[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 6]
[House]
[Pages 8017-8071]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




        DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2014


                             General Leave

  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous material on the consideration of H.R. 2217 and that 
I may include tabular material on the same.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 243 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. 2217.
  The Chair appoints the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Roe) to preside 
over the Committee of the Whole.

                              {time}  1245


                     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. 2217) making appropriations for the Department of Homeland 
Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2014, and for other 
purposes, with Mr. Roe of Tennessee in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the 
first time.
  The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter) and the gentleman from North 
Carolina (Mr. Price) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  It was 69 years ago this Thursday that more than 9,000 Allied 
soldiers were killed or wounded during the D-day invasion in Normandy, 
France. That courageous operation, as well as the sacrifice of so many 
brave individuals, serves as a sobering reminder that freedom and 
security are, in fact, not free.
  It is with this solemn commitment to both freedom and security that I 
respectfully present to the people's House the fiscal year 2014 
appropriations bill for the Department of Homeland Security. Similar to 
our subcommittee's work over the past 3 fiscal years, this bill 
demonstrates how we can fund vital security programs and enforce the 
law while also reducing discretionary spending overall. So this bill is 
about our security and fiscal priorities and getting them right.
  The President's fiscal year 2014 budget proposal for DHS presents a 
harmful budget for our frontline homeland security agencies, 
diminishing their operational workforces and undermining mission 
capabilities. The end result of the President's budget proposal would, 
undoubtedly, be a less capable DHS. That's why our subcommittee, on a 
bipartisan basis, strove to significantly improve the flawed budget 
request through this bill before the House today.

[[Page 8018]]

  First, this bill targets the very programs and systems displayed 
during and after the recent horrific attack at the Boston Marathon. It 
does this by a nearly 20 percent increase above the request for FEMA's 
first responder grants; substantial increases above the request and 
last year's level for CBP's targeting, TSA's Secure Flight, and ICE's 
visa enforcement programs, including the phase-in of 1,600 additional 
CBP officers; doubling the Department's Bombing Prevention program, 
substantially increasing counter-IED training and applying the lessons 
learned from our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; and a nearly 40 percent 
increase in the program If You See Something, Say Something.
  In addition, the bill restores virtually all of the unjustified 
proposed cuts to DHS' operational programs, to include restoring the 
cuts to ICE's mandated 34,000 detention beds and vital investigative 
programs; restoring cuts to the Coast Guard's operational expenses, 
including aviation and flight hours, as well as restoring the 
President's truly harmful cuts to recapitalization and acquisitions of 
cutter and aviation assets; restoring the proposed cuts to CBP air and 
marine operating hours and procurement, as well as mission support 
functions; restoring the proposed long-term cuts to Secret Service 
staffing and financial crime investigations; and providing these 
restorations while also strongly supporting the Department's disaster 
relief, cybersecurity and research programs, including the full-year 
construction increment for the National Agro- and Bio-Defense facility 
in Kansas.

                              {time}  1250

  This bill also considers our Nation's fiscal crisis by invoking real 
fiscal discipline and efficiency, including a more than $613 million--
or more than 1.5 percent--reduction below fiscal year 2013 to the 
Department's annual budget; a 15 percent cut below the request to DHS 
headquarters staffing; a nearly 25 percent cut below the request to 
departmental administrative expenses and bureaucratic overhead; denial 
of the President's request to increase bureaucracy by creating three 
new headquarters offices; termination of funding for ineffectual 
offices and programs and substantial oversight requirements, ranging 
from withholding funds to statutory mandates to reporting requirements 
on everything from major acquisitions to ammunition inventories, 
purchases, and usage.
  Mr. Chairman, this bill does not represent a false choice between 
fiscal responsibility and security. Both are urgent priorities, and 
both are vigorously addressed by this bill.
  I must note that DHS did a shameful job in complying with statutory 
requirements enacted into law FY13. Those failures are certainly 
addressed in this bill. We are serious about compelling the Department 
to both enforce the law and comply with the law, and we will not 
tolerate further failures in this regard, a point I think we make clear 
in this bill through 50 percent withholdings to the Department's 
executive offices and 50 percent reductions to offices that are 
delaying the review and submittal of needed, factual information 
requested by Congress.
  On a final and regrettably sober note, my staff and I have been 
regularly talking with our dear friend and my classmate, Tom Cole, and 
doing all that we can to help the good people of his Oklahoma district 
get back on their feet from the devastating tornado that hit the town 
of Moore and surrounding communities.
  So, in addition to the nearly $11 billion that is currently in FEMA 
coffers, this bill fully supports the known requirements of $6.2 
billion for the disaster relief fund in FY14. These funds, combined 
with our continued oversight, will help ensure disaster assistance 
rapidly gets to those who've lost so much. Mr. Chairman, we send Tom 
and his constituents our sincere condolences and wish them a speedy 
recovery.
  In closing, let me first thank Ranking Member Price for his 
statesmanship and partnership. I sincerely thank him and his dedicated 
professional staff for their input and notable contributions to this 
bill.
  In addition, let me thank the thoughtful Members of this body. We 
received program submissions from 222 Members, and their input was 
critical to our oversight work over the past few months, as well as the 
production of this bill. I know that my staff and I made every effort 
to accommodate virtually every Member's submission we received, and 
that has only made this a stronger product.
  Finally, I must thank the distinguished chairman and ranking member 
of the full committee, Chairman Rogers and Mrs. Lowey. Their input and 
support for the bill is genuinely appreciated.
  I sincerely believe this bill reflects our best effort to address our 
Nation's urgent needs: security, enforcement, and fiscal restraint.
  I urge my colleagues to support this measure, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.

[[Page 8019]]





[[Page 8020]]



[[Page 8021]]



[[Page 8022]]



[[Page 8023]]



[[Page 8024]]



[[Page 8025]]



[[Page 8026]]



[[Page 8027]]



[[Page 8028]]



[[Page 8029]]



[[Page 8030]]



[[Page 8031]]



[[Page 8032]]


  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the fiscal year 2014 Department of 
Homeland Security appropriations bill and am pleased that we're 
bringing this bill to the House floor under an open rule. I want to 
commend Chairman Carter for the open, collaborative, and bipartisan 
process he has led this spring. There's a long history of bipartisan 
cooperation on this subcommittee that's critical for allowing us to 
focus on the Nation's domestic security needs.
  The funding allocation provided to the subcommittee hews closely to 
the overall spending figure requested by the President for the 
Department of Homeland Security, but I don't believe either number is 
fully adequate to provide DHS with the resources it needs to help keep 
the Nation safe. We have been able to fill a number of significant 
holes in the President's budget request, but that has necessitated 
creating some shortfalls in other areas.
  I want to make clear, however, that my support of Chairman Carter's 
efforts are in no way an endorsement of the overall discretionary 
spending caps adopted by the majority in the House budget resolution. 
Sequestration was intended to be a mechanism to force the parties to 
come together to address our long-term fiscal challenges. It was never 
meant, in itself, to be a tool for deficit reduction, and it certainly 
was never meant to be the basis for a discretionary spending cap on a 
budget resolution.
  While not quite sufficient, our allocation is still better than most 
of the other domestic appropriations bills, which will struggle to 
appropriately fund critical priorities, such as medical and energy 
research, law enforcement and the justice system, and investments in 
education and infrastructure. Our Homeland Security bill is not the 
only bill that deals with our country's strength and security, and the 
allocations provided to these other subcommittees by the Ryan budget 
will put that strength and security at grave risk.
  That being said, and given the low 302(b) allocation this 
subcommittee had to work with, I applaud the chairman and the staff for 
addressing a number of Democratic priorities, including first responder 
and antiterrorism grants, as well as providing increases above the 
request for frontline DHS employees so that they can continue to 
conduct critical operations along our borders, protect our Nation's 
airports, seaports, and land ports of entry, and respond to natural 
disasters across the country.
  Right before last year's markup, we were reminded of the threats 
facing our Nation when the intelligence community thwarted an attempt 
to place a nonmetallic improvised explosive device on an aircraft bound 
for the United States.
  This year, following the terrorist attacks in Boston, we're forced to 
confront the tragic reality that these threats remain constant, that 
terrorists remain determined to attack the homeland and they will 
devise more and more perverse ways to kill and harm innocent people. 
This requires DHS and the intelligence community and local first 
responders to remain vigilant and to strive continually to optimize 
their scarce resources. That's why I'm pleased this bill increases 
funding for critical grant programs, while once again rejecting the 
administration's insufficiently articulated proposal to reengineer the 
grant structure, a proposal that has not been authorized.
  Specifically, the bill includes $1.5 billion for FEMA State and local 
grants, an increase of $35 million over the FY13 appropriated level, 
and it keeps both fire grants and emergency performance grants level 
with FY13. The bill also doubles the requested funding for the Office 
of Bombing Prevention to accelerate planning, training, and awareness 
programs to help detect and respond to IEDs and other explosive 
devices.
  Equally important, the bill provides a $16.9 million increase in 
funding for research and development efforts at the Science and 
Technology Directorate. When you combine this funding with what was 
included in the final FY13 bill, we've made significant progress since 
FY12, providing funding for high-priority research efforts and some new 
projects, as well.
  The bill also provides substantial funding--$404 million--for 
construction of the National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility, a 
laboratory that's essential to our ability to help prevent and respond 
to animal disease threats.
  The bill also increases funding for critical Coast Guard and CBP air 
and marine acquisitions to recapitalize aging assets while also 
bringing the latest aviation and vessel technologies online to ensure 
our frontline personnel can operate more effectively, improving on the 
administration's request on each of those fronts.

                              {time}  1300

  I am also pleased that the bill provides funding for an additional 
1,600 Customs and Border Protection officers requested by the 
administration and for substantially strengthened cybersecurity 
protective efforts. These efforts are absolutely necessary to monitor 
and detect intrusions to our Federal networks and protect them from 
foreign espionage and cyber attacks.
  Finally, I commend Chairman Carter for providing the requested 
amount, $6.22 billion, for the Disaster Relief Fund, which will ensure 
that there are sufficient disaster relief resources moving into the 
coming fiscal year. And I echo the chairman's pledge of support for 
Representative Tom Cole, for his constituents and the other people of 
Oklahoma to fully address their needs.
  I also want to remind my colleagues, however, that should emergency 
disaster relief funding become necessary beyond what we have budgeted, 
Congress must respond immediately and effectively, without distracting 
fights over budget policy.
  I do have some concerns with the bill, notably, some of the 
immigration provisions. The bill once again sets an arbitrary minimum 
of 34,000 ICE detention beds, denying ICE the flexibility it needs to 
manage its enforcement and removal resources in response to changing 
circumstances and to use cheaper, alternative forms of supervision when 
appropriate.
  The bill also unnecessarily and wastefully continues the 287(g) 
program, which was designed to secure local law enforcement 
participation in immigration enforcement. In addition to being 
seriously flawed, this program has become obsolete with the full 
implementation of the Secure Communities program.
  I also must note my concern with some of the withholdings in the 
bill. I understand the need to give incentives to the Department to 
respect reporting deadlines established by the committee, but I hope we 
can temper some of these withholdings as we move through the process, 
as they have the potential to seriously undermine the Department's 
management functions.
  The bill also provides no funding for the new DHS headquarters, 
despite $105 million in the request. We have been told repeatedly by 
the administration that deferring these investments will greatly 
increase the project's costs and eventually it's bound to affect 
frontline operations, and I believe they're correct on both counts.
  I also want to note my strong objection to three general provisions 
related to abortion services for detainees that were added to the bill 
in full committee. While they have no impact on ICE policies, they 
unnecessarily interject a divisive issue into the bill, distracting us 
from what should be our focus and straying far outside the lines of the 
jurisdiction of the Appropriations Committee.
  So while I support the bill as reported to the House by the 
Appropriations Committee and believe it represents an improvement over 
the budget request, it still falls short of the bill I believe we would 
want to craft were we operating under a more adequate allocation.
  Let me also express the hope, going into this debate, that this year 
we can avoid loading the bill up here on the floor with controversial 
and unnecessary policy riders. There will be a time

[[Page 8033]]

and place to debate immigration reform, and the Homeland Security 
appropriations bill should not be caught up in that process.
  In closing, I, too, want to express my appreciation for the 
hardworking and dedicated staff on both sides of the aisle. In the 
course of just 2 months, they have diligently wrapped up the fiscal 
2013 bill, digested and analyzed the President's fiscal 2014 request, 
and crafted the bipartisan measure before us. Thanks to Ben Nicholson, 
Kris Mallard, Corenell Teague, Valerie Baldwin, Pam Williams, and 
Hilary May on the majority side, and of course, Darek Newby and Justin 
Wein on our side of the aisle.
  With that, I urge approval of the bill, and I reserve the balance of 
my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, at this time I yield such time as he may 
consume to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), the chairman of 
the Appropriations Committee, who is the former founding chairman of 
this subcommittee and a former great prosecutor from the State of 
Kentucky.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I thank the chairman for yielding me the 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this bill.
  First, I'd like to thank our colleagues for their careful 
consideration yesterday of the Military Construction and Veterans 
Affairs appropriations bill, which, as you know, passed overwhelmingly 
in the House. There were only four Members who voted against that bill, 
and I'd like to ask all of the supporters of that bill to continue on 
this bill today. It's a very conscientious piece of legislation that I 
believe can and should pass this body on a bipartisan basis.
  The bill before you, as the chairman and the ranking member have 
said, provides $38.9 billion for the Department of Homeland Security. 
In such austere budget times, this bill rightly prioritizes spending on 
programs that save American lives. Frontline protection, terrorism 
prevention and response, disaster recovery, and a strong and secure 
border, all of these are paramount to the safety and security of our 
homeland.
  Mr. Chairman, we are constantly reminded that we can't let our 
frontline security efforts lapse. The terrible attack at the Boston 
Marathon underscored the need to support key readiness programs, 
provide heroic first responders with the funding and equipment they 
deserve, and improve intelligence and threat-targeting activities so we 
can help avoid terrible attacks like Boston in the future.
  With this bill, we are tightening security at our borders with 
funding increases for Customs and Border Protection and ICE that 
preserve the highest totals of Border Patrol agents and CBP officers 
and the highest detention bed capacity in history. We've targeted 
funding to combat human trafficking, child exploitation, cyber crime, 
and drug smuggling. And we're protecting our shores and access points 
with adequate funding for the Coast Guard and TSA.
  This bill also fully supports the known requirements from the FEMA 
Disaster Relief Fund, which provides assistance to localities 
overwhelmed by catastrophic natural disasters like the recent tornadoes 
in the Midwest. Our thoughts and prayers continue to be with the 
victims of those disasters that have ravaged our Nation, like Oklahoma.
  To that end, this bill provides an additional $6.2 billion for that 
Disaster Relief Fund. That's for fiscal 2014. Right now, though, as the 
chairman has said, combined with the approximately $11 billion kitty 
that FEMA has on hand, there is sufficient funding for the immediate 
response needs in Oklahoma and other affected areas.
  Our committee stands at the ready to reassess any further needs as a 
fuller picture of the damage becomes clear. It's our duty as Members of 
Congress to provide this critical assistance to communities that are 
suffering from such unexpected and devastating natural disasters.
  Mr. Chairman, strong national security comes at a price. And as we 
all know, tax dollars for these programs are in limited supply these 
days, so we can't let any of the funding that we appropriate to the 
Department of Homeland Security go to unproven or wasteful programs. 
Across the Department, we've made careful reductions that bring total 
funding in this bill to $617 million less than the fiscal year 2013 
enacted level. We've enforced strict reporting requirements and other 
oversight tools to guarantee that DHS is spending its dollars wisely, 
and we've prevented funding from being used on risky or controversial 
efforts like transferring detainees from Guantanamo Bay or another Fast 
and Furious-type program.
  Before I conclude, let me extend my appreciation to Chairman Carter 
and Ranking Member Price, former chairman of the subcommittee, for 
their hard work in crafting this bill. As has been said by both sides, 
this is a nonpartisan bill. It always has been that way.

                              {time}  1310

  We've attempted to work from the very beginning of this 
subcommittee's existence to work across the aisle, to be sure that the 
homeland is adequately protected. That takes cooperation across the 
middle aisle, and it's happened over the years, and it's happened this 
year. And I want to thank these two gentlemen, especially, for working 
together, as they have.
  This is John Carter's first bill as a cardinal. He's making his 
maiden voyage, and I think the ship is sailing through. He says he 
hopes so.
  And we want to thank, of course, the staff of the subcommittee for 
their tireless hours dedicated towards crafting this bill of great 
importance to our national security.
  So I'm proud to say, Mr. Chairman, that I stand before you in 100 
percent support of this bill. It represents all that makes our country 
great and the security that will keep our country great. And I urge our 
colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I'm pleased to yield 3 
minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), the 
distinguished ranking member of the full committee.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I want to share the very gracious remarks 
on the part of the chair of the full committee, the chair of the 
subcommittee, the outstanding ranking member, and all the staff for the 
important work you did on this bill.
  Over the past year, we have experienced the devastation of Hurricane 
Sandy, heartbreak in Moore, Oklahoma, tragic acts of terror in Boston. 
Disasters, natural or manmade, pose risks to our communities, which 
must be matched with the resources of the Federal Government and, in 
particular, the Department of Homeland Security.
  The bill before us, which is approximately $35 million below the 
administration's request, does a good job of meeting these tasks, yet 
inadequately funds other programs such as operational accounts, which 
face cuts so severe that they cannot realistically be implemented.
  I do thank the chairman and ranking member for including several 
priorities, providing $1.5 billion for FEMA State and local grants 
which were underfunded in the request, prioritizing high-risk areas in 
our grant programs, continuing the Securing the Cities program to 
prevent radiological or nuclear attacks, making needed investments in 
cybersecurity, and including language to help stem sexual assault in 
the Coast Guard, which has become a significant and outrageous problem 
in the military.
  However, the bill before us ignores the dangerous impact of 
sequestration, putting off difficult choices that must be made if we 
are to enact responsible spending bills for FY14.
  With the majority's unworkable 302(a) allocation, which is $92 
billion below the President's request, and less than the amounts agreed 
to under the Budget Control Act, this is one of the few bills that will 
have sufficient funding to garner bipartisan support.
  The budget resolution and appropriations process under way harm our 
ability to invest in education, medical research, transportation 
infrastructure, energy development, all of which we need to grow our 
economy and build a competitive workforce for the future.

[[Page 8034]]

  I was very proud to serve on the Homeland Security Subcommittee and 
appreciate, again, the chairman and ranking member's efforts, as well 
as the professional staff, in writing this bill. This subcommittee has 
a history of working across the aisle; and if we avoid poison pill 
riders during this debate, we will likely pass a bipartisan bill to 
provide responsible funding levels for the agencies tasked with vital 
security functions.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, at this time I yield 3 minutes to my 
colleague from the great State of Texas, (Mr. McCaul), the chairman of 
the full Committee on Homeland Security.
  Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Chairman, let me thank my dear friend and colleague 
from Texas, the great State, Judge Carter, and commend him for a fine 
job on this legislation.
  The recent Boston attacks serve as a stark reminder that the 
terrorist threat to America remains constant. Despite the President's 
dangerous narrative downplaying the radical jihadist threat to America, 
al Qaeda and its affiliates and those they inspire have not given up 
their quest to attack us.
  In today's challenging fiscal climate, it is more important than ever 
that every dollar spent on national security be linked to results. Our 
safety depends on the strategic funding of programs and technologies 
that provide us with valuable defenses and measurable outcomes. This 
bill demands that those criteria be met.
  As chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security, I'm pleased to see 
that this bill provides appropriate funding for our frontline efforts, 
reins in wasteful spending, and ensures that tax dollars are accounted 
for by enacting important reporting requirements for the Department.
  I will soon introduce a cybersecurity bill defining the Department's 
role in ensuring the real-time flow of information to protect our 
Nation's critical infrastructure, data, intelligence, and financial 
systems. This bill provides the necessary funding needed for DHS to 
fulfill its important cybersecurity mission.
  I recently introduced H.R. 1417, the Border Security Results Act, 
requiring DHS to implement a strategy to gain operational control of 
our borders. The appropriations bill presented here today supports a 
strong commitment to secure our borders by providing over $350 million 
to the Border Technology account and supports the refinement and 
adaptation of proven technology needed to monitor the border and 
support our boots on the ground.
  The bill provides for an additional 800 CBP officers, $387 million 
for ICE operations, and funding for ICE's 34,000 detention beds, 
despite the administration's plan to reduce that number and release 
hundreds of dangerous criminals into our communities.
  It also restores cuts to our Coast Guard, which will strengthen our 
interdiction efforts in the Western Hemisphere.
  And, finally, the bill applies lessons learned from the recent Boston 
attacks. For example, the bill rejects the President's proposed 39 
percent cut to Bombing Prevention programs, and increases funding for 
visa security and overstay enforcement programs by $10 million.
  This bill reflects the right priorities and insists on accountability 
from DHS. It will help to ensure that America is safe, secure, and 
protected; and I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I'm now pleased to yield 3 
minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Roybal-Allard), an 
outstanding member of our subcommittee.
  Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. I thank Chairman Carter and Ranking Member Price 
for their bipartisan efforts in the drafting of this bill.
  Unfortunately, with the refusal of the House leadership to go to 
conference on the budget, this year's appropriations process will be at 
the expense of essential funding for critical programs such as 
education, research, transportation, and infrastructure.
  Nonetheless, this bill will help make our Nation stronger and more 
secure. It robustly funds grants to provide our first responders with 
the resources they need to protect the public when disaster strikes.
  The bill also funds the highly effective Alternatives to Detention 
program at $24 million above the President's request. While I believe 
ATD should be significantly expanded, I was pleased to see the 
increased allocation for this proven program.
  In addition, the bill provides a $16.9 million increase in funding 
for the Science and Technology Directorate, which will enable DHS to 
develop new tools to detect and deter terrorists before they attack.
  However, there are still aspects of the bill that are of concern. For 
example, the bill continues to mandate that every night ICE maintain 
34,000 detention beds, even when they are not needed. This needless 
quota restricts ICE's flexibility in using the smartest, most cost-
effective means of enforcing our immigration laws by limiting ICE's 
ability to base detention decisions on whether or not an individual 
poses a threat to our country.

                              {time}  1320

  The bill also increases funding for the ineffective and unnecessary 
287(g) program, which encourages racial profiling and undermines 
confidence in law enforcement in our minority and immigrant 
communities. These scarce resources could be better spent addressing 
serious threats like cyber warfare and cyber crime. Instead, the bill 
underfunds this critical national priority by more than $24 million 
below the President's request.
  In spite of these weaknesses and given the limited resources 
allocated to the subcommittee, I do believe Chairman Carter and Ranking 
Member Price have done their best to enable DHS to protect the American 
people in an increasingly dangerous world. For that reason, I support 
the bill in its current form. However, I understand some Members will 
try to pass anti-immigrant amendments, which would make it impossible 
for me to support this bill. These efforts are contrary to the 
bipartisan spirit in which this bill was written and the bipartisan 
spirit in which this House has always approached issues of national 
security. If introduced, I urge my colleagues to reject these 
irresponsible amendments.
  Again, I thank Chairman Carter, Ranking Member Price, and the 
subcommittee's hardworking staff for putting together this bill.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, at this time I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Aderholt), a former chairman of this 
subcommittee and currently chairman of the Appropriations Committee's 
Subcommittee on Agriculture.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. I rise today also in support of the FY 2014 
appropriations bill for the Department of Homeland Security. I want to 
commend Chairman Carter and also Ranking Member Price for their hard 
work in making sure that they set up the right priorities during a very 
difficult budget time here in this Nation.
  The bill provides the resources that are needed to meet our most 
essential obligations, while at the same time maintaining fiscal 
responsibility and also greater oversight. It is $617 million below 
last year's spending level. As has been mentioned, the bill rejects the 
administration's proposed reductions to CBP operations and the Coast 
Guard and increases funding for critical programs such as the TSA 
Secure Flight Program and the FEMA first responder grants.
  The bill maintains the needed number of beds for ICE detention. It 
also includes a substantial amount of funding for NBAF. This important 
asset provides our Nation with critical capabilities to conduct 
research and develop vaccines and other countermeasures in a time when 
we would most need it.
  Again, I want to congratulate Chairman Carter and Ranking Member 
Price for their hard work on this bill. I would urge my colleagues that 
this is a good bill and a measure that should have their support.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to 
another outstanding subcommittee member, Mr. Cuellar of Texas.
  Mr. CUELLAR. I rise in support of this appropriations bill, which 
includes

[[Page 8035]]

the hiring of 1,600 new CBP officers. Those are the men and women in 
blue that man our ports of entry. These 1,600 CBP officers will be a 
huge and historic step in addressing the congested ports of entries. 
And I thank Chairman Carter and Ranking Member Price for their 
leadership and a bipartisan approach to this very important issue.
  In FY 2012, CBP processed more than 350 million travelers and 
facilitated $2.3 trillion worth of trade at ports of entry. America's 
ports of entry are vital hubs of economic activity. As high volumes of 
goods and persons move through our ports of entry, port security is an 
urgent priority. Therefore, this new increase of CBP officers will 
achieve the goal of facilitating trade and travel and boost economic 
development.
  The southern border is one of the fastest-growing regions in North 
America. In fact, every day there's $1.2 billion of trade between the 
U.S. and Mexico. My hometown of Laredo handles about 45 percent of all 
the trade between the U.S. and Mexico. In fact, every day about 12,000 
commercial trucks cross the bridges in Laredo. These 1,000 men and 
women in blue will help facilitate trade and travel at our ports of 
entry and will help our economy. Again, I want to thank both the 
chairman and ranking member for this effort.
  We also have to do some enhancements to infrastructure at our 
critical ports. That's also very necessary. If we limit the Federal 
funding at our ports of entry, we need to be innovative and think 
outside the box. In fact, it's essential that the Federal Government 
explore the use of public-private partnerships, which allows the 
Federal agencies to partner up with local governments and private 
stakeholders to help fund the land port, seaport, or airport 
infrastructure projects. These innovative financing mechanisms, with 
the proper safeguards that we will add, will adequately staff, supply, 
construct, and rehab our ports of entry and, in turn, will make our 
ports more secure and more efficient.
  I've been working with my colleagues, both the Democrats and 
Republicans, to encourage the use of public-private partnerships. In 
fact, I reached out to our colleague in the Senate from the Homeland 
Security Subcommittee, the chairwoman, Mary Landrieu, and she supports 
this particular concept. I look forward to working with my good friend, 
the judge from Texas. Both he and I agree that these are not Federal 
handouts but they actually allow the local government to partner up 
with the Federal Government and allow us to make our ports more 
efficient, more effective. I look forward to working with you, Chairman 
Carter, and with Ranking Member Price and the staff as we address this 
conference committee.
  I ask you to support this bill.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
member of our subcommittee, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Dent).
  Mr. DENT. I rise in support of the 2014 Department of Homeland 
Security appropriations bill being debated this afternoon. I certainly 
want to applaud the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Rogers, and 
certainly the chair of the subcommittee, Mr. Carter, as well as Ranking 
Member Price and the ranking member of the full committee, Mrs. Lowey, 
for carefully piecing together a bill that appropriately addresses the 
evolving threats that face our Nation. This bill strikes a proper 
balance of fiscal responsibility while fulfilling the mission of vital 
security programs and providing the resources to enforce current law.
  Regarding fiscal restraint, we're considering a bill today that 
provides for a reduction in the Department's annual budget by $613 
million, eliminating ineffectual programs. Yet the legislation was 
crafted in such a way that agencies and programs will receive the 
resources and flexibility they need to meet the security needs facing 
communities across the country day in and day out.
  For example, in the wake of the Boston bombings this spring, the bill 
before us restores DHS' Bombing Prevention program and increases 
counter-IED training. The Disaster Relief Fund, or the DRF, is robustly 
funded and will meet the disaster needs of Oklahoma, as well as those 
who were affected by the hurricanes in the Northeast, such as Hurricane 
Sandy.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Hultgren). The time of the gentleman has 
expired.
  Mr. CARTER. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
  Mr. DENT. The FEMA first responder grants, including fire grants, 
will receive a 20 percent increase. Further, these SAFER grants will 
continue to provide additional flexibility to allow communities to use 
grants to retain or rehire firefighters facing layoffs. As an aside, I 
want to thank again Ranking Member Price as well as Chairman Rogers for 
working with me on this critical issue once again.
  The bottom line is this is a smart, responsible bill that practices 
fiscal restraint while addressing our most pressing needs in securing 
our homeland. I urge support of the underlying bill.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to the 
remaining time?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina has 12 minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from Texas has 10 minutes remaining.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. At this time I have no further requests 
for time, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. At this time I yield 2 minutes to a very distinguished 
member of our subcommittee from the great of State of Tennessee (Mr. 
Fleischmann).
  Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the fiscal 2014 
Homeland Security appropriations bill.
  First, I would like to thank Chairman Carter and the subcommittee 
staff for all the work that they have done in preparation for this 
legislation.

