     Homeland Security security clearance and suitability review 
     procedures for Department employees and contractors, as well 
     as individuals in State and local government agencies and 
     private sector entities with a need to receive classified 
     information.
       (b) Strengthening of Security Screening Policies.--
       (1) In general.--Based on the findings of the review 
     conducted under subsection (a), the Secretary shall, as 
     appropriate, take all necessary steps to strengthen the 
     Department's security screening policies, including 
     consolidating the security clearance investigative authority 
     at the headquarters of the Department.
       (2) Elements.--In strengthening security screening policies 
     under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall consider whether and 
     where appropriate ensure that--
       (A) all components of the Department of Homeland Security 
     meet or exceed Federal and Departmental standards for 
     security clearance investigations, adjudications, and 
     suitability reviews;
       (B) the Department has a cadre of well-trained adjudicators 
     and the Department has in place a program to train and 
     oversee adjudicators; and
       (C) suitability reviews are conducted for all Department of 
     Homeland Security employees who transfer from a component of 
     the Department to the headquarters of the Departmental.

     SEC. 509. AUTHORITIES OF CHIEF SECURITY OFFICER.

       (a) Establishment.--Title VII of the Homeland Security Act 
     of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 341 et seq.) is further amended by adding 
     at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 708. CHIEF SECURITY OFFICER.

       ``(a) Establishment.--There is in the Department a Chief 
     Security Officer.
       ``(b) Responsibilities.--The Chief Security Officer shall--
       ``(1) have responsibility for personnel security, facility 
     access, security awareness, and related training;
       ``(2) ensure that each component of the Department complies 
     with Federal standards for security clearances and background 
     investigations;
       ``(3) ensure, to the greatest extent practicable, that 
     individuals in State and local government agencies and 
     private sector entities with a need to receive classified 
     information, receive the appropriate clearances in a timely 
     fashion; and
       ``(4) perform all other functions as determined by the 
     Secretary.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 
     1(b) of such Act is amended by inserting after the items 
     relating to such title the following new item:

``Sec. 708. Chief Security Officer.''.

     SEC. 510. DEPARTMENTAL CULTURE IMPROVEMENT.

       (a) Consideration Required.--The Secretary of Homeland 
     Security, acting through the Chief Human Capital Officer, 
     shall consider implementing recommendations set forth in the 
     Homeland Security Advisory Council Culture Task Force Report 
     of January 2007.
       (b) Identification of Terms.--As part of this 
     consideration, the Secretary, acting through the Chief Human 
     Capital Officer, shall identify an appropriate term, as among 
     ``workforce'', ``personnel'', and ``employee'', to replace 
     ``human capital'' and integrate its use throughout the 
     operations, policies, and programs of the Department of 
     Homeland Security.

     SEC. 511. HOMELAND SECURITY EDUCATION PROGRAM ENHANCEMENTS.

       Section 845(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 
     U.S.C. 415(b)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(b) Leveraging of Existing Resources.--To maximize 
     efficiency and effectiveness in carrying out the Program, the 
     Administrator shall use curricula modeled on existing 
     Department-reviewed Master's Degree curricula in homeland 
     security, including curricula pending accreditation, together 
     with associated learning materials, quality assessment tools, 
     digital libraries, asynchronous distance learning, video 
     conferencing, exercise systems, and other educational 
     facilities, including the National Domestic Preparedness 
     Consortium, the National Fire Academy, and the Emergency 
     Management Institute. The Administrator may develop 
     additional educational programs, as appropriate.''.

     SEC. 512. REPEAL OF CHAPTER 97 OF TITLE 5, UNITED STATES 
                   CODE.

       (a) Repeal.--

[[Page 11836]]

       (1) In general.--Effective as of the date specified in 
     section 4 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101 
     note), chapter 97 of title 5, United States Code (as added by 
     section 841(a)(2) of such Act), section 841(b)(3) of such 
     Act, and subsections (c) and (e) of section 842 of such Act 
     are repealed.
       (2) Regulations.--Any regulations prescribed under 
     authority of chapter 97 of title 5, United States Code, are 
     void ab initio.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of chapters for part III 
     of title 5, United States Code, is amended by striking the 
     item relating to chapter 97.

     SEC. 513. UTILIZATION OF NON-LAW ENFORCEMENT FEDERAL 
                   EMPLOYEES AS INSTRUCTORS FOR NON-LAW 
                   ENFORCEMENT CLASSES AT THE BORDER PATROL 
                   TRAINING ACADEMY.

       The Director of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center 
     (FLETC) of the Department of Homeland Security, in 
     consultation with the Chief of the Border Patrol, is 
     authorized to select appropriate employees of the Federal 
     Government other than law enforcement officers (as defined in 
     section 8401(17) of title 5, United States Code) to serve as 
     instructors of non-law enforcement classes.

                 TITLE VI--BIOPREPAREDNESS IMPROVEMENTS

     SEC. 601. CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER AND OFFICE OF HEALTH AFFAIRS.

       Section 516 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 
     321e) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 516. CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER.

       ``(a) In General.--There is in the Department a Chief 
     Medical Officer, who shall be appointed by the President, by 
     and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and shall have 
     the rank and title of Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs 
     and Chief Medical Officer (in this section referred to as the 
     `Chief Medical Officer').
       ``(b) Office of Health Affairs.--There is in the Department 
     an Office of Health Affairs, which shall be headed by the 
     Chief Medical Officer.
       ``(c) Qualifications.--The individual appointed as the 
     Chief Medical Officer shall possess a demonstrated ability in 
     and knowledge of medicine, public health, and the treatment 
     of illnesses caused by chemical, biological, nuclear, and 
     radiological agents.
       ``(d) Responsibilities.--The Chief Medical Officer shall 
     have the primary responsibility within the Department for 
     medical and health issues related to the general roles, 
     responsibilities, and operations of the Department, and 
     terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies, 
     including--
       ``(1) serving as the principal advisor to the Secretary and 
     leading the Department's medical care, public health, food, 
     water, veterinary care, and agro- security and defense 
     responsibilities;
       ``(2) providing oversight for all medically-related actions 
     and protocols of the Department's medical personnel;
       ``(3) administering the Department's responsibilities for 
     medical readiness, including--
       ``(A) planning and guidance to support improvements in 
     local training, equipment, and exercises funded by the 
     Department; and
       ``(B) consistent with the National Response Plan 
     established pursuant to Homeland Security Presidential 
     Directive 8, assisting in fulfilling the Department's roles 
     in related emergency support functions;
       ``(4) serving as the Department's primary point of contact 
     with the Department of Agriculture, the Department of 
     Defense, the Department of Health and Human Services, the 
     Department of Transportation, the Department of Veterans 
     Affairs, and other Federal departments and agencies, on all 
     matters of medical and public health to ensure coordination 
     consistent with the National Response Plan;
       ``(5) serving as the Department's primary point of contact 
     for State, local, tribal, and territorial governments, the 
     medical community, and the private sector, to ensure that 
     medical readiness and response activities are coordinated and 
     consistent with the National Response Plan and the 
     Secretary's incident management requirements;
       ``(6) managing the Department's biodefense and 
     biosurveillance activities including the National 
     Biosurveillance Integration System, and the Departments 
     responsibilities under Project BioShield in coordination with 
     the Under Secretary of Science and Technology as appropriate;
       ``(7) assuring that the Department's workforce has science-
     based policy, standards, requirements, and metrics for 
     occupational safety and health;
       ``(8) supporting the operational requirements of the 
     Department's components with respect to protective medicine 
     and tactical medical support;
       ``(9) developing, in coordination with appropriate 
     Department entities and other appropriate Federal agencies, 
     end-to-end plans for prevention, readiness, protection, 
     response, and recovery from catastrophic events with human, 
     animal, agricultural, or environmental health consequences;
       ``(10) integrating into the end-to-end plans developed 
     under paragraph (9), Department of Health and Human Services' 
     efforts to identify and deploy medical assets (including 
     human, fixed, and material assets) used in preparation for or 
     response to national disasters and catastrophes, and to 
     enable access to patient electronic medical records by 
     medical personnel to aid treatment of displaced persons in 
     such circumstance, in order to assure that actions of both 
     Departments are combined for maximum effectiveness during an 
     emergency consistent with the National Response Plan and 
     applicable emergency support functions;
       ``(11) performing other duties relating to such 
     responsibilities as the Secretary may require; and
       ``(12) directing and maintaining a coordinated system for 
     medical support of the Department's operational 
     activities.''.

     SEC. 602. IMPROVING THE MATERIAL THREATS PROCESS.

       (a) In General.--Section 319F-2(c)(2)(A) of the Public 
     Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 247d-6b(c)(2)(A)) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating clauses (i) and (ii) as subclauses (I) 
     and (II), respectively;
       (2) by moving each of such subclauses two ems to the right;
       (3) by striking ``(A) Material threat.--The Homeland 
     Security Secretary'' and inserting the following:
       ``(A) Material threat.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Secretary of Homeland Security''; 
     and
       (4) by adding at the end the following clauses:
       ``(ii) Use of existing risk assessments.--For the purpose 
     of satisfying the requirements of clause (i) as expeditiously 
     as possible, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall, as 
     practicable, utilize existing risk assessments that the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the 
     Secretaries of Health and Human Services, Defense, and 
     Agriculture, and the heads of other appropriate Federal 
     agencies, considers credible.
       ``(iii) Order of assessments.--

       ``(I) Groupings to facilitate assessment of 
     countermeasures.--In conducting threat assessments and 
     determinations under clause (i) of chemical, biological, 
     radiological, and nuclear agents, the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security shall, to the extent practicable and appropriate, 
     consider the completion of such assessments and 
     determinations for groups of agents toward the goal of 
     facilitating the assessment of countermeasures under 
     paragraph (3) by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
       ``(II) Categories of countermeasures.--The grouping of 
     agents under subclause (I) by the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security shall be designed to facilitate assessments under 
     paragraph (3) by the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
     regarding the following two categories of countermeasures:

       ``(aa) Countermeasures that may address more than one agent 
     identified under clause (i)(II).
       ``(bb) Countermeasures that may address adverse health 
     consequences that are common to exposure to different agents.

       ``(III) Rule of construction.--A particular grouping of 
     agents pursuant to subclause (II) is not required under such 
     subclause to facilitate assessments of both categories of 
     countermeasures described in such subclause. A grouping may 
     concern one category and not the other.

       ``(iv) Deadline for completion of certain material threat 
     determinations.--With respect to chemical, biological, 
     radiological, and nuclear agents known to the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security as of the day before the date of the 
     enactment of this clause, and which such Secretary considers 
     to be capable of significantly affecting national security, 
     such Secretary shall complete the determinations under clause 
     (i)(II) not later than December 31, 2007.
       ``(v) Report to congress.--Not later than 30 days after the 
     date on which the Secretary of Homeland Security completes a 
     material threat assessment under clause (i), the Secretary 
     shall submit to Congress a report containing the results of 
     such assessment.
       ``(vi) Definition.--For purposes of this subparagraph, the 
     term `risk assessment' means a scientific, technically-based 
     analysis of agents that incorporates threat, vulnerability, 
     and consequence information.''.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 521(d) of the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 321j(d)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``2006,'' and inserting 
     ``2009,''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) Additional authorization of appropriations regarding 
     certain threat assessments.--For the purpose of providing an 
     additional amount to the Secretary to assist the Secretary in 
     meeting the requirements of clause (iv) of section 319F-
     2(c)(2)(A) of the Public Health Service Act (relating to time 
     frames), there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as 
     may be necessary for fiscal year 2008, in addition to the 
     authorization of appropriations established in paragraph (1). 
     The purposes for which such additional amount may be expended 
     include conducting risk assessments regarding clause (i)(II) 
     of such section when there are no existing risk assessments 
     that the Secretary considers credible.''.

     SEC. 603. STUDY ON NATIONAL BIODEFENSE TRAINING.

       (a) Study Required.--The Secretary of Homeland Security 
     shall, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense and the 
     Secretary for Health and Human Services, conduct a joint 
     study to determine the staffing and training requirements for 
     pending capital programs to construct biodefense laboratories 
     (including agriculture and animal laboratories) at Biosafety 
     Level 3 and Biosafety Level 4 or to expand current biodefense 
     laboratories to such biosafety levels.
       (b) Elements.--In conducting the study, the Secretaries 
     shall address the following:
       (1) The number of trained personnel, by discipline and 
     qualification level, required for existing biodefense 
     laboratories at Biosafety Level

[[Page 11837]]

     3 and Biosafety Level 4, including the number trained in Good 
     Laboratory Practices (GLP).
       (2) The number of research and support staff, including 
     researchers, laboratory technicians, animal handlers, 
     facility managers, facility or equipment maintainers, safety 
     and security personnel (including biosafety, physical 
     security, and cybersecurity personnel), and other safety 
     personnel required to manage biodefense research efforts to 
     combat bioterrorism at the planned biodefense laboratories 
     described in subsection (a).
       (3) The training required to provide the personnel 
     described by paragraphs (1) and (2), including the type of 
     training (whether classroom, laboratory, or field training) 
     required, the length of training required by discipline, and 
     the curriculum required to be developed for such training.
       (4) Training schedules necessary to meet the scheduled 
     openings of the biodefense laboratories described in 
     subsection (a), including schedules for refresher training 
     and continuing education that may be necessary for that 
     purpose.
       (c) Report.--Not later than December 31, 2007, the 
     Secretaries shall submit to Congress a report setting forth 
     the results of the study conducted under this section.

     SEC. 604. NATIONAL BIOSURVEILLANCE INTEGRATION CENTER.

       (a) In General.--Title III of the Homeland Security Act of 
     2002 (6 U.S.C. 181 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new section:

     ``SEC. 316. NATIONAL BIOSURVEILLANCE INTEGRATION CENTER.

       ``(a) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a 
     National Biosurveillance Integration Center (referred to in 
     this section as the `NBIC') to enhance the capability of the 
     Federal Government to rapidly identify, characterize, and 
     localize a biological event by integrating and analyzing data 
     related to human health, animals, plants, food, and the 
     environment. The NBIC shall be headed by a Director.
       ``(b) Integrated Biosurveillance Network.--As part of the 
     NBIC, the Director shall develop, operate, and maintain an 
     integrated network to detect, as early as possible, a 
     biological event that presents a risk to the United States or 
     the infrastructure or key assets of the United States. The 
     network shall--
       ``(1) consolidate data from all relevant surveillance 
     systems maintained by the Department and other governmental 
     and private sources, both foreign and domestic, to the extent 
     practicable; and
       ``(2) use an information technology system that uses the 
     best available statistical and other analytical tools to 
     identify and characterize biological events in as close to 
     real-time as possible.
       ``(c) Responsibilities.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Director shall--
       ``(A) monitor on an ongoing basis the availability and 
     appropriateness of candidate data feeds and solicit new 
     surveillance systems with data that would enhance biological 
     situational awareness or overall performance of the NBIC;
       ``(B) review and seek to improve on an ongoing basis the 
     statistical and other analytical methods used by the NBIC;
       ``(C) establish a procedure to enable Federal, State and 
     local government, and private sector entities to report 
     suspicious events that could warrant further assessments by 
     the NBIC;
       ``(D) receive and consider all relevant homeland security 
     information; and
       ``(E) provide technical assistance, as appropriate, to all 
     Federal, State, and local government entities and private 
     sector entities that contribute data relevant to the 
     operation of the NBIC.
       ``(2) Assessments.--The Director shall--
       ``(A) continuously evaluate available data for evidence of 
     a biological event; and
       ``(B) integrate homeland security information with NBIC 
     data to provide overall biological situational awareness and 
     determine whether a biological event has occurred.
       ``(3) Information sharing.--The Director shall--
       ``(A) establish a mechanism for real-time communication 
     with the National Operations Center;
       ``(B) provide integrated information to the heads of the 
     departments and agencies with which the Director has entered 
     into an agreement under subsection (d);
       ``(C) notify the Secretary, the head of the National 
     Operations Center, and the heads of appropriate Federal, 
     State, tribal, and local entities of any significant 
     biological event identified by the NBIC;
       ``(D) provide reports on NBIC assessments to Federal, 
     State, and local government entities, including departments 
     and agencies with which the Director has entered into an 
     agreement under subsection (d), and any private sector 
     entities, as considered appropriate by the Director; and
       ``(E) use information sharing networks available to the 
     Department for distributing NBIC incident or situational 
     awareness reports.
       ``(d) Interagency Agreements.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall, where feasible, 
     enter into agreements with the heads of appropriate Federal 
     departments and agencies, including the Department of Health 
     and Human Services, Department of Defense, the Department of 
     Agriculture, the Department of State, the Department of 
     Interior, and the Intelligence Community.
       ``(2) Content of agreements.--Under an agreement entered 
     into under paragraph (1), the head of a Federal department or 
     agency shall agree to--
       ``(A) use the best efforts of the department or agency to 
     integrate biosurveillance information capabilities through 
     NBIC;
       ``(B) provide timely, evaluated information to assist the 
     NBIC in maintaining biological situational awareness for 
     timely and accurate detection and response purposes;
       ``(C) provide connectivity for the biosurveillance data 
     systems of the department or agency to the NBIC network under 
     mutually agreed protocols;
       ``(D) detail, if practicable, to the NBIC department or 
     agency personnel with relevant expertise in human, animal, 
     plant, food, or environmental disease analysis and 
     interpretation;
       ``(E) retain responsibility for the surveillance and 
     intelligence systems of that department or agency, if 
     applicable; and
       ``(F) participate in forming the strategy and policy for 
     the operation and information sharing practices of the NBIC.
       ``(e) Notification of Director.--The Secretary shall ensure 
     that the Director is notified of homeland security 
     information relating to any significant biological threat and 
     receives all classified and unclassified reports related to 
     such a threat in a timely manner.
       ``(f) Administrative Authorities.--
       ``(1) Privacy.--The Secretary shall--
       ``(A) designate the NBIC as a public health authority;
       ``(B) ensure that the NBIC complies with any applicable 
     requirements of the Health Insurance Portability and 
     Accountability Act of 1996; and
       ``(C) ensure that all applicable privacy regulations are 
     strictly adhered to in the operation of the NBIC and the 
     sharing of any information related to the NBIC.
       ``(2) Collection of information.--The NBIC, as a public 
     health authority with a public health mission, is authorized 
     to collect or receive health information, including such 
     information protected under the Health Insurance Portability 
     and Accountability Act of 1996, for the purpose of preventing 
     or controlling disease, injury, or disability.
       ``(g) NBIC Interagency Working Group.--The Director shall--
       ``(1) establish an interagency working group to facilitate 
     interagency cooperation to advise the Director on 
     recommendations to enhance the biosurveillance capabilities 
     of the Department; and
       ``(2) invite officials of Federal agencies that conduct 
     biosurveillance programs, including officials of the 
     departments and agencies with which the Secretary has entered 
     into an agreement under subsection (d), to participate in the 
     working group.
       ``(h) Annual Report Required.--Not later than December 31 
     of each year, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report 
     that contains each of the following:
       ``(1) A list of departments, agencies, and private or 
     nonprofit entities participating in the NBIC and a 
     description of the data that each entity has contributed to 
     the NBIC during the preceding fiscal year.
       ``(2) The schedule for obtaining access to any relevant 
     biosurveillance information not received by the NBIC as of 
     the date on which the report is submitted.
       ``(3) A list of Federal, State, and local government 
     entities and private sector entities that have direct or 
     indirect access to the information that is integrated by the 
     NBIC.
       ``(4) For any year before the NBIC is fully implemented or 
     any year in which any major structural or institutional 
     change is made to the NBIC, an implementation plan for the 
     NBIC that includes cost, schedule, key milestones, and the 
     status of such milestones.
       ``(i) Relationship to Other Departments and Agencies.--The 
     authority of the Secretary under this section shall not 
     affect an authority or responsibility of any other Federal 
     department or agency with respect to biosurveillance 
     activities under any program administered by that department 
     or agency.
       ``(j) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section such 
     sums as may be necessary for each fiscal year.
       ``(k) Biological Event.--For purposes of this section, the 
     term `biological event' means--
       ``(1) an act of terrorism involving biological agents or 
     toxins of known or unknown origin; or
       ``(2) a naturally occurring outbreak of an infectious 
     disease that may be of potential national significance.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 
     1(b) of such Act is amended by inserting after the items 
     relating to such title the following:

``Sec. 316. National Biosurveillance Integration Center.''.

       (c) Deadline for Implementation.--The National 
     Biosurveillance Integration Center required under section 316 
     of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as added by subsection 
     (a), shall be fully operational by not later than September 
     30, 2008.

     SEC. 605. RISK ANALYSIS PROCESS AND INTEGRATED CBRN RISK 
                   ASSESSMENT.

       (a) In General.--Title III of the Homeland Security Act of 
     2002 (6 U.S.C. 181 et seq.) is further amended by adding at 
     the end the following:

     ``SEC. 317. RISK ANALYSIS PROCESS AND INTEGRATED CBRN RISK 
                   ASSESSMENT.

       ``(a) Risk Analysis Process.--The Secretary shall develop a 
     risk analysis process that utilizes a scientific, 
     quantitative methodology to assess and manage risks posed by 
     chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) 
     agents.

[[Page 11838]]

       ``(b) Integrated CBRN Risk Assessment.--The Secretary shall 
     use the process developed under subsection (a) to conduct a 
     risk assessment that shall support the integration of 
     chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear agents.
       ``(c) Purpose.--The purpose of the risk analysis process 
     developed under subsection (a) and the integrated risk 
     assessment conducted under subsection (b) shall be to 
     identify high risk agents, determine how best to mitigate 
     those risks, and guide resource allocation. Such risk 
     analysis shall--
       ``(1) facilitate satisfaction of the requirements of 
     section 602;
       ``(2) guide research, development, acquisition, and 
     deployment of applicable countermeasures, including detection 
     systems;
       ``(3) identify key knowledge gaps or vulnerabilities in the 
     CBRN defense posture of the Department;
       ``(4) enable rebalancing and refining of investments within 
     individual classes of threat agents as well as across such 
     classes; and
       ``(5) support end-to-end assessments of the overall CBRN 
     defense policy of the Department, taking into account the 
     full spectrum of countermeasures available, including 
     prevention, preparedness, planning, response and recovery 
     activities, to better steer investments to strategies with 
     the greatest potential for mitigating identified risks.
       ``(d) Risk Information.--
       ``(1) Classes of threat agents.--In developing the risk 
     analysis process under subsection (a) and conducting the risk 
     assessment under subsection (b), the Secretary shall consider 
     risks posed by the following classes of threats:
       ``(A) Chemical threats, including--
       ``(i) toxic industrial materials and chemicals;
       ``(ii) traditional chemical warfare agents; and
       ``(iii) non-traditional agents, which are defined as novel 
     chemical threat agents or toxicants requiring adapted 
     countermeasures.
       ``(B) Biological threats, including--
       ``(i) traditional agents listed by the Centers of Disease 
     Control and Prevention as Category A, B, and C pathogens and 
     toxins;
       ``(ii) enhanced agents, which are defined as traditional 
     agents that have been modified or selected to enhance their 
     ability to harm human populations or circumvent current 
     countermeasures;
       ``(iii) emerging agents, which are defined as previously 
     unrecognized pathogens that may be naturally occurring and 
     present a serious risk to human populations; and
       ``(iv) advanced or engineered agents, which are defined as 
     novel pathogens or other materials of biological nature that 
     have been artificially engineered in the laboratory to bypass 
     traditional countermeasures or produce a more severe or 
     otherwise enhanced spectrum of disease.
       ``(C) Nuclear and radiological threats, including fissile 
     and other radiological material that could be incorporated 
     into an improvised nuclear device or a radiological dispersal 
     device or released into a wide geographic area by damage to a 
     nuclear reactor.
       ``(D) Threats to the agriculture sector and food and water 
     supplies.
       ``(E) Other threat agents the Secretary determines 
     appropriate.
       ``(2) Sources.--The risk analysis process developed under 
     subsection (a) shall be informed by findings of the 
     intelligence and law enforcement communities and integrated 
     with expert input from the scientific, medical, and public 
     health communities, including from relevant components of the 
     Department and other Federal agencies.
       ``(3) Data quality, specificity, and confidence.--In 
     developing the risk analysis process under subsection (a), 
     the Secretary shall consider the degree of uncertainty and 
     variability in the available scientific information and other 
     information about the classes of threat agents under 
     paragraph (1). An external review shall be conducted to 
     assess the ability of the risk analysis process developed by 
     the Secretary to address areas of large degrees of 
     uncertainty.
       ``(4) New information.--The Secretary shall frequently and 
     systematically update the risk assessment conducted under 
     subsection (b), as needed, to incorporate emerging 
     intelligence information or technological changes in order to 
     keep pace with evolving threats and rapid scientific 
     advances.
       ``(e) Methodology.--The risk analysis process developed by 
     the Secretary under subsection (a) shall--
       ``(1) consider, as variables--
       ``(A) threat, or the likelihood that a type of attack that 
     might be attempted;
       ``(B) vulnerability, or the likelihood that an attacker 
     would succeed; and
       ``(C) consequence, or the likely impact of an attack;
       ``(2) evaluate the consequence component of risk as it 
     relates to mortality, morbidity, and economic effects;
       ``(3) allow for changes in assumptions to evaluate a full 
     range of factors, including technological, economic, and 
     social trends, which may alter the future security 
     environment;
       ``(4) contain a well-designed sensitivity analysis to 
     address high degrees of uncertainty associated with the risk 
     analyses of certain CBRN agents;
       ``(5) utilize red teaming analysis to identify 
     vulnerabilities an adversary may discover and exploit in 
     technology, training, and operational procedures and to 
     identify open-source information that could be used by those 
     attempting to defeat the countermeasures; and
       ``(6) incorporate an interactive interface that makes 
     results and limitations transparent and useful to decision 
     makers for identifying appropriate risk management 
     activities.
       ``(f) Coordination.--The Secretary shall ensure that all 
     risk analysis activities with respect to radiological or 
     nuclear materials shall be conducted in coordination with the 
     Domestic Nuclear Detection Office.
       ``(g) Timeframe; Reports to Congress.--
       ``(1) Initial report.--By not later than June 2008, the 
     Secretary shall complete the first formal, integrated, CBRN 
     risk assessment required under subsection (b) and shall 
     submit to Congress a report summarizing the findings of such 
     assessment and identifying improvements that could be made to 
     enhance the transparency and usability of the risk analysis 
     process developed under subsection (a).
       ``(2) Updates to report.--The Secretary shall submit to 
     Congress updates to the findings and report in paragraph (1), 
     when appropriate, but by not later than two years after the 
     date on which the initial report is submitted. Such updates 
     shall reflect improvements in the risk analysis process 
     developed under subsection (a).''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 
     1(b) of such Act is amended by inserting after the items 
     relating to such title the following:

``Sec. 317. Risk analysis process and integrated CBRN risk 
              assessment.''.

     SEC. 606. NATIONAL BIO AND AGRO-DEFENSE FACILITY.

       (a) In General.--Title III of the Homeland Security Act of 
     2002 (6. U.S.C. 181 et seq.) is further amended by adding at 
     the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 318. NATIONAL BIO AND AGRO-DEFENSE FACILITY.

