Secure Border Initiative Accountability Act of 2005

Mr. Speaker, let me thank the distinguished gentlemen, the ranking member and the chairman of the Management Subcommittee on Homeland Security, that deal with these crucial issues.

I rise to support the Secure Border Initiative Financial Accountability Act and offer that there is an overall vision that this is a very important component of, and I hope that as we move this legislation along we still may have a window of opportunity to ensure that the Secure Border Initiative that Secretary Chertoff speaks of, that this is a major component of, is in place.

And I just want to thank both gentlemen for your leadership and acknowledge that, even with this Financial Accountability Act, we are still missing and need to move forward on: More agents to patrol our borders, secure our ports of entry and enforce immigration laws; expanded detention and removal capabilities to eliminate ``catch and release'' once and for all; a comprehensive and systematic upgrading of the technology used in controlling the border, including increased manned aerial assets, expanded use of UAVs, and next-generation detection technology; increased investment in infrastructure improvements at the border, providing additional physical security to sharply reduce illegal border crossings; and greatly increased interior enforcement of our immigration laws, including more robust work site enforcement; and, of course, an earned access to legalization.

We must not frighten America. Let them know that we are doing the job. But we can do both. We can account for everyone that is inside our borders, and we can work to protect and secure our northern and southern border. This initiative, the Financial Accountability, is crucial because it gives the Inspector General oversight and we, as the Management Subcommittee of the Homeland Security Committee, have seen the fractures in the oversight of spending money. This is an important way to provide the Department of Homeland Security's Inspector General to immediately review any Secure Border Initiative contract valued at $20 million or more.

Let me thank the two gentlemen, Mr. Rogers and Mr. Meek, who spent hours and hours reviewing some of the mishaps that have occurred with contracts that have not fulfilled the responsibility of securing America, contracts that have violated our trust. They have not had the right equipment, the technology. It hasn't worked. They haven't had the right staff.

This way, the Inspector General can make findings, including cost overruns, delays in contract execution, lack of rigorous contract management, insufficient Department oversight, and limitations on small business participation, which now will be able to be reported under this particular bill. Within 30 days of receiving the Inspector General's report, the Secretary must submit a corrective action plan to Congress, and as well we must ensure open opportunity.

Let me congratulate the ranking member, Mr. Thompson, and I joined him on these amendments that will highlight small businesses, automatically triggers oversight based on the award of contracts once a certain monetary amount has been reached, requires that the Inspector General conduct a review during the pendency of the project and requires that the Inspector General assess the inclusion of small, minority, and women-owned businesses in the SBI subcontracting plans as a factor in its review.

If that is not one of the larger pieces, everywhere we go, as this Department grows larger and larger and larger, Homeland Security spends more and more money, the question is, why can't the homegrown people do the job, the small businesses, the women-owned businesses, the minority-owned businesses? And the answer is a blank. We don't have an answer.

This committee has been in the leadership realm, this subcommittee with Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Meek. You have been in the driver's seat on pushing the Homeland Security Department and our subcommittee in ensuring that the little guys get the work.

We are now suffering in Louisiana and the Gulf Region because the little guys have been ignored, and the jurisdictions down there say we have got the little guys willing to work but the big guys have thrown us out the door and not allowed us to be able to do an efficient, cost- efficient, good job. It has been the layered contracts with multinationals, and it never gets down to small business persons.

So I rise to support this initiative, the Secure Border Initiative Financial Accountability Act, and I want to thank Cherri Branson and Rosaline Cohen for their leadership of staff.

I thank the ranking member for yielding to me, and I ask my colleagues to support it. But our work is yet undone until we finish comprehensive immigration reform.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 6162, requiring financial accountability with respect to certain contract actions related to the Secure Border Initiative (SBI) of the Department of Homeland Security .

