[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 16]
[House]
[Pages 22687-22688]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICE GUARD CONTRACTING REFORM ACT OF 2008

  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in 
the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 3068) to prohibit the award of 
contracts to provide guard services under the contract security guard 
program of the Federal Protective Service to a business concern that is 
owned, controlled, or operated by an individual who has been convicted 
of a felony.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the Senate amendment is as follows:

       Senate amendment:
       Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert:

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Protective Service 
     Guard Contracting Reform Act of 2008''.

     SEC. 2. FEDERAL PROTECTIVE SERVICE CONTRACTS.

       (a) Prohibition on Award of Contracts to Any Business 
     Concern Owned, Controlled, or Operated by an Individual 
     Convicted of a Felony.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Homeland Security, acting 
     through the Assistant Secretary of U.S. Immigration and 
     Customs Enforcement--
       (A) shall promulgate regulations establishing guidelines 
     for the prohibition of contract awards for the provision of 
     guard services under the contract security guard program of 
     the Federal Protective Service to any business concern that 
     is owned, controlled, or operated by an individual who has 
     been convicted of a felony; and
       (B) may consider permanent or interim prohibitions when 
     promulgating the regulations.
       (2) Contents.--The regulations under this subsection 
     shall--
       (A) identify which serious felonies may prohibit a 
     contractor from being awarded a contract;
       (B) require contractors to provide information regarding 
     any relevant felony convictions when submitting bids or 
     proposals; and
       (C) provide guidelines for the contracting officer to 
     assess present responsibility, mitigating factors, and the 
     risk associated with the previous conviction, and allow the 
     contracting officer to award a contract under certain 
     circumstances.
       (b) Regulations.--Not later than 6 months after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue 
     regulations to carry out this section.

     SEC. 3. REPORT ON GOVERNMENT-WIDE APPLICABILITY.

       Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of the 
     Act, the Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy shall 
     submit a report on establishing similar guidelines 
     government-wide to the Committee on Homeland Security and 
     Governmental Affairs and the Committee on Oversight and 
     Government Reform of the House of Representatives.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from 
the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) and the gentleman from Arkansas 
(Mr. Boozman) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia.


                             General Leave

  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous material on H.R. 3068.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I rise in support of the Senate amendment to H.R. 3068. The bill is 
the result of two oversight hearings held by the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public 
Buildings and Emergency Management that examined the role of the 
Federal Protective Service in providing security to our Nation's public 
buildings.
  There was evidence and serious allegations of wrongdoings, chaos and 
irregularities in the contracting and employment of private security 
guards who protect Federal employees and facilities. This legislation 
intends to preserve the security of the country's most sensitive 
buildings.
  The Senate amendment supports the principles of the House bill and 
authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security to devise regulations 
that prohibit contracts for the provision of guard services to any 
business owned or controlled by a convicted felon. In addition, the 
Senate amendment provides some limited flexibility for the contract 
officer to identify serious felons and create guidelines for the 
contracting officer to assess mitigating factors and the risks 
associated with previous convictions.
  I urge all Members to vote for the Senate amendment to H.R. 3068, the 
Federal Protective Service Guard Contracting Reform Act of 2008.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might 
consume.
  H.R. 3068 was introduced by Subcommittee Chairwoman Norton last year, 
and prohibits the Federal Protective Service from awarding contracts to 
businesses owned, controlled or operated by convicted felons. 
Specifically, the bill would direct the Secretary of Homeland Security 
to promulgate regulations to implement this prohibition.
  The Federal Protective Service, FPS, has a critical mission. FPS 
serves as one of the first lines of defense for our Federal buildings. 
It employs more than 1,000 trained personnel, and 15,000 contract 
security guards. It is charged with securing nearly 9,000 federally 
owned and leased buildings.
  This legislation will help improve security at those buildings and 
facilities and increase the standards of safety for Federal properties 
across the country. H.R. 3068 passed the House last year and was 
amended in the Senate. The Senate amendment provides additional 
direction to the Secretary of Homeland Security on key issues that the 
regulations should include. The Senate amendment also directs the 
administrator for Federal procurement policy to issue a report to 
Congress on establishing similar guidelines government-wide.
  This legislation is important to ensure the integrity of the forces 
protecting our Federal buildings and the employees and visitors that 
work in and visit those buildings every day. I support this 
legislation. I urge my colleagues to do the same.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, we very much appreciate that the House has 
gotten to this bill before we adjourn. This bill arose from oversight, 
and I think emphasizes the importance of oversight. Essentially it 
eliminates proxy ownership of vital FPS contracting operations. As a 
result of oversight and reports from workers and sometimes from unions, 
we learned that there were unpaid contract guards. As a result of the 
hearings, upon learning of these reports, we found that there was a 
contractor who was a felon, had spent 5 years in jail for money 
laundering and fraud.
  What we discovered was sometimes there were unpaid guards working out 
of, of all places, the Department of Homeland Security, and that at 
other times the money had been received, as in the case of the proxy 
ownership, and had not been paid.
  Security guards have grown to overwhelm the Federal Protective 
Service which is the official service that guards these buildings. The 
decrease in the Federal Protective Service is itself a hazard. But with 
15,000 Federal security guards, that means hundreds probably of 
contractors, because many of them are small businesses. As the number 
of security guards and therefore contractors has grown, it is important 
that our vigilance of the contract operations also increases.
  I was particularly concerned because these reports came in, from all 
places, the Nation's capital and the national