                              {time}  1330

  This bill is a perfect example of what happens when real time and 
thought is put into how taxpayer dollars will be spent.
  As I have often said, budgeting is about prioritization, and this is 
exactly what this bill does. The legislation before us today exercises 
fiscal discipline. As a whole, we will reduce discretionary spending, 
while ensuring that programs vital to our national security are 
properly supported.
  This bill also recalibrates the President's pernicious budget 
proposals for the Department of Homeland Security to ensure that we are 
getting the most out of every taxpayer dollar. We must ensure the 
protection of Americans by strengthening security at and within our 
borders.
  By streamlining select programs within DHS and implementing stringent 
oversight, Chairman Carter and committee staff, with help from Ranking 
Member Price, have produced a bill that adequately funds our highest 
security priorities and eliminates waste, fraud, and abuse.
  Again, I thank the subcommittee for their diligence in crafting this 
legislation that pays equal heed to the protections of our taxpayer 
dollars and the security of our citizens.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, at this time I'd like to yield 2 minutes to 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), who is the chairman of the 
Coast Guard and Maritime Subcommittee of the full committee.
  Mr. HUNTER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  As the chairman of the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime 
Transportation, it is my pleasure to rise today in very strong support 
of H.R. 2217.
  Earlier this year, the President released a fiscal year 2014 budget 
that would cut funding for the Coast Guard by nearly 10 percent below 
current levels. This is the second year in a row that this President 
has asked the Coast Guard to sacrifice mission readiness and success to 
pay for his questionable spending at other agencies.
  The President's budget would slash the service's acquisitions budget 
by 42 percent below current levels and would severely undermine efforts 
to recapitalize the service's aging and failing

[[Page 8036]]

legacy assets, increase acquisition costs for taxpayers, and seriously 
degrade mission effectiveness. The President's proposed budget points 
to a future in which a downsized Coast Guard would fail to be able to 
accomplish even its most basic missions, and the cost could be measured 
in lives. Fortunately, the bill Chairman Carter has put before us 
totally rejects the massive cuts proposed by the President and ensures 
the Coast Guard is provided with the resources needed to carry out its 
very critical missions.
  I want to thank Chairman Carter, Ranking Member Price, and staff for 
their tremendous efforts and for their commitment to the men and women 
of the Coast Guard and the safety of the maritime community.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, at this time I'd like to 
yield 3 minutes to our distinguished colleague from Florida (Ms. 
Wasserman Schultz).
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Thank you, Ranking Member Price.
  First, let me commend both Chairman Carter and Ranking Member Price 
on a strong, bipartisan bill. But let me especially recognize their 
leadership for adding language to this legislation to protect our most 
vulnerable constituents--our children.
  This language that I refer to will effectively fence off $20 million 
in funds for child exploitation investigations and forensics within 
Immigration and Customs Enforcement's Child Exploitation Investigations 
Unit at the Department of Homeland Security.
  Mr. Chair, there is no question that our children need our support 
now more than ever. With the proliferation of the Internet and wireless 
technology, the spread of child pornography online must be addressed 
now. We don't have a moment or an opportunity to waste.
  The Department of Justice estimates that at any moment there are more 
than 1 million pornographic images of children on the Internet--think 
about that, 1 million--with an additional 200 images being posted every 
day, and more than one-third of the world's pedophiles involved in 
organized pornography rings worldwide live in the United States.
  The Internet allows these images to be disseminated indefinitely, 
victimizing that child again and again with each click of the mouse. 
Because let's not forget that these aren't just heinous images, they 
are crime scene photos. Every face in those photographs is the face of 
a child who needs our support in order to escape a living hell of 
constant abuse and exploitation.
  Since the 1970s, before we even had a Federal child pornography 
statute, ICE--which was then called the U.S. Customs Service--was a 
leader in the fight to protect our children. That is still true today. 
Last year, there were more than 1,600 criminal arrests relating to 
child exploitation, and 2,600 worldwide investigations were launched, 
setting new records for Homeland Security investigations. Already this 
year, there have been 1,382 criminal arrests relating to child 
exploitation. Their efforts are second to none, and I know they will 
continue to put these resources to good use.
  But for every child rescued, hundreds more remain trapped in a 
current of abuse, the horrors of which none of us can truly imagine. We 
need the absolute best personnel going into the fight to rescue these 
children. That's why it's my hope that some of these funds will be used 
to employ our wounded warriors, in addition to the experienced agents 
already fighting these battles. And I thank the chairman and ranking 
member for adding report language in the bill to encourage the hiring 
of these valued veterans.
  Our armed services have already protected us abroad, so naturally our 
veterans are a perfect choice to protect our most precious resources at 
home. In fact, retired Army Master Sergeant Rich Robertson is already 
fighting child exploitation at the ICE field office in Tennessee. In 
his words, ``Who better to hunt child predators than someone who's 
already hunted men?''
  I am enthusiastic about this initiative because I know of the immense 
skills and motivation of our returning servicemen and -women, and the 
skills that they possess could be the key to our most successful 
affront on child exploitation yet. Child predators won't stand a 
chance.
  By harnessing the abilities of our wounded warriors, we not only 
ensure that their skills, dedication, and drive are put to good use 
back at home, we give them the most dignifying thank-you of all: a job 
that truly makes a difference.
  Mr. Chair, let me be clear: with the inclusion of this language, we 
are putting predators on notice. Their reign of terror is coming to an 
end--you can bet on it.
  I thank my colleagues on the committee for committing to fight until 
every American child can live free from terror and exploitation.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, at this time I would like to yield 2 
minutes to the distinguished gentleman from the State of Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Barletta). He is the chairman of the committee that authorizes 
FEMA.
  Mr. BARLETTA. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Chairman Rogers and 
Chairman Carter for putting together a bill that supports communities' 
ability to prepare for natural disasters in this very difficult fiscal 
environment.
  As chairman of the subcommittee with jurisdiction over FEMA, I want 
to thank them for including all three of my committee recommendations 
in the bill:
  Thank you for continuing the Pre-Disaster Mitigation program, which 
saves money in future disaster assistance;
  Thank you for preserving the FEMA administrator's authority for 
directing Federal disaster response by limiting the role of the 
principal Federal official;
  Finally, thank you for funding the Emergency Management Performance 
Grants, or EMPG. With a 50 percent match requirement, EMPG grants 
leverage twice as many preparedness dollars as any other Federal 
program. For 60 years, EMPG has been focused on building local and 
State emergency management capability. There are plenty of programs 
that buy equipment and other things, but they won't do much good in a 
major disaster without qualified local emergency managers.
  We have all seen the photos of evacuation buses flooded and useless 
in New Orleans because they didn't have a good hurricane evacuation 
plan. Emergency managers develop the plans to get people out of harm's 
way and to bring help from outside to the disaster area. The EMPG 
program helps buy that capability, and FEMA needs to keep the EMPG 
grant guidance focused on building local government emergency 
management capacity.
  Again, let me thank Chairman Rogers and Chairman Carter for a good 
bill, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of very important report 
language included in the Homeland Security Appropriations bill, which 
will sustain inland Border Patrol stations in states along our nation's 
southern border.
  In 2012, the U.S. Border Patrol proposed to close nine interior 
Border Patrol stations as part of a cost-savings proposal. Six of the 
nine proposed closures are located in Texas, including one located in 
my district in the city of Amarillo. The U.S. Border Patrol made this 
announcement without first ensuring that local law enforcement agencies 
will have the necessary resources to deal with the serious illegal 
immigration problems in our area. The inland stations proposed for 
closure apprehend hundreds of illegal aliens every year. If these 
closures are allowed, several hundred illegal aliens would have to be 
let go due to the lack of federal presence.
  Since the proposal was unveiled last year, I have repeatedly heard 
from numerous local law enforcement officials who have serious concerns 
about the detrimental effect this would have on our local communities. 
They also believe this impact could reverberate throughout the country.
  You do not have to be on--or even near--the border to see and feel 
the effects of illegal immigration on our local communities, and that 
is something we want to make sure the folks

[[Page 8037]]

in Washington understand. Enforcement of our immigration laws does not 
stop at the border. Interior enforcement is essential as well. The 
Supreme Court has confirmed that it is the federal government's job to 
enforce these laws.
  The Border Patrol cited ``cost-saving measures'' as a reason for this 
proposal, but it is simply penny-wise and pound-foolish. Although the 
agency anticipates closing these nine stations could save $1.3 million, 
they admit it will cost $2.47 million to transfer all the agents to 
other stations.
  When I first brought these concerns to the U.S. Border Patrol, I was 
told time and time again that the agency was working with Immigration 
and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to develop a transition plan to ensure 
that someone from the federal government will be there to pick up the 
phone when local law enforcement needs their help. To date, I have seen 
no evidence of a viable plan. There appears to be no draft plan or even 
an outline of a plan. There are simply too many unanswered questions to 
allow these inland border patrol station closures to proceed.
  Any country must be able to control who and what comes across its 
borders. A government that cannot or will not do so fails in one of its 
most basic responsibilities.
  I would like to thank the Appropriations Committee and Subcommittee 
Chairman Carter for including this important language. I look forward 
to continuing to work together to ensure that our country is not left 
with a gaping hole in the enforcement of our immigration laws.
  Mr. GARCIA. Mr. Chair, I rise today to express my disappointment that 
the DHS Appropriations bill provides $68 million in funding for 
287(g)--a redundant, controversial immigration enforcement program.
  I will be offering an amendment later today to cut $10 million from 
this unnecessary program and use those funds to increase CBP staffing 
at our nation's airports.
  I would like to express my frustration that the legislation we are 
considering today, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations 
Act, provides $68 million for the 287(g)--a superfluous and 
controversial program that allows local police to act like federal 
agents.
  It does not make any sense to waste $68 million on a program that 
will not help us fix our immigration system nor secure our country.
  Because of this, today, I will be proposing an amendment that will 
cut $10 million from this program and use that money to increase the 
number of customs agents in our airports.
  This would reduce long lines and unacceptable delays, promoting 
commerce and tourism and furthering our economic recovery.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of this bill, though not in 
support of the process that brought it to the House floor.
  I am pleased that the overall committee process that produced this 
bill was bipartisan. For the first time in several years, this bill 
actually provides slightly more money for the State and Local Grant 
program, which funds such critical community grant programs like SAFER, 
AFG, and the Nonprofit Security Grant Program. Specifically, the bill 
provides $1.5 billion for State and Local Grants, which is $456.8 
million above the request and $35.4 million above the FY2013 enacted 
level. This is still far less than what our firefighters, EMS and other 
first responders need to replace aging equipment and hire needed 
additional personnel, but it is nonetheless movement in the right 
direction.
  Unfortunately, that positive development is offset by the failure of 
this bill to reverse the effects of sequester. TSA is addressing its 
sequestration-related funding shortfalls in part with a reduction in 
overtime and a freeze on hiring of new transportation security 
officers, which will lead to longer checkpoint lines at airports during 
peak summer travel season. CBP reduced overtime for CBP Officers, 
leading to significant increases in wait times at air, land, and sea 
ports of entry for citizens and international commerce. Coast Guard 
drug and migrant interdiction efforts have been reduced substantially, 
increasing the flow of narcotics into the United States. Sequestration 
cut $928 million from FEMA's Disaster Relief Fund (DRF), threatening to 
reduce funds available to help future victims of hurricanes, tornadoes, 
and other natural disasters recover and rebuild. This is no way to run 
a government, and I again urge the House majority to bring a bill to 
the floor that permanently overturns sequester. The American people 
want it, they need it, and we should do it today.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, before us is H.R. 2217, the Department of 
Homeland Security Appropriations Act for FY 2014. Although this 
legislation is far from perfect, I rise in reluctant support of the 
bill because ensuring that our first responders and those who work on 
the frontline protecting our borders have adequate resources to protect 
our homeland and keep our citizens safe.
  I strongly disapprove of the method employed by the House Republican 
to discharge the House's fundamental responsibility to reach a budget 
agreement with the Senate establishing the framework governing the 
appropriations process. The Republican majority brought to the floor 
and passed a rule that ``deems'' adopted the draconian spending limits 
imposed by the Ryan Budget resolution rather than a resolution that 
realistic and responsible limits that is to be negotiated and agreed to 
by House and Senate budget conferees.
  Indeed, the Republican House leadership has refused for months to 
appoint conferees empowered to reach a budget agreement that is fair, 
balanced and would end sequestration.
  I agree with President Obama that prior to consideration of 
appropriations bills the House and Senate should first reach agreement 
on an appropriate framework for all appropriations bills and one does 
not harm our economy or require draconian cuts to middle-class 
priorities.
  Without such an agreement, House Republican appropriation bills will 
result in: hundreds of thousands of low-income children losing access 
to Head Start programs, tens of thousands of children with disabilities 
losing federal funding for their special education teachers and aides, 
thousands of federal agents who will not be able to secure the border, 
enforce drug laws, combat violent crime or apprehend fugitives; and 
thousands of scientists without medical grants to conduct research to 
find new treatments and cures for diseases like breast cancer and 
Alzheimer's.
  The Ryan Budget that the House majority deemed adopted and 
incorporated in the rule governing consideration of this legislation 
assumes that the draconian funding levels established under 
sequestration will remain in place for the next several years.
  Sequestration has been an unmitigated disaster for the American 
people, especially for Texas and the people I represent in Houston. Let 
me identify just a few of the ways my constituents are being adversely 
affected by sequestration:
  Teachers and Schools: Texas will lose approximately $67.8 million for 
primary and secondary education, putting around 930 teacher and aide 
jobs at risk. In addition about 172,000 fewer students would be served 
and approximately 280 fewer schools would receive funding.
  Education for Children with Disabilities: Texas will lose 
approximately $51 million for about 620 teachers, aides, and staff who 
help children with disabilities.
  Head Start: Head Start and Early Head Start services would be 
eliminated for approximately 4,800 children in Texas, reducing access 
to critical early education.
  Military Readiness: In Texas, approximately 52,000 civilian 
Department of Defense employees would be furloughed, reducing gross pay 
by around $274.8 million in total.
  Law Enforcement and Public Safety Funds: Texas will lose about 
$1,103,000 in Justice Assistance Grants that support law enforcement, 
prosecution and courts, crime prevention and education, corrections and 
community corrections, drug treatment and enforcement, and crime victim 
and witness initiatives.
  Job Search Assistance: Around 83,750 fewer Texans will get the help 
and skills they need to find employment as Texas will lose about 
$2,263,000 for job search assistance, referral, and placement, meaning.
  Child Care: Up to 2,300 disadvantaged and vulnerable children could 
lose access to child care, which is also essential for working parents 
to hold down a job.
  Vaccines for Children: In Texas around 9,730 fewer children will 
receive vaccines for diseases such as measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus, 
whooping cough, influenza, and Hepatitis B due to reduced funding for 
vaccinations.
  Violence Against Women Grants: Texas could lose up to $543,000 to 
provide services to victims of domestic violence, resulting in up to 
2,100 fewer victims being served.
  Public Health: Texas will lose approximately $2,402,000 to help 
upgrade its ability to respond to public health threats including 
infectious diseases, natural disasters, and biological, chemical, 
nuclear, and radiological events. In addition, Texas will lose about 
$6,750,000 in grants to help prevent and treat substance abuse, 
resulting in around 2,800 fewer admissions to substance abuse programs. 
And the Texas State Department of Public Health will lose about 
$1,146,000 resulting in around 28,600 fewer HIV tests.
  Regarding the merits of the legislation before us, let me say that 
there is much in the bill that should command bipartisan support. For 
example, the bill includes $1.5 billion for

[[Page 8038]]

FEMA State and Local Grants, which is $35.4 million above the FY 2013 
enacted level. These grants fund critical programs such as the Homeland 
Security Grant Program, which primarily fund first responders, and the 
Urban Area Security Initiative.
  The bill also provides $10.6 billion for Customs and Border 
Protection and includes funding for the additional 1,600 Customs and 
Border Protection Officers requested by the President.
  The bill also makes needed investments in cybersecurity, providing 
$786 million to help protect federal networks from foreign espionage 
and cyber attacks. The bill also provides a total of $6.2 billion for 
disaster relief, as requested by the President.
  A major improvement to the bill was the adoption by the House of the 
Jackson Lee-Markey-Grimm-Reed Amendment which prohibits the 
Transportation Security Agency from changing its Prohibited Items List 
(PIL) to permit knives on planes. Adoption of my amendment enhances the 
security of air travel and protects TSA workers, flight attendants, 
pilots, and federal air marshals.
  I am also pleased that H.R. 2217 incorporates several program funding 
recommendations I made to the Committee, especially the funding 
provided for the Assistance to Firefighters Grant and the Staffing for 
Adequate Emergency Response Grant (SAFER) programs. The tragic loss of 
four firefighters last week in Houston reminds us again of the dangers 
faced daily by first responders and the necessity of providing them the 
resources and support required to keep them safe. Specifically, the 
bill funds in full or substantial part the following programmatic 
requests I submitted to the Appropriations Committee:
  1. $337,500,000, which is 100% of the amount requested, for the 
Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program. This program is critical to 
ensuring that our nation's first responders are adequately trained and 
equipped to safely and effectively respond to emergencies in their 
communities.
  2. $337,000,000 for the SAFER Program, which is 100% of the amount 
requested. The SAFER Grant Program provides much-needed funding for 
career and volunteer fire departments to hire new firefighters and 
recruit and retain volunteer firefighters. This program is critical to 
the thousands of fire stations across the country that are currently 
operating short of staff and to those seeking to retain current first 
responders in the face of the economic downturn and recovery.
  3. $11,002,000, 91 percent of my request, for the Citizenship and 
Integration Grant Program, which awards funding to organizations that 
help legal immigrants prepare for citizenship. Since the current 
immigration system does not always meet the comprehensive needs of 
immigrants, integration grants provide culturally sensitive and 
intentional services to uplift AAPI immigrants. Integration grants are 
critical as they prevent integration barriers, such as precluding 
applicants from registering to vote or to secure jobs that require U.S. 
citizenship.
  4. $111,590,000, 86.4 percent of my request, for Alternatives to 
Detention. These programs provide alternate detention options for low-
priority AAPIs where detention is neither mandated nor appropriate. 
While some immigrants need to be detained because they pose a public 
safety or flight risk, many immigrants do not need to be jailed and 
should be placed in less costly supervision programs. A recent report 
reveals that 40% of individuals held in detention in October 2011 had 
no criminal history.
  It is critical that this legislation continue to undergo further 
improvement and refinement before it is presented to the President for 
signature. As Ranking Member of the Homeland Security Border and 
Maritime Security Subcommittee, I will continue working with my 
colleagues across the aisle and in the Senate to ensure that our 
firefighters and other first responders have the resources needed to 
keep the American people safe.
  Mr. HONDA. Mr. Chair, I rise today to express my concern about the 
proposal in the President's budget request, which is included in this 
bill, to shift the responsibility for exit lane staffing from TSA to 
airport operators across this country.
  Since November 2001, TSA has assumed responsibility for staffing exit 
lanes under the authority of Aviation and Transportation Security Act. 
Citing budget constraints, in the Fiscal Year 2014 Budget Request, TSA 
has sought to shift the responsibility and costs for exit lane staffing 
to airport operators.
  This move raises a number of concerns ably described by the Committee 
in the report accompanying this bill. Particularly troubling is TSA's 
intention to continue to collect money for performing this function 
through the Aviation Security Infrastructure Fee while passing the buck 
along to airports.
  Like many of my colleagues, I have heard from my local airport--
Norman Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport--about the devastating 
impact this unfunded mandate would have on airport operators. Mineta 
airport is already paying $200,000 per year to staff one exit lane 
because TSA decided it was not ``co-located'' with the checkpoint 
screening area, and it cannot absorb the additional costs for more exit 
lane staffing--over the last few years, the airport has already reduced 
staff by more than 50 percent due to budget constraints.
  At the end my statement is the text of a letter I received from the 
City of San Jose, CA's director of aviation on behalf of Mineta San 
Jose Airport outlining these concerns in greater detail.
  Chairman Carter and Ranking Member Price, I know that you were faced 
with a challenging task, working within the allocation given and trying 
to fill holes left by the budget request. And I know from the language 
you included in the report that you regret being unable to fill this 
hole in the budget.
  I thank you for including language in the report directing TSA to 
work with airport operators to assess the impact of this change and 
consider delaying or at least phasing in this shift of responsibility 
until TSA can certify effective technology solutions that would reduce 
the cost for airport operators.
  I hope that as we move this bill to the Senate and into conference, 
we will have a more favorable allocation to work with that will allow 
us to reject this ill-conceived proposal and protect already strapped 
airports from an unfunded mandate to perform duties that they have 
never had the responsibility for and which TSA is receiving fees to 
carry out.

                                                     May 30, 2013.
     Hon. Mike Honda,
     Longworth House Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Congressman Honda: I am writing to express my strong 
     concern over the Transportation Security Administration's 
     (TSA) plan to shift responsibility--without funding--for 
     monitoring passenger exit lanes onto airport operators. While 
     all levels of government face tough budget decisions in the 
     current economic environment, we need your help to prevent 
     TSA from shifting this unfunded mandate onto our airport. TSA 
     should also explain to the Congressional appropriators why 
     shifting its security function to airports and airlines is 
     not an abdication of its Federal responsibility under current 
     law.
       It is unconscionable that a Federal agency that is 
     responsible for national security make a unilateral decision 
     to shift a security responsibility and the associated costs 
     to airport operators, particularly as there currently exists 
     no regulation or other requirement which specifically assigns 
     the responsibility for monitoring sterile area exit lanes to 
     airport operators. Notably, this regulatory option does not 
     ``take into account benefits and costs, both quantitative and 
     qualitative,'' as stipulated by Presidential Executive Order 
     13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review.
       Congress, through the Aviation and Transportation Security 
     Act (ATSA), delegated the responsibility for passenger and 
     baggage screening to the TSA following the tragic events of 
     September 11. It was decided by Congress that aviation 
     security was a matter of national security and should be 
     provided by the federal government.
       Through the Aviation Security Infrastructure Fee (ASIF), 
     based on the airlines' calendar year 2000 costs for passenger 
     and property screening, TSA collects money from airlines to 
     offset the cost of monitoring exit lanes. In fact, TSA 
     provided to air carriers for use in determining their ASIF 
     fee amount, ``Calendar Year 2000 Costs for Passenger and 
     Property Screening'' (Appendix A to 49 Code of Federal 
     Regulations Part 1511), which specifically includes, at line 
     item ``2'', the air carrier's costs for ``Exit Lane 
     Monitors''.
       The TSA, with no Congressional review or legislation, has 
     decided to impose the responsibility for exit lane monitoring 
     on airports. Although the agency proposes to do this through 
     an amendment to airports' Airport Security Programs, which 
     the TSA unilaterally controls, industry will be afforded the 
     opportunity to submit comments. However, TSA is neither 
     required to consider those comments nor make any changes 
     based on industry input.
       It is time to take a close look at ATSA to see if its 
     provisions are still appropriate or need some modifications 
     or enhancements. This review should be done in a very 
     thoughtful and deliberate way by the appropriate 
     Congressional Committees, not by an agency that can make 
     unilateral and arbitrary decisions. At minimum, TSA needs to 
     issue a notice of proposed rulemaking and seek legislative 
     changes to promulgate a requirement for airport operators to 
     assume responsibility for monitoring exit lanes.
       The cost implications of exit lane monitoring are 
     significant for all airports, and in many cases, these costs 
     will be passed on to

[[Page 8039]]

     airlines. Based on reports from some airport operators, the 
     cost would range from approximately $160,000 per year for a 
     smaller airport to as much as $2.5 million for a larger 
     airport to monitor exit lanes in accordance with the way the 
     TSA performs the function today. At Mineta San Jose the cost 
     to take on the exit lane responsibility is now estimated at 
     $180,000 to $200,000 a year. The Airport cannot absorb these 
     costs through further reductions in staff and services. 
     (Through the Great Recession of the past 4-5 years, the 
     Airport has gone from a staff of 400 in 2008 to just 187 
     staff members today.) Accordingly, this additional cost would 
     have to be passed on to the airlines through the Airport's 
     rates and charges structure and ultimately be paid by 
     passengers, who are already paying a fee to the airlines as 
     part of their ticket, for security-related costs.
       We ask that your office take action to put a stop to this 
     unfunded mandate and require TSA to explain why shifting a 
     security function and the associated costs to airports and 
     airlines is not an abdication of its Federal responsibility 
     under current legislation.
       Members of my staff will be in touch with your office 
     shortly to arrange for an opportunity to discuss this issue 
     with you or your staff in more detail. In the meantime, 
     please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any 
     questions.
           Sincerely,
                                        William F. Sherry, A.A.E.,
                                             Director of Aviation.

  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chair, I want to commend the Chairman of 
the Appropriations Committee and the members of the Committee for 
producing bills that meet the current law limit on appropriations of 
$967 billion. The one area of the budget where we are exercising real 
fiscal discipline is discretionary spending and Chairman Rogers and the 
Committee are to be commended for bringing about that result. The 
Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2014 
(H.R. 2217) funds critical programs that promote the safety and 
security of the United States. In total, the bill provides $44.6 
billion of discretionary funding for the operations of the Department 
of Homeland Security. While the majority of this funding is provided in 
accordance with the budget resolution adopted by the House of 
Representatives, $5.6 billion is provided in excess of the levels 
anticipated by the budget resolution using the disaster relief 
exception to the normal budget rules. We should be budgeting for these 
expenses and not adding funding through cap adjustments that provide 
funding in excess of the limits on discretionary spending. Congress 
should afford disaster relief the priority it deserves within the 
budget. Notwithstanding my objections to the use of this budget 
loophole, on balance, I believe this bill is worthy of support.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chair, I deeply appreciate the leadership and 
insight from my dear friend and colleague from North Carolina. Your 
efforts have helped keep this country safe in the midst of ongoing 
threats both known and unpredictable.
  An essential component of these efforts is the UASI grant program, 
which provides financial assistance to address the unique planning, 
operations, equipment, training, and exercise needs of high-threat, 
high-density urban areas.
  As you know so well, the UASI program is critical to helping our 
cities build and sustain capabilities to prevent, protect against, 
respond to, and recover from threats or acts of terrorism.
  In my district, the Portland Urban Area has been a recipient of UASI 
grant funds since FY 2003. This critical funding has enhanced regional 
collaboration and coordination within and between responder disciplines 
and across jurisdictions.
  The Portland Urban Area is more secure as a result, but most 
certainly has further to go, and must continue its partnership with the 
UASI program.
  Problematically, Portland is no longer a recipient of UASI funding, 
with little notice that would have allowed proper planning for 
alternative methods to meet their security needs, and with little 
transparency as to why this is the case.
  The FY 2012 program funded the top 31 highest risk urban areas in the 
country. And while the FY 2013 appropriations bill funds the program at 
a nearly equal level than the year before, unfortunately it also 
contains language that limits use of the UASI funds to no more than the 
top 25 highest risk urban areas, a cap which seems arbitrary and not 
based in risk or threat data.
  This cap is having a significant impact. Important regional areas 
like Portland, Orlando, Las Vegas and New Orleans have been eliminated 
from FY13 funding despite being national centers of tourism and 
commerce.
  Under no circumstances are Portland and the other affected cities any 
less vulnerable to terrorism than they were 12 months ago.
  And in the last 12 months, the Portland Urban Area has gone from a 
ranking of 23 11 months ago, 29 one month ago, and 27 weeks ago. How 
can a city plan with such drastic changes in ranking, with little 
notice? Clearly the metrics used by DHS are flawed, or at the very 
least, are not adapted to operate within a 25-city cap.
  The federal government has a responsibility to be a partner with our 
local communities, protecting our citizens from terrorist threats, and 
moderating potential impacts from natural disasters. While diminished 
resources are a factor for all levels of government, there should be 
some certainty for our communities that the federal government will be 
a continuing partner and when.
  In the long term, I would deeply appreciate an opportunity to engage 
with this Committee, my Senate colleagues, and all local cities 
impacted, to better understand this issue, and the future of the UASI 
program.
  And in the short term, the FY 2013 appropriations for DHS included 
$188 million in discretionary homeland security grant funds. The 
Secretary has latitude to apply these funds to previously eliminated 
grant programs including the UASI program.
  I would urge the Secretary to use some of this funding to the 
jurisdictions on that have fallen below the FY13 cap. This bridge 
funding would greatly assist these communities to continue their anti-
terrorism coordination at some level while working to achieve 
sustainable funding in the years to come.
  There are also common-sense reforms that can strengthen the federal-
local partnership for the UASI program by, for example, extending the 
timeline for cities to use these grant dollars. The shifting timeline 
from 4, to 3, and now 2 years adds another layer of difficulty to 
planning and utilizing these dollars as effectively and comprehensively 
as possible.
  I sincerely appreciate the courtesy of my colleagues for taking my 
concerns into consideration and I look forward to addressing this issue 
with you in a comprehensive and thoughtful way, something you both know 
how to do so very well.
  The Acting CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  During consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chair may accord 
priority in recognition to a Member offering an amendment who has 
caused it to be printed in the designated place in the Congressional 
Record. Those amendments will be considered read.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 2217

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the 
     Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the Department of 
     Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
     2014, and for other purposes, namely:

                                TITLE I

                 DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS

                        Departmental Operations

            Office of the Secretary and Executive Management

       For necessary expenses of the Office of the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security, as authorized by section 102 of the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 112), and executive 
     management of the Department of Homeland Security, as 
     authorized by law, $103,246,000:  Provided, That not to 
     exceed $45,000 shall be for official reception and 
     representation expenses:  Provided further, That all official 
     costs associated with the use of government aircraft by 
     Department of Homeland Security personnel to support official 
     travel of the Secretary and the Deputy Secretary shall be 
     paid from amounts made available for the Immediate Office of 
     the Secretary and the Immediate Office of the Deputy 
     Secretary:  Provided further, That the Secretary shall submit 
     to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the 
     House of Representatives, with the President's budget 
     proposal for fiscal year 2015 submitted pursuant to section 
     1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, expenditure plans 
     for the Office of Policy, the Office for Intergovernmental 
     Affairs, the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, the 
     Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman, and the 
     Privacy Officer.


                     Amendment Offered by Ms. Moore

  Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 2, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,346,000)''
       Page 9, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $4,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Wisconsin is recognized for 5 
minutes.