The Secure Border Initiative, SBI, is a comprehensive multi-year plan to secure America's borders and reduce illegal migration.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chert-off has announced an overall vision for the SBI which includes: more agents to patrol our borders, secure our ports of entry and enforce immigration laws; expanded detention and removal capabilities to eliminate ``catch and release'' once and for all; a comprehensive and systemic upgrading of the technology used in controlling the border, including increased manned aerial assets, expanded use of UAVs, and next-generation detection technology; increased investment in infrastructure improvements at the border--providing additional physical security to sharply reduce illegal border crossings; and greatly increased interior enforcement of our immigration laws--including more robust work site enforcement.

Mr. Speaker, an earlier version of this important bill passed the House as part of a border security measure in December 2005. Furthermore, the language of this bill also appears in fiscal year 2007 DHS authorization measure that passed the Committee on Homeland Security in July 2006.

This bill requires the DHS's Inspector General to immediately and automatically review any Secure Border Initiative contract valued at more than $20 million. This review necessarily entails examining the cost requirements, performance objectives, and program timelines set by the Department for the SBI project and requires an assessment of the inclusion of small, minority and women-owned businesses in any subcontracting plans.

The Inspector General's review must be completed within 60 days after its initiation and reported to the Secretary of DHS. Within 30 days of receiving the Inspector General's report, the Secretary of DHS must submit to the Committee on Homeland Security a report on the Inspector General's findings and the corrective action plan the Secretary has taken and plans to take.

This automatic triggering of oversight by the Inspector General for contracts greater than $20 million is critical to minimize the waste, abuse, and fraud, which unfortunately has plagued many of DHS's contracts. In addition, this review will occur during the pendency of the project rather than at its termination to minimize waste and ensure redemptive steps are taken expeditiously. The Inspector General's findings will include cost overruns, delays in contract execution, lack of rigorous Department contract management, insufficient Department financial oversight, limitations on small business participation, and other high risk business practices.

Moreover, this bill requires that the Inspector General assess the inclusion of small, minority and women-owned businesses in the SBI subcontracting plans as a factor in its review. Historically, small, minority and women-owned businesses have been disadvantaged in seeking and winning these types of contracts. There may be inherent disadvantages for these businesses, but it is clear their potential is tremendous. It is critical that DHS ensures that these businesses have the ability to compete fairly for these lucrative opportunities.

I am very proud that my district, Harris County and Houston ranks sixth and Texas ranks fifth in the country for the largest number of African-American owned firms, following New York, California, Florida, and Georgia. Minority and women-owned businesses across the country will appreciate the effort to preserve their opportunity to compete for these contracts. I encourage my colleagues to remember that there are a great many barriers to minority and women business professionals, and provisions such as these preserve equal access and open opportunities.

In the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma, small, minority and disadvantaged businesses from the region were shut out of disaster-related contracts because goals and preferences were not in place. Since the late 1960s, it has been the policy of the Federal Government to assist small businesses owned by minorities and women to become fully competitive, viable business concerns. As a result, the Small Business Administration has set forth government-wide goals to level the playing field for small and minority businesses seeking Federal Government contracts. Leveling the playing field continues to be a central concern for me and should continue to be a central concern for this Congress.

The oversight required in this bill is integral because SBlnet is expected to be a $2.5 billion procurement and the contracts allocated through SBI will be substantial. For example, last week, DHS awarded a contract valued at $80 million to a team led by Boeing under the SBInet program. Furthermore, the predecessors to SBI--ISIS and American Shield--fell far short of expectations. The Department spent over $429 million and protected 4 percent of the border, which is about $100 million for every 1 percent of the border.

Similarly, the Inspector General has found that the Department's failure in these past programs has been due to poor planning, lax program management, inappropriate equipment purchases and spotty implementation.

This bill is the first step in requiring effective oversight. Realistically, effective oversight cannot be the sole province of Inspectors General. It is Congress's constitutional duty to conduct systematic oversight of the programs and activities of the executive branch. Just as the Department cannot contract out its responsibilities, neither can we.

Consequently, I urge my colleagues to support this important bill.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6162) to require financial accountability with respect to certain contract actions related to the Secure Border Initiative of the Department of Homeland Security.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this bill, and to insert extraneous material on the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 6162, the Secure Border Initiative Financial Accountability Act of 2006.