       ``(a) Establishment.--There is in the Department a National 
     Bio and Agro-defense Facility (referred to in this section as 
     the `NBAF'), which shall be headed by a Director who shall be 
     appointed by the Secretary.
       ``(b) Purposes.--
       ``(1) In general.--The NBAF shall be an integrated human, 
     foreign-animal, and zoonotic disease research, development, 
     testing, and evaluation facility with the purpose of 
     supporting the complementary missions of the Department, the 
     Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Health and 
     Human Services in defending against the threat of potential 
     acts of agroterrorism and natural-occurring incidents related 
     to agriculture with the potential to adversely impact public 
     health, animal health, and the economy, or may otherwise 
     impact homeland security.
       ``(2) Knowledge production and sharing.--The NBAF shall 
     produce and share knowledge and technology for the purpose of 
     reducing economic losses caused by foreign-animal, zoonotic, 
     and, as appropriate, other endemic animal diseases of 
     livestock and poultry, and preventing human suffering and 
     death caused by diseases existing or emerging in the 
     agricultural sector.
       ``(c) Responsibilities of Director.--The Secretary shall 
     vest in the Director primary responsibility for each of the 
     following:
       ``(1) Directing basic, applied, and advanced research, 
     development, testing, and evaluation relating to foreign-
     animal, zoonotic, and, as appropriate, other endemic animal 
     diseases, including foot and mouth disease, and performing 
     related activities, including--
       ``(A) developing countermeasures for foreign-animal, 
     zoonotic, and, as appropriate, other endemic animal diseases, 
     including diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics;
       ``(B) providing advanced test and evaluation capability for 
     threat detection, vulnerability, and countermeasure 
     assessment for foreign-animal, zoonotic, and, as appropriate, 
     other endemic animal diseases;
       ``(C) conducting nonclinical, animal model testing and 
     evaluation under the Food and Drug Administration's Animal 
     Rule as defined in parts 314 and 601 of title 22, Code of 
     Federal Regulations, to support the development of human 
     medical countermeasures by the Department of Human Services 
     under the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 201 et seq);
       ``(D) establishing NBAF information-sharing mechanisms to 
     share information with relevant stakeholders, including the 
     National Animal Health Laboratory Network; and
       ``(E) identifying and promoting uniform national standards 
     for animal disease diagnostics.
       ``(2) Facilitating the coordination of Federal, State, and 
     local governmental research and development efforts and 
     resources relating to protecting public health and animal 
     health from foreign-animal, zoonotic, and, as appropriate, 
     other endemic animal diseases.
       ``(3) Ensuring public safety during an emergency by 
     developing an emergency response plan under which emergency 
     response providers in the community are sufficiently prepared 
     or trained to respond effectively and given sufficient notice 
     to allow for an effective response.
       ``(4) Ensuring NBAF site and facility security.
       ``(5) Providing training to develop skilled research and 
     technical staff with the needed expertise in operations 
     conducted at biological and agricultural research facilities.
       ``(6) Leveraging the expertise of academic institutions, 
     industry, the Department of Energy National Laboratories, 
     State and local governmental resources, and professional 
     organizations involved in veterinary, medical and public 
     health, and agriculture issues to carry out functions 
     describes in (1) and (2).
       ``(d) Requirements.--The Secretary, in designing and 
     constructing the NBAF, shall ensure that the facility meets 
     the following requirements:

[[Page 11839]]

       ``(1) The NBAF shall consist of state-of-the-art 
     biocontainment laboratories capable of performing research 
     and activities at Biosafety Level 3 and 4, as designated by 
     the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the 
     National Institutes of Health.
       ``(2) The NBAF facility shall be located on a site of at 
     least 30 acres that can be readily secured by physical 
     measure.
       ``(3) The NBAF facility shall be at least 500,000 square 
     feet with a capacity of housing a minimum of 80 large animals 
     for research, testing and evaluation;
       ``(4) The NBAF shall be located at a site with a 
     preexisting utility infrastructure, or a utility 
     infrastructure that can be easily built.
       ``(5) The NBAF shall be located at a site that has been 
     subject to an Environmental Impact Statement under the 
     National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
       ``(6) The NBAF shall be located within a reasonable 
     proximity to a national or regional airport and to major 
     roadways.
       ``(e) Authorization To Procure Real Property and Accept in 
     Kind Donations for the NBAF Site.--The Secretary may accept 
     and use donations of real property for the NBAF site and may 
     accept and use in-kind donations of real property, personal 
     property, laboratory and office space, utility services, and 
     infrastructure upgrades for the purpose of assisting the 
     Director in carrying out the responsibilities of the Director 
     under this section.
       ``(f) Applicability of Other Laws.--
       ``(1) Public buildings act.--The NBAF shall not be 
     considered a ``public building'' for purposes of the Public 
     Buildings Act of 1959 (40 U.S.C. 3301 et seq.).
       ``(2) Live virus of foot and mouth disease research.--The 
     Secretary shall enable the study of live virus of foot and 
     mouth disease at the NBAF, wherever it is sited, 
     notwithstanding section 113a of title 21, United States Code.
       ``(g) Coordination.--
       ``(1) Interagency agreements.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall enter into 
     understandings or agreements with the heads of appropriate 
     Federal departments and agencies, including the Secretary of 
     Agriculture and the Secretary of Health and Human Services, 
     to define the respective roles and responsibilities of each 
     Department in carrying out foreign-animal, zoonotic, and 
     other endemic animal disease research and development at the 
     NBAF to protect public health and animal health.
       ``(B) Department of agriculture.--The understanding or 
     agreement entered into with the Secretary of Agriculture 
     shall include a provision describing research programs and 
     functions of the Department of Agriculture and the Department 
     of Homeland Security, including those research programs and 
     functions carried out at the Plum Island Animal Disease 
     Center and those research programs and functions that will be 
     transferred to the NBAF.
       ``(C) Department of health and human services.--The 
     understanding or agreement entered into with the Department 
     of Health and Human Services shall describe research programs 
     of the Department of Health and Human Services that may 
     relate to work conducted at NBAF.
       ``(2) Cooperative relationships.--The Director shall form 
     cooperative relationships with the National Animal Health 
     Laboratory Network and American Association of Veterinary 
     Laboratory Diagnosticians to connect with the network of 
     Federal and State resources intended to enable an integrated, 
     rapid, and sufficient response to animal health 
     emergencies.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 
     1(b) of such Act is further amended by adding at the end of 
     the items relating to such title the following:

``Sec. 318. National Bio and Agro-defense Facility.''.

        TITLE VII--HOMELAND SECURITY CYBERSECURITY IMPROVEMENTS

     SEC. 701. CYBERSECURITY AND COMMUNICATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Subtitle C of title II of the Homeland 
     Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 141 et seq.) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 226. OFFICE OF CYBERSECURITY AND COMMUNICATIONS.

       ``(a) In General.--There shall be within the Department of 
     Homeland Security an Office of Cybersecurity and 
     Communications, which shall be headed by the Assistant 
     Secretary for Cybersecurity and Communications.
       ``(b) Duty of the Assistant Secretary.--The Assistant 
     Secretary shall assist the Secretary in carrying out the 
     responsibilities of the Department regarding cybersecurity 
     and communications.
       ``(c) Responsibilities.--The Assistant Secretary shall be 
     responsible for overseeing preparation, situational 
     awareness, response, reconstitution, and mitigation necessary 
     for cybersecurity and to protect communications from 
     terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies, 
     including large-scale disruptions, and shall conduct the 
     following activities to execute those responsibilities:
       ``(1) Preparation and situational awareness.--
       ``(A) Establish and maintain a capability within the 
     Department to monitor critical information infrastructure to 
     aid in detection of vulnerabilities and warning of potential 
     acts of terrorism and other attacks.
       ``(B) Conduct risk assessments on critical information 
     infrastructure with respect to acts of terrorism and other 
     large-scale disruptions, identify and prioritize 
     vulnerabilities in critical information infrastructure, and 
     coordinate the mitigation of such vulnerabilities.
       ``(C) Develop a plan for the continuation of critical 
     information operations in the event of a cyber attack or 
     other large-scale disruption of the information 
     infrastructure of the United States.
       ``(D) Oversee an emergency communications system in the 
     event of an act of terrorism or other large-scale disruption 
     of the information infrastructure of the United States.
       ``(2) Response and reconstitution.--
       ``(A) Define what qualifies as a cyber incident of national 
     significance for purposes of the National Response Plan.
       ``(B) Ensure that the Department's priorities, procedures, 
     and resources are in place to reconstitute critical 
     information infrastructures in the event of an act of 
     terrorism or other large-scale disruption.
       ``(3) Mitigation.--
       ``(A) Develop a national cybersecurity awareness, training, 
     and education program that promotes cybersecurity awareness 
     within the Federal Government and throughout the Nation.
       ``(B) Consult and coordinate with the Under Secretary for 
     Science and Technology on cybersecurity research and 
     development to strengthen critical information infrastructure 
     against acts of terrorism and other large-scale disruptions.
       ``(d) Definition.--In this section the term `critical 
     information infrastructure' means systems and assets, whether 
     physical or virtual, used in processing, transferring, and 
     storing information so vital to the United States that the 
     incapacity or destruction of such systems and assets would 
     have a debilitating impact on security, national economic 
     security, national public health or safety, or any 
     combination of those matters.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 
     1(b) of such Act is amended by inserting at the end of the 
     items relating to subtitle C of title II the following:

``Sec. 226. Office of Cybersecurity and Communications.''.

     SEC. 702. CYBERSECURITY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.

       (a) In General.--The Under Secretary for Science and 
     Technology shall support research, development, testing, 
     evaluation, and transition of cybersecurity technology, 
     including fundamental, long-term research to improve the 
     ability of the United States to prevent, protect against, 
     detect, respond to, and recover from acts of terrorism and 
     cyber attacks, with emphasis on research and development 
     relevant to large-scale, high-impact attacks.
       (b) Activities.--The research and development supported 
     under subsection (a) shall include work to--
       (1) advance the development and accelerate the deployment 
     of more secure versions of fundamental Internet protocols and 
     architectures, including for the domain name system and 
     routing protocols;
       (2) improve and create technologies for detecting attacks 
     or intrusions, including monitoring technologies;
       (3) improve and create mitigation and recovery 
     methodologies, including techniques for containment of 
     attacks and development of resilient networks and systems 
     that degrade gracefully;
       (4) develop and support infrastructure and tools to support 
     cybersecurity research and development efforts, including 
     modeling, testbeds, and data sets for assessment of new 
     cybersecurity technologies;
       (5) assist the development and support of technologies to 
     reduce vulnerabilities in process control systems (PCS); and
       (6) test, evaluate, and facilitate the transfer of 
     technologies associated with the engineering of less 
     vulnerable software and securing the IT software development 
     lifecycle.
       (c) Coordination.--In carrying out this section, the Under 
     Secretary for Science and Technology shall coordinate 
     activities with--
       (1) the Assistant Secretary for Cybersecurity and 
     Communications; and
       (2) other Federal agencies, including the National Science 
     Foundation, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, 
     the Information Assurance Directorate of the National 
     Security Agency, the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology, and other appropriate working groups established 
     by the President to identify unmet needs and cooperatively 
     support activities, as appropriate.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--Of the amount 
     authorized by section 101, there is authorized to be 
     appropriated for the Department of Homeland Security for 
     fiscal year 2008, $50,000,000, for the cybersecurity research 
     and development activities of the Directorate for Science and 
     Technology to prevent, detect, and respond to acts of 
     terrorism and other large-scale disruptions to information 
     infrastructure.

            TITLE VIII--SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY IMPROVEMENTS

     SEC. 801. REPORT TO CONGRESS ON STRATEGIC PLAN.

       Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Under Secretary for Science and Technology shall 
     transmit to Congress the strategic plan described in section 
     302(2) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 
     182(2)). In addition to the requirements described in that 
     section 302(2), the strategic plan transmitted under this 
     section shall include--
       (1) a strategy to enhance the Directorate for Science and 
     Technology workforce, including education and training 
     programs, improving morale, minimizing turnover, 
     strengthening workforce recruitment, and securing 
     institutional knowledge;

[[Page 11840]]

       (2) the Department policy describing the procedures by 
     which the Directorate for Science and Technology hires and 
     administers assignments to individuals assigned to the 
     Department as detailees under an arrangement described in 
     subchapter VI of chapter 33 of title 5, United States Code;
       (3) the Department policy governing the responsibilities of 
     the Under Secretary for Science and Technology, the Under 
     Secretary for Policy, and the Under Secretary for Management, 
     and the operational components of the Department regarding 
     research, development, testing, evaluation, and procurement 
     of homeland security technologies;
       (4) a description of the methodology by which research, 
     development, testing, and evaluation is prioritized and 
     funded by the Directorate for Science and Technology;
       (5) a description of the performance measurements to be 
     used or a plan to develop performance measurements that can 
     be used to annually evaluate the Directorate for Science and 
     Technology's activities, mission performance, and stewardship 
     of resources;
       (6) a plan for domestic and international coordination of 
     all related programs and activities within the Department and 
     throughout Federal agencies, State, local, and tribal 
     governments, the emergency responder community, industry, and 
     academia;
       (7) a plan for leveraging the expertise of the National 
     Laboratories and the process for allocating funding to the 
     National Laboratories; and
       (8) a strategy for the Homeland Security Advanced Research 
     Projects Agency that includes--
       (A) a mission statement;
       (B) a description of the Department's high risk and high 
     payoff research, development, test, and evaluation strategy; 
     and
       (C) internal policies designed to encourage innovative 
     solutions.

     SEC. 802. CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE PROGRAM.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Of the amount 
     authorized by section 101, there is authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary of Homeland Security for 
     carrying out the Centers of Excellence Program $31,000,000 
     for fiscal year 2008 such that each center that received 
     funding in fiscal year 2007 shall receive, at a minimum, the 
     same amount it received in fiscal year 2007.
       (b) Minority Serving Institutions Program.--Of the amount 
     authorized by section 101, there is authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary of Homeland Security for 
     carrying out the Minority Serving Institutions Program 
     $8,000,000 for fiscal year 2008.
       (c) Centers of Excellence Program Participation.--
       (1) Requirement.--If, by the date of the enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security has not selected a 
     Minority Serving Institution to participate as a Center of 
     Excellence under the Department of Homeland Security Centers 
     of Excellence Program, at least one of the next four Centers 
     of Excellence selected after the date of enactment of this 
     Act shall be an otherwise eligible applicant that is a 
     Minority Serving Institution.
       (2) Minority serving institution defined.--In this 
     subsection the term ``Minority Serving Institution'' means--
       (A) an historically black college or university that 
     receives assistance under part B of title III of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 106 et seq);
       (B) an Hispanic-serving institution (as that term is 
     defined in section 502 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 
     (20 U.S.C. 1101a); or
       (C) a tribally controlled college or university (as that 
     term is defined in section 2 of the Tribally Controlled 
     College or University Assistance Act of 1978 (25 U.S.C. 
     1801)).

     SEC. 803. NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL STUDY OF UNIVERSITY 
                   PROGRAMS.

       (a) Study.--Not later than 3 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary for Science and 
     Technology of the Department of Homeland Security shall seek 
     to enter into an agreement with the National Research Council 
     of the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a study to 
     assess the University Programs of the Department, with an 
     emphasis on the Centers of Excellence Program and the future 
     plans for these programs, and make recommendations for 
     appropriate improvements.
       (b) Subjects.--The study shall include--
       (1) a review of key areas of study needed to support the 
     homeland security mission, and criteria that should be 
     utilized to determine those key areas for which the 
     Department should maintain or establish Centers of 
     Excellence;
       (2) a review of selection criteria and weighting of such 
     criteria for Centers of Excellence;
       (3) an examination of the optimal role of Centers of 
     Excellence in supporting the mission of the Directorate of 
     Science and Technology and the most advantageous relationship 
     between the Centers of Excellence and the Directorate and the 
     Department components the Directorate serves;
       (4) an examination of the length of time the Centers of 
     Excellence should be awarded funding and the frequency of the 
     review cycle in order to maintain such funding, particularly 
     given their focus on basic, long term research;
       (5) identification of the most appropriate review criteria 
     and metrics to measure demonstrable progress, and mechanisms 
     for delivering and disseminating the research results of 
     established Centers of Excellence within the Department, and 
     to other Federal, State, and local agencies;
       (6) an examination of the means by which academic 
     institutions that are not designated or associated with 
     Centers of Excellence can optimally contribute to the 
     research mission of the Directorate;
       (7) an assessment of the interrelationship between the 
     different University Programs; and
       (8) a review of any other essential elements of the 
     University Programs to be determined in the conduct of the 
     study.
       (c) Report.--The Under Secretary for Science and Technology 
     shall transmit a report containing the results of the study 
     and recommendations required by subsection (a) and the Under 
     Secretary's response to the recommendations, to the 
     appropriate Congressional committees not later than 24 months 
     after the date of enactment of this Act.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--Of the amount 
     authorized in section 101, there is authorized to be 
     appropriated to carry out this section $500,000.

     SEC. 804. STREAMLINING OF SAFETY ACT AND ANTITERRORISM 
                   TECHNOLOGY PROCUREMENT PROCESSES.

       (a) Personnel.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     ensure that, in addition to any personnel engaged in 
     technical evaluations that may be appropriate, a sufficient 
     number of full-time equivalent personnel, who are properly 
     trained and qualified to apply legal, economic, and risk 
     analyses, are involved in the review and prioritization of 
     antiterrorism technologies for the purpose of determining 
     whether such technologies may be designated by the Secretary 
     as qualified antiterrorism technologies under section 862(b) 
     of the SAFETY Act (6 U.S.C. 441(b)) or certified by the 
     Secretary under section 863(d) of such Act (6 U.S.C. 442(d)).
       (b) Coordination Within Department of Homeland Security.--
     The Secretary of Homeland Security shall--
       (1) establish a formal coordination process that includes 
     the official of the Department of Homeland Security with 
     primary responsibility for the implementation of the SAFETY 
     Act, the Chief Procurement Officer of the Department, the 
     Under Secretary for Science and Technology, the Under 
     Secretary for Policy, and the Department of Homeland Security 
     General Counsel to ensure the maximum application of the 
     litigation and risk management provisions of the SAFETY Act 
     to antiterrorism technologies procured by the Department; and
       (2) promote awareness and utilization of the litigation and 
     risk management provisions of the SAFETY Act in the 
     procurement of antiterrorism technologies.
       (c) Issuance of Departmental Directive.--The Secretary of 
     Homeland Security shall, in accordance with the final rule 
     implementing the SAFETY Act, issue a Departmental management 
     directive providing for coordination between Department 
     procurement officials and any other Department official 
     responsible for implementing the SAFETY Act in advance of any 
     Department procurement of an antiterrorism technology, as 
     required under subsection (b).

     SEC. 805. PROMOTING ANTITERRORISM THROUGH INTERNATIONAL 
                   COOPERATION ACT.

       (a) In General.--Title III of the Homeland Security Act of 
     2002 (6 U.S.C. 181 et seq.) is further amended by adding at 
     the end the following:

     ``SEC. 319. PROMOTING ANTITERRORISM THROUGH INTERNATIONAL 
                   COOPERATION PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Director.--The term `Director' means the Director 
     selected under subsection (b)(2).
       ``(2) International cooperative activity.--The term 
     `international cooperative activity' includes--
       ``(A) coordinated research projects, joint research 
     projects, or joint ventures;
       ``(B) joint studies or technical demonstrations;
       ``(C) coordinated field exercises, scientific seminars, 
     conferences, symposia, and workshops;
       ``(D) training of scientists and engineers;
       ``(E) visits and exchanges of scientists, engineers, or 
     other appropriate personnel;
       ``(F) exchanges or sharing of scientific and technological 
     information; and
       ``(G) joint use of laboratory facilities and equipment.
       ``(b) Science and Technology Homeland Security 
     International Cooperative Programs Office.--
       ``(1) Establishment.--The Under Secretary shall establish 
     the Science and Technology Homeland Security International 
     Cooperative Programs Office.
       ``(2) Director.--The Office shall be headed by a Director, 
     who--
       ``(A) shall be selected by and shall report to the Under 
     Secretary; and
       ``(B) may be an officer of the Department serving in 
     another position.
       ``(3) Responsibilities.--
       ``(A) Development of mechanisms.--The Director shall be 
     responsible for developing, in consultation with the 
     Department of State, understandings or agreements that allow 
     and support international cooperative activity in support of 
     homeland security research, development, and comparative 
     testing.
       ``(B) Priorities.--The Director shall be responsible for 
     developing, in coordination with the Directorate of Science 
     and Technology, the other components of the Department of 
     Homeland Security, and other Federal agencies, strategic 
     priorities for international cooperative activity in support 
     of homeland security research, development, and comparative 
     testing.
       ``(C) Activities.--The Director shall facilitate the 
     planning, development, and implementation

[[Page 11841]]

     of international cooperative activity to address the 
     strategic priorities developed under subparagraph (B) through 
     mechanisms the Under Secretary considers appropriate, 
     including grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts to or 
     with foreign public or private entities, governmental 
     organizations, businesses, federally funded research and 
     development centers, and universities.
       ``(D) Identification of partners.--The Director shall 
     facilitate the matching of United States entities engaged in 
     homeland security research with non-United States entities 
     engaged in homeland security research so that they may 
     partner in homeland security research activities.
       ``(4) Coordination.--The Director shall ensure that the 
     activities under this subsection are coordinated with those 
     of other relevant research agencies, and may run projects 
     jointly with other agencies.
       ``(5) Conferences and workshops.--The Director may hold 
     international homeland security technology workshops and 
     conferences to improve contact among the international 
     community of technology developers and to help establish 
     direction for future technology goals.
       ``(c) International Cooperative Activities.--
       ``(1) Authorization.--The Under Secretary is authorized to 
     carry out international cooperative activities to support the 
     responsibilities specified under section 302.
       ``(2) Mechanisms and equitability.--In carrying out this 
     section, the Under Secretary may award grants to and enter 
     into cooperative agreements or contracts with United States 
     governmental organizations, businesses (including small 
     businesses and small and disadvantaged businesses), federally 
     funded research and development centers, institutions of 
     higher education, and foreign public or private entities. The 
     Under Secretary shall ensure that funding and resources 
     expended in international cooperative activities will be 
     equitably matched by the foreign partner organization through 
     direct funding or funding of complementary activities, or 
     through provision of staff, facilities, materials, or 
     equipment.
       ``(3) Loans of equipment.--The Under Secretary may make or 
     accept loans of equipment for research and development and 
     comparative testing purposes.
       ``(4) Cooperation.--The Under Secretary is authorized to 
     conduct international cooperative activities jointly with 
     other agencies.
       ``(5) Foreign partners.--Partners may include Israel, the 
     United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Singapore, and other 
     allies in the global war on terrorism, as appropriate.
       ``(6) Exotic diseases.--As part of the international 
     cooperative activities authorized in this section, the Under 
     Secretary, in coordination with the Chief Medical Officer, 
     may facilitate the development of information sharing and 
     other types of cooperative mechanisms with foreign countries, 
     including nations in Africa, to strengthen American 
     preparedness against threats to the Nation's agricultural and 
     public health sectors from exotic diseases.
       ``(d) Budget Allocation.--There is authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary, to be derived from amounts 
     otherwise authorized for the Directorate of Science and 
     Technology, $25,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2008 
     through 2011 for activities under this section.
       ``(e) Foreign Reimbursements.--Whenever the Science and 
     Technology Homeland Security International Cooperative 
     Programs Office participates in an international cooperative 
     activity with a foreign country on a cost-sharing basis, any 
     reimbursements or contributions received from that foreign 
     country to meet its share of the project may be credited to 
     appropriate current appropriations accounts of the 
     Directorate of Science and Technology.
       ``(f) Report to Congress on International Cooperative 
     Activities.--
       ``(1) Initial report.--Not later than 180 days after the 
     date of enactment of this section, the Under Secretary, 
     acting through the Director, shall transmit to the Congress a 
     report containing--
       ``(A) a brief description of each partnership formed under 
     subsection (b)(4), including the participants, goals, and 
     amount and sources of funding; and
       ``(B) a list of international cooperative activities 
     underway, including the participants, goals, expected 
     duration, and amount and sources of funding, including 
     resources provided to support the activities in lieu of 
     direct funding.
       ``(2) Updates.--At the end of the fiscal year that occurs 5 
     years after the transmittal of the report under subsection 
     (a), and every 5 years thereafter, the Under Secretary, 
     acting through the Director, shall transmit to the Congress 
     an update of the report required under subsection (a).''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents for the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002 is further amended by adding at 
     the end of the items relating to such title the following new 
     item:

``Sec. 319. Promoting antiterrorism through international cooperation 
              program.''.

                 TITLE IX--BORDER SECURITY IMPROVEMENTS

     SEC. 901. US-VISIT.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 7 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security 
     shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security of the 
     House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland 
     Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate, the 
     comprehensive strategy required by section 7208 of the 
     Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 for 
     the biometric entry and exit data system (commonly referred 
     to as the United States Visitor and Immigrant Status 
     Indicator Technology program or US-VISIT) established under 
     the section and other laws described in subsection (b) of 
     such section. The comprehensive strategy shall include an 
     action plan for full implementation of the biometric exit 
     component of US-VISIT, as required under subsection (d) of 
     section 7208 of such Act.
       (b) Contents.--The comprehensive strategy and action plan 
     referred to in subsection (a) shall, at a minimum, include 
     the following:
       (1) An explanation of how US-VISIT will allow law 
     enforcement officials to identify individuals who overstay 
     their visas.
       (2) A description of biometric pilot projects, including 
     the schedule for testing, locations, cost estimates, 
     resources needed, and performance measures.
       (3) An implementation schedule for deploying future 
     biometric exit capabilities at all air, land, and sea ports 
     of entry.
       (4) The actions the Secretary plans to take to accelerate 
     the full implementation of the biometric exit component of 
     US-VISIT at all air, land, and sea ports of entry.
       (c) Airport and Seaport Exit Implementation.--Not later 
     than December 31, 2008, the Secretary of Homeland Security 
     shall complete the exit portion of the biometric entry and 
     exit data system referred to in subsection (a) for aliens 
     arriving in or departing from the United States at an airport 
     or seaport.
       (d) Prohibition on Transfer.--The Secretary of Homeland 
     Security shall not transfer to the National Protection and 
     Programs Directorate of the Department of Homeland Security 
     the office of the Department that carries out the biometric 
     entry and exit data system referred to in subsection (a) 
     until the Secretary submits to the committees specified in 
     such subsection the action plan referred to in such 
     subsection for full implementation of the biometric exit 
     component of US-VISIT at all ports of entry.

     SEC. 902. SHADOW WOLVES PROGRAM.

       Of the amount authorized by section 101, there is 
     authorized to be appropriated $4,100,000 for fiscal year 2008 
     for the Shadow Wolves program.

     SEC. 903. COST-EFFECTIVE TRAINING FOR BORDER PATROL AGENTS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     take such steps as may be necessary to control the costs of 
     hiring, training, and deploying new Border Patrol agents, 
     including--
       (1) permitting individuals who are in training to become 
     Border Patrol agents to waive certain course requirements of 
     such training if such individuals have earlier satisfied such 
     requirements in a similar or comparable manner as determined 
     by the Secretary; and
       (2) directing the Office of Inspector General to conduct a 
     review of the costs and feasibility of training new Border 
     Patrol agents at Federal training centers, including the 
     Federal Law Enforcement Training Center facility in 
     Charleston, South Carolina, and the HAMMER facility in 
     Hanford, Washington, and at training facilities operated by 
     State and local law enforcement academies, non-profit 
     entities, and private entities, including institutions in the 
     southwest border region, as well as the use of all of the 
     above to conduct portions of such training.
       (b) Limitation on Per-Agent Cost of Training.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     Secretary shall take such steps as may be necessary to ensure 
     that the fiscal year 2008 per-agent cost of hiring, training, 
     and deploying each new Border Patrol agent does not exceed 
     $150,000.
       (2) Exception and certification.--If the Secretary 
     determines that the per-agent cost referred to in paragraph 
     (1) exceeds $150,000, the Secretary shall promptly submit to 
     the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and 
     Governmental Affairs of the Senate a certification explaining 
     why such per-agent cost exceeds such amount.