[[Page 8040]]



                              {time}  1340

  Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to the 
Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill for fiscal year 
2014. My amendment is intended to restore the Office of Civil Rights 
and Civil Liberties to fiscal year '13 levels by transferring 
$3,346,000 into the Office of the Secretary and Executive Management. 
The amendment is wholly offset. It is budget-neutral.
  Mr. Chairman, as you know, the Office of Civil Rights and Civil 
Liberties is an integral part of ensuring that our rights and values 
are carried out through the Department of Homeland Security. Today, it 
is even more important than ever to ensure that this Office is 
adequately funded.
  While this body continues to increase funding for immigration 
enforcement--and we expect even more funding and personnel to be added 
in any comprehensive immigration reform bill that we adopt--it is 
essential that we maintain adequate safeguards to protect our rights 
and liberties.
  I offered a similar amendment last year that sought to provide the 
office funding that it requested to adequately review 287(g) and Secure 
Communities programs, and I thank the chairman and the ranking member 
for directing $2.39 million to be used for review of these 287(g) 
programs.
  As I mentioned last year, I remain gravely concerned about any 287(g) 
programs that have been found to facilitate racial profiling in our 
communities or enforcement programs that make it harder for immigrants, 
especially women victims, to get help from the police.
  If my colleagues on the other side of the aisle continue to insist on 
fully funding 287(g) programs, as they do here in this bill--$44 
million above the President's budget request and cited as one of the 
reasons for a White House veto--at the very least, we should have 
rigorous safeguards and oversight. And I'll tell you, I must question 
whether or not we're on a path that recognizes that oversight is 
paramount as we continue to allow local police to act as Federal 
immigration officers. The bill increases these programs for review of 
287(g)s, but I question whether or not we really get it.
  I am here today because I disagree with the approach of the bill. 
Specifically, the bill would cut the Office of Civil Rights and Civil 
Liberties by 15.5 percent and then direct the office to pay for this 
increase of reviews for the 287(g) and Secure Communities programs by 
making further internal cuts to other essential areas of their mission.
  In addition to oversight of 287(g) and Secure Community programs, the 
Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties provides Homeland Security 
officials with advice on the full range of civil rights and civil 
liberties issues.
  The office engages with communities that are disproportionately 
impacted by Homeland Security policies and activities. In 2005, the 
Office had regular roundtables with Arab Americans, Sikhs, Muslims, and 
other ethnic minorities. Today, they work in 13 core centers around the 
country.
  The office investigates detention facility violations through site 
visits to ICE detention facilities to investigate civil rights 
violations.
  Complaints from the public, oversight of intelligence collection, 
and, as I mentioned, comprehensive immigration reform has a chance of 
becoming a reality. And we know there's going to be a vast increase of 
enforcement funding and personnel for this Department, but we can't 
continue to balance essential rights with the security of our country 
if we play these zero-sum games. It is essential that we adequately 
fund the Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties to implement 
changes to our immigration law in a way that respects our values that 
the country was founded upon.
  Again, my amendment is budget-neutral, Mr. Chairman. It only 
transfers a very small amount, which is vital funding, to this $21.6 
million office.
  I urge my colleagues to support this important amendment, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is unnecessary since the 
bill already includes ample funding for necessary oversight of ICE's 
287(g) program. In fact, on page 11 of the bill's accompanying report, 
it states:

       Included within the amount recommended for the Office of 
     Civil Rights and Civil Liberties is a total of $2,394,000 for 
     reviews of 287(g) agreements and ICE's Secure Communities. 
     These funds are in addition to the ongoing work of ICE's 
     Office of Professional Responsibility and the DHS Office of 
     Inspector General, who reviews 287(g) agreements for 
     compliance.

  So, while I certainly support robust oversight and also demand ICE's 
compliance with all applicable laws and standards therein pertaining to 
civil liberties and civil rights, I cannot support additional 
bureaucracy.
  Furthermore, the offset to this amendment will cut CBP's Automation 
Modernization account--a cut that will impede CBP's processing of trade 
and result in longer wait times at our ports of entry, which are 
detrimental impacts to our economy which none of us can afford to 
accept.
  Finally, I think I need to remind Members that the President's budget 
request decimated operational staffing and enforcement programs. This 
bill reversed that flawed approach and is holding DHS headquarters' 
resources in check. Therefore, I cannot support an amendment that 
increases headquarters staffing beyond what is necessary or what can be 
afforded, and does so at the expense of our economy.
  Mr. Chairman, I strongly urge my colleagues to support fiscal 
discipline, support economic growth, and vote ``no'' on this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I want to express my 
support of this amendment by our colleague from Wisconsin to restore 
funding for the Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties.
  The bill before us provides $18.3 million for the Office of Civil 
Rights and Civil Liberties, which is $3.4 million below the budget 
request and $3.3 million below current year funding. The amendment 
would simply restore funding for the Office to the fiscal 2013 enacted 
level.
  Now, I want to commend Chairman Carter for fully funding the much-
needed oversight activities related to the troubled 287(g) program and 
to the Secure Communities program. Oversight of these programs is 
probably the highest priority for this office. But with just a little 
more funding, as provided in this amendment, we can go further to 
ensure the protection of civil rights and civil liberties across the 
Department's many functions, programs, and activities.
  The Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties is the key mechanism 
at the Department of Homeland Security for ensuring that the proper 
balance is maintained between measures to protect the country and the 
personal freedoms that we cherish. So I thank the gentlewoman for 
offering the amendment. It's a good amendment, a reasonable amendment, 
and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote, and pending that, 
I make the point of order that a quorum is not present.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Wisconsin 
will be postponed.
  The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. Reichert

  Mr. REICHERT. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:


[[Page 8041]]

       Page 2, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $2,838,000)''.
       Page 42, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,838,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington is recognized for 5 
minutes.

                              {time}  1350

  Mr. REICHERT. I rise to offer an amendment to H.R. 2217, and I thank 
the chairman and Mr. Delaney.
  As a former law enforcement officer, I know very well the needs of 
first responders. That is why I am proposing that we increase funding 
for the United States Fire Administration by $1.8 million.
  This would restore total funding for the administration to the fiscal 
year 2013 level of $44 million. My amendment is offset by cutting $2.8 
million from the Secretary of Homeland Security's departmental 
operation and administrative account. According to the CBO, the 
amendment would reduce net budget authority by $1 million and will have 
no impact on fiscal year 2014 outlays.
  Continued funding for the brave men and women who protect American 
citizens by fighting fires is extremely critical, as we all know. The 
fire death rate in the United States is one of the highest in the 
industrialized world. We can prevent deaths by ensuring that the USFA 
has better resources. Data collection, public education, research, and 
training are all ways the USFA works to reduce the Nation's fire death 
rate.
  Last year, my district experienced record devastation from forest 
fires, fires that quickly burned out of control and threatened both 
homes and entire communities. Tens of thousands of acres were 
destroyed, and it took over 1,000 firefighters and volunteers to get 
them under control. Hundreds of families lost their homes, and it was 
only due to the valiant efforts of our fire personnel that more were 
not lost.
  One of the key roles of the USFA is to work to prepare and prevent 
those types of fires from happening. They do this by working directly 
with the local communities and stakeholders. They work to promote the 
adoption of local codes, protection plans, preventative measures, and 
much more. They are also a key component of the National Wildfire 
Coordinating Group, which coordinated wildland fire prevention, 
preparedness, mitigation, and response programs of various Federal 
agencies. They do all of this, not just to fight a common natural 
menace, but to protect lives.
  I urge my colleagues to support this important amendment, which is 
endorsed by the International Association of Firefighters, the 
International Association of Fire Chiefs, and the Congressional Fire 
Services Institute. Together, we can ensure the safety of our first 
responders and the American people they serve.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DELANEY. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DELANEY. I rise in support of this amendment, and I thank Mr. 
Reichert for his work on this amendment and for his care on this issue. 
This is a bipartisan and commonsense amendment. It ensures that we 
fully fund the USFA so that our firefighters receive world-class 
training.
  Fires are not limited to Republican districts or to Democratic 
districts. Fires do not discriminate against rural or urban districts. 
Fires do not choose between districts on the coast or in our 
heartland--and, thankfully, neither do our firefighters. Firefighters 
serve us all. Across the Nation, when crisis strikes and when the 
flames begin, our brave firefighters rush in. They risk their lives to 
save ours. We should do everything we can to make sure that 
firefighters are trained well. That investment will directly result in 
more saved lives and fewer tragedies.
  Mr. Reichert has spoken very eloquently and with great care about the 
benefits of this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to add that one of the keystones of our 
firefighter education system is the National Fire Academy, located at 
the National Emergency Training Center in Emmitsburg, Maryland. This 
training center in Emmitsburg is a world-class facility and is one of 
the most important assets in our public safety infrastructure. This is 
the only Federal facility of its kind. This facility is a tremendous 
public safety asset for our country. Thousands are trained in 
Emmitsburg each year. In western Maryland, we are proud to train 
heroes--heroes who save lives from Maine to Washington State, from 
Minnesota to Texas.
  This amendment restores funding for our critical training facilities 
to pre-sequester levels at no cost to the taxpayer. I truly thank my 
colleague for his work on this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I want to applaud Chairman Carter for 
funding the Fire Administration at a level higher than the 
administration's request, but the bill before us still provides a 
slight decrease in funding when compared to the current year. I believe 
this increase is warranted. The Fire Administration, as we all know, 
plays a critical role in training our first responders, in enhancing 
the security of our infrastructure, and in better preparing the 
response capabilities of our communities.
  I do want to register a concern, Mr. Chairman, about the offset for 
this amendment in that the money is taken from the Office of the Under 
Secretary for Management, and this is at a time when departmental 
management funding is already in this bill--$302 million below the 
request and $147 million below the fiscal 2013 pre-sequestration level.
  In dealing with this on the way to conference, we are going to have 
to pay attention to that offset. However, this is an important 
amendment, as the Fire Administration is important to all of us, and I 
urge the adoption of the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I want to congratulate Mr. 
Reichert for his amendment. I think it is necessary, and I approve of 
it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Reichert).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Polis

  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 2, line 17, under ``Departmental Management and 
     Operations_Departmental Operations_Office of the Secretary 
     and Executive Management'', after the first dollar amount 
     insert ``(increased by $4,359,200)''.
       Under ``U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement_Salaries 
     and Expenses''--
       (1) after the first dollar amount insert ``(reduced by 
     $43,592,000)''; and
       (2) after the sixth dollar amount, insert ``(reduced by 
     $5,400,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Colorado is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, the 287(g) program has become increasingly 
controversial and increasingly recognized as a costly failure.
  By allowing local police officers to effectively act as Federal 
agents and immigration officials, it not only increases crime by taking 
local cops off the beat and not only costs taxpayers money at a time 
when we have an over $600 billion deficit, but it also creates fear in 
Latino communities and in other immigrant communities. 287(g) 
exacerbates tensions and interferes with community policing and the 
efforts of law enforcement to gain the trust of people in the 
communities that they need in order to be able to do their jobs well. 
In effect, it has trained local law enforcement officials to use racial 
profiling, asking community members where they are born or if they are 
in this country legally.

[[Page 8042]]

  Now, the 287(g) program has become infamous because of the 
implementation in Maricopa County under Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his 
racial profiling. The practices sanctioned under 287(g) have led to an 
unprecedented civil rights investigation by the Department of Justice 
and an independent civil suit. Even Sheriff Arpaio has acknowledged 
that the Department of Homeland Security directed him and his officers 
to use racial profiling as part of their policing practices in 
identifying individuals for deportation.
  You know that, if Sheriff Arpaio is citing a Federal expenditure as 
the justification for his actions, there must be a problem with that 
Federal expenditure--and in fact there is.
  In the fiscal year 2014 bill, the House Appropriations Committee has 
funded 287(g) at $44 million above the White House request. The White 
House has even threatened to veto the Department of Homeland Security 
appropriations bill, listing as one of its concerns that, in fact, the 
287(g) program has been largely replaced by other enforcement 
mechanisms, like Secure Communities. Now, we don't all agree on Secure 
Communities, but there is increasing consensus on all sides of the 
aisle that 287(g) has no place in our communities or in our budget. It 
doesn't help combat illegal immigration. In fact, it makes it worse, 
and it increases crime in our communities.

                              {time}  1400

  This amendment will allocate 10 percent of that funding to the Office 
for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties and 90 percent toward deficit 
reduction. By seeking to cut the funding for a program that relies on 
racial profiling and increases crime, we're sending a clear message 
that we won't tolerate any more Arpaios, we care about the budget 
deficit, and we want to cut wasteful government spending.
  Programs like 287(g) have created mistrust between Latinos and other 
immigrant communities throughout this country and local law enforcement 
and interfered with community policing. Eliminating 287(g) once and for 
all will begin to repair the trust that's been lost over the last 
decade. It will help local law enforcement fight crime, instead of 
trying to implement failed Federal laws, and will be a step forward in 
the ultimate goal of this Congress of fixing our broken immigration 
system and restoring the rule of law so that we can grow our economy 
and decrease crime.
  This amendment is very simple. It would save $44 million from a 
wasteful government spending program, allocate just over $4 million of 
that to address some of the cuts that have been made to the Office for 
Civil Rights and Civil Liberties and use the bulk of that for the 
deficit reduction account.
  Let's come together, Democrats and Republicans, to go after wasteful 
government spending and counterproductive government spending, as it is 
in this case.
  With that, I strongly encourage my colleagues on both sides of the 
aisle to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. Robust enforcement of our immigration laws is critical to 
our national security. Clearly, the 287(g) program supports that goal.
  Under the 287(g) program, ICE enters into a partnership with State 
and local enforcement agencies and authorizes them to remove criminal 
aliens who are a threat to local communities. In effect, the program 
acts as a force multiplier and ensures more resources to enforce 
immigration laws and policy. In fact, since January of 2006, the 287(g) 
program is credited with identifying more than 279,311 potentially 
removable aliens, mostly at local jails.
  ICE's cross-designation of more than 1,500 State and local patrol 
officers, detectives, investigators, and correctional officers allows 
them to pursue a wide range of investigations, such as human smuggling, 
gang/organized crime activity, and money laundering. In addition, 
participating entities are eligible for increased resources and support 
in more remote geographic locations.
  Currently, ICE has 287(g) agreements with 75 law enforcement agencies 
in 24 States. Utilizing these funds as an offset takes resources from 
local sheriffs, police officers, and other first responders and puts it 
in the hands of a bureaucrat at DHS headquarters.
  And while I appreciate the gentleman's suggestion that the deficit is 
too high, I reject his choice of balancing the budget by jeopardizing 
public safety and law enforcement.
  To his point that the deficit must be reduced, let me point my 
colleagues to other provisions in the bill that instill fiscal 
discipline by cutting departmental administrative expenses and 
bureaucratic overhead by nearly 25 percent and by denying the 
President's request to create three new offices.
  For these reasons, I oppose the amendment, urge Members to join me in 
opposition, and yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the 
gentleman from Colorado's amendment.
  The gentleman's amendment eliminates increased funding in the bill 
for the critically flawed 287(g) program, and it increases funding for 
the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. I want to support the 
gentleman on both of these fronts.
  As our colleague has noted, the 287(g) program designed to facilitate 
cooperation between Federal and local authorities and immigration 
enforcement, is, in fact, prone to serious abuse. It's fundamentally 
flawed in the way it blurs the line between Federal and local roles in 
immigration enforcement.
  Moreover, it simply wastes money. It is very costly. The cost to the 
taxpayer per removal in the task force model of 287(g) is especially 
outrageous: $32,789 per removal. Compare that to only $1,500 per 
removal under the more workable and more appropriate Secure Communities 
program. So not only is 287(g) flawed and prone to abuse, it's also 
simply a waste of taxpayer dollars, and it's increasingly redundant as 
the Secure Communities program takes effect.
  The gentleman is redirecting money, I think, in a useful way to the 
Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. The most important 
activity of that office is to oversee this problematic 287(g) program, 
as well as secure communities. And the funding level in the bill is 
short of the request; it's short of the current year's funding. So with 
a little more funding, we can enable the Office for Civil Rights and 
Civil Liberties to do its job in a much better way.
  Ideally, Mr. Chairman, this amendment would address other seriously 
shortchanged areas of the bill. For example, cybersecurity, Coast Guard 
acquisitions, human trafficking, Secret Service. We can think of a lot. 
I would like to see some of those things addressed, as well as the 
deficit reduction item. But I believe this amendment greatly improves 
this bill both in the money it saves and in the money it redirects.
  With that, I urge its adoption and yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. CHU. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. CHU. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Polis-Chu-
Cardenas amendment to strike Federal funding for the 287(g) program.
  287(g) is a misguided program. While it claims to help enforce our 
immigration laws, it actually diverts critical law enforcement 
resources and makes our communities less safe. By encouraging the 
police to do the Federal Government's job, 287(g) breeds mistrust in 
local law enforcement. Immigrants worry that they will be punished or 
deported if they talk to the police. This means that victims will 
choose to suffer in silence. This means fewer witnesses will come 
forward to help solve crimes.
  And this isn't just about undocumented immigrants being scared to

[[Page 8043]]

come forward. Citizens and legal residents are holding back too. That's 
because the 287(g) program is a tool that too often relies on racial 
profiling. Take the case of Sheriff Arpaio in Maricopa County, Arizona. 
Just a few weeks ago, a Federal judge ruled that he and his deputies 
violated the constitutional rights of Latinos by targeting them during 
raids and traffic stops. It's no wonder that 44 percent of Latinos 
surveyed across the country said they were less likely now to contact 
police if they were victims of a crime. That's why 10 percent of the 
funding for 287(g) in this bill will be transferred to the Office for 
Civil Rights and Civil Liberties that investigates allegations of 
racial profiling against immigrant communities.
  Law enforcement officials from across the country oppose 287(g) 
because it's getting in the way of their real job: stopping crime and 
keeping people safe. The 287(g) program takes cops away from going 
after violent criminals to focus instead on civil violations. According 
to FBI and census data, 61 percent of 287(g) localities had violent and 
property crime indices lower than the national average. Former LA 
Police Chief Bill Bratton decided not to participate in the 287(g) 
program because his officers ``can't prevent or solve crimes if victims 
or witnesses are unwilling to talk to us. Criminals are the biggest 
beneficiaries when immigrants fear the police.''
  As if that weren't bad enough, the Department of Homeland Security's 
own inspector general couldn't tell if the 287(g) money was being used 
for its intended purpose. In the same 2010 program, the IG cited 
insufficient oversight and supervision of the 287(g) program by ICE, an 
ineffective complaint system for abuse, and a lack of focus on their 
local partners' civil rights issues.
  To keep our neighborhoods safe, we need the entire community to come 
together to solve crimes. Without it, the LAPD would never have solved 
the murder of Juan Garcia, a 53-year-old homeless man who was brutally 
killed in an alley just west of downtown Los Angeles in 2009.

                              {time}  1410

  At first, the police were stumped. There were no known witnesses and 
few clues. Then a 43-year-old undocumented immigrant who witnessed the 
crime came forward and told the homicide detectives what he saw. 
Because of his help, a suspect was identified and arrested a few days 
later while hiding on skid row. Because the witnesses were not afraid 
to contact the police, an accused murderer was taken off the streets, 
and we are all a little bit safer. We need to end this program today 
and ensure that no murder, no theft, no assault goes unsolved because 
of misguided policies like 287(g).
  I urge you to vote in favor of the Polis-Chu-Cardenas amendment and 
end funding for 287(g). It's time to let police fight crime, not 
illegal immigration.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. CLARKE. Mr. Chair, I rise today to support the Polis Amendment to 
defund the 287(g) program, a program that promotes racial profiling and 
injustice.
  The 287(g) program allows local law enforcement to act as immigration 
officials, which has led to rampant abuses throughout the country, most 
notably in Arizona, where the practices under 287(g) led to an 
unprecedented civil rights investigation by the Department of Justice.
  As the Representative of the 9th Congressional District of New York, 
I have worked diligently to decrease the amount of racial profiling in 
New York City. I have worked to reduce the number of stop and frisks 
for the past year and eliminate the racial and ethnic intolerance that 
has plagued New York City and other cities around the country.
  By cutting the funding for a program that relies on racial profiling 
like 287(g), we are sending a clear message that we will not tolerate 
bigotry. Programs like 287(g) have created mistrust between Latino and 
other immigrant communities throughout the country and local law 
enforcement. Ending the 287(g) program will move our country in the 
right direction to repair the trust that has been lost and is a step 
forward in fixing our broken immigration system and restoring the rule 
of law.
  We must continue to work to build a supportive environment for 
immigrant and minority communities in every part of our civil society.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado 
will be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

              Office of the Under Secretary for Management

       For necessary expenses of the Office of the Under Secretary 
     for Management, as authorized by sections 701 through 705 of 
     the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 341 through 345), 
     $171,173,000, of which not to exceed $2,250 shall be for 
     official reception and representation expenses:  Provided, 
     That of the total amount made available under this heading, 
     $4,020,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2015, 
     solely for the alteration and improvement of facilities, 
     tenant improvements, and relocation costs to consolidate 
     Department headquarters operations at the Nebraska Avenue 
     Complex; and $7,815,000 shall remain available until 
     September 30, 2015, for the Human Resources Information 
     Technology program:  Provided further, That the Under 
     Secretary for Management shall, pursuant to the requirements 
     contained in House Report 112-331, submit to the Committees 
     on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives at the time the President's budget proposal 
     for fiscal year 2015 is submitted pursuant to section 1105(a) 
     of title 31, United States Code, a Comprehensive Acquisition 
     Status Report, which shall include the information required 
     under the heading ``Office of the Under Secretary for 
     Management'' under title I of division D of the Consolidated 
     Appropriations Act, 2012 (Public Law 112-74), and quarterly 
     updates to such report not later than 45 days after the 
     completion of each quarter.


                 Amendment Offered by Mr. Poe of Texas

  Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

         Page 3, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $10,000,000)''.
         Page 10, line 4, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank you, and I want to thank 
Judge Carter as well.
  This amendment is relatively simple. It started back in March of 
2010. On March 27, 2010, a rancher by the name of Rob Krentz was on his 
own property about 20 miles north of the Arizona-Mexico border, and he 
was murdered. Even now 3 years later, the killer or killers have not 
been captured. When he was found by the people who lived there, his 
wife, Sue, was convinced one of the reasons he was murdered was he was 
in a certain area of his ranch that's a dead zone. Dead zones, Mr. 
Chairman, exist along the Arizona-Mexico border, the Texas-Mexico 
border, and are areas where there is no cell phone service. Ranchers 
rely many times on short-wave radios to communicate with each other and 
law enforcement. Basically, Rob Krentz could not call for help before 
he was murdered.
  This legislation first started when Gabby Giffords was here in 
Congress. She proposed in 2010 that we fix that problem by taking about 
$10 million from the Office of the Under Secretary of Management of DHS 
and move it to the Border Security, Fencing, Infrastructure and 
Technology account with the purpose of allowing the ranchers to have 
access to cell phone service so they can call for help when they're in 
trouble. The legislation has passed twice, but has not passed the 
Senate and become law.
  So this legislation is being brought to the House again for the third 
time. I appreciate the support from my friend, Henry Cuellar from 
Laredo, Texas. It's commonsense legislation. There are portions of the 
border that are not secure, and those portions, those dead zones, let's 
help the ranchers so they can call for help when they are in trouble. 
That's what this legislation does.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

[[Page 8044]]

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to accept this amendment from my 
colleague and friend, Judge Poe, which provides $10 million for CBP to 
procure additional equipment for surveillance and detection at both the 
southern and northern borders.
  Some of the technological solutions CBP procures for border security 
include integrated fixed towers, tactical communication, and tethered 
aerostat radar systems. All these systems increase situational 
awareness and assist law enforcement personnel as they identify and 
resolve illegal activity. In effect, they become a workforce 
multiplier, freeing agents to focus on other vital tasks like 
identifying, tracking, interdicting, and resolving events along the 
border.
  For these reasons, I accept the gentleman's amendment, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment Offered by Mr. Heck of Nevada

  Mr. HECK of Nevada. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 3, line 13, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $5,000,000)''.
       Page 4, line 14, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $10,000,000)''.
       Page 8, line 6, after the first dollar amount insert 
     ``(reduced by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 35, line 25, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $5,000,000)''.
       Page 37, line 7, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $22,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. HECK of Nevada. Mr. Chairman, I have come to the floor today, 
along with my colleague, Mr. Horsford, to offer a very simple amendment 
because we must do everything we can to protect our cities, towns, and 
communities.
  The Urban Area Security Initiative, according to the Department of 
Homeland Security, dedicates funds to:

       Address the unique planning, organization, equipment, 
     training and exercise needs of high-threat, high-density 
     urban areas, and assists them in building an enhanced and 
     sustainable capacity to prevent, protect against, mitigate, 
     respond to, and recover from acts of terrorism.

  However, due to a recent change in qualification criteria, a number 
of major metropolitan areas will be going without UASI funds despite 
being qualified for such funds last year. Those areas that will be 
without funds to prevent and respond to threats include Riverside, 
California; Portland, Oregon; Orlando, Florida; Indianapolis, Indiana; 
New Orleans, Louisiana; San Antonio, Texas; Kansas City, Missouri; and 
Las Vegas, Nevada. Now, if those sound like high-threat, high-density 
locations to you, you'd be correct. They are. Yet despite recent 
events, they are not going to be receiving UASI funds this year.
  Now, I cannot speak for all of these areas, Mr. Chairman, but I can 
tell you that Las Vegas, which holds more high-profile, highly attended 
events than any city in the country, is worthy of UASI funding.
  In Las Vegas, law enforcement has to not only defend the Las Vegas 
metro area, which includes the fabulous Las Vegas Strip with more 
densely packed hotel rooms than any other city in our country, but also 
has high-threat areas outside the city, like the Las Vegas Motor 
Speedway, which holds 140,000 people, and the Hoover Dam, which is not 
only a popular tourist attraction, but a source of electrical power for 
more than 1 million people across the southwestern United States.
  So today, I have a very simple amendment to the bill. The amendment 
decreases funding under four different accounts as outlined previously 
and redirects those amounts to the Urban Area Security Initiative for 
the purpose of funding the program to the top 35 eligible metropolitan 
areas.
  Now I recognize that as our debt continues to increase, we must work 
to rein in wasteful spending, and I recognize that all of the funding 
in the world isn't going to prevent every attack. But in this case, 
don't we think the safety and well-being of our cities and communities, 
our families and our children, are a worthy expense? Don't we believe 
they deserve our support?
  My amendment goes to the very heart of the core functions of our 
democratic government, Mr. Chairman. Our Constitution states that our 
Federal Government must ``insure domestic tranquility'' and ``provide 
for the common defense.'' That is the issue at hand with my amendment.
  As someone who has worked on the front lines of homeland security as 
a SWAT physician and emergency preparedness consultant, as well as 
someone who has worn the uniform in the U.S. Army Reserve, I believe 
that overlooking the risks faced by the top 35 cities would be a 
mistake, and we should provide them the funding they need. I urge my 
colleagues to support this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Nevada is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Chairman, this bipartisan amendment that I am 
offering along with Congressman Heck would help address some of our 
concerns about the calculations in the Urban Area Security Initiative 
funding formula. UASI provides critical funding to cities that are at 
risk for a terrorist attack.

