[House Report 108-223]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



108th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    108-223

======================================================================



 
      RESOLUTION OF INQUIRY TO THE SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY

                                _______
                                

   July 21, 2003.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

Mr. Cox, from the Select Committee on Homeland Security, submitted the 
                               following

                             ADVERSE REPORT

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                       [To accompany H. Res. 286]

    The Select Committee on Homeland Security, to whom was 
referred the resolution (H. Res. 286) directing the Secretary 
of Homeland Security to transmit to the House of 
Representatives not later than 14 days after the date of the 
adoption of this resolution all physical and electronic records 
and documents in his possession related to any use of Federal 
agency resources in any task or action involving or relating to 
Members of the Texas Legislature in the period beginning May 
11, 2003, and ending May 16, 2003, except information the 
disclosure of which would harm the national security interests 
of the United States, having considered the same, report 
unfavorably thereon with amendments and recommend that the 
resolution as amended not be agreed to.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose and Summary..............................................     2
Background and Need for Legislation..............................     2
Hearings.........................................................     3
Committee Consideration..........................................     3
Committee Votes..................................................     3
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................    11
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............    11
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures    11
Committee Cost Estimate..........................................    11
Federal Mandates Statement.......................................    11
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................    11
Constitutional Authority Statement...............................    11
Applicablility to Legislative Branch.............................    11
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation...................    11
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............    11
Dissenting Views.................................................    12

    The amendments are as follows:
    On page 2, line 3, strike ``14'' and insert ``30'' (and 
amend the title of the bill accordingly).
    Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

That the Secretary of Homeland Security is directed to transmit to the 
House of Representatives not later than 30 days after the date of the 
adoption of this resolution all physical and electronic records and 
documents in his possession related to any us of agency resources in 
any task or action involving or relating to Members of the Texas 
Legislature in the period beginning May 11, 2003, and ending May 16, 
2003, except information the disclosure of which would harm the 
national security interests of the United States.

    Amend the title so as to read:

    Resolution directing the Secretary of Homeland Security to 
transmit to the House of Representatives not later than 30 days 
after the date of the adoption of this resolution all physical 
and electronic records and documents in his possession related 
to any use of Federal agency resources in any tasks or action 
involving or relating to Members of the Texas Legislature in 
the period beginning May 11, 2003, and ending May 16, 2003, 
except information the disclosure of which would harm the 
national security interests of the United States.

                          PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

    House Resolution 286, introduced by Rep. Green (D-TX) on 
June 19, 2003, directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to 
transmit to the House of Representatives not later than 14 days 
after the date of its adoption all physical and electronic 
records and documents in his possession related to any use of 
Federal agency resources in any task or action involving or 
relating to Members of the Texas Legislature in the period 
beginning May 11, 2003, and ending May 16, 2003, except 
information the disclosure of which would harm the national 
security interests of the United States.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    House Resolution 286 is a resolution of inquiry, which, 
pursuant to clause 7 of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives, requires the Committee to act on the 
resolution within 14 legislative days, or a privileged motion 
to discharge the Committee is in order. The day of introduction 
and the day of discharge are not counted in the 14 days. H. 
Res. 286 was referred to the Select Committee on Homeland 
Security on June 19, 2003.
    A Committee has several possible courses of action after a 
resolution of inquiry is referred to it. The Committee may 
choose to amend the resolution, report it favorably, adversely, 
with no recommendation, or not at all. Two common reasons for 
reporting a resolution of inquiry adversely are substantial 
compliance and competing investigations.
    In the first case--the one that applies here--the Executive 
Branch may deliver documents that substantially fulfill the 
purpose of the resolution, thus making it unnecessary for the 
Committee to report the resolution favorably for floor action.
    On May 15, 2003, ten Members of the House of 
Representatives sent a letter to the Office of the Inspector 
General of the Department of Homeland Security, requesting an 
investigation of the use of Department of Homeland Security 
resources to locate a plane belonging to former Texas State 
House Speaker Pete Laney, and believed to be carrying Members 
of the Texas State Legislature.
    The Inspector General of the Department of Homeland 
Security subsequently performed a full investigation of the 
matter, releasing a final report, entitled ``Air and Marine 
Interdiction Center,'' on June 13, 2003. The report contains a 
comprehensive description of what took place regarding 
Department resources, and includes relevant documents and 
transcripts.
    The Inspector General concluded that there was no 
wrongdoing by the Air and Marine Interdiction Coordination 
Center or other Department personnel, that Department of 
Homeland Security resources used during this process were de 
minimis, and that the use of Department of Homeland Security 
resources warranted no further investigation.
    The Committee believes the Inspector General report 
fulfills the purpose of, and represents substantial compliance 
with, H. Res. 286. We therefore report the resolution 
adversely.