     SEC. 904. STUDENT AND EXCHANGE VISITOR PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Section 442 of the Homeland Security Act 
     of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 252) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (10); and
       (B) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following:
       ``(5) Student and exchange visitor program.--In 
     administering the program under paragraph (4), the Secretary 
     shall--
       ``(A) prescribe regulations to require an institution or 
     exchange visitor program sponsor participating in the Student 
     and Exchange Visitor Program to ensure that each covered 
     student or exchange visitor enrolled at the institution or 
     attending the exchange visitor program--
       ``(i) is an active participant in the program for which the 
     covered student or exchange visitor was issued a visa to 
     enter the United States;
       ``(ii) is not unobserved for any period--

       ``(I) exceeding 30 days during any academic term or program 
     in which the covered student or exchange visitor is enrolled; 
     or
       ``(II) exceeding 60 days during any period not described in 
     subclause (I); and

       ``(iii) is reported to the Department if within 21 days 
     of--

       ``(I) transferring to another institution or program; or
       ``(II) being hospitalized or otherwise incapacitated 
     necessitating a prolonged absence from the

[[Page 11842]]

     academic institution or exchange visitor program; and

       ``(B) notwithstanding subparagraph (A), require each 
     covered student or exchange visitor to be observed at least 
     once every 60 days.
       ``(6) Enhanced access.--The Secretary shall provide access 
     to the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System 
     (hereinafter in this subsection referred to as the `SEVIS'), 
     or other equivalent program or system, to appropriate 
     employees of an institution or exchange visitor program 
     sponsor participating in the Student and Exchange Visitor 
     Program if--
       ``(A) at least two authorized users are identified at each 
     participating institution or exchange visitor sponsor;
       ``(B) at least one additional authorized user is identified 
     at each such institution or sponsor for every 200 covered 
     students or exchange visitors enrolled at the institution or 
     sponsor; and
       ``(C) each authorized user is certified by the Secretary as 
     having completed an appropriate training course provided by 
     the Department for the program or system.
       ``(7) Program support.--The Secretary shall provide 
     appropriate technical support options to facilitate use of 
     the program or system described in paragraph (4) by 
     authorized users.
       ``(8) Upgrades to sevis or equivalent data.--The Secretary 
     shall update the program or system described in paragraph (4) 
     to incorporate new data fields that include--
       ``(A) verification that a covered student's performance 
     meets the minimum academic standards of the institution in 
     which such student is enrolled; and
       ``(B) timely entry of academic majors, including changes to 
     majors, of covered students and exchange visitors enrolled at 
     institutions or exchange program sponsors participating in 
     the Student and Exchange Visitor Program.
       ``(9) Savings clause.-- Nothing in this section shall 
     prohibit the Secretary or any institution or exchange program 
     sponsor participating in the Student Exchange Visitor Program 
     from requiring more frequent observations of covered students 
     or exchange visitors.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
       ``(1) The term `covered student' means a student who is a 
     nonimmigrant pursuant to section 101(1)(15)(F), 
     101(1)(15)(J), or 101(1)(15)(M) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act of 1952.
       ``(2) The term `observed' means positively identified by 
     physical or electronic means.
       ``(3) The term `authorized user' means an individual 
     nominated by an institution participating in the Student 
     Exchange Visitor Program and confirmed by the Secretary as 
     not appearing on any terrorist watch list.
       ``(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--Of the amount 
     authorized by section 101 of the Department of Homeland 
     Security Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, there are 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary such sums as 
     may be necessary to carry out this section.''.
       (b) Comptroller General Review.--The Comptroller General 
     shall conduct a review of the fees for the Student and 
     Exchange Visitor Program of the Department of Homeland 
     Security. The Comptroller General shall include in such 
     review data from fiscal years 2004 through 2007 and shall 
     consider fees collected by the Department and all expenses 
     associated with the review, issuance, maintenance, data 
     collection, and enforcement functions of the Student and 
     Exchange Visitor Program.

     SEC. 905. ASSESSMENT OF RESOURCES NECESSARY TO REDUCE 
                   CROSSING TIMES AT LAND PORTS OF ENTRY.

       The Secretary of Homeland Security shall, not later than 
     180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, conduct 
     an assessment, and submit a report to the Congress, on the 
     personnel, infrastructure, and technology required to reduce 
     border crossing wait times for pedestrian, commercial, and 
     non-commercial vehicular traffic at land ports of entry into 
     the United States to wait times less than prior to September 
     11, 2001, while ensuring appropriate security checks continue 
     to be conducted.

     SEC. 906. BIOMETRIC IDENTIFICATION OF UNAUTHORIZED ALIENS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     conduct a pilot program for the mobile biometric 
     identification in the maritime environment of aliens 
     unlawfully present in the United States.
       (b) Requirements.--The Secretary shall ensure that the 
     pilot program is coordinated with other biometric 
     identification programs within the Department of Homeland 
     Security and shall evaluate the costs and feasibility of 
     expanding the capability to all appropriate Department of 
     Homeland Security maritime vessels.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--Of the amounts 
     authorized in section 101, there is authorized to be 
     appropriated $10,000,000 to carry out this section.

     SEC. 907. REPORT BY GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 
                   REGARDING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES OF THE BORDER 
                   PATROL.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the 
     United States shall submit to the Committee on Homeland 
     Security of the House of Representatives and the Committee on 
     Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate a 
     report regarding the policies and procedures of the Border 
     Patrol pertaining to the use of lethal and non-lethal force 
     and the pursuit of fleeing vehicles, including data on the 
     number of incidents in which lethal or non-lethal force was 
     used and any penalties that were imposed on Border Patrol 
     agents as a result of such use.
       (b) Consultation.--
       (1) Requirement.--In complying with this section, the 
     Comptroller General shall consult with Customs and Border 
     Protection and with representatives of the following:
       (A) State and local law enforcement agencies located along 
     the northern and southern international borders of the United 
     States.
       (B) The National Border Patrol Council.
       (C) The National Association of Former Border Patrol 
     Officers.
       (D) Human rights groups with experience regarding aliens 
     who cross the international land borders of the United 
     States.
       (E) Any other group that the Comptroller General determines 
     would be appropriate.
       (2) Inclusion of opinions.--The Comptroller General shall 
     attach written opinions provided by groups referenced to in 
     paragraph (1) as appendices to the report.

               TITLE X--INFORMATION SHARING IMPROVEMENTS

     SEC. 1001. STATE AND LOCAL FUSION CENTER PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Subtitle I of title VIII of the Homeland 
     Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 481 et seq.) is amended by 
     striking sections 895 through 899 and inserting the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 895. STATE AND LOCAL FUSION CENTER PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish within 
     the Department a State and Local Fusion Center Program. The 
     program shall be overseen by the component charged with 
     overseeing information sharing of homeland security 
     information with State, local and tribal law enforcement. The 
     purpose of the State and Local Fusion Center Program is to 
     facilitate information sharing between the Department and 
     State, local, and tribal law enforcement for homeland 
     security and other purposes.
       ``(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary such sums as are 
     necessary for the Secretary to carry out the purpose of the 
     State and Local Fusion Center Program, including for--
       ``(1) deploying Department personnel with intelligence and 
     operational skills to State and local fusion centers 
     participating in the Program;
       ``(2) hiring and maintaining individuals with substantial 
     law enforcement experience who have retired from public 
     service and deploying such individuals to State and local 
     fusion centers participating in the Program (with the consent 
     of such centers); and
       ``(3) maintaining an adequate number of staff at the 
     headquarters of the Department to sustain and manage the 
     portion of the Program carried out at the headquarters and to 
     otherwise fill positions vacated by Department staff deployed 
     to State and local fusion centers participating in the 
     Program.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 
     1(b) of such Act is amended by striking the items relating to 
     sections 895 through 899 and inserting the following:

``Sec. 895. State and Local Fusion Center Program.''.
       (c) Prior Amendments Not Affected.--This section shall not 
     be construed to affect the application of sections 895 
     through 899 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (including 
     provisions enacted by the amendments made by those sections), 
     as in effect before the effective date of this section.

     SEC. 1002. FUSION CENTER PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES TRAINING 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Subtitle A of title II of the Homeland 
     Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 121 et seq.) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 203. FUSION CENTER PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES 
                   TRAINING PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Establishment.--The Secretary, through the Assistant 
     Secretary for Information Analysis, the Privacy Officer, and 
     the Officer for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, shall 
     establish a program within the Office of Civil Rights and 
     Civil Liberties to provide privacy, civil liberties, and 
     civil rights protection training for appropriate Department 
     employees and State, local, tribal employees serving in State 
     and local fusion centers participating in the State and Local 
     Fusion Center Program.
       ``(b) Mandatory Training.--
       ``(1) Department employees.--The Secretary shall require 
     each employee of the Department who is embedded at a State or 
     local fusion center and has access to United States citizens 
     and legal permanent residents personally identifiable 
     information to successfully complete training under the 
     program established under subsection (a).
       ``(2) Fusion center representatives.--As a condition of 
     receiving a grant from the Department, a fusion center shall 
     require each State, local, tribal, or private sector 
     representative of the fusion center to successfully complete 
     training under the program established under subsection (a) 
     not later than six months after the date on which the State 
     or local fusion center at which the employee is embedded 
     receives a grant from the Department.
       ``(c) Contents of Training.--Training provided under the 
     program established under subsection (a) shall include 
     training in Federal law in each of the following:
       ``(1) Privacy, civil liberties, and civil rights policies, 
     procedures, and protocols that can provide or control access 
     to information at a State or local fusion center.
       ``(2) Privacy awareness training based on section 552a of 
     title 5, United States Code, popularly known as the Privacy 
     Act of 1974.

[[Page 11843]]

       ``(3) The handling of personally identifiable information 
     in a responsible and appropriate manner.
       ``(4) Appropriate procedures for the destruction of 
     information that is no longer needed.
       ``(5) The consequences of failing to provide adequate 
     privacy and civil liberties protections.
       ``(6) Compliance with Federal regulations setting standards 
     for multijurisdictional criminal intelligence systems, 
     including 28 CFR 23 (as in effect on the date of the 
     enactment of this section).
       ``(7) The use of immutable auditing mechanisms designed to 
     track access to information at a State or local fusion 
     center.
       ``(d) Certification of Training.--The Secretary, acting 
     through the head of the Office of Civil Rights and Civil 
     Liberties, shall issue a certificate to each person who 
     completes the training under this section and performs 
     successfully in a written examination administered by the 
     Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. A copy of each 
     such certificate issued to an individual working at a 
     participating fusion center shall be kept on file at that 
     fusion center.
       ``(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--Of the amounts 
     authorized by section 101, there are authorized to be 
     appropriate to carry out this section--
       ``(1) $3,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2008 through 
     2013; and
       ``(2) such sums as may be necessary for each subsequent 
     fiscal year.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 
     1(b) of such Act is amended by adding at the end of the items 
     relating to such subtitle the following:

``Sec. 203. Fusion center privacy and civil liberties training 
              program.''.

     SEC. 1003. AUTHORITY TO APPOINT AND MAINTAIN A CADRE OF 
                   FEDERAL ANNUITANTS FOR THE OFFICE OF 
                   INFORMATION ANALYSIS.

       (a) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       (1) the term ``IA'' means the Office of Information 
     Analysis;
       (2) the term ``annuitant'' means an annuitant under a 
     Government retirement system;
       (3) the term ``Government retirement system'' has the 
     meaning given such term by section 501(a); and
       (4) the term ``employee'' has the meaning given such term 
     by section 2105 of title 5, United States Code.
       (b) Appointment Authority.--The Secretary (acting through 
     the Assistant Secretary for Information Analysis) may, for 
     the purpose of accelerating the ability of IA to perform its 
     statutory duties under the Homeland Security Act of 2002, 
     appoint annuitants to positions in IA in accordance with 
     succeeding provisions of this section.
       (c) Noncompetitive Procedures; Exemption From Offset.--An 
     appointment made under subsection (b) shall not be subject to 
     the provisions of title 5, United States Code, governing 
     appointments in the competitive service, and any annuitant 
     serving pursuant to such an appointment shall be exempt from 
     sections 8344 and 8468 of such title 5 (relating to annuities 
     and pay on reemployment) and any other similar provision of 
     law under a Government retirement system.
       (d) Limitations.--No appointment under subsection (b) may 
     be made if such appointment would result in the displacement 
     of any employee or would cause the total number of positions 
     filled by annuitants appointed under such subsection to 
     exceed 100 as of any time (determined on a full-time 
     equivalent basis).
       (e) Rule of Construction.--An annuitant as to whom an 
     exemption under subsection (c) is in effect shall not be 
     considered an employee for purposes of any Government 
     retirement system.
       (f) Termination.--Upon the expiration of the 5-year period 
     beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act--
       (1) any authority to make appointments under subsection (b) 
     shall cease to be available; and
       (2) all exemptions under subsection (c) shall cease to be 
     effective.

                   TITLE XI--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

     SEC. 1101. ELIGIBLE USES FOR INTEROPERABILITY GRANTS.

       The Secretary of Homeland Security shall ensure that all 
     funds administered by the Department of Homeland Security to 
     support the interoperable communications needs of State, 
     local, and tribal agencies, including funds administered 
     pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding or other agreement, 
     may be used to support the standards outlined in the SAFECOM 
     interoperability continuum, including governance, standard 
     operating procedures, technology, training and exercises, and 
     usage.

     SEC. 1102. RURAL HOMELAND SECURITY TRAINING INITIATIVE.

       (a) Establishment.--The Secretary of Homeland Security 
     shall establish a program to be administered by the Director 
     of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center of the 
     Department of Homeland Security to expand homeland security 
     training to units of local and tribal governments located in 
     rural areas. The Secretary shall take the following actions:
       (1) Evaluation of needs of rural areas.--The Secretary 
     shall evaluate the needs of such areas.
       (2) Development of training programs.--The Secretary shall 
     develop expert training programs designed to respond to the 
     needs of such areas, including, but not limited to, those 
     pertaining to rural homeland security responses including 
     protections for privacy, and civil rights and civil 
     liberties.
       (3) Provision of training programs.--The Secretary shall 
     provide to such areas the training programs developed under 
     paragraph (2).
       (4) Outreach efforts.--The Secretary shall conduct outreach 
     efforts to ensure that such areas are aware of the training 
     programs developed under paragraph (2) so that such programs 
     are made available to units of local government and tribal 
     governments located in rural areas.
       (b) No Duplication or Displacement of Current Programs.--
     Any training program developed under paragraph (2) of 
     subsection (a) and any training provided by the program 
     pursuant to such subsection shall be developed or provided, 
     respectively, in a manner so as to not duplicate or displace 
     any program in existence on the date of the enactment of this 
     section.
       (c) Prioritized Locations for Rural Homeland Security 
     Training.--In designating sites for the provision of training 
     under this section, the Secretary shall, to the maximum 
     extent possible and as appropriate, give priority to 
     facilities of the Department of Homeland Security in 
     existence as of the date of the enactment of this Act and to 
     closed military installations, and to the extent possible, 
     shall conduct training onsite, at facilities operated by 
     participants.
       (d) Rural Defined.--In this section, the term ``rural'' 
     means an area that is not located in a metropolitan 
     statistical area, as defined by the Office of Management and 
     Budget.

     SEC. 1103. CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE STUDY.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     work with the Center for Risk and Economic Analysis of 
     Terrorism Events (CREATE), led by the University of Southern 
     California, to evaluate the feasibility and practicality of 
     creating further incentives for private sector stakeholders 
     to share protected critical infrastructure information with 
     the Department for homeland security and other purposes.
       (b) Included Incentives.--Incentives evaluated under this 
     section shall include, but not be limited to, tax incentives, 
     grant eligibility incentives, and certificates of compliance 
     and other non-monetary incentives.
       (c) Recommendations.--The evaluation shall also include 
     recommendations on the structure and thresholds of any 
     incentive program.

     SEC. 1104. TERRORIST WATCH LIST AND IMMIGRATION STATUS REVIEW 
                   AT HIGH-RISK CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE.

       From amounts authorized under section 101, there may be 
     appropriated such sums as are necessary for the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security to require each owner or operator of a Tier 
     I or Tier II critical infrastructure site as selected for the 
     Buffer Zone Protection Program, to conduct checks of their 
     employees against available terrorist watch lists and 
     immigration status databases.

     SEC. 1105. AUTHORIZED USE OF SURPLUS MILITARY VEHICLES.

       The Secretary of Homeland Security shall include United 
     States military surplus vehicles having demonstrated utility 
     for responding to terrorist attacks, major disasters, and 
     other emergencies on the Authorized Equipment List in order 
     to allow State, local, and tribal agencies to purchase, 
     modify, upgrade, and maintain such vehicles using homeland 
     security assistance administered by the Department of 
     Homeland Security.

     SEC. 1106. COMPUTER CAPABILITIES TO SUPPORT REAL-TIME 
                   INCIDENT MANAGEMENT.

       From amounts authorized under section 101, there are 
     authorized such sums as may be necessary for the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security to encourage the development and use of 
     software- or Internet-based computer capabilities to support 
     real-time incident management by Federal, State, local, and 
     tribal agencies. Such software-based capabilities shall be 
     scalable and not be based on proprietary systems to ensure 
     the compatibility of Federal, State, local, and tribal first 
     responder agency incident management systems. In the 
     development and implementation of such computer capabilities, 
     the Secretary shall consider the feasibility and desirability 
     of including the following capabilities:
       (1) Geographic information system data.
       (2) Personnel, vehicle, and equipment tracking and 
     monitoring.
       (3) Commodity tracking and other logistics management.
       (4) Evacuation center and shelter status tracking.
       (5) Such other capabilities as determined appropriate by 
     the Secretary.

     SEC. 1107. EXPENDITURE REPORTS AS A CONDITION OF HOMELAND 
                   SECURITY GRANTS.

       (a) In General.--Subtitle H of title VIII of the Homeland 
     Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 451 et seq.) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 890A. EXPENDITURE REPORTS AS A CONDITION OF HOMELAND 
                   SECURITY GRANTS.

       ``(a) Quarterly Reports Required as a Condition of Homeland 
     Security Grants.--
       ``(1) Expenditure reports required.--As a condition of 
     receiving a grant administered by the Secretary, the 
     Secretary shall require the grant recipient to submit 
     quarterly reports to the Secretary describing the nature and 
     amount of each expenditure made by the recipient using grant 
     funds.
       ``(2) Deadline for reports.--Each report required under 
     paragraph (1) shall be submitted not later than 30 days after 
     the last day of a fiscal quarter and shall cover expenditures 
     made during that fiscal quarter.
       ``(b) Publication of Expenditures.--Not later than 30 days 
     after receiving a report under subsection (a), the Secretary 
     shall publish and make publicly available on the Internet 
     website

[[Page 11844]]

     of the Department a description of the nature and amount of 
     each expenditure covered by the report.
       ``(c) Protection of Sensitive Information.--In meeting the 
     requirements of this section, the Secretary shall take 
     appropriate action to ensure that sensitive information is 
     not disclosed.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 
     1(b) of such Act is amended by adding at the end of the items 
     relating to such subtitle the following:

``Sec. 890A. Expenditure reports as a condition of homeland security 
              grants.''.

     SEC. 1108. ENCOURAGING USE OF COMPUTERIZED TRAINING AIDS.

       The Under Secretary for Science and Technology of the 
     Department of Homeland Security shall use and make available 
     to State and local agencies computer simulations to help 
     strengthen the ability of municipalities to prepare for and 
     respond to a chemical, biological, or other terrorist attack, 
     and to standardize response training.

     SEC. 1109. PROTECTION OF NAME, INITIALS, INSIGNIA, AND 
                   DEPARTMENTAL SEAL.

       Section 875 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 
     455) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(d) Protection of Name, Initials, Insignia, and Seal.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except with the written permission of 
     the Secretary, no person may knowingly use, in connection 
     with any advertisement, commercial activity, audiovisual 
     production (including film or television production), 
     impersonation, Internet domain name, Internet e-mail address, 
     or Internet Web site, merchandise, retail product, or 
     solicitation in a manner reasonably calculated to convey the 
     impression that the Department or any organizational element 
     of the Department has approved, endorsed, or authorized such 
     use, any of the following (or any colorable imitation 
     thereof):
       ``(A) The words `Department of Homeland Security', the 
     initials `DHS', the insignia or seal of the Department, or 
     the title `Secretary of Homeland Security'.
       ``(B) The name, initials, insignia, or seal of any 
     organizational element (including any former such element) of 
     the Department, or the title of any other officer or employee 
     of the Department, notice of which has been published by the 
     Secretary in accordance with paragraph (3).
       ``(2) Civil action.--Whenever it appears to the Attorney 
     General that any person is engaged or is about to engage in 
     an act or practice that constitutes or will constitute 
     conduct prohibited by paragraph (1) the Attorney General may 
     initiate a civil proceeding in a district court of the United 
     States to enjoin such act or practice. Such court shall 
     proceed as soon as practicable to the hearing and 
     determination of such action and may, at any time before 
     final determination, enter such restraining orders or 
     prohibitions, or take such other actions as is warranted, to 
     prevent injury to the United States or to any person or class 
     of persons for whose protection the action is brought.
       ``(3) Notice and publication.--The notice and publication 
     to which paragraph (1)(B) refers is a notice published in the 
     Federal Register including the name, initials, seal, or class 
     of titles protected under paragraph (1)(B) and a statement 
     that they are protected under that provision. The Secretary 
     may amend such notice from time to time as the Secretary 
     determines appropriate in the public interest and shall 
     publish such amendments in the Federal Register.
       ``(4) Audiovisual production.--For the purpose of this 
     subsection, the term `audiovisual production' means the 
     production of a work that consists of a series of related 
     images that are intrinsically intended to be shown by the use 
     of machines or devices such as projectors, viewers, or 
     electronic equipment, together with accompanying sounds, if 
     any, regardless of the nature of the material objects, such 
     as films or tapes, in which the work is embodied.''.

     SEC. 1110. REPORT ON UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE APPROACH TO 
                   SHARING UNCLASSIFIED, LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE 
                   INFORMATION WITH FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL 
                   PARTNERS.

       (a) Report by Director of United States Secret Service.--
     Not later than 240 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Director of the United States Secret Service 
     shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security of the 
     House of Representatives, the Committee on Homeland Security 
     and Governmental Affairs of the Senate, and the Inspector 
     General of the Department of Homeland Security a report 
     describing the approach of the Secret Service to sharing 
     unclassified, law enforcement sensitive information with 
     Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies for 
     homeland security and other purposes.
       (b) Report by Inspector General.--The Inspector General of 
     the Department of Homeland Security shall conduct a review of 
     the report submitted by the Director of the United States 
     Secret Service under subsection (a), and submit a report with 
     recommendations on whether and how such approach could be 
     incorporated throughout the Department to Congress within 240 
     days after receiving the report of the Director of the United 
     States Secret Service under subsection (a).

     SEC. 1111. REPORT ON UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE JAMES J. 
                   ROWLEY TRAINING CENTER.

       Within 240 days after the date of the enactment of this 
     Act, the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland 
     Security shall provide to the appropriate congressional 
     committees, including the Committees on Homeland Security and 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committees on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and 
     Appropriations of the Senate, a report describing the 
     following:
       (1) The mission and training capabilities of the United 
     States Secret Service James J. Rowley Training Center.
       (2) Current Secret Service personnel throughput capacity of 
     the James J. Rowley Training Center.
       (3) Maximum Secret Service personnel throughput capacity of 
     the James J. Rowley Training Center.
       (4) An assessment of what departmental components engage in 
     similar training activities as those conducted at the James 
     J. Rowley Training Center.
       (5) An assessment of the infrastructure enhancements needed 
     to support the mission and training capabilities of the James 
     J. Rowley Training Center.
       (6) An assessment of the actual and expected total 
     throughput capacity at the James J. Rowley Training Center, 
     including outside entity participants.

     SEC. 1112. METROPOLITAN MEDICAL RESPONSE SYSTEM PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Title V of the Homeland Security Act of 
     2002 (6 U.S.C. 311 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:

     ``SEC. 522. METROPOLITAN MEDICAL RESPONSE SYSTEM PROGRAM.

       ``(a) In General.--There is a Metropolitan Medical Response 
     System Program (in this section referred to as the 
     `program').
       ``(b) Purpose.--The purpose of the program shall be to 
     support local jurisdictions in enhancing and maintaining all-
     hazards response capabilities to manage mass casualty 
     incidents (including terrorist acts using chemical, 
     biological, radiological, nuclear agents, or explosives, 
     large-scale hazardous materials incidents, epidemic disease 
     outbreaks, and natural disasters) by systematically enhancing 
     and integrating first responders, public health personnel, 
     emergency management personnel, business representatives, and 
     volunteers.
       ``(c) Program Administration.--The Assistant Secretary for 
     Health Affairs shall develop the programmatic and policy 
     guidance for the program in coordination with the 
     Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
       ``(d) Personnel Costs.--The program shall not be subject to 
     an administrative cap on the hiring of personnel to conduct 
     program activities.
       ``(e) Financial Assistance.--
       ``(1) Administration.--The Administrator of the Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency shall administer financial 
     assistance provided to State and local jurisdictions under 
     the program.
       ``(2) Assistance to local jurisdictions.--In providing 
     financial assistance to a State under the program, the 
     Administrator shall ensure that 100 percent of the amount of 
     such assistance is allocated by the State to local 
     jurisdictions, except that a State may retain up to 20 
     percent of the amount of such assistance to facilitate 
     integration between the State and the local jurisdiction 
     pursuant to a written agreement between the State and the 
     chair of the Metropolitan Medical Response System steering 
     committee.
       ``(3) Mutual aid.--
       ``(A) Agreements.--Local jurisdictions receiving assistance 
     under the program are encouraged to develop and maintain 
     memoranda of understanding and agreement with neighboring 
     jurisdictions to support a system of mutual aid among the 
     jurisdictions.
       ``(B) Contents.--A memorandum referred to in subparagraph 
     (A) shall include, at a minimum, policies and procedures to--
       ``(i) enable the timely deployment of program personnel and 
     equipment across jurisdictions and, if relevant, across State 
     boundaries;
       ``(ii) share information in a consistent and timely manner; 
     and
       ``(iii) notify State authorities of the deployment of 
     program resources in a manner that ensures coordination with 
     State agencies without impeding the ability of program 
     personnel and equipment to respond rapidly to emergencies in 
     other jurisdictions.
       ``(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--Of the amounts 
     authorized by section 101 there is authorized to be 
     appropriated to carry out the program $63,000,000 for each of 
     the fiscal years 2008 through 2011.''.
       (b) Program Review.--
       (1) In general.--The Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs 
     shall conduct a review of the Metropolitan Medical Response 
     System Program.
       (2) Content of review.--In conducting the review of the 
     program, the Assistant Secretary shall examine--
       (A) strategic goals;
       (B) objectives;
       (C) operational capabilities;
       (D) resource requirements;
       (E) performance metrics;
       (F) administration;
       (G) whether the program would be more effective if it were 
     managed as a contractual agreement;
       (H) the degree to which the program's strategic goals, 
     objectives, and capabilities are incorporated in State and 
     local homeland security plans; and
       (I) challenges in the coordination among public health, 
     public safety, and other stakeholder groups to prepare for 
     and respond to mass casualty incidents.
       (3) Report.--Not later than 9 months after the date of 
     enactment of this subsection, the Assistant Secretary shall 
     submit to the Committee

[[Page 11845]]

     on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of 
     the Senate a report on the results of the review.
       (c) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Repeal.--Section 635 of the Post-Katrina Management 
     Reform Act of 2006 (6 U.S.C. 723) is repealed.
       (2) Table of contents.--The table of contents contained in 
     section 1(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 is amended 
     by inserting after the item relating to section 521 the 
     following:

``Sec. 522. Metropolitan Medical Response System Program.''.