This bipartisan legislation will help to ensure that taxpayer funds dedicated to technologies to secure our Nation's borders are spent efficiently and effectively.

The ranking member of the Committee on Homeland Security, Mr. Thompson, and I have worked for almost a year on this important bill.

Last November, I introduced H.R. 4284, the Secure Border Financial Accountability Act of 2005. I was pleased that Chairman King and Ranking Member Thompson were original cosponsors of that bill.

We also worked to include the language in the border security bill which the Committee on Homeland Security marked up on November 11, 2005. At that time, Mr. Thompson added a key funding trigger to ensure that the Inspector General had the necessary resources to respond quickly to major disasters.

This language ultimately was included in H.R. 4437, the Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005, which passed the House on December 16 of that same year. We again worked in a bipartisan manner to include this provision in H.R. 5814, the Department of Homeland Security Authorization Act for 2007, which the Committee on Homeland Security reported favorably in July of this year.

But, why is this bill so important? The Homeland Security Subcommittee on Management, Integration, and Oversight, which I chair, has held three hearings over the past year and a half on the existing border technology program.

We found the Integrated Surveillance Intelligence System, ISIS, and its remote video surveillance program, was plagued by mismanagement, operational problems and financial waste. On June 16, 2005, our committee heard from the GSA deputy inspector general that electronic surveillance equipment covered only 2 to 4 percent of the border and that over $200 million was paid by the Federal Government for poor, incomplete and never-delivered goods and services.

At our second hearing on December 16, 2005, the Department of Homeland Security Inspector General testified that cameras and sensors were not integrated, oversight of contractor performance was ineffective, numerous poles and cameras were never installed along the border, and millions of program dollars remained unspent at the GSA.

Our third hearing on February 16, 2006, examined the disciplinary actions taken by the Department against employees responsible for these problems at ISIS to ensure that those employees would not be involved in any future border technology contracts.

Last Thursday, Secretary Chertoff announced the contract for the technology component of the Secure Border Initiative, known as SBInet. This is a 6-year, multi-billion dollar contract, and it is designed to establish a virtual fence across 6,000 miles of our borders through a mix of poles, cameras, ground-based radar, aircraft and other aerial platforms.

My subcommittee intends to hold a fourth hearing on November 15 to review the SBInet contract. The purpose of this bill is to prevent the same type of financial mismanagement of ISIS from taking place in SBInet.

Specifically, this bill directs the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security to review each contract action related to the Department's Secure Border Initiative that is a contracting amount of $20 million or more. This contract review will determine whether each contract action fully complies with cost requirements, performance objectives, and timelines.

The bill further requires that the Homeland Security Inspector General report to the Secretary of Homeland Security on cost overruns, significant delays in contract execution, lack of rigorous contract management, insufficient financial oversight, and other high-risk business practices.

The Secretary of Homeland Security is then required to notify the Congress and take immediate steps to rectify the problems within 30 days.

To carry out this vigorous oversight, the bill includes a provision by Mr. Thompson that would authorize additional funds. SBInet will involve numerous large and small Federal contractors to implement the technology required to successfully secure our Nation's borders.

We look forward to working with the chairman of the Committee on Government Reform, Mr. Tom Davis, in the coming months to ensure that we have the best oversight process in place to ensure SBInet is cost effective.

A ``yes'' vote on this legislation will send a strong message to the contractor and to the Department that Congress intends to ``hold their feet to the fire'' in fulfilling these contract requirements.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I think folks can take from the dialogue here today that this committee, this full committee, and particularly this Management Subcommittee that the gentleman from Florida and I are the ranking member and Chair of, are going to be vigorous in our oversight of these contracts going forward to ensure that we do not have future problems like we saw with ISIS and American Shield.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

I would like to sum up by emphasizing that it is critically important for the Members to recognize that we need to put these kinds of accountability measures in place so that we can ensure that as we go forward with the massive expenditures we are going to make to secure our borders that we don't have a repeat of the waste, fraud, and abuse that we have seen in the past.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge an ``aye'' vote for H.R. 6162.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member of the subcommittee for allowing me to speak on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Mr. Rogers for his commitment to stemming waste, fraud and abuse in the Department of Homeland Security.