                                HEARINGS

    The Committee did not hold hearings on H. Res. 286.

                        COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

    The Select Committee on Homeland Security met in open 
markup session on Wednesday, July 16, 2003, and took the 
following action:
    H. Res. 286 was ordered reported to the House, adversely, 
amended, by a recorded vote of 24 yeas and 20 nays (Rollcall 
Vote No. 8).
    The following amendments were offered:
    An amendment offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee (#1), page 2, line 
3, strike ``14'' and insert ``30'' (and amend the title of the 
bill accordingly) was AGREED TO by unanimous consent.
    An Amendment offered by Mr. Pascrell (#2), page 2, line 8, 
after ``May 16, 2003,'' insert ``including an unredacted copy 
of the Office of Inspector General's Report of Investigation 
number IN03-OIG-LA-0662-S, dated June 13, 2003, and an 
unredacted copy of each exhibit to that Report of 
Investigation,'' was NOT AGREED TO by a recorded vote of 19 
yeas and 24 nays (Rollcall Vote No. 6).

                            COMMITTEE VOTES

    Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires the Committee to list the record votes 
that occurred during consideration of H. Res. 286.
    On a motion to move the previous question, was AGREED TO by 
a recorded vote of 24 yeas and 19 nays (Rollcall Vote No. 5) as 
follows:


    An Amendment offered by Mr. Pascrell (#2), page 2, line 8, 
after ``May 16, 2003,'' insert ``including an unredacted copy 
of the Office of Inspector General's Report of Investigation 
number IN03-OIG-LA-0662-S, dated June 13, 2003, and an 
unredacted copy of each exhibit to that Report of 
Investigation,'' was NOT AGREED TO by a recorded vote of 19 
yeas and 24 nays (Rollcall Vote No. 6) as follows:


    On a motion to move the previous question, was AGREED TO by 
a recorded vote of 24 yeas and 20 nays (Rollcall Vote No. 7) as 
follows:


    On reporting H. Res. 286 adversely to the House, as 
amended, by a recorded vote of 24 yeas and 20 nays (Rollcall 
Vote No. 8) as follows:


                      COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee reports that the 
findings and recommendations of the Committee, based on its 
oversight activities, are incorporated into this report.

         STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    Clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives does not apply, as H. Res. 286 does not 
authorize funding.

   NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT AUTHORITY, AND TAX EXPENDITURES

    Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives does not apply, as H. Res. 286 does not provide 
new budgetary authority or increased tax expenditures.

                        COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE

    In compliance with clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee estimates the 
costs of implementing H. Res. 286 would be minimal.

                       FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

    H. Res. 286 provides no Federal mandates.

                      ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

    H. Res. 286 does not establish or authorize any new 
advisory committees.

                   CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

    Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives does not apply, as H. Res. 286 is not a bill or 
joint resolution.

                  APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    H. Res. 286 does not relate to the terms and conditions of 
employment or access to public services or accommodations 
within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of the Congressional 
Accountability Act.

             SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION

    H. Res. 286, as amended, is a simple resolution directing 
the Secretary of Homeland Security to transmit to the House of 
Representatives not later than 30 days after the date of the 
adoption of this resolution all physical and electronic records 
and documents in his possession related to any use of Federal 
agency resources in any task or action involving or relating to 
Members of the Texas Legislature in the period beginning May 
11, 2003, and ending May 16, 2003, except information the 
disclosure of which would harm the national security interests 
of the United States.

         CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

    H. Res. 286 makes no changes to existing law.

                DISSENTING VIEWS OF HONORABLE JIM TURNER

    The Select Committee on Homeland Security has considered 
and rejected H. Res. 286, a Resolution of Inquiry authorized by 
clause 7 of House Rule XIII, directing the Secretary of 
Homeland Security to transmit to the House certain records and 
documents in the possession of the Department of Homeland 
Security. This procedure is contained in and authorized by the 
Rules as a tool to enable the Congress to effectively carry out 
our oversight responsibility.
    I strongly dissent from the Committee's rejection of H. 
Res. 286 and use of the motion on the previous question to 
limit the opportunity for Members to express their strongly 
held views in support of the Resolution. This Resolution, and 
the mark up session to address it, provided an important 
opportunity to address a matter which should not be partisan in 
nature. This Resolution of Inquiry arises out of the very 
serious allegation that Department of Homeland Security 
resources were used to advance a partisan effort to achieve 
passage of Congressional Redistricting by the Texas 
Legislature.
    When this issue was first brought to our attention, I was 
pleased that serious concern over this allegation was expressed 
on both sides of the aisle on this Committee. Ensuring that 
federal Homeland Security resources are not used for political 
gain is a matter of utmost importance and I was pleased that 
Secretary Ridge agreed to conduct an Inspector General's 
investigation into the matter.
    While Chairman Cox and other Members on the Republican side 
of the aisle now argue that the issuance of the Department's IG 
Office's report on June 13, 2003, makes further review of this 
matter unnecessary, there can be no disagreement that agency 
investigations have never been a substitute for the exercise of 
our responsibility for Congressional oversight.
    Indeed, Chairman Cox previously led a probing inquiry into 
the transfer of missile technology to China even though 
multiple investigations by the Executive Branch were ongoing, 
including criminal prosecutions. Many Committees of this 
Congress investigated a host of issues during the 1990s, even 
though Executive Branch or outside probes had been conducted.
    History is clear. We have a right and a duty to conduct 
independent inquiries when there are serious allegations that 
the public trust has been abused.
    The need for further inquiry into the allegations of misuse 
of federal Homeland Security resources is highlighted by the 
stark contrast between the investigative report filed by the 
Homeland Security IG Office and the report prepared by the 
Department of Transportation IG Office issued on July 11, 2003, 
and presented on July 15th to the House Transportation 
Committee.
    The deficiencies of the Homeland Security IG Office's 
report are numerous and disturbing. The report reveals a lack 
of clarity, lack of disclosure, lack of thoroughness, lack of 
concern for the misuse of federal resources, and lack of 
recommendations for prevention of such misuse in the future. 
These deficiencies, coupled with the total failure to deal with 
the homeland security threat implications arising from the 
ready accessibility of information that could be useful to 
potential terrorists, shows a complete lack of concern by the 
Department for an array of legitimate and compelling issues 
presented by the events brought to the Department's attention 
by this Committee.
    While the Department of Transportation IG documented how 
Federal Aviation Administration resources were used for 
partisan purposes, the Department of Homeland Security IG 
Office's investigation barely even touched on this important 
issue. The Homeland Security IG Office assumed that it was 
appropriate for agency employees to track down a private 
airplane flown by law abiding citizens, even though there was 
no evidence that the plane had crashed, was otherwise in 
danger, or was involved in criminal activity. The Homeland 
Security IG Office totaled up the amount of time spent tracking 
the plane and concluded that this was a ``nominal'' use of 
assets.
    This is not the point. The question is whether it was right 
and proper for Department officials to use positions of 
responsibility, to use the power of the federal government, to 
hunt for a private plane carrying a law abiding member of the 
Texas legislature. Indeed, there are suggestions in the report 
that government officials knew full well that they were 
involved in the political dispute in Texas.
    For example, the Department of Homeland Security employee 
at the Air and Marine Interdiction Coordination Center (AMICC) 
who spent 40 minutes of his time seeking to track the plane's 
whereabouts told the IG Office that this was a ``normal part of 
his duties.'' The IG Office accepted that at face value. Yet, 
that same employee said that he found it ``fishy'' that the 
Texas Department of Public Safety official stated ``they're 
Texas legislators and that's all he was at liberty to say.'' 
That same employee ``got a bad feeling'' when he learned from 
an airport contractor that there had been something about this 
in the news or the media and the contractor sounded reluctant 
to look for the aircraft. Even after these gut reactions by the 
AMICC employee, he continued to search for the plane.
    But the IG Office ignored this evidence. There are other 
signs of a lack of a professional, rigorous investigation:
          There is no indication that any of the persons 
        interviewed were asked specifically about their 
        awareness of the political situation going on in Texas.
          There is no corroboration in the Report to justify 
        the IG Office's willingness to accept the assertion 
        that this incident was a ``typical request from a law 
        enforcement agency, which reportedly occurs at least 
        thirty times a day.''
          There are no signs that the IG office reviewed any 
        email exchanges relating to this matter.
    In contrast, the Department of Transportation IG showed in 
great detail, that Mr. DeLay's office triggered the use of FAA 
resources to track down the Texas legislators. The Homeland 
Security IG Office showed little interest or initiative to 
ascertain the initial source of the Department of Homeland 
Security's involvement into a purely partisan political matter.
    The Department of Transportation IG realized that important 
policy matters were at stake and made important recommendations 
on changes that should be made to ensure that federal resources 
not be misused again. I note that on July 15th, the 
Transportation Department responded to its IG's recommendations 
by making changes to its procedures governing release of 
aircraft tracking information. The Homeland Security IG Office 
failed to understand this point. By limiting its review to a 
criminal investigative matter, the Office of Inspector General 
failed to ensure that agency resources are not diverted from 
the homeland security mission.
    The Department of Transportation IG report identified the 
persons involved in this incident and recommended that they be 
held accountable. The Homeland Security IG Office's report and 
exhibits are filled with redactions which have hidden 
information from public view and made the report 
incomprehensible. Attached to my dissenting views are two 
documents which clearly set forth the differences in approach 
and show the contrast in Congress's ability to gather the 
facts.
    We are entitled to the full findings and recommendations of 
Inspectors General throughout the government. By law, the 
Inspector General is obligated to keep the Congress fully and 
currently informed concerning problems with the programs and 
operations of the Department, recommendations for corrective 
action, and the Department's progress in implementing such 
recommendations.
    For this reason, the Democratic Members of the Committee 
unanimously supported the amendment to the Resolution offered 
by Mr. Pascrell to ensure that the House of Representatives be 
provided an unredacted version of the IG Office's report and 
exhibits.
    I am disappointed that the Majority rejected Mr. Pascrell's 
amendment. Congress receives documents containing our most 
sensitive national security secrets and sensitive law 
enforcement matters. There is no acceptable justification to 
withhold from Congress a complete, unredacted version of this 
report on allegations involving the use of federal resources 
funded by taxpayer dollars and involving the official actions 
of government officials. Thus it comes as no surprise that the 
Majority cut short the debate on the amendment and offered no 
rationale for their votes.
    This Committee must protect its oversight responsibilities 
and demand that the Inspector General's first effort at 
preparing a report to this Committee meet a high standard for 
accountability and responsiveness to the Congress. We expect a 
higher quality of work from the Inspector General's Office.
    Finally, I am very disappointed that this matter was not 
treated with greater seriousness and more deliberation by the 
Majority. The limitation of debate and discussion was 
inconsistent with the bipartisan manner that this Committee has 
heretofore functioned and will function in the future on the 
critical issue of homeland security, where all Americans stand 
united in defense of our Nation.