     SEC. 1113. IDENTITY FRAUD PREVENTION GRANT PROGRAM.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the 
     United States found that the 19 hijackers had been issued 16 
     State driver's licenses (from Arizona, California, Florida, 
     and Virginia) and 14 State identification cards (from 
     Florida, Maryland and Virginia).
       (2) The Commission concluded that ``[s]ecure identification 
     should begin in the United States. The Federal Government 
     should set standards for the issuance of birth certificates 
     and sources of identification, such as driver's licenses. 
     Fraud in identification is no longer just a problem of theft. 
     At many entry points to vulnerable facilities, including 
     gates for boarding aircraft, sources of identification are 
     the last opportunity to ensure that people are who they say 
     they are and to check whether they are terrorists.''
       (b) Grant Program.--Subtitle D of title IV of the Homeland 
     Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 251 et seq.) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 447. DOCUMENT FRAUD PREVENTION GRANT PROGRAM.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall establish a program 
     to make grants available to States to be used to prevent 
     terrorists and other individuals from fraudulently obtaining 
     and using State-issued identification cards and to develop 
     more secure State-issued documents to be used for official 
     Federal purposes.
       ``(b) Use of Funds.--A recipient of a grant under this 
     section may use the grant for any of the following purposes:
       ``(1) To develop machine readable technology, encryption 
     methods, or other means of protecting against unauthorized 
     access of information appearing on licenses or 
     identification.
       ``(2) To establish a system for a State-to-State data 
     exchange that allows electronic access to States to 
     information contained in a State department of motor vehicles 
     database.
       ``(3) To develop or implement a security plan designed to 
     safeguard the privacy of personal information collected, 
     maintained, and used by State motor vehicles offices from 
     unauthorized access, misuse, fraud, and identity theft.
       ``(4) To develop a querying service that allows access to 
     Federal databases in a timely, secure, and cost-effective 
     manner, in order to verify the issuance, validity, content, 
     and completeness of source documents provided by applicants 
     for identity documents issued by State agencies, including 
     departments of motor vehicles.
       ``(5) To develop a system for States to capture and store 
     digital images of identity source documents and photographs 
     of applicants in electronic format.
       ``(6) To design systems or establish procedures that would 
     reduce the number of in-person visits required to State 
     departments of motor vehicles to obtain State-issued identity 
     documents used for Federal official purposes.
       ``(c) Priority in Awarding Grants.--In awarding grants 
     under this section the Secretary shall give priority to a 
     State that demonstrates that--
       ``(1) the grant will assist the State in complying with any 
     regulation issued by the Department to prevent the fraudulent 
     issuance of identification documents to be used for official 
     Federal purposes; and
       ``(2) such compliance will facilitate the ability of other 
     States to comply with such regulations.
       ``(d) Limitation on Source of Funding.--The Secretary may 
     not use amounts made available under this section for any 
     other grant program of the Department to provide funding for 
     expenses related to the REAL ID Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-
     13).
       ``(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--Of the amounts 
     authorized by section 101 there are authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary for making grants under this 
     section--
       ``(1) $120,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
       ``(2) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
       ``(3) $80,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.''.
       (c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 
     1(b) of such Act is amended by inserting after the items 
     relating to such subtitle the following:

``Sec. 447. Document fraud prevention grant program.''.

     SEC. 1114. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.

       The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-296; 6 
     U.S.C. 361 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) in section 1(b) in the table of contents by striking 
     the items relating to the second title XVIII, as added by 
     section 501(b)(3) of Public Law 109-347, and inserting the 
     following:

             ``TITLE XIX--DOMESTIC NUCLEAR DETECTION OFFICE

``Sec. 1901. Domestic Nuclear Detection Office.
``Sec. 1902. Mission of Office.
``Sec. 1903. Hiring authority.
``Sec. 1904. Testing authority.
``Sec. 1905. Relationship to other Department entities and Federal 
              agencies.
``Sec. 1906. Contracting and grant making authorities.''.
       (2) by redesignating the second title XVIII, as added by 
     section 501(a) of Public Law 109-347, as title XIX;
       (3) in title XIX (as so redesignated)--
       (A) by redesignating sections 1801 through 1806 as sections 
     1901 through 1906, respectively;
       (B) in section 1904(a) (6 U.S.C. 594(a)), as so 
     redesignated, by striking ``section 1802'' and inserting 
     ``section 1902''; and
       (C) in section 1906 (6 U.S.C. 596), as so redesignated, by 
     striking ``section 1802(a)'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``section 1902(a)''.

     SEC. 1115. CITIZEN CORPS.

       Of the amount authorized to be appropriated under section 
     101, such sums as may be necessary shall be available to the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security to encourage the use of 
     Citizen Corps funding and local Citizen Corps Councils to 
     provide education and training for populations located around 
     critical infrastructure on preparing for and responding to 
     terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies.

     SEC. 1116. REPORT REGARDING DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 
                   IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPTROLLER GENERAL AND 
                   INSPECTOR GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING 
                   PROTECTION OF AGRICULTURE.

       (a) Report Required.--The Secretary of Homeland Security 
     shall prepare a report describing how the Department of 
     Homeland Security will implement the applicable 
     recommendations of the following reports:
       (1) Comptroller General report entitled ``Homeland 
     Security: How Much is Being Done to Protect Agriculture from 
     a Terrorist Attack, but Important Challenges Remain'' (GAO-
     05-214).
       (2) Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector 
     General report entitled ``The Department of Homeland 
     Security's Role in Food Defense and Critical Infrastructure 
     Protection'' (OIG-07-33).
       (b) Submission of Report.--Not later than 120 days after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall 
     submit the report to the Committee on Homeland Security of 
     the House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland 
     Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate. If the 
     Secretary determines that a specific recommendation will not 
     be implemented or will not be fully implemented, the 
     Secretary shall include in the report a description of the 
     reasoning or justification for the determination.

     SEC. 1117. REPORT REGARDING LEVEE SYSTEM.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 6 months after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security 
     shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a 
     report analyzing the threat, vulnerability, and consequence 
     of a terrorist attack on the levee system of the United 
     States.
       (b) Existing Reports.--In implementing this section, the 
     Secretary may build upon existing reports as necessary.

     SEC. 1118. REPORT ON FORCE MULTIPLIER PROGRAM.

       Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to 
     the appropriate congressional committees a report on the 
     progress of the Secretary--
       (1) in establishing procedures to ensure compliance with 
     section 44917(a)(7) of title 49, United States Code; and
       (2) in accomplishing the operational aspects of the Force 
     Multiplier Program, as required pursuant to the Department of 
     Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2007 (Public Law 109-
     295).

     SEC. 1119. ELIGIBILITY OF STATE JUDICIAL FACILITIES FOR STATE 
                   HOMELAND SECURITY GRANTS.

       (a) In General.--States may utilize covered grants for the 
     purpose of providing funds to State and local judicial 
     facilities for security at those facilities.
       (b) Covered Grants.--For the purposes of this section, the 
     term ``covered grant'' means a grant under any of the 
     following programs of the Department of Homeland Security:
       (1) The State Homeland Security Grant Program.
       (2) The Urban Area Security Initiative.

     SEC. 1120. AUTHORIZATION OF HOMELAND SECURITY FUNCTIONS OF 
                   THE UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE.

       (a) Authorized Funding.--Of the amounts authorized by 
     section 101, there is authorized to be appropriated for 
     fiscal year 2008 for necessary expenses of the United States 
     Secret Service, $1,641,432,000.
       (b) Authorized Personnel Strength.--The United States 
     Secret Service is authorized to provide 6,822 full-time 
     equivalent positions.

     SEC. 1121. DATA SHARING.

        The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide 
     information relating to assistance requested or provided in 
     response to a terrorist attack, major disaster, or other 
     emergency, to Federal, State, or local law enforcement 
     entities to assist in the location of a missing child or 
     registered sex offender. In providing such information, the 
     Secretary shall take reasonable steps to protect the privacy 
     of individuals.

                  TITLE XII--MARITIME ALIEN SMUGGLING

     SEC. 1201. SHORT TITLE.

        This title may be cited as the ``Maritime Alien Smuggling 
     Law Enforcement Act''.

     SEC. 1202. CONGRESSIONAL DECLARATION OF FINDINGS.

        The Congress finds and declares that maritime alien 
     smuggling violates the national sovereignty of the United 
     States, places the country at risk of terrorist activity, 
     compromises the

[[Page 11846]]

     country's border security, contravenes the rule of law, and 
     compels an unnecessary risk to life among those who enforce 
     the Nation's laws. Moreover, such maritime alien smuggling 
     creates a condition of human suffering among those who seek 
     to enter the United States without official permission or 
     lawful authority that is to be universally condemned and 
     vigorously opposed.

     SEC. 1203. DEFINITIONS.

        In this title:
       (1) The term ``alien'' has the same meaning given that term 
     in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
     U.S.C. 1101).
       (2) The term ``lawful authority'' means permission, 
     authorization, or waiver that is expressly provided for in 
     the immigration laws of the United States or the regulations 
     prescribed thereunder and does not include any such authority 
     secured by fraud or otherwise obtained in violation of law or 
     authority that has been sought but not approved.
       (3) The term ``serious bodily injury'' has the same meaning 
     given that term in section 1365 of title 18, United States 
     Code, including any conduct that would violate sections 2241 
     or 2242 of such title, if the conduct occurred in the special 
     maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
       (4) The term ``State'' has the same meaning given that term 
     in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
     U.S.C. 1101).
       (5) The term ``terrorist activity'' has the same meaning 
     given that term in section 212(a)(3)(B) of the Immigration 
     and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(3)(B)).
       (6) The term ``United States'' includes the several States, 
     the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, 
     Guam, American Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, the 
     Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and any other 
     territory or possession of the United States.
       (7) The term ``vessel of the United States'' and ``vessel 
     subject to the jurisdiction of the United States'' have the 
     same meanings given those terms in section 2 of the Maritime 
     Drug Law Enforcement Act (46 U.S.C. App. 1903).

     SEC. 1204. MARITIME ALIEN SMUGGLING.

       (a) Offense.--For purposes of enforcing Federal laws, 
     including those that pertain to port, maritime, or land 
     border security, no person on board a vessel of the United 
     States or a vessel subject to the jurisdiction of the United 
     States, or who is a citizen or national of the United States 
     or an alien who is paroled into or is a resident of the 
     United States on board any vessel, shall assist, encourage, 
     direct, induce, transport, move, harbor, conceal, or shield 
     from detection an individual in transit from one country to 
     another on the high seas, knowing or in reckless disregard of 
     the fact that such individual is an alien, known, or 
     suspected terrorist, or an individual seeking to commit 
     terrorist activity, seeking to enter the United States 
     without official permission or lawful authority.
       (b) Attempt or Conspiracy.--Any person who attempts or 
     conspires to commit a violation of this title shall be 
     subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the 
     violation, the commission of which was the object of the 
     attempt or conspiracy.
       (c) Jurisdiction and Scope.--
       (1) In general.--Jurisdiction of the United States with 
     respect to vessels and persons subject to this section is not 
     an element of any offense. All jurisdictional issues arising 
     under this section are preliminary questions of law to be 
     determined solely by the trial judge.
       (2) Extraterritorial jurisdiction.--There is 
     extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction over the offenses 
     described in this section.
       (3) Nonapplicability to lawful activities.--Nothing in this 
     title shall apply to otherwise lawful activities carried out 
     by or at the direction of the United States Government.
       (d) Claim of Failure To Comply With International Law; 
     Jurisdiction of Court.--Any person charged with a violation 
     of this title shall not have standing to raise the claim of 
     failure to comply with international law as a basis for a 
     defense. A claim of failure to comply with international law 
     in the enforcement of this title may be invoked solely by a 
     foreign nation, and a failure to comply with international 
     law shall not divest a court of jurisdiction or otherwise 
     constitute a defense to any proceeding under this title.
       (e) Affirmative Defense.--It shall be an affirmative 
     defense to a violation of this section, as to which the 
     defendant has the burden of proof by a preponderance of the 
     evidence, that prior to the alleged violation the defendant 
     rescued the alien at sea, if the defendant--
       (1) immediately reported to the Coast Guard the 
     circumstances of the rescue, and the name, description, 
     registry number, and location of the rescuing vessel; and
       (2) did not bring or attempt to bring the alien into the 
     land territory of the United States without official 
     permission or lawful authority, unless exigent circumstances 
     existed that placed the life of the alien in danger, in which 
     case the defendant must have reported to the Coast Guard the 
     information required by paragraph (1) of this subsection 
     immediately upon delivering that alien to emergency medical 
     personnel ashore.
       (f) Admissibility of Evidence.--Notwithstanding any 
     provision of the Federal Rules of Evidence, the testimony of 
     Coast Guard personnel and official records of the Coast 
     Guard, offered to show either that the defendant did not 
     report immediately the information required by subsection (e) 
     or the absence of any such report by the defendant, shall be 
     admissible, and the jury shall be instructed, upon request of 
     the United States, that it may draw an inference from such 
     records or testimony in deciding whether the defendant 
     reported as required by subsection (e).
       (g) Admissibility of Videotaped Witness Testimony.--
     Notwithstanding any provision of the Federal Rules of 
     Evidence, the videotaped (or otherwise audiovisually or 
     electronically preserved) deposition of a witness to any 
     alleged violation of subsection (a) of this section who has 
     been repatriated, removed, extradited, or otherwise expelled 
     from or denied admission to the United States or who is 
     otherwise unable to testify may be admitted into evidence in 
     an action brought for that violation if the witness was 
     available for cross examination at the deposition and the 
     deposition otherwise complies with the Federal Rules of 
     Evidence.
       (h) Penalties.--A person who commits any violation under 
     this section shall--
       (1) be imprisoned for not less than 3 years and not more 
     than 20 years, fined not more than $100,000, or both;
       (2) in a case in which the violation furthers or aids the 
     commission of any other criminal offense against the United 
     States or any State for which the offense is punishable by 
     imprisonment for more than 1 year, be imprisoned for not less 
     than 5 years and not more than 20 years, fined not more than 
     $100,000, or both;
       (3) in a case in which any participant in the violation 
     created a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury 
     to another person (including, but not limited to, 
     transporting a person in a shipping container, storage 
     compartment, or other confined space or at a speed in excess 
     of the rated capacity of the vessel), be imprisoned for not 
     less than 5 years and not more than 20 years, fined not more 
     than $100,000, or both;
       (4) in a case in which the violation caused serious bodily 
     injury to any person, regardless of where the injury 
     occurred, be imprisoned for not less than 7 years and not 
     more than 30 years, fined not more than $500,000, or both;
       (5) in a case in which the violation involved an alien who 
     the offender knew or had reason to believe was an alien 
     engaged in terrorist activity or intending to engage in 
     terrorist activity, be imprisoned for not less than 10 years 
     and not more than 30 years, fined not more than $500,000, or 
     both; and
       (6) in the case where the violation caused or resulted in 
     the death of any person regardless of where the death 
     occurred, be punished by death or imprisoned for not less 
     than 10 years and up to a life sentence, fined not more than 
     $1,000,000, or both.

     SEC. 1205. SEIZURE OR FORFEITURE OF PROPERTY.

       (a) In General.--Any conveyance (including any vessel, 
     vehicle, or aircraft) that has been or is being used in the 
     commission of any violation of this title), the gross 
     proceeds of such violation, and any property traceable to 
     such conveyance or proceeds shall be seized and subject to 
     forfeiture in the same manner as property seized or forfeited 
     under section 274 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
     U.S.C. 1324).
       (b) Prima Facie Evidence of Violations of the Title.--
     Practices commonly recognized as alien smuggling tactics may 
     provide prima facie evidence of intent to use a vessel to 
     commit, or to facilitate the commission of, a violation of 
     this title and may support seizure and forfeiture of the 
     vessel, even in the absence aboard the vessel of an alien in 
     unlawful transit. The following indicia may be considered, in 
     the totality of the circumstances, to be prima facie evidence 
     that a vessel is intended to be used to commit, or to 
     facilitate the commission of, a violation of this title:
       (1) The construction or adaptation of the vessel in a 
     manner that facilitates smuggling, including--
       (A) the configuration of the vessel to avoid being detected 
     visually or by radar;
       (B) the presence of any compartment or equipment that is 
     built or fitted out for smuggling (excluding items reasonably 
     used for the storage of personal valuables);
       (C) the presence of an auxiliary fuel, oil, or water tank 
     not installed in accordance with applicable law or installed 
     in such a manner as to enhance the vessel's smuggling 
     capability;
       (D) the presence of engines, the power of which exceeds the 
     design specifications or size of the vessel;
       (E) the presence of materials used to reduce or alter the 
     heat or radar signature of the vessel or avoid detection;
       (F) the presence of a camouflaging paint scheme or 
     materials used to camouflage the vessel; and
       (G) the display of false vessel registration numbers, false 
     indicia of vessel nationality, false vessel name, or false 
     vessel homeport.
       (2) The presence or absence of equipment, personnel, or 
     cargo inconsistent with the type or declared purpose of the 
     vessel.
       (3) The presence of fuel, lube oil, food, water, or spare 
     parts inconsistent with legitimate operation of the vessel, 
     the construction or equipment of the vessel, or the character 
     of the vessel.
       (4) The operation of the vessel without lights during times 
     lights are required to be displayed under applicable law or 
     regulation or in a manner of navigation.
       (5) The failure of the vessel to stop, respond, or heave to 
     when hailed by an official of the Federal Government, 
     including conducting evasive maneuvers.
       (6) The declaration to the Federal Government of apparently 
     false information about the vessel, crew, or voyage or the 
     failure to identify the vessel by name or country of 
     registration when requested to do so by a Government 
     official.

[[Page 11847]]

       (c) Prima Facie Evidence of the Absence of Lawful Authority 
     To Enter.--Notwithstanding any provision of the Federal Rules 
     of Evidence, in determining whether a violation of this title 
     has occurred, any of the following shall be prima facie 
     evidence in an action for seizure or forfeiture pursuant to 
     this section that an alien involved in the alleged offense 
     had not received prior official permission or legal 
     authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United 
     States or that such alien had come to, entered, or remained 
     in the United States in violation of law:
       (1) Any order, finding, or determination concerning the 
     alien's status or lack thereof made by a Federal judge or 
     administrative adjudicator (including an immigration judge or 
     an immigration officer) during any judicial or administrative 
     proceeding authorized under the immigration laws or 
     regulations prescribed thereunder.
       (2) Official records of the Department of Homeland 
     Security, the Department of Justice, or the Department of 
     State concerning the alien's status or lack thereof.
       (3) Testimony by an immigration officer having personal 
     knowledge of the facts concerning the alien's status or lack 
     thereof.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. No amendment to the committee amendment is in 
order except those printed in House Report 110-136. Each amendment may 
be offered only in the order printed in the report, by a Member 
designated in the report, shall be considered read, shall be debatable 
for the time specified in the report, equally divided and controlled by 
the proponent and an opponent of the amendment, shall not be subject to 
amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the 
question.


         Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Thompson of Mississippi

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 
printed in House Report 110-136.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Thompson of Mississippi:
       In the proposed section 401(b)(3)(B), as proposed to be 
     added by section 201 of the bill, insert before the period at 
     the end the following: ``, excluding each agency that is a 
     distinct entity within the Department''.
       In the proposed section 401(b)(3)(E), as proposed to be 
     added by section 201 of the bill, insert before the period at 
     the end the following: ``, consistent with this section''.
       Strike subsection (b) of the proposed section 707, as 
     proposed to be added by section 202 of the bill, and insert 
     the following:
       ``(b) Coordination.--The Secretary shall direct the Chief 
     Operating Officer of each component agency to coordinate with 
     that Officer's respective Chief Operating Officer of the 
     Department to ensure that the component agency adheres to 
     Government-wide laws, rules, regulations, and policies to 
     which the Department is subject and which the Chief Operating 
     Officer is responsible for implementing.''.
       In the proposed section 707(c), strike ``reporting to'' and 
     insert ``coordinating with''.
       In the proposed section 402(d), as proposed to be added by 
     section 203 of the bill, insert after ``submit to the 
     Committee on Homeland Security'' the following: ``and the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure''.
       Strike the proposed subsection (d), as proposed to be added 
     by section 208 of the bill, and insert the following:
       ``(d) Authority of Assistant Secretary for Legislative 
     Affairs Over Departmental Counterparts.--The Secretary for 
     the Department shall ensure that the Assistant Secretary for 
     Legislative Affairs has adequate authority or the Assistant 
     Secretary's respective counterparts in component agencies of 
     the Department to ensure that such component agencies adhere 
     to the laws, rules, and regulations to which the Department 
     is subject and the departmental policies that the Assistant 
     Secretary for Legislative Affairs is responsible for 
     implementing.''.
       In section 301(c), after ``submit to the Committee on 
     Homeland Security'' the following: ``and the Committee on 
     Oversight and Government Reform''.
       In the proposed subsection (d)(1), as proposed to be added 
     by section 302 of the bill, strike ``and the Committee on 
     Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate'' 
     and insert ``, the Committee on Homeland Security and 
     Governmental Affairs of the Senate, and other appropriate 
     congressional committees''.
       In the proposed subsection (d)(2), as proposed to be added 
     by section 302 of the bill, strike ``and the Committee on 
     Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate'' 
     and insert ``, the Committee on Homeland Security and 
     Governmental Affairs of the Senate, and other appropriate 
     congressional committees''.
       In the proposed section 104(a), as proposed to be added by 
     section 304 of the bill, insert after ``congressional 
     homeland security committees'' the following: ``and other 
     appropriate congressional committees''.
       Strike section 305 and conform the table of contents 
     accordingly.
       In section 402, strike subsection (b) and insert the 
     following:
       (b) Appointment Authority.--The Secretary (acting through 
     the Chief Procurement Officer) may, for the purpose of 
     supporting the Department's acquisition capabilities and 
     enhancing contract management throughout the Department, 
     appoint annuitants to positions in procurement offices in 
     accordance with succeeding provisions of this section, except 
     that no authority under this subsection shall be available 
     unless the Secretary provides to Congress a certification 
     that--
       (1) the Secretary has submitted a request under section 
     8344(i) or 8468(f) of title 5, United States Code, on or 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act, with respect to 
     positions in procurement offices;
       (2) the request described in paragraph (1) was properly 
     filed; and
       (3) the Office of Personnel Management has not responded to 
     the request described in paragraph (1), by either approving, 
     denying, or seeking more information regarding such request, 
     within 90 days after the date on which such request was 
     filed.
       In section 402, strike subsection (f) and insert the 
     following:
       (f) Termination of Authority.--Effective 2 years after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act--
       (1) all authority to make appointments under subsection (b) 
     shall cease to be available; and
       (2) all exemptions under subsection (c) shall cease to be 
     effective.
       In the proposed section 837(b), as proposed to be added by 
     section 403 of the bill, after ``require the contractor to 
     submit'' insert the following: ``past performance''.
       In section 406, strike subsection (c) and redesignate 
     subsection (d) as subsection (c).
       In the proposed section 839(b), as proposed to be added by 
     section 407 of the bill, strike paragraph (4).
       In the proposed section 839(d), strike ``the micro-purchase 
     threshold (as defined in section 32 of the Office of Federal 
     Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 428))'' and insert ``the 
     simplified acquisition threshold (as defined in section 4 of 
     the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 
     403))''.
       In the proposed section 839, as proposed to be added by 
     section 407 of the bill, strike subsection (f).
       In section 408(c), strike ``the Department of Homeland 
     Security shall consider'' and insert ``The Secretary of 
     Homeland Security shall consider, among the other factors the 
     Secretary deems relevant,''.
       Strike section 409, redesignate section 410 as section 409, 
     and conform the table of contents accordingly.
       In section 409, as so redesignated, strike ``The 
     Secretary'' and insert ``Consistent with any applicable law, 
     the Secretary''.
       In section 501, redesignate subsections (g) and (h) as 
     subsections (h) and (i), respectively, and insert after 
     subsection (f), the following new subsection (g):
       (g) Comptroller General Report.--The Comptroller General 
     shall conduct a comprehensive review of the retirement system 
     for law enforcement officers employed by the Federal 
     Government. The review shall include all employees 
     categorized as law enforcement officers for purposes of 
     retirement and any other Federal employee performing law 
     enforcement officer duties not so categorized. In carrying 
     out the review, the Comptroller General shall review 
     legislative proposals introduced over the 10 years preceding 
     the date of the enactment of this Act that are relevant to 
     the issue law enforcement retirement and consult with law 
     enforcement agencies and law enforcement employee 
     representatives. Not later than August 1, 2007, the 
     Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a report on the 
     findings of such review. The report shall include each of the 
     following:
       (1) An assessment of the reasons and goals for the 
     establishment of the separate retirement system for law 
     enforcement officers, as defined in section 8331 of title 5, 
     United States Code, including the need for young and vigorous 
     law enforcement officers, and whether such reasons and goals 
     are currently appropriate.
       (2) An assessment of the more recent reasons given for 
     including additional groups of employees in such system, 
     including recruitment and retention, and whether such reasons 
     and goals are currently appropriate.
       (3) A determination as to whether the system is achieving 
     the goals in (1) and (2).
       (4) A summary of potential alternatives to the system, 
     including increased use of bonuses, increased pay, and 
     raising the mandatory retirement age, and a recommendation as 
     to which alternatives would best meet each goal defined in 
     (1) and (2), including legislative recommendations if 
     necessary.
       (5) A recommendation for the definition of law enforcement 
     officer.
       (6) An detailed review of the current system including its 
     mandatory retirement age and benefit accrual.
       (7) A recommendation as to whether the law enforcement 
     officer category should be

[[Page 11848]]

     made at the employee, function and duty, job classification, 
     agency or other level, and by whom.
       (8) Any other relevant information.
       In section 502(a) by inserting after ``transmit to the 
     Committee on Homeland Security'' the following: ``and the 
     Committee on Oversight and Government Reform''.
       In section 504, strike subsection (b) and insert the 
     following:
       (b) Appointment Authority.--The Secretary (acting through 
     the Commissioner of the United States Customs and Border 
     Protection) may, for the purpose of accelerating the ability 
     of the CBP to secure the borders of the United States, 
     appoint annuitants to positions in the CBP in accordance with 
     succeeding provisions of this section, except that no 
     authority under this subsection shall be available unless the 
     Secretary provides to Congress a certification that--
       (1) the Secretary has submitted a request under section 
     8344(i) or 8468(f) of title 5, United States Code, on or 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act, with respect to 
     positions in the CBP;
       (2) the request described in paragraph (1) was properly 
     filed; and
       (3) the Office of Personnel Management has not responded to 
     the request described in paragraph (1), by either approving, 
     denying, or seeking more information regarding such request, 
     within 90 days after the date on which such request was 
     filed.
       In section 504, strike subsection (f) and insert the 
     following:
       (f) Termination of Authority.--Effective 2 years after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act--
       (1) all authority to make appointments under subsection (b) 
     shall cease to be available; and
       (2) all exemptions under subsection (c) shall cease to be 
     effective.
       In section 505(a), insert after ``statutes'' the following: 
     `` and Office of Personnel Management Regulations and 
     Guidelines''.
       Strike section 507, redesignate sections 508 through 513 as 
     sections 507 through 512, respectively, and conform the table 
     of contents accordingly.
       In the proposed section 708, as proposed to be added by 
     section 508 of the bill, as so redesignated, strike 
     subsection (b)(1) and insert the following:
       ``(1) have responsibility for overall Department-wide 
     security activities, including issuing and confiscating 
     credentials, controlling access to and disposing of 
     classified and sensitive but unclassified materials, 
     controlling access to sensitive areas and Secured 
     Compartmentalized Intelligence Facilities, and communicating 
     with other government agencies on the status of security 
     clearances and security clearance applications;''.
       Strike section 606 and conform the table of contents 
     accordingly.
       In the proposed section 226(c)(1)(A), as proposed to be 
     added by section 701 of the bill, strike ``to monitor 
     critical information infrastructure'' and insert ``for 
     ongoing activities to identify threats to critical 
     information infrastructure''.
       In section 702(c)(2), insert after ``Standards and 
     Technology,'' the following: ``the Department of Commerce,''.
       Insert after section 702 the following (and conform the 
     table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 703. COLLABORATION.