                              {time}  1420

  As a member of the authorizing committee for the Department of 
Homeland Security, I want to work with the appropriators on this 
concern.
  I have become deeply concerned about how the formula currently being 
used by the Department of Homeland Security will determine eligibility 
for this funding. The formula sometimes counts multiple buildings as a 
single site, something that shortchanges the Las Vegas Strip. It also 
punishes cities for successfully implementing anti-terror programs. 
Well, we should not be the victims of our own success.
  As it stands now, critical anti-terror programs for major tourist 
destinations around the country are being defunded, including for Las 
Vegas, New Orleans, and Orlando, to name a few. That's the Las Vegas 
Strip, the site of Mardi Gras, and Disney World.
  This is not an issue of budget cuts. It's an issue of prioritization. 
It's an issue of a faulty policy that completely ignores some major 
international tourist destinations and the threat posed to them.
  During a recent House Homeland Security Committee hearing, I asked 
Boston Police Commissioner Edward Davis about the value of the UASI 
program in responding to the tragic events of the Boston Marathon 
attack.
  Commissioner Davis told the committee that if it were not for UASI 
``there would have been more people who would have died in these 
attacks. It is critical that we maintain that funding to urban areas.''
  He stressed that this is not a frivolous expenditure. It's something 
that works. It's something that our sheriff is asking for, it's 
something that our mayor of Las Vegas is asking for, and it's something 
the people on the ground, the first responders, desperately need.
  I visited the Southern Nevada Counter-Terrorism Center recently. They 
do incredible work in keeping the 2 million residents and the 40 
million tourists who come to southern Nevada safe.
  In studies on terrorist targets, however, the RAND Corporation has 
stated that Las Vegas ``stands out in having a high proportion of high-
likelihood targets compared to the Nation as a whole.''
  The same study also reports that the unique composition of hotels, 
casinos, and skyscrapers ``increases the overall attack probability in 
Las Vegas relative to other cities in the same likelihood tier.''
  Yet, in my home State of Nevada, Mr. Chairman, we face reduced UASI 
funding because of flaws in the Relative Risk Profile model that has 
inappropriately dropped Las Vegas' ranking as a likely terrorist 
target.
  We need a serious reevaluation of the funding formula for UASI. It is 
wrong

[[Page 8045]]

that Las Vegas has dropped in ranking, and it is wrong that we will 
face reduced funds because of faulty calculations.
  I urge adoption of this amendment, and I look forward to continuing 
to work with the appropriators on addressing this very important 
concern to the safety of our domestic homefront.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. The bill before us today was born out of a need for 
reform. It consolidates disparate grant programs, provides discretion 
to the Secretary while balancing fiscal discipline.
  In total, this bill provides for $2.5 billion for Homeland Security 
First Responder Grants. This is $400 million above the President's 
request for fiscal year 2014 and $35 million above fiscal year 2013.
  This bill prioritizes our funding. The consolidation in this bill 
forces the Secretary to examine the intelligence and risk and put 
scarce dollars where they are needed most, whether it is port, rail, 
surveillance, or access and hardening projects, or whether it is to 
high-risk urban areas or to States, as opposed to reverse engineering 
projects to fill the amount designated for one of many programs.
  This does not mean lower-risk cities will lose all funding. It means 
the funds will come from other programs, such as State homeland grants 
that are risk-and formula-based.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to support fiscal discipline and vote 
``no'' on this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I want to join the 
chairman in opposing this well-intentioned amendment.
  The amendment would cannibalize various administrative accounts 
throughout the bill, the Office of the Secretary for Executive 
Management, the Chief Financial Officer, the CBP Salaries and Expenses, 
FEMA Salaries and Expenses, somewhat obscure accounts, you might say; 
but, nonetheless, accounts that are vital to the Department's 
functioning. It would cannibalize these accounts and put $22 million 
more in grants, presumably for urban grants, UASI.
  Now, the grant programs can always use more money. I've championed 
those programs for years, especially the risk-based UASI program. But 
we need to think carefully what this amendment is really about.
  This is a risky path for this body to go down. It really seems to be 
about adding cities to UASI, adding cities.
  Now, UASI-eligible cities, and there are 25 of them, are picked on a 
risk basis. There's a formula involving threat and vulnerability and 
consequence. The estimates are updated every year. This is probably the 
most strictly risk-based assessment that DHS undertakes.
  Do we really want to substitute that for picking these cities on the 
House floor?
  I'm afraid that's what this amendment is all about, or at least it's 
the path that it could put us on. And so, therefore, I urge its 
rejection.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Heck).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. HECK of Nevada. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nevada will 
be postponed.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Runyan

  Mr. RUNYAN. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 3, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $5,000,000)''.
       Page 40, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $5,000,000)''.
       Page 40, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,500,000)''.
       Page 41, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,500,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. RUNYAN. Mr. Chair, my budget-neutral amendment, authored with my 
colleague from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), who was going to be here on 
the floor today but is attending Senator Lautenberg's memorial service 
this afternoon, supports our Nation's firefighters in two critical 
ways.
  The FIRE and SAFER grant programs are two need-based, Department of 
Homeland Security-administered programs that go directly to local fire 
departments throughout the country. This amendment supports volunteer 
and career firefighters by giving them resources to purchase highly 
specialized equipment necessary to carry out their mission.
  Mr. Chair, we all recognize the budget pressures facing our Federal 
Government and the need to prioritize where our tax dollars are spent. 
FIRE and SAFER grants are a very important partnership with local fire 
departments and invest in our communities and increase the safety of 
our constituents.
  For that reason, I strongly urge my colleagues to support this 
amendment, which helps to ensure firefighters have the resources they 
need.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise simply to express 
support of the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I accept the gentleman's amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chair, I stand to urge my colleagues to support 
this amendment to provide $5 million in additional funding for 
Firefighter Assistance Grants. This funding would be equally divided 
between the Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG) and Staffing for 
Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) programs, which provide 
equipment and staffing assistance for local fire departments.
  In my work to develop the AFG and SAFER programs, I envisioned them 
as ways to fill needs that local budgets sometimes can't. As we all 
know, in today's tough budget environment, many states and towns are 
strapped for cash and have asked their first responders to make 
sacrifices. These are the times when AFG and SAFER are most important.
  These programs put more firefighters on our streets and provide 
better equipment to keep them safe. For example, in New Jersey's Ninth 
Congressional District, the towns of Garfield and North Arlington have 
recently received hundreds of thousands of dollars in AFG assistance 
for the purchase of electronic accountability systems and Self 
Contained Breathing Apparatuses. These firefighters are risking their 
lives to protect our lives and property, and we owe it to them to 
ensure that they are protected with the best possible equipment.
  Earlier this year, my hometown of Paterson received a SAFER grant of 
almost $7 million to prevent the layoff of 40 firefighters and allow 
the city to hire 9 new firefighters to replace retirees. This funding 
goes directly to job creation in our local communities while helping 
our departments to maintain adequate staffing levels for public safety.
  I am relieved that President Obama signed into law reauthorizations 
for AFG and SAFER this January after the program authorizations had 
been allowed to lapse. Now we must continue to provide adequate 
funding. Working together in a bipartisan manner, we have been able to 
restore over $800 million in proposed cuts to AFG and SAFER over the 
past 3 years. I am proud that the Fire Caucus gathered the signatures 
of over 140 on a bipartisan letter to the Appropriations Committee 
opposing any cuts to these critical programs in FY 2014.
  I would like to thank Mr. Runyan for his work on this amendment and 
this issue, as

[[Page 8046]]

well as Chairman Carter and Ranking Member Price for their work on this 
bill and for allowing this amendment. Our firefighters are on the front 
lines of our homeland security. I urge my colleagues to support their 
local firefighters by supporting this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Runyan).
  The amendment was agreed to.

                              {time}  1430


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Grimm

  Mr. GRIMM. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 3, line 13, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $7,667,000)''.
       Page 35, line 25, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $7,667,000)''.
       Page 36, line 21, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $7,667,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. GRIMM. I rise today in support of my amendment that would fund 
the National Urban Search and Rescue Response System at $35.18 million, 
which is level funding compared to FY 2013 but still reflects a 
reduction of roughly $6 million from fiscal year 2012.
  The National Urban Search and Rescue Response System, or US&R, 
provides a significant national resource for search and rescue 
assistance in the wake of major disasters and structural collapse. A 
typical US&R task force will conduct physical search and rescue 
operations, provide emergency medical care to trapped victims, assess 
and control hazards such as ruptured gas and electric lines, and 
evaluate and stabilize damaged structures. Due to the critical 
lifesaving nature of their mission, US&R task forces must be prepared 
to deploy within 6 hours of notification and must be self-sufficient 
for the first 72 hours.
  These teams have been deployed in responses to the Oklahoma 
tornadoes, Superstorm Sandy, the Japanese tsunami, the Haiti 
earthquake, Hurricane Katrina, 9/11 attacks, and many, many other 
disasters. Current Federal funding for the Nation's US&R teams only 
provides a fraction of the funds necessary to maintain each task force. 
It's important to note the recent devastation left in the wake of the 
Oklahoma tornadoes, as well as Superstorm Sandy, and the subsequent 
response underscore the importance of the national search and rescue 
capacity. Providing proper funding for the Urban Search and Rescue 
Response System will help ensure these highly skilled teams are 
available to respond to major emergencies without jeopardizing the 
budget priorities of our local first responders.
  I'd also like to thank my colleague and friend from Virginia (Mr. 
Connolly), who's the lead cosponsor of this amendment and a strong, 
strong advocate for the Urban Search and Rescue program.
  Therefore, I urge you to vote ``yes'' on this amendment and properly 
fund this critical program, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes
  Mr. CONNOLLY. I am pleased to join my colleague once again in 
sponsoring this important amendment to restore funding to our Nation's 
elite Urban Search and Rescue teams.
  Our modest, simple, straightforward amendment, which has the support 
of the International Association of Firefighters, would provide level 
funding, as my colleague just indicated, for the Department to continue 
supporting the 28 national teams currently spread across 19 States, 
including our respective home States of New York and Virginia.
  When people are trapped in the unstable rubble of a collapsed 
building, the window of survivability can be measured in hours. Without 
highly trained responders, rescue attempts can actually imperil victims 
and rescuers alike. Thankfully, because of this training, we have made 
strategic investments in specialized research and search and rescue 
teams. These elite firefighters and emergency medical technicians are 
not just first responders, though they are that. For people awaiting 
rescue, they are often the last hope.
  As my colleagues are aware, federally supported search and rescue 
responders were on the scene recently in Oklahoma after the tornadoes 
there and in New Jersey and New York after Superstorm Sandy last year.
  Prior to coming to Congress, Mr. Chairman, I served for 14 years in 
local government in Fairfax County, Virginia. For 9 of those years, I 
shared an office with the fire department. I saw daily the selfless 
dedication of men and women who put their lives at risk in service to 
others. Fairfax County is home to one of the most elite US&R teams in 
the country--in fact, in the world. In partnership with the U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Agency for International 
Development, FEMA, and Fairfax County government, the team serves 
American interests both here at home and abroad.
  The team is comprised of highly skilled career and volunteer fire and 
rescue personnel whose daily duties are to serve the community by 
responding to local fire and medical emergencies. But when called into 
service, that team, designated as Virginia Task Force One, is mobilized 
for quick response to domestic disasters, natural or manmade, with 
special expertise in collapsed building rescue.
  Our team was deployed in Oklahoma City in the wake of the terrorist 
bombing in 1995 and was among the first on the scene at the Pentagon on 
9/11. It was also dispatched to Mississippi and Louisiana in response 
to Hurricane Katrina in 2005. It has answered the call for help in 
multiple States, including California, North Carolina, Texas, Florida, 
Kansas, Georgia, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, and 
the Virgin Islands, to name a few.
  When disaster strikes, whether natural or manmade, domestically or 
internationally, the US&R teams have rushed to the scene, saving 
countless lives and preserving and protecting property. Their heroic 
efforts have shown this to be a wise investment that absolutely must be 
maintained.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Grimm-Connolly amendment to 
ensure that this successful partnership with our local partners and 
first responders is sustained, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I accept this good amendment, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I, too, rise in qualified 
support of this amendment. When disasters strike, these Urban Search 
and Rescue Teams stand ready for FEMA deployment, complete with unique 
tools and equipment and training.
  I do want to register another concern about the cannibalizing of 
management accounts that this amendment, along with other amendments, 
is undertaking to do. We're already $302 million below the request and 
$147 million below our fiscal 2013, pre-sequestration, in this 
departmental management funding, so we've got to pay attention to this 
as we take this amendment to conference. We've got to have a better 
offset.
  Having said that, I do think this is a meritorious amendment, well 
justified. I urge its adoption, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Grimm).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Lynch

  Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 19, line 1, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $15,676,000)''.

[[Page 8047]]

       Page 3, line 13, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $15,676,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. LYNCH. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment increases surface transportation security 
funding by about $15.6 million, bringing it to the enacted FY 2013 
level of $124.3 million. This would be offset by a reduction in a 
similar amount to the Office of the Under Secretary for Management.
  Last April, the United States received a chilling reminder that it 
remains a target for attacks by terrorists and their sympathizers when 
two men detonated bombs in my home city at the finish line of the 
Boston Marathon. Just 1 week later, authorities foiled a plot to attack 
a passenger train running between Canada and the U.S.
  After the September 11, 2001, attacks, we, as a Nation, undertook--
and rightly so--a massive effort to strengthen aviation security. We 
invested significant resources into making our skies safer. I strongly 
supported those efforts but would also caution that we cannot forget 
that other forms of transportation remain vulnerable to attack.
  Since fiscal year 2002, $69.3 billion in funding has been dedicated 
to aviation security. However, during that same period, surface 
transportation security has been funded at about $3.3 billion. Less 
than 5 percent of our transportation security funding has gone to our 
transit systems--our rails and buses.
  Now it is sometimes said that our military planners are guilty of 
fighting the last war. I believe that in the war on terror, my fear is 
that it may be the case here.

                              {time}  1440

  Over the last number of years, we have seen buses and passenger rail 
systems targeted throughout Europe and Asia. I'll just mention a few.
  As I mentioned, in April of 2013, there was an al Qaeda-linked plot 
to attack a passenger train running between New York and Toronto. In 
July 2006, seven bomb blasts over 11 minutes took place in a suburban 
railway in Mumbai; 209 were killed and over 700 injured.
  In March 2004, coordinated bombings on the Madrid commuter rail 
system resulted in 191 killed and 1,800 injured. In February 2004, two 
suicide bombers attacked the Moscow metro stations; at least 40 were 
killed and over 100 injured. As well in Israel, France and Japan, they 
have suffered similar attacks on their bus and railway systems.
  Many people don't realize that U.S. passenger rail systems carry 
about five times as many people as do airlines. For a potential 
terrorist looking to cause as much damage and panic as possible, we 
cannot ignore the fact that our rails and buses are a target. This 
amendment is one step to better secure our surface transportation 
systems that move millions of Americans each and every day.
  I urge my colleagues to support both this amendment and the main 
bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I am prepared to accept the amendment. I, 
too, have concerns about surface rail.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend the 
gentleman on his attention to the very real vulnerabilities of surface 
rail, his attention to this, and I urge acceptance of the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                 Office of the Chief Financial Officer

       For necessary expenses of the Office of the Chief Financial 
     Officer, as authorized by section 103 of the Homeland 
     Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 113), $41,242,000, of which 
     $4,000,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2015, 
     for financial systems modernization efforts: Provided, That 
     the Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives, at the time that the President's budget 
     proposal for fiscal year 2015 is submitted pursuant to 
     section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, the Future 
     Years Homeland Security Program and a comprehensive report 
     compiled in conjunction with the Government Accountability 
     Office that details updated missions, goals, strategies, 
     priorities, along with performance metrics that are 
     measurable, repeatable, and directly linked to requests for 
     funding, as described in the accompanying report.

                Office of the Chief Information Officer

       For necessary expenses of the Office of the Chief 
     Information Officer, as authorized by section 103 of the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 113), and Department-
     wide technology investments, $210,735,000; of which 
     $99,397,000 shall be available for salaries and expenses; and 
     of which $111,338,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2015, shall be available for development and acquisition 
     of information technology equipment, software, services, and 
     related activities for the Department of Homeland Security:  
     Provided, That the Department of Homeland Security Chief 
     Information Officer shall submit to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives, at the time that the President's budget 
     proposal for fiscal year 2015 is submitted pursuant to 
     section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, a multi-year 
     investment and management plan, to include each of fiscal 
     years 2014 through 2017, for all information technology 
     acquisition projects funded under this heading or funded by 
     multiple components of the Department of Homeland Security 
     through reimbursable agreements, that includes--
       (1) the proposed appropriations included for each project 
     and activity tied to mission requirements, program management 
     capabilities, performance levels, and specific capabilities 
     and services to be delivered;
       (2) the total estimated cost and projected timeline of 
     completion for all multi-year enhancements, modernizations, 
     and new capabilities that are proposed in such budget or 
     underway;
       (3) a detailed accounting of operations and maintenance and 
     contractor services costs; and
       (4) a current acquisition program baseline for each 
     project, that--
       (A) notes and explains any deviations in cost, performance 
     parameters, schedule, or estimated date of completion from 
     the original acquisition program baseline;
       (B) aligns the acquisition programs covered by the baseline 
     to mission requirements by defining existing capabilities, 
     identifying known capability gaps between such existing 
     capabilities and stated mission requirements, and explaining 
     how each increment will address such known capability gaps; 
     and
       (C) defines life-cycle costs for such programs.

                        Analysis and Operations

       For necessary expenses for intelligence analysis and 
     operations coordination activities, as authorized by title II 
     of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 121 et seq.), 
     $291,623,000; of which not to exceed $3,825 shall be for 
     official reception and representation expenses; and of which 
     $89,334,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2015.

                      Office of Inspector General

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.), $113,903,000, of which not to exceed 
     $300,000 may be used for certain confidential operational 
     expenses, including the payment of informants, to be expended 
     at the direction of the Inspector General.

                                TITLE II

               SECURITY, ENFORCEMENT, AND INVESTIGATIONS

                   U.S. Customs and Border Protection

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses for enforcement of laws relating to 
     border security, immigration, customs, agricultural 
     inspections and regulatory activities related to plant and 
     animal imports, and transportation of unaccompanied minor 
     aliens; purchase and lease of up to 7,500 (6,500 for 
     replacement only) police-type vehicles; and contracting with 
     individuals for personal services abroad; $8,275,983,000; of 
     which $3,274,000 shall be derived from the Harbor Maintenance 
     Trust Fund for administrative expenses related to the 
     collection of the Harbor Maintenance Fee pursuant to section 
     9505(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 
     9505(c)(3)) and notwithstanding section 1511(e)(1) of the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 551(e)(1)); of which 
     not to exceed $34,425 shall be for official reception and 
     representation expenses; of which such sums as become 
     available in the Customs User Fee Account, except sums 
     subject to section

[[Page 8048]]

     13031(f)(3) of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation 
     Act of 1985 (19 U.S.C. 58c(f)(3)), shall be derived from that 
     account; of which not to exceed $150,000 shall be available 
     for payment for rental space in connection with preclearance 
     operations; and of which not to exceed $1,000,000 shall be 
     for awards of compensation to informants, to be accounted for 
     solely under the certificate of the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security:  Provided, That for fiscal year 2014, the overtime 
     limitation prescribed in section 5(c)(1) of the Act of 
     February 13, 1911 (19 U.S.C. 267(c)(1)) shall be $35,000; and 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, none of the funds 
     appropriated by this Act shall be available to compensate any 
     employee of U.S. Customs and Border Protection for overtime, 
     from whatever source, in an amount that exceeds such 
     limitation, except in individual cases determined by the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security, or the designee of the 
     Secretary, to be necessary for national security purposes, to 
     prevent excessive costs, or in cases of immigration 
     emergencies:  Provided further, That the Border Patrol shall 
     maintain an active duty presence of not less than 21,370 
     full-time equivalent agents protecting the borders of the 
     United States in the fiscal year.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Garcia

  Mr. GARCIA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 8, line 6, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
       Page 12, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $10,000,000)''.
       Page 12, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. GARCIA. Mr. Chairman, my amendment seeks to increase by $10 
million the funding for Customs and Border Protection staffing and to 
decrease by $10 million the funding for the controversial 287(g) 
immigration enforcement program.
  At a time when our economy is just starting to pick up steam, this 
amendment is intended to promote trade, travel, tourism, and investment 
through our Nation's airports and ultimately support our economic 
recovery.
  As the busiest airport in the United States for international flights 
and the Gateway to the Americas, Miami International Airport is a vital 
economic engine for south Florida and our country. Unfortunately, MIA 
has been among the worst hit with inadequate Customs and Border Patrol 
staffing levels. On the worst peak travel days, we have over 3\1/2\ 
hours of waiting time, and sometimes up to 800 missed connections.
  If we want to continue being the top destination for foreign 
investors, for immigrants, for tourists, for visitors, and for business 
people, we need to ensure we have adequate CBP staffing to handle our 
growing number of visitors.
  While these personnel shortages are especially acute at MIA, these 
delays are prevalent at international hubs throughout the country, 
impeding the trade, travel, tourism, and investment that we need to 
fuel our economic recovery and create jobs.
  This amendment seeks to reduce the funding of the section 287(g) 
program to enable the increase of funding for CBP staffing. This 
immigration enforcement program has been controversial and criticized 
for many years and has been made increasingly redundant by the 
development and expansion of other questionable programs, like Secure 
Communities.
  While this appropriations bill provides $68 million in funding for 
287(g), that amount exceeds the request from the Department of Homeland 
Security by $44 million, that is, a $44 million increase over the 
request.
  Both the Major Cities Chiefs Associations and the International 
Association of Chiefs of Police have expressed strong concerns about 
section 287(g)'s program, which undermine's public safety and diverts 
limited law enforcement resources, and exacerbates fear and distrust in 
our communities. And if that wasn't enough, other immigration 
enforcement programs like Secure Communities have replaced the need for 
287(g), and yet we are continuing to fund a practically defunct 
program. I believe these funds are better spent in promoting American 
commerce at our Nation's airports and invigorating our economy.
  I urge my colleagues to support what I think is a very sensible and 
important amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. Not only do I oppose the increase of $10 million for 
additional CBP officers; I oppose the offset suggested to pay for the 
increase.
  As drafted, the bill provides for $105 million for hiring 1,600 
officers over a 2-year period. In fact, we provide funds sufficient to 
cover the costs of no less than 21,186 CBP officers, which sets a 
historical precedent.
  The reason we took this incremental approach into hiring 1,600 new 
officers is because CBP's staffing and deployment plan was not linked 
to its goals for border security. To address these concerns, the report 
includes language directing CBP to provide a more complete 5-year 
staffing and deployment plan.
  Furthermore, an internal audit revealed systemic failures within 
CBP's budget formulation for salaries and benefits of its operational 
workforce. And though I believe taking a go-slow approach to hiring 
just makes sense, I oppose the offset, which decreases funds for the 
287(g) program.
  Under the 287(g) program, ICE enters into partnerships with State and 
local law enforcement agencies and authorizes them to remove criminal 
aliens who are a threat to local communities. In effect, the program 
acts as a force multiplier to ensure more resources to enforce 
immigration laws and policies. In fact, since 2006, the 287 program has 
been credited with identifying more than 279,311 potentially removable 
aliens, mostly from local jails.
  So I oppose this amendment and yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this 
amendment. I think it's a positive contribution to the bill. It 
improves the balance in the bill, both in what it proposes--
positively--and also what it cuts. I think we can use the additional 
funds in CBP for additional officers. And as has been said many times 
on this floor today, the 287(g) is flawed and wasteful and can well 
afford this kind of cut.
  So I commend the gentleman on both fronts--adding to the right 
things, cutting the right things--and I urge adoption of his amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Garcia).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. GARCIA. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida will 
be postponed.

                              {time}  1450

  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                        automation modernization

       For necessary expenses for U.S. Customs and Border 
     Protection for operation and improvement of automated 
     systems, including salaries and expenses, $707,897,000; of 
     which $325,526,000 shall remain available until September 30, 
     2016; and of which not less than $140,762,000 shall be for 
     the development of the Automated Commercial Environment.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Tipton

  Mr. TIPTON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 9, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(decreased by $7,655,000)''.
       Page 49, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $7,655,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Colorado is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. TIPTON. Mr. Chairman, as I stand here, wildfires are burning in 
my district and in the State of Colorado.

[[Page 8049]]

The bark beetle epidemic, rampant drought, intense weather occurrences, 
and deteriorating forest health have increased the propensity for 
devastating wildfires throughout the Western United States.
  According to the National Interagency Fire Center, last year, more 
than 9.3 million acres of land burned. That is an area that is 
approximately the size of Rhode Island, Delaware, the District of 
Columbia, and Massachusetts combined. These fires tragically claimed 13 
lives, destroyed more than 2,000 homes, and led to hundreds of millions 
of dollars in damages. Nearly 400,000 acres burned in Colorado, alone, 
with the tragic loss of six lives.
  The status quo of addressing a problem when it's too late is no 
longer good enough. The status quo has given us decades of declining 
forest health. The status quo has given us years of increasingly 
catastrophic wildfires. The status quo has put people, communities, and 
ecosystems at risk. We must do more.
  Forests are vital for the Western United States. They provide 
limitless environmental and economic benefits when healthy. It's our 
responsibility to be able to preserve this incredible natural resource 
and do all that we can to be able to restore forest health. And we also 
need to be able to prevent future loss of life and property to 
catastrophic wildfire.
  I urge this body to be able to join with me and my colleague, 
Congressman Polis of Colorado, in taking a step to be able to prevent 
these tragedies. For far too long we've been working to stop fires once 
they start and mitigate damage once it has already occurred. As the old 
saying goes, ``an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.'' That 
is what this amendment is about: getting ahead of this problem by 
investing greater resources toward prevention so that we can take a 
more proactive approach to restoring our forests to a healthy, natural 
state.
  Representative Polis and I have introduced this amendment to direct 
$7,655,000 to FEMA's National Pre-Disaster Mitigation Fund, a program 
uniquely suited to be able to assist in our effort to be able to reduce 
the occurrence of wildfire, as it would provide funds aimed at 
mitigating conditions that lead to these fires.
  Despite the need for proactive programs such as this in the wake of 
increased occurrences of extreme weather events, including wildfire, 
the National Pre-Disaster Mitigation Fund is facing a reduction of 
nearly $2.5 million this year. Considering the value of this program 
and the term saving it generates through prevention of destructive 
fires, I believe there are more appropriate areas within the Federal 
Government where it can realize budget savings.
  Our amendment is offset by decreasing the same amount of funding in 
the Automation Modernization account of the Department of Homeland 
Security, which received an increase of $7,655,000 this year for its IT 
modernization, despite concerns with transparency of spending within 
the agency. I share the concerns expressed there.
  Senator Coburn's Wastebook provided some troubling findings about 
wasteful spending within DHS, including the fact that this agency has 
spent over $35 billion of taxpayers' money in the last 10 years. In 
fiscal year '10, DHS spent $6.5 billion on IT spending alone. In 2013, 
DHS planned to spend $4 billion on 68 major IT programs. A third of 
these programs cost about $1 billion and were identified by the 
Government Accountability Office as containing waste and not meeting 
specified commitments.
  Besides being replete with wasteful government spending, many 
programs at DHS have been found to be overlapping, unnecessary, or 
lacking in transparency. Until these concerns are addressed, I do not 
believe we should be providing additional resources for these programs 
at DHS. Instead, we could better use that $7,655,000 to take steps 
towards proactively reducing the occurrence of devastating wildfires by 
redirecting those funds to the National Pre-Disaster Mitigation Fund.
  I urge my colleagues to support this important amendment and 
safeguard our forests.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Colorado is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to join my colleague, Mr. 
Tipton, in bringing forward this important amendment.
  Here, in the first year of June, there are already two wildfires that 
have erupted in my district. Mr. Tipton and I share northern and 
western Colorado. Just this last Monday, a wildfire ignited near 
Evergreen, Colorado. We had an evacuation of several thousand people. 
These are just the early season fires, and this year's wildfire season 
could very well be longer and more extreme than ever before. Already, 
the National Interagency Fire Center has predicted that this summer 
will bring an increased fire threat to communities in multiple States 
across the United States.
  Unfortunately, last year was a devastating year for fires in my home 
State. We had two of our most destructive fires in history. In 2012, 
wildfires destroyed 650 structures, six Coloradans lost their life in 
wildfires, 384,000 acres of land were burnt and caused over half a 
billion dollars in property damage.
  In addition to wildfires, our country and our State have experienced 
natural disasters, like droughts and tornadoes. The impacts of these 
are reminders of how costly and destructive extreme weather can be and 
how important it is to be prepared and to reduce risks where we can. In 
total, 11 extreme weather events last year across the country, 
including hurricanes, tornadoes, and fires, cost taxpayers $96 billion. 
Extreme weather events have a real impact, a human impact, and a cost.
  We have an opportunity in this amendment to reduce and minimize the 
damage and costs of extreme weather events, like wildfires, by 
mitigating the threat prior to an event. That is why I join 
Representative Tipton in directing $7.6 million to the National Pre-
Disaster Mitigation Fund. We can spend a penny now to save a dollar 
later. The National Pre-Disaster Mitigation Fund is one of the only 
FEMA programs that reduces fire danger before a fire starts. By 
increasing funding to mitigate extreme weather events, we can allocate 
more resources to preventing the impact of these devastating fires, 
saving lives and saving money.
  Unfortunately, the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Fund, absent this 
amendment, is only funded at $22.5 million, which is actually a 
reduction of $2.475 million, even though events were occurring at 
higher rates last year and we have no reason to believe that this year 
will be different.
  The Pre-Disaster Mitigation Fund, very simply, is a good investment, 
Mr. Chairman. The Pre-Disaster Mitigation Fund investments have already 
led to significant savings to taxpayers by reducing risks and damages 
caused by extreme weather.
  The amendment is completely offset by reducing the same amount of 
funding in the Automation Modernization account. In fact, our amendment 
actually decreases costs in the first year by $4 million. The 
Automation Modernization account has already been noted by the 
committee of lacking transparency regarding how the funds are managed. 
And of course, while I support the DHS modernizing its technology 
systems, I cannot support increasing that account in this time of 
fiscal constraint, especially when the result of these disasters could 
very well cost more than an ounce of prevention now.
  So this bill increases the account by $7.655 million that we're 
directing to the National Pre-Disaster Mitigation Fund to proactively 
reduce the threat of wildfires and save taxpayer money. Now, we can't 
stop wildfires, but we can take measures to reduce their impacts on our 
communities and to save taxpayer money.
  That is why I am proud to join Representative Tipton, and I've 
offered this commonsense amendment that would allocate $7.655 million 
in additional resources to the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Fund.

[[Page 8050]]

  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. I would like to accept this amendment and yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I, too, urge adoption of this amendment.
  I want to commend the chairman, though, while I have a moment, for 
putting in $22.5 million for pre-disaster mitigation into this bill. He 
did that at my request. We had a proposal for the President, which was 
quite inadequate in this respect, and so the chairman has put this 
money in. This is an amendment that would add more to that, and it is 
money we can quite well use.

                              {time}  1500

  I don't believe the offset is ideal. The offset would slow down the 
IT initiatives at Customs and Border Protection, which are designed to 
modernize customs processes and risk-based targeting efforts. I don't 
necessarily think it's the best process for us on the House floor to be 
establishing carveouts in the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program. We need 
an all-hazards approach. We don't necessarily want to rank the threat 
of fire higher than the threat of hurricanes and so forth.
  Having said that, though, I think this bipartisan pair of cosponsors 
has made a very compelling case today for the threat that their areas 
face, and I urge my colleagues to support them.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tipton).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

        border security fencing, infrastructure, and technology

       For expenses for border security fencing, infrastructure, 
     and technology, $351,454,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2016.

                       air and marine operations

       For necessary expenses for the operations, maintenance, and 
     procurement of marine vessels, aircraft, unmanned aircraft 
     systems, and other related equipment of the air and marine 
     program, including salaries and expenses and operational 
     training and mission-related travel, the operations of which 
     include the following: the interdiction of narcotics and 
     other goods; the provision of support to Federal, State, and 
     local agencies in the enforcement or administration of laws 
     enforced by the Department of Homeland Security; and, at the 
     discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security, the 
     provision of assistance to Federal, State, and local agencies 
     in other law enforcement and emergency humanitarian efforts; 
     $802,741,000; of which $292,791,000 shall be available for 
     salaries and expenses; and of which $509,950,000 shall remain 
     available until September 30, 2016:  Provided, That no 
     aircraft or other related equipment, with the exception of 
     aircraft that are one of a kind and have been identified as 
     excess to U.S. Customs and Border Protection requirements and 
     aircraft that have been damaged beyond repair, shall be 
     transferred to any other Federal agency, department, or 
     office outside of the Department of Homeland Security during 
     fiscal year 2014 without prior notice to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives:  Provided further, That the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security shall report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives, not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, on any changes to the 5-year strategic 
     plan for the air and marine program required under this 
     heading in Public Law 112-74.

                 construction and facilities management

       For necessary expenses to plan, acquire, construct, 
     renovate, equip, furnish, operate, manage, and maintain 
     buildings, facilities, and related infrastructure necessary 
     for the administration and enforcement of the laws relating 
     to customs, immigration, and border security, $471,278,000, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2018:  Provided, That 
     the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection shall 
     submit to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and 
     the House of Representatives, at the time that the 
     President's budget proposal for fiscal year 2015 pursuant to 
     section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, an inventory 
     of the real property of U.S. Customs and Border Protection 
     and a plan for each activity and project proposed for funding 
     under this heading that includes the full cost by fiscal year 
     of each activity and project proposed and underway in fiscal 
     year 2015.