                                                        Jim Turner.



         DISSENTING VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVE BILL PASCRELL, JR.

    I fully concur with the Dissenting Views of Ranking 
Minority Member Jim Turner. The Committee's rejection of H. 
Res. 286, a Resolution of Inquiry authorized by longstanding 
House Rules, is an abrogation of our responsibility to conduct 
oversight of the Department of Homeland Security. The 
Committee's rejection of my amendment to ensure that we receive 
a full, unredacted version of the Department's Inspector 
General report on allegations involving the misuse of taxpayer 
dollars is mind-boggling. But most of all, the manner in which 
this Committee cut off debate on both my amendment and the 
Resolution itself is very disturbing and I hope will never be 
repeated.
    I dissent from the Committee's final vote on H. Res. 286 
and use of the motion on the previous question to limit the 
opportunity for Members to discuss and debate the Resolution 
and my amendment.
    It is my firm view that the Department of Homeland Security 
was used by others to carry out a partisan political objective 
relating to Congressional redistricting by the Texas 
Legislature. It is unconscionable to use these precious 
resources at a fledgling department for political purposes when 
there is so much left to do to improve homeland security. This 
is simply unacceptable to the American people, and should be 
unacceptable to the Members of Congress. It is our duty to seek 
out all of the facts on this matter to make sure that it never 
happens again.
    The report by the Transportation Department's Inspector 
General makes crystal clear what contacts were made with FAA 
officials to search for a private aircraft that no one, at any 
time, suggested had crashed, was in distress, or was involved 
in a criminal endeavour. These included a Congressional request 
from the Office of Congressman DeLay. And the FAA was quick to 
respond. But what was the reaction after the fact by one FAA 
official? According to the IG's report, he said, ``* * * I just 
felt like I had been used * * *.''
    Whereas, the FAA felt used, our Committee was shortchanged 
when we rejected this Resolution and my amendment. The 
Transportation Committee dispensed with the resolution in a 
bipartisan manner because the Congress received the information 
requested--in its totality. We wish this Committee would do the 
same, but the report we have is unsatisfactory. We didn't carry 
out our responsibility to get the full facts, something that 
lends itself to a bipartisan process.
    As I have made clear, I am extremely disappointed in the 
quality of the Department of Homeland Security IG Office's 
report, which didn't get all the facts, didn't appreciate the 
significance of the facts they had, and missed a golden 
opportunity to educate the Department of Homeland Security 
about this matter by publishing a comprehensive report. 
Instead, what we received was the product of a narrow look at 
the facts and a report riddled with so many redactions that we 
can make no sense of it. For that reason, I offered my 
amendment to ensure that we receive a full, uncensored copy of 
the IG Report. This is not a partisan issue. This is not a 
Texas issue. Rather, it is about setting a precedent. The 
Congress has certainly been trusted with information much more 
sensitive than this. As representatives of the people, we have 
a right to know.
    The Majority's action to stifle debate on my amendment and 
to vote it down without explanation is deeply disturbing. We 
simply failed to carry out our oversight responsibility here. 
As Mr. Turner said in his dissenting views, we must do better.

                                                 Bill Pascrell, Jr.

                                