       In carrying out this title, the Assistant Secretary of 
     Homeland Security for Cybersecurity and Communications shall 
     collaborate with any Federal entity that, under law, has 
     authority over the activities set forth in this title.
       In section 804(b)(1), strike ``maximum''.
       In the proposed section 319(e), as proposed to be added by 
     section 805 of the bill, after ``the project may'' insert the 
     following: ``, subject to the availability of appropriations 
     for such purpose,''.
       Insert at the end of title VIII the following (and conform 
     the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 806. AVAILABILITY OF TESTING FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT.

       (a) Authority.--The Under Secretary for Science and 
     Technology or his designee may make available to any person 
     or entity, for an appropriate fee, the services of any 
     Department of Homeland Security owned and operated center, or 
     other testing facility for the testing of materials, 
     equipment, models, computer software, and other items 
     designed to advance the homeland security mission.
       (b) Interference With Federal Programs.--The Under 
     Secretary for Science and Technology shall ensure that the 
     testing of materiel and other items not owned by the 
     Government shall not cause government personnel or other 
     government resources to be diverted from scheduled tests of 
     Government materiel or otherwise interfere with Government 
     mission requirements.
       (c) Confidentiality of Test Results.--The results of tests 
     performed with services made available under subsection (a) 
     and any associated data provided by the person or entity for 
     the conduct of such tests are trade secrets or commercial or 
     financial information that is privileged or confidential 
     within the meaning of section 552b(4) of title 5, United 
     States Code, and may not be disclosed outside the Federal 
     Government without the consent of the person or entity for 
     whom the tests are performed.
       (d) Fees.--The fees for exercising the authorities under 
     subsection (a) may not exceed the amount necessary to recoup 
     the direct and indirect costs involved, such as direct costs 
     of utilities, contractor support, and salaries of personnel 
     that are incurred by the United States to provide for the 
     testing.
       (e) Use of Fees.--The fees for exercising the authorities 
     under subsection (a) shall be credited to the appropriations 
     or other funds of the Directorate of Science and Technology.
       (f) Operational Plan.--Not later than 90 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary for 
     Science and Technology shall submit to Congress a report 
     detailing a plan for operating a program that would allow any 
     person or entity, for an appropriate feel, to use any center 
     or testing facility owned and operated by the Department of 
     Homeland Security for testing of materials, equipment, 
     models, computer software, and other items designed to 
     advance the homeland security mission. The plan shall 
     include--
       (1) a list of the facilities and equipment that could be 
     made available to such persons or entities;
       (2) a five-year budget plan, including the costs for 
     facility construction, staff training, contract and legal 
     fees, equipment maintenance and operation, and any incidental 
     costs associated with the program;
       (3) A five-year estimate of the number of users and fees to 
     be collected;
       (4) a list of criteria for selecting private-sector users 
     from a pool of applicants, including any special requirements 
     for foreign applicants; and
       (5) an assessment of the effect the program would have on 
     the ability of a center or testing facility to meet its 
     obligations under other Federal programs.
       (g) Report to Congress.--The Under Secretary for Science 
     and Technology shall submit to Congress an annual report 
     containing a list of the centers and testing facilities that 
     have collected fees under this section, the amount of fees 
     collected, a brief description of each partnership formed 
     under this section, and the purpose for which the testing was 
     conducted.
       (h) GAO.--Not later than two years after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit 
     to Congress an assessment of the implementation of this 
     section.
       Strike section 904 and insert the following (and conform 
     the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 904. REPORT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STUDENT AND 
                   EXCHANGE VISITOR PROGRAM.

       Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit to the 
     appropriate congressional committees a report to update the 
     Government Accountability Office report of June 18, 2004, 
     GAO-04-690, on the Student and Exchange Visitor Program 
     (referred to in this section as ``SEVP'') and specifically 
     the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (referred 
     to in this section as ``SEVIS''). The report shall include 
     the following information:
       (1) The rate of compliance with the current SEVIS 
     requirements by program sponsors and educational 
     institutions, including non-academic institutions authorized 
     to admit students under SEVIS.
       (2) Whether there are differences in compliance rates among 
     different types and sizes of institutions participating in 
     SEVIS.
       (3) Whether SEVIS adequately ensures that each covered 
     foreign student or exchange visitor in nonimmigrant status 
     is, in fact, actively participating in the program for which 
     admission to the United States was granted.
       (4) Whether SEVIS includes data fields to ensure that each 
     covered foreign student or exchange visitor in nonimmigrant 
     status is meeting minimum academic or program standards and 
     that major courses of study are recorded, especially those 
     that may be of national security concern.
       (5) Whether the Secretary of Homeland Security provides 
     adequate access, training, and technical support to 
     authorized users from the sponsoring programs and educational 
     institutions in which covered foreign students and exchange 
     visitors in a nonimmigrant status are enrolled.
       (6) Whether each sponsoring program or educational 
     institution participating in SEVP has designated enough 
     authorized users to comply with SEVIS requirements.
       (7) Whether authorized users at program sponsors or 
     educational institutions are adequately vetted and trained.
       (8) Whether the fees collected are adequate to support 
     SEVIS.
       (9) Whether there any new authorities, capabilities, or 
     resources needed for SEVP and SEVIS to fully perform.
       Strike section 906, redesignate section 907 as section 906, 
     and conform the table of contents accordingly.
       In section 1003, strike subsection (b) and insert the 
     following:
       (b) Appointment Authority.--The Secretary (acting through 
     the Assistant Secretary for Information Analysis) may, for 
     the purpose of accelerating the ability of the IA to perform 
     its statutory duties under the Homeland Security Act of 2002, 
     appoint annuitants to positions in the IA in accordance

[[Page 11849]]

     with succeeding provisions of this section, except that no 
     authority under this subsection shall be available unless the 
     Secretary provides to Congress a certification that--
       (1) the Secretary has submitted a request under section 
     8344(i) or 8468(f) of title 5, United States Code, on or 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act, with respect to 
     positions in the IA;
       (2) the request described in paragraph (1) was properly 
     filed; and
       (3) the Office of Personnel Management has not responded to 
     the request described in paragraph (1), by either approving, 
     denying, or seeking more information regarding such request, 
     within 90 days after the date on which such request was 
     filed.
       In section 1003, strike subsection (f) and insert the 
     following:
       (f) Termination of Authority.--Effective 2 years after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act--
       (1) all authority to make appointments under subsection (b) 
     shall cease to be available; and
       (2) all exemptions under subsection (c) shall cease to be 
     effective.
       Strike section 1101, redesignate sections 1102 through 1108 
     as sections 1101 through 1107, respectively, and conform the 
     table of contents accordingly.
       Strike sections 1109, 1110, 1111, redesignate sections 1112 
     through 1119 as sections 1108 through 1115, respectively, and 
     amend the table of contents accordingly.
       Strike section 1120, redesignate section 1121 as section 
     1116, and amend the table of contents accordingly.
       Strike section 1102, as so redesignated, and insert the 
     following:

     SEC. 1102. CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE STUDY.

       The Secretary of Homeland Security shall work with the 
     Center for Risk and Economic Analysis of Terrorism Events 
     (CREATE), led by the University of Southern California, to 
     evaluate the feasibility and practicality of creating further 
     incentives for private sector stakeholders to share protected 
     critical infrastructure information with the Department for 
     homeland security and other purposes.
       In section 1103, as so redesignated, strike ``and 
     immigration status databases''.
       In the heading for section 1103, as so redesignated, strike 
     ``AND IMMIGRATION REVIEW''.
       In the proposed section 890A(a), as proposed to be added by 
     section 1106 of the bill, as so redesignated, insert after 
     paragraph (2) the following:
       ``(3) Excluded programs.--This section shall not apply to 
     or otherwise affect any grant issued under the Robert T. 
     Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) or the Federal Fire Prevention and 
     Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2201 et seq.).''.
       Add at the end of title XI the following (and conform the 
     table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 1117. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT ON CRITICAL 
                   INFRASTRUCTURE.

       (a) Requirement.--The Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall conduct a study to--
       (1) determine the extent to which architecture, 
     engineering, surveying, and mapping activities related to the 
     critical infrastructure of the United States are being sent 
     to offshore locations;
       (2) assess whether any vulnerabilities or threats exist 
     with respect to terrorism; and
       (3) recommend policies, regulations, or legislation, as 
     appropriate, that may be necessary to protect the national 
     and homeland security interests of the United States.
       (b) Consultation.--In carrying out the study authorized by 
     this section, the Comptroller General shall consult with--
       (1) such other agencies of the Government of the United 
     States as are appropriate; and
       (2) national organizations representing the architecture, 
     engineering, surveying, and mapping professions.
       (c) Report.--The Comptroller General shall submit to the 
     Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure, Energy and 
     Commerce, and Homeland Security of the House of 
     Representatives, and to the Senate, by not later than 6 
     months after the date of the enactment of this Act a report 
     on the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the 
     study under this section.
       (d) Definitions.--As used in this section--
       (1) each of the terms ``architectural'', ``engineering'', 
     ``surveying'', and ``mapping''--
       (A) subject to subparagraph (B), has the same meaning such 
     term has under section 1102 of title 40, United States Code; 
     and
       (B) includes services performed by professionals such as 
     surveyors, photogrammetrists, hydrographers, geodesists, or 
     cartographers in the collection, storage, retrieval, or 
     dissemination of graphical or digital data to depict natural 
     or man-made physical features, phenomena, or boundaries of 
     the earth and any information related to such data, including 
     any such data that comprises the processing of a survey, map, 
     chart, geographic information system, remotely sensed image 
     or data, or aerial photograph; and
       (2) the term ``critical infrastructure''--
       (A) means systems and assets, whether physical or virtual, 
     so vital to the United States that the incapacity or 
     destruction of such systems and assets would have a 
     debilitating impact on security, national economic security, 
     national public health or safety, or any combination of those 
     matters; and
       (B) includes the basic facilities, structures, and 
     installations needed for the functioning of a community or 
     society, including transportation and communications systems, 
     water and power lines, power plants, and the built 
     environment of private and public institutions of the United 
     States.
       Add at the end of title XI the following (and conform the 
     table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 1118. IMPROVING THE NEXUS AND FAST REGISTERED TRAVELER 
                   PROGRAMS.

       (a) Merging Requirements of Nexus and Fast.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     merge the procedures for the programs described in subsection 
     (j) into a single procedure, with common eligibility and 
     security screening requirements, enrollment processes, and 
     sanctions regimes.
       (2) Specific requirements.--In carrying out paragraph (1), 
     the Secretary shall ensure that the procedures for the 
     programs known as ``NEXUS Highway'', ``NEXUS Marine'', and 
     ``NEXUS Air'' are integrated into such a single procedure.
       (b) Integrating Nexus and Fast Information Systems.--The 
     Secretary of Homeland Security shall integrate all databases 
     and information systems for the programs described in 
     subsection (j) in a manner that will permit any 
     identification card issued to a participant to operate in all 
     locations where a program described in such subsection is 
     operating.
       (c) Creation of Nexus Convertible Lanes.--In order to 
     expand the NEXUS program described in subsection (j)(2) to 
     major northern border crossings, the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security, in consultation with appropriate representatives of 
     the Government of Canada, shall equip not fewer than six new 
     northern border crossings with NEXUS technology.
       (d) Creation of Remote Enrollment Centers.--The Secretary 
     of Homeland Security, in consultation with appropriate 
     representatives of the Government of Canada, shall create a 
     minimum of two remote enrollment centers for the programs 
     described in subsection (j). Such a remote enrollment center 
     shall be established at each of the border crossings 
     described in subsection (c).
       (e) Creation of Mobile Enrollment Centers.--The Secretary 
     of Homeland Security, in consultation with appropriate 
     representatives of the Government of Canada, shall create a 
     minimum of two mobile enrollment centers for the programs 
     described in subsection (j). Such mobile enrollment centers 
     shall be used to accept and process applications in areas 
     currently underserved by such programs. The Secretary shall 
     work with State and local authorities in determining the 
     locations of such mobile enrollment centers.
       (f) On-Line Application Process.--The Secretary of Homeland 
     Security shall design an on-line application process for the 
     programs described in subsection (j). Such process shall 
     permit individuals to securely submit their applications on-
     line and schedule a security interview at the nearest 
     enrollment center.
       (g) Promoting Enrollment.--
       (1) Creating incentives for enrollment.--In order to 
     encourage applications for the programs described in 
     subsection (j), the Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     develop a plan to admit participants in an amount that is as 
     inexpensive as possible per card issued for each of such 
     programs.
       (2) Customer service phone number.--In order to provide 
     potential applicants with timely information for the programs 
     described in subsection (j), the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security shall create a customer service telephone number for 
     such programs.
       (3) Publicity campaign.--The Secretary shall carry out a 
     program to educate the public regarding the benefits of the 
     programs described in subsection (j).
       (h) Travel Document for Travel Into United States.--For 
     purposes of the plan required under section 7209(b) of the 
     Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, an 
     identification card issued to a participant in a program 
     described in subsection (j) shall be considered a document 
     sufficient on its own when produced to denote identity and 
     citizenship for travel into the United States by United 
     States citizens and by categories of individuals for whom 
     documentation requirements have previously been waived under 
     section 212(d)(4)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
     (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)(B)).
       (i) Report.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security 
     shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees (as 
     defined in section 2 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 
     U.S.C. 101)) a report on the implementation of subsections 
     (a) through (g).
       (j) Programs.--The programs described in this subsection 
     are the following:
       (1) The FAST program authorized under subpart B of title IV 
     of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1411 et seq.).
       (2) The NEXUS program authorized under section 286(q) of 
     the Immigration and Nationality Act (U.S.C. 1356(q)).

[[Page 11850]]



     SEC. 1119. TRAVEL DOCUMENTS.

       (a) Travel to Canada and Mexico.--Section 7209(b) of the 
     Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
       ``(3) Pass card infrastructure.--The Secretary of Homeland 
     Security shall conduct not less than one trial on the 
     usability, reliability, and effectiveness of the technology 
     that the Secretary determines appropriate to implement the 
     documentary requirements of this subsection. The Secretary 
     may not issue a final rule implementing the requirements of 
     this subsection until such time as the Secretary has 
     submitted to the appropriate congressional committees (as 
     defined in section 2 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 
     U.S.C. 101)) a report on the results and outcome of such 
     trial or trials. The report shall include data and evidence 
     that demonstrates that the technology utilized in such trial 
     or trials is operationally superior to other alternative 
     technology infrastructures.
       ``(4) Flexible implementation period.--In order to provide 
     flexibility upon implementation of the plan developed under 
     paragraph (1), the Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     establish a special procedure to permit an individual who 
     does not possess a passport or other document, or combination 
     of documents, as required under paragraph (1), but who the 
     Secretary determines to be a citizen of the United States, to 
     re-enter the United States at an international land or 
     maritime border of the United States. The special procedure 
     referred to in this paragraph shall terminate on the date 
     that is 180 days after the date of the implementation of the 
     plan described in paragraph (1)(A).
       ``(5) Special rule for certain minors.--Except as provided 
     in paragraph (6), citizens of the United States or Canada who 
     are less than 16 years of age shall not be required to 
     present to an immigration officer a passport or other 
     document, or combination of documents, as required under 
     paragraph (1), when returning or traveling to the United 
     States from Canada, Mexico, Bermuda, or the Carribean at any 
     port of entry along the international land or maritime border 
     of the United States.
       ``(6) Special rule for certain student minors traveling as 
     part of an authorized and supervised school trip.--
     Notwithstanding the special rule described in paragraph (5), 
     the Secretary of Homeland Security is authorized to consider 
     expanding the special rule for certain minors described in 
     such paragraph to a citizen of the United States or Canada 
     who is less than 19 years of age but is 16 years of age or 
     older and who is traveling between the United States and 
     Canada at any port of entry along the international or 
     maritime border between the two countries if such citizen is 
     so traveling as a student as part of an authorized and 
     supervised school trip.
       ``(7) Public outreach.--To promote travel and trade across 
     the United States border, the Secretary of Homeland Security 
     shall develop a public communications plan to promote to 
     United States citizens, representatives of the travel and 
     trade industries, and local government officials information 
     relating to the implementation of this subsection. The 
     Secretary of Homeland Security shall coordinate with 
     representatives of the travel and trade industries in the 
     development of such public communications plan.
       ``(8) Cost-benefit analysis.--The Secretary of Homeland 
     Security shall prepare an extensive regulatory impact 
     analysis that is fully compliant with Executive Order 12866 
     and Office of Management and Budget Circular A-4 for an 
     economically significant regulatory action before publishing 
     a rule with respect to the implementation of the requirements 
     of this subsection.''.
       (b) Report.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act and every 120 days thereafter, the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to the 
     appropriate congressional committees (as defined in section 2 
     of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101)) a report 
     on the implementation of paragraphs (3) through (8) of 
     section 7209(b) of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism 
     Prevention Act of 2004.
       Strike title XII and conform the table of contents 
     accordingly.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 382, the gentleman 
from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mississippi.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, my manager's amendment strengthens H.R. 1684 by adding 
some things and taking out some others. Ninety-two percent of the 
provisions that I am seeking to have removed were items offered for the 
first time in the committee's mark-up. They were good ideas, but we 
haven't had the benefit of giving these novel ideas the full 
consideration they deserve.
  After the mark-up, I had the opportunity to speak with a number of 
chairs who had a shared interest in these items. Collaboration is a 
wonderful thing, Mr. Chairman. In some cases, they offered suggestions 
to make the bill better. Those changes are contained in this amendment. 
In other cases, they offered to work together on these issues and other 
legislative vehicles. So, as a testament to the collaborative spirit of 
this majority, I offer this amendment.
  I am well aware that some of my Republican colleagues are complaining 
about what my amendment does. I am reminded of what LBJ once told an 
audience: ``Perhaps you can help. Don't just complain, develop a better 
doctrine.'' This Congress, we're developing a better doctrine.
  It is important to look at this milestone in context. Let me provide 
a little lesson on the Committee of Homeland Security's history.
  In 2003, the year the committee was created, then Chairman Chris Cox 
failed to put forth an authorization bill.
  In 2004, Chairman Cox scheduled his first markup of an authorization 
bill but barely got half the committee Republicans to show up. 
Outnumbered by Democrats, the markup was cancelled after opening 
statements. Even if the markup had proceeded, it was still 2 months 
late, as the appropriations bill had passed a month earlier.
  In 2005, Mr. Cox was still a day late and a dollar short in getting 
the bill passed through the House. The appropriation bill still came 
first.
  In 2006, the committee took two steps back. My colleague from New 
York didn't even mark up an authorization bill until late July, a month 
and a half after the appropriation bill passed the House. His bill 
never even went to the floor for a vote. Come on, now. We've all 
learned Legislation 101, that Congress first authorizes, then 
appropriates.
  Today, under Democratic leadership, we are considering a timely, 
thorough and thoughtful authorization bill that has the input of 
numerous committees.
  This is the earliest a Homeland Security authorization bill has ever 
appeared on the floor. It also bears mention that it is on the floor 
before the appropriations bill. America is not interested in 
congressional infighting but in getting the job done. We are doing just 
that.
  I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support my 
manager's amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to the 
manager's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. KING of New York. I recognize myself for as much time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I understand the chairman's dilemma. The bottom line is 
we did pass a very strong bill out of committee. And let's just again 
delineate some of those provisions which were unanimously agreed to and 
have been agreed to: Language on maritime alien smuggling; language 
which would have monitored the activities of foreign students and 
visitors; biometric identification of illegal aliens; expanding the use 
of interoperability grants, which is so much needed by our local law 
enforcement and first responders; authorizing the Secret Service and 
its functions; increasing the authorizations of the Secret Service to 
provide security to Presidential candidates; prohibiting grants to 
universities which bar Coast Guard recruiters. It eliminated a report 
on Secret Service training facilities. And, as Mr. McCaul said before, 
it eliminated the provision providing for a National Bio and Agro 
Defense facility.
  Also, more significantly, if we go to the heart of the 9/11 
Commission, it eliminated the language calling for a sense of Congress 
that the homeland security be in fact the focal point and the central 
point when it comes to legislation on homeland security and also when 
it comes to overseeing the Department of Homeland Security.
  Now the chairman has gone back in history to talk about what happened 
in the past. The fact is, this is a growing

[[Page 11851]]

committee, and we all have to make decisions. We have to make value-
based decisions. We have to make prudent decisions.
  I was the chairman last year; and I did not go for an authorization 
bill early on in the year because I thought it was important, in 
establishing the jurisdiction of the committee, that we go forward and 
adopt the most far-reaching port security bill ever enacted and, in 
doing so, confronting jurisdictional impediments thrown at us by other 
committees.
  We did that. It was a long, hard fight. It began early spring and 
wasn't concluded until September, but we did conclude it. And not only 
did we enact solid legislation, but, as importantly, we were able to 
establish our jurisdiction at the expense of competing committees. And 
I say that not as part of a turf battle, but if we are going to have 
real homeland security, we have to have a real Homeland Security 
Committee.
  Similarly, when it came to restructuring FEMA, which was a mammoth 
fight here in the Congress last year, we stood strong through May and 
June and July and into September; and when the final product came out, 
it again enhanced the jurisdiction of the Homeland Security Committee.
  Also, on the issue of chemical plant security, we fought hard on 
that. We fought hard for our language, and we got it in. It was part of 
the omnibus appropriation, and that language again established the 
Committee on Homeland Security as the primary committee on that issue.

                              {time}  1445

  So these were all solid steps forward made by the committee.
  Now, I understand the chairman's dilemma. I am not here to take cheap 
shots. I realize how tough this can be. But my point is, when we had 
such a solid vote, a unanimous vote coming out of committee, I think 
more should have been done in resisting the efforts of the other 
chairmen and of the Democratic leadership to strip so many of the 
provisions. Almost half of the provisions have been stripped out 
altogether or dramatically modified. So I do see this, unfortunately, 
as a step backwards. Certainly not a step forward.
  I realize the significance of getting the authorization bill done. I 
am not trying to minimize that. But the fact is, considering the 
progress we made last year in such significant areas as port security, 
chemical plant security and the restructuring of FEMA, we could have 
done better on this authorization bill this year.
  Again, I will have to urge a ``no'' vote on this manager's amendment 
because of the damage which I believe it does to the Committee on 
Homeland Security. And also, Mr. Chairman, to send a signal, not to 
Chairman Thompson but to the leadership of the House, that we did come 
forward on our side. We were willing to stand up to the administration 
and increase spending by over $2 billion more than the administration 
requests and wants. We did that unanimously on the Republican side. We 
also again worked with Chairman Thompson on the language that he 
wanted. He worked with us. So we did make that effort at the committee 
level.
  I just wish the same level of bipartisan cooperation was shown at the 
leadership level of the House of Representatives rather than having the 
minority excluded altogether, which was never done at the committee 
level, either under myself or now under Chairman Thompson.
  Mr. Chairman, with that, I will rest on the eloquence of my previous 
remarks and yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I insert for the Record a 
letter from the chairman and ranking minority member of the Judiciary 
Committee in support of our legislation but reserving, under rule X, 
the jurisdiction of their committee.

                                         House of Representatives,


                                   Committee on the Judiciary,

                                      Washington, DC, May 1, 2007.
     Hon. Bennie G. Thompson,
     Chairman,
     Hon. Peter T. King,
     Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Homeland Security, 
         House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Thompson and Mr. King: We are writing regarding 
     the bill H.R. 1684, the ``Department of Homeland Security 
     authorization act for Fiscal Year 2008.'' We understand that 
     the Committee on Homeland Security intends to report this 
     bill in the next few days, and that it may come to the House 
     floor as early as next week.
       H.R. 1684 is an ambitious bill that contains a number of 
     provisions that fall within the Rule X jurisdiction of the 
     Committee on the Judiciary rather than the Committee on 
     Homeland Security. Our Committee was not furnished the text 
     of the bill as it will be reported until almost a month after 
     your Committee approved it, and was not consulted regarding 
     any of the provisions in question. As there is not adequate 
     time now for our Committee to take a referral of this bill 
     and appropriately consider these provisions, we would request 
     that they be removed from the bill before its consideration 
     on the floor.
       The provisions in question include: section 305; section 
     507; section 901; section 904; section 906; section 1104; new 
     subsection (d)(2) of 6 U.S.C. 455 as it would be added by 
     section 1109; section 1110; section 1111; section 1120; 
     section 1121; and all of title XII.
       Thank you for your attention to our request.
           Sincerely,
                                                 John Conyers, Jr.
                                                         Chairman.
                                                      Lamar Smith,
                                          Ranking Minority Member.

  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the 
ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Mississippi 
will be postponed.


          Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Tom Davis of Virginia

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 
printed in House Report 110-136.
  Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 2 offered by Mr. Tom Davis of Virginia:
       Strike section 407.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 382, the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment will remove from this legislation a very 
dangerous and costly restriction on the government's ability to obtain 
protective gear, apparel and other materials that are critical to those 
charged with protecting our Nation.
  Is 9/11 already such a distant memory that we are willing to 
sacrifice the safety of those protecting our country in order to delude 
ourselves into believing we are saving jobs? Are there Members of this 
House who believe we should not be doing everything we can to make sure 
that our Customs Officers, our Border Patrol agents, our Air Marshals 
have the best protective gear, the best bulletproof vest, the best body 
armor available in the world when we go out and purchase this for them? 
Wherever it is made, we want them to have the best.
  Make no mistake about it, a vote against my amendment is a vote to 
jeopardize the safety and security of the agents and officers 
protecting our country by restricting the sourcing and our ability to 
buy the best available around the globe.
  What is more, section 407 limits competition, which ends up driving 
up taxpayer costs, and it limits the Homeland Security Department's 
ability to obtain the best products to protect our homeland.
  Members should not be conned into thinking that domestic source 
restrictions, ``Buy America,'' save jobs. Time

[[Page 11852]]

and time again, these shortsighted restrictions have ended up costing 
us more American jobs than they save, as our trading partners then take 
retaliatory action against American-made goods and services that we 
sell abroad. We should remember that we are only 4 percent of the 
world's consumers here in the United States. Pretty soon, with these 
kind of source restrictions on what America can buy and sell, we are 
going to be selling only to ourselves.
  Restrictions such as these jeopardize national security; do not make 
available to us the most modern technologies, the best body armor, the 
best bulletproof vests in the world. The highest technology available 
in the world for ID cards could be eliminated under this amendment. It 
hamstrings market competition by eliminating who can bid on these 
contracts, it leads to higher prices and lower quality goods and 
services, and it wastes precious taxpayer dollars.
  I think by supporting homeland security, you should support our 
amendment to strike section 407.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from North Carolina is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment because section 
407 that my colleague wants to strike has one purpose, to strengthen 
our national security. It is a commonsense provision that says that 
sensitive materials, uniforms, protective gear, badges and 
identification cards should be produced and shipped only within the 
United States of America. It has a flexible provision that contains an 
exception for when materials are not available domestically of an 
acceptable quality or at market value. As long as the Secretary 
certifies that national security will be protected, he may do it. So if 
one of our allies makes an item of protective gear that is not 
available domestically, it will still be available to the Department.
  Additionally, it does not apply to purchases made outside the United 
States for use outside the United States. So if an agent or officer is 
overseas and needs a bulletproof vest or other piece of protective gear 
quickly, he or she can get it.
  Our national security could be compromised if terrorists, smugglers 
or other would-be counterfeiters had ready access to the Department of 
Homeland Security's uniforms, protective gear or ID cards.
  This amendment would remove or reduce the opportunity for terrorists 
or others with bad intentions to pose as Homeland Security officials or 
officers. It is not uncommon for cargo to be hijacked or lost, 
particularly in the staging areas at our Nation's ports-of-entry.
  The potential theft of uniforms, badges or ID cards, by the truckload 
it could be, poses a clear threat. In years past, there have been 
several reports on the overseas manufacture of uniforms for the 
Department of Homeland Security's operational components. Indeed, most 
Americans would be shocked to learn that Border Patrol uniforms have 
been manufactured in Mexico and other countries. This ongoing practice 
raises legitimate security concerns, not only at the border but all 
across this country, which is what this provision addresses.
  For that reason, I oppose this amendment, and I urge my colleagues to 
join me in rejecting it.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, one of the difficulties in our procurement system today 
in government is that we try to reach too many competing policy goals 
in the way that we buy goods and services. When we use taxpayer 
dollars, when we take hard-earned money from our taxpayers and the 
government needs a good or a service, our purpose ought to be to buy 
the best good and the best service and get the best value for our tax 
dollars, period. That is what we do when we buy our cars. That is what 
we do when we add additions to our home. The government should be 
subject to the same rules and regulations.
  In this particular case, there is no safety issue over where these 
materials may be made. That is a subterfuge. What this is is an attempt 
to try to protect American jobs in some ways, and of course, the end 
result is you lose them in others.
  But by reaching these competing goals in procurement through set-
asides, where we exclude parts of the economic system from bidding, 
this ``Buy America'' language is another effort another effort to 
restrict competition. We end up driving up costs for the taxpayers. We 
don't make use, many times, of the best technology. Although there is 
catch-all language in this and other ``Buy America'' language that 
allows the Secretary to certify certain things, in point of fact, they 
don't work. They are reluctant to do that, and you end up many times 
with higher-costing goods of the same order. That reduces our ability 
to use taxpayer dollars wisely.
  In a global economy, American taxpayers should get the benefit of the 
best value when we go out and use our dollars to buy goods and 
services. Restrictions on competition like this means that tax dollars 
are limited in their choices. Fewer choices means inferior products. It 
means greater costs. It means less competition. Section 407 of this 
legislation restricts competition, and it should be restricted.
  My amendment is endorsed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, by the 
Information Technology Association of America as well. I think every 
taxpayer ought to be concerned about how their tax dollars are spent.
  Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman from North Carolina and his 
position in the area that he represents, but I just don't think these 
restrictive source provisions over the long term are in the American 
taxpayers' interests.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I admire the gentleman, but I think, in this case, we 
are talking about an issue that transcends the issues we are talking 
about. We are talking about the safety and security of American people.
  I believe in trade. I have supported it. But there are issues that 
are paramount to the security and protection of the American people. I 
think this is one where it goes to the badges and the uniforms that our 
men and women use to protect Americans' interests.
  So, with that, I would urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the 
noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia 
will be postponed.


                Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Langevin

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 
printed in House Report 110-136.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 3 offered by Mr. Langevin:
       At the end of title XI add the following:

     SEC. __. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH NATIONAL ORGANIZATION ON 
                   DISABILITY TO CARRY OUT EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS 
                   INITIATIVE.

       The Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management 
     Agency, in coordination with the Disability Coordinator of 
     the Department of Homeland Security and the Office for Civil 
     Rights and Civil Liberties of

[[Page 11853]]

     the Department, shall use amounts authorized under section 
     101 to enter into a cooperative agreement with the National 
     Organization on Disability to carry out the Emergency 
     Preparedness Initiative of such organization.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 382, the gentleman 
from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Rhode Island.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I am certainly grateful for the opportunity to offer 
this amendment, which would simply direct officials at the Department 
of Homeland Security to work with the National Organization on 
Disability on their Emergency Preparedness Initiative.
  We all know that people with disabilities face unique challenges in 
their daily lives. They range from mobility impairment to 
communications barriers, and they can become substantial obstacles in 
an emergency.
  As we take steps to make our Nation a safer place, it is critical to 
keep in mind that if we neglect issues of accessibility and inclusion 
in our planning, the problems that surface later will be more 
complicated, more expensive and, in some cases, could cost people their 
lives.
  After September 11, the National Organization on Disability, or NOD, 
as it is known, showed tremendous leadership by launching the Emergency 
Preparedness Initiative, or EPI, to ensure that emergency managers 
address disability concerns and that people with disabilities are 
included at all levels of emergency preparedness, planning, response 
and recovery. Indeed, this time of planning serves all those with 
special needs, not just individuals with disabilities but also the 
elderly and other vulnerable populations.
  Now, with support from Congress and many in the disability community, 
EPI has become firmly established within the emergency management 
industry and among disability advocate organizations.
  In my capacity as cochair of the Bipartisan Disabilities Caucus, I 
have worked closely with representatives from EPI to highlight these 
issues here on Capitol Hill and throughout the Nation. The work they 
are doing is a critical component to our national security, and I am 
proud to support their efforts.

                              {time}  1500

  As we work to keep all Americans safe and secure, I urge my 
colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in 
opposition, although I will not oppose the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from New York 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I urge its adoption, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for his 
sensitivity and his foresight.
  Again, I urge my colleagues to look seriously at this amendment. 
Again, it is vital that we think ahead of time at what people with 
special needs may need in an emergency situation. So many people who 
lost their lives, both on 9/11 and as a result of Hurricane Katrina, 
were people with disabilities in particular. The tragic loss of life 
across the board was incredibly sad.
  We want to make sure where we can prevent loss of life we do so and 
made sure that those with special needs are not forgotten and their 
needs are a forethought rather than an afterthought. That is what EPI 
is all about. I commend them for their hard work in putting together 
their emergency preparedness plans and working with emergency 
management officials to include the needs of people with disabilities. 
I urge adoption of the amendment.
  Having no further speakers, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of 
my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Andrews

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 
printed in House Report 110-136.
  Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Andrews:
       Insert after section 513 the following new section:

     SEC. 514. TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT OF VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS 
                   AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL PERSONNEL PROHIBITED.

       (a) Termination Prohibited.--
       (1) In general.--No employee may be terminated, demoted, or 
     in any other manner discriminated against in the terms and 
     conditions of employment because such employee is absent from 
     or late to the employee's employment for the purpose of 
     serving as a volunteer firefighter or providing volunteer 
     emergency medical services as part of a response to an 
     emergency or major disaster.
       (2) Deployment.--The prohibition in paragraph (1) shall 
     apply to an employee serving as a volunteer firefighter or 
     providing volunteer emergency medical services if such 
     employee--
       (A) is specifically deployed to respond to the emergency or 
     major disaster in accordance with a coordinated national 
     deployment system such as the Emergency Management Assistance 
     Compact or a pre-existing mutual aid agreement; or
       (B) is a volunteer firefighter who--
       (i) is a member of a qualified volunteer fire department 
     that is located in the State in which the emergency or major 
     disaster occurred;
       (ii) is not a member of a qualified fire department that 
     has a mutual aid agreement with a community affected by such 
     emergency or major disaster; and
       (iii) has been deployed by the emergency management agency 
     of such State to respond to such emergency or major disaster.
       (3) Limitations.--The prohibition in paragraph (1) shall 
     not apply to an employee who--
       (A) is absent from the employee's employment for the 
     purpose described in paragraph (1) for more than 14 days per 
     calendar year;
       (B) responds to the emergency or major disaster without 
     being officially deployed as described in paragraph (2); or
       (C) fails to provide the written verification described in 
     paragraph (5) within a reasonable period of time.
       (4) Withholding of pay.--An employer may reduce an 
     employee's regular pay for any time that the employee is 
     absent from the employee's employment for the purpose 
     described in paragraph (1).
       (5) Verification.--An employer may require an employee to 
     provide a written verification from the official of the 
     Federal Emergency Management Agency supervising the Federal 
     response to the emergency or major disaster or a local or 
     State official managing the local or State response to the 
     emergency or major disaster that states--
       (A) the employee responded to the emergency or major 
     disaster in an official capacity; and
       (B) the schedule and dates of the employee's participation 
     in such response.
       (6) Reasonable notice required.--An employee who may be 
     absent from or late to the employee's employment for the 
     purpose described in paragraph (1) shall--
       (A) make a reasonable effort to notify the employee's 
     employer of such absence; and
       (B) continue to provide reasonable notifications over the 
     course of such absence.
       (b) Right of Action.--
       (1) Right of action.--An individual who has been 
     terminated, demoted, or in any other manner discriminated 
     against in the terms and conditions of employment in 
     violation of the prohibition described in subsection (a) may 
     bring, in a district court of the United States of 
     appropriate jurisdiction, a civil action against individual's 
     employer seeking--
       (A) reinstatement of the individual's former employment;
       (B) payment of back wages;
       (C) reinstatement of benefits; and
       (D) if the employment granted seniority rights, 
     reinstatement of seniority rights.
       (2) Limitation.--The individual shall commence a civil 
     action under this section not later than 1 year after the 
     date of the violation of the prohibition described in 
     subsection (a).
       (c) Study and Report.--
       (1) Study.--The Secretary of Labor shall conduct a study on 
     the impact that the requirements of this section could have 
     on the employers of volunteer firefighters or individuals who 
     provide volunteer emergency medical services and who may be 
     called on to respond to an emergency or major disaster.

[[Page 11854]]

       (2) Report.--Not later than 12 months after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor shall submit a 
     report of the study conducted under paragraph (1) to the 
     Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions and the 
     Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship of the 
     Senate and the Committee on Education and the Workforce and 
     the Committee on Small Business of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (d) Definitions.--In this section--
       (1) the term ``emergency'' has the meaning given such term 
     in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and 
     Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122);
       (2) the term ``major disaster'' has the meanings given such 
     term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 
     and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122);
       (3) the term ``qualified volunteer fire department'' has 
     the meaning given such term in section 150(e) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986;
       (4) the term ``volunteer emergency medical services'' means 
     emergency medical services performed on a voluntary basis for 
     a fire department or other emergency organization; and
       (5) the term ``volunteer firefighter'' means an individual 
     who is a member in good standing of a qualified volunteer 
     fire department.
       Amend the table of contents by adding, after the item 
     relating to section 513, the following new item:

Sec. 514. Termination of employment of volunteer firefighters and 
              emergency medical personnel prohibited.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 382, the gentleman 
from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank those involved in this bipartisan 
effort for a commonsense idea. I would especially like to thank my new 
colleague, Ms. Shea-Porter from New Hampshire, who has shown great 
interest in the volunteer fire service; Mr. Pascrell from New Jersey, 
who wrote the FIRE Act; the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle); and 
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Kuhl), who has long been interested in 
this issue. I would also like to thank Mr. Matthew Riggins of my office 
for his participation on this matter.
  Here is what the bill says. If a volunteer firefighter or EMT is 
called to a national emergency as declared under the relevant statutes 
and that volunteer responds to a call, not self-volunteers but responds 
to a call, that person should have protection when they go back to his 
or her job. They shouldn't be fired, they shouldn't be disciplined, 
they shouldn't have their pay docked for up to 14 days in each calendar 
year.
  The service that is performed by our volunteer firefighters and EMTs 
across this country is enormous and enormously important. We believe 
that none of those individuals should have the burden of suffering 
problems at work because of their voluntary spirit. Again, one cannot 
self-volunteer. Again, the emergency must be sufficient in scope for a 
Presidential declaration.
  We believe this makes good sense, and it is a good bipartisan issue, 
and I urge Members of the House to vote ``yes.''
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, 
even though I am not opposed to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from New York 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle).
  Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member from New York 
for yielding me this time.
  I rise in strong support of this amendment. I believe its passage is 
important to ensure that our local first responders are prepared for 
major disasters.
  Over the years, volunteer firefighters and EMS personnel have 
repeatedly answered the call of duty. In fact, my home State of 
Delaware, which is served almost entirely by volunteer firefighters, 
sent 37 ambulances to New York City on September 11. In the wake of 
Hurricane Katrina, as fires spread throughout New Orleans and survivors 
struggled to find dry land, volunteer firefighters and EMS personnel 
rose to the occasion and proved to be crucial in the massive rescue 
operation.
  Unfortunately, under current law, volunteer firefighters and EMS 
personnel are not protected from termination or demotion by their 
employer when they respond to national disasters.
  As a result, just a few weeks after Hurricane Katrina destroyed the 
gulf coast, a group of us got together here on Capitol Hill to craft 
this legislation which will make certain that our volunteer responders 
are more readily available to assist local authorities in major 
disasters.
  This proposal is similar to the job protections given to members of 
the National Guard who serve their country on the battlefield, and it 
will go a long way in enhancing our ability to respond to catastrophic 
events and save lives.
  Mr. Chairman, last Congress, we collected over 70 bipartisan co-
sponsors on this legislation. I appreciate the support of the gentleman 
from New Jersey and his introduction of this and all the others who 
have been involved. I urge Members to support this amendment.
  Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I now yield to a new Member who has shown 
a real affinity for and commitment to these issues in her short time 
here, the gentlewoman from New Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter) for 2 
minutes.
  Ms. SHEA-PORTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise as a proud sponsor of this 
amendment, the Volunteer Firefighter and EMS Personnel Protection Act. 
The bill will provide job protection to the brave men and women who 
volunteer their time as firefighters and EMTs during national 
disasters.
  Some volunteers put their lives on hold to help others. Others 
literally put their lives on the line.
  When Hurricane Katrina hit in 2005, our Nation's emergency services 
were overcome by the immensity of the disaster. Almost 400,000 people 
were displaced from their homes. The images of this tragedy will be 
seared in our minds forever.
  In the aftermath of the hurricane, I went down to do a very small 
part to help those, and I saw the devastation. But in a disaster of the 
magnitude of Hurricane Katrina or the recent tragedy in Kansas, we need 
more than an extra pair of hands. When our Nation's emergency services 
are overwhelmed, we need highly skilled professionals who can step in 
to provide such help.
  More than 800,000 skilled first responders volunteer for such 
emergencies each year. Volunteer firefighters and emergency medical 
technicians, EMTs, are a critical part of this effort. They are 
fighting fires and providing essential medical care. They are saving 
lives.
  But, under current law, when volunteer firefighters and EMTs return 
to their homes, there is no guarantee that they will still have their 
jobs. They can do the right thing for America and find out they are 
left out in the cold. In effect, when disaster strikes, these first 
responders are forced sometimes to decide between helping others and 
having the security of knowing they still have their jobs when they go 
home.
  This amendment would change all that. It would guarantee volunteer 
firefighters and EMT the right to keep their job when they respond in a 
national emergency and allow them to volunteer 14 days per calendar 
year when they act in an official capacity.
  Our Nation absolutely needs highly skilled professionals who are 
willing to leave their homes and their jobs to help save lives. 
Congress can help support our volunteer firefighters and EMTs. I urge 
my colleagues to vote ``yes.''
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), the author of the FIRE Act.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I thank Mr. Andrews and the ranking

[[Page 11855]]

member, my good friend from New York.
  In the book of Isaiah, chapter 6, the question is very specific: Who 
shall I send?
  Volunteers come forward all the time. They come through for us every 
time. They come through. Three thousand of them came through after 9/
11. Thousands and thousands came through after Hurricane Katrina. As we 
go to the very heart and soul of this great Nation, let us serve these 
volunteers. Let us serve.
  I have spoken with these volunteers not only in New Jersey but 
throughout this great Nation. They always respond after these 
tragedies, and I said ``thank you.'' We are saying thank you, and we 
mean it. We are willing to put it in a law, a law of this Nation.
  I am honored to co-sponsor this and join with Rob Andrews, who has 
been a tremendous leader in public safety issues throughout the United 
States, and Carol Shea-Porter and Mr. Castle, real friends of the fire 
service.
  How we respond to catastrophes shows the character of our Nation. How 
we treat our emergency responders shows who we are as people. We take 
them for granted. Let's be honest. Congress must do everything in its 
power to help those who help others.
  We have heard about the 14 days a year as they carry out their 
duties. But, simply put, volunteers should not be penalized when they 
are off protecting lives of their fellow citizens. No volunteer should 
be terminated or demoted or discriminated against in their regular job 
when they are dealing with emergencies and providing vital assistance 
to the American family.
  This amendment ensures that the major contributions of volunteers can 
and will continue. It ensures that those who have the calling to help 
will not have to worry about the ramifications of their nobility. It is 
a wise amendment. It is a bipartisan amendment. I ask for the full 
support of everyone on this floor
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KING of New York. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. ANDREWS. I did want to thank personally thank the ranking member 
of the full committee, who is co-Chair of the Congressional Fire 
Service Caucus, for his support and the chairman of the full committee, 
Mr. Thompson, for his enthusiastic support for this amendment.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Andrews), Mr. Pascrell, Mr. Castle, and all of the others 
in the House who support this amendment. Because 9/11 changed our lives 
in many ways, but one of the most dramatic ways is that it made our 
first responders and our volunteer firefighters front-line warriors in 
the war against Islamic terrorism. That is why it is essential that 
they receive the same protections as our warriors fighting overseas. 
They are at the front line and deserve our support. I am proud to 
support the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
  The amendment was agreed to.


        Amendment No. 5 Offered by Ms. Corrine Brown of Florida

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 
printed in House Report 110-136.
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 5 offered by Ms. Corrine Brown of Florida:
       Insert at the end of title XI the following:

     SEC. 1122. CONSIDERATION OF TOURISM IN AWARDING URBAN AREA 
                   SECURITY INITIATIVE GRANTS.

       In awarding grants under the Urban Area Security 
     Initiative, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall take 
     into consideration the number of tourists that have visited 
     an urban area in the two years preceding the year during 
     which the Secretary awards the grant.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 382, the 
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown) and a Member opposed each 
will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Florida.
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to urge my 
colleagues to support my amendment.
  This amendment would direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to 
consider the number of tourists who have visited an urban area in the 2 
years preceding the year the Secretary awards Urban Area Security 
Initiative Grants.
  Urban Area Security Initiative Grants are designed to fund activities 
to prevent, protect against, and respond to terrorist attacks and 
catastrophic events in designated high-threat, high-risk urban areas.

                              {time}  1515

  The Department of Homeland Security uses a number of factors to 
allocate funds and assess risks, including special events, theme parks 
and population. However, a critical element is missing from their list 
of factors. Homeland Security has yet to explicitly account for 
tourists as a risk factor when allocating Urban Area Security 
Initiative Grants.
  A recent Congressional Research Service report says due to the 
potential for mass casualty incidents and economic damage from 
terrorist attacks, tourist locations are at risk. In addition to the 
location of tourist destinations, the tourist population could possibly 
be at risk, too.
  Heavy tourist areas present a twofold incentive for terrorists: a 
high probability of a sizeable number of casualties and damage to the 
economy. A 2005 study by the Rand Corporation found that terrorists 
have an increased concentration on civilian targets and an ongoing 
emphasis on economic attacks.
  Most experts agree the evidence shows that terrorists are seeking to 
kill as many people as possible. The high number of tourists who are 
staying at any given time in tourist magnets such as Orlando or Miami 
significantly increases the potential consequence of an attack in those 
cities. Congress cannot let terrorists exploit this gap in our grant 
funding.
  In addition, the economic danger resulting from a terrorist attack on 
a tourist location is another incentive. Terrorist attacks depress 
consumer confidence and spending that hurts businesses, undermines 
investment and our overall economic condition. Congress must ensure 
that the Department of Homeland Security considers this incentive for 
terrorists when distributing Urban Area Security Initiative Grants.
  In past years, concerns were raised that the Department did not 
adequately account for the large tourist population in cities such as 
Las Vegas, Orlando and San Diego when they calculated the risk for our 
Nation's urban areas. In fact, in fiscal year 2006, Las Vegas and San 
Diego were left off the list of the top 35 cities that were eligible to 
receive grants under the UASI program.
  The Department of Homeland Security has been very secretive regarding 
how Urban Area Security Initiative Grants are allocated. A recent 
General Accountability Office report stated, ``DHS has not provided us 
documentation on what analyses were conducted, how they were conducted, 
how they were used and how they affected the final risk assessment 
scores and relative rankings.''
  The Department of Homeland Security has made claims that they 
consider tourist populations, but the problem is Homeland Security has 
not been specific regarding risk assessment methods or providing 
Congress adequate information to prove that they have done so. Although 
the Department of Homeland Security made administrative changes to the 
fiscal year 2007 grant process to account for tourist populations, my 
amendment would clearly codify this change.
  I urge my colleagues to adopt this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page 11856]]


  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in 
opposition.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I 
may consume, and I would say at the outset that my understanding is 
that this is already factored in by the Department of Homeland 
Security, the whole issue of tourism. Also, similar language is 
included in H.R. 1 and S. 4 which currently are ready to go to 
conference.
  Having said that, no harm, no foul. I have no objection to the 
language. I think it is unnecessary, but having said that, I will not 
oppose the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have?
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from Florida has 1 minute 
remaining.
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remaining 
time to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Al Green).
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman, and I 
commend her for bringing this amendment to the floor.
  This amendment is going to accord the kind of protection that 
tourists deserve and should receive in high-density areas. It is odd 
that Las Vegas, Orlando and San Diego were not adequately considered. 
We are talking about $746.9 million that will be allocated to 46 urban 
areas.
  I strongly support the amendment. It will provide the protection that 
tourists richly deserve.
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I am asking that the 
ranking member on the other side yield 1 minute to Ms. Berkley because 
I think I am out of time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York (Mr. King) has 
already yielded back the balance of his time. The gentlewoman from 
Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown) does have 28 seconds remaining.
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 28 seconds to the 
gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Berkley).
  Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank Ms. Brown for introducing this.
  This is essential that we provide the necessary resources for those 
areas in our country that have a high number of tourists. Las Vegas is 
home to 1.9 million residents, but at any given time, we have over 
300,000 visitors.
  Now, God forbid anything should happen, they are not in the formula, 
but they are the ones that are going to be most needy because they are 
away from home. They do not know how to access facilities. We need to 
provide for these people, and I suspect that that is the case at all 
tourist destinations.
  I rise in support of this amendment, which ensures that we take 
tourism into account when calculating a city's homeland security risk 
level. The Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) addresses the homeland 
security needs of high-threat, high-density Urban Areas, and assists 
them in preventing, and recovering from acts of terrorism.
  Las Vegas, my district, is a rapidly growing city, but it is even 
bigger when you add the 40 million tourists who visit our city every 
year. These tourists are particularly vulnerable because they are far 
from home and aren't familiar with our city. Al Qaeda and other 
terrorist groups have made it clear they intend to attack our most 
vulnerable populations, where they can do the most harm to our economy 
and our confidence.
  The areas Mrs. Brown and I represent are dependent on tourism and the 
dollars they bring in. It is therefore essential that tourists be 
included in any risk assessments for homeland security.
  And yet, last year, Las Vegas was left off the list entirely due to 
various data errors and thoughtless criteria. Over 100,000 tourists per 
day were completely overlooked. I worked with the Department of 
Homeland Security to ensure that Las Vegas was ultimately included, but 
there is no guarantee it couldn't happen again.
  Thankfully, this amendment would make sure that--by law--tourism 
would be taken into account when calculating risk. It's the right thing 
to do, it's the smart thing to do and it's the safe thing to do. I urge 
support for this amendment and thank the gentlewoman from Florida.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. All time for debate has expired on this 
amendment.
  The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Castle

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6 
printed in House Report 110-136.
  Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 6 offered by Mr. Castle
       At the end of title XI, insert the following:

     SEC. __. STUDY OF FOREIGN RAIL SECURITY PRACTICES.

