[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 12]
[House]
[Pages 16246-16248]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                FORMER PRESIDENTS PROTECTION ACT OF 2012

  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass 
the bill (H.R. 6620) to amend title 18, United States Code, to 
eliminate certain limitations on the length of Secret Service 
Protection for former Presidents and for the children of former 
Presidents.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 6620

       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 ``Former Presidents Protection 
     Act of 2012''.

     SEC. 2. ELIMINATING CERTAIN LIMITATIONS ON THE LENGTH OF 
                   SECRET SERVICE PROTECTION FOR FORMER PRESIDENTS 
                   AND FOR THE CHILDREN OF FORMER PRESIDENTS.

       (a) Former Presidents.--Section 3056(a)(3) of title 18, 
     United States Code, is amended by striking ``unless the 
     former President did not'' and all that follows through 
     ``warrant such protection''.
       (b) Children of Former Presidents.--Section 3056(a)(4) of 
     title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking ``for a 
     period'' and all that follows through ``comes first''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.


                             General Leave

  Mr. SMITH of Texas. 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 materials on H.R. 6620, currently 
under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 6620, the Former Presidents Protection Act of 2012, 
amends Federal law to uniformly provide lifetime Secret Service 
protection to all of America's former Presidents.
  I want to thank the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Gowdy) and the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) for sponsoring this commonsense, 
bipartisan legislation.
  America has a responsibility to protect its Presidents and their 
families, and not simply while they serve in office. We also have a 
duty to ensure the ongoing safety of those who serve in America's 
highest elected office after they leave office.
  In 1958, Congress first authorized Secret Service protection for 
former Presidents, which was limited to a reasonable period of time 
after a President leaves office. Congress expanded this to lifetime 
protection in 1965.
  But in 1994, Congress once again limited Secret Service protection 
for former Presidents, this time to 10 years after a President leaves 
office. This 10-year restriction applied to Presidents who took office 
after January 1, 1997.
  The role of a former President has changed throughout the years. 
Former Presidents now have a global presence, and they are often seen 
as de facto representatives of the United States.
  Whether it's former President Carter's work in peace negotiations 
with other countries or President Clinton's global initiative, former 
Presidents have a valuable role in using their experience and knowledge 
to help the U.S. in both a public and private capacity.
  The world has changed dramatically since the 9/11 terrorist attacks. 
The threats to American personnel and interests continue as terrorists 
wage a war against the United States. Arbitrarily limiting Secret 
Service protection to 10 years may have made sense in 1994, after the 
Cold War had ended and before the war on terror had begun.
  In a world where Americans who serve the public interest are 
considered targets, we must make sure that the safety and security of 
our former Chief Executives is not jeopardized. H.R. 6620 recognizes 
that those who serve as President are symbols of America and

[[Page 16247]]

American freedoms and deserve to be protected.
  There are only a handful of Americans who will be called upon to 
serve this country as President. These individuals represent America, 
not only while serving in office, but remain in the public 
consciousness long after they leave. H.R. 6620, simply recognizes that 
unique role and reinstates lifetime protection for all of our former 
Presidents.
  I want to again thank Mr. Gowdy and Mr. Scott for their work on this 
issue, and I urge my colleagues to support the bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Ladies and gentlemen, H.R. 6620 is a commonsense bill that will 
ensure the continued safety of our Presidents after they leave the 
White House by extending the ability of the Secret Service to protect 
former Presidents; and I'm proud to join with the chairman, Mr. Smith, 
of Judiciary, in support of this bill.
  For Presidents who didn't serve prior to 1997, current Federal law 
provides that the Secret Service's protection terminates 10 years after 
the President leaves office. The 10-year limitation was enacted in 
1994, when the nature of threats to former Presidents was more limited. 
But times have changed, and it's an unfortunate fact that former 
Presidents will require Secret Service protection for the rest of their 
lives. Therefore, this bill would simply restore the law to its prior 
form.
  When a President of the United States completes his term, he remains 
a symbol of our Nation. Sadly, our Presidents who've worked hard to 
protect us from those who would harm our Nation may, themselves, 
continue to be in harm's way even after they complete their terms in 
office.
  Most former Presidents remain prominently in the public eye, 
continuing to represent our country in significant ways and providing 
leadership on important issues. We should recognize and encourage their 
continued service by providing them with the protection they need.
  This bill would also expand the Secret Service's authorization to 
protect the children of former Presidents until they reach 16 years of 
age. This also makes good sense under the current circumstances.
  I want to recognize the Secret Service for their excellent and 
tireless job that they perform in protecting our national leaders. The 
men and women of the Secret Service conduct themselves with valor, 
while carrying out the protective function of their agency. They 
provide protection for a variety of people and events, including the 
President and special national security events as well.
  The Secret Service has other important functions which also deserve 
recognition. For example, the investigative role of the Secret Service 
has expanded greatly, from protecting the currency against 
counterfeiting, to investigating a wide variety of crimes related to 
this country's financial institutions and credit systems.