                U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses for enforcement of immigration and 
     customs laws, detention and removals, and investigations, 
     including overseas vetted units operations; and purchase and 
     lease of up to 3,790 (2,350 for replacement only) police-type 
     vehicles; $5,344,461,000; of which not to exceed $10,000,000 
     shall be available until expended for conducting special 
     operations under section 3131 of the Customs Enforcement Act 
     of 1986 (19 U.S.C. 2081); of which not to exceed $11,475 
     shall be for official reception and representation expenses; 
     of which not to exceed $2,000,000 shall be for awards of 
     compensation to informants, to be accounted for solely under 
     the certificate of the Secretary of Homeland Security; of 
     which not less than $305,000 shall be for promotion of public 
     awareness of the child pornography tipline and activities to 
     counter child exploitation; of which not less than $5,400,000 
     shall be used to facilitate agreements consistent with 
     section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
     U.S.C. 1357(g)); and of which not to exceed $11,216,000 shall 
     be available to fund or reimburse other Federal agencies for 
     the costs associated with the care, maintenance, and 
     repatriation of smuggled aliens unlawfully present in the 
     United States:  Provided, That none of the funds made 
     available under this heading shall be available to compensate 
     any employee for overtime in an annual amount in excess of 
     $35,000, except that the Secretary of Homeland Security, or 
     the designee of the Secretary, may waive that amount as 
     necessary for national security purposes and in cases of 
     immigration emergencies:  Provided further, That of the total 
     amount provided, $15,770,000 shall be for activities to 
     enforce laws against forced child labor, of which not to 
     exceed $6,000,000 shall remain available until expended:  
     Provided further, That of the total amount available, not 
     less than $1,600,000,000 shall be available to identify 
     aliens convicted of a crime who may be deportable, and to 
     remove them from the United States once they are judged 
     deportable:  Provided further, That the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security shall prioritize the identification and removal of 
     aliens convicted of a crime by the severity of that crime:  
     Provided further, That funding made available under this 
     heading shall maintain a level of not less than 34,000 
     detention beds through September 30, 2014:  Provided further, 
     That of the total amount provided, not less than 
     $2,835,581,000 is for detention and removal operations, 
     including transportation of unaccompanied minor aliens:  
     Provided further, That of the total amount provided, 
     $31,541,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2015, 
     for the Visa Security Program:  Provided further, That not 
     less than $10,000,000 shall be available for investigation of 
     intellectual property rights violations, including operation 
     of the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination 
     Center:  Provided further, That none of the funds provided 
     under this heading may be used to continue a delegation of 
     law enforcement authority authorized under section 287(g) of 
     the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1357(g)) if the 
     Department of Homeland Security Inspector General determines 
     that the terms of the agreement governing the delegation of 
     authority have been violated:  Provided further, That none of 
     the funds provided under this heading may be used to continue 
     any contract for the provision of detention services if the 
     two most recent overall performance evaluations received by 
     the contracted facility are less than ``adequate'' or the 
     equivalent median score in any subsequent performance 
     evaluation system:  Provided further, That nothing under this 
     heading shall prevent U.S. Immigration and Customs 
     Enforcement from exercising those authorities provided under 
     immigration laws (as defined in section 101(a)(17) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(17))) 
     during priority operations pertaining to aliens convicted of 
     a crime.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Deutch

  Mr. DEUTCH. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 13, beginning on line 22, strike ``Provided further, 
     That funding made available under this heading shall maintain 
     a level of not less than 34,000 detention beds through 
     September 30, 2014:''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DEUTCH. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would strike the provision 
in H.R. 2217, which states:

       Funding made available under this heading shall maintain a 
     level of not less than 34,000 detention beds through 
     September 30, 2014.

  Immigration and Customs Enforcement has interpreted this provision, 
which has been in past appropriations bills, to require the maintenance 
of a

[[Page 8051]]

daily detention population of 34,000 people. This detention bed mandate 
ties the hands of ICE and restricts its discretion to make detention 
decisions even when release could be appropriate. Indeed, this is an 
unprecedented mandate for law enforcement as no other law enforcement 
agencies have a quota for the number of people that they must keep in 
jail.
  This detention bed mandate is a drain on ICE's limited resources. On 
March 19 of this year, I participated in a Judiciary Committee 
oversight hearing with ICE Director John Morton that addressed this 
issue. Director Morton explained that ICE had interpreted language in 
the previous continuing resolution as requiring the agency to keep ``a 
yearly average daily population of approximately 34,000 individuals.'' 
Accordingly, ICE has been maintaining an average daily detention 
population well over 34,000 people with the numbers fluctuating between 
35,000 and 37,000 people. Due to this fiscally unsustainable mandate, 
ICE released more than 2,000 individuals earlier this year to avoid 
burning through its detention funds.
  Detention is extremely costly, and it strains ICE's limited budget in 
an era of fiscal restraint. Mandating ICE to keep 34,000 detainees in 
custody each day forces ICE to forgo alternatives to detention that 
would save taxpayer money. In fact, a single detention bed is 
approximately $122 per day; and with additional administrative costs, 
it can rise to $164 a day. Meanwhile, alternatives such as ankle 
bracelets, parole, telephonic, and in-person reporting, curfews, and 
home visits can run from 30 cents to $14 per day.
  By untying ICE's hands by striking this minimum detention population 
requirement, we can allow ICE to pursue effective alternatives and make 
budgetary savings. ICE agents could use these savings when focusing on 
their many additional responsibilities, such as cracking down on drug 
smuggling, human trafficking and child pornography--all priorities 
which are shared by Republicans and Democrats alike.
  I would like to thank my friend, Congressman Bill Foster, for his 
dedication to this issue.
  Detention takes an enormous toll on our communities, and mandating 
ICE detain 34,000 individuals a day does not secure our borders or make 
us safer. The Deutch-Foster amendment would strike this arbitrary 
provision from the bill, and I urge its adoption.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to my friend, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Foster).
  Mr. FOSTER. I rise today in support of this amendment, and I would 
like to thank my colleague from Florida (Mr. Deutch) for joining me in 
the fight on this important issue.
  Our amendment would end the costly and inhumane practice of imposing 
arbitrary immigrant detention requirements by striking the language in 
this bill which mandates that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, 
otherwise known as ICE, maintain 34,000 immigrants in detention every 
single day.
  Mandatory detention comes at a high cost both for taxpayers and 
immigrant families who are needlessly torn apart. Immigration detention 
costs the United States $2 billion a year. That's $5.4 million a day or 
$164 per day per detainee. Despite the availability of other proven 
cheaper methods, including ankle bracelets and supervised release that 
cost the Federal Government anywhere from 30 cents a day to $14 a day, 
we continue to use detention as the primary method for immigrants 
facing deportation. Not only is this quota fiscally irresponsible, but 
it makes it impossible for DHS to make rational decisions about 
detention based on enforcement priorities and needs.
  There is also a high human cost. Most immigrants in detention are 
held in county jails or facilities run by private prison corporations 
often hundreds of miles from anyone they know. Human rights abuses have 
been well documented in facilities across the country. Many immigrants 
in the system have strong ties to their communities and no criminal 
records; yet they must fight their cases from a distant jail all 
because of this arbitrary quota. No other law enforcement agencies in 
our government have such quotas. Rather than a per-day bed quota, ICE's 
use of bed space should be based on actual need, which is the approach 
used in every other law enforcement context.
  In his letter from the Birmingham jail, Martin Luther King, Jr., 
said:

       Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

  Mandatory detention quotas distort our system of justice and are a 
threat to freedom and justice in our country. Mr. Chairman, I rise to 
end this costly and needless injustice, and I urge my colleagues to 
support our amendment.
  Mr. DEUTCH. Mr. Chairman, I have a letter of support for this 
amendment that is signed by 66 local, national and State groups, which 
I submit for the Record.

                                                     June 5, 2013.
     Re H.R. 2217--Support Rep. Deutch's Amendment to Eliminate 
         the Immigration Detention Bed Mandate

     Hon. John Boehner,
     Speaker, House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Minority Leader, House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Boehner and Minority Leader Pelosi: As 
     organizations that work to protect and advance the rights of 
     individuals in immigration detention, we write to encourage 
     bipartisan support of Rep. Deutch's amendment (co-sponsored 
     by Rep. Foster) to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 
     Appropriations Act, H.R. 2217, that would eliminate the 
     immigration detention bed mandate.
       Congress has mandated through appropriations that DHS 
     maintain a daily immigration detention level of 34,000 
     individuals, a micro-managing approach that does not exist in 
     any other law enforcement context. DHS already uses a Risk 
     Assessment Tool to help determine whether an individual 
     presents a risk of flight or a risk to public safety and 
     whether that person should be detained. Yet the bed 
     ``mandate'' precludes the agency from making decisions about 
     detention based on its enforcement priorities, policies, and 
     need. It also makes increased efficiencies, effective 
     alternatives to detention, and other cost-savings efforts for 
     taxpayers impossible--an irresponsible approach for the 
     federal government to take when Washington seeks to reduce 
     federal spending. Alternatives to detention have received 
     bipartisan support for its cost-savings from groups such as 
     the Council on Foreign Relations' Independent Task Force on 
     U.S. Immigration Policy, the Heritage Foundation, the 
     Pretrial Justice Institute, the Texas Public Policy 
     Foundation (home to Right on Crime), the International 
     Association of Chiefs of Police, and the National Conference 
     of Chief Justices.
       Today, taxpayers pay upward of $2 billion a year to fund 
     immigration detention, approximately $5.5 million each day. 
     Decades ago, criminal justice and correctional experts 
     observed that holding all individuals subject to 
     incarceration in jails or prisons was unsustainable, 
     unnecessary, and a wasteful use of resources. It is common in 
     the criminal justice system to use an array of less costly 
     custody options, such as electronic monitoring and house 
     arrest, to meet pre-trial and post-sentencing needs. The 
     federal sentencing guidelines expressly allow substitution of 
     a prison sentence with alternatives to incarceration. The 
     immigration detention system should follow suit and conform 
     to established best practices.
       We urge you to support this important amendment, which will 
     eliminate this arbitrary immigration detention quota and save 
     critical taxpayer dollars. Please feel free to contact Royce 
     Murray with any questions.
           Sincerely,


                         National Organizations

       Adrian Dominican Sisters.
       All of Us or None.
       American Civil Liberties Union.
       American Friends Service Committee.
       American Immigration Lawyers Association.
       Americans for Immigrant Justice, formerly Florida Immigrant 
     Advocacy Center.
       America's Voice.
       Arab American Institute.
       Congregation of St. Joseph.
       Detention Watch Network.
       Human Rights First.
       Immigration Equality Action Fund.
       Japanese American Citizens League.
       Justice for Immigrants.
       Justice Strategies.
       League of United Latin American Citizens.
       Lutheran Immigration Refugee Service.
       NAFSA: Association of International Educators.
       National Center for Transgender Equality.
       National Council of La Raza (NCLR).
       National Immigrant Justice Center.
       National Immigration Forum.
       National Immigration Law Center.
       Physicians for Human Rights.
       Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

[[Page 8052]]

       Sisters of St. Francis, Sylvania, OH.
       Sisters of St. Joseph, TOSF.
       Sisters of the Most Precious Blood, O'Fallon, MO.
       Sisters, Home Visitors of Mary.
       South Asian Americans Leading Together (SAALT).
       Southeast Asia Resource Action Center (SEARAC).
       Southern Poverty Law Center.
       The Advocates for Human Rights.
       The Center for APA Women.
       UC Davis Immigration Law Clinic.
       Women's Refugee Commission.


                          State Organizations

       Advocates for Survivors of Torture and Trauma.
       California Immigrant Policy Center.
       Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project.
       Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights.
       Legal Services for Prisoners with Children.
       Maria Baldini-Potermin & Associates, PC.
       Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition.
       New York Immigration Coalition.
       Northwest Immigrant Rights Project.
       OneAmerica.
       Pax Christi Florida.
       Political Asylum Immigration Representation Project.
       Scott D. Pollock & Associates, P.C.
       Sisters of Mercy West Midwest Justice Team.
       Vermont Immigration and Asylum Advocates.
       Voces de la Frontera.


                          Local Organizations

       Capital Area Immigrants' Rights Coalition.
       Dominican Sisters of Houston.
       Gesu Immigration Study Group.
       Good Shepherd Immigration Study Group.
       Gospel Justice Committee Sisters of the Most Precious Blood 
     of O'Fallon, MO.
       Immigration Taskforce, SWPA Synod, Evangelical Lutheran 
     Church in America.
       Justice and Peace Committee/Sisters of St Joseph/West 
     Hartford, CT.
       Justice for Immigrants, District 4 & 5.
       Milwaukee New Sanctuary Movement.
       PCUN, Oregon's Farmworker Union.
       Reformed Church of Highland Park, NJ.
       Sisters of St. Joseph of Rochester.
       University of Miami School of Law Immigration Clinic.

  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. I rise in opposition to this amendment, which strikes the 
legal requirement for 34,000 detention beds.
  The simple fact is that sovereign countries control their borders and 
have an immigration system with integrity that adheres to the rule of 
law.
  This last Friday, I visited the ICE facility in Houston, Texas. I 
find it interesting the numbers that they explained to me that were 
going on today in the Houston-Corpus Christi region, which takes in the 
entire gulf coast of Texas along with what we call the lower Rio Grande 
Valley of Texas. They informed me that we are having a massive 
encroachment into our country from across the border right now of 
approximately 100 OTMs a day in addition to the Mexicans who are coming 
across the border. It's interesting that we talk as to the alternatives 
to incarceration. In the Houston office alone, 64,000-plus are on 
alternatives to incarceration, which is almost double the number of 
detention beds for the entire United States in one office. So I think, 
with this, we get a better picture of what this invasion is all about.
  The attacks of 9/11 taught us that immigration enforcement matters. 
It matters to our security. The Boston Marathon attacks underscored 
this sobering lesson. Each year, more than 1 million aliens attempt to 
illegally enter the United States without proper documentation, or they 
enter legally but overstay and violate their visas.
  Though reasonable people can disagree, I believe detention beds are a 
critical component in enforcing U.S. immigration laws with the 
detention and eventual removal of those aliens who enter this country 
illegally. Therefore, the bill recommends $2.8 billion to fully fund 
ICE's obligation to maintain no fewer than 34,000 beds.

                              {time}  1510

  In contrast, the President's request provided funds sufficient to 
support 31,800 beds, justifying the request by saying there's no need 
to support 34,000 detention beds, even though, as I speak today, those 
in detention are at 38,000 beds. So it looks like we've got overage, 
not shortage.
  The facts, however, refute this completely.
  First, as of last Friday, more than 38,000 illegal immigrants are 
being held in ICE custody, many of whom meet the mandatory detention 
requirements.
  Second, by the administration's own estimate, there's at least 1.9 
million removable criminal aliens in the United States.
  There is general acknowledgement of an illegal alien population of 
approximately 11 million. That estimate goes up to as high as 20 
million in some quarters.
  Clearly, detention beds are necessary. This bed mandate is needed.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support 
of the Deutch-Foster amendment, and I commend my colleagues for 
addressing one of the major problems in this bill.
  Once again, this bill sets an arbitrary minimum of 34,000 ICE 
detention beds, whether or not ICE needs them, whether or not the 
population it is managing on a given day warrants detention.
  This detention bed mandate denies ICE the flexibility it needs to 
manage its enforcement and removal resources in response to changing 
circumstances. It prevents ICE from making full use of cheaper 
alternative forms of supervision when it's appropriate.
  The specific number of beds is not the main issue here. The problem 
is attempting to micromanage detention operations from the floor of 
this House and doing it, by the way, in a way that wastes money and 
reduces flexibility. I've never understood why we would want to do 
that, and yet this keeps appearing in the bill produced by our majority 
colleagues.
  Once again, we need to remove this provision, and I commend Mr. 
Deutch and Mr. Foster for focusing attention on this so effectively.
  I urge adoption of their amendment, and I yield back the balance of 
my time.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Illinois is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of Mr. Deutch 
and Mr. Foster's amendment.
  I think it is absolutely astonishing. We can have a conversation 
about different people who are here undocumented and whether or not 
they ought to be in detention and whether or not they have a criminal 
record and whether they're a danger to our country, but to say that 
34,000 beds have to be filled no matter what is so un-American. It's so 
un-American to say we're going to build X number of prison cells and 
then, no matter what the law says, we're going to fill them. We start 
with the need to fill the cell?
  What the Deutch-Foster amendment would do would be to strike that 
mandate. It doesn't strike the idea that some people are going to be 
detained. It just strikes the idea that we have to fill what Janet 
Napolitano, who is the Homeland Security Secretary, just said is 
arbitrary. These mandated levels effectively mean that ICE, our 
immigration system, can't make detention decisions based on risk to our 
country, to our people, the various agency priorities. Its officers 
have to focus instead on filling daily quotas. And as a result, growing 
numbers of immigrants are held in detention. In fiscal year 2011 alone, 
ICE detained 429,000 people.
  Let's talk about those people. Some of them are dangerous criminals, 
but most are not. Over half of the immigrants detained in 2009 and 2010 
had zero criminal history. Of those who did, about 20 percent had only 
traffic violations. Only 11 percent of the detainees with felony 
convictions had committed violent crimes.
  Included among those detained are victims of trafficking, families 
with small children, elderly individuals, individuals with serious 
medical and

[[Page 8053]]

mental health conditions. Many of those detained have U.S. citizen 
children or spouses and deep ties to their American families and their 
communities. Many have potential claims for lawful status, but still 
are detained for months or even years. Some are even survivors of 
torture seeking asylum in the United States.
  In my district, the Heartland Alliance Marjorie Kovler Center works 
with survivors of torture and emphasizes that placing these individuals 
in detention can be particularly traumatic, even replicating the 
feeling of vulnerability that they experienced during their torture.
  And the irony is this: detaining large numbers of immigrants who have 
no criminal convictions, except immigration charges, does not make us 
safer. It's not necessary to enforce immigration law--we don't need it 
to enforce the immigration law--and it represents a major waste of 
taxpayer dollars. Each detainee costs the government around $164 a day 
to hold. I understand why the prison industry, the private prisons in 
particular, would love to see $164 and set this goal of detaining all 
these people every day.
  So we should detain people because they pose a threat to our 
communities, not to meet congressionally mandated quotas. The criminal 
justice system does use a range of cheaper and effective custody 
options: electronic monitoring, house arrest. Alternatives to detention 
cost between 30 cents and $14 per individual per day, far less than our 
current spending on detention.
  We're making real progress toward immigration reform. The Senate is 
considering language that would allow undocumented immigrants to come 
out of the shadows and earn the chance to pursue their American Dream.
  Let me tell you, as a first-generation American, I find this policy 
so offensive to me, and my district is one of the most diverse in the 
country. To say we have to fill prison beds with these people, whether 
or not they're criminals, whether or not they pose harm to our country, 
this is not who we are as Americans. These provisions don't make us 
safer and they don't solve the immigration challenges we face. They are 
a waste of taxpayer money.
  I urge support of the Deutch-Foster amendment in promoting real 
immigration reform and yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Gingrey of Georgia). The gentleman from 
Colorado is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chair, I agree strongly with the impassioned plea by 
my colleague from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), and I'm very grateful for 
this amendment to be brought forward by Mr. Deutch and Mr. Foster.
  This really is an outrage. It's an outrage to our values as 
Americans, and frankly it's an outrage to taxpayers. The cost of 
holding an immigrant overnight is $120. We have viable and proven 
alternatives to detention that we should be using for noncriminal 
aliens.
  Again, what we're talking about here are different folks. When we're 
talking about criminal aliens, I don't think there's any dispute to the 
extent that we have criminal aliens. At any given time, this can be 
approximately 40 percent of the people in detention. When I visited the 
ICE facility in Aurora, they keep them separate, they wear different 
colored jumpsuits. They're criminal aliens, and they are--however many 
we have that have been apprehended for a crime--subject to deportation 
orders. It's perfectly fair to keep them in some form of detention.
  But the majority, 60 percent, are noncriminal aliens. They were in 
the wrong place at the wrong time. It could have been a tail light out. 
They could have been going 10 miles over the speed limit. Yet, we as 
taxpayers are removing noncriminal aliens from their homes, from being 
the breadwinner for their family, from supporting their kids and being 
an asset to our country and instead turning them into a liability for 
taxpayers to the tune of $120 a day. Again, I don't see how this makes 
fiscal sense at all. We're paying for free rooms, free board, food, 
medical services. All of these are being provided at taxpayer cost for 
folks.

                              {time}  1520

  How is this a good deal for Americans? It just doesn't make any sense 
to me when we have at one-tenth the cost alternatives to detention that 
include call-ins and ankle bracelets. There's a comprehensive program 
for noncriminal aliens that can do it at a much less expensive cost. 
And in detention, many of them remain for a period of months. I've even 
talked to folks, noncriminal aliens, who'd been in limbo for over a 
year, some approaching 2 years.
  So yes, anybody who opposes this amendment is saying U.S. taxpayers 
should foot the bill for food and board and health care for someone who 
is here illegally for 2 years. Why do people want to subsidize our 
illegal population? It's absolutely absurd.
  This is a commonsense measure. However many beds we need for criminal 
aliens, let's have. However many we need for noncriminal aliens in 
terms of alternatives to detention, let's do. Obviously, what we really 
need is comprehensive immigration reform to address this issue. There's 
no way I don't think people on either side of the aisle think that we 
should pay for 12 million people to be detained at the cost $120 a day. 
I can't even add that up in my own mind, but I can tell you, it'd be a 
deficit buster right there.
  So let's start here. Let's address our deficit. Let's make sure that 
we keep families together. Don't take parents away from kids. Don't 
force taxpayers to buy medical care and lodging and food for people who 
aren't even here in this country legally. We can do that right here, 
right now by passing the Deutch amendment. I call upon my colleagues to 
join me in doing so.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this important 
amendment, the Deutch-Foster amendment. First of all, this is the right 
thing to do, but to bring the conversation back to what my colleagues 
on the other side of the aisle pivot to in almost every policy 
discussion we have in this body--cutting spending.
  In a budget age where many in this body celebrate the draconian and 
harmful cuts of the sequester, it seems we've come to accept as the 
norm indiscriminate, across-the-board cuts that in many cases fall on 
the backs of the most vulnerable among us. Cutting spending in this 
Congress no longer equates to targeted cuts to inefficient or 
duplicative government programs to root out waste. Cutting spending in 
this budget climate is simply about the bottom line. But it doesn't 
have to be that way.
  This amendment is the perfect example of how we can cut spending in a 
smart and efficient way while defending those most vulnerable. By 
ending the arbitrary 34,000-bed mandate for immigration detention, we 
can cut spending and do the right thing.
  How's this for a bottom line: alternatives to immigration detention 
save money. We're spending more than $5 million a day to detain 
immigrants, 45 percent of which have no criminal record, according to 
Human Rights Watch. That equates to roughly $164 per day per detainee 
for detention and roughly $2 billion per year.
  On the other hand, alternatives to detention only cost between 30 
cents and $14 per day per detainee, and they have proven to be safe and 
effective. According to Julie Myers Wood, who ran ICE under President 
Bush, 96 percent of individuals enrolled in alternatives to detention 
show up for their final hearing and 84 percent comply with removal 
orders.
  So what's stopping us from putting in place these effective, cost-
saving policies? Another harmful appropriations policy rider, mandating 
a daily detention level of 34,000 immigrants. In no other law 
enforcement context do we impose such a ridiculous quota. You wouldn't 
tell a county jail or a State prison that you have to keep ``X'' number 
of prisoners in that facility.
  Mandating such a high level of detention makes absolutely no sense. 
By

[[Page 8054]]

doing so, ICE is effectively prohibited from making decisions about 
detention based on enforcement policies, efficiency, and need.
  All-too-often in this body, we look for someone else to blame. But in 
this case, we have no one to blame for this wasteful policy but 
ourselves. We have the power to change a policy that does nothing but 
waste the taxpayers' money and cause undue hardship to immigrant 
families across the country. I urge my colleagues to vote for increased 
efficiency and compassion, and urge a ``yes'' vote on this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. I have listened to the arguments from my colleagues on 
the other side of the aisle, and I find it interesting. First, those 
who cross into our country without and contrary to the laws of this 
great Nation have committed an illegal act. Calling them not illegal 
doesn't make them not illegal.
  I really would like to point out that we have a curious way to 
discuss this as a policy; that is, no one here stands responsible for 
the decision. You know, the alternatives to incarceration were created 
by judges, and the judicial system stands in a little different 
situation than the Members of Congress. When one of these people who's 
let out under alternatives to incarceration in fact commits another 
criminal act--and believe me, it happens--nothing more than just DWI, 
when you run over a little kid--the judge, who puts him on that 
particular forum, is held responsible. And he is now going to read his 
name in the newspaper that he put that person out that should have been 
in jail, out on an alternative to incarceration. Or if the person 
commits another criminal act even more severe--murder, rape, robbery--
if it happens when the judge puts him out on alternatives, the judge 
has to take the heat.
  But as we have this great policy debate in Congress, no one who is 
arguing to release all these people on alternatives is taking any heat 
at all on what the accomplishments in the criminal realm will be of 
those we release.
  I approve of alternatives to incarceration. I just told you that 
64,000 people alone in the city of Houston's jurisdiction, which is the 
valley all of the way up to Beaumont, were out on alternatives. But 
detention beds are also full and overflowing. When I visited the ICE 
unit there, the red uniforms were the majority, and the red uniforms 
are criminal aliens. They have committed crimes in this country.
  And so I think we are being a little bit safe to make these arguments 
as we stand here in these hallowed Halls. Never is our name going to 
appear in any newspaper when one of these people commits an act that 
causes damage to our fellow citizens. And yet we make this argument 
very passionately. I just want to remind everybody that we are 
responsible for those criminal aliens that we release, and criminal 
aliens are right now being released. And, in fact, Ms. Napolitano, 
after I asked her specifically, Are you releasing anyone from 
detention, she looked me right in the eye and said, No. And 2 days 
later, she released 2,300. And of those 2,300, the top two categories 
were both represented in that release--the most serious and the second-
most serious categories of crimes we hold people for.
  So this is a policy. This administration continues to have a policy 
of not enforcing the law, and, quite frankly, we need this availability 
of beds so we can enforce the law.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutch).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. DEUTCH. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida will 
be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                        automation modernization

       For expenses of immigration and customs enforcement 
     automated systems, $34,900,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2016.

                              construction

       For necessary expenses to plan, construct, renovate, equip, 
     and maintain buildings and facilities necessary for the 
     administration and enforcement of the laws relating to 
     customs and immigration, $5,000,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 2017.

                 Transportation Security Administration

                           aviation security

       For necessary expenses of the Transportation Security 
     Administration related to providing civil aviation security 
     services pursuant to the Aviation and Transportation Security 
     Act (Public Law 107-71; 115 Stat. 597; 49 U.S.C. 40101 note), 
     $4,872,739,000, to remain available until September 30, 2015, 
     of which not to exceed $7,650 shall be for official reception 
     and representation expenses: Provided, That of the total 
     amount made available under this heading, not to exceed 
     $3,824,625,000 shall be for screening operations and not to 
     exceed $1,048,114,000 shall be for aviation security 
     direction and enforcement: Provided further, That of the 
     amount made available in the preceding proviso for screening 
     operations, $2,972,715,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2014, shall be available for Screener 
     Compensation and Benefits; $163,190,000 shall be available 
     for the Screening Partnership Program; $382,354,000 shall be 
     available for explosives detection systems, of which 
     $83,845,000 shall be available for the purchase and 
     installation of these systems; and $103,309,000 shall be for 
     checkpoint support:  Provided further, That any award to 
     deploy explosives detection systems shall be based on risk, 
     the airport's current reliance on other screening solutions, 
     lobby congestion resulting in increased security concerns, 
     high injury rates, airport readiness, and increased cost 
     effectiveness:  Provided further, That security service fees 
     authorized under section 44940 of title 49, United States 
     Code, shall be credited to this appropriation as offsetting 
     collections and shall be available only for aviation 
     security:  Provided further, That the sum appropriated under 
     this heading from the general fund shall be reduced on a 
     dollar-for-dollar basis as such offsetting collections are 
     received during fiscal year 2014 so as to result in a final 
     fiscal year appropriation from the general fund estimated at 
     not more than $2,752,739,000:  Provided further, That any 
     security service fees collected in excess of the amount made 
     available under this heading shall become available during 
     fiscal year 2015:  Provided further, That notwithstanding 
     section 44923 of title 49, United States Code, for fiscal 
     year 2014, any funds in the Aviation Security Capital Fund 
     established by section 44923(h) of title 49, United States 
     Code, may be used for the procurement and installation of 
     explosives detection systems or for the issuance of other 
     transaction agreements for the purpose of funding projects 
     described in section 44923(a) of such title:  Provided 
     further, That none of the funds made available in this Act 
     may be used for any recruiting or hiring of personnel into 
     the Transportation Security Administration that would cause 
     the agency to exceed a staffing level of 46,000 full-time 
     equivalent screeners:  Provided further, That the preceding 
     proviso shall not apply to personnel hired as part-time 
     employees:  Provided further, That not later than 90 days 
     after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security shall submit to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
     a detailed report on--
       (1) the Department of Homeland Security efforts and 
     resources being devoted to develop more advanced integrated 
     passenger screening technologies for the most effective 
     security of passengers and baggage at the lowest possible 
     operating and acquisition costs;
       (2) how the Transportation Security Administration is 
     deploying its existing passenger and baggage screener 
     workforce in the most cost effective manner; and
       (3) labor savings from the deployment of improved 
     technologies for passenger and baggage screening and how 
     those savings are being used to offset security costs or 
     reinvested to address security vulnerabilities:

       Provided further, That Members of the Senate and House of 
     Representatives, including the leadership; the heads of 
     Federal agencies and commissions, including the Secretary, 
     Deputy Secretary, Under Secretaries, and Assistant 
     Secretaries of the Department of Homeland Security; the 
     Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, Assistant 
     Attorneys General, and the United States Attorneys; and 
     senior members of the Executive Office of the President, 
     including the Director of the Office of Management and 
     Budget, shall not be exempt from Federal passenger and 
     baggage screening.