       The Secretary shall--
       (1) study select foreign rail security practices, and the 
     cost and feasibility of implementing selected best practices 
     that are not currently used in the United States, including--
       (A) implementing covert testing processes to evaluate the 
     effectiveness of rail system security personnel;
       (B) implementing practices used by foreign rail operators 
     that integrate security into infrastructure design;
       (C) implementing random searches or screening of passengers 
     and their baggage; and
       (D) establishing and maintaining an information 
     clearinghouse on existing and emergency security technologies 
     and security best practices used in the passenger rail 
     industry both in the United States and abroad; and
       (2) report the results of the study, together with any 
     recommendations that the Secretary may have for implementing 
     covert testing, practices for integrating security in 
     infrastructure design, random searches or screenings, and an 
     information clearinghouse to the Committee on Homeland 
     Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate, the 
     Committee on Homeland Security of the House of 
     Representatives, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation of the Senate, and the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 382, the gentleman 
from Delaware (Mr. Castle) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Delaware.
  Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I rise to offer a critical amendment to this legislation before us 
today.
  Yesterday, it was revealed that several individuals operating out of 
the Philadelphia area had plotted to attack key installations in the 
Northeast, including Fort Dix, New Jersey, and Dover Air Force Base in 
my home State of Delaware. While the tremendous work of our law 
enforcement community prevented these attacks from taking place, this 
case serves as a clear reminder that terrorists are intent on attacking 
us wherever we are vulnerable.
  One of our greatest vulnerabilities remains our mass transit systems, 
which move millions of people every year. In fact, terrorists are 
increasingly targeting rail and transit systems throughout the world, 
and the recent bombings in India, London and Madrid are clear evidence 
of this dangerous trend.
  While the concept of rail security is relatively new here at home, 
security officials in Europe and Asia have decades of experience with 
terrorist attacks, and I have long believed in the importance of 
leveraging this experience to improve our own system.
  In 2003, I asked the General Accountability Office to undertake an 
in-depth study of foreign rail security practices. Over the course of 
several months, the GAO team visited 13 different foreign rail systems, 
and its subsequent report identified several innovative measures to 
secure rail systems, many of which are currently being used in the 
United States.
  Most significantly, however, the GAO report identified four important 
foreign rail security practices that are not currently being used to 
any great extent in the United States.
  First, the report found that other nations had improved the vigilance 
of their security staff by performing daily

[[Page 11857]]

unannounced events, known as covert testing, to gauge responsiveness to 
incidents such as suspicious packages or open emergency doors.
  Similarly, two of the 13 foreign operators interviewed by GAO also 
reported success using some form of random screening to search 
passengers and baggage for bombs and other suspicious materials. This 
practice has been used sporadically in the U.S., including in New York 
City following the 2005 London bombings, but it has never been 
implemented for any continuous period of time.
  The GAO also noted that many foreign governments maintain a national 
clearinghouse on security technologies and best practices. Such a 
government-sponsored database would allow rail operators to have one 
central source of information on the merits of rail security 
technology, like chemical sensors and surveillance equipment.
  Finally, while GAO noted that the Department of Transportation has 
taken steps to encourage rail operators to consider security when 
renovating or constructing facilities, many foreign operators are still 
far more advanced when it comes to incorporating aspects of security 
into infrastructure design.
  For example, this photograph of the London Underground demonstrates 
several security upgrades, such as vending machines with sloped tops to 
reduce the likelihood of a bomb being placed there, clear trash bins 
and netting throughout the station to prevent objects from being left 
in recessed areas. As you can see, the London stations are also 
designed to provide security staff with clear lines of sight to all 
areas of the station, including underneath benches and ticket machines.
  The British Government has praised these measures for deterring 
terrorist attacks, and in one incident, their security cameras recorded 
IRA terrorists attempting to place an explosive device inside a 
station. According to London officials, due to infrastructure design 
improvements, the terrorists were deterred when they could not find a 
suitable location to hide the device inside the station.
  While the GAO acknowledged that deploying these four practices in 
this country may be difficult, in fact random screening may pose many 
challenges, it is clear that these foreign security techniques deserve 
greater consideration.
  Therefore, the amendment I am offering today would take steps to 
improve rail and transit security by requiring the Secretary of 
Homeland Security to study the cost and feasibility of implementing 
these practices and submit a report making recommendations to the 
Homeland Security and Transportation Committees within 1 year of 
enactment.
  Mr. Chairman, recent attacks on rail and transit throughout the world 
underscore the importance of acting now to upgrade security here at 
home. My amendment will make certain that we are knowledgable and 
consider all available options when it comes to ensuring the safety and 
security of our rail system.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in 
opposition to the amendment. However, I do not oppose the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown).
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the 
amendment.
  As chair of the Rail Subcommittee, we have done initial studies, and 
we have found that we are celebrating the anniversary of the bombing in 
Madrid, the bombing in London, the bombing in India, and yet the 
administration has not come forward with recommendations as to how to 
secure our rail system, how to implement a program to safeguard that we 
do not have this kind of attack on homeland security here in the United 
States.
  So I strongly support the amendment
  March 11th marked the third anniversary of the train bombings in 
Madrid, and we have seen terrorist attacks in London and India in each 
year since. Yet the Bush Administration and past Republican leadership 
has done little to protect our Nation's freight rail or the millions of 
passengers that use public transportation every day.
  The anniversary of this terrible tragedy again raises the serious 
question of whether we are prepared in this country for a similar 
attack. Sadly, that answer is a resounding NO. But with the passage of 
this legislation, we will start investing the money that is needed to 
safeguard our rail and transit infrastructure from those who wish us 
harm.
  The Federal Government has focused most of its attention on enhancing 
security in the airline industry and has largely ignored the needs of 
public transit agencies and railroads. Yet, worldwide, more terrorist 
attacks have occurred on transit and rail systems since 9/11 than on 
airlines.
  In 2006, we dedicated $4.7 billion to the airline industry for 
security, while 6,000 public transit agencies and one national 
passenger railroad, Amtrak, had to share a meager $136 million total 
for security upgrades. Nothing was provided to the 532 freight 
railroads for security upgrades.
  Fortunately for the traveling public, the legislation on the floor 
today will address the security challenges facing our Nation's transit 
and rail systems.
  This bill requires comprehensive security plans; strengthens 
whistleblower protections for workers; mandates security training; 
improves communication and intelligence sharing; authorizes a higher-
level of grant funding for Amtrak, the freight railroads, and public 
transportation providers; and provides funding for life-safety 
improvements to the tunnels in New York, Boston, and Washington, DC.
  Most importantly, it helps make sure our communities, our First 
Responders, and our transit and rail workers are safe and secure. And 
it does all of this through a coordinated effort between the Department 
of Homeland Security and the Department of Transportation, the agency 
that has the expertise to deal with transportation safety issues.
  We are way behind many other countries in protecting our transit and 
rail systems, but with the new leadership in Congress and this 
comprehensive legislation, we have a plan that will protect millions of 
transit and rail passengers and the communities through which freight 
railroads operate from harm, while keeping the trains running on time.
  I encourage all my colleagues to do the right thing for your 
constituents and support this long overdue rail and transit security 
legislation.
  Mr. CASTLE. How much time do I have left, Mr. Chairman?
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Delaware has 1 minute 
remaining.
  Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, let me just close by thanking those on the 
other side who have spoken in favor of the amendment and for their 
support of it. I truly believe that this is a small but a very 
significant step perhaps in preventing terrorism in mass transit in the 
United States. It is the reason I hope we all can support it.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I would like to, if I may, extend, my greatest appreciation to Mr. 
Castle for bringing this amendment to the floor. It is very thoughtful, 
and it is very timely.
  Mr. Speaker, we must learn from the experiences of others. This 
amendment will provide us an opportunity to study the best practices 
available and to benefit from these practices by implementing policies 
and procedures within our country that will help to secure our rail 
system.
  This is a good amendment, and I strongly urge my colleagues to 
support it. And again, I commend the gentleman for bringing it to the 
floor.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. All time for debate on the amendment having 
expired, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Delaware (Mr. Castle).
  The amendment was agreed to.

                              {time}  1530


           Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Hastings of Florida

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7 
printed in House Report 110-136.

[[Page 11858]]


  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 7 offered by Mr. Hastings of Florida:
       At the end of title XI, insert the following:

     SEC. 2211. FEMA RECOVERY OFFICE IN FLORIDA.

       (a) Establishment.--To provide eligible Federal assistance 
     to individuals and State, local, and tribal governments 
     affected by Hurricanes Charley, Frances, Ivan, Jeanne, Wilma, 
     Tropical Storm Bonnie, and other future declared emergencies 
     and major disasters, in a customer-focused, expeditious, 
     effective, and consistent manner, the Administrator of the 
     Federal Emergency Management Administration shall maintain a 
     recovery office in the State of Florida for a period of not 
     less than three years after the date of enactment of this 
     Act.
       (b) Structure.--The recovery office shall have an executive 
     director, appointed by the Administrator, who possesses a 
     demonstrated ability and knowledge of emergency management 
     and homeland security, and a senior management team.
       (c) Responsibilities.--The executive director, in 
     coordination with State, local, and tribal governments, non-
     profit organizations, including disaster relief 
     organizations, shall--
       (1) work cooperatively with local governments to mitigate 
     the impact of a declared emergency or major disaster; and
       (2) provide assistance in a timely and effective manner to 
     residents of Florida and other States as determined 
     appropriate by the Administrator for recovery from previous 
     and future declared emergencies and major disasters.
       (d) Staffing.--Staffing levels of the recovery office shall 
     be commensurate with the current and projected workload as 
     determined by the Administrator.
       (e) Performance Measures.--To ensure that the recovery 
     office is meeting its objectives, the Administrator shall 
     identify performance measures that are specific, measurable, 
     achievable, relevant, and timed, including--
       (1) public assistance program project worksheet completion 
     rates; and
       (2) the length of time taken to reimburse recipients for 
     public assistance.
       (f) Evaluation.--The Administrator shall evaluate the 
     effectiveness and efficiency of the recovery office in the 
     State of Florida in meeting the requirements of this section. 
     Not later than three years after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, the Administrator shall report to the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives on whether continuing to operate such office 
     is necessary.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 382, the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Hastings) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I rise today to offer an amendment to the Department of Homeland 
Security bill which would establish in statute, a FEMA Office of Long-
Term Recovery in Florida for a period of no less than 3 years.
  FEMA initially opened an Office of Long-Term Recovery in Florida 
following the devastating 2004 hurricane season, which left my home 
State in peril following the landfall of four Category 3 or greater 
hurricanes. The results have been incredible, and it hasn't only been 
residents of my State who benefited from the work that FEMA is doing in 
Florida and elsewhere.
  Since it was created, the office has reduced response times to 
disasters and helped to mitigate the impact of future storms.
  In the first months of the office's existence, FEMA officials were 
successful in more than doubling public assistance reimbursements from 
$1 billion to $2 billion. Moreover, the full-time recovery staff, well 
versed in State and Federal and local policies, was able to rectify the 
mistakes made by previous emergency management teams.
  The permanencies of the staff and the relationships they have 
cultivated with local governments, nonprofits, communities and Federal 
officials have reduced FEMA's response time to disasters, saving 
taxpayers' dollars and lives, while reducing confusion.
  From this office, more mitigation funds have gone out to recipients 
than ever before in FEMA's history. The office also closed down two 
large-scale housing missions, something never accomplished in all of 
FEMA's history. Florida's Office of Long-Term Recovery has made FEMA 
more of a customer-oriented business, where citizens and government 
alike are better served by more responsive managing.
  Congress has already established long-term recovery offices in 
Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama and Texas, and rightly so. It would be 
appropriate that we officially establish a similar one in Florida to 
serve the State and region. Footnote there, there is a storm off the 
east coast that has now been named, which is indicative of the fact 
that we can expect not only Florida but the areas mentioned to continue 
to have this problem. It is the eve of hurricane season; and the House, 
acting today, could not be more timely.
  Before I conclude, I want to thank the chairman and ranking member of 
the Homeland Security Committee and the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Subcommittee. I would like to especially thank, 
personally, Mr. Thompson of Mississippi and Mr. Oberstar and my good 
friend from New York (Mr. King) and Mr. Mica for their help on this 
amendment. They all know the great benefit that this office provides 
for the State of Florida and the entire region, and I ask for my 
colleagues' support.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I commend the gentleman from 
Florida. I support his amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8 
printed in House Report 110-136.


                 Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Stupak

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9 
printed in House Report 110-136.
  Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 9 offered by Mr. Stupak:
       At the end of title IX, add the following:

     SEC. 908. REPORT ON INTEGRATED BORDER ENFORCEMENT TEAM 
                   INITIATIVE.

       Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit a 
     report to the Congress on the status of the Integrated Border 
     Enforcement Team (IBET) initiative. The report should include 
     an analysis of current resources allocated to IBETs, an 
     evaluation of progress made since the inception of the 
     program, and recommendations as to the level of resources 
     that would be required to improve the program's effectiveness 
     in the future.
       In the table of contents, insert after the item relating to 
     section 907 the following:

Sec. 908. Report on Integrated Border Enforcement Team initiative.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 382, the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. STUPAK. I want to thank Chairman Thompson and the Homeland 
Security Committee for their work on this bill. I think it's an 
excellent piece of legislation and will go a long way towards making 
the Department of Homeland Security more accountable and effective.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise to ask my colleagues to support my amendment to 
H.R. 1684, which would require the Secretary to conduct a study on ways 
to improve the effectiveness of the Integrated Border Enforcement Team, 
or IBET program. IBETs are already one of the border's great security 
success stories of the post-9/11 era. The program grew out of a history 
of informal cooperation between American and Canadian border protection 
officers.

[[Page 11859]]

  In December 2001, the IBET concept was made official as part of the 
Smart Border Declaration signed by the United States and Canada. As a 
former law enforcement officer, I know that access to timely, reliable 
information is one of the most effective, important tools an officer 
can have. IBETs allow law enforcement officers from along our northern 
border to collaborate in real time and share information and expertise 
with their Canadian counterparts.
  This strategy has paid off along our northern border. In the past 
year alone, IBETs helped to break up several organized criminal 
operations that were smuggling drugs and people into the United States, 
leading to dozens of arrests and confiscation of millions of dollars in 
drug and cash.
  I have seen firsthand how important this program is to local border 
protection officers. One of the 15 current IBET sites is in my district 
in Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan.
  The IBET consists of area law enforcement officers from the United 
States and Canada, including cooperation with county and local police 
officers, Customs and Border Protection agents, the Coast Guard and 
Canadian border officers and police officers. The officers involved in 
this IBET have been unanimous in telling me how much IBET has improved 
their ability to police the border and make our homeland more safe and 
secure.
  I am concerned, however, that the potential of the IBET has not been 
fully realized at Sault Ste. Marie and other sites. The Department of 
Homeland Security has not assigned a full-time officer to monitor and 
lead the IBET, instead defining IBET as ``collateral duty'' for an 
officer who already has a full-time job. The previous IBET chairperson 
was transferred to a post in Miami, leading to a loss of valuable 
institutional knowledge.
  Finally, there is no specific funding line for IBET activities; and 
direct funding has been minimal, in fact, only $5,000 for 15 IBETs for 
2006.
  My amendment would require the Secretary to report to Congress on the 
resources currently being devoted to the IBET program. In addition, the 
amendment asks the Secretary to make recommendations to Congress on how 
to make the IBET program even more effective in the future. It is clear 
that when the IBET program is fully funded and staffed it can be a 
powerful tool for law enforcement. My amendment is intended to improve 
accountability and oversight for the IBET program and ensure that all 
IBETs, not just some, receive the resources they need to be truly 
effective.
  Once again, I would like to thank the chairman and the ranking member 
for their outstanding work on this bill and for their willingness to 
support this amendment. I urge support of the Stupak amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I recognize myself for as much 
time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to commend the gentleman from Michigan for this 
amendment and for bringing his law enforcement expertise to the 
Congress in so many ways for so many years. I urge adoption of the 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. STUPAK. I appreciate the comments from Mr. King, and I yield the 
remaining time to Mr. Green, my friend from Texas.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. How much time do I have, Mr. Chairman?
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 1\1/
2\ minutes.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I would like to commend Mr. 
Stupak for this outstanding amendment. This amendment is one of our 
best bets; and, hence, I think IBET is a great way to style the team 
that will be working.
  This amendment will accord us an opportunity to have Customs 
enforcement, the Coast Guard, the immigration authority, Border Patrol, 
the Royal Canadian Mounted Police all work together to help thwart and 
hopefully end any human trafficking, drug trafficking, and cross-border 
terrorist activities that may take place.
  This is a very thoughtful amendment. It provides an opportunity for 
our countries, Canada and the United States, to work together in the 
best effort possible to secure the northern border
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak).
  The amendment was agreed to.


         Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Hastings of Washington

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10 
printed in House Report 110-136.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 10 offered by Mr. Hastings of Washington
       In section 801, amend paragraph (7) to read as follows:
       (7) a plan for leveraging the expertise of the National 
     Laboratories, the process for allocating funding to the 
     National Laboratories, and a plan for fulfilling existing 
     National Laboratory infrastructure commitments to maintain 
     current capabilities and meet mission needs; and

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 382, the gentleman 
from Washington (Mr. Hastings) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would 
require the Department of Homeland Security, or DHS, to report on a 
plan for fulfilling its infrastructure commitments at our national 
laboratories.
  I want to thank my two Washington State colleagues, Mr. Norman Dicks 
and Mr. Dave Reichert, a member of the committee, for their co-
sponsorship of this amendment.
  This amendment ensures that national laboratory infrastructure 
changes will not interrupt security programs needed by DHS.
  When DHS was established, it inherited facilities around the Nation 
and from other agencies, some of which were aging and in need of 
repair. These capital facilities include critical components involving 
radiological and nuclear countermeasures, threat vulnerabilities and 
threat assessments, as well as work on biological and chemical 
countermeasures. In order for DHS to carry out its mission to protect 
our Nation, it is critical that the Department have the facilities that 
it needs.
  At the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, PNNL, in Washington 
State, critical DHS research and development will be transferred to new 
facilities as existing labs are torn down for environmental cleanup 
activities at the 300 Area of the Hanford Federal nuclear site in my 
district.
  In 2006, the DHS Under Secretary for Science and Technology signed an 
MOU with the Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security 
Administration that established funding commitments for the agencies 
involved in the transition of PNNL's facilities from the 300 Area to 
new lab space. This MOU underscores DHS's critical role in making sure 
national security related work at PNNL will not be interrupted by this 
transition.
  This amendment I have introduced is not only important to the State 
of Washington and my constituents but also to our overall national 
security. I understand that this has been accepted on both sides, and I 
want to thank Chairman Thompson and Ranking Member King for agreeing to 
agree with that.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I would like to claim time in 
opposition to the amendment. However, I do not oppose it and, in fact, 
would like to say a word, if I might, in support of it.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.

[[Page 11860]]


  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. I think this is an appropriate amendment that 
Mr. Hastings has brought to the attention of the House. It is most 
appropriate that we have a strategic plan that would provide some 
leverage such that the expertise of the national lab can be properly 
utilized.
  This is a national plan. It is one that is most appropriate, and we 
support it. We commend the gentleman for bringing it to the attention 
of the House.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the ranking 
member from New York.
  Mr. KING of New York. I thank the gentleman from Washington for 
yielding. I commend him for this amendment, and I strongly urge its 
adoption
  Mr. DICKS. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to join the gentleman from 
Washington, Mr. Hastings, in amending H.R. 1684 to emphasize what we 
believe is an important connection between our national research 
laboratories and the Department of Homeland Security, DHS.
  Our amendment would simply insert in the bill a requirement of the 
Department to report to Congress about its plan for ``leveraging the 
expertise of the National Laboratories, the process for allocating 
funding to the National Laboratories and . . . for fulfilling existing 
National Laboratory infrastructure commitments to maintain current 
capabilities and mission needs.''
  I believe the national labs represent a tremendously valuable 
resource that can and should be used by the Department of Homeland 
Security to protect our population. With expertise it biological, 
chemical, radiological and nuclear science and technology and computer 
and information science the national laboratories--those controlled by 
the Homeland Security Department as well as the laboratories under the 
jurisdiction ofl the Department of Energy--can play a vital role in the 
prevention, deterrence, detection, mitigation and attribution of the 
use of weapons of mass destruction. DHS has already initiated a series 
of cooperative arrangements with several of the labs recognizing the 
great synergy that is possible through combined research efforts.
  Congressman Hastings and I have been working on one such cooperative 
program with the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, PNNL, in the 
State of Washington. Under a Memorandum of Understanding, the 
Department of Homeland Security, the Energy Department's National 
Nuclear Security Administration and DOE's Office of Science are 
contributing to PNNL's Capability Replacement Laboratory, CRL, to 
replace mission critical RDT&E capabilities that will be otherwise lost 
as a result of the Department of Energy Environmental Management 
Office's accelerated cleanup of Hanford's 300 Area. Among the 
capabilities of the CRL that should and will be utilized by DHS are 
radiation detection and analysis, information analytics, and the 
testing, evaluation and certification of new methods and technologies.
  According to the interagency MOU signed by all parties, DHS was 
expected to provide $25 million for the project in FY 2008; however, 
the President's budget does not include the funds. With construction 
scheduled to begin this year, we are now worried about the future of 
this project due to the lack of attention to this issue at DHS.
  Although Congressman Hastings and I are working to correct this 
situation in the FY 2008 budget, I believe this situation highlights 
the need to examine more closely the relationship of the labs to the 
Department's R&D effort. Thus, our amendment calls for a report to 
Congress on the Homeland Security Department's strategic plan for its 
research efforts to include a plan for fulfilling existing national 
laboratory infrastructure commitments in order to maintain current 
capabilities and mission needs.
  Our hope is that such a public clarification of the role of the labs 
can help the Department to make a stronger case to Congress for the 
importance of the work at PNNL as well as the other important national 
research laboratories.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of 
my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings).
  The amendment was agreed to.

                              {time}  1545

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11 
printed in House Report 110-136.


                         Parliamentary Inquiry

  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 
his parliamentary inquiry.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, can you tell us the current 
status of the Committee of the Whole, what is being considered at this 
time?
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 12 
printed in House Report 110-136.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 13 printed in House 
Report 110-136.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 14 printed in House 
Report 110-136.


                 Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Terry

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 15 
printed in House Report 110-136.
  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 15 offered by Mr. Terry
       At the end of title XI add the following:

     SEC. __. REQUIREMENT TO CONSULT STATES REGARDING GRANT 
                   AWARDS.

       Before the release by the Department of Homeland Security 
     of any information regarding the award of any grant to a 
     State with amounts authorized under section 101, including 
     before submitting to Congress any list of such grant awards, 
     the Secretary of Homeland Security shall consult with States.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 382, the gentleman 
from Nebraska (Mr. Terry) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Nebraska.
  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the recognition.
  This is a rather simple and focused amendment that recognizes that 
our Homeland Security Department has had difficulties communicating to 
its partners. My Governor called me last year when the press showed up 
in his office and wanted an answer about a grant and no one had 
notified the Governor's office. We contacted the National Governor's 
Association, NGA, and found out that this is a very deep and epidemic 
problem with our Department of Homeland Security.
  So all that we are asking in this amendment is that in regard to 
grants that affect the State, that the State be put into the 
communication loop so when reporters show up at their office asking for 
comment, they actually know what the reporters are talking about.
  I think it is egregious that reporters get to be notified sooner than 
the grant recipient or the State that was denied the grant.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the 
amendment; however, I do not oppose the amendment and would support it.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Member from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, let me say simply that I thank 
the Member for bringing this amendment to the attention of the floor of 
the House and would encourage my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, with that very articulately stated and 
persuasive argument, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry).
  The amendment was agreed to.


            Amendment No. 16 Offered by Mr. King of New York

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 16 
printed in House Report 110-136.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, can you just tell me what 
amendments have gone by and what amendments are coming up now?
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. We are on amendment No. 16.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I will ask to be the designee of 
Mr. Mica.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized as the designee of 
Mr. Mica.

[[Page 11861]]

  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 16 printed in House 
Report 110-136.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I am introducing the Mica 
amendment as his designee.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the Clerk will designate the 
amendment.
  There was no objection.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 16 offered by Mr. King of New York
       In section 1102(a) of the bill, after ``The Secretary of 
     Homeland Security'' insert ``and the Secretary of 
     Transportation''.
       In section 1102(a) of the bill, strike ``the Department of 
     homeland security'' and insert ``the Department of Homeland 
     Security, the Department of Transportation,''

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 382, the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. King) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment adds the Secretary of Transportation to 
a study to increase incentives for the sharing of critical 
infrastructure information with the Department of Homeland Security.
  The Homeland Security Act of 2002 included the Critical 
Infrastructure Act in title II. All agencies will benefit from this 
study. I know that Congressman Mica has put effort into it. It has, my 
understanding, bipartisan support.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in 
opposition, and I am opposed to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the 
gentleman's amendment. And might I indicate, because I know Members are 
in their offices working and committees, and deliberations on the floor 
are instructive to the Members and their staff, make it very clear of 
the cooperative and collaborative relationship that the Homeland 
Security Committee has had with the Transportation and Infrastructure 
Committee, along with many other committees. Let me reemphasize the 
very strong working relationship of the chairman of the Homeland 
Security Committee and the chairperson of the Transportation Committee.
  So this amendment is unnecessary. We have worked closely together on 
this bill and on many issues. I specifically remember the close 
relationship that we had in working on the rail security bill, where we 
are jointly responsible for securing the Nation's transportation system 
or rail transportation system.
  This amendment, though possibly well-intended, unnecessarily creates 
a bureaucratic and burdensome process to what should be a simple study.
  Let us be reminded of the 9/11 Commission. The 9/11 Commission wanted 
to emphasize the ending of bureaucratic red tape. That is why we have 
the Homeland Security Department and the Homeland Security Committee.
  Specifically, this amendment seeks to add the Secretary of 
Transportation to a study on incentives to secure critical 
infrastructure information for private stakeholders. Mr. Chairman, we 
all know what happens when we have too many cooks in the kitchen. We 
also know that we have a working relationship between our committees 
and between the Members of this Congress, and also a duty and 
responsibility to Homeland Security Committee to ensure the securing of 
this Nation through the securing and the responsibilities of the 
Homeland Security Department. Adding more layers to a project like this 
only assures that the project will not get done in a timely manner.
  The Secretary of Homeland Security is charged with working to 
identify and help with other agencies and protect critical 
infrastructure. That is a component of our committee and the 
subcommittee that was set up by the chairman of this committee and the 
subcommittee that I serve to ensure efficiency. The Secretary of 
Homeland Security by himself is more than capable of working to 
complete a study of incentives, infrastructure, stakeholders, to share 
information with the government.
  For these reasons, I oppose this amendment. And I would simply say to 
my colleagues, what did the 9/11 Commission dictate or ask us to do? 
Thoughtfully streamline the process of securing America and make sure 
that we are attentive, we are efficient, and we get the job done. Lives 
are at stake.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to 
the author of the amendment, Mr. Mica.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding me 
time and also for presenting my amendment.
  My amendment would have required that the Department of 
Transportation participate in the infrastructure study that is required 
by this legislation. My amendment ensures that the government 
transportation experts are fully utilized to identify cost-effective 
measures for protecting critical infrastructure. Right now, as the bill 
is drafted, it is just limited to Homeland Security leading that 
effort.
  Because our highest risk in this center is involved in addressing 
risks, terrorist risks, our highest risks are transportation and 
infrastructure under the jurisdiction of the Department of 
Transportation, it would only be logical to include them in this 
effort. I believe the bill as drafted was a mistake, and why the 
Congress would require a critical infrastructure study like this and 
not include the Federal agency that has the expertise and the private 
sector relationships necessary to get the job done. So, again, I have 
concerns about doing this further directive by the bill.
  If you stop to look at what the risks are as far as terrorist risks: 
Look at the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center; look at the 1995 
Tokyo subway sarin gas attack; look at the Oklahoma City bombing 
against an infrastructure facility; look at the 9/11 attack using 
aviation transportation equipment on the World Trade Center and on the 
Pentagon; look at the Madrid train bombings; look at the London 
underground train and bus bombings.
  What do they all have in common? They have in common transportation. 
What does the provision that they have included in this bill have in 
it? Homeland Security, with no participation with the Department of 
Transportation. The Department of Transportation also handles these 
transportation and infrastructure issues and really should be a part of 
this study if it in fact goes forward.
  Now, consider some of our greatest concerns, attacks on hazardous 
materials, pipelines, chlorine gas, tank cars and transit systems. 
These are all areas regulated by DOT. And they want to leave them out 
of this study. The DOT has a long working relationship with all of 
these transportation and infrastructure issues, and I believe DOT would 
be a vital partner in assessing the risks and economic analysis 
associated with the terrorist attacks on our critical infrastructure.
  And part of the study here is to find out how to get the private 
sector to participate in this. Who else would be better equipped, a 
bureaucracy of 177,000 or whatever it is up to, 200,000, in Homeland 
Security that doesn't have a clue or people who actually work with 
people in transportation, on transportation projects and with those 
projects and systems that may be at risk?
  Including DOT will help us avoid problems like throwing billions of 
dollars at transit systems without understanding its impact on our 
economy and mobility.
  I should point out finally that DOT is already involved in some of 
the critical infrastructure planning, and my amendment is simply an 
extension of that effort. It is a reasonable amendment. It doesn't 
replace or duplicate the Department of Homeland Security

[[Page 11862]]

or diminish their role over these critical infrastructure protection 
efforts. And if other appropriate agencies or sectors are being left 
out, I think they should also be included in the effort. But to leave 
out DOT is to leave out the success that we need to make any kind of 
study or future partnership of working together to address terrorist 
risks and threats.

