[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 14]
[Senate]
[Page 18430]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                             GUANTANAMO BAY

  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise to express my concerns about the 
administration's failure to make the deadline of issuing a report on 
the Guantanamo detainee policy. Today's deadline, similar to the 
January 2010 closure deadline, was self-imposed. It concerns me that 
the administration maintains that closure will occur even though the 
execution of this process has been less than stellar.
  In January, on his very first full day in office, President Obama 
signed the order to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility in 12 
months. The President created separate task forces to examine closure 
and detainee issues. These task forces were developed and staffed by 
the Obama administration to achieve successful closure in 1 year. The 
product of this review is to include a report on a broader detainee 
policy.
  Today marks the first deadline in this process. It was set to be the 
date of release and publication of the task force report on a broader 
detainee policy going forward. The administration's failure to meet the 
deadline appears to me to be the ``canary in the coal mine'' that a 
January closure of Guantanamo without a detailed plan is an exercise in 
futility.
  Yet the White House downplays the missed deadline and publicly states 
that the January closure is still on track. Is it? Despite not having a 
plan and missing a deadline for a key integral part of the closure 
process, the administration claims it can still meet the overall 
deadline of closure by January 1. I find that notion suspect at best 
and completely absurd at worst.
  In May, a Gallup Poll indicated that 65 percent--65 percent--of 
Americans oppose the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention facility. 
Even so, the administration intends to follow its timeline and close 
Guantanamo by January 2010. The task force examining the cases of the 
remaining 229 detainees has only reviewed half the necessary caseload 
thus far.
  The Justice Department hopes to complete its review by an October 
reporting deadline, but that benchmark is quickly slipping away too. 
This review process has taken twice the amount of time the 
administration thought it would take. Yet keeping Guantanamo open 
beyond January is inexplicably still not an option in the 
administration's view.
  Recently, media reports are circulating that the administration's 
Guantanamo closure plan has been fraught with political miscalculation 
and internal dissension. Moreover, the complex nature of this issue 
will undoubtedly force the transfer of detainees inside the United 
States. Since the announcement of the President's intention to close 
Guantanamo, I have joined other Senators in pointing out the lack of 
planning and clear miscalculation of this decision. That pool has grown 
and a groundswell of bipartisan support is signaling the White House to 
``pump the brakes.''
  In May, the Senate voted 90 to 6 to strip out funding in the fiscal 
year 2010 war spending request that would authorize $80 million for the 
transfer of detainees to the interior of the United States of America. 
Now that the failure to meet this deadline has been reported by outlets 
such as the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and New York Times, 
the administration still does not get it. Senior administration 
officials are letting hubris get in the way. This is neither the proper 
manner nor the time to close Guantanamo.
  There should have been more study of this issue prior to setting us 
on a course for closure. It is easy to say that Guantanamo can be 
closed when you are a candidate for President. It is even easier to 
sign an order on your very first full day in office as President that 
says in 12 months Guantanamo will close. What is hard is taking a 
deliberative, methodical approach and then formulating the proper plan 
to balance the safety of this country with the needs of lawful 
detention. Had the administration conducted a careful and thorough 
review of this issue, the conclusion would have been that Guantanamo 
fulfills both requirements. Instead, the administration has painted 
itself into a corner.
  Clearly, the administration miscalculated and underestimated the 
depth and breadth of this issue. From the onset, the administration has 
tried to reverse-engineer the process for closing Guantanamo--starting 
from the end and working backward. If changes are not made immediately, 
administration officials will force this issue on American cities and 
towns in just 185 days. They will limp across the finish line. We have 
185 days until Guantanamo is closed. The days until the plan is 
released ARE a big question mark. They are going to limp across the 
finish line on January 22, 2010, and herald their accomplishments a 
victory despite its ill-conceived planning and Three Stooges-like 
manner of execution.
  Guantanamo is still an asset to this country. It complies with 
international treaties and exceeds the standards of domestic 
corrections facilities. I don't see how anyone who is honest about this 
matter can characterize it in any other way, especially when there is 
not a sufficient replacement located domestically to meet the Justice 
Department's needs. It is my fervent hope that the President and 
Attorney General will reconsider their ill-considered plan to close 
Guantanamo and recognize the obvious, that a $200 million facility that 
is already operational and in compliance with international treaties 
should not be shuttered.
  This is an important issue. I don't think the American people are 
going to stand to have these very dangerous people brought on shore to 
our country when we have a $200 million facility that meets 
international treaty obligations sitting there doing the job. I think 
the administration needs to get this work done and needs to get it done 
the right way.
  With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. (Mr. Udall of Colorado). The Senator from 
Washington is recognized.

                          ____________________