[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 19]
[Senate]
[Pages 25114-25116]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2010--CONFERENCE 
                                 REPORT

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
proceed to the consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 
2892, which the clerk will state.

[[Page 25115]]

  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the 
     two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 
     2892), making appropriations for the Department of Homeland 
     Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and 
     for other purposes, having met, have agreed that the House 
     recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate 
     and agree to the same with an amendment, and the Senate agree 
     to the same, signed by a majority of the conferees on the 
     part of both Houses.

  (The conference report is printed in the House proceedings of the 
Record of October 13, 2009.)
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mr. BYRD. I thank the Chair.
  Madam President, I speak today in support of the conference report 
providing appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for 
fiscal year 2010. I especially wish to thank my ranking member, Senator 
George Voinovich, for his cooperation in producing the agreement that 
is now before the Senate. It has been 8 years--8 long years--since the 
attacks of 9/11. There are some people in this country who have become 
complacent about the threat of another attack. Don't count me as one of 
them. I am not one of those people.
  There have been numerous terrorist attacks around the globe, 
including the London, Madrid, and Mumbai bombings. Just last month, a 
Denver man was indicted on a charge of conspiracy to use weapons of 
mass destruction. Where? In New York City. So we must continue to be 
vigilant. Nor can we be complacent about Mother Nature's power to wreak 
havoc with a major earthquake, flood, or hurricane, meaning that such 
disaster relief will require the funding provided in this bill.
  This year, I have set five goals for the Homeland Security 
Department, five goals that I trust we all share. What are they? No. 1, 
to secure our borders and enforce our immigration laws. No. 2, to 
protect the American people--your people, my people, the American 
people--from terrorist threats. No. 3, to prepare for and respond to 
all disasters, both manmade and natural. No. 4, to support our State, 
local, tribal, and private sector partners with resources and 
information. No. 5, to give the Department of Homeland Security the 
management tools it needs to succeed.
  I believe the conference report we are presenting today meets those 
goals.
  Funding for the Department of Homeland Security totals $42.8 billion. 
Do you know how much money that is? That is $42.80 for every minute 
since Jesus Christ was born. That is a lot of money. It is an increase 
of $2.65 billion over 2009. Again, I thank my friend, the very able 
Senator George Voinovich, the ranking member, for his notable 
contributions to this legislation. I thank Senator Daniel Inouye and 
Senator Thad Cochran, the chairman and the vice chairman of the 
Appropriations Committee.
  I also thank our able majority and minority staff who have worked 
together to produce this legislation. Let me name them: Charles 
Kieffer, Chip Walgren, Scott Nance, Drenan Dudley, Christa Thompson, 
Rebecca Davies, Carol Cribbs, and Arex Avanni.
  Madam President, I thank all Senators, and I urge support for the 
conference report.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.
  Mr. VOINOVICH. Madam President, I am pleased to join the 
distinguished Senator from West Virginia in presenting the fiscal year 
2010 appropriations conference report for the Department of Homeland 
Security.
  As my colleagues know, it is after October 1--the start of a new 
fiscal year--and the Department of Homeland Security's programs and 
activities are being funded under a continuing resolution because we 
did not complete our work on time. I think this is unfortunate. The 
House adopted its version of the bill on June 24 and the Senate adopted 
it on July 9.
  When I was mayor and Governor of Ohio, I would have lost my job if 