                              {time}  1600

  So I thank also Ms. Castor from my State of Florida for offering an 
amendment today.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished chairman.
  Let me just simply say to my good friend, nothing precludes the 
engaging by the Homeland Security Department of those who have a 
stakeholder's role. Remember, this is an assessment of critical 
infrastructure on the issue of security.
  The rules of the House designate the Homeland Security Committee as 
the committee that deals with the question of security. In addition, 
none of us work in a vacuum; and we would expect this center of 
excellence to engage those necessary parties.
  This amendment is opposed by the committee. This amendment will 
create another layer of bureaucracy. This amendment goes against the 9/
11 Commission, which has asked us to be efficient and to be definitive 
on our questions of security issues. And what we are attempting to do 
is to allow the Homeland Security Department to do its job, which 
creates a center of excellence to focus on the security protection 
measures for critical infrastructure, a defined responsibility of the 
Homeland Security Department. And we simply expect that there will be a 
collaborative working on that such that no Department, Mr. Chairman and 
my colleagues, will be left out, including the very important 
Department of Transportation. And we would look forward to 
collaborating with them.
  And, in that regard, I rise to vigorously oppose the amendment and 
ask for a ``no'' vote.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment. This amendment--while well-intented--unnecessarily creates a 
bureaucratic and burdensome process to what should be a simple study.
  Specifically, this amendment seeks to add the Secretary of 
Transportation to a study on incentives to secure critical 
infrastructure information from private stakeholders.
  Mr. Chairman, we all know what happens when we have too many cooks in 
the kitchen.
  Adding more layers to a project like this only assures that the 
project will not get done in a timely manner.
  The Secretary of Homeland Security is charged with working to 
identify and help, with other agencies, protect critical 
infrastructure.
  The Secretary of Homeland Security by himself is more than capable of 
working with CREATE to complete a study of incentives for 
infrastructure stake holders to share information with the government.
  For these reasons, I oppose this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. All time on the amendment having expired, the 
question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. King).
  The amendment was rejected.


                Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Cardoza

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 17 
printed in House Report 110-136.
  Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 17 offered by Mr. Cardoza:
       At the end of title XI add the following:

     SEC. __. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS ON INTEROPERABILITY.

       It is the sense of the Congress that efforts to achieve 
     local, regional, and national interoperable emergency 
     communications in the near term should be supported and are 
     critical in assisting communities with their local and 
     regional efforts to properly coordinate and execute their 
     interoperability plans.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 382, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Cardoza) and a member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is a simple sense of Congress 
stressing the importance of interoperability in emergency 
communications.
  We all know the importance of overcoming interoperability problems, 
which have been prevalent for years but only brought to light due to 
the 9/11 tragedy.
  In this day and age, Mr. Chairman, it is critical that our first 
responders be able to communicate with each other in the field. The 
reality, however, is that firefighters, police and other emergency 
responders simply cannot communicate during times of emergency.
  For example, police chiefs in my district have informed me that 
officers are forced to communicate on their cell phones literally from 
across the street because their radios cannot operate on the same 
frequency; and, recently, radio communications were ineffective and 
created an extremely dangerous situation in the 2006 canyon fire that 
devastated 34,000 acres in the western portion of Stanislaus County.
  The need for improved emergency communications is not new. Whether we 
are talking about wilderness, wildfires, hurricanes or other disaster, 
or even day-to-day events, the same interoperability problems exist for 
the large communities as they do for the smallest.
  Large cities are receiving the bulk of homeland security funding for 
interoperable communications. In many instances, that is rightly the 
case. But interoperability is a problem that permeates across the 
country and also affects our smaller communities. Smaller communities 
face the exact same problems, yet only receive a fraction of the 
funding and the attention that they need. As a result, smaller 
communities are left behind and are forced to do the best they can with 
what they've got.
  In Stanislaus County, for example, the county was able to build the 
architecture for one channel through which all responders in the field 
can communicate. However, only one person can talk at a time. We can 
and need, Mr. Chairman, to do better.
  The point of this amendment is simply to stress the importance of 
achieving local, regional and national interoperability plans and the 
impacts they have on the ongoing efforts in communities across the 
country.
  Simply stated, localities and smaller communities matter as well, and 
their efforts to address interoperability should not be ignored by the 
Department of Homeland Security.
  I want to make one other statement, Mr. Chairman. In the year 2000, 
FEMA issued a report that outlined the three greatest disaster 
scenarios that might befall the United States: a terror attack in New 
York, a hurricane that would hit New Orleans, and an earthquake on the 
Hayward fault in the east bay of California that would affect the 
California delta and flood massive lands near my area.
  Well, the first two scenarios have, in fact, taken place, as we all 
know, and the third is still a very grave possibility. If, in fact, we 
have an earthquake on the Hayward fault in Northern California, the 
evacuation area would very likely be my area. Another area affected 
would be the San Joaquin delta in San Joaquin County.
  All of this needs to be addressed, Mr. Chairman, and interoperability 
is the third awaiting disaster that could hit us anytime with an 
earthquake.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask that we adopt this amendment and that Homeland 
Security help prepare California for the third disaster that FEMA's 
already noted could befall the United States at any time.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in 
opposition.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

[[Page 11863]]

  I don't intend to oppose the amendment. My only concern is, as I 
understand it, this is an amendment expressing the sense of Congress. 
The language, which is actually my language in the bill which passed 
the full committee, actually would have called for the implementation 
and not just the sense of Congress; and this, to me, is another 
deficiency in the bill and that we are taking, at best, a half step 
forward. We could have taken the full step.
  Having said that, I certainly agree in spirit with the amendment. 
Certainly this is better than nothing. And with that, I will urge the 
adoption of the amendment.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KING of New York. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for, 
again, his outstanding spirit of bipartisanship.
  I think the importance of Mr. Cardoza's amendment is that he agrees 
with the Homeland Security Committee and the message and the mission of 
yourself and Mr. Thompson and all of the Members that, in addition to 
just handing out equipment, you want to make sure there's a continuing 
of training, professional development, understanding of the system. And 
it really impacts firefighters, police, other emergency responders who 
cannot communicate during times of emergency. We know what happened in 
9/11.
  Let me just finish by saying, one of the other elements of helping us 
work through this question of interoperability is, as your amendment 
suggests, focusing on local and regional interoperability 
communications efforts and, particularly, and I raise this point for a 
city like Houston, that simply says, let us use the dollars, let us 
directly use the dollars so that we can follow the pathway of Mr. 
Cardoza's amendment, which is to improve our interoperable 
communication efforts. Let us get the monies directly, as opposed to 
the layering that goes on through the State system.
  But, in any event, let me thank the gentleman for his amendment.
  The need for improved emergency communications is not new. Whether we 
are talking about the Oklahoma City bomb detonated by homegrown 
terrorist Timothy McVeigh, September 11, or Hurricanes Katrina and 
Rita--the same story emerged.
  Firefighters, police, and other emergency responders cannot 
communicate during times of emergency.
  Five and one-half years after the 9/11 attacks, and 1\1/2\ years 
after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the Department still does not have a 
dedicated interoperability grant program.
  Subsequently, states and localities are forced to rob Peter to pay 
Paul by using large chunks of homeland security grant funding--in some 
instances 80 percent--to purchase communications equipment instead of 
securing bridges, ports, buildings.
  The FY 2006 Budget Reconciliation Act created a $1 billion 
interoperability grant program to be administered by the Department of 
Commerce based on the proceeds from the sales of the 700 Mhz spectrum.
  While that is a good start, the 9/11 Commission has called on 
Congress to prioritize and improve interoperable emergency 
communication.
  Buying equipment is not enough!
  Congress must support State, local and regional interoperable 
communication plans that recognize all of the critical factors for a 
successful interoperability solution.
  Those factors are part of the SAFECOM Interoperability Continuum. 
They are: governance, standard operating procedures, training and 
exercises, and usage, in addition to technology.
  We cannot just throw money at interoperability--we have to develop a 
strategic, national plan to improve interoperable communications.
  The Administration and DHS officials have testified that the cost of 
achieving interoperability will cost in the tens of billions to $100 
billion.
  More than 90 percent of the public safety communication 
infrastructure in the United States is owned and operated at the local 
and state level. Therefore, we must have improved coordination, 
training, and planning across many jurisdictions to achieve 
interoperability.
  According to Project SAFECOM at DHS, interoperability directly 
impacts the first responder community which consists of over 61,000 
public safety agencies including 960,000 Firefighters, 830,000 EMS 
personnel, and 710,000 Law Enforcement Officers.
  The Federal government must show leadership on this issue if it is 
going to tell state and local governments that they need to enhance and 
improve their emergency communications capability.
  Funding is only one-half the solution for the interoperability 
crisis. There must be leadership by all the key stakeholders to sit 
down and develop the plans necessary to create effective nationwide 
interoperable communication standards.
  This amendment provides support to the local governments and regions 
that are developing plans and systems that will better enable multi-
jurisdictions to communicate during times of emergency.
  The Cardozo amendment will encourage jurisdictions to move toward a 
truly ``national'' emergency communications capability.
  This is an excellent amendment, and we rise to support it.
  I yield back to the distinguished gentleman.
  Mr. KING of New York. Reclaiming my time from the gentlelady from 
Texas, I always admire her eloquence and her kind words.
  And, as I said, I appreciate what the gentleman is doing. I support 
it. I just wish we could have had the stronger language that was in the 
initial legislation.
  But, having said that, I commend the gentleman from California and 
urge the adoption of his amendment.
  Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to my colleague from 
Michigan, Mr. Stupak.
  Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, the key words to this whole amendment are 
``in the near term.'' Unfortunately, it's been 25 years since the Air 
Florida accident. We've been talking about interoperability, and 
nothing ever gets done.
  The time for studies and promises are over. If you listen to the 
program that DHS has, according to them, it will take us 20 years and 
$100 billion to achieve interoperability. That is not the case at all. 
We don't need 20 years. We don't have 20 years to wait in this country 
to have interoperability.
  Last Congress, we passed the National Telecommunications Information 
Agency, which is advancing technologies that are available today to 
solve the interoperability problem, technologies that don't cost $100 
billion and 20 years.
  And what has happened, though, the $1 billion we put in the NTIA 
grant program, the administration used it to make further cuts in the 
Department of Homeland Security. So $1 billion that should have gone to 
interoperability has cut off other DHS programs.
  This administration has ignored congressional intent on 
interoperability. It's time for the excuses to stop. The administration 
has to put forth a reasonable plan to achieve interoperability in this 
country, and that's what the Cardoza amendment does, and I fully 
support it.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that I am able to revise and 
extend my remarks.
  I rise today in support of the Cardoza Amendment, which expresses the 
Sense of the Congress that efforts to achieve interoperable emergency 
communications in the near term should be supported and are critical in 
assisting communities properly execute their interoperability plans.
  The key words in this amendment are ``in the near term.'' It's been 
25 years since the Air Florida crash on the Potomac. It's been over 5 
years since September 11th, when over 120 firefighters and hundreds of 
civilians lost their lives due to a lack of interoperability.
  Terrorist attacks, man made disasters, and natural disasters are a 
certainty. Yet, we still do not have nationwide interoperability in 
this country.
  This problem has been studied and studied.
  In its final report, the 9/11 Commission concluded:

       The inability to communicate was a critical element of the 
     World Trade Center, Pentagon, Somerset County, Pennsylvania, 
     crash sites . . . The occurrence of this problem at three 
     very different sites is strong evidence that compatible and 
     adequate communications among public safety organizations at 
     the local, state and federal levels remains an important 
     problem . . . Federal funding of such (interagency 
     communication) units should be given high priority . . .

  After September 11th, President Bush said, ``we want to spend money 
to make sure

[[Page 11864]]

equipment is there, strategies are there, communications are there to 
make sure that you have whatever it takes to respond.''
  Yet, under the President and the Republican-led Congress, the money 
was not allocated, the equipment was not there, strategies were 
incomplete, and first responders still cannot communicate across 
agencies and jurisdictions.
  DHS has testified it will take an $18 billion to $100 billion 
investment to make our first responder communications fully 
interoperable.
  DHS's plan to achieve full interoperability is 20 years. We do not 
have another 20 years.
  The time for study and excuses is over. This bill and this amendment 
represent action by the Democratic Congress.
  This bill reverses the draconian cuts to first responder grant 
programs made by this administration. And this amendment tells DHS to 
advance solutions that help first responders in the near term.
  The Energy and Commerce Committee created, and Congress enacted, a $1 
billion interoperability grant program at the National 
Telecommunications Information Agency (NTIA), in 2006.
  Our intent was to advance new approaches to solve the 
interoperability problem; approaches that don't cost $100 billion and 
take 20 years to implement.
  Yet, the administration seems to be missing the point. The 
administration's budget proposal justified the DHS grant cuts by 
``offsetting'' those cuts with the $1 billion NTIA grant program.
  Our committee has heard testimony from experts, industry, and first 
responders that there are new technologies today that can help our 
first responders at a fraction of the cost.
  Again, this amendment tells DHS that Congress has lost its patience 
with excuses. It says invest in near term solutions that are available 
today. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Barton).
  Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, with the Cardoza amendment, the 
Congress expresses its support for efforts like the $1 billion 
interoperability program to be implemented by NTIA.
  The House Energy and Commerce Committee is deeply concerned about the 
ongoing inability of our first responders to communicate with each 
other in times of emergency. This public safety interoperability 
problem has gone on for far too long, which is why the Energy and 
Commerce Committee is playing a stronger leadership role in setting the 
policy direction through its communications jurisdiction.
  I will put the rest of my statement in the Record, Mr. Chairman. But 
we do support the Cardoza amendment, and I thank the gentleman from New 
York for yielding some time.
  Mr. Chairman, with the Cardoza amendment, the Congress expresses its 
support for efforts like the $1 billion interoperability program to be 
implemented by the NTIA. The House Energy and Commerce Committee is 
deeply concerned about the ongoing inability of our first responders to 
communicate with each other in times of emergency. This public safety 
interoperability problem has gone on far too long, which is why the 
Energy and Commerce Committee is playing a stronger leadership role in 
setting the policy direction through its communications jurisdiction.
  Our Committee authored a section in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 
that set a final date for the DTV transition that will transfer 24 MHz 
of spectrum to public safety. To help first responders communicate on 
this spectrum efficiently, the DTV legislation also established the $1 
billion Public Safety Interoperable Communications grant program to 
leverage NTIA's extensive telecommunications and spectrum policy 
expertise.
  To improve interoperability throughout the Nation, Congress directed 
the NTIA to identify and fund forward-looking, spectrum-efficient, 
cost-effective and timely solutions. That program was designed to be 
separate from other programs, with its own criteria, and its own 
metrics for success. Until our existing, disparate public safety 
networks can communicate together, we will not truly be equipped to 
respond to a natural or man-made disaster.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my 
time.
  I would just say to the gentleman from Michigan, my good friend, that 
I agree that the time for study is over and the time for delay is over.
  I believe the original legislation that passed our committee would 
have moved it forward much more quickly. This is a sense of Congress. 
We actually were going to demand action.
  But, having said that, this is a significant step, and I urge 
adoption of the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from New York and 
also the gentleman from Texas for their support.
  This is an important amendment. It needs to state clearly, this bill 
needs to state clearly that the Congress supports finding a resolution 
to interoperability conflicts that we have been besieged with. This is 
a very specific problem, as outlined in the FEMA report.
  I thank Chairman Dingell and Chairman Thompson for both appearing 
before my constituents and hearing this problem and also agreeing to 
shepherd this resolution through the House.
  I encourage adoption of my amendment.
  Mr. DOYLE, Madam Chairman, My colleagues who were with us last year, 
and frankly, I'm glad we have so many new faces, but my colleagues who 
were with us last year will recall my commitment to protecting local 
telecommunications resources and making sure decisions are made where 
they are best made.
  That's why I'm glad to talk about this important issue. Spectrum 
itself is nearly infinite. But in terms of what's usable, what's worth 
investing in is much more limited.
  Which is why we must challenge everyone who uses our airwaves to do 
so in the most efficient way possible. And that's why efforts to make 
public safety's communications interoperable, redundant and more 
effective are so critical to our Nation's first responders, and 
ultimately the American public. The days when government hands money 
over to people who don't understand technology to make choices between 
inefficient and expensive dead-end radios should be long gone.
  My time is short, but we must take the best of what we have learned 
from the commercial space like interoperability and cost-effective 
technology and merge it with the best of public safety's communications 
legacy such as rock-solid dependability.
  By passing this amendment today, Congress will be saying that we 
support innovative, forward-looking, technologically-neutral solutions, 
including IP-Based solutions.
  And I believe we are saying that the Department of Homeland Security 
should follow all of the recommendations that the Government 
Accountability Office made earlier this year, and especially the one 
that the administration rejected--that first responders need to have 
the flexibility to take advantage of technological innovations that 
could advance the state of interoperability.
  We need accountability and measurable goals from any and all programs 
that fund interoperability so that we can ensure that the money is 
being spent wisely. The Department of Homeland Security has told us we 
need to wait 15 years to get interoperability--it's clear to me that we 
need to get interoperable communications by any means necessary, even 
if it means relying on expertise outside Homeland Security and within 
other agencies like the National Telecommunications and Information 
Administration.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. All time for the amendment having expired, the 
question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Cardoza).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mrs. Jones of Ohio). Pursuant to clause 6 of 
rule XVIII, proceedings will now resume on those amendments on which 
further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
  Amendment No. 1 by Mr. Thompson of Mississippi.
  Amendment No. 2 by Mr. Tom Davis of Virginia.
  The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


         Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Thompson of Mississippi

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Mississippi (Mr. Thompson) on which further proceedings were postponed 
and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.

[[Page 11865]]

  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 216, 
noes 209, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 314]

                               AYES--216

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barton (TX)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boucher
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castor
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Lincoln
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Emanuel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Faleomavaega
     Farr
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Gillibrand
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Klein (FL)
     Kucinich
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rodriguez
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Wexler
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--209

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Bean
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Castle
     Chabot
     Coble
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Donnelly
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Ellsworth
     Emerson
     English (PA)
     Everett
     Fallin
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fortuno
     Fossella
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Hall (TX)
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hill
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Jindal
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jordan
     Keller
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline (MN)
     Knollenberg
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lamborn
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marshall
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHenry
     McKeon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mitchell
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Saxton
     Schmidt
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shays
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Space
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Bordallo
     Brady (PA)
     Doolittle
     Engel
     Fattah
     Johnson, E. B.
     Larson (CT)
     McMorris Rodgers
     Moran (KS)
     Renzi
     Souder
     Tiahrt

                              {time}  1639

  Messrs. BARROW, EHLERS, FLAKE, ALTMIRE, CRAMER and GOHMERT changed 
their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Messrs. PAUL, HOYER and McNERNEY changed their vote from ``no'' to 
``aye.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


          Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Tom Davis of Virginia

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia 
(Mr. Tom Davis) on which further proceedings were postponed and on 
which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 36, 
noes 390, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 315]

                                AYES--36

     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barton (TX)
     Berman
     Biggert
     Brady (TX)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Chabot
     Davis, Tom
     Dreier
     Feeney
     Flake
     Fossella
     Franks (AZ)
     Hall (TX)
     Hensarling
     Hoekstra
     Kingston
     Kline (MN)
     Lewis (CA)
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Matheson
     McKeon
     Moran (VA)
     Neugebauer
     Paul
     Ramstad
     Rohrabacher
     Ryan (WI)
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shays
     Thornberry
     Waxman

                               NOES--390

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Carter
     Castle
     Castor
     Chandler
     Christensen
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Lincoln
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doyle
     Drake
     Duncan
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Faleomavaega
     Fallin
     Farr
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fortuno
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jindal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Jordan
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Knollenberg

[[Page 11866]]


     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lamborn
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lynch
     Mack
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Nunes
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pence
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sali
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Space
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Westmoreland
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Brady (PA)
     Doolittle
     Engel
     Fattah
     Johnson, E. B.
     Larson (CT)
     McMorris Rodgers
     Moran (KS)
     Renzi
     Souder
     Tiahrt


                  Announcement by the Acting Chairman

  The Acting CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Members are advised 2 minutes 
remain in this vote.

                              {time}  1649

  Mr. COHEN changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. FEENEY and Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California changed their vote 
from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


               Amendment No. 18 Offered by Mr. Van Hollen

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 18 
printed in House Report 110-136.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 18 offered by Mr. Van Hollen:
       At the end of title XI of the bill, add the following (and 
     conform the table of contents accordingly):

     SEC. 1122. TRAVELERS REDRESS INQUIRY PROGRAM.

       Of the amount authorized to be appropriated under section 
     101, such sums as may be necessary shall be available to the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security to take all necessary actions 
     to protect the security of personal information submitted 
     electronically to the Internet website of the Department of 
     Homeland Security established for the Travelers Redress 
     Inquiry Program and other websites of the Department related 
     to that program.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 382, the gentleman 
from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Chairman, let me start by commending Chairman Thompson, Ranking 
Member King and the Homeland Security Committee on a bipartisan basis 
for their good work on this piece of legislation. I have an amendment 
that I hope will be agreeable to all sides.
  In January of this year, the TSA launched a Web site. Some of you may 
have seen it. It was called the Traveler Verification Identification 
Program, and it was designed to allow those passengers who were 
wrongfully identified on the no-fly lists or the selectee lists the 
opportunity to start the process of getting their names removed from 
that list.
  The way you did that was you go and you log on to the TSA Web site 
and submit sensitive security information and personal information, 
like your Social Security number, the place and date of birth, your 
drivers license number and other personal identification numbers in 
order to demonstrate and prove to TSA that you were not a ``person of 
concern'' on their list. That was an important step forward, a positive 
list. I think we have all heard the stories about individuals who were 
wrongfully placed on that list or whose identifications were mistaken 
for somebody else. So that was a good way to start to get people off 
the list.
  But right after the launch of that program, they had to shut it down. 
The TSA had to shut down the site because, as was reported in The 
Washington Post and the high-tech magazine Wired, it was determined 
that the information that individuals were entering onto the TSA Web 
site was not secure, very personal types of information. Security 
experts found that the site lacked many of the basic measures necessary 
to protect personal information, no encryption devices, no other 
safeguards, and that the data being transferred to TSA was essentially 
vulnerable to being taken and used for identity theft and other 
purposes.
  After these concerns were brought to the attention of TSA, they had 
to bring down the Web site. They put up another Web site and program in 
February called the Travelers Redress Inquiry Program.
  Now, the TSA has said that it has made the necessary adjustments to 
protect this very personal and confidential information from exposure 
and theft, but it is not clear that they have taken all the measures 
that are necessary, especially in light of the fact that only last week 
we found out that a hard drive containing the personal data of almost 
100,000 TSA employees disappeared.
  Data security does not seem to have been taken seriously enough by 
the TSA. This amendment is designed to focus greater attention on that 
issue.
  This amendment is very simple. It requires TSA to take the necessary 
steps required to protect the personal information submitted online by 
passengers, by our constituents, when they are seeking to remove their 
names from the no-fly list, the selectee list or other related lists. 
It is designed to get at a very specific problem that has arisen in 
recent months, and I urge its adoption.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, let me thank the gentleman 
for a very thoughtful amendment. We have addressed this question in the 
Homeland Security Committee, but also in the subcommittee that I chair, 
and I think the important point is that when people are trying to 
clarify their name and they submit personal data, we should be 
responsible for protecting it. In light of what happened last week, and 
by the way, we will be having a briefing on that very issue dealing 
with the TSA's loss of the computer and all that data, this is a very 
instructive amendment.
  It would be great to think that we would never lose material, but we 
do, and also to protect those that have been subjected to a lot of 
scrutiny, some of them coming from different ethnic groups. This is 
very thoughtful, and I rise to support the amendment.
  Madam Chairman, this amendment should be supported as it seeks to 
require the Department of Homeland Security (the Department) to use 
funds to protect the security of personal information submitted 
electronically to the Department's Web site for the Department of 
Homeland Security Traveler Redress

[[Page 11867]]

Inquiry Program, otherwise known as DHS-TRIP, and any other Web site 
associated with that program.
  It would be great if we only had to theorize about the possible 
security, or lack thereof, of the information sent to the Department 
via redress Web sites.
  However, the past has shown that this problem is very real.
  In February of this year, the Department's Transportation Security 
Administration (TSA) learned that the website they were using to 
collect personal information to aid in traveler redress contained a 
link that was not secure.
  This insecure link caused hundreds of individuals to transmit 
information through cyberspace that was not encrypted and subject to 
being captured by identity thieves, at best, and terrorists, at worst.
  The Web site was established to provide a remedy for passengers that 
had been delayed at airports and therefore believed that they had been 
incorrectly identified as someone on an aviation watch list.
  What causes even greater concern is that for 4 months and 8 days TSA 
did not detect the problem through their own internal procedures. In 
fact, they became aware of the situation through an independent 
internet blog.
  The fact that the redress Web site lacked the necessary security 
measures to protect users' personal information is proof in the pudding 
that more needs to be done to protect personally identifiable 
information sent to TSA.
  The American public needs to know that the ``S'' in TSA stands for 
something.
  Individuals that may have already been wrongfully identified--which 
can cause airport delays for hours or even days--should not have to 
experience a second round of mistreatment by having their personal 
information, including their name, gender, date of birth, social 
security numbers and addresses vulnerable to being hacked.
  A few weeks after this discovery TSA launched the Department of 
Homeland Security Traveler Redress Inquiry Program, otherwise known as 
DHS-TRIP.
  We have not yet determined whether the internal controls that should 
have been in place during the first mishap have been put in place with 
respect to DHS-TRIP.
  The recent revelation that a TSA hard drive containing the personal, 
payroll and bank information of over 100,000 former and current TSA 
employees was reported stolen, does nothing to alleviate our concerns.
  For these reasons, this amendment is a good idea, and should be 
supported.
  Mr. KING of New York. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. KING of New York. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Chairman, I do not intend to oppose the amendment. I just would 
say to the gentleman, he is addressing a legitimate concern. One 
question I would have, and ask this be resolved as the process goes 
forward, it just says all funds that are necessary from the $39.8 
billion. Since Homeland Security funding is stretched as it is, since 
every dollar is essential to be spent for the right purpose, I would 
ask, as the process goes forward, we try to find a way to specify the 
amount necessary. I am just raising that as a point with the gentleman. 
I would certainly work with the gentleman as we go forward and with the 
chairman.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KING of New York. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman, and I 
appreciate the point you are raising. As it says, such sums as may be 
necessary to address this issue. I wouldn't expect it to be a very 
large sum. TSA is telling us they have addressed this issue. I am not 
sure we are totally convinced. If we could get this amendment passed, 
obviously as we go through the process, if there is some claim that 
this is going to cost billions of dollars, I wouldn't expect it would, 
but I would be happy to work with the gentleman.
  Mr. KING of New York. Madam Chairman, reclaiming my time, I will not 
oppose the amendment.
  Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment No. 18 offered 
by the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Chairman, I move that the 
Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Cleaver) having assumed the chair, Mrs. Jones of Ohio, Acting Chairman 
of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported 
that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 
1684) to authorize appropriations for the Department of Homeland 
Security for fiscal year 2008, and for other purposes, had come to no 
resolution thereon.

                          ____________________