                              {time}  1530


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk, 
and I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of the 
amendment.

[[Page 8055]]

  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the Clerk will designate the 
amendment.
  There was no objection.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 15, line 20, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $4,872,739,000)''.
       Page 15, line 21, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $7,650)''.
       Page 15, line 24, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $3,824,625,000)''.
       Page 15, line 25, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $1,048,114,000)''.
       Page 16, line 4, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $2,972,715,000)''.
       Page 16, line 6, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $163,190,000)''.
       Page 16, line 7, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $382,354,000)''.
       Page 16, line 8, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $83,845,000)''.
       Page 16, line 10, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $103,309,000)''.
       Page 16, line 25, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $2,752,739,000)''.
       Page 93, line 9, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $4,872,739,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would completely 
eliminate funding for the Transportation Security Administration, TSA, 
and transfer that money to the spending reduction account, saving 
taxpayers nearly $5 billion.
  Congress intended for TSA to be an efficient, cutting-edge, 
intelligence-based agency responsible for protecting our airports and 
keeping our passengers safe and secure, but today it has grown into one 
of the largest bureaucracies in the Federal Government. They've had a 
400 percent increase in staff since they were created. A good portion 
of those are headquarters employees making six-figure incomes, on the 
average.
  What's worse is that the American passengers aren't getting a good 
return on the more than $60 billion investment that they've spent on 
TSA. Reports indicate that more than 25,000--repeat, 25,000--security 
breaches have occurred in U.S. airports since 2001.
  Plus, we have evidence today that terrorists on the no-fly list still 
have been able to board U.S. aircraft--terrorists boarding U.S. 
aircraft, in spite of TSA.
  Furthermore, we've seen report after report on TSA employees 
displaying a lack of professionalism, being inadequately trained, and 
even engaging in theft and other illegal activities.
  Just about the only thing that the TSA is consistently good at is 
using its extensive power to violate American travelers' civil 
liberties. Veterans, the disabled, the elderly, and even small children 
have been the victims of overly invasive searches by TSA officers. This 
is all evidence that the TSA has veered dangerously off course.
  I've repeatedly asked that we use our resources to focus on 
intelligence and technologies that could be more effective when it 
comes to catching terrorists. I've called for the privatization of TSA, 
and so have many other of my colleagues. But we still have yet to see 
the necessary changes made to the TSA personnel or to its procedures 
that will ensure the safety and security of our airports and 
passengers.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment to zero out funding for the TSA forces 
Congress and the Department of Homeland Security to start from scratch 
on a leaner, more effective, and more focused and more productive 
system for protecting our U.S. citizens. I urge my colleagues to 
support my amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, the simple fact is this amendment is 
unnecessary and harmful to national security, in my opinion.
  Now, am I happy with TSA? No. I have criticism of TSA also. Most 
people who travel have some criticism of TSA. But zeroing out TSA and 
leaving our airports unsecured is not the solution to the problem.
  If the gentleman's argument is that we're being fiscally responsible 
to do away with the TSA part of this budget, I would argue the 
contrary. This bill, quite frankly, has made cuts, and, in fact, for 4 
years now we have reduced spending in this bill. That's not a good 
argument.
  It's easy to get mad at somebody that interferes with your life every 
time you travel, especially when you travel every week, but the reality 
is, this would be a mistake to national security. This would be a 
mistake to our country.
  And even though we have criticism of TSA, our job is to fix TSA, not 
abolish TSA. And I know there's plenty of folks that think that 
abolishing it is a good idea, but, quite honestly, it would be a real 
tragedy to leave our airports undefended. We need to make them better. 
And I think one of the things we're doing is the oversight that we've 
provided in this bill so that we can take a hard look at DHS across the 
board and come up with solutions where things need to be fixed; and, of 
course, if TSA's on the radar screen, they ought to be fixed.
  But I think this is a mistake. I think it's bad policy. I think it's 
good grandstanding but bad policy, and I oppose the gentleman's 
amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I join the subcommittee 
chairman in strong opposition to this amendment. The gentleman's 
amendment would eliminate entirely the TSA aviation security account 
from this bill, more than $4.8 million.
  Now, I oppose this dangerous amendment on numerous grounds, but I'm 
most appalled by the fact that it includes no language on who, if not 
TSA, would be securing our Nation's airports and under what authority, 
what guidelines.
  If this amendment were to pass, not only would the public not worry 
about bringing knives on planes, but terrorists would be able to bring 
guns and explosives on planes. So surely the sponsor can't be 
suggesting that as an acceptable outcome of this amendment.
  I just have to say, the job of this subcommittee and of this bill is 
to provide for the defense of our homeland. That's our bottom-line 
obligation, and this amendment is in direct contradiction to that 
obligation. So I urge the resounding defeat of this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
  The amendment was rejected.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Tipton

  Mr TIPTON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 15, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,000,000)''.
       Page 15, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,000,000)''.
       Page 16, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,000,000)''.
       Page 19, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $4,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Colorado is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. TIPTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise today with an amendment that cuts $4 
million from the Transportation Security Administration and provides 
these resources for small and rural airports, airports that have had 
important passenger screening devices removed as a result of the 
Federal Aviation Administration Modernization Act.
  Passengers in rural airports in my district, including Yampa Valley, 
Montrose, Gunnison, Durango, they've all been impacted by unnecessary 
delays and intrusions because of the removal of security screening 
devices that were sent to larger airports.
  In the interest of protecting passenger privacy, the FAA 
Modernization Reform Act of 2012 required the use of Automated Target 
Recognition scanners, or ``Gumby scanners,'' at all airports by June 1 
of 2012. While the intent of Congress was admirable and protecting the 
privacy of passengers should be a priority, TSA's interpretation and 
implementation of the law has caused numerous problems for passengers 
traveling from small and rural airports throughout the country.

[[Page 8056]]

  One of TSA's manufacturers who provided equipment for passenger 
screening could not comply with the changes in the law and provide new 
equipment. As a result, TSA decided to remove 174 of these noncompliant 
machines throughout the country. Rather than waiting for funding for 
new machines or finding alternative ways to be able to fix this 
problem, TSA made the arbitrary decision of taking compliant scanners 
from small and rural airports throughout the country and giving them to 
larger airports that lost their noncompliant scanners.

                              {time}  1540

  One alternative could have been the cost-effective private-Federal 
alternative screening model that was put forth by then-House 
Transportation Chairman John Mica that would have saved billions of 
dollars and not compromised security at small and rural airports.
  TSA's implication that security checkpoints at small and rural 
airports are somehow less critical is inaccurate. Once passengers clear 
screening at small and rural airports, they typically do not receive 
additional screening for connecting flights at any other potentially 
larger airports.
  The amendment will assist with reducing unnecessary delay for 
passengers at small and rural airports by providing funding to be able 
to speed up the replacement of security equipment removed by the TSA. 
It is important to note that the funds being redirected from TSA toward 
improving passenger screening at small airports come from its 
administrative budget and, as such, do not impact passenger security.
  There are numerous concerns with transparency and waste in the TSA 
budget, including a recent agreement by the TSA to purchase $50 million 
worth of new uniforms that are unnecessary, wasting approximately $212 
million each year on the inefficient SPOT program and billions on the 
Transportation Worker Identification Credential program. I believe that 
these resources could be better used to more efficiently screen 
passengers at small airports, strengthen security, prevent delays and 
unavoidable intrusions.
  I encourage my colleagues to join me in support of this commonsense 
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I share some of these concerns with the 
gentleman from Colorado, and I believe that outstanding questions still 
remain over the timeline for replacing the AIT scanners. I expect TSA 
to sufficiently answer the question posed here today.
  I urge TSA to move forward with the replacement of AIT scanners at 
the affected airports as soon as possible. I commit to the gentleman 
from Colorado that the committee will look into this issue further and 
do everything within its power to fix the problem to the extent that it 
does not cost the American taxpayers more money. It's my understanding 
that this amendment will not result in the need for additional TSA 
screeners.
  Therefore, I accept the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I, too, would suggest that 
for now we accept this amendment and continue to work on the problems 
that the amendment highlights. My understanding from TSA is that they 
have prior-year funding available to replace detection machines that 
were removed due to the FAA Modernization Act. The machines that were 
removed didn't meet certain privacy standards and were removed at the 
cost of the contractor. TSA is currently testing new machines that 
could be used to replace the roughly 250 that were removed from 
airports across the country. Clearly, of course, this needs to be done.
  So I'll be happy to work with the gentleman to press TSA to move at 
an expeditious pace to replace these with more advanced machines, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tipton).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Hudson

  Mr. HUDSON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 15, line 25, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $12,500,000) (increased by $12,500,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. HUDSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to encourage my colleagues to 
support our amendment which strengthens the Federal Flight Deck Officer 
program, or FFDO. Our amendment increases funding for the FFDO by $12.5 
million, bringing the total authorized for the program to $25 million, 
with the Congressional Budget Office reporting no budgetary impact.
  Since its creation in 2003, this program has provided training to 
pilots who are willing to step up and volunteer to protect their fellow 
citizens by defending the airliners that millions of Americans fly on 
every year. As part of TSA's risk-based approach to aviation security, 
which I've strongly advocated for on the Homeland Security Committee, 
the FFDO program plays an integral role in providing an additional 
layer of security against a hijacking or terrorist attack.
  Since its inception, the FFDOs have protected thousands of flights 
each day and over 100,000 flights a month, at a fraction of the cost to 
taxpayers compared to the Federal Air Marshal Service. As the first 
line of deterrence and the last line of defense, it only makes sense 
that we should continue to provide adequate funding to the FFDO 
program. While zeroed out in the President's budget, we believe the 
FFDO program provides a cost-effective solution in protecting 
passengers aboard our airliners.
  I applaud Chairman Rogers, Subcommittee Chairman Carter, and the 
Appropriations Committee for finding ways to prioritize spending so 
this program did not meet its demise. With that said, $12.5 million 
represents more than a 50 percent cut from last year's amount. At this 
level of funding, the FFDO program would be unable to recertify all the 
pilots currently in the program, maintain its current management 
structure, or train any additional officers.
  We have offered a responsible and fully offset amendment that moves 
$12.5 million to the FFDO program to ensure that we are using our 
resources wisely and in a manner that directly benefits America's 
safety. The House unanimously agreed to a similar amendment offered in 
the FY 2013 Homeland Security Appropriations bill, and I hope my 
colleagues will join me this year in providing the support that such a 
valuable program deserves.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. It's been nearly a decade since, on a bipartisan basis, 
against bipartisan opposition, we fought and were successful in 
creating the Federal Flight Deck Officer program. Since that time, over 
hundreds of thousands of flights have been protected by armed pilots.
  There was controversy at the beginning. Could we trust pilots with 
guns? Well, we trust them with our lives. We trust them with planes 
that were used as weapons of mass destruction by the terrorists in 
2011. Of course, we can trust them with guns. But they need proper 
training because it's an unusual environment in which to possess and 
use a weapon--and use a weapon as the last line of defense--should a 
plane be taken over by terrorists.
  We've done other things to provide security like Federal air 
marshals, armored flight decks. But still, we know

[[Page 8057]]

that this program is essential, it's inexpensive, and it is something 
that pilots want to do. There were openings last year for a few 
additional training spots. Over a thousand people volunteered for those 
slots. Many, obviously, were not chosen.
  If this program were eliminated, as was proposed in the President's 
budget, or even if it's cut in half--and I appreciate the fact that the 
committee has labored to find money to restore half the funding--many 
officers will not be recertified, new officers will not be allowed to 
join, and we will lose this last critical line of defense and one that 
is wonderfully random. A terrorist could never, ever know if the pilots 
on that plane were armed. It's pretty hard to spot the air marshals, 
but it's even impossible to know what the pilot has behind that locked 
flight deck door.
  So we're recommending an amendment to our colleagues that would take 
money out of other parts of the bureaucracy of the TSA at no increase 
in debt or deficit and fully fund this program so that thousands of 
pilots can continue to participate meaningfully as the last line of 
defense against a future terrorist attack.
  I think this amendment has tremendous common good sense about it. 
It's very cost effective. And I would hope that my colleagues will join 
us on a bipartisan basis in supporting it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.

                              {time}  1550

  Mr. MICA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also want to thank particularly 
the committee leadership, Mr. Carter, Mr. Price, and the staff. They've 
done an excellent job in trying to put into appropriations language, 
and amount of money expended, reforms that are long overdue in TSA.
  I'm pleased to join the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hudson) 
and my colleague, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), in this 
bipartisan amendment to restore the $25 million for the Flight Deck 
Officer program.
  I can't, for the life of me, understand why the Obama administration 
would propose to Congress that we zero out one of the most cost-
effective mechanisms we have to ensure the safety and security of the 
flying public.
  Now, this program costs $25 million, and that's out of a $5 billion 
expenditure for TSA--$25 million. It is probably the most cost-
effective layer of security that we have. Just a few dollars 
underwriting, again, the expense of training these pilots who have 
asked for the ability to protect their aircraft themselves and their 
passengers.
  We put this in place--everyone was against it. You heard Mr. DeFazio 
tell the story of this. The Senate was against it. The administration 
was against it. The airlines were against it. We brought it out here in 
a demo project, and the House overwhelmingly voted to support this 
program; and it's done it time and time again because it is cost 
effective and it's a good layer of security.
  Now, let me tell you what these pilots do. These pilots go at their 
own expense. They're not paid per diem. They're not paid for the 
flight. I went out to visit the program, and I have to admit, whether 
it was a Republican administration or a Democratic administration, 
everybody tried to do the program. And so they put the training 
facility almost on the border of Mexico. I had to take three flights--
one to Denver, one to Albuquerque, and another jumper flight--and then 
drive almost 2 hours to the border to get to this flight facility. 
That's what these pilots are doing on their own dollar for a weeklong 
training program that, again, this is the cost of that training program 
but the expense is borne by the pilot. I saw men, I saw women, I saw 
pilots for cargo, passenger all going to get this training.
  Why would you want to end a program that is so cost effective and 
gives us this protection?
  So, I don't want to belabor this. Mr. Hudson and Mr. DeFazio have 
stated the case well. Thousands and thousands of flights are protected, 
and thousands of pilots participate on their own dime.
  I urge the passage of this amendment and yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. SWALWELL of California. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SWALWELL of California. Mr. Chairman, moments ago, the TSA 
Administrator announced that he will reverse his earlier decision to 
allow knives back onto airplanes. Knives will now continue to be a part 
of the prohibited items list on our aircraft, making our passengers and 
our crew more safe. This is positive news.
  However, the administration's desire to zero out this FFDO program--
allowing our trained pilots to be armed on the aircraft--puts us in a 
position that will put us more at risk, will put passengers and flight 
crew more at risk. The TSA not allowing knives on planes, that's just 
one step for passenger and crew safety when we need a comprehensive 
approach to keep our passengers and crew safe, which would include not 
allowing knives on planes, which would include risk-based screening, 
which would include, as my friends from the other side have talked 
about, increasing funding for intelligence operations to make sure we 
know who is getting on these airplanes. But it would also mean keeping 
the Federal Flight Deck Officer program fully funded.
  This is a program I know about because of a personal friend in 
Livermore, California, who is a Southwest pilot. I have seen firsthand 
over the last 7 years how serious he has trained to be ready for this 
program. As my friend and colleague from the other side just mentioned, 
they fly down to Texas routinely to train down there, and they are very 
diligent. They do this many times on their own dime. And a lot of skill 
and effort is put into their training to make sure that if something 
dangerous were to happen on that aircraft, they would be prepared. It 
is a task they take seriously, and it's a task we want them to continue 
to be supported by in the Federal Government.
  So, to have comprehensive airline passenger security, we want to 
restore the Federal dollars for this, put it back at $25 million. And I 
appreciate that this amendment was offered.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. I accept the amendment and yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hudson).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. HUDSON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word for the 
purpose of a colloquy.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. HUDSON. Mr. Chairman, as chair of the House Transportation 
Security Subcommittee, I want to raise my concern about a delay in 
finalizing a rule to improve the security of FAA-approved domestic and 
foreign repair stations. This rulemaking, mandated by Congress in 2003 
and again in 2007, has languished for almost 10 years.
  By way of background, TSA signed off on the rule late last year, and 
DHS completed consideration early this year. The Office of Management 
and Budget is currently reviewing the rule. I hope that OMB will 
complete this rulemaking by June 14, 2013, which is the end of the 90-
day clock for their consideration.
  At this time, I yield to my colleague from Texas (Mr. Carter).
  Mr. CARTER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I share the gentleman from North Carolina's concern on that. The 
House Appropriations Committee included report language asking for 
final action on this rule. It is well past time to finalize this rule, 
whose delay has impeded manufacturers in growing critical markets for 
aviation exports.

[[Page 8058]]


  Mr. HUDSON. I thank my colleague.
  At this time I would like to yield to my colleague from North 
Carolina (Mr. Price).
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank my colleague for yielding, and I 
very much appreciate my fellow North Carolinian raising this issue.
  I agree with his assessment that OMB needs to finalize this rule as 
soon as possible. It's critical to establish this risk-based security 
regime for these repair stations. So we do hope for a rapid conclusion 
of this protracted episode, and I appreciate his raising the matter.
  Mr. HUDSON. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.


                  Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Mica

  Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. It's Mica 
amendment 8, designated and preprinted.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 15, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $31,810,000)''.
       Page 16, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $31,810,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman and my colleagues, first I want to again thank 
Chairman Carter and Ranking Member Price for their excellent work, and 
again his staff. They have gone through some of the expenditures for 
TSA not only in the dollar amounts, but also in the language that's 
contained supporting their appropriations measures, some excellent 
provisions.
  Now, I do offer this amendment, which is no greater increase in 
spending, but does move some money around from TSA administration to 
support our private screening partnership program. As you heard earlier 
from one of the speakers, this program is very successful, it's cost 
effective, and many airports want to avail themselves of it.
  TSA has thwarted all the efforts to increase the private screening 
under Federal supervision, and they came up with a whole host of 
excuses. Also, they have cooked the books as far as the cost of 
operating these private screening operations.

                              {time}  1600

  Now, you've got to remember that if you look at this bill, it puts a 
limit of 46,000 screeners, I believe, in the past. We've increased that 
from 40,000. Mr. Rogers and I did that some time ago. Actually, if you 
go online, you'll find 51,000 screeners. We're not sure exactly what 
the figure is right now. It may be less than that.
  There are a total of 66,000 TSA employees. So that leaves 
approximately 15,000--even at our most conservative estimate--of the 
number of people in administration.
  Right now, there is close to $1.2 billion spent on nonscreener 
salaries. That's $1.19 billion, to be exact, in this bill. So this 
moves a small amount of money--$20-some million--over to, again, the 
private screening account. I think it's justified. I think we're going 
to need it.
  I have several amendments that I'm going to offer in a minute that I 
would like to expand, again, on the size of the bureaucracy and what 
TSA is doing to thwart the privatization effort that could bring cost-
effective screening to play and do a better job and save taxpayers 
money.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I accept this amendment and yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to 
the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman's amendment 
would provide an additional $32 million for the Screening Partnership 
Program. I have no objection to the concept of the Screening 
Partnership Program. If a local airport authority applies to 
participate in the program and a private company can provide screening 
in accordance with TSA standards and costs, then so be it.
  In fact, this bill increases funding for the SPP by $15.6 million 
over current-year levels and $10 million above the request in 
anticipation of the program's vast expansion. But I am unaware of a 
surge in demand for participation in the SPP that would warrant a 30-
percent increase in funding for this program. The offset for the 
amendment is aviation security direction and enforcement, which the 
bill already cuts by $20 million below the request.
  Now, Mr. Chairman, should additional demand warrant funding for the 
SPP above what is already provided in this bill, we could work with the 
TSA to transfer funding to meet that demand. But it simply makes no 
sense to provide such a significant increase for the SPP when it is 
almost certain that those additional funds are going to go unused.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Ms. TITUS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Nevada is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. TITUS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to voice my objections to the 
limits placed on DHS regarding the UASI Grant program. My district is 
slated to lose $2 million due to the limit of awards to only 25 UASI 
grantees. While I believe that counterterrorism funding should go to 
the places that need it the most, an arbitrary cap, along with a flawed 
formula, is not helping our Nation's efforts to prepare for, and 
respond to, natural disasters and potential terrorist attacks. I have 
voiced these concerns on a number of occasions over the past few months 
with DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, and I appreciate her willingness 
to work with me on this issue.
  I want to acknowledge other Members of our Nevada delegation for 
joining with me today to work on this issue through a proposed 
amendment, but I have a number of reservations about their approach. I 
am concerned about reductions in salary accounts for agencies that are 
charged with keeping our Nation safe and prepared for all types of 
emergencies. Furthermore, their amendment provides additional funding, 
but not additional instruction, so there is no guarantee that 
additional cities, like Las Vegas, will receive any of this increased 
funding in the amendment.
  I am proud to represent Las Vegas, one of the premier vacation and 
business destinations in the world. Ensuring that my constituents and 
millions of visitors who we welcome every year stay safe is a top 
priority of our local government and law enforcement. Without UASI 
funding to sustain and enhance our regional capabilities, Las Vegas, as 
well as our portion of the large FEMA Region IX, will be at a 
significant disadvantage in preparedness, response, and recovery 
capabilities.
  Hundreds of thousands of people gather in large venues in southern 
Nevada every day. Fifteen of the world's 25 largest hotels are in my 
district on the Las Vegas Strip with a total of over 62,000 rooms. In 
2012, some 37.5 million visitors came to Las Vegas and over 21,000 
conventions are held each year. On any given day, tens of thousands of 
tourists walk along the 4.2 mile Las Vegas Strip, just a few miles from 
critical Federal assets, including Nellis Air Force Base and Creech Air 
Force Base, as well as the National Nuclear Security Site and Boulder 
Dam.
  Mr. Chairman, I believe that counterterrorism funding decisions 
should be made using forward-looking, risk-based metrics. It is 
critical that DHS update their decision-making matrix to reflect these 
principles. DHS does not accurately count expected visitors in their 
decision-making process. It is important to remember that visitors to 
our city would need the most assistance in the event of a natural 
disaster or terrorist attack because they are unfamiliar with the area, 
as well as with local evacuation and safety plans.

[[Page 8059]]

  In Las Vegas, we welcomed over 40 million travelers to our city this 
year, an increase of 400,000 over last year. We are also expecting our 
local population to continue to grow. Yet despite these increases and 
increases in other components of our risk profile, Las Vegas actually 
slipped in DHS' risk rankings. This fall in ranking caused the city to 
fall out of contention for a grant, and it was announced that we will 
not receive the funding we need. This is not good planning and should 
be remedied immediately.
  I pledge to work with my colleagues from districts with other tourist 
destinations and with the Secretary to be sure that the formulas are 
updated and improved and that the funding goes to where it is truly 
needed.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.


                  Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Mica

  Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 15, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $23,334,000)''.
       Page 19, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $23,334,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman and Members of the House, I have this 
amendment and I have several others. I'm going to combine my remarks on 
this amendment and one of the other amendments to expedite this 
process.
  I am very pleased that the previous amendment to take money out of 
administration--TSA administration--which I believe is extremely 
bloated, and putting it into, again, the private Screening Partnership 
Program, that successfully passed. With that passing, I had a second 
amendment to take a similar amount to put those funds into the 
transportation security support and intelligence account.
  Ladies and gentlemen, we have created this multi-billion dollar 
bureaucracy that has been unable to connect the dots. Here is almost 
every terrorist incident. We'll put this in the Record. TSA failed 
every single time. They have never connected the dots. We need to be 
putting the money not into this huge screening bureaucracy that hassles 
veterans and little old ladies and children--and you've seen it all.

                              {time}  1610

  We have created this unbelievable detriment to the American right to 
fly and to be a free citizen, and it's so difficult to get this darned 
thing under control, but I'm telling you that the money needs to be 
going into security.
  When Mr. DeFazio and I helped create TSA, the purpose was to connect 
the dots, so I would move money out of administration. They have 4,000 
to 5,000 people just within a mile or two of here who are doing 
nothing, with most of them making, on average, $104,000. Someone told 
me who just left there that there were four secretaries in his office 
making over $100,000 apiece. Do the math. We only have 457 airports in 
the country. That means you've got about 17 people in administration 
out there and about nine in Washington in administration overseeing 
this program. It's totally out of control.
  So the Mica amendment that I'm going to ask to withdraw in just a 
second would take money out of administration and put it into 
connecting the dots in security. I know that's a dumb idea.
  Then the other thing is that the staff has done a great job here. 
There is some good report language, but TSA is thwarting the intent of 
Congress to allow the honest competition of the private Screening 
Partnership Program. We never intended to keep this all bureaucratic. 
Only Bulgaria, Romania, and Poland have a similar screening model as 
the United States today.
  What they've done is they've packed each of the private screening 
operations with huge bureaucracies left in place. In San Francisco, 
there are somewhere between 60 and 85 TSA administrators who, most of 
them, are making in the $100,000 range and don't have a job. How would 
you like that position? In Kansas City, there are 51 that they left 
there of private screening. They don't need these positions. They leave 
them there to jack up the cost to try to make private screening look 
more costly.
  So, while you have language again in this bill--and it's good 
language--we need to hold TSA accountable to stop cooking the books and 
to give us honest accounting, and then allow for the natural process of 
evolution to private screening under Federal supervision--you don't do 
away with TSA--then finally getting TSA and Homeland Security to 
concentrate on security and intelligence and on connecting the dots to 
stop the terrorists before they ever get to the airport or get to 
screening.