This bill, H.R. 6162, would require the Department of Homeland Security Inspector General to immediately review any Secure Border Initiative contract valued at $20 million or more. By requiring a review once this amount has been triggered, the Inspector General can immediately review the cost requirement, performance objectives and timelines for the SBI project.

This trigger builds accountability into every contract made for the Secure Border Initiative and will provide the American public with some certainty about where their money is going. This bill also will allow the Inspector General to express its concerns if they find unsatisfactory practices early on.

They will not have to wait until all the money is out the door and excuses are being made before they get involved in the oversight of this multibillion dollar project.

Mr. Speaker, I also want to emphasize that this review would include the assessment of the inclusion of small, minority, and women-owned businesses in any subcontracting plans, an area of constant challenge for the Department.

I guess some people would wonder why this kind of oversight is necessary or whether we are being fair. Let me tell you why this kind of oversight is necessary for a project of this size.

First of all, SBInet is expected to cost around $2.5 billion. Under the predecessors to Secure Border, ISIS and American Shield, we have spent over $429 million and protected only 4 percent of the border. That is about $100 million for every 1 percent of the border. It is not an understatement to say that this has not been a cost-effective use of funds.

The Inspector General has found that the Department's failure in these past programs has been due to poor planning, bad equipment purchases, and spotty implementation. We are told once again that this program will solve the problems of our porous border through the use of integrated and coordinated technology and manpower. It seems like I have heard this before, Mr. Speaker.

We have not seen a detailed rendering of the Department's overall strategy. And in fact, this procurement allows the industry to pitch solutions based not on the Department's objectives. As I have said many times, I support the use of technology as a force-multiplier in the effort to secure our borders. However, I also support the effective use of our taxpayers' money. We all want to see this initiative fare better than its failed predecessors, but that will only happen with effective oversight and management of this program.

I commend Mr. Rogers again and I commend my ranking member, Mr. Meek, for their support of this legislation. I look forward not only to the passage of this legislation, but I look forward to working with both these gentlemen to make sure that with any other large contracts we provide similar oversight to make sure that the taxpayers' dollars are well spent.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to Mr. Thompson of Mississippi, the ranking member of the Committee on Homeland Security.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from the great State of Texas, Ms. Sheila Jackson-Lee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I think we have identified the true essence of this bill; and I think also that it is very, very important. I want to take from not only Ms. Jackson-Lee but also Mr. Rogers and Ranking Member Bennie Thompson in saying in this area, when we look at management and oversight of one of the fastest-growing Departments and the largest Department in the history of the world, that we have to put these parameters in place because we have the responsibility of article I, section 1 of the U.S. Constitution to make sure that we have the level of oversight that is needed.

I think the record reflects for itself that when oversight is not paramount the taxpayers lose; and I hope, like Mr. Thompson said, that we can expand this kind of theme throughout other programs in the Department of Homeland Security.

Now, the people that are happy today are members on this committee and, hopefully, the Members when they vote for this piece of legislation. But the Inspector General is very happy because the Inspector General, especially in the Department of Homeland Security, writes these reports, submits them to Congress, and then there is a foot-dragging process at the Department of Homeland Security.

Within this piece of legislation within 30 days they have to respond as it relates to corrective action. And it would hopefully bring about the kind of accountability not only that we look for on the economic side, Mr. Speaker, but also look for as it relates to protecting our borders. Two programs before this program, well over $400 million, $429 million, was spent. We are going back again with a contract with a different company that would take us to $2.5 billion. We had the Secretary before the full committee just yesterday, or the day before last, and this was the line of my questioning. Because we do not want to be after the fact; we want to be before it.

So, Mr. Speaker, I encourage the Members to vote an affirmative on this very good piece of legislation; and hopefully, just hopefully, Mr. Speaker, we could head further into other contracting matters not only within the Department of Homeland Security but I would also add the Department of Defense and other departments like it so we can do away with waste and having individuals watching over the shoulders of individuals that may not hold the taxpayers' dollars as high as we do as it relates to accountability.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.