[[Page 22688]]

capital region. This is the region at the top of the list of places 
where we are always on the alert against terrorism.
  We want to particularly compliment the workers who continued to work 
even though they were unpaid. I want to give some credit to ICE because 
in the hearings where we followed up to see that this matter was 
corrected while this bill was pending, we worked closely with ICE which 
had jurisdiction over the Federal Protective Service and now has an 
ombudsman for security guard contracts; it centralized contracting 
operations so that prompt payment and monitoring of the invoices can 
occur. We gave them a deadline to cure that backlog, and they cured 
that backlog by August of last year.

                              {time}  1045

  What this bill does is to now shut the door with legislation that was 
clearly required after the discovery of proxy ownership by a felon who 
had, essentially, the responsibility for guards' guarding vital 
buildings in the Nation's capital and perhaps elsewhere.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Chairwoman Norton for 
bringing this legislation forward. It's something that we certainly 
support.
  We thank you for your hard work.
  I yield back the balance of our time.
  Ms. NORTON. I thank the gentleman, and I thank the entire committee 
and subcommittee for the strong bipartisan support that this bill and 
the work that uncovered it have had throughout.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Senate amendment 
to H.R. 3068. This bill, as amended by the Senate, represents an 
important step in ensuring the safety of Federal employees and all 
those who work in and visit our Federal buildings.
  On April 18, 2007, the Committee held a hearing entitled ``Proposals 
to Downsize the Federal Protective Service and Effects on the 
Protection of Federal Buildings''. The hearing probed the Department of 
Homeland Security's plans to cut the presence of Federal Protective 
Service (``FPS'') officers nationally. The reliance on contract 
security guards to protect Federal buildings is a troubling trend.
  On October 2, 2007, the House passed H.R. 3068 to prohibit the 
Secretary of Homeland Security from awarding security guard contracts 
to businesses owned, controlled, or operated by convicted felons.
  H.R. 3068, as amended by the Senate, continues to support the central 
concept of the legislation as enacted by the House. The Senate 
amendment authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish 
guidelines that prohibit contracts for the provision of guard services 
to any business owned or controlled by individuals convicted of serious 
felonies, as determined by the Secretary. Further, the amendment allows 
discretion to contracting officers assess mitigating factors and the 
risks associated with a particular conviction.
  This bill, as amended, offers a common sense way to ensure that 
security contracts that provide an essential service are awarded only 
to contractors who are, ``capable, responsible, and ethical'', as 
required by the Federal Acquisition Regulations.
  I support H.R. 3068, as amended, and urge its passage.
  Finally, I insert in the Congressional Record an exchange of letters 
between Chairman Henry Waxman, Chairman of the Committee on Oversight 
and Government Reform, and me.

         House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and 
           Infrastructure,
                               Washington, DC, September 25, 2008.
     Hon. Henry A. Waxman,
     Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, House 
         of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Waxman: I write to you regarding H.R. 3068, 
     the ``Federal Protective Service Guard Contracting Reform Act 
     of 2007''.
       I agree that provisions in H.R. 3068, as amended by the 
     Senate, are of jurisdictional interest to the Committee on 
     Oversight and Government Reform. I appreciate your 
     willingness to waive rights to further consideration of H.R. 
     3068, and I acknowledge that through this waiver, your 
     Committee is not relinquishing its jurisdiction over the 
     relevant provisions of H.R. 3068.
       This exchange of letters will be placed in the 
     Congressional Record as part of the consideration of H.R. 
     3068, as amended by the Senate, in the House. Thank you for 
     the cooperative spirit in which you have worked regarding 
     this matter and others between our respective committees.
       I look forward to working with you as we prepare to pass 
     this important legislation.
           Sincerely,
                                          James L. Oberstar, M.C.,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

         House of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and 
           Government reform,
                               Washington, DC, September 25, 2008.
     Hon. James Oberstar,
     Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
         House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Oberstar: I am writing about H.R. 3068, the 
     ``Federal Protective Service Guard Contracting Reform Act of 
     2008''.
       I appreciate your effort to consult with the Committee on 
     Oversight and Government Reform regarding those provisions of 
     H.R. 3068, as amended by the Senate, that fall within the 
     Oversight Committee's jurisdiction. In the interest of 
     expediting consideration of H.R. 3068, the Oversight 
     Committee will not separately consider relevant provisions of 
     this bill. Moreover, this letter should not be construed as a 
     waiver of the Oversight Committee's legislative jurisdiction 
     over subjects addressed in H.R. 3068 that fall within the 
     jurisdiction of the Oversight Committee.
       Please include our exchange of letters on this matter in 
     the Congressional Record during consideration of this 
     legislation on the House floor.
       Again, I appreciate your willingness to consult the 
     Committee on these matters.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Henry A. Waxman,
                                                         Chairman.

  Ms. NORTON, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) that the House 
suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill, H.R. 
3068.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the Senate amendment was concurred in.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________