[[Page 8060]]



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Date                   Target                 Description             Arrest location     Suspect(s)        Nationality         Status
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
22-Dec-01....................  American          A man was put into custody       Paris to Miami..  Richard Colvin    British Citizen.  Serving a life
                                Airlines 63.      after attempting to detonate a                     Reid.                               sentence
                                                  shoe bomb. Conspirators                                                                without parole
                                                  include a British man, Saajid
                                                  Badat from Gloucester, England
                                                  and a Tunisian man Nizar
                                                  Trabelsi, who is in jail in
                                                  Belgium in a plot to blow up
                                                  two airliners bound for the
                                                  United States, using their
                                                  shoe bombs.
8-May-02.....................  ?...............  A man was arrested after         Chicago,          JoseAE1 Padilla.  U.S. National...  Sentenced to 17
                                                  returning from Pakistan for      Illinois.                                             years in prison
                                                  allegedly attempting to build                                                          [4]
                                                  a dirty bomb. Arrested by U.S.
                                                  Customs agents at Chicago's
                                                  O'Hare International Airport
                                                  on May 8, 2002, and held as a
                                                  material witness on a warrant
                                                  issued in the state of New
                                                  York stemming from the
                                                  September 11, 2001 attacks.
Sep-02.......................  ?...............  Reportedly are six naturalized   Buffalo, New      Lackawanna Six:   Yemen...........  Each sentenced
                                                  American citizens who were       York.             Mukhtar Al-                         to 10 years of
                                                  friends from childhood in                          Bakri, Sahim                        prison or
                                                  Yemen; were arrested for                           Alwan, Faysal                       less[6]
                                                  allegedly providing material                       Galab, Shafal
                                                  support for al-Qaeda and                           Mosed, Yaseinn
                                                  running a terrorist cell in                        Taher, and
                                                  Buffalo, NY.                                       Yahya Goba.
13-Mar-03....................  Brooklyn Bridge.  A man was arrested and accused   Columbus, Ohio..  Iyman Faris.....  Kashmir, entered  Sentenced to 20
                                                  of giving aid to al-Qaeda and                                        US in 1994,       years in Prison
                                                  attempting to destroy the                                            became US         [8]
                                                  Brooklyn Bridge.                                                     citizen in 1999.
Jun-03.......................  ?...............  Eleven members of the Virginia   Northern          Ali al-Timimi,    US Nationals....  --
                                                  Jihad Network were arrested      Virginia.         Ali Asad
                                                  and accused of training for                        Chandia,
                                                  holy war around the globe. A                       Muhammed
                                                  federal grand jury indicted 11                     Aatique, Hammad
                                                  people on conspiracy, firearms                     Abdur-Raheem,
                                                  and other charges, six members                     Ibrahim Ahmed
                                                  have pleaded guilty and                            Al-Hamdi,
                                                  received prison sentences. Two                     Seifullah
                                                  others were acquitted of all                       Chapman, Khwaja
                                                  charges. Ali Al-Tamimi                             Hasan, Masoud
                                                  sentenced to life                                  Khan, Yong
                                                  imprisonment, others less than                     Kwon, Randall
                                                  20 years or less.                                  Todd Royer and
                                                                                                     Donald Surratt.
Aug-04.......................  New York Stock    Security in the United States    United Kingdom..  Dhiren Barot....  Indian..........  Sentenced to
                                Exchange, World   was put on high alert after a                                                          life in prison,
                                Bank,Internatio   plot surfaces to destroy the                                                           reduced to 30
                                nal Monetary      New York Stock Exchange and                                                            years in 2007.
                                Fund.             other financial institutions
                                                  in New Jersey and Washington.
                                                  Dhiren Barot converted to
                                                  Islam at age 20. Came to the
                                                  U.S. on a student visa in
                                                  August 2000. Returned to UK in
                                                  2001, arrested by UK
                                                  authorities in 2004.
28-Aug-04....................  Herald Square     Two men were arrested after      New York, New     Shahawar Matin    Pakistani and US  Sentenced to 30
                                subway system.    attempting to bomb the New       York.             Siraj and James   National.         years in prison
                                                  York subway system on the day                      Elshafay.                           [14]
                                                  before the 2004 Republican
                                                  National Convention. Over a
                                                  period of several months in
                                                  2004 he was recorded by an FBI
                                                  informer Osama Eldawoody
                                                  plotting to plant a bomb in
                                                  the 34th Street Herald Square
                                                  station of the New York City
                                                  Subway.
Aug-04.......................  Pakistani         Two leaders of an Albany         Albany, New York  Yassin Aref and   Banglideshi and   Both sentenced
                                diplomat.         Mosque, Mohammed M. Hossain                        Mohammed          Kurdish.          to 15 years in
                                                  and Yassin M. Aref, conspired                      Hossain.                            prison
                                                  with a man who claimed to have
                                                  ties to Islamic terrorists in
                                                  laundering $50,000 in payments
                                                  for a Chinese missile that he
                                                  showed them. In fact, the
                                                  contact turned out to be an
                                                  undercover informer for the
                                                  Federal Bureau of
                                                  Investigation, and the RPG-7
                                                  missile was a disabled weapon
                                                  owned by the federal
                                                  government.
Jun-05.......................  ?...............  In June 2005 Hamid Hayat was     Lodi, California  Hamid and Umer    Pakistani.......  Hamid was
                                                  arrested and charged with                          Hayat.                              sentenced to 24
                                                  providing material support to                                                          years in prison
                                                  terrorists, and of lying about
                                                  it to FBI agents. The
                                                  prosecution alleged that Hamid
                                                  Hayat had spent the better
                                                  part of two years at an al-
                                                  Qaeda training camp in
                                                  Pakistan, returning in 2005
                                                  with an intent to attack
                                                  civilian targets in the United
                                                  States. Umer Hayat was also
                                                  arrested and charged with two
                                                  counts of making false
                                                  statements to the FBI
                                                  regarding the investigation of
                                                  his son and of certain members
                                                  of the Muslim community of
                                                  Lodi.
Aug-05.......................  Los Angeles-area  Indicted on terrorism charges    Los Angeles,      Kevin James,      US Nationals and  James sentenced
                                military bases,   related to conspiracy to         California.       Levar             Pakistani.        to 16 years in
                                synagogues and    attack military facilities in                      Washington,                         prison
                                other places.     the Los Angeles area and of                        Gregory
                                                  attempting to fund their                           Patterson,
                                                  campaign by robbing gas                            Hammad Samana.
                                                  stations in Southern
                                                  California.
Dec-05.......................  Williams Natural  A man was arrested on suspicion  Pennsylvania....  Michael Curtis    US National.....  Sentenced to 30
                                Gas (Wyoming),    that he had plans to destroy                       Reynolds.                           years in prison
                                Transcontinenta   several sites. Reynolds was
                                l Pipeline,       formally charged with a
                                Standard Oil      firearms offence for
                                refinery.         possessing a hand grenade,
                                                  though a sealed statement from
                                                  the FBI also stated that he
                                                  intended to blow up multiple
                                                  pipelines in the United States
                                                  in a bid to help further
                                                  terrorist causes.
Feb-06.......................  Troops in Iraq,   Three men were arrested for      Toledo, Ohio....  Mohammad Zaki     U.S. National,    Amawi was
                                Toledo, Ohio      allegedly planning to build                        Amawi, Marwan     Jordanian.        sentenced to 20
                                citizens.         bombs for use by terrorists in                     Othman El-                          years in
                                                  Iraq and were arrested and                         Hindi, and                          prison, the
                                                  charged with conspiracy to                         Wassim Mazloum.                     others 13 and 8
                                                  provide material support to                                                            years,
                                                  terrorists in Iraq and engage                                                          respectively.
                                                  in violent jihad in their home
                                                  town, as well as making verbal
                                                  threats against the President
                                                  of the United States. The
                                                  investigation was conducted by
                                                  the FBI and the Toledo Joint
                                                  Terrorism Task Force, with the
                                                  cooperation of an informant
                                                  called 'The Trainer' who has a
                                                  U.S. military background in
                                                  security.
Apr-06.......................  Washington D.C.-  Two men from the U.S. state of   Toronto, Ontario  Syed Haris Ahmed  Pakistani.......  Ahmed sentenced
                                area buildings.   Georgia, were arrested after                       and Ehsanul                         to 13 years in
                                                  videotaping Washington-area                        Islam Sadequee.                     prison,
                                                  buildings and sending the                                                              Sadequee
                                                  tapes to a London based                                                                sentenced to
                                                  jihadist website. Ahmed and                                                            17.[26]
                                                  Sadequee were reindicted by a
                                                  federal grand jury in
                                                  December, 2008. Both men were
                                                  again charged with conspiring
                                                  to provide material support to
                                                  terrorists, including trying
                                                  to join Lashkar-e-Taiba in
                                                  2005. According to the new
                                                  indictment, the videos were
                                                  passed to another convicted
                                                  British terrorist, Aabid
                                                  Hussain Khan, on whose
                                                  computer they were found
                                                  subsequent to his own arrest.
Jun-06.......................  Sears Tower and   The charges centered around the  Miami, Florida,   Narseal Batiste,  US National.....  Five of the men
                                FBI offices.      group's belief that they were    Atlanta,          Patrick                             were convicted.
                                                  being offered money by someone   Georgia.          Abraham,                            Batiste was
                                                  in Yemen to help their mission                     Stanley Grant                       sentenced to 13
                                                  in Liberty City, provided they                     Phanor,                             years in
                                                  supported the al-Qaeda jihad.                      Rotschild                           prison.8472
                                                  The FBI agents represented                         Augustine,
                                                  themselves as representatives                      Burson
                                                  of al-Qaeda (but who were                          Augustin,
                                                  actually undercover FBI                            Naudimar
                                                  agents), and persuaded Batiste                     Herrera,
                                                  to provide plans for a stated                      Lyglenson
                                                  intention to destroy the Sears                     Lemorin.
                                                  Tower in Chicago, the FBI
                                                  field office in Miami, and
                                                  other targets.
Jul-06.......................  Port Authority    Living in Lebanon who was        New York, New     Assem Hammoud...  Lebanon.........
                                Trans-Hudson      charged with plotting a          York.
                                train tunnels.    mission to blow up the PATH
                                                  train tunnels beneath the
                                                  Hudson River between New
                                                  Jersey and lower Manhattan,
                                                  New York City, United States
                                                  with a team of suicide bombers
                                                  with backpack explosives. He
                                                  was arrested by the Lebanese
                                                  Armed Forces, a division of
                                                  the Internal Security Forces
                                                  (ISF), in the Mouseitbeh area
                                                  of west Beirut on April 27,
                                                  2006.

[[Page 8061]]

 
7-May-07.....................  Fort Dix........  Six men were arrested after      Fort Dix, New     Dritan Duka,      Duka family       Four of the men
                                                  attempting an attack on the      Jersey.           Shain Duka,       ethnic            received life
                                                  Fort Dix military base. The                        Eljvir Duka,      Albanians from    sentences, one
                                                  men were arrested by the                           Mohamad Ibrahim   Debar, then in    man received
                                                  Federal Bureau of                                  Shnewer, Serdar   Yugoslavia,       five years in
                                                  Investigation (FBI) on May 8,                      Tatar and Agron   currently the     prison and the
                                                  2007, and were prosecuted in                       Abdullahu.        Republic of       other received
                                                  federal court in October 2008.                                       Macedonia. The    33
                                                  On December 22, 2008, five                                           Duka family
                                                  were found guilty of                                                 entered the
                                                  conspiracy to commit murder in                                       United States
                                                  their intentions to kill U.S.                                        illegally
                                                  military personnel; four                                             through Mexico
                                                  received life sentences, while                                       in October
                                                  one received 33 years in                                             1984.
                                                  prison. The remaining member                                         Palestinian,
                                                  was thought to have had a                                            Turkish, and
                                                  minor role in the plot and was                                       Albanian.
                                                  sentenced to five years in
                                                  prison for weapons offenses.
3-Jun-07.....................  John F. Kennedy   Four men were arrested in New    New York, New     Abdul Kadir,      Guyana, Trinidad
                                International     York after a plot is revealed    York.             Russell
                                Airport.          to bomb the fuel line of JFK                       Defreitas,
                                                  airport. Defreitas was                             Kareem Ibrahim,
                                                  arrested in Brooklyn, New                          Abdel Nur.
                                                  York. Kadir and Ibrahim were
                                                  arrested in Trinidad on June
                                                  3, 2007. Nur surrendered to
                                                  police two days later in
                                                  Trinidad.
20-May-09....................  New York City     Four men were arrested In April  New York, New     James Cromitie,   US Nationals....  All serving 25
                                Synagogues/U.S.   2009, Cromitie and his three     York.             Onta Williams,                      year sentences
                                Military          alleged accomplices chose                          David Williams,
                                Aircraft.         their targets. They allegedly                      Laguerre Payen.
                                                  attempted to both bomb the
                                                  Riverdale Temple and nearby
                                                  Riverdale Jewish Center in the
                                                  Bronx, and, using Stinger
                                                  surface-to-air guided
                                                  missiles, shoot down military
                                                  planes flying out of a nearby
                                                  air base. The men placed fake
                                                  bombs wired to cell phones in
                                                  three separate cars outside
                                                  the Riverdale Temple and
                                                  nearby Riverdale Jewish
                                                  Center, both in the Riverdale
                                                  community of Bronx. New York
                                                  City Police Department
                                                  Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly
                                                  said one of the suspects
                                                  placed explosives, while the
                                                  other three suspects served as
                                                  lookouts As the men were
                                                  returning to the vehicle, the
                                                  signal was given for the
                                                  arrest. An 18-wheel New York
                                                  City Police Department vehicle
                                                  blocked the end of the street.
                                                  The FBI informer also served
                                                  as the driver of the suspects'
                                                  vehicle. Another armored
                                                  vehicle arrived, and officers
                                                  from the department's
                                                  Emergency Service Unit smashed
                                                  the blackened windows of the
                                                  S.U.V., removed the men from
                                                  the vehicle, and handcuffed
                                                  them on the ground. None
                                                  offered resistance.
19-Sep-09....................  New York Subway   Zazi, a native of Afghanistan    New York City,    Najibullah Zazi,  Afghanistan.....
                                System.           who lived in Colorado, was       NY.               Adis
                                                  arrested and convicted of                          Medunjanin,
                                                  plotting to bomb the NYC                           Zarein
                                                  Subway system. He was trained                      Ahmedzay,
                                                  by al-Qaeda in Pakistan. 5                         Mohammed Wali
                                                  others were also indicted on                       Zazi, Imam
                                                  related charges. On September                      Ahmad Wais
                                                  19, 2009, authorities arrested                     Afzali and
                                                  Zazi, and on September 21 they                     Naqib Jaji.
                                                  charged him in the United
                                                  States District Court for the
                                                  District of Colorado with
                                                  making false statements in a
                                                  matter involving international
                                                  and domestic terrorism.
24-Sep-09....................  Dallas            A 19 year old was arrested on    Dallas, Texas...  Hosam Maher       Jordanian.......  On October 20,
                                skyscraper.       charges that he intended to                        Husein Smadi.                       2010, sentenced
                                                  bomb a downtown Dallas                                                                 to 24 years
                                                  skyscraper. The device was a                                                           imprisonment
                                                  dud provided by FBI agents                                                             and will be
                                                  posing as al-Qaeda members.                                                            deported after
                                                  Smadi activated a timer                                                                serving his
                                                  connected to the decoy with a                                                          sentence.
                                                  cell phone, then rode with an
                                                  undercover agent and waited to
                                                  watch the explosion. Instead,
                                                  the phone rang an FBI number,
                                                  and Smadi was arrested.
16-Oct-09....................  Various overseas  Colleen LaRose, also known as    Philadelphia, PA  Colleen LaRose,   Americans,
                                targets.          JihadJane and Fatima LaRose,                       Jamie Paulin-     Algerian and
                                                  is an American citizen charged                     Ramirez, Ali      Libyan.
                                                  with terrorism-related crimes,                     Charaf Damache,
                                                  including conspiracy to commit                     Abdul Salam al-
                                                  murder and providing material                      Jahani.
                                                  support to terrorists. Lars
                                                  Vilks was a named target in
                                                  response to drawings of the
                                                  Prophet Muhammad. LaRose was
                                                  arrested on Oct. 16, 2009, at
                                                  Philadelphia International
                                                  Airport as she returned from
                                                  London. She allegedly
                                                  confessed her role in the plot
                                                  to kill Vilks to FBI agents
                                                  shortly after her arrest,
                                                  according to two people close
                                                  to the investigation.
25-Dec-09....................  Northwest         `Underwear Bomber': On           Detroit,          Abdul Farouk      Nigerian........
                                Airlines Flight   Christmas Day 2009,              Michigan.         Abdulmutallab.
                                253.              Abdulmutallab traveled from
                                                  Ghana to Amsterdam, where he
                                                  boarded Northwest Airlines
                                                  Flight 253 en route to
                                                  Detroit. He had a Nigerian
                                                  passport and valid U.S.
                                                  tourist visa, and purchased
                                                  his ticket with cash in Ghana
                                                  on December 16.
1-May-10.....................  Times Square....  A Pakistani American who         New York City,    Faisal Shahzad..  Pakistani.......  Convicted and
                                                  attempted the May 1, 2010,       NY.                                                   sentenced by a
                                                  Times Square car bombing. He                                                           federal judge
                                                  was arrested approximately 53                                                          in New York
                                                  hours after the attempt,[9] at                                                         City to life
                                                  11:45 p.m. EDT on May 3, 2010,                                                         imprisonment
                                                  by U.S. Customs and Border                                                             without parole
                                                  Protection officers after he
                                                  had boarded Emirates Flight
                                                  202 to Dubai. On June 21,
                                                  2010, in Federal District
                                                  Court in Manhattan he
                                                  confessed to 10 counts arising
                                                  from the bombing attempt.
27-Oct-10....................  Arlington         A Pakistani-born Virginia man    Arlington, VA...  Farooque Ahmed..  Pakistani.......  Sentenced to 23
                                Cemetery (WMATA   was arrested and accused of                                                            years in prison
                                station).         casing Washington-area subway                                                          after pleading
                                                  stations in what he thought                                                            guilty
                                                  was an al-Qaeda plot to bomb
                                                  and kill commuters.
28-Sep-11....................  The Pentagon,     Rezwan Ferdaus is a U.S.         Washington, D.C.  Rezwan Ferdaus..  Banglideshi.....
                                United States     citizen, born and raised in
                                Capitol           Massachusetts, of Bangladeshi
                                Building.         descent, who was arrested by
                                                  the FBI on September 28, 2011,
                                                  for allegedly plotting to
                                                  attack The Pentagon and United
                                                  States Capitol with remote-
                                                  controlled model aircraft
                                                  packed with explosives. He was
                                                  also charged with supporting
                                                  al-Qaeda and plotting attacks
                                                  on U.S. soldiers abroad, by
                                                  making IED detonators.
7-Jan-12.....................  Tampa, FL,        Sami Osmakac is a man who        Tampa, FL.......  Sami Osmakac....  Albania.........
                                various targets.  allegedly plotted an attack,
                                                  to avenge what he felt were
                                                  wrongs done to Muslims, in the
                                                  area around Tampa, Florida.
                                                  Osmakac, an Albanian from
                                                  Kosovo and a naturalized US
                                                  citizen, was arrested January
                                                  7, 2012, for the alleged
                                                  attack plan, which involved
                                                  bombing nightclubs, detonating
                                                  a car bomb, using an assault
                                                  rifle, wearing an explosive
                                                  belt in a crowded area, and
                                                  taking hostages.
17-Feb-12....................  United States     A Moroccan man who was arrested  Washington, D.C.  Amine El Khalifi  Morrocan........
                                Capitol.          by the Federal Bureau of
                                                  Investigation (FBI) for
                                                  allegedly plotting to carry
                                                  out a suicide bombing on the
                                                  United States Capitol. El
                                                  Khalifi thought he was working
                                                  with al-Qaeda operatives, but
                                                  was actually in contact with
                                                  undercover FBI agents. He was
                                                  sentenced to prison for 30
                                                  years in September 2012.
10-Aug-12....................  Wainwright        On the morning of August 10,     St. Louis,        Mark Anthony        ..............
                                Building.         2012, several St. Louis          Missouri.         Grady.
                                                  television and radio outlets
                                                  received an e-mail from a
                                                  person who said they were
                                                  going to bomb the Wainwright
                                                  State Office Building in
                                                  downtown St. Louis. The e-
                                                  mailer was taken into custody
                                                  by ATF and FBI and is
                                                  currently charged with attempt
                                                  to commit mass-murder and
                                                  attempt to commit a terrorist
                                                  act.

[[Page 8062]]

 
17-Oct-12....................  New York Federal  A Bangladeshi man was charged    New York City,    Quazi Mohammad    Bangladeshi.....
                                Reserve.          with trying to blow up the       NY.               Rezwanul Ahsan
                                                  Federal Reserve building in                        Nafis.
                                                  New York. While Nafis believed
                                                  he had the blessing of al-
                                                  Qaeda and was acting on behalf
                                                  of the terrorist group, he has
                                                  no known ties, according to
                                                  federal officials.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 8063]]

  With that, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment. I will 
work with the committee, and we will finalize better language to get 
this done.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Tennessee is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, when Congress created the 
Transportation Security Administration in 2001, we defined ``TSA 
security screeners'' in law as ``Federal security screeners.'' Their 
role, as defined by the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, is to 
screen passengers and luggage at airports across the country. However, 
beginning in 2005, TSA administratively reclassified ``TSA security 
screeners'' as ``transportation security officers'' and proceeded to 
upgrade their uniforms to reflect those of Federal law enforcement 
officers with metal officer badges.
  My concern and those of many of my constituents is that, despite 
their appearance, TSA officers do not have any Federal law enforcement 
training to reflect their current title and appearance. This can be 
confusing to the traveling public as they interact with TSA officers at 
airports and now on the highways, at rail stations, ferry terminals, 
bus stations, and at other mass transit facilities across the country.
  I strongly believe that Congress has an obligation to ensure that the 
title and appearance of Federal employees properly reflects their 
training and background. Until we are able to pass a legislative fix to 
correct TSA's administrative decision, we need to use the power of the 
purse to ensure that TSA screeners are not abusing the current 
perception that they are trained Federal law enforcement officers.
  I would like to commend Chairman Carter and committee staff for their 
due diligence and dedication in working with my office to address this 
issue. I am pleased that we were able to reduce screener uniforms by 
$18 million, a 20 percent decrease, so that we can continue to monitor 
this issue.
  I look forward to continuing to work with Chairman Carter and his 
staff in moving forward on finding a permanent solution.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. I share the gentlelady's concern of this implication that 
these are law enforcement officers. It is something that anyone who has 
ever dealt with law enforcement officers should be worried about, so I 
thank her for working with us and for explaining to us her concerns. I 
don't want anyone to be out there fooling the public, having people 
think they're trained law enforcement officers when they're not. I 
think that's an important thing at every level of law enforcement.
  Representative Blackburn brought this to my attention and to the 
attention of the committee last year. We appreciate her staying on top 
of these issues. In fact, I asked the staff to look into this matter 
earlier this year. As a result, as she has described, this bill cuts 
the screeners' uniforms by $18 million, which is about a 20 percent 
decrease. In fact, this bill calls for a net decrease of $387.5 million 
to TSA, or 8 percent below the FY13 enacted levels.
  Finally, the committee has directed TSA to provide a report 
describing in detail how TSA is complying with the Buy American Act and 
to provide Congress with the total number of uniforms and screener 
consumables purchased in fiscal years '12 and '13.
  Moving forward, we will continue to work with the gentlewoman from 
Tennessee to ensure TSA screeners are not abusing the perception that 
they are officers of the law. We credit her for shedding light on this 
issue, and I thank her for bringing it to the attention of the 
committee. I am willing to work with the gentlewoman in any way she 
chooses.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                    surface transportation security

       For necessary expenses of the Transportation Security 
     Administration related to surface transportation security 
     activities, $108,618,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2015.

           transportation threat assessment and credentialing

       For necessary expenses for the development and 
     implementation of screening programs of the Office of 
     Transportation Threat Assessment and Credentialing, 
     $182,617,000, to remain available until September 30, 2015.

                    transportation security support

       For necessary expenses of the Transportation Security 
     Administration related to transportation security support and 
     intelligence pursuant to the Aviation and Transportation 
     Security Act (Public Law 107-0971; 115 Stat. 597; 49 U.S.C. 
     40101 note), $901,666,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2015:  Provided, That of the funds provided 
     under this heading, $50,000,000 shall be withheld from 
     obligation for headquarters administration until the 
     Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration 
     submits to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and 
     the House of Representatives detailed expenditure plans for 
     air cargo security, checkpoint support, and explosives 
     detection systems refurbishment, procurement, and 
     installations on an airport-by-airport basis for fiscal year 
     2014 and the completion of a security assessment measuring 
     the effectiveness of using the Transportation Worker 
     Identification Credential:  Provided further, That the 
     Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration 
     shall submit to the Committees of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives, at the time that the President's budget 
     proposal for fiscal year 2015 is submitted pursuant to 
     section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, the 
     expenditure plans and report detailed in the preceding 
     proviso.

                          federal air marshals

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Air Marshal Service, 
     $821,107,000:  Provided, That the Director of the Federal Air 
     Marshal Service shall submit to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
     not later than 45 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act a detailed, classified expenditure and staffing plan for 
     ensuring optimal coverage of high-risk flights.

                              Coast Guard

                           operating expenses

       For necessary expenses for the operation and maintenance of 
     the Coast Guard, not otherwise provided for; purchase or 
     lease of not to exceed 25 passenger motor vehicles, which 
     shall be for replacement only; purchase or lease of small 
     boats for contingent and emergent requirements (at a unit 
     cost of no more than $700,000) and repairs and service-life 
     replacements, not to exceed a total of $31,000,000; purchase 
     or lease of boats necessary for overseas deployments and 
     activities; minor shore construction projects not exceeding 
     $1,000,000 in total cost on any location; payments pursuant 
     to section 156 of Public Law 97-09377 (42 U.S.C. 402 note; 96 
     Stat. 1920); and recreation and welfare; $6,839,416,000; of 
     which $340,000,000 shall be for defense-related activities, 
     of which $24,500,000 shall be derived from the Oil Spill 
     Liability Trust Fund to carry out the purposes of section 
     1012(a)(5) of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 
     2712(a)(5)); and of which not to exceed $15,300 shall be for 
     official reception and representation expenses:  Provided, 
     That none of the funds made available by this Act shall be 
     for expenses incurred for recreational vessels under section 
     12114 of title 46, United States Code, except to the extent 
     fees are collected from owners of yachts and credited to this 
     appropriation:  Provided further, That of the funds provided 
     under this heading, $167,683,000 shall be withheld from 
     obligation for Coast Guard Headquarters Directorates until a 
     revised future-years capital investment plan for fiscal years 
     2015 through 2019, as specified under the heading ``Coast 
     Guard Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements'' of this 
     Act is submitted to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     Senate and the House of Representatives.

                environmental compliance and restoration

       For necessary expenses to carry out the environmental 
     compliance and restoration functions of the Coast Guard under 
     chapter 19 of title 14, United States Code, $13,164,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2018.

                            reserve training

       For necessary expenses of the Coast Guard Reserve, as 
     authorized by law; operations and maintenance of the Coast 
     Guard Reserve program; personnel and training costs; and 
     equipment and services; $112,991,000.

              acquisition, construction, and improvements

       For necessary expenses of acquisition, construction, 
     renovation, and improvement of aids to navigation, shore 
     facilities, vessels, and aircraft, including equipment 
     related thereto; and maintenance, rehabilitation, lease, and 
     operation of facilities and equipment; as authorized by law; 
     $1,222,712,000; of which $20,000,000 shall be derived from 
     the

[[Page 8064]]

     Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to carry out the purposes of 
     section 1012(a)(5) of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 
     U.S.C. 2712(a)(5)); and of which the following amounts, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2018 (except as 
     subsequently specified), shall be available as follows: 
     $18,000,000 shall be available for military family housing, 
     of which not more than $6,828,691 shall be derived from the 
     Coast Guard Housing Fund established pursuant to 14 U.S.C. 
     687; $860,553,000 shall be available to acquire, effect major 
     repairs to, renovate, or improve vessels, small boats, and 
     related equipment; $149,710,000 shall be available to 
     acquire, effect major repairs to, renovate, or improve 
     aircraft or increase aviation capability; $74,930,000 shall 
     be available for other acquisition programs; $5,000,000 shall 
     be available for shore facilities and aids to navigation, 
     including waterfront facilities at Navy installations used by 
     the Coast Guard; and $114,519,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2014, shall be available for personnel 
     compensation and benefits and related costs:  Provided, That 
     the funds provided by this Act shall be immediately available 
     and allotted to contract for the production of the seventh 
     National Security Cutter notwithstanding the availability of 
     funds for post-production costs:  Provided further, That the 
     funds provided by this Act shall be immediately available and 
     allotted to contract for long lead time materials, 
     components, and designs for the eighth National Security 
     Cutter notwithstanding the availability of funds for 
     production costs or post-production costs:  Provided further, 
     That the Commandant of the Coast Guard shall submit to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives, at the time that the President's budget 
     proposal for fiscal year 2015 is submitted pursuant to 
     section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, a future-
     years capital investment plan for the Coast Guard that 
     identifies for each requested capital asset--
       (1) the proposed appropriations included in that budget;
       (2) the total estimated cost of completion, including and 
     clearly delineating the costs of associated major acquisition 
     systems infrastructure and transition to operations;
       (3) projected funding levels for each fiscal year for the 
     next 5 fiscal years or until acquisition program baseline or 
     project completion, whichever is earlier;
       (4) an estimated completion date at the projected funding 
     levels; and
       (5) a current acquisition program baseline for each capital 
     asset, as applicable, that--
       (A) includes the total acquisition cost of each asset, 
     subdivided by fiscal year and including a detailed 
     description of the purpose of the proposed funding levels for 
     each fiscal year, including for each fiscal year funds 
     requested for design, pre-acquisition activities, production, 
     structural modifications, missionization, post-delivery, and 
     transition to operations costs;
       (B) includes a detailed project schedule through 
     completion, subdivided by fiscal year, that details--
       (i) quantities planned for each fiscal year; and
       (ii) major acquisition and project events, including 
     development of operational requirements, contracting actions, 
     design reviews, production, delivery, test and evaluation, 
     and transition to operations, including necessary training, 
     shore infrastructure, and logistics;
       (C) notes and explains any deviations in cost, performance 
     parameters, schedule, or estimated date of completion from 
     the original acquisition program baseline and the most recent 
     baseline approved by the Department of Homeland Security's 
     Acquisition Review Board, if applicable;
       (D) aligns the acquisition of each asset to mission 
     requirements by defining existing capabilities of comparable 
     legacy assets, identifying known capability gaps between such 
     existing capabilities and stated mission requirements, and 
     explaining how the acquisition of each asset will address 
     such known capability gaps;
       (E) defines life-cycle costs for each asset and the date of 
     the estimate on which such costs are based, including all 
     associated costs of major acquisitions systems infrastructure 
     and transition to operations, delineated by purpose and 
     fiscal year for the projected service life of the asset;
       (F) includes the earned value management system summary 
     schedule performance index and cost performance index for 
     each asset, if applicable; and
       (G) includes a phase-out and decommissioning schedule 
     delineated by fiscal year for each existing legacy asset that 
     each asset is intended to replace or recapitalize:
       Provided further, That the Commandant of the Coast Guard 
     shall ensure that amounts specified in the future-years 
     capital investment plan are consistent, to the maximum extent 
     practicable, with proposed appropriations necessary to 
     support the programs, projects, and activities of the Coast 
     Guard in the President's budget proposal for fiscal year 2015 
     is submitted pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31, United 
     States Code, for that fiscal year:  Provided further, That 
     any inconsistencies between the capital investment plan and 
     proposed appropriations shall be identified and justified:  
     Provided further, That subsections (a) and (b) of section 
     6402 of Public Law 110-0928 shall apply with respect to the 
     amounts made available under this heading.

              research, development, test, and evaluation

       For necessary expenses for applied scientific research, 
     development, test, and evaluation; and for maintenance, 
     rehabilitation, lease, and operation of facilities and 
     equipment; as authorized by law; $9,928,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2015, of which $500,000 shall 
     be derived from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to carry 
     out the purposes of section 1012(a)(5) of the Oil Pollution 
     Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2712(a)(5)):  Provided, That there may 
     be credited to and used for the purposes of this 
     appropriation funds received from State and local 
     governments, other public authorities, private sources, and 
     foreign countries for expenses incurred for research, 
     development, testing, and evaluation.

                              retired pay

       For retired pay, including the payment of obligations 
     otherwise chargeable to lapsed appropriations for this 
     purpose, payments under the Retired Serviceman's Family 
     Protection and Survivor Benefits Plans, payment for career 
     status bonuses, concurrent receipts and combat-related 
     special compensation under the National Defense Authorization 
     Act, and payments for medical care of retired personnel and 
     their dependents under chapter 55 of title 10, United States 
     Code, $1,460,000,000, to remain available until expended.