                              {time}  1010

  I, too, join in commending the gentleman from South Carolina, a 
member of our committee, Trey Gowdy, for his special work on this bill; 
and I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 6620.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume 
to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Gowdy), who is the sponsor of 
this legislation.
  Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to first thank Chairman Lamar 
Smith. This may be my last opportunity to thank him for his service as 
chairman of the Judiciary Committee, not just for this bill but for the 
work he's done in the full 2 years. He has done a fantastic job, and I 
would like to thank the chairman for that.
  Mr. Speaker, two things are clear: protection, security, and public 
safety--those are the fundamental obligations of government; and, 
secondly, we live in an increasingly dangerous world with increasing 
threats against our citizens and targets that are viewed as high 
profile. For those reasons, Mr. Speaker, and others, I earnestly 
believe those who serve this country as President should never have to 
worry about their personal safety.
  Under current law, protection for President Obama and President 
George W. Bush will cease after 10 years. Both men are young, enjoy 
good health, and have long lives ahead of them post-Presidency. This 
bill proposes to extend that security for the remainder of their lives. 
There's an unintended anomaly, Mr. Speaker, that if current law were 
not changed, Hillary Clinton, Barbara Bush and Laura Bush would receive 
more protections by virtue of being First Lady than they would if they 
had served as President themselves. So I hope my colleagues will make 
sure that the person and the symbol of our Presidency is safe and 
secure for the duration of their natural lives.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, before I yield to the distinguished 
gentlelady from Texas, I would like to observe the great relationship 
that has been formed on Judiciary between myself and the distinguished 
gentleman from San Antonio, Texas. For 4 years he was the ranking 
member on his side, while I was chair. We worked together. And for the 
2 years he served as chair, I worked as his ranking member. We had a 
cordial and, I think, important relationship in framing and putting 
forward the issues for the Committee on the Judiciary, and I thank him.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. CONYERS. I will yield to the gentleman, with pleasure.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to thank the former 
chairman of the Judiciary Committee himself for those generous comments 
and say I've certainly enjoyed our working relationship over the last 6 
years, and I know that that will continue as well.
  Mr. CONYERS. I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlelady 
from Texas, a senior member of Judiciary, Ms. Sheila Jackson Lee.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. This is an enormously positive exhibition 
of the working relationship of the members of the House Judiciary 
Committee. And I thank both the chairman and the ranking member for the 
evidence of collegiality in these waning moments of the 112th Congress.
  I'm going to follow my ranking member and acknowledge appreciation 
for the service of Judiciary Committee Chairperson Lamar Smith, who 
happens to be a tall Texan. And so we are delighted to thank him very 
much for the work that he has done, and to join with an established 
icon of Judiciary prominence in John Conyers. The two match well in 
their excellence, and I thank the ranking member and the former 
chairperson for his work and service. There is great work being done by 
the Judiciary Committee, and I think it is enormously important that we 
are the holders and protectors of the Constitution on behalf of not 
only our Members but on behalf of the United States of America.
  Now is not the time, but I do want to acknowledge and hope that the 
House will consent at the appropriate time to acknowledge one of our 
fallen of great prominence of this committee, someone who I sat in his 
office as a baby Member of Congress, the Honorable Jack Brooks, who has 
passed. I hope there will be an appropriate moment for us to honor him 
before we leave today.
  I rise to be able to thank the sponsor of this legislation--he 
attracted my interest in it--to correct something that probably was 
thought to be of good direction, but was not, in the limitation of the 
coverage of the President and the President's children, the First 
Family's children.
  As a member of the Homeland Security Committee, let me say that we 
are celebratory of the fact that we have not had another attack on our 
soil since 9/11. If we look at it in a global perspective, we've not 
fought a war on our soil since--I believe at least an intense one--
since the Civil War. But certainly we know that terrorism and danger 
have taken a new direction in this country and the world. And for those 
of us who spend time on these issues on a regular basis, this is a 
forward-thinking and smart initiative to

[[Page 16248]]

ensure that the security of the men and/or women who have served as 
President of the United States and their children can be fully 
protected.
  Let me acknowledge, as well, the service of the men and women of the 
United States Secret Service. And to be very frank, having jurisdiction 
over the Secret Service and Homeland Security and having interacted 
with them on a number of occasions, certainly we note that there was a 
moment in this last year that did not reflect well upon the decades of 
service of the United States Secret Service. But they have done their 
job well. They have been dutiful servants and protectors of the men 
that have held the highest office, along with the First Ladies and 
their children. This legislation speaks to a modern-day world where you 
never know where danger may approach someone and can be utilized in an 
untoward manner, such as being held hostage and used to threaten the 
sanctity and democracy and freedom of this Nation.
  So this legislation reflects our smartness and astuteness in 
correcting what was probably thought to be good but upon reflection 
does not reflect on the goodness of this Congress, the goodness of the 
American people, who respect the service of their public servants to 
the highest office in this land.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I want to ask my colleagues to support the 
underlying legislation. And as this exhibits our opportunity that we 
can work together, I know that we'll find the right solution for 
solving our issues of middle class tax cuts and the fiscal deadline and 
make sure we move in a very positive direction.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, we have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, we have no further requests for 
time, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) that the House suspend the rules and 
pass the bill, H.R. 6620.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________