the budget were not done in time or the appropriations not done on 
time. I think everyone would agree that this is not the way to properly 
run our operation. I know of no good explanation as to why we could not 
have resolved our differences to allow this conference agreement to be 
signed into law before this date.
  Senator Byrd said the conference report recommends a total of $44.1 
billion in appropriations to support programs and activities of the 
Department of Homeland Security. Of this amount, $42.8 billion is for 
discretionary spending, and this is roughly $254 million less than the 
President's total discretionary request. I wish to make that clear, 
that it is less than the President requested.
  In addition, $1.4 billion is provided for the Coast Guard retired 
pay--the only mandatory appropriations account in the conference 
report--and $241.5 million is provided for Coast Guard overseas 
contingency operations.
  The conference report includes significant resources for border 
security and enforcement of our immigration laws, for continued 
improvements in security at our Nation's airports and modes of surface 
transportation, for the Coast Guard operations and recapitalization, 
for helping our citizens prepare for and recover from natural 
disasters, and for equipping and training our Nation's first 
responders. I think Senator Byrd did a beautiful job in terms of his 
five reasons and the things we ought to be doing, and that is what we 
have tried to do in this report, to respond to those five goals Senator 
Byrd outlined.
  As Senator Byrd has indicated, there is much in this conference 
report to recommend. I am not going to list all of the funding 
recommendations, but I do wish to note some. This is very important: 
Full funding is provided for border security. This includes funds to 
support 20,163 Border Patrol agents, 21,124 Customs and border 
protection officers, and 33,400 detention beds. These are the beds we 
use when we pick up people and we put them there and hold them until we 
return them to where they came from. Also included is $800 million to 
continue work on the virtual border fence and to improve radio 
communications.
  Starting in fiscal year 2005, significant increases have been 
provided for border and immigration enforcement. Fewer people are 
illegally crossing our borders. This can be seen in the decrease in 
apprehensions of aliens along our borders from nearly 1.2 million in 
fiscal year 2005 to nearly 724,000 in fiscal year 2008. More fencing, 
roads, and personnel have allowed the Border Patrol to increase the 
number of miles over which it has effective control from 253 miles in 
October of 2005 to 729 miles in March of 2009.
  Additional agents and detention beds have allowed U.S. Immigration 
and Customs Enforcement to increase total removals of aliens from 
nearly 247,000 removals in fiscal year 2005 to approximately 347,000 in 
fiscal year 2008. We are making significant progress in terms of our 
border protection and going after these illegal aliens.
  This fiscal year 2010 conference report provides nearly $16 billion 
in appropriations for these activities. This will allow us to continue 
making progress, but we still have a long way to go and at a great 
expense. One of these days I am going to come to the Senate floor and 
talk about how much money we have spent and how much money we are going 
to have to continue to spend if we are going to do anything about the 
problems of illegal aliens in this country.
  While this conference report is significant for what it includes, it 
excludes two important provisions added to this bill when it was 
considered by this Senate, including a permanent extension of the E-
Verify program and the extension of E-Verify to current employees. I 
would have preferred to have the conference agreement to include both 
provisions, but my House colleagues were not so inclined. Even though 
this conference agreement does not permanently authorize E-Verify 
programs as opposed to the Senate bill, it does extend the program's 
authorization for an additional 3 years, allowing its continued 
development as a crucial tool for employers to ensure a legal 
workforce. However, it does not include the Senate provision offered by 
my colleague from Iowa, Senator Grassley,

[[Page 25116]]

which would have given employers the flexibility to voluntarily check 
their entire workforce and not solely new hires.
  The administration expressed concerns that the provision could tax 
the capacity of E-Verify. Let me tell my colleagues, E-Verify has the 
capacity to handle more than 60 million queries a year and it has 
received less than 8.7 in fiscal year 2009. Capacity does not seem to 
be a barrier of this program, and this is an issue I hope we are going 
to revisit one of these days.
  I wish to thank the chairman of the Senate subcommittee, my colleague 
from West Virginia, Senator Byrd. It has been an honor for me to work 
with Senator Byrd this year. This is my first year on Appropriations, 
and who do I have as my chairman but the distinguished Senator from 
West Virginia.
  Mr. BYRD. I thank the Senator.
  Mr. VOINOVICH. Madam President, I wish to thank Mr. Price, the 
ranking member of the House committee, and Mr. Rogers for their 
substantial contributions to this bill. It has taken many hours of hard 
work by these Members and their staffs to reach the agreements which 
are presented to the Senate today. While everything is not settled to 
my liking, I believe this is a balanced set of recommendations which 
reflects many of the Department's priorities and achieves a reasonable 
degree of compromise in some of the more contentious issues.
  I again wish to join Senator Byrd in commending our staff. Mr. 
Kieffer has been wonderful to work with. The folks on my side, Carol 
and Rebecca. I am a new member of the Appropriations Committee. I have 
never seen staff work as conscientiously as we have had for the 
Appropriations Committee. Senator Byrd, it is almost like magic they do 
such a good job for us. So again, I wish to thank them for their good 
work.
  Madam President, I recommend this conference report to my colleagues 
for their consideration, and I support it.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. BYRD. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. TESTER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. TESTER. Madam President, I congratulate Chairman Byrd and Senator 
Voinovich in getting this conference report to the Senate today. This 
is a very good example of good work that comes from folks who work 
together to get things done.
  With good funding levels for our firefighter support programs and 
funding for two emergency operations centers critical to my State, this 
is a bill that does right by the folks to keep America safe every day.
  There is one issue, however, that still gives me great concern; that 
is, the funding in this bill for the proposed National Bio and Agro-
Defense Facility. The final conference report includes my amendment 
requiring DHS to conduct a security and risk mitigation study before 
getting any money for construction of the bio facility. It also 
includes an additional requirement that the National Academy of 
Sciences puts its independent eyes on the Department's study before 
funds go out the door.
  This is a good start, but it is not enough. I do not understand why 
we are going to appropriate $30 million for a project we need not one 
but two studies about whether this project can move forward safely.
  Independent experts have real concerns about building the NBAF in the 
heart of the beef belt where an accidental or intentional release of 
foot-and-mouth disease could have disastrous consequences for America's 
livestock industry, and that industry includes Montana where the 
livestock industry is a $1.5 billion industry.
  This facility will house some of the most dangerous agricultural 
diseases around the world. We should not start doing this research on 
the U.S. mainland and in the middle of tornado alley without taking 
every possible precaution.
  On a matter this serious, we ought to measure twice and cut once. 
Regrettably, by giving the Department $30 million this year, we are not 
heeding that old saying.
  The GAO, the subcommittee, and independent experts acknowledge that 
we do not know if this research can be done safely on the U.S. 
mainland. We all agree that an accidental release of foot-and-mouth 
disease or another dangerous disease from this facility would devastate 
America's livestock industry. Yet we are providing the money to go 
ahead with it anyway.
  Why not just wait and do the studies this year and then the 
Department can come back to us with their revised funding request next 
year?
  I understand this has to do with getting Kansas to sign a cost-
sharing agreement. But are we convinced Kansas will not put forward the 
money next year if this facility is to be built there?
  If this facility is built in Kansas, the United States will become 
the only country, other than England and Canada, to do FMD research on 
a mainland. Everyone else does it on an island.
  England had an accidental release in 2007 which led to eight separate 
outbreaks of FMD on farms surrounding their facility. Canada at least 
does it in an urban area far from livestock production areas.
  Congress's nonpartisan, independent auditor, the Government 
Accountability Office, has sounded the alarm on this issue. They are 
telling us that Homeland Security has not conducted or commissioned any 
study to determine whether foot-and-mouth disease work can be done 
safely on the mainland.
  Proponents of this facility have said it is OK to do this research 
because the new Kansas facility will have the most modern technology 
and all the safety bells and whistles that Plum Island lacks. But the 
GAO rightfully argues this view only encourages a false sense of 
security.
  The GAO says:

       Even with a proper biosafety program, human error can never 
     be completely eliminated. Many experts told us that the human 
     component accounts for the majority of accidents in high-
     contaminant laboratories. This risk persists, even in the 
     most modern facilities and with the latest technology.

  I know I am not the only Senator who shares the GAO's concern. So I 
look forward to working with many of my colleagues on this issue again 
next year. We do need to pay attention to what these studies say, and 
as a member of this subcommittee, I will be watching it very closely.
  The Department is going to come here next spring with a $500 million 
request for funding for this project. That is a lot of money. But the 
true cost of doing this research in the middle of tornado alley could 
be much higher. The cost of cleaning up after an FMD release--the 
culling of entire herds of livestock, the loss of foreign agricultural 
sales that will endure for years after a release, and the loss of 
America's food security--will be measured in the tens of billions of 
dollars. That is something America cannot afford, and we must not let 
it happen.
  Madam President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a 
quorum. I ask that the time be equally divided between both sides.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk 
will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BYRD. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________