                      United States Secret Service

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the United States Secret Service, 
     including purchase of not to exceed 652 vehicles for police-
     type use for replacement only; hire of passenger motor 
     vehicles; purchase of motorcycles made in the United States; 
     hire of aircraft; services of expert witnesses at such rates 
     as may be determined by the Director of the Secret Service; 
     rental of buildings in the District of Columbia, and fencing, 
     lighting, guard booths, and other facilities on private or 
     other property not in Government ownership or control, as may 
     be necessary to perform protective functions; payment of per 
     diem or subsistence allowances to employees in cases in which 
     a protective assignment on the actual day or days of the 
     visit of a protectee requires an employee to work 16 hours 
     per day or to remain overnight at a post of duty; conduct of 
     and participation in firearms matches; presentation of 
     awards; travel of United States Secret Service employees on 
     protective missions without regard to the limitations on such 
     expenditures in this or any other Act; research and 
     development; grants to conduct behavioral research in support 
     of protective research and operations; and payment in advance 
     for commercial accommodations as may be necessary to perform 
     protective functions; $1,534,589,000; of which not to exceed 
     $19,125 shall be for official reception and representation 
     expenses; of which not to exceed $100,000 shall be to provide 
     technical assistance and equipment to foreign law enforcement 
     organizations in counterfeit investigations; of which 
     $2,358,000 shall be for forensic and related support of 
     investigations of missing and exploited children; of which 
     $6,000,000 shall be for a grant for activities related to 
     investigations of missing and exploited children and shall 
     remain available until September 30, 2015; and of which not 
     less than $8,000,000 shall be for activities related to 
     training in electronic crimes investigations and forensics:  
     Provided, That $18,000,000 for protective travel shall remain 
     available until September 30, 2015:  Provided further, That 
     $4,500,000 for National Special Security Events shall remain 
     available until September 30, 2015:  Provided further, That 
     the United States Secret Service is authorized to obligate 
     funds in anticipation of reimbursements from Federal agencies 
     and entities, as defined in section 105 of title 5, United 
     States Code, for personnel receiving training sponsored by 
     the James J. Rowley Training Center, except that total 
     obligations at the end of the fiscal year shall not exceed 
     total budgetary resources available under this heading at the 
     end of the fiscal year:  Provided further, That none of the 
     funds made available under this heading shall be available to 
     compensate any employee for overtime in an annual amount in 
     excess of $35,000, except that the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security, or the designee of the Secretary, may waive that 
     amount as necessary for national security purposes:  Provided 
     further, That none of the funds made available to the United 
     States Secret Service by this Act or by previous 
     appropriations Acts may be made available for the protection 
     of the head of a Federal agency other than the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security:  Provided further, That the Director of 
     the Secret Service may enter into an agreement to provide 
     such protection on a fully reimbursable basis:  Provided 
     further, That none of the funds made available to the United 
     States Secret Service by this Act or by previous 
     appropriations Acts may be obligated for the purpose of 
     opening a new permanent domestic or overseas office or 
     location unless the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     Senate and the House of Representatives are notified 15 days 
     in advance of such obligation:  Provided further, That for

[[Page 8065]]

     purposes of section 503(b) of this Act, $15,000,000 or 10 
     percent, whichever is less, may be transferred between 
     ``Protection of Persons and Facilities'' and ``Domestic Field 
     Operations''.

     acquisition, construction, improvements, and related expenses

       For necessary expenses for acquisition, construction, 
     repair, alteration, and improvement of physical and 
     technological infrastructure, $51,775,000; of which 
     $5,380,000, to remain available until September 30, 2018, 
     shall be for acquisition, construction, improvement, and 
     maintenance of facilities; and of which $46,395,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2016, shall be for 
     information integration and technology transformation 
     execution:  Provided, That the Director of the Secret Service 
     shall submit to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     Senate and the House of Representatives at the time that the 
     President's budget proposal for fiscal year 2015 is submitted 
     pursuant to section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, 
     a multi-year investment and management plan for its 
     Information Integration and Technology Transformation program 
     that describes funding for the current fiscal year and the 
     following 3 fiscal years, with associated plans for systems 
     acquisition and technology deployment.

                               TITLE III

            PROTECTION, PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY

              National Protection and Programs Directorate

                     management and administration

       For salaries and expenses of the Office of the Under 
     Secretary and the Offices of the Assistant Secretaries for 
     the National Protection and Programs Directorate, support for 
     operations, and information technology, $50,522,000:  
     Provided, That not to exceed $3,825 shall be for official 
     reception and representation expenses.

           infrastructure protection and information security

       For necessary expenses for infrastructure protection and 
     information security programs and activities, as authorized 
     by title II of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 
     121 et seq.), $1,176,629,000, of which $200,000,000, shall 
     remain available until September 30, 2015:  Provided, That of 
     the total amount provided for the ``Infrastructure Security 
     Compliance'' program, project, and activity, $20,000,000 
     shall be withheld from obligation until the Under Secretary 
     for the National Protection and Programs Directorate submits 
     to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the 
     House of Representatives an expenditure plan for the Chemical 
     Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards program that includes the 
     number of facilities covered by the program, inspectors on-
     board, inspections pending, and inspections projected to be 
     completed by September 30, 2014.

                       federal protective service

       The revenues and collections of security fees credited to 
     this account shall be available until expended for necessary 
     expenses related to the protection of federally owned and 
     leased buildings and for the operations of the Federal 
     Protective Service.

                office of biometric identity management

       For necessary expenses for the Office of Biometric Identity 
     Management, as authorized by section 7208 of the Intelligence 
     Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (8 U.S.C. 1365b), 
     $232,190,000:  Provided, That of the total amount made 
     available under this heading, $113,956,000 shall remain 
     available until September 30, 2016:  Provided further, That 
     the Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives, not later than 60 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, an expenditure plan for the Office of 
     Biometric Identity Management:  Provided further, That the 
     Secretary shall submit to the Committees on Appropriations of 
     the Senate and the House of Representatives at the time the 
     President's budget is submitted each year under section 
     1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, a multi-year 
     investment and management plan for the Office of Biometric 
     Identity Management program, to include each fiscal year 
     starting with the current fiscal year and the 3 subsequent 
     fiscal years, that provides--
       (1) the proposed appropriation for each activity tied to 
     mission requirements and outcomes, program management 
     capabilities, performance levels, and specific capabilities 
     and services to be delivered, noting any deviations in cost 
     or performance from the prior fiscal years expenditure or 
     investment and management plan for United States Visitor and 
     Immigrant Status Indicator Technology;
       (2) the total estimated cost, projected funding by fiscal 
     year, and projected timeline of completion for all 
     enhancements, modernizations, and new capabilities proposed 
     in such budget and underway, including and clearly 
     delineating associated efforts and funds requested by other 
     agencies within the Department of Homeland Security and in 
     the Federal Government and detailing any deviations in cost, 
     performance, schedule, or estimated date of completion 
     provided in the prior fiscal years expenditure or investment 
     and management plan for United States Visitor and Immigrant 
     Status Indicator Technology; and
       (3) a detailed accounting of operations and maintenance, 
     contractor services, and program costs associated with the 
     management of identity services.

  Mr. CARTER (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous 
consent that the remainder of the bill through page 35, line 10, be 
considered as read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any 
point.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. Are there any intervening amendments to that 
section?
  Hearing none, the Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                        Office of Health Affairs

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Health Affairs, 
     $123,425,000; of which $25,072,000 is for salaries and 
     expenses; and of which $79,534,000 is for BioWatch 
     operations:  Provided, That of the amount made available 
     under this heading, $18,819,000 shall remain available until 
     September 30, 2015, for biosurveillance, chemical defense, 
     medical and health planning and coordination, and workforce 
     health protection:  Provided further, That not to exceed 
     $2,250 shall be for official reception and representation 
     expenses.

                  Federal Emergency Management Agency

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Emergency Management 
     Agency, $914,795,000, including activities authorized by the 
     National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et 
     seq.), the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
     Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), the Cerro Grande 
     Fire Assistance Act of 2000 (division C, title I, 114 Stat. 
     583), the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 
     7701 et seq.), the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 
     App. 2061 et seq.), sections 107 and 303 of the National 
     Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 404, 405), Reorganization 
     Plan No. 3 of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.), the Homeland Security Act 
     of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), the Implementing 
     Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (Public 
     Law 110-53), the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 
     1974 (15 U.S.C. 2201 et seq.), the Post-Katrina Emergency 
     Management Reform Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-295; 120 Stat. 
     1394), and the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 
     2012 (Public Law 112-141, 126 Stat. 916):  Provided, That not 
     to exceed $2,250 shall be for official reception and 
     representation expenses:  Provided further, That of the total 
     amount made available under this heading, $27,513,000 shall 
     be for the Urban Search and Rescue Response System, of which 
     none is available for Federal Emergency Management Agency 
     administrative costs:  Provided further, That of the total 
     amount made available under this heading, $22,000,000 shall 
     remain available until September 30, 2015, for capital 
     improvements and other expenses related to continuity of 
     operations at the Mount Weather Emergency Operations Center.

                        state and local programs

       For grants contracts, cooperative agreements, and other 
     activities, $1,500,000,000, which shall be allocated as 
     follows:
       (1) Notwithstanding section 503 of this Act, $1,264,826,000 
     shall be distributed, according to threat, vulnerability, and 
     consequence, at the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security based on the following authorities:
       (A) The State Homeland Security Grant Program under section 
     2004 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 605):  
     Provided, That notwithstanding subsection (c)(4) of such 
     section 2004, for fiscal year 2014, the Commonwealth of 
     Puerto Rico shall make available to local and tribal 
     governments amounts provided to the Commonwealth of Puerto 
     Rico under this paragraph in accordance with subsection 
     (c)(1) of such section 2004.
       (B) Operation Stonegarden.
       (C) The Urban Area Security Initiative under section 2003 
     of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 604).
       (D) Organizations (as described under section 501(c)(3) of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from tax section 
     501(a) of such code) determined by the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security to be at high risk of a terrorist attack.
       (E) Public Transportation Security Assistance and Railroad 
     Security Assistance, under sections 1406 and 1513 of the 
     Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 
     2007 (6 U.S.C. 1135 and 1163), including Amtrak security:  
     Provided, That such public transportation security assistance 
     shall be provided directly to public transportation agencies.
       (F) Port Security Grants in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 
     70107.
       (G) Over-the-Road Bus Security Assistance under section 
     1532 of the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 
     Commission Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-53; 6 U.S.C. 1182).
       (H) The Metropolitan Medical Response System under section 
     635 of the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 
     2006 (6 U.S.C. 723).

[[Page 8066]]

       (I) The Citizen Corps Program.
       (J) The Driver's License Security Grants Program in 
     accordance with section 204 of the REAL ID Act of 2005 (49 
     U.S.C. 30301 note).
       (K) The Interoperable Emergency Communications Grant 
     Program under section 1809 of the Homeland Security Act of 
     2002 (6 U.S.C. 579).
       (L) Emergency Operations Centers under section 614 of the 
     Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 5196c).
       (M) The Buffer Zone Protection Program Grants.
       (N) Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grants.
       (2) $235,174,000 shall be to sustain current operations for 
     training, exercises, technical assistance, and other 
     programs, of which $157,991,000 shall be for training of 
     State, local, and tribal emergency response providers:

       Provided, That of the amounts provided in paragraph (1) 
     under this heading, $55,000,000 shall be for operation 
     Stonegarden; Provided further, That for grants under 
     paragraph (1), applications for grants shall be made 
     available to eligible applicants not later than 60 days after 
     the date of enactment of this Act, that eligible applicants 
     shall submit applications not later than 80 days after the 
     grant announcement, and the Administrator of the Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency shall act within 65 days after 
     the receipt of an application:  Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding section 2008(a)(11) of the Homeland Security 
     Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 609(a)(11)), or any other provision of 
     law, a grantee may not use more than 5 percent of the amount 
     of a grant made available under this heading for expenses 
     directly related to administration of the grant:  Provided 
     further, That for grants under paragraphs (1) and (2), the 
     installation of communications towers is not considered 
     construction of a building or other physical facility:  
     Provided further, That grantees shall provide reports on 
     their use of funds, as determined necessary by the Secretary 
     of Homeland Security.


            Amendment Offered by Ms. Brownley of California

  Ms. BROWNLEY of California. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. 
Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 37, lines 7 and 10, after each dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $97,500,000)(increased by $97,500,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. BROWNLEY of California. Mr. Chair, I rise today to offer an 
amendment to the fiscal year 2014 Homeland Security appropriations bill 
that will provide $97.5 million for the Port Security Grant Program. I 
offer this amendment in conjunction with my colleague and friend, the 
gentlewoman also from California.
  I represent Port Hueneme, a critical west coast commercial port and 
home of Naval Base Ventura County. The presence of the naval base makes 
the port a potential target of those who seek to do our Nation harm. I 
believe we must do more to protect Port Hueneme and other ports across 
this great Nation from potential threats.

                              {time}  1620

  The Port Security Grant program is a critical component of our 
strategy to protect our Nation's critical infrastructure against risks 
associated with potential terrorist attacks.
  The vast majority of critical U.S. maritime infrastructure is owned 
and/or operated by State, local, and private sector maritime industry 
partners, which is why this State and local grant program is so 
critical.
  The funds that the program makes available to non-Federal entities 
are intended to improve port-wide maritime security risk management, 
enhance awareness, support training and exercises, and support port 
recovery capabilities.
  Grant recipients must use funds to address vulnerabilities in port 
security and support the prevention of, detection of, response to and 
recovery from attacks involving improvised explosive devices and other 
nonconventional weapons.
  My amendment simply ensures that the Port Security Grant program will 
be funded at $97.5 million, which is at the same level as the previous 
fiscal year.
  This program is a critical Homeland Security initiative for Port 
Hueneme in Ventura County and ports across our great country.
  I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Ms. HAHN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlelady from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. HAHN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to urge support for this amendment 
that I'm cosponsoring with my good friend from California, 
Congresswoman Brownley.
  This straightforward and simple amendment will keep the Port Security 
Grant program funded at last year's levels and ensure it's protected 
from further cuts.
  U.S. ports remain one of our country's most important economic 
engines as they link our Nation to the rest of the world and the global 
economy. Each day, our ports move both imports and exports totaling 
some $3.8 billion worth of goods through all 50 of our States. And 
according to the American Association of Port Authorities, the U.S. 
port industry supports 13.3 million jobs and accounts for more than 
$649 billion in personal income.
  That's why I cofounded the bipartisan congressional PORTS Caucus with 
my good friend Ted Poe from Texas in order to ensure that Congress 
recognizes the vital role ports play in our national economy and the 
importance of keeping them competitive and, most importantly, secure.
  Despite their growing importance, ports have failed to garner the 
attention and the resources that they deserve.
  During my very first Homeland Security hearing, I asked Lee Hamilton, 
vice chairman of the 9/11 Commission, ``What should Congress be doing 
to improve security at our Nation's ports?'' He responded by saying, 
``My judgment would be that we have not focused enough on our ports.''
  For instance, despite a peak funding level of $400 million as 
recently as 2009, Congress has decreased funding for the Port Security 
Grant program nearly every year since. This is despite the fact that 
ports remain extremely vulnerable to attacks.
  According to the Congressional Research Service, a 10-kiloton to 20-
kiloton weapon detonated in a major seaport would kill 50,000 to 1 
million people and would result in direct property damage of $50- to 
$500 billion and indirect costs of $300 billion to $1.2 trillion due to 
trade disruption. And while an attack of this magnitude may seem 
unlikely to many Americans, experts agree that a major attack at one of 
our Nation's ports is more likely than ever before.
  Just last week in a discussion regarding the likelihood of a nuclear 
attack at a major seaport, former DHS Under Secretary Jay Cohen stated 
that it's not a question of if it's going to happen, ``but rather a 
question of where, when, and to what magnitude.''
  As someone who can see the Port of Los Angeles from my backyard, this 
statement provides a sobering reminder that we must be doing anything 
and everything we can to guard against this threat.
  The port complex of LA/Long Beach is responsible for approximately 44 
percent of all the trade that comes into this country. If an attack 
were to ever occur there, it would be economically debilitating not 
only for my district, but for the entire country, as well.
  This amendment will ensure the Port Security Grant program maintains 
last year's funding and will protect the program from any further 
budget cuts.
  By appropriately funding this program, we'll allow our port operators 
to continue to increase our capability to prevent, detect, respond to, 
and recover from chemical, biological, nuclear, and other 
nonconventional attacks.
  And while ideally I would like to see this program returned to its 
previous authorized level of $400 million, ensuring this critical 
program is protected against further cuts is one of utmost importance 
at this time.
  Therefore, I urge my colleagues to support this incredibly important 
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, while I have concerns with carving out 
funding

[[Page 8067]]

amounts for specific grants, I will accept the amendment.
  I was born and raised in Houston, Texas. I had something happen to me 
many years ago as a young lawyer in a hearing at the Port of Houston. 
Back in 1968, I was told by the Coast Guard that every day two ships 
pass each other in the Port of Houston, and should those ships collide, 
just the mixing of those two cargos would explode and kill every man, 
woman, and child on the Texas gulf coast all the way to Corpus Christi. 
That's without a nuclear weapon.
  We are the largest petrochemical port in the United States. I too am 
concerned about our ports. I'm very concerned that they could be a 
target of attack that could cause great damage both in structures and 
in human life.
  So I join my colleagues from California to accept this amendment, and 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I too rise in support of the amendment, 
which would simply require a funding floor for the Port Security Grant 
program at the current level.
  I very much appreciate the gentlewoman's intent with this amendment. 
Our seaports are critically important to our Nation's economy, and, 
therefore, have been a primary focus of our security and preparedness 
efforts.
  Because our bill does not currently allocate State and local program 
funding among the major Homeland Security Grant programs, I do have 
concerns with carving out funding for one specific program. But the 
funding level which our colleague has proposed is equal to the amount 
allocated to ports in 2013 and that we anticipate would be available in 
2014.
  Therefore, I support the gentlewoman's amendment, urge its adoption, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Brownley).
  The amendment was agreed to.


            Amendment Offered by Mr. Swalwell of California

  Mr. SWALWELL of California. I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 37, line 7, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $97,500,000) (increased by $97,500,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SWALWELL of California. Mr. Chairman, if we learned anything 
about the Boston Marathon bombings, it is that real threats exist 
against our homeland from outside actors motivated by outside forces 
with great access now from readily accessible materials that they can 
get on the Internet, and they can become radicalized also on the 
Internet and can target us here at home with IED devices.
  I rise in support of my amendment, Mr. Chairman, which would require 
that at least $97.5 million of the $1.5 billion provided to the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency for State and local government Homeland 
Security grants would be used for mass transit security programs.
  These programs are listed on (1)(E) on page 38 of the bill. The main 
FEMA and Department of Homeland Security mass transit security effort 
is their Transit Security Grant Program.
  I want to start by thanking Homeland Security Appropriations 
Subcommittee Chairman Carter and Ranking Member Price for the increase 
in funding for the account that funds local grant programs for security 
and terrorism readiness.

                              {time}  1630

  I organized a letter, signed by 39 other Members of Congress, asking 
for funding that is sufficiently robust for TSGP, the Transit Security 
Grant Program, to be able to meet our needs for mass transit security. 
Chairman Carter and Ranking Member Price listened to our request, and 
more money will be available for this critical security program.
  While the FEMA State and local grant account funds a variety of 
homeland security initiatives, my amendment addresses the critical, if 
often overlooked, element of mass transit security. Mass transit, which 
mostly includes bus and rail, is used by millions of Americans every 
year. In fact, according to the American Public Transportation 
Association, there are over 10.5 billion passenger trips in 2012 alone. 
That amounts to over 28 million trips per day.
  We're fortunate in the East Bay of California, which I am privileged 
to represent, to have an excellent bus system and the world-famous Bay 
Area Rapid Transit system, also known as BART. There were over 400,000 
BART passenger trips on average each weekday just this past April.
  Unfortunately, some of what makes mass transit so great, that it is 
easily accessible and carries so many people quickly through critical 
urban centers, makes it vulnerable to terrorist attacks. In June 2009, 
the Government Accountability Office, GAO, summarized the issues facing 
mass transit, writing the following:

       According to the Transportation Security Administration 
     transit officials and transit experts, certain 
     characteristics of mass transit systems, such as multiple 
     access points and limited barriers to access, make them 
     inherently vulnerable to terrorist attack and therefore 
     difficult to secure. High ridership, expensive 
     infrastructure, economic importance, and location in large 
     metropolitan areas or tourist destinations also make them 
     attractive targets for terrorists because of the potential 
     for mass casualties and economic damage.

  Just 2 months ago in April, a plot to target trains in Canada was 
thankfully disrupted before anybody was hurt. And, of course, everyone 
remembers the horrible London attacks from 2005, and the Madrid transit 
attacks in 2004.
  No American, in any part of our country on any of our mass transit 
systems, should live in fear of a mass transit attack. And damaging 
mass transit in our key urban centers wouldn't only harm that 
particular area but could ripple through our Nation's economy. Transit 
security means economic security. Everyone has an interest in 
protecting our public transit systems, and that's where TSGP comes in.
  Through TSGP, local mass transit systems receive grants to protect 
and minimize damage from terrorist events. Example of uses include 
surveillance training, public awareness campaigns, detection equipment, 
security cameras, and the hardening of infrastructure.
  The continuing resolution for fiscal year 2013 provided a floor of 
$97.5 million for mass transit security, before sequestration, of which 
$10 million was reserved for Amtrak. My amendment would use that same 
number. And since the bill before us is based on sequestration levels 
already, that would amount to an increase in the floor for fiscal year 
2014 over fiscal year 2013.
  To provide such broad discretion for the Department of Homeland 
Security is important. However, I also understand the argument that the 
Homeland Security Secretary should be able to distribute money based on 
risk and potential harm. I know some Members may feel we shouldn't set 
minimum amounts to be spent out of this account.
  To provide such discretion is important, but it ignores our 
constitutional responsibility to provide clear direction on how the 
money is spent. And, it risks certain priorities being ignored. 
Moreover, the Transit Security Grant Program is a competitive grant 
program, and so within that framework money would only be distributed 
based on risk and damage potential.
  Last Congress, minimums were included for this account when a 
compromise was developed with the Senate, including for transit 
security. I hope the same thing will happen again. My amendment gives 
this House an opportunity to state now on the record that we value mass 
transit security.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

[[Page 8068]]

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. I'm willing to accept this amendment. Once again, I have 
the same concerns as my colleague, Mr. Price, about the carving out of 
funding amounts for specific grants, but I will accept this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this 
amendment, which would simply require a funding floor for public 
transportation security assistance and railroad security assistance at 
the current level. I appreciate the gentleman's intent with this 
amendment. Public transportation infrastructure is absolutely critical 
to the functioning of our economy, and, therefore, is and must be a 
primary focus of our security and preparedness efforts.
  The same reservation applies to this amendment as to the previous 
amendment. We do not currently allocate State and local program funding 
among the major homeland security programs. So we have some concerns 
with carving out funding for specific programs, but the funding level 
proposed here is equal to the amount allocated to transit in 2013 and 
that we anticipate would be available in 2014. Therefore, I support the 
gentleman's amendment and urge its adoption.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Swalwell).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                     firefighter assistance grants

       For grants for programs authorized by the Federal Fire 
     Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2201 et seq.), 
     $675,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2015, 
     of which $337,500,000 shall be available to carry out section 
     33 of that Act (15 U.S.C. 2229) and $337,500,000 shall be 
     available to carry out section 34 of that Act (15 U.S.C. 
     2229a).


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR. 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 by Ms. Moore of Wisconsin.
  Amendment by Mr. Polis of Colorado.
  Amendment by Mr. Heck of Nevada.
  Amendment by Mr. Garcia of Florida.
  Amendment by Mr. Deutch of Florida.
  The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the minimum time for any 
electronic vote after the first vote in this series.


                     Amendment Offered by Ms. Moore

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from 
Wisconsin (Ms. Moore) 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 CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 167, 
noes 257, not voting 9, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 194]

                               AYES--167

     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fattah
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Grayson
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Horsford
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kuster
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Michaud
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Negrete McLeod
     Nolan
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Pelosi
     Peters (MI)
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--257

     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Amash
     Amodei
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barrow (GA)
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bentivolio
     Bera (CA)
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Bustos
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clarke
     Cleaver
     Coble
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cooper
     Costa
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Daines
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Enyart
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Garcia
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kelly (IL)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Lankford
     Latham
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Maffei
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pearce
     Perlmutter
     Perry
     Peters (CA)
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Radel
     Rahall
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shea-Porter
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stockman
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Andrews
     Campbell
     Green, Al
     Holt
     Jackson Lee
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Markey
     McCarthy (NY)
     Pittenger

                              {time}  1703

  Messrs. POE of Texas, SANFORD, CUELLAR, PAYNE, ROONEY, MAFFEI and Ms. 
FUDGE changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Messrs. RANGEL, HINOJOSA, CONNOLLY, and Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ

[[Page 8069]]

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 Offered by Mr. Polis

  The Acting CHAIR (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen). The unfinished business is the 
demand for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Colorado (Mr. Polis) 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 CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 180, 
noes 245, not voting 8, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 195]

                               AYES--180

     Andrews
     Bachmann
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera (CA)
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Enyart
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fattah
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia
     Grayson
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Kuster
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Michaud
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Negrete McLeod
     Nolan
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters (CA)
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--245

     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Amash
     Amodei
     Bachus
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barrow (GA)
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bentivolio
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Bustos
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cooper
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Daines
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Holding
     Horsford
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Lankford
     Latham
     Latta
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peters (MI)
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Radel
     Rahall
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schock
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stockman
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Campbell
     Green, Al
     Holt
     Jackson Lee
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Markey
     McCarthy (NY)
     Pittenger

                              {time}  1711

  Messrs. ELLISON and SEAN MALONEY of New York changed their votes from 
``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Heck

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nevada 
(Mr. Heck) 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 CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 156, 
noes 268, not voting 9, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 196]

                               AYES--156

     Amodei
     Andrews
     Bachmann
     Barr
     Barrow (GA)
     Bass
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Braley (IA)
     Brooks (IN)
     Brown (FL)
     Bucshon
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chaffetz
     Chu
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coffman
     Cohen
     Collins (NY)
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooper
     Courtney
     Cuellar
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DelBene
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Duffy
     Duncan (TN)
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellmers
     Enyart
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Frankel (FL)
     Gallego
     Gosar
     Grijalva
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hall
     Hanabusa
     Hartzler
     Heck (NV)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Honda
     Horsford
     Hunter
     Jeffries
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Joyce
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kline
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Lewis
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Marchant
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCollum
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McMorris Rodgers
     Messer
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Negrete McLeod
     Nolan
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson
     Petri
     Polis
     Pompeo
     Reichert
     Rice (SC)
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Rogers (MI)
     Ross
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tsongas
     Veasey
     Walden
     Walorski
     Walz
     Waters
     Watt
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Wilson (FL)
     Wittman
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IN)

[[Page 8070]]



                               NOES--268

     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Amash
     Bachus
     Barber
     Barletta
     Barton
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Benishek
     Bentivolio
     Bera (CA)
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NY)
     Black
     Bonner
     Boustany
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Broun (GA)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Bustos
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carney
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Cicilline
     Clarke
     Coble
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Conaway
     Connolly
     Costa
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Daines
     Davis (CA)
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Duckworth
     Duncan (SC)
     Engel
     Farenthold
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Garamendi
     Garcia
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Grayson
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (WA)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hinojosa
     Holding
     Hoyer
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huffman
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hurt
     Israel
     Issa
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly (PA)
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kuster
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Langevin
     Lankford
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     Latta
     Levin
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lummis
     Maloney, Sean
     Marino
     Massie
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McDermott
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (FL)
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nunnelee
     O'Rourke
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Pearce
     Perlmutter
     Perry
     Peters (CA)
     Peters (MI)
     Pingree (ME)
     Pitts
     Pocan
     Poe (TX)
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Radel
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Rothfus
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (OH)
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schakowsky
     Schneider
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stockman
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Tonko
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waxman
     Weber (TX)
     Welch
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yarmuth
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Campbell
     Davis, Rodney
     Green, Al
     Holt
     Jackson Lee
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Markey
     McCarthy (NY)
     Pittenger

                              {time}  1716

  Messrs. CARNEY and CUMMINGS changed their vote from ``aye'' to 
``no.''
  Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois changed his vote from ``no'' to 
``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated against:
  Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois. Madam Chair, on rollcall No. 196 I was 
unavoidably detained during this five minute vote. Had I been present, 
I would have voted ``no.''


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Garcia

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. Garcia) 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 CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 186, 
noes 236, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 197]

                               AYES--186

     Andrews
     Barber
     Barton
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera (CA)
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Enyart
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fattah
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia
     Grayson
     Griffith (VA)
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Horsford
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Kuster
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Michaud
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Negrete McLeod
     Nolan
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters (CA)
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Radel
     Rangel
     Richmond
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--236

     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Amash
     Amodei
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barrow (GA)
     Benishek
     Bentivolio
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Broun (GA)
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cooper
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Daines
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Gene
     Griffin (AR)
     Grimm
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Keating
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Lankford
     Latham
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Maffei
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peters (MI)
     Petri
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Rahall
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Southerland
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stockman
     Stutzman
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)

[[Page 8071]]


     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Campbell
     Coffman
     Green, Al
     Grijalva
     Holt
     Honda
     Jackson Lee
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Markey
     McCarthy (NY)
     Pittenger

                              {time}  1721

  Mr. HOYER changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Mr. FINCHER. Madam Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker having assumed the 
chair, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, Acting Chair 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. 2217) making appropriations for 
the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 2014, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution 
thereon.

                